• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

Renae said:
I am not "dude" and ask you stop that. Grow up.
Click to expand...

Oh I was only referring to a name I called my kids when they were making unreasonable demands.
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

Renae said:
For the record, that phrase was one of my Grandmother's favorites when my sisters would get out of hand and make unreasonable demands.
Click to expand...

Your grandmother quoted journal articles from the Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences when your sisters got out of hand? I'm impressed!
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

JustHanging said:
This woman is being threatened with death, and these people are likely racists, and to me, that means they are nasty people.

But I can't just make an assertion that these people are likely racists, I needed to provide very strong evidence for such a claim. So I provide a link which has links to articles published in two prestigious peer reviewed journals:

Research Finds That Racism, Sexism, and Status Fears Drove Trump Voters


Feel free to refute either study. As I've mentioned before...Pro-Tip: "Nuh uh!" is not an acceptable refutation of a peer reviewed journal article.
Click to expand...

I'll refute your assumptions based on that study's assumptions. All that happening is the race card is being played and everyone can see it.
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

JustHanging said:
The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences is "echo chamber noise for those that want to believe it."? You are so very very wrong, this is the second most cited journal in the world. Please look up "cited" so you understand what this means.

So far your entire argument is "NUH UH!!!", while my argument is supported by some of the best sources available in the world. Do you have any actual evidence, or are you going to continue to deny facts and reality in your need to support Trump?
Click to expand...

I showed you a link to science indicating liberals are Psychotic. You must now accept that or admit you don't actually believe the **** you shovel.
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

joko104 said:
Democrats Congressional staff members should stop their false flag sending her and her family death threats. They are crazy and loony for doing so.
Click to expand...

No false flags, just crazy and dangerous Trump supporters that can't have anyone threatening their messiah's SCOTUS picks.
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

JustHanging said:
Garbage? These are links to the Cambridge University journal, and the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences journal. These are two very prestigious peer reviewed journals.

Research Finds That Racism, Sexism, and Status Fears Drove Trump Voters

Feel free to refute either study. As I've mentioned before...Pro-Tip: "Nuh uh!" is not an acceptable refutation of a peer reviewed journal article.
Click to expand...

Both of those institutions are full of angry Leftists who suppress any opposition opinion. It happened in their studies on climate change and it's happened here with this racism nonsense. It's all gotten totally out of hand since Trump was elected and it part of the scheme to dismiss him.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/charle...r-the-global-warming-conspiracy/#ee717277c086
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

WCH said:
Both of those institutions are full of angry Leftists who suppress any opposition opinion.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you're having little fantasies because you don't like what the research says. How can we have a discussion if we're not using the best, most accurate, information?

If you're correct, you should be able to easily refute the studies I linked to. If you don't, we know you don't have a clue what you're talking about, and are only capable of parroting FOX News and Trump talking points. Won't that be sad to learn is the case?

It happened in their studies on climate change and it's happened here with this racism nonsense. It's all gotten totally out of hand since Trump was elected and it part of the scheme to dismiss him.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/charle...r-the-global-warming-conspiracy/#ee717277c086
Click to expand...

What does any of this have to do with the studies in peer reviewed journals I linked to?

Again, it should be a breeze for you to refute these studies. In the meantime, let's base our discussion on the best evidence available, not what FOX News or Trump told you to say. OK?


Anyways, considering Ms. Ford has had Trump supporters threaten to kill her, and these supporters are likely racists:

Research Finds That Racism, Sexism, and Status Fears Drove Trump Voters

I can understand her reluctance to testify without first having an FBI investigation. If you had a bunch of racist Trump supporters threatening your life, wouldn't you want the same?
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

Renae said:
So you admit you don't' believe what you shovel,
Click to expand...

Hmmm, it appears accurately assessing the veracity of information isn't your only weakness. You also seem to be having trouble with language comprehension, I never said or suggested anything of the sort.

I will avoid your posts moving forward as you're just trolling at this point. Have a nice day.
Click to expand...

Basing a discussion on the best available information, from prestigious peer reviewed journals, is "trolling." Surely even you must see how weak this is. Instead of suffering cognitive dissonance, spend some time learning so you can put forth a coherent argument, rather than being forced to rely on "NUH UH!" as your primary rebuttal.
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

Renae said:
Look missy, you do NOT get to set how this works. Either Testify or withdraw your claims.
Click to expand...

Blasey doesn't want to testify and her lawyers are looking for excuses not to.
These demands would serve that purpose if they aren't satisfied.
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

JustHanging said:
Garbage? These are links to the Cambridge University journal, and the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences journal. These are two very prestigious peer reviewed journals.

Research Finds That Racism, Sexism, and Status Fears Drove Trump Voters

Feel free to refute either study. As I've mentioned before...Pro-Tip: "Nuh uh!" is not an acceptable refutation of a peer reviewed journal article.
Click to expand...

Education, schmeducation. And we don't need no sciency stuff, y'all! That's just fer them snooty libruls! :roll:
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

JustHanging said:
The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences is "echo chamber noise for those that want to believe it."? You are so very very wrong, this is the second most cited journal in the world. Please look up "cited" so you understand what this means.

