Sounds like unreliable testimony to me...
1
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
3 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.Try posting the FULL testimony uncut. It plays very differently, you know it which is why you posted the cherry picked and edited version from a conservative website. How is that for statign facts?!
snytiger6
Level 9
Oct 2, 2018
0
the LINK has no video. It's a point by point explanation of why the Prosecutor says Ford's case is all weak and has no substance.
It literally says:
The sex crimes prosecutor who questioned Christine Blasey Ford about her allegations of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh has released a memo detailing inconsistencies in Ford’s testimony.
“I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee,” Rachel Mitchell wrote in a five-page-long memo obtained by The Washington Post. “A ‘he said, she said’ case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that.”
and then she goes over point by point.
Did you even LOOK at the link?
There is nothing to refute here unless you want to attack Rachel Mitchell and her credentials and expertise. It's because she's a woman, right?
You only see it from the left wing liberal side. The attack on Kavanaugh is nothing more than a democrat attempt to keep Trump from putting another good judge on the US Supreme Court. It would be a lot more respectable and not near as divisive if the democrats just said Kavanaugh was too conservative and they didn’t want him on the court that to wage the dirty war on him by dragging his name through the mud like they have been doing. Hell I hope he is confirmed and remembers the democrats treatment of him in his judgements for the next 40 years!! @Spiketalon
I took a look at that. It seems cherry-picked, rather than a point by point analysis of... an analysis of the testimony. If there are any holes to blow in her testimony, presumably the FBI should shed light on that.
bingst
Level 8
Oct 2, 2018
1
The Federalist is a very conservative group. Of course they cropped the video an dherry picked clips. They produce propaganda, not journalism or unbiased analysis.
So, then you are saying that Rachel Mitchell is incompetent and didn't do her job correctly and shouldn't be allowed to offer her EXPERT opinion? Why? Because her opinion goes against what you believe?
hmmmmmmmmmmm......who is really doing the cherry picking around here.....
@SkotlandSkye I said nothing of the sort. Please read my comment again.
oooooooooooooooh! You can't post that on here or publicly go against anything Ford says!
Don't you know that free speech is dead and you have to follow public opinion?
There's only one side to a story now.
Someone is going to start bringing up things you did when you were a minor.
You should probably go ahead an quit your job as a pre-emptive measure.
SkotlandSkye
Level 8
Oct 2, 2018
1
@SpikeTalon Well, not EVERYONE. Since you're a white male, you don't qualify for any government aid. You need to work until you drop dead of a heart attack. But you need to work at Walmart so that you don't have anything worth suing you over. You certainly aren't entitled to any wealth you create.
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.