eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Two possible Republican turncoats claim they are on the fence, and require that Ford be "allowed' to give her side.
That is why the Demons keep stalling.

Mikeyavelli

Exactly! In high school, we heard of a guy in the next county who got laid, but then we found out that it was all bullmueller.

bdamage Loc: My Bunker

HA!
The Dems know Ford will be toast on Thursday so they had to bring another phony accuser to demand a halt to the proceedings.

This one is even more phony than Ford...and New Kav Accuser, Deborah Ramirez, Named 2003 George Soros Open Societies Senior Fellow.

Ramirez’s Yale Classmates Reject Kavanaugh Allegations, White House Stands by Nominee
23 Sep 2018
https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/09/23/ramirez-yale-classmates-deny-kavanaugh-allegations/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook


New Kav Accuser, Deborah Ramirez, Named 2003 George Soros Open Societies Senior Fellow
By Shad Olson/September 24, 2018/

http://www.shadolsonshow.com/2018/09/24/new-kav-accuser-deborah-ramirez-named-2003-george-soros-open-societies-senior-fellow/

They're getting really desperate now, eh?

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Yep; desperation calls for desperate women!

NEW KAV ACCUSER, DEBORAH RAMIREZ, NAMED 2003 GEORGE SOROS OPEN SOCIETIES SENIOR FELLOW
http://www.shadolsonshow.com/2018/09/24/new-kav-accuser-deborah-ramirez-named-2003-george-soros-open-societies-senior-fellow/

You’d think they’d get more creative. Or, at least pick prettier girls.

In any event, one of the first facts to surface after Ronan Farrow’s latest adventure in nepotism journalism regarding Deborah Ramirez’s predictable pile-on against Brett Kavanaugh: A hard and fast link to George Soros and his f**gship societal destruction vehicle, Open Societies Initiative, or OSI.

Turns out, besides being Brett Kavanaugh’s Yale classmate who now alleges he exposed his penis and thrust it toward her face during a drunken dorm party at Yale in 1983, Deborah Ramirez’s steepage in social justice warrior protocol was so ubiquitously undertaken that it earned her a 2003 mention as ‘Senior Fellow’ by George Soros’ Open Society Initiative. The George Soros hits just keep coming and coming.

buffalo Loc: Texas

Has anybody done any background investigation on these 2 whores. How does any one know that they weren't "loose" in their younger days? It's for damn certain they weren't nuns? Oh, wait, I forgot...they are snowflake pure moonbatty women...LOOL

bdamage Loc: My Bunker

Now Stormy Daniels weasel lawyer is jumping on the bandwagon.

This is some sick stuff.

All lies to get Kavanaugh to drop out.

Avenatti says he represents woman with ‘credible information’ about Kavanaugh
By Chris Perez September 23, 2018

https://nypost.com/2018/09/23/avenatti-says-he-represents-woman-with-credible-information-about-kavanaugh/?utm_source=facebook_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons

bdamage Loc: My Bunker

I believe they were "whores".

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Girls just want to have fun!

https://static.onepoliticalplaza.com/upload/2018/9/24/t1-436243-kav15.jpg

buffalo Loc: Texas

This from the puffington post:

"Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is providing calendars he kept in 1982 to the Senate Judiciary Committee to back up his denial of a sexual assault allegation against him, The New York Times is reporting.

Kavanuagh’s team admits the calendars do not disprove the alleged assault took place, but say they also do not corroborate the allegations of his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford. Blasey claims Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed and groped her when they were at a party in high school, and that she only escaped when his friend Mark Judge jumped on them.

People on Twitter were quick to d**g the nominee and his team for thinking a calendar kept by a 17-year-old Kavanaugh would be a viable defense."

Viable defense against, what? An unsubstantiated, unverifiable accusation...WHERE IS MARK JUDGE?

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Game-Changer: Journalist Uncovers Devastating Contradiction to WaPo’s Ford Story
https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/author/benjamin-dekraker/?ff_source=push&ff_medium=conservativetribune&ff_campaign=manualpost&ff_content=2018-09-24
The controversy surrounding Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is exploding … but at the same time, details from his accuser are imploding.
At the center of the firestorm is a claim by University of Palo Alto Professor Christine Blasey Ford that the widely respected federal judge groped her at a drunken party nearly 40 years ago. Her memory of the alleged incident is hazy at best, and it looks increasingly unlikely that the incident happened as she said.
Still, The Washington Post knows a scoop when it sees one. Eager to jump on the story, the newspaper published an article on Sept. 16 that seemed to side with Ford, or at least treat her scandalous claim as credible.
On Saturday, however, well-known journalist Kimberley Strassel of The Wall Street Journal tore into The Post’s story. In a series of thought-provoking tweets on her Twitter account, Strassel pointed out a big problem with the anti-Kavanaugh story … and at the very least, it leaves serious questions for the newspaper to answer.
Strassel explained that The Washington Post story that torpedoed Kavanaugh’s confirmation has a major inaccuracy at its core, and that the newspaper’s explanation for this error makes no sense.
In notes from the family therapist to whom Ford described the alleged assault in 2012, there are four boys mentioned as being involved in the incident, which, if true, happened when the Supreme Court nominee was just 17.
However, Ford claimed that those notes were actually wrong — which is exactly what The Post told its readers:
“The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room,” The Post reported.
However, Strassel reported that she’d obtained an email written by Emma Brown, the reporter who wrote the story, to alleged witness Mark Judge. The email was written the day The Post story appeared.
The email describes a different makeup of the party — it was not four boys, as The Post reported. It was three boys and two girls.


Kimberley Strassel
✔@KimStrassel

· Sep 22, 2018


Replying to @KimStrassel
2) The email wants a comment from him. The subsequent story would reveal Christine Ford's name, and give details of the supposed "assault."

3) One part of the email to Judge reads: "In addition to Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge, whom she called acquaintances she knew from past socializing, she recalls that her friend Leland (last name then was Ingham, now Keyser) was at the house and a friend of the boys named PJ."
11:47 PM - Sep 22, 2018

So, according to Strassel, what Brown wrote in an email to Judge was different from the account presented in The Post’s story. The Post reporter was writing one thing in an email, and something different in the newspaper for the public.
“Wait, say what?” declared Strassel on Twitter. “WaPo reports publicly that Ford says it was ‘four boys,’ even after WaPo reporter tells Judge that Ford had told her it was three boys and a girl.”


Replying to @KimStrassel
5) "The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room.”

6) Wait, say what? WaPo reports publicly that Ford says it was "four boys,"even after WaPo reporter tells Judge that Ford had told her it was three boys and a girl.
11:47 PM - Sep 22, 2018

And that, Strassel wrote on Twitter, is a “huge problem” for Ford’s credbility, as well as the credibility of The Washington Post.
“This was just a week ago, and we have Ford giving two different accounts of who was present,” Strassel continued. “Four boys. No, three boys, one girl. Either way, therapist notes from 2012 definitively say four boys, which Ford didn’t dispute. But now… a girl!”


Replying to @KimStrassel
6) Wait, say what? WaPo reports publicly that Ford says it was "four boys,"even after WaPo reporter tells Judge that Ford had told her it was three boys and a girl.

7) So first, huge problem: This was just a week ago, and we have Ford giving two different accounts of who was present. Four boys. No, three boys, one girl. Either way, therapist notes from 2012 definitively say four boys, which Ford didn't dispute. But now... a girl!
11:47 PM - Sep 22, 2018

She went on to point out that The Washington Post appeared to publish details of Ford’s claim that it knew were inaccurate.
“Reporter has for a week had the names of those Ford listed as present. One is a woman. Yet it writes a story saying FOUR BOYS. Why?” asked Strassel. “Maybe a mistake. But if so, why did WaPo never correct the narrative?”


Replying to @KimStrassel
7) So first, huge problem: This was just a week ago, and we have Ford giving two different accounts of who was present. Four boys. No, three boys, one girl. Either way, therapist notes from 2012 definitively say four boys, which Ford didn't dispute. But now... a girl!

8) Other problem: WaPo's reporting. Reporter has for a week had the names of those Ford listed as present. One is a woman. Yet it writes a story saying FOUR BOYS. Why? Maybe a mistake. But if so, why did WaPo never correct that narrative?
11:47 PM - Sep 22, 2018

Leland Keyser — the one woman who supposedly witnessed the decades-old alleged incident but was never identified, or even mentioned, in The Washington Post account — was also apparently never contacted by The Post until it quoted her for a story follow-up story a full week after its original story appeared. (While Keyser told The Post she believes Ford, it’s much more important to note that she also told the newspaper she doesn’t remember the party.)
8) Other problem: WaPo's reporting. Reporter has for a week had the names of those Ford listed as present. One is a woman. Yet it writes a story saying FOUR BOYS. Why? Maybe a mistake. But if so, why did WaPo never correct that narrative?

9) What, you can't find Keyser? She has lived in the DC area a long time. The paper had no trouble tracking down the other two men (btw, who also denied such party). And why not publish Keyser's name? It published the other men's names.
11:47 PM - Sep 22, 2018

“She has lived in the DC area a long time. The paper had no trouble tracking down the other two men (btw, who also denied such party). And why not publish Keyser’s name? It published the other men’s names,” Strassel pointed out.
Strassel quoted the update from The Post that contained another damning fact: “Before her name became public, Ford told The Post she did not think Keyser would remember the party because nothing remarkable had happened there, as far as Keyser was aware.”
9) What, you can't find Keyser? She has lived in the DC area a long time. The paper had no trouble tracking down the other two men (btw, who also denied such party). And why not publish Keyser's name? It published the other men's names.
And that is huge.
“That is WaPo admitting that it had the name, and had Ford’s response to what would clearly be a Keyser denial, but NEVER PUT IT OUT THERE,” posted Strassel. “Again, why? A lot of people have a lot questions to answer.”
Here’s the bottom line: Even if media outlets like The Washington Post weren’t tripping over themselves to bring down Kavanaugh without doing due diligence, the accuser’s claims contradict themselves, and the coverage of the story is not making that clear…

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

10 Serious Problems With New Accusations Against Kavanaugh
https://www.dailywire.com/authors/ryan-saavedra

The New Yorker published new accusations on Sunday from a second woman who alleges that Judge Brett Kavanaugh acted sexually inappropriate towards her at a party during their college years.

Deborah Ramirez, 53, alleges that while she was at a Yale party, intoxicated to the point that she was on the ground in a "foggy" state "slurring" her words, Kavanaugh pulled his pants down and exposed himself to her.

The New Yorker report and a subsequent report from The New York Times both raise multiple red f**gs about the credibility of the allegations. Here are 10 key points compiled from both reports that raise serious questions about the claims:

1. The New Yorker could not find a single witness who could put Kavanaugh at the alleged party.

Buried more than 1,000 words into the report, Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer wrote:

The New Yorker has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party. The magazine contacted several dozen classmates of Ramirez and Kavanaugh regarding the incident. Many did not respond to interview requests; others declined to comment, or said they did not attend or remember the party.

2. The New York Times could not find a single person who could corroborate Ramirez's claims.

The New York Times likewise could not find a single witness to backup her allegations:

The Times had interviewed several dozen people over the past week in an attempt to corroborate her story, and could find no one with firsthand knowledge.

3. The man accused of egging on Kavanaugh denied Ramirez's allegations and vouched for Kavanaugh's character.

Buried more than 1,400 words into The New Yorker story, Farrow and Mayer provide a quote from one of the men named by Ramirez:

One of the male classmates who Ramirez said egged on Kavanaugh denied any memory of the party. "I don’t think Brett would flash himself to Debbie, or anyone, for that matter," he said. Asked why he thought Ramirez was making the allegation, he responded, "I have no idea." The other male classmate who Ramirez said was involved in the incident commented, "I have zero recollection."

4. A third person that Ramirez claimed was at the party says she was not there for the alleged incident.

The classmate, who was not named, said that "she was not present at the incident."

5. Ramirez contacted her former classmates, asking about the incident, and admitted she was not sure that Kavanaugh was the male who exposed himself.

The Times' report states:

Ms. Ramirez herself contacted former Yale classmates asking if they recalled the incident and told some of them that she could not be certain Mr. Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself.

6. A woman who claims she was "best friends" with Ramirez says Ramirez never mentioned the story and initially said her friend's accusations against Kavanaugh might be "politically motivated."

Buried nearly 1,700 words into the New Yorker piece, the report states:.....

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

This all must be costing the DNC a pretty penny. It'll come out eventually.