Kavenaugh Hearing Travesty. Dems Obstruct throughout

[boxcar]

I'm reposting Mitchell's report again since it's in an easier-to- read format.

Prosecutor’s Senate Report Outlines 9 Reasons Why Christine Blasey Ford Not Credible

Rachel Mitchell, the veteran sex crimes prosecutor chosen by Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to question Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh, has filed a report that points out Ford’s inconsistencies and apparent deceptions.

“In the legal context, here is my bottom line,” she writes. “A ‘he said, she said’ case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that. I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence.”

She adds, “Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard.” This means Ford’s story does no reach the 50-50 level of more likely than not.

https://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...paign=20181001

In other words, for you libs who are hard of understanding, this is a nothingburger.

[woodtoo]

Dems are getting their in depth FBI investigation it began Sept. 12 the day DIFi
sent a copy of Dr. Ford's letter off to the FBI.

They just didn't realize it. And will be shocked when their house of con comes tumbling down.
Most can see through their scams now.

Its.What.They.Do,

[woodtoo]

She doesn't remember year, but remembers she was 15.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by woodtoo

She doesn't remember year, but remembers she was 15.

Highly questionable she even remembers that.

[woodtoo]

Have you driven a two door Ford lately?

[upthecreek]

Twitter

[Burls]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

[Burls]

Originally Posted by horses4courses

That might be a good idea with Clarence Thomas.

Here Here!
Clarence Thomas has been a complete waste of space on the Supreme Court since he started.
If the wanted to save money, they could have just axed Thomas and given Scalia two votes.

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Burls

Here Here!
Clarence Thomas has been a complete waste of space on the Supreme Court since he started.
If the wanted to save money, they could have just axed Thomas and given Scalia two votes.

That's pretty funny because its pretty true...

Has he ever really been a deciding vote and author of a worthy opinion?

[Burls]

Originally Posted by boxcar

I'm reposting Mitchell's report again since it's in an easier-to- read format.

Prosecutor’s Senate Report Outlines 9 Reasons Why Christine Blasey Ford Not Credible

Rachel Mitchell, the veteran sex crimes prosecutor chosen by Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to question Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh, has filed a report that points out Ford’s inconsistencies and apparent deceptions.

“In the legal context, here is my bottom line,” she writes. “A ‘he said, she said’ case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that. I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence.”

She adds, “Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard.” This means Ford’s story does no reach the 50-50 level of more likely than not.

https://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...paign=20181001

In other words, for you libs who are hard of understanding, this is a nothingburger.

Why should anyone pay any attention to what this paid shill has to say to the people who are paying her?
For a balanced view, read this article alongside the Breitbart tripe.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics...-disingenuous/

Rachel Mitchell’s Former Colleague Slams Her Kavanaugh Memo as “Absolutely Disingenuous”
The prosecutor hired by Republicans to question Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser would have applied much higher standards in her own office, he says.

“I find her willingness to author this absolutely disingenuous. She knows better,” Matthew Long, a former sex crimes prosecutor said. “She should only be applying this standard when there’s an adequate investigation.” Rather than jump to conclusions, Mitchell should have laid out the steps that needed to be taken in order to gather enough information to make a determination about the case. “Mitchell doesn’t have sufficient information to even draw these conclusions,” he said.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

That's pretty funny because its pretty true...

Has he ever really been a deciding vote and author of a worthy opinion?

He has always been the 5th vote the puts the 4th vote by the liberal embarrassments on the bench out with the trash.

[woodtoo]

The only witness to Ford naming Kavanaugh in 1982 is supposedly her husband.
Where is his sworn testimony?
Where was he at the hearing?
Where were her parents?
Literally no one is backing up this 2 door Ford. NO ONE backs up this Ford!!!


She lies!!!!

[upthecreek]

Twitter

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Burls

Why should anyone pay any attention to what this paid shill has to say to the people who are paying her?
For a balanced view, read this article alongside the Breitbart tripe.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics...-disingenuous/

Rachel Mitchell’s Former Colleague Slams Her Kavanaugh Memo as “Absolutely Disingenuous”
The prosecutor hired by Republicans to question Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser would have applied much higher standards in her own office, he says.

“I find her willingness to author this absolutely disingenuous. She knows better,” Matthew Long, a former sex crimes prosecutor said. “She should only be applying this standard when there’s an adequate investigation.” Rather than jump to conclusions, Mitchell should have laid out the steps that needed to be taken in order to gather enough information to make a determination about the case. “Mitchell doesn’t have sufficient information to even draw these conclusions,” he said.

Mitchell, as a professional prosecutor who specializes in sex crimes, is an expert interrogator and knows all the characteristics of a liar. Ford's testimony is so full of holes, she has no case. The proof is in the eating, Mr. Burly: If Ford had a case, she would have filed a formal criminal complaint against Kavanaugh long before now. But her and her lawyer are too smart for that. And they're too smart to go before the Senate and not play the faulty memory card. This card allows Ford to say virtually anything without fear of perjury charges. "I'm not sure about this, not sure about that, not clear on this, not clear on that, I don't recall exactly, it could be this or it could be that, maybe this, maybe that....yada, yada, yada. I'm sure you get the point. So what law enforcement agency or prosecutor would give this mousey airhead the right time of day when she probably doesn't know she's alive? And that, sir, was the crucial point to Mitchell's report: There's NOTHING credible there for anyone to go on.

And for your info, various body language experts don't believe Ford either.

[ElKabong]

Originally Posted by woodtoo

The only witness to Ford naming Kavanaugh in 1982 is supposedly her husband.
Where is his sworn testimony?
Where was he at the hearing?
Where were her parents?
Literally no one is backing up this 2 door Ford. NO ONE backs up this Ford!!!


She lies!!!!

loose nut behind the wheel... That's ford.