Pretty hard to want the truth and a certain outcome that goes against the Republicans at the same time

To me it seems dishonest to use the alleged victim as a tool at any cost while championing on her behalf or any victim's

sure it may be difficult, but those aren't mutually exclusive...

i get it, im just hoping by pointing out how shitty of a person that makes you, repeatedly, that you may make better life choices in the future.

but you can stop acting like you're for finding out the truth, that's just a lie, you're purely motivated by the second half of that. resistance. you could give 2 shits whether the accusation is real or not if it causes fits for the GOP and Kav. that, more than partisan hackery, is what makes you shitty here. just like your party you're willing to weaponize sexual assault allegations with zero care for how credible they are. you dont care about victims, and you're part of the problem. you're the patriarchy. you're the oppressive masculinity. a woman's potential victim-hood means nothing to you, only what effect it can have on your preferred SCOTUS pick. When ghot talks about future effects and what this means for woman thinking about coming forward he's generally wrong, but there's a grain of truth there. you're doing damage to sexual assault victims, for political pettiness, and you should feel bad.

If you need to believe tjhat to get through the day, then be my guest.

If Dr. Ford is found out to be lying, throw her in prison for all i care and it'll be a big win for the republicans, idgaf.

that's more of a reason why I think Dr. Ford is credible, if she were fabricating anything, it so would very politically damaging to the democrats IMO and I think Feinstein was weighing that, obviously the democrats find her to be credible or else they wouldn't have made all this public (I would hope?).

its almost like they sat on this because of the lack of details, and then released it because they knew no investigation would be done (meaning Ford wont have anything to lose) if they dont release any details. and thus she wont testify. and they can blankly call on the FBI for an investigation that isn't warranted knowing it wont happen to win cheap political points from people who they can trick into thinking it's all the GOP's fault. just at a guess.



is there a difference between "cant investigate" and "cant easily / justifiably investigate"? and which one is correct?

I want the truth, if it's a loss for dems, so be it. So when you "that's juts a lie" when I say I want the truth, that offends me. Believe me, I want the truth (which we're probably never going to find out)

@ Bold, you don't see any irony there do you? I want the supreme court to be liberal, America is generally liberal whether you realize it or not, and I want the supreme court to represent America, which is increasingly liberal (as the old people like Ghot die and the younger people achieve voting age). That's why I don't want Trump nominating 2 conservative Judges (he should only have one nominee, like i've stated repeatedly). Trump/Pence PROMISED to nominated a judge to overturn Roe Vs Wade, I am STRONGLY pro-choice, a big reason why I don't want Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court. So when you say "a woman's potential victim-hood means nothing" to me, I'm offended by that.



a Kavanaugh supreme court will take America backwards, not forwards. And it's wrong.

that is entirely possible and that could be in fact the case, I briefly thought about that (or a similar) circumstance before.

#1 im glad i offended you. i think you're lying to yourself about something that in actuality means more to you than you're accounting for. i think you're using this victimhoood as a shallow excuse for your real motivation. thats exactly what i mean, not that you dont care at all for victims, but that your care for victims in this situation compared to your motivations for the SCOTUS pick pale in comparison. you can lie to me, but don't lie to yourself.

as to the status of the supreme court needing to match the populace, #1 i have 12 credits under my belt on just the SCOTUS. and #2 the "liberal country" you're referencing voted in Donald Trump to be president. the "correct" makeup isn't to match the populace, it's 5 conservatives to 4 progressives. period.