Trump is the WWE and Mueller is The Undertaker

[Poopadoop]

I got no credible way to respond to these posts.

Here's some ad hominens instead.

fyp

[BananaStand]

fyp

I spent the better part of last week giving overwhelmingly credible responses to the points being made today. Learn to read.

If there is anything you think is at all ambiguous, then feel free to ask. There's a lot of dog shit to respond to today, so in the interest of keeping this non-ridiculous...please just pick one thing at a time. So, what's first?

__________ is a disqualifying flaw that precludes BK from serving on the court.

Please cite your evidence. I will accept factual evidence, empirical evidence, compelling circumstantial evidence, or even logical assumptions as long as they're based in the universe of rationality.

[Poopadoop]

I spent the better part of last week giving overwhelmingly credible responses to the points being made today. aaargh.jpg

From what little of your earlier ramblings I did get through before I realised you were talking shit, your "responses" to these points were mostly attacks on the credibility of the evidence against K. IOW, you were talking about other issues.

These posts today, had you read them, related to what K himself said at the hearing, how he lied about what his yearbook said for example. Maybe you have some good excuses for those too now?

let me sum those up for you:

Boofing, devil's triangle, Renate. All things K lied about under oath.

PJ was there. Specifically, how Ford remembered that little detail of the evening in question on her own years ago before K was ever nominated.

K's petulant behavior at hearing towards D senators.

K's evasiveness at hearing, especially as compared to Ford's directness.

[BananaStand]

he lied about what his yearbook said for example.

Lied? About what?

Boofing, devil's triangle, Renate. All things K lied about under oath.

There's the L word again? How do you know he is lying? What qualifies you to judge the veracity of his account of 30-year old inside-jokes?

PJ was there. Specifically, how Ford remembered that little detail of the evening in question on her own years ago before K was ever nominated.

If I'm not mistaken, PJ refutes Ford's account. Has he changed his mind?

K's petulant behavior at hearing towards D senators.

If he played it cool they'd be ripping him for being cold and uncaring with regards to an abused woman. If he sinks, he's innocent. if he floats, he's a witch. Fuck that argument.

And the D senators engaged in a coordinate political play in which it was content to destroy this man's life for the petty end result of delaying his confirmation and holding the seat open until the head count in the Senate is more favorable to them. That's fucking bullshit. Every american who cares about due process, the presumption of innocence, democratic elections, and the fucking constitution should be profusely disappointed in every one of their democrat senators.

There is not an informed person in the world that thinks BK is guilty of anything....and that statement includes every democratic senator.

If I were BK I wouldn't have answered any questions. I would have sat there holding up both birds for three hours. I think that's an appropriate response when you live your entire life according to the highest moral standard, and then some political hack wants to try and tear you down by asking about your fucking high school yearbook.

K's evasiveness at hearing, especially as compared to Ford's directness.

Evasiveness? What hearing were you watching? What question was he reluctant to answer?

What I saw, was that the only question he wouldn't answer was "Will you call for an FBI investigation into yourself?"

[Poopadoop]

There's the L word again? How do you know he is lying? What qualifies you to judge the veracity of his account of 30-year old inside-jokes?"

Let's be realistic.

Imagine I say three things that everyone agrees have three particular meanings. And then when asked, I give three other definitions that by mere coincidence all make me look more virtuous than the accepted meanings. No-one should believe that I'm telling the truth, even if I'm a republican.

If I'm not mistaken, PJ refutes Ford's account. Has he changed his mind?

Any account along the lines of "I don't remember being complicit in attempted rape" does not count as a refutation, sorry. And what do you expect him to say? "Sure I was there and stood by laughing while it happened. So what?"

I also find your use of Judge as a "witness" ridiculous for the same reasons.

You also claim the friend of Ford who doesn't remember a party 36 years ago where nothing happened to HER is evidence that K is innocent of assaulting Ford. No, it's evidence that K is innocent of assaulting Ford's friend.

If he played it cool they'd be ripping him for being cold and uncaring with regards to an abused woman. If he sinks, he's innocent. if he floats, he's a witch. Fuck that argument.

Nope. There's a middle ground of being engaged and showing concern without being belligerent. He acted like a bratty entitled kid that needed a slap.

