Kreepy Kavanaugh

[BBX50]

Ford says that the polygraph was “extensive.” The data showed only two questions. Were there more than two questions? If so, why wasn’t that data provided? Also, Ford didn’t pay for the polygraph “yet” and doesn’t know who did

 

[BBX50]

Sheldon Whitehouse asks, “You specifically asked for an FBI investigation, did you not?” Ford could have filed a complaint with the police at any time during this process, too.

 

[Que]

Cornyn: “Basically she’s repeating what we already knew, which is she believes something happened. She believes it was Brett Kavanaugh but everybody she claims was in the house denies having any knowledge of it. There is no corroboration.”

I think she does (at this point) believe she is telling the truth. It only took 6 days to convince victim number 2 that she was actually a victim of Kavanaugh.

She's had months to convince herself of this. As George Costanza said it's not a lie if you believe it. I don't have any doubt that she could pass a polygraph on this. That doesn't speak at all to the veracity of her memory.

The fact that she names four witnesses all of whom refute her memory tells us that this is a false memory. She is just as sure that they were at this party that she distinctly remembers.

 

[BBX50]

The woman asking questions of Blah Z clearly established that BlahZ has either faulty memory or is lying

 

[Emerson40]

Exactly, as they should be. They should and have been not hired or let go. It happens all of the time. Just look at the Trump administration. He has a fella there that was canned for his cover up of the sexual harassment of women.

Perhaps there should be mandatory counselling, and education sessions about not grabbing her by the pussy, as the Trump administration moves through the stages of their moral bankruptcy.

 

[BBX50]

I know you clowns make light of the FLYING issue

But why did she say she is afraid of flying when in questioning it comes out she flies all the time?

 

[phrodeau]

I'm keen to hear Brett's testimony, so that we can see some other posters on this thread.

 

[Mello_SixtyNine]

Isn't the important thing what the polygraph actually revealed? It's not in dispute that she did take a polygraph. (And for the record, I think polygraphs are about as useful as reading the bumps on someone's head, which is why I haven't brought the results up in her defense.)

As I understand it, the reason why polygraph tests are not admitted in court, is because they have an accuracy rating between 75-95% accuracy. Penn & Teller did an entire episode about the polygraph on their show, "Bullshit".

This youtube from Seeker mentions that over 80 peer-reviewed studies showed that the polygraph has a 30% error rate.

 

[BBX50]

Ford says that the polygraph was “extensive.” The data showed only two questions. Were there more than two questions? If so, why wasn’t that data provided? Also, Ford didn’t pay for the polygraph “yet” and doesn’t know who did

Ford’s polygraph expert has been a subcontractor of the Democrat law firm representing Ford in DC. Hanafin’s a “progressive” from Boston who says that when administering polygraphs on “victims” like Ford u automatically “believe them” & don’t ask them specific questions.

 

[Wrong Element]

I think she does (at this point) believe she is telling the truth. It only took 6 days to convince victim number 2 that she was actually a victim of Kavanaugh.

She's had months to convince herself of this. As George Costanza said it's not a lie if you believe it. I don't have any doubt that she could pass a polygraph on this. That doesn't speak at all to the veracity of her memory.

The fact that she names four witnesses all of whom refute her memory tells us that this is a false memory. She is just as sure that they were at this party that she distinctly remembers.

She told her husband about it 6 years ago, but OK.

 

[BBX50]

For a Ph.D. Blasey-Ford is awfully ditzy, forgetful and is incapable of answering simple questions

 

[Oblimo]

I'm keen to hear Brett's testimony, so that we can see some other posters on this thread.

This is one of the most subtle insults I’ve ever seen employed on the Internet.

 

[BBX50]

She told her husband about it 6 years ago, but OK.

Why?

Why 6 yrs ago? What happened in 2012?

They married in 2002....WHY DID SHE WAIT SIX YEARS?

What prompted her to tell him?


My guess is teh marrieage was fucked up and she used this BS as an excuse

 

[BBX50]

Why?

Why 6 yrs ago? What happened in 2012?

They married in 2002....WHY DID SHE WAIT SIX YEARS?

What prompted her to tell him?


My guess is teh marrieage was fucked up and she used this BS as an excuse

damn good question

good thing you all (pretend) to have me on IGGY so you wont have 2 answer

 

[BBX50]

She can’t remember:

Who paid for her polygraph,

The details of the polygraph taken last month (August 7) but she (vividly) remembers (some) of what happened 36 years ago, while being intoxicated?


REALLY?

 

[BBX50]

So she was at the party with her best friend ONLY and she doesnt know how she got home? Y say that? BC she knows her friend would not cooborate that, thats Y she left her name out of the initial statements!

 

[Oblimo]

Clearly you've never worked in a major corporation.

The merest whiff of an allegation like this would be taken VERY seriously, and probably require suspension (at the very least) while it's investigated. HR Departments bend over backwards to accommodate these kinds of complaints.

