Posted on 10/01/2018 3:40:35 PM PDT by yesthatjallen
Then it’s a meh
Friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend... and I just want to say that I haven’t come to any conclusion...
If they asked him for a quote for the article, they must have told him about the allegation. That was before publication but the source was the New Yorker article.
And in the transcripts, it asks about the senator and her staff mentioning it. They didn't.
Never send anything via electronic media that you wouldn’t want on the front page of your church bulletin.
There is as of yet very little legal protection for any type of electric communication (with the possible exception of land line telephones).
He was quoted in the story with a denial OF COURSE he knew the story was coming out, that is not at odds with him saying that he first heard of the allegations via the New Yorker story. He didn’t say first time he heard about it was when he READ it in the magazine.
The texts were ABOUT the upcoming story and the allegations.
Note what the question was: INCIDENT IN QUESTION.
Look what Fake News NBC left out of the "story."
Oh wait, Judge Kavanaugh had already heard and testified that Ramirez was calling around looking for dirt on him. He didn't know the specific allegation, but he had every reason to try to pre-empt something from her.
NBC is lying. As usual.
Heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend who
Heard it from another you’ve been messing around...
(apologies to REO Speedwagon)
You hear people are making up a smear and you ask them to help defend youself and that is cause for “invetigation”
HOW about we spend even 10% as much effort investigated the smear machine has we have the accused?
Yes. I just went and looked at the article and she said she was drunk.
Thank you!!
Just read in the NewYorker that Judge’s ex girlfriend with her attorney wants to talk to the FBI as she has information regarding Judge and Kav. Said she felt morally obligated to challenge Judge’s description of his and Kavanaugh’s high-school sex lives as innocent.
I have to say, Kav should never have made the statement he was a virgin. It wasn’t necessary to state that during the hearing. You deny the allegations of Ford, you don’t give them more then asked. In my line of work with government audits, we are hammered with this, only answer what they ask, never give them more then they ask for. We are rated as one of the best organizations for our financial book-keeping. Lot of tight controls and 4 audits a year.
Better not call friends as character witnesses anymore.
The only case one can make based on hearsay concerning ancient matters of little relevance is a political one.
Newspapers that publish hearsay ought to go out of business.
(((AG)))@Twitter Utterly Debunks Latest NBC Smear Against Kavanaugh
Twitter | 10/1/2018 | (((AG)))
Posted on 10/01/2018 4:59:48 PM PDT by mojito
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3692624/posts
I heard it from a friend who, heard it from a friend who, blah, blah, blah.
This is just so beyond ridiculous at this point. I can’t imagine being Judge Kavanaugh and having to deal with this nonsense. He’s tough though, I’ll give him credit for that.
He didn’t say that he was a virgin during the hearing, he said that in his interview with Fox. Either way, it’s still he said she said.
This is all just silly nonsense and gossip. It’s just so ridiculous.
He is as clean as a whistle. The fact that they had to go back to his high school years to try and dredge stuff up should prove that.
I thought the accusation was that he showed her a dildo.
Maybe so. Lost count. I believe my point stands in that scenario. Would
Never think twice about that a week, a year or 10 years later.
There is so much one can say about women accusing a man of abuse that makes many take the she side but just wait until we hear a she said/she said. Good luck in that scenario!
I was sent an article from the New Yorker about a certain Yale Classmete who claims to have heard about this incident - AProfessor Appold, who was a classmate of Kavanaugh’s at Yale and is now a professor of religion at Princeton Theological Seminary. He says that he had heard the story from another classmate, at or near the time it occurred, about the party that Kavanaugh and Deborah Ramirez attended.
When I tried to post the article and its link, I got a message that we can’t post articles from the New Yorker here.
Sorry to bring it up but it is relevant to this thread. Any refutations are welcome.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.