Mark Judge meet the FBI

[TJustice]

I think the irony here is that this democrat tactic has also fired up the least likely to vote of the former Trump voters.

A few weeks ago I said none of the casual base from the last election was talking politics. I just didn't think the women who voted from Trump were even going to go to the polls and I was not so sure about the men.

Well that has changed in bigly. From what I have seen and heard many women are concerned for their sons, brothers and husbands. I am told this has become a common conversation among women.

This issue touches almost all women and many seem to have strong opinions. I now understand that even women who have been molested don't want their situation denigrated by unsubstantiated allegations. They don't like b.s. in this very sensitive area.

Some women are really fired up about this and some of them don't like what the democrats have done. Think about this, the democrats already had the activists. So its possible they have fired up the non activists... many of whom voted for Trump.

The least likely part of Trump base is now fired up. Will they now vote? I think so. My advice to the Republicans is you better give them a reason to vote for you if the FBI does not find any more evidence.

 

[constitutionman]

I think the irony here is that this democrat tactic has also fired up the least likely to vote of the former Trump voters.

A few weeks ago I said none of the casual base from the last election was talking politics. I just didn't think the women who voted from Trump were even going to go to the polls and I was not so sure about the men.

Well that has changed in bigly. From what I have seen and heard many women are concerned for their sons, brothers and husbands. I am told this has become a common conversation among women.

This issue touches almost all women and many seem to have strong opinions. I now understand that even women who have been molested don't want their situation denigrated by unsubstantiated allegations. They don't like b.s. in this very sensitive area.

Some women are really fired up about this and some of them don't like what the democrats have done. Think about this, the democrats already had the activists. So its possible they have fired up the non activists... many of whom voted for Trump.

The least likely part of Trump base is now fired up. Will they now vote? I think so. My advice to the Republicans is you better give them a reason to vote for you if the FBI does not find any more evidence.

Those women should be more worried about themselves around guys that think groping and sexual assault is a horseplay and happy that their voices are being heard. BS Macho time is over.

 

[TJustice]

That is exactly the fake bullshit argument that riles up thinking women. Not all voices are legit. Some of those voices are standing up for political reasons. You have to be stupid if you think the activists on the left are doing this because they are all altruistic. Most of the big names are doing what they do for money or power. Sometimes those activists are hurting the cause of group they are pretending to represent.

Ms. Ford may be doing this because she thinks its right but we all know the democrat party is motivated by power. This is at best a hybrid but it seems suspiciously like a massive political effort to put off a vote until after the election. Its seems that the democrats may have gone after any candidate for anything.



Women know there is sexual assault and its very distinct from consensual acts to a women. But, women know that line is almost always determined by women once the initial consent to begin is given. Thinking women understand that this issue is real and its complicated. Bringing up something from 36 years ago without any facts dates or corroboration is probably not helping real victims. This should have been handled differently with private investigations. Without corroboration this should not have turned into a spectacle...in my opinion. That is why we know the democrats are not doing this for women.

Those women should be more worried about themselves around guys that think groping and sexual assault is a horseplay and happy that their voices are being heard. BS Macho time is over.

 

[GRULSTMRNN]

Obstruction of Justice ring any bells? Get your facts straight bro. He will talk and anything that turns out to be a lie will land him most likely in prison.

He's under no obligation to talk to the FBI. This is still America, at least for little while longer. He has a credible excuse that they might drag up some old indiscretions and threaten prosecution, Mueller-style, unless he incriminates Kavanaugh.

 

[GRULSTMRNN]

Time to start your own party? You seem to be predestined. Go for it big boy

That wouldn’t happen even if she was caught on camera taking a suitcase of cash from Soros himself.
The pussy GOP would rather just let everything “go away” than stand up and stop the bullshit once and for all.
They can’t beat the media so they run and hide.

 

[GRULSTMRNN]

Oh you mean justice a la Mexico? Why don't you move there? The rule of law of the mafia there seems to suit you. You are so angry you must be having heartaches every day.