You're a moron.

Well, maybe he’s thinking of major corporations of the 70s and 80s.

Although I don’t think there would be a suspension. And, of course, the HR department’s goal is not justice for the accused but protection of the corporation against risk.

And an executive with a history of getting publically drunk and assaulting people is a prettt significant risk. HR wants emotionally manipulative psychopaths on XCOM, not physically violent ones.

 

[Que]

She told her husband about it 6 years ago, but OK.

Yes he (now) "remembers" that detail with the same clarity that he "remembers" her naming Kavenaugh to the therapist...

...which we know did not happen, per therapist notes.

"Hey honey, you remember when I told you and the therapist about Brett Kavenaugh groping me? He has just been nominated to SCOTUS."

Bingo. Memory association made.

I will bet that if you put the husband on a polygraph and ask him he will tell you that she told him 6 years ago, when more likely discussions recently have reinforced that impression to him.

Human beings are not tape recorders.

What we do know is that the notes taken contemporaneously 6 years ago do not reflect what you are saying. We also know that those notes are inconsistent with what she believes today about how many people were in the room.

We have no idea when she pulled the four names out of the hat that is her memory as to who was in that home but we know that that part of her memory is completely flawed.

 

[Mello_SixtyNine]

That latest accusation about gang rapes sounds like complete horse shit.

The accuser stated that when she was a 20-year-old college student, she went to ten high school parties with 18-year-olds & younger. During those ten parties, the accuser witnessed a young Kavenaugh get girls drunk so they could be gang raped in front of many witnesses that were in attendance at the parties.

The accuser was not gang raped at the first party she attended but she still went back to NINE other parties. She accuses that she was finally gang raped herself at the tenth party she attended.

Kavenaugh has been investigated six times. The idea that not one person present at one of those ten so-called rape parties failed to mention to the FBI that Kavenaugh was present and took part.

How often is eyewitness testimony wrong?
Since the 1990s, when DNA testing was first introduced, Innocence Project researchers have reported that 73% of the 239 convictions overturned through DNA testing were based on eyewitness testimony. One third of these overturned cases rested on the testimony of two or more mistaken eyewitnesses.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Jeebus. Guess we know which way the wind is blowing since our lil' luvvable racist shitstain is off his meds again.

Last time I saw an oversized melt like his, there was corned beef, sauerkraut and sliced rye involved!

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxpj6grFIe1qcaomb.gif

 

[BBX50]

Yes he (now) "remembers" that detail with the same clarity that he "remembers" her naming Kavenaugh to the therapist...

...which we know did not happen, per therapist notes.

"Hey honey, you remember when I told you and the therapist about Brett Kavenaugh groping me? He has just been nominated to SCOTUS."

Bingo. Memory association made.

I will bet that if you put the husband on a polygraph and ask him he will tell you that she told him 6 years ago, when more likely discussions recently have reinforced that impression to him.

Human beings are not tape recorders.

What we do know is that the notes taken contemporaneously 6 years ago do not reflect what you are saying. We also know that those notes are inconsistent with what she believes today about how many people were in the room.

We have no idea when she pulled the four names out of the hat that is her memory as to who was in that home but we know that that part of her memory is completely flawed.

they were married 6 yrs prior

why did she bring it up 6 yrs after getting married?

 

[Que]

Well, maybe he’s thinking of major corporations of the 70s and 80s.

Although I don’t think there would be a suspension. And, of course, the HR department’s goal is not justice for the accused but protection of the corporation against risk.

And an executive with a history of getting publically drunk and assaulting people is a prettt significant risk. HR wants emotionally manipulative psychopaths on XCOM, not physically violent ones.

They also have a duty to due process to the accused. When the accused and ALL three named witnesses all refute the alleged victims version of events they cannot proceed as you suggest. Yes they absolutely have to guard against even the appearance that they are fostering a hostile work environment but they also have to worry about wrongful termination. Which is an actual thing; which can be costly.

Yes, corporations would take this story (if credible) extremely seriously. If found to he not credible, they would not. Not every accusation results in action, else no man in America would ever work with a woman again.

No HR department in America is going to take action when the person alleging something happened can't even tell them where or when the alleged offense occurred. Breakroom? On-site? Off-site? After hours? In a bar? In the parking lot? Where?

Yesterday? Last week? Last month? Why did you wait so long to report this? Do you have a history of consensual dealings with this other employee?

 

[BBX50]

Ford thought Leland would play ball, but she decided not to smear somebody she never met.

 

[von_Bismarck]

Que is really earning his sexual assault apologist credentials in this thread.

Belly rubs from AJ are incoming?

 

[BBX50]

Wow, Ford says Leland denies that party took place under oath because Leland has health problems. So she just indirectly accused her best friend of submitting a false statement under oath.