And the D senators engaged in a coordinate political play in which it was content to destroy this man's life for the petty end result of delaying his confirmation and holding the seat open until the head count in the Senate is more favorable to them.

So you don't accept credible direct eyewitness evidence for K's guilt, but you do accept some vague conspiracy-driven theory of Dems' guilt in trying to 'ruin his life'.

Frankly, I don't doubt the D's exploited Ford's testimony for political gain. That doesn't in and of itself discredit the testimony itself however.

Also, if I recall correctly it was Flake who agreed to the FBI investigation. So I guess he's in on the conspiracy too by your logic.

That's fucking bullshit. Every american who cares about due process, the presumption of innocence, democratic elections, and the fucking constitution should be profusely disappointed in every one of their democrat senators.

Due process has been followed. What are you even talking about?

The rest of this stuff is just pure demagoguery. There's nothing about democratic elections being at stake here. There's nothing about the presumption of innocence that has been abused, nor about the constitution. Is Kavanaugh in jail? No, it's under investigation. As it should be.

There is not an informed person in the world that thinks BK is guilty of anything....and that statement includes every democratic senator.

You're right, every informed person thinks more investigation is needed.

If I were BK I wouldn't have answered any questions. I would have sat there holding up both birds for three hours. I think that's an appropriate response

Somehow I'm not surprised his belligerence seemed appropriate to you.

when you live your entire life according to the highest moral standard

source? 'Cause i've heard three separate accounts to the contrary, one of which was very credible, as well as several people describe him as quite the pisstank.

and then some political hack wants to try and tear you down by asking about your fucking high school yearbook.

Goes to credibility. If the guy can't admit he was a pisstank in high school and college and had sex (who didn't?) why expect him to admit to anything even worse?

Evasiveness? What hearing were you watching? What question was he reluctant to answer?

What I saw, was that the only question he wouldn't answer was "Will you call for an FBI investigation into yourself?"

Look at the graph I posted earlier. He was evasive at several points.

Here's a few examples:

Q: Did you ever pass out from drinking?

A: Did you?


Q: Did you ever drink too much?

A: Did you?


Q: How many drinks is too many?

A: I dunno. Whatever the chart says.


It's like interviewing a fucking teenager. Answer the question, yes, no, or how many. Why act all petulant if you're innocent?

[BananaStand]

Let's be realistic.

Yes, please.

Imagine I say three things that everyone agrees have three particular meanings. And then when asked, I give three other definitions

How are we being realistic if we're 'imagining'? Can you admit how fucking ridiculous you are now?

And who is "everyone" in this context?

Any account along the lines of "I don't remember being complicit in attempted rape" does not count as a refutation, sorry. And what do you expect him to say? "Sure I was there and stood by laughing while it happened. So what?"

Mark Judge does not have a current relationship with BK. They haven't spoken in years. He has nothing to risk by admitting that such an incident happened Everyone, including democrats agree, that there is nothing in Ford's allegation that warrants prosecution. So there's no legal risk for Judge to corroborate Ford's story.

If your theory is that Judge is merely invoking "bro's before ho's" in a matter involving the nation's highest court, you're a special kind of stubborn.

I also find your use of Judge as a "witness" ridiculous for the same reasons.

Oh? you weren't talking about Judge just then? Fine, replace Judge's name with PJ's, or Keyser's, or creepy porn lawyer, or whoever. None of these people are lying, or purposefully misremembering just to do a solid for their high school pal.

You also claim the friend of Ford who doesn't remember a party 36 years ago where nothing happened to HER is evidence that K is innocent of assaulting Ford. No, it's evidence that K is innocent of assaulting Ford's friend.

it goes to credibility. Ford named that friend as a witness. They didn't pick that woman's name out of a hat. Ford said "this person was there, she'll remember". Then they asked that person, and she didn't.

Apparently where you live, in bizarro world, that doesn't count against Ford at all? WTF??

Nope. There's a middle ground of being engaged and showing concern without being belligerent. He acted like a bratty entitled kid that needed a slap.

He might have saved his nomination. And if he didn't, it was sunk anyway, so at least he went out birds flying.

