Posted on 09/30/2018 8:54:49 PM PDT by bitt
It’s really not. She’s a sex crimes prosecutor, not a politician. This is not for the Dems but Flake, Collins and Murkowski.
Relax this is a very damning report re. Ford’s credibility.
Of course all the detractors are saying since she was “paid” by Trump, you can’t trust her findings.
“If it’s accurate and helps Flake, Collins and Murkowski come to a pro Kavenaugh decision than it’s not worthless.”
Okay I’ll buy that. Good job!
Again I think this is Grassley’s way to get Flake, Collins and Murkowski on board.
Just the facts ma’am.
Please rethink that post. It’s a photo of a young girl with an inappropriate caption.
We’re all angry, but there’s no need to go there. That photo might not even be hers.
Then the FBI should start digging deeper into his kindergarten years.
><
Or he wore girls Pampers.
L8r
“Neither on a criminal or civil standard is the evidence sufficient. That’s gotta hurt Dims.”
Kavanaugh should file a civil suit
for exactly the amount in Ford’s Go-
Fund-Me account for defamation of
character. That would really p*ss
off her lawyers, as I’m sure they
want a piece of that pie.
But Republicans and many here and elsewhere were attacking her performance at the hearing. Now the facts. Michell has documented numerous inconsistencies in her report based on Ford's own statements, her own words. That's not a political thing, it's just the facts and even the detractors couldn't deny them.
No, include her ENTIRE estate and add 10%. The criminal case will land her in the pokey so she won’t need her houses.
Thank you for posting the report in a readable format.
She wasn’t there to cross-examine. She was there to collect information. Her typical job is to interview someone who claims they are a victim of a sex crime, and then determine whether to charge a perpetrator.
In her report she mentioned the issues you referred to.
Surely there is a legitimate photo that can be certified of what Dr. Fraud looked like in 1982 = if this is not it.
That photo is straight out of the British tabloids!
You see a page 5?
Even if it is her, it’s a photo of a young girl.
That caption should not be placed under it.
Rachael Mitchell....wasn’t she that lesbo that asked softball questions during the ‘hearing’? I thought feinstein hired her...Kavanaugh didn’t need exonerating. We needed tough questions asked at Balsey Ford’s testimony.
I've looked. But I have not found.
What we really need is a link to a PDF, hopefully with text, or at least OCR'ed.
Oh, I see, that photo isn’t even her photo.
Thanks for the link!
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.