The way this works is, they try to get as many statements as possible, then they compare them and see if they can charge someone with lying. It doesn't matter if they were lying, they don't giver a crap about that. We know that from Gen. Flynn's case.

McConnell is foolish to let this continue. He needs to hold a frickin' vote and show his members open graves with their names on them if they vote the wrong way.

 

[GRULSTMRNN]

She asked for that very same FBI investigation which would include her own background and statements. You are a real dumb ass I believe.

If there is to be a meaningful investigation, the FBI needs to go over every aspect of Dr. Ford's life since the alleged incident. If she's not hiding something, why wouldn't she agree? After all, she is such a great citizen and so brave and all. If she is some sort of sociopath or deluded TDS nutcase, don't we have a right to know? We have had no opportunity to look at her life and try to assess if she is trustworthy. A committee appearance with no opportunity for background checks proves nothing.

She has chosen to share one alleged incident with us. She would have us believe one brief incident that amounted to nothing traumatized her for the rest of her life. So much so that as a grown women, she insisted on a second front door. That does not sound like a particularly stable or rational personality to me.

Alternatively, she could be one of the growing ranks of false accusers, women whose thirst for the status of victimhood leads them to conflate or invent false charges. We know she was a fervent liberal activist and a proud anti-Trump resistance zealot. She surely could envision the adulation the next Anita Hill would receive. She grew up in the privileged DC private school world and could easily spin a plausible, if unprovable , tale. It's very possible as well that she had no intention of it getting this far. She just wanted to throw some sand into the process with her anonymous letter. Perhaps she didn't realize that outside of academia, people kind of expect you to back up charges like this rather than let you destroy a man without showing your face.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

Obstruction of Justice ring any bells? Get your facts straight bro. He will talk and anything that turns out to be a lie will land him most likely in prison.

If you are talking about Mark Judge, then it is as AAA said, ie....he is under no obligation to talk to the FBI. Since this is not a criminal case, there is no subpoena power or grand jury involved. There is no way to compel testimony from him if the only preceedings intiated is a background check.

If he does talk to them though, he is legally required to be truthful. But he can just decline if he wishes, although I think he has said he will do it. Not sure how you can get him on obstruction of justice if he just no-showed or refused to answer certain questions in the interview. Answering untruthfully to a question is another matter though.

 

[GRULSTMRNN]

We all know he agreed to talk so that is a given. I stated my point in this precise context. If any thing he says does not corroborate with facts that constitutes a lie and obstruction of justice. And he will pay the price for that. Not as high a price he paid for fucking up his entire privileged life with alcoholism (oops, how could it be a good frat boy from boarding school ever ended up an alcoholic muse muse, another story for another day, or perhaps we just settle this as karma) but it will rob him even of the next couple years in freedom. I think he is bloodily aware of that and I think the FBI can expect to hear the truth from him and others they will interview.

If you are talking about Mark Judge, then it is as AAA said, ie....he is under no obligation to talk to the FBI. Since this is not a criminal case, there is no subpoena power or grand jury involved. There is no way to compel testimony from him if the only preceedings intiated is a background check.

If he does talk to them though, he is legally required to be truthful. But he can just decline if he wishes, although I think he has said he will do it. Not sure how you can get him on obstruction of justice if he just no-showed or refused to answer certain questions in the interview. Answering untruthfully to a question is another matter though.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

We all know he agreed to talk so that is a given. I stated my point in this precise context. If any thing he says does not corroborate with facts that constitutes a lie and obstruction of justice. And he will pay the price for that. Not as high a price he paid for fucking up his entire privileged life with alcoholism (oops, how could it be a good frat boy from boarding school ever ended up an alcoholic muse muse, another story for another day, or perhaps we just settle this as karma) but it will rob him even of the next couple years in freedom. I think he is bloodily aware of that and I think the FBI can expect to hear the truth from him and others they will interview.

Sounds like a lot of anger there.

Remember what I said: If he is confirmed, we are here for you.