|
Quoted:
Stockholm Syndrome A hostage's development of positive feelings towards their captor Doesn't want the judge to be a SCOTUS, no positive feelings for him. No previous hostage-captor relationship Says she knew them before hand. A refusal by hostages to co-operate with police forces and other government authorities Wants the FBI to investigate. A hostage's belief in the humanity of their captor, for the reason that when a victim holds the same values as the aggressor, they cease to be perceived as a threat. Uh huh. Not Stockholm. |
| I see what the prosecutor is doing. You cannot, cannot, cannot attack a person who is making an outcry; all you do is alienate the jury and make them angry for beating up on the poor rape victim. Instead, you have to quietly and respectfully gather evidence about inconsistencies in the story and call into question the witness’s memory. So far, the prosecutor has done a prettt good job of that. |
|
Quoted:
If her memory is sufficiently poor to not be able to remember the events of 45 days ago, how can we trust any memories from 36 years ago? It has been 12 years since my last grandfather died. I remember a great deal. |
| Dems seem really upset that the Republican senators aren't asking questions and are leaving everything to the frumpy female prosecutor. Maybe they know that Chad Kav is going to get confirmed anyway and they are doing this just for sound bites and other political ad material. |
|
Quoted:
Not my lane but I doubt a polygraph operator would do a test on the same day you buried a relative. And it wasn't a legit test anyway. Quoted:
Quoted:
Would somebody supposedly crying etc give accurate polygraph results? Not that I believe anything she says is truthful anyway...... And it wasn't a legit test anyway. Two question poly is bullshit. And I agree that the day of a close family member's funeral would not be conducive. The polygraph is as irrelevant as the letters of support the Democrats entered into evidence. |
|
http://i.4cdn.org/pol/1538063585589.gif WTH is this? Edit can someone post the gif, I can not figure it out |
|
|
Quoted:
http://i.4cdn.org/pol/1538063585589.gif WTH is this? Edit can someone post the gif, I can not figure it out |
|
Quoted:
Had the polygraph in the hotel because she was on a tight schedule to catch a flight to New Hampshire. But then she says the polygraph might have been the next day because she spent the night in the hotel.... 
Fucking lies.... |
|
Quoted:
http://i.4cdn.org/pol/1538063585589.gif WTH is this? Edit can someone post the gif, I can not figure it out |
|
The fact that this thing is being litigated in front the Senate Judiciary committee is disgusting. If she really was assaulted, she would have/should have reported it to the police. But she and her leftist pals all know that if they turned it over to law enforcement, nothing would come of it because her story is complete bullshit. In other words, she's full of shit, leftist, and wants to burn down the nomination. If she really was assaulted, it would be in the hands of law enforcement. |
|
Quoted:
Same. I am hoping they are getting her on record committing perjury and are going to drop some bombs in the next session, but not holding out any hopes Quoted:
Quoted:
i am not sure how this is going. The GOP doesn't even want the optics of having male senators question her in this hearing, yet many here think that charging "the victim of a sexual assault" is a possibility? 
Hell, 90% of GD was positive that she wasn't even going to show up....yet, here we are. |
|
Quoted:
Who is the dude SJL is passing the envelope to? Quoted:
Quoted:
http://i.4cdn.org/pol/1538063585589.gif WTH is this? Edit can someone post the gif, I can not figure it out |
|
Unless R's know they have the votes already (ala the Murkowski-Feinstein photo from yesterday) I can't imagine why the counsel is going at her with such kid-gloves...
Only other thing I can think, is these questions are to lock up Collins and Murkowski votes. McConnell and Grassley have been whipping their votes, and telling them this is all a Dem smear. So questions that evoke responses showing that Eshoo, Feinstein, Counsel, or others have been driving the boat not Ford could demonstrate that to Collins and Murkowski. Without having to attack Ford directly. But it seems a pretty piss poor job of that is being done and I fear Collins and Murkowski will be sympathetic to Ford and thinks she's credible. |
|
Quoted:
I see what the prosecutor is doing. You cannot, cannot, cannot attack a person who is making an outcry; all you do is alienate the jury and make them angry for beating up on the poor rape victim. Instead, you have to quietly and respectfully gather evidence about inconsistencies in the story and call into question the witness’s memory. So far, the prosecutor has done a prettt good job of that. |
|
Quoted:
Hell, 90% of GD was positive that she wasn't even going to show up....yet, here we are. Perjury? LOL Republicans don't have the balls for that. |
|
Quoted:
Are you watching a different CSPAN feed? I don't like saying it, but, Ford and the (D) are not making many mistakes. Mitchell is not getting in much at all and wasting the clock. She only has 55min to get it done and now things are making Ford look much more believable. BK had better be solid, to the point, and have some serious statements of facts to refute the accusations. Mitchell needs to land on a date/location and really zero in on this to get any credibility issues across. Twitchy follow up is brutal... even Chris Wallace is making the case for Ford Quoted:
Quoted:
What we are watching is an attorney demonstrate that this woman has credibility issues..a lot of them. She's being destroyed and doesn't even know it. She's nuts. I don't like saying it, but, Ford and the (D) are not making many mistakes. Mitchell is not getting in much at all and wasting the clock. She only has 55min to get it done and now things are making Ford look much more believable. BK had better be solid, to the point, and have some serious statements of facts to refute the accusations. Mitchell needs to land on a date/location and really zero in on this to get any credibility issues across. Twitchy follow up is brutal... even Chris Wallace is making the case for Ford See my statement 5 posts above yours. The 55 minute thing is subject to change per the Committe Chair as I understand it. |
|
Quoted:
I see what the prosecutor is doing. You cannot, cannot, cannot attack a person who is making an outcry; all you do is alienate the jury and make them angry for beating up on the poor rape victim. Instead, you have to quietly and respectfully gather evidence about inconsistencies in the story and call into question the witness's memory. So far, the prosecutor has done a prettt good job of that. |
|
Quoted:
Terrified of flying, flies all over the world for vacations. Love it Says her polygraph was really long and she laid out her whole life story. Was only asked 2 questions. On and on and on..... Credibility problems...she has them. |
|
summary so far:
to the general public who hasn't been following what ford has been saying or doing, or if you're a lefty, ford is doing great, and has been solid and consistant with her answers to anyone that has been following what ford has said or done, and what the media has reported on, ford has been full of inconsistancies, from not knowing on a map, where she lived, yet knowing details of the house where the alleged assault occured, to being driven home by an unknown person that has not shown up as a withness. she is afraid of flying, yet has traveled to tahiti and hawaii frequently, as well as cross country conus. she doesn't rremember details about what she said or did with the wapo, yet, is certain her memory of events is correct etc |
Join the Community
Your next conversation starts here.
Create your free account to join discussions, share your experience, save topics, and connect with the AR15.COM community.
- Join discussions
- Follow topics and replies
- Connect with fellow enthusiasts
Already a member? Sign in
Stay informed by subscribing to our Newsletter