So you don't accept credible direct eyewitness evidence for K's guilt

I would, if such a thing existed. What's your source?

but you do accept some vague conspiracy-driven theory of Dems' guilt in trying to 'ruin his life'.

Vague? Dems had this info in July. Hid it until september. Those are overt facts.

Frankly, I don't doubt the D's exploited Ford's testimony for political gain.

That's an understatement.

That doesn't in and of itself discredit the testimony itself however.

If it was credible, it could have been used more effectively. The fact it was used THIS WAY, severely inhibits its believability.

Also, if I recall correctly it was Flake who agreed to the FBI investigation. So I guess he's in on the conspiracy too by your logic

He got guilt-tripped pretty hard. Some feminist cunts cornered him in an elevator and played the "I was a victim, don't you care about me?" card.

Due process has been followed. What are you even talking about?

Dems had the info in July. They hid it until September. There were inquiries, hearings, interviews, etc etc etc. All appropriate times to bring this up.

There's nothing about democratic elections being at stake here.

Umm, one side won in 2016, they currently hold power, they are within their rights to govern and appoint as they see fit. They have a mandate from the voting public. if minority political faction undercuts that mandate until they get more favorable election results, they are usurping the results of a democratic election.

There's nothing about the presumption of innocence that has been abused

,
Are you on meth right now?

nor about the constitution.

Try READING the fucking constitution! There's a separation of powers. there are supposed to be checks and balances. Congress is supposed to check the executive branch by consenting to appointments to the judicial branch. That's why the judiciary committee exists! It's there for the purpose of vetting appointments. See...the constitution doesn't like it when the executive branch investigates itself. The founding fathers thought that was a little corrupt.

So who in their right mind thinks it's ok for the FBI to investigate kavanaugh when the Senate has the exact same investigative powers?

How is this not obvious to you?

Is Kavanaugh in jail? No, it's under investigation. As it should be.

What about the investigation to date is unsatisfactory to you?

You're right, every informed person thinks more investigation is needed.

False.

Somehow I'm not surprised his belligerence seemed appropriate to you.

source? 'Cause i've heard three separate accounts to the contrary, one of which was very credible, as well as several people describe him as quite the pisstank.

There have been 6 separate exhaustive FBI inquiries into his background. These inquires' scope includes interviews of all of your personal contacts going back to grade school.

Goes to credibility. If the guy can't admit he was a pisstank in high school and college and had sex (who didn't?) why expect him to admit to anything even worse?

I don't see how this isn't the case-cracking detail that completely exonerates BK. He claims he was a virgin. The allegations against him say he was a drugging rapist, participator in gang rape, and fluently used code words for raunchy group sex. Obviously someone is lying.

Don't you think if he was a tenth of the sexual aggressor that they say he is, that there would be one woman out there who would raise her hand and at least admit to consensual sex with BK, thus refuting his virginity claim. The fact that hasn't happen is probably the MOST compelling fact in this whole story.

It's like interviewing a fucking teenager. Answer the question, yes, no, or how many. Why act all petulant if you're innocent?

The questions are so obviously made in bad faith. There's no "right" answer he can give that they won't use to smear him. If he says "six drinks is too many", then they'll find evidence of him having seven drinks a handful of times and say what an excessive boozehound he was. If he says "ten drinks is too many", then they'll find some dumb-ass scientist to cite some dumb-ass expert study about how someone BK's height and weight can only metabolize 9.2 drinks or some dumb-ass shit like that.

[Poopadoop]

How are we being realistic if we're 'imagining'? Can you admit how fucking ridiculous you are now?

Oh that's clever.

And who is "everyone" in this context?

What? You need me to define 'everyone' for you?

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Boof

https://www.urbandictionary.com/defi...L%27S+TRIANGLE

https://www.urbandictionary.com/defi...ils%20Triangle

aaargh.jpg

Not going to read the rest, sorry. You've already discredited yourself too much already with this disingenuous beginning.

[Poopadoop]

After they're done with Kavanaugh, I want the FBI to look into this.

I am a victim of sexual assault. I don't expect Judge Kavanaugh or Jake Tapper, or Jeff Flake, or anybody, to be held responsible for that.

Attachment 1074

[Poopadoop]