So far your entire argument is "NUH UH!!!", while my argument is supported by some of the best sources available in the world. Do you have any actual evidence, or are you going to continue to deny facts and reality in your need to support Trump?
Click to expand...

Well, you know, the NY Post is soooo much more factual and peer-reviewed than scientific journals. By the way, did you see that article in the Post on Page Six? That new lip gloss that Kylie Jenner came out with is just fab!!!!

:roll:
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

Renae said:
I showed you a link to science indicating liberals are Psychotic. You must now accept that or admit you don't actually believe the **** you shovel.
Click to expand...

You posted an article linked to "science" from the NY Post. What's next, a peer-reviewed article from the Weekly World News?

batboy.jpg
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

JustHanging said:
Sounds like you're having little fantasies because you don't like what the research says. How can we have a discussion if we're not using the best, most accurate, information?

If you're correct, you should be able to easily refute the studies I linked to. If you don't, we know you don't have a clue what you're talking about, and are only capable of parroting FOX News and Trump talking points. Won't that be sad to learn is the case?



What does any of this have to do with the studies in peer reviewed journals I linked to?

Again, it should be a breeze for you to refute these studies. In the meantime, let's base our discussion on the best evidence available, not what FOX News or Trump told you to say. OK?


Anyways, considering Ms. Ford has had Trump supporters threaten to kill her, and these supporters are likely racists:

Research Finds That Racism, Sexism, and Status Fears Drove Trump Voters

I can understand her reluctance to testify without first having an FBI investigation. If you had a bunch of racist Trump supporters threatening your life, wouldn't you want the same?
Click to expand...

Why would racism even be a component in the situation? Those studies are based on a biased PC notion of how they think the world works. They don't dare oppose one another.

She and her lawyer want BK testify about something he said he never did at a time and place that can't be identified. Does that make sense?
 
Last edited:
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

WCH said:
Why would racism even be a component in the situation?
Click to expand...

Because I believe racists can be particularly nasty people. They live in fear, and fear can drive people to

Not only are they committing a disgusting racist act, but these people are smiling as they hang other human beings, for the crime of having the wrong skin colour. Doesn't that remind you of Trump?

Remember this:

Trump Is Still The Same Man Who Wanted The Central Park Five Executed

Racism, and the dangers associated with it are alive and well in the Republican party. Trump is proof, the only difference I can see is Trump is too cowardly, as always, to do the job himself.



Those studies are based on a biased PC notion of how they think the world works. They don't dare oppose one another.
Click to expand...
Try again. Here is the link to the studies, have at 'er. But as I told you before "NUH UH!" is not a refutation of a peer reviewed journal article. We need to see your argument and your evidence to support your argument. Make sure you quote the parts of the study you are referring to in your refutation.

Research Finds That Racism, Sexism, and Status Fears Drove Trump Voters

She and her lawyer want BK testify about something he said he never did at a time and place that can't be identified. Does that make sense?
Click to expand...

Yes, because if he lies, especially under oath, that is extremely important. Which is of course what Republican leadership is terrified of.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

This whole nomination process has been a huge black eye for Democrats. From the idiocy of Harris and Booker and that nitwit from Hawaii, to the sleaziness of Feinstein.

Horrible stuff. Horrible
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

KLATTU said:
This whole nomination process has been a huge black eye for Democrats. From the idiocy of Harris and Booker and that nitwit from Hawaii, to the sleaziness of Feinstein.

Horrible stuff. Horrible
Click to expand...

Let me take a really wild stab in the dark here .... you are a Republican?
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

KLATTU said:
This whole nomination process has been a huge black eye for Democrats. From the idiocy of Harris and Booker and that nitwit from Hawaii, to the sleaziness of Feinstein.

Horrible stuff. Horrible
Click to expand...

If you support excusing men who attempt to gang rape teenage girls, sure. But if you don't then I would say it's a huge black eye for Republicans.
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

Renae said:
Look missy, you do NOT get to set how this works. Either Testify or withdraw your claims.
Click to expand...

Where did the "sometime in the future" thing come from? The article mentions she's willing to testify next week with conditions. To act as though "next week" is some arbitrary broadly scoped future time is kind of silly.

Reality is that the FBI should investigate this as they would with any background check of a judicial nominee, but the Republicans are blocking it. They could easily interview the alleged witnesses (who are all too scared to say anything under oath for some reason) and provide what they found to the committee in a week or twos time. But getting someone on the court is more important than silly questions like "did he actually attempt to rape someone?"

I keep coming across people that are really honestly surprised that republicans are trying to push this guy through without giving this a proper investigation. I simply remind them that they nearly elected a child predator for senate. Like, by the skin of their teeth he lost the election. And he was credibly accused of child molestation.

Lets just be honest. Put all the cards on the table. If republicans knew 100% for a fact that Kavanaugh really did get drunk when he was a teenager, turned up the music, pinned her down, covered her mouth to stifle her screams, grinded against her and tried to undress her only to let her go after his buddy broke it up, it wouldn't matter to most. He might not get on the SC, simply because it would only take 2 republicans to vote against him, but the majority by in large would still vote for him. I don't think there's any disputing that.
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

JustHanging said:
Because I believe racists can be particularly nasty people. They live in fear, and fear can drive people to

black-people-lynched.jpg


Not only are they committing a disgusting racist act, but these people are smiling as they hang other human beings, for the crime of having the wrong skin colour. Doesn't that remind you of Trump? Remember this:

Trump Is Still The Same Man Who Wanted The Central Park Five Executed

Racism, and the dangers associated with it are alive and well in the Republican party.


Try again. Here is the link to the studies, have at 'er. But as I told you before "NUH UH!" is not a refutation of a peer reviewed journal article. We need to see your argument and your evidence to support your argument. Make sure you quote the parts of the study you are referring to in your refutation.

Research Finds That Racism, Sexism, and Status Fears Drove Trump Voters



Yes, because if he lies, especially under oath, that is extremely important. Which is of course what Republican leadership is terrified of.
Click to expand...

You are entirely easily amused.

Everyone of those people in that picture are Southern Democrats. Today's Democrat party are the true racists and purveyors of identity politics.

Who is this "we" that demands refutation of their biased review process? I showed you how the "peer reviewed" process works and you denied it made any difference here.

You hate opposition opinion also? Need a safe space?
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

roughdraft274 said:
Where did the "sometime in the future" thing come from? The article mentions she's willing to testify next week with conditions. To act as though "next week" is some arbitrary broadly scoped future time is kind of silly.

Reality is that the FBI should investigate this as they would with any background check of a judicial nominee, but the Republicans are blocking it. They could easily interview the alleged witnesses (who are all too scared to say anything under oath for some reason) and provide what they found to the committee in a week or twos time. But getting someone on the court is more important than silly questions like "did he actually attempt to rape someone?"

I keep coming across people that are really honestly surprised that republicans are trying to push this guy through without giving this a proper investigation. I simply remind them that they nearly elected a child predator for senate. Like, by the skin of their teeth he lost the election. And he was credibly accused of child molestation.

Lets just be honest. Put all the cards on the table. If republicans knew 100% for a fact that Kavanaugh really did get drunk when he was a teenager, turned up the music, pinned her down, covered her mouth to stifle her screams, grinded against her and tried to undress her only to let her go after his buddy broke it up, it wouldn't matter to most. He might not get on the SC, simply because it would only take 2 republicans to vote against him, but the majority by in large would still vote for him. I don't think there's any disputing that.
Click to expand...

Judging from the way your party ignored the likes of Clinton, Kennedy, Franken, etc., I'd say it doesn't matter to y'all.
 
Last edited:
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

haymarket said:
Let me take a really wild stab in the dark here .... you are a Republican?
Click to expand...


I'd be embarassed to call myself a Democrat right now.
 
Re: Christine Blasey Ford opened the possibility she would testify - "Sometime in the future"

roughdraft274 said:
Where did the "sometime in the future" thing come from? The article mentions she's willing to testify next week with conditions. To act as though "next week" is some arbitrary broadly scoped future time is kind of silly.

Reality is that the FBI should investigate this as they would with any background check of a judicial nominee, but the Republicans are blocking it. They could easily interview the alleged witnesses (who are all too scared to say anything under oath for some reason) and provide what they found to the committee in a week or twos time. But getting someone on the court is more important than silly questions like "did he actually attempt to rape someone?"

I keep coming across people that are really honestly surprised that republicans are trying to push this guy through without giving this a proper investigation. I simply remind them that they nearly elected a child predator for senate. Like, by the skin of their teeth he lost the election. And he was credibly accused of child molestation.

Lets just be honest. Put all the cards on the table. If republicans knew 100% for a fact that Kavanaugh really did get drunk when he was a teenager, turned up the music, pinned her down, covered her mouth to stifle her screams, grinded against her and tried to undress her only to let her go after his buddy broke it up, it wouldn't matter to most. He might not get on the SC, simply because it would only take 2 republicans to vote against him, but the majority by in large would still vote for him. I don't think there's any disputing that.
Click to expand...

No the GOP isn't blocking an FBI Investigation.

1) The FBI had no jurisdiction to investigate a state-law assault claim.

2) Even if the FBI had had jurisdiction, it is federal practice not to investigate and prosecute minors, especially for offenses that state authorities have jurisdiction over, except in rare circumstances involving heinous crimes.

3) Even if the FBI had had jurisdiction over the offense, the bureau would never have opened an investigation of a 36-year-old allegation, even if the evidence were strong.

4) Even though the FBI had jurisdiction to conduct a background investigation of Kavanaugh, such investigations are not occasions to trigger full-blown criminal investigations of crimes the Justice Department has no jurisdiction to prosecute, but rather result in a flagging of allegations for the Senate’s consideration (which has been done here).
Click to expand...
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/brett-kavanaugh-nomination-stop-stalling-and-vote/

Let's be honest, you're just parroting the Dem position because you have zero understanding how the law works or the FBI works, you're just playing the meme because it sounds good (unless you understand how stupid it is)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom