Page 4 of 19 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 14 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 273

Thread: Feinstein releases cryptic statement about Brett Kavanaugh nomination amid intrigue over secret letter

  1. #46
    Mr Magoo RBP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    60,390
    vCash
    2000
    Mentioned
    185 Post(s)
    Thanks
    78,181
    Thanked 27,731 Times in 15,014 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by DemonGeminiX View Post
    Randomly? An uber-liberal university professor (if you've been paying attention to news articles in here, then you'll realize that "uber-liberal" and "university professor" is pretty much saying the same thing), who has been outed as an Anti-Trump protester, decides at the 11th hour to come out and accuse Trump's pick for the Supreme Court of sexual assault. Because nothing else the Democrat's have done to try to sabotage this appointment has worked.

    Why throw the accusation out there anonymously? And why wait this long?

    If this really happened, then why can't she remember details? She doesn't remember exactly where it happened, she doesn't remember exactly when... if it was so pivotally detrimental to her life that she needed intense therapy for years, then wouldn't every last horrible detail be burned in her memory for the rest of her life? Before you answer that question, keep in mind that I have been through a pivotally detrimental experience in my life, and I know exactly what I'm talking about. I remember every fucking detail of it, and I will until the day I die.

    Furthermore, why not go to the police? I mean you can't prove anything now, and even if you could, the statute of limitations has surely ran out by now. But she could have brought charges against him and the other guy that she named (surprise! surprise! A conservative writer!) 35+ years ago when it allegedly happened. She could have brought charges at any time during which the statute of limitations hadn't expired. Did she? No.

    Now let's talk about Feinstein. She knew about this accusation since July and she didn't bring it up until now. She went through all the interviews and committees related to this appointment, even meeting Kavanaugh and questioning him in private, knowing this accusation was out there, and she didn't even bring it up. She said and did nothing about it at all, not even to her own party members until now.

    Feinstein forwarded the accusation to the FBI, and the FBI decided not to bother with it. If there was any clout to this accusation, they would be all over it.

    This woman hasn't accepted an invitation to testify before Congress after saying that she would testify. Kavanaugh has quickly accepted the invitation. They have a tentative hearing scheduled. It depends on whether or not she agrees to testify before Congress. If she accepts, I will be surprised. She is full of shit, lying her ass off, making it up... however you want to put it, that's what she's doing. And the Democrats are using it to play dirty politics. This is not real, this is a bullshit tactic to #StopTrump. #MeTooGoneTooFar
    And don't forget, this isn't his first confirmation. The senate approved him 12 years ago for the circuit court.
    I wanted to be a Monk, but I never got the chants.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to RBP For This Useful Post:

    Teh One Who Knocks (09-19-2018)

  3. #47
    Take Box B DemonGeminiX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Bum Fuck Egypt, East Jabip
    Posts
    64,808
    vCash
    27021
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Thanks
    45,043
    Thanked 16,893 Times in 11,968 Posts
    Exactly.


    Warning: The posts of this forum member may contain trigger language which may be considered offensive to some.

    Music was better when ugly people were allowed to make it.

  4. #48
    Hal killed Tormund! Pony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Borneo
    Posts
    17,296
    vCash
    2000
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Thanks
    7,298
    Thanked 7,742 Times in 4,207 Posts

  5. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Pony For This Useful Post:

    DemonGeminiX (09-18-2018), KevinD (09-21-2018), lost in melb. (09-18-2018), PorkChopSandwiches (09-19-2018), RBP (09-18-2018), Teh One Who Knocks (09-19-2018)

  6. #49
    Shelter Dweller lost in melb.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Down Under
    Posts
    23,788
    vCash
    7596
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Thanks
    18,695
    Thanked 7,563 Times in 5,213 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by DemonGeminiX View Post
    Randomly? An uber-liberal university professor (if you've been paying attention to news articles in here, then you'll realize that "uber-liberal" and "university professor" is pretty much saying the same thing), who has been outed as an Anti-Trump protester, decides at the 11th hour to come out and accuse Trump's pick for the Supreme Court of sexual assault. Because nothing else the Democrat's have done to try to sabotage this appointment has worked.

    Why throw the accusation out there anonymously? And why wait this long?

    If this really happened, then why can't she remember details? She doesn't remember exactly where it happened, she doesn't remember exactly when... if it was so pivotally detrimental to her life that she needed intense therapy for years, then wouldn't every last horrible detail be burned in her memory for the rest of her life? Before you answer that question, keep in mind that I have been through a pivotally detrimental experience in my life, and I know exactly what I'm talking about. I remember every fucking detail of it, and I will until the day I die.

    Furthermore, why not go to the police? I mean you can't prove anything now, and even if you could, the statute of limitations has surely ran out by now. But she could have brought charges against him and the other guy that she named (surprise! surprise! A conservative writer!) 35+ years ago when it allegedly happened. She could have brought charges at any time during which the statute of limitations hadn't expired. Did she? No.

    Now let's talk about Feinstein. She knew about this accusation since July and she didn't bring it up until now. She went through all the interviews and committees related to this appointment, even meeting Kavanaugh and questioning him in private, knowing this accusation was out there, and she didn't even bring it up. She said and did nothing about it at all, not even to her own party members until now.

    Feinstein forwarded the accusation to the FBI, and the FBI decided not to bother with it. If there was any clout to this accusation, they would be all over it.

    This woman hasn't accepted an invitation to testify before Congress after saying that she would testify. Kavanaugh has quickly accepted the invitation. They have a tentative hearing scheduled. It depends on whether or not she agrees to testify before Congress. If she accepts, I will be surprised. She is full of shit, lying her ass off, making it up... however you want to put it, that's what she's doing. And the Democrats are using it to play dirty politics. This is not real, this is a bullshit tactic to #StopTrump. #MeTooGoneTooFar
    I"m still thinking 'something happened' due the probabilistic unlikely-hood of a university professor making up a rape accusation about a random Trump-fanboy. Plenty of reasons not to go to court - mainly he's a powerful man likely from a powerful family. Maybe she's a coward. Plenty of reasons to anonymously leak it out now: maximum damage to him and least effort to her. Revenge at last!

    As for the Dem's - yep milking it for all it's political worth. Would you expect otherwise?

  7. #50
    Take Box B DemonGeminiX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Bum Fuck Egypt, East Jabip
    Posts
    64,808
    vCash
    27021
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Thanks
    45,043
    Thanked 16,893 Times in 11,968 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by lost in melb. View Post
    I"m still thinking 'something happened' due the probabilistic unlikely-hood of a university professor making up a rape accusation about a random Trump-fanboy. Plenty of reasons not to go to court - mainly he's a powerful man likely from a powerful family. Maybe she's a coward. Plenty of reasons to anonymously leak it out now: maximum damage to him and least effort to her. Revenge at last!

    As for the Dem's - yep milking it for all it's political worth. Would you expect otherwise?
    I'm still thinking nothing happened and she's just one of those crazy asshat liberals that thinks it's ok to damage someone else's reputation just because they have different political opinions or just because she wants the attention. If you recall, in the recent past, there has been a deluge of women falsely accusing men of rape in this country. They've all been found out. And I bet dollars to donuts that this loon is too much of a pussy to step up to plate and testify, because she knows that once she's on the hot seat, she's going to be exposed for the fraud that she really is.

    A man is innocent until proven guilty in this country, and no accusation without trial and conviction should be enough to ruin his life.


    Warning: The posts of this forum member may contain trigger language which may be considered offensive to some.

    Music was better when ugly people were allowed to make it.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to DemonGeminiX For This Useful Post:

    lost in melb. (09-19-2018)

  9. #51
    #DeSantis2024 Teh One Who Knocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    5280' Above Sea Level
    Posts
    256,055
    vCash
    10966
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Thanks
    23,819
    Thanked 113,103 Times in 59,908 Posts

    Interesting Polygraph exam taken by Kavanaugh accuser Christine Ford comes under scrutiny

    By Gregg Re | Fox News




    One day after Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., raised concerns about the polygraph test taken by Brett Kavanaugh accuser Christine Ford, her attorney is refusing to comment on who paid for the examination or provide additional details on how it was conducted.

    And experts contacted by Fox News confirmed that while polygraph examinations can be useful, they are ultimately fallible tools that "can be beaten." Without mentioning any particular instances, one former senior FBI agent said polygraphs would have difficulty detecting deception by sociopaths, psychopaths and committed liars lacking a "conscience."

    Even well-intentioned individuals who have come to believe that their false stories are, in fact, true -- whether because of therapist-induced memories or other causes -- can sometimes pass polygraph tests, former FBI officials and psychology experts told Fox News.

    Ford provided The Washington Post the results of a polygraph examination conducted by a former FBI agent in August, which reportedly showed that she had been truthful in her allegations. According to the Post, Ford took the polygraph on the advice of her attorney, Debra Katz.

    Katz did not respond to numerous requests for comment by Fox News on Tuesday concerning the polygraph.

    Speaking to Fox News' "Hannity" on Monday, Graham questioned who had paid for the polygraph, which experts told Fox News could cost anywhere from $500 to $1,000.

    "If Ms. Ford really did not want to come forward, never intended to come forward ... why did she pay for a polygraph in August, and why did she hire a lawyer in August? And who paid for it?" Graham asked.

    Democratic politicians and operatives have repeatedly cited the claim that Ford had passed a polygraph exam to bolster her claims.

    "The woman who says Kavanaugh attacked her has reportedly passed a polygraph test," Paul Begala, a onetime aide to former President Bill Clinton while he was besieged by numerous accusations of sexual misconduct while in office. "Will Kavanaugh take one?"

    But several experts told Fox News that viewing polygraphs as reliable lie-detector machines is a dangerous oversimplification.

    "It's not the result of the polygraph; it is what polygraph subjects say during the polygraph interview that is most valuable," said Thomas Mauriello, a lecturer in criminology at the University of Maryland who worked as a senior polygraph examiner at the Defense Department.

    "The result of a polygraph simply is whether you did or did not respond to a particular question. A response is not a lie, because the polygraph is not a lie detector as most think," Mauriello added. "A response is the activation of your sympathetic nervous system when answering a question asked during the examination."

    James Gagliano, a former FBI agent who led a SWAT team in New York for several years and now teaches at St. John's University, told Fox News that while polygraphs are valuable, they "can be beaten."

    "In this case, if they want to put this out as irrefutable evidence that this woman is telling the truth because she passed a polygraph -- that's not the way polygraphs work," Gagliano added. "If that were the case, I would've taken every drug dealer, gangbanger, and pedophile I investigated, and I would've thrown them on the polygraph."

    Gagliano, who said he was subjected to several polygraphs at the FBI but never administered one himself, said people can sometimes pass polygraphs if they've convinced themselves they are telling the truth: "It's not a lie if you believe it," he said.

    "Everyone knows polygraph exams can be beaten," Gagliano added. "If someone is a psychopath or a sociopath, if you don't have a conscience, if you don't know right from wrong -- you can beat it."

    Ford announced on Tuesday she would refuse to testify about her allegations, despite numerous invitations from Senate Republicans, until the FBI conducts a full investigation into the events she claims occurred at a house in Maryland more than 35 years ago. Ford has been unable to identify who owned the house in question, or why she was there.

    "It's totally inappropriate for someone to demand we use law enforcement resources to investigate a 35-year-old allegation when she won't go under oath and can't remember key details including when or where it happened," a federal law enforcement official told Fox News.

    Gagliano explained that polygraphs are typically conducted by highly trained professionals who first establish a "baseline" physiological response by asking simplistic questions. Then, Gagliano said, polygraphists often attempt to "scare" examinees by asking a question to make them think they're in trouble, which provides an additional data point.

    Speaking separately on "The Ingraham Angle" Monday night, Mauriello explained that numerous factors -- including how questioners pose those complicated interrogatories -- can affect polygraph results.

    Asked what it meant that Ford had passed a polygraph, Mauriello said flatly, "absolutely nothing."

    Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, seemed to admit as much Tuesday night, even as she insisted Ford was credible.

    "This is a woman who has been profoundly impacted by this," Feinstein told Fox News. "Now, I can't say everything's truthful. I don't know."

  10. #52
    #DeSantis2024 Teh One Who Knocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    5280' Above Sea Level
    Posts
    256,055
    vCash
    10966
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Thanks
    23,819
    Thanked 113,103 Times in 59,908 Posts
    Speaking to Fox News' "Hannity" on Monday, Graham questioned who had paid for the polygraph, which experts told Fox News could cost anywhere from $500 to $1,000.

    "If Ms. Ford really did not want to come forward, never intended to come forward ... why did she pay for a polygraph in August, and why did she hire a lawyer in August? And who paid for it?" Graham asked.
    Those are very good questions...

    Gagliano, who said he was subjected to several polygraphs at the FBI but never administered one himself, said people can sometimes pass polygraphs if they've convinced themselves they are telling the truth: "It's not a lie if you believe it," he said.

  11. #53
    #DeSantis2024 Teh One Who Knocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    5280' Above Sea Level
    Posts
    256,055
    vCash
    10966
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Thanks
    23,819
    Thanked 113,103 Times in 59,908 Posts

    Gotcha! Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford demands 'full investigation' by FBI before testifying, in letter from her lawyers

    By Gregg Re | Fox News




    Christine Blasey Ford, the California professor claiming Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her more than 35 years ago, late Tuesday demanded a "full investigation" by the FBI before she attends any congressional hearing or "interrogation" into her accusations.

    In response, Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, who said Ford is still invited to speak to the committee, countered that "nothing the FBI or any other investigator does would have any bearing on what Dr. Ford tells the committee, so there is no reason for any further delay.”

    Lisa Banks, one of Ford's lawyers, told CNN that her client "will talk to the committee," but she is not prepared for the hearing on Monday.

    She said her client has been faced with threats and she has been figuring out how to protect her family.

    "There should be no rush to a hearing," Banks said.

    Other top Republicans, including Arizona Republican Sen. Jeff Flake, who had said they wanted to hear from Ford before voting on Kavanaugh's confirmation, have indicated they would move forward with a vote if Ford chose not to testify.





    Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., tweeted late Tuesday that Republican leadership "took immediate action" to ensure Ford and Kavanaugh could be heard.

    "If we don’t hear from both sides on Monday, let’s vote," he tweeted.

    Republicans had repeatedly invited Ford and Kavanaugh to testify next week after delaying a planned Judiciary Committee vote that had been scheduled for Thursday. Kavanaugh accepted the committee's invitation, but Ford stayed mum until Tuesday night.

    Ford's insistence on an FBI investigation, which a federal law enforcement official told Fox News was "totally inappropriate," throws the entire hearing into doubt: Grassley, R-Iowa, had threatened to nix the proceeding if Ford refused to participate.

    It was also sure to add fuel to Republican claims that the allegations -- which were known to ranking Judiciary Committee Democrat Dianne Feinstein in July, but revealed to federal authorities just last Thursday -- are part of a concerted effort to stall Kavanaugh's nomination at the last minute.

    "While Dr. Ford’s life was being turned upside down, you and your staff scheduled a public hearing for her to testify at the same table as Judge Kavanaugh in front of two dozen U.S. Senators on national television to relive this traumatic and harrowing incident," Ford's attorneys wrote to Grassley.

    But Republicans on the Judiciary Committee directly disputed that claim Tuesday night, writing in a statement that Ford had been offered a chance to testify privately, and had never been told she would need to sit near Kavanaugh.

    In the letter, Ford's lawyers went on to assert that Ford's family "was forced to relocate out of their home" and that "her email has been hacked, and she has been impersonated online."

    "The hearing was scheduled for six short days from today and would include interrogation by Senators who appear to have made up their minds that she is 'mistaken' and 'mixed up.' While no sexual assault survivor should be subjected to such an ordeal, Dr. Ford wants to cooperate with the Committee and with law enforcement officials."

    The lawyers, Debra Katz and Banks, said historical precedent supported the delay, echoing comments by Feinstein, who on Tuesday wrote on Twitter that the FBI had also "investigated Anita Hill’s allegations of sexual harassment against Clarence Thomas," the Supreme Court justice.

    However, Thomas was accused of sexually harassing Hill while both worked at federal agencies, in potential violation of federal law; Ford has accused Kavanaugh of sexual harassment that would fall well outside of any applicable federal or state statute of limitations because the alleged episode occured decades ago.

    "As the Judiciary Committee has recognized and done before, an FBI investigation of the incident should be the first step in addressing her allegations," the letter continued. "A full investigation by law enforcement officials will ensure that the crucial facts and witnesses in this matter are assessed in a non-partisan manner, and that the Committee is fully informed before conducting any hearing or making any decisions."

    But a federal law enforcement official told Fox News, "It's totally inappropriate for someone to demand we use law enforcement resources to investigate a 35-year-old allegation when she won't go under oath and can't remember key details including when or where it happened."

    Because Ford's allegations do not involve any federal crime within the applicable statute of limitations, Fox News has learned that the bureau would require explicit instructions from the White House to conduct any additional probe.

    The document concluded: "We would welcome the opportunity to talk with you and Ranking Member Feinstein to discuss reasonable steps as to how Dr. Ford can cooperate while also taking care of her own health and security."

    The Judiciary Committee statement Tuesday night condemned any threats against Ford, but maintained that her request for an FBI probe was unfounded.

    "The FBI has indicated to the committee and in public statements that it considers the matter closed," Grassley and other top Republicans wrote. "The FBI does not make credibility determinations. The FBI provides information on a confidential basis in order for decision makers to determine an individual’s suitability. The Senate has the information it needs to follow up with witnesses and gather and assess the relevant evidence."

    The Republicans also disputed the suggestion in Ford's letter that the committee had not been accommodating: "Contrary to suggestions by Dr. Ford’s attorneys, the committee had no plans to place Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh on a panel together, and never indicated plans to do so. Grassley’s staff offered Dr. Ford multiple dates as well as a choice of providing information in a public or private setting."

    Meanwhile, Feinstein and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer released statements backing Ford.

    "I agree with her 100 percent that the rushed process to hold a hearing on Monday has been unfair and is reminiscent of the treatment of Anita Hill," Feinstein said. "I also agree that we need the facts before senators—not staff or lawyers—speak to witnesses.

    "We should honor Dr. Blasey Ford’s wishes and delay this hearing," Feinstein continued. "A proper investigation must be completed, witnesses interviewed, evidence reviewed and all sides spoken to. Only then should the chairman set a hearing date."

    Feinstein had told Fox News earlier Tuesday that she could not be sure Ford was being entirely truthful.

    "This is a woman who has been profoundly impacted by this," Feinstein said. "Now, I can't say everything's truthful. I don't know."

    Eric Holder, the former attorney general, tweeted late Tuesday that the FBI should do a "routine, normal inquiry concerning new Kavanaugh allegations. This is basic background investigation procedure."

    In a separate statement, Schumer said an FBI probe would be consistent with "precedent," adding, "Dr. Ford’s call for the FBI to investigate... demonstrates her confidence that when all the facts are examined by an impartial investigation, her account will be further corroborated and confirmed."

    Earlier Tuesday, Judiciary Committee member Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., rejected a comparison to the Clarence Thomas episode.

    "You’re talking about history," Graham said. "We’re not looking back. We’re looking forward.”

    The attorneys' letter was yet another curveball in Kavanaugh's ongoing nomination drama, which began last week after a leak to The Intercept revealed that Feinstein was in possession of a supposedly damning letter relevant to his confirmation. Republicans have charged that Senate Democrats orchestrated that leak, which then prompted Feinstein to discuss the letter and its then-anonymous accusations publicly and with the FBI.

    Ford went public on Sunday, alleging that Kavanaugh forced himself onto her and covered her mouth in the 1980s, when Kavanaugh was 17 and she was 15. Ford did not mention the incident to others by her own admission until 2012, according to The Washington Post, when her therapist recorded her claim that four individuals had committed the assault.

    Ford has since claimed that the therapist incorrectly transcribed that detail, and that she had said there were only two people in the room. Her husband has maintained that Ford mentioned Kavanaugh in the therapy sessions.

    Ford also told The Post she could not remember in whose house the alleged incident occurred, the exact month of the episode, or why there was a gathering there.

    Republicans on Tuesday also reiterated Grassley's criticism of Feinstein for not telling Republicans, even privately, about the claims against Kavanaugh during days of private and public hearings on the nominee.

    "Ranking Member Feinstein first received a letter with allegations against Judge Brett Kavanaugh from Dr. Ford in July," the Republicans' statement read. "However, Feinstein neglected to notify Committee Republicans of the letter until the day of the first Committee markup, six weeks after receiving the letter and well after the vetting and hearing process had concluded."

    The statement concluded by charging that Feinstein had not taken the matter "seriously."

    "Feinstein referred the letter to the FBI, which added it to Kavanaugh’s background investigation file," it continued. "She should have treated these allegations seriously, as Grassley has done, in immediately acting upon hearing of them."

    Earlier Tuesday, a key potential swing vote senator, Arizona Republican Jeff Flake, said he would move to push Kavanaugh's nomination forward if Ford refused to show up to the hearing planned for Monday. Graham, R-S.C., has also said that if Ford refused to testify, the committee would move forward with a vote within the week.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Teh One Who Knocks For This Useful Post:

    RBP (09-19-2018)

  13. #54
    #DeSantis2024 Teh One Who Knocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    5280' Above Sea Level
    Posts
    256,055
    vCash
    10966
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Thanks
    23,819
    Thanked 113,103 Times in 59,908 Posts
    And here we go....this just proves that this is nothing more than a stall tactic. WTF is an FBI investigation going to do to get to the bottom of this and why does it need to be done before she appears in front of congress? The more this unfolds, the worse it stinks.

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Teh One Who Knocks For This Useful Post:

    DemonGeminiX (09-19-2018), RBP (09-19-2018)

  15. #55
    #DeSantis2024 Teh One Who Knocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    5280' Above Sea Level
    Posts
    256,055
    vCash
    10966
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Thanks
    23,819
    Thanked 113,103 Times in 59,908 Posts

    Double Standards Kavanaugh Accuser’s Lawyer Longtime Dem Donor, Defended Clinton, Franken

    By Penny Star - Breitbart




    Debra Katz, the attorney hired by Christine Blasey Ford to represent her and her claim that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh attacked her at a high school party three decades ago, is a longtime Democratic activist and donor. Katz has, in the past, defended men accused of sexual assault by multiple women, including former President Bill Clinton and disgraced former U.S. Senator Al Franken (D-MN).

    And she is a part of the “resist” movement, the anti-President Donald Trump crowd. In an October 2017 interview posted on the National Women Law Center’s website, Katz was asked about sexual misconduct cases.

    “Today, in your practice, have you noticed an increase in these kinds of cases or complaints? Why do you think that is?” Emily Martin, vice president for Education and Workplace Justice, asked Katz in 2017.

    “Unfortunately, these kinds of cases do not go away. In times of economic uncertainty when people feel vulnerable on many levels, it is easy for them to blame other ‘outside’ groups, including women, African-Americans, and national origin minorities, for their lost opportunities,” Katz said. “Part of President Trump’s appeal is apparently that he reinforces those fears and resentments.”

    “We are seeing a large uptick in sexual, racial, and religious harassment cases since the election,” Katz said. “Unfortunately, President Trump’s misogynistic, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim conduct and comments have radically lowered the bar and have normalized abusive and assaultive conduct in the workplace.”

    However, when asked about men who have been accused of sexual assault by numerous women — Clinton who was impeached and Franken who resigned — Katz has defended them.

    In Clinton’s case, Katz took his word over that of Paula Jones, who claimed that the president exposed himself and pressured her to commit a sexual act, according to a report in Townhall:

    Katz dismissed Jones’ assertions on March 30th, 1998 on CNN’s “Talkback Live” saying that, “Paula Jones’ suit is very, very, very weak. She’s alleged one incident that took place in a hotel room that, by her own testimony, lasted 10 to 12 minutes. She suffered no repercussions in the workplace.”

    Likewise, Katz again said on CBS’ Evening News on April 2nd, 1998 that Jones’ allegation could not hold up in court because, “Clearly a one-time incident that took place in 10 to 12 minutes, she was not forced to have sex, she left on her own volition, the courts increasingly are finding that that is not enough to create a sexually hostile work environment claim.”



    In 1998, Katz told the media that, “If a woman came to me with a similar fact pattern, that is someone in the company above her propositioned her but only once and she suffered no tangible job detriment. I would probably tell her that I’m sorry, it’s unfair, but you don’t have a case.’ Katz said that courts have generally held that a one-time proposition does not constitute harassment. If it’s one time, it has to be severe, almost a sexual assault, not just a touching of somebody’s breast or buttocks or even forceful kissing.”

    Katz also defended Franken when several women accused him of sexual misconduct.

    “Context is relevant,” Katz said of the scandal. “He did not do this as a member of the U.S. Senate. He did this in his capacity of someone who was still functioning as an entertainer.”

    Katz has also been a longtime financial supporter of Democrats, according to Open Secrets. She donated more than $8,000 to both former President Barack Obama’s presidential campaigns.

    At an event to raise money for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign in 2015, Katz is credited with raising $29,000.

    She also has ties to George Soros, according to the Washington Times, through her involvement with the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), an organization that has been directly funded by Soros’s Open Society Foundation.

    POGO co-signed a letter to Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) with a variety of leftist groups demanding Kavanaugh records, according to FrontPageMag.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Teh One Who Knocks For This Useful Post:

    RBP (09-19-2018)

  17. #56
    Mr Magoo RBP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    60,390
    vCash
    2000
    Mentioned
    185 Post(s)
    Thanks
    78,181
    Thanked 27,731 Times in 15,014 Posts
    I wanted to be a Monk, but I never got the chants.

  18. #57
    Shelter Dweller PorkChopSandwiches's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    77,135
    vCash
    5000
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Thanks
    47,197
    Thanked 29,255 Times in 16,489 Posts
    Yep, they think if they can push for the FBI investigation they will have to wait to confirm him. Since she wont even show up to make her statement in front of congress makes me feel she is full of shit, and I imagine they just go ahead and confirm him.






  19. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to PorkChopSandwiches For This Useful Post:

    DemonGeminiX (09-19-2018), RBP (09-19-2018), Teh One Who Knocks (09-19-2018)

  20. #58
    21-Jazz hands salute Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    On the Waters of Life
    Posts
    47,246
    vCash
    9653
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Thanks
    25,971
    Thanked 12,316 Times in 8,172 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by PorkChopSandwiches View Post
    Yep, they think if they can push for the FBI investigation they will have to wait to confirm him. Since she wont even show up to make her statement in front of congress makes me feel she is full of shit, and I imagine they just go ahead and confirm him.
    They wont.. Anyone voting yes right now will be killed by the #metoo movement. Not everyone has balls like Trump.

  21. #59
    #DeSantis2024 Teh One Who Knocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    5280' Above Sea Level
    Posts
    256,055
    vCash
    10966
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Thanks
    23,819
    Thanked 113,103 Times in 59,908 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Muddy View Post
    They wont.. Anyone voting yes right now will be killed by the #metoo movement. Not everyone has balls like Trump.
    If she refuses to appear in front of congress on Monday, I bet they vote to confirm. She has her chance.

  22. #60
    #DeSantis2024 Teh One Who Knocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    5280' Above Sea Level
    Posts
    256,055
    vCash
    10966
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Thanks
    23,819
    Thanked 113,103 Times in 59,908 Posts

  23. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Teh One Who Knocks For This Useful Post:

    DemonGeminiX (09-19-2018), Muddy (09-19-2018), RBP (09-19-2018)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •