Who said this matter was going to reach an actual court? Who said it needs to? Hearings under oath are not courts. And this just in:
You see Captain, I've never hit a woman, not once. I've beaten many a man near to death but I've never needed to hurt a woman. Every man I've met in my life who dwells on they will come after us all etc. actually has had a disgraceful past I learned. So I get the whole it is fine until it is you and you are innocent however.. I am certain from experience the people who cry loudest about the fear of false accusations are dodgy. This is different from seemingly good guys who actually have have been accused. What seems new to you, listening to women, is actually something civilized men have done for a long time now. Simple reality is women can be bitches but men do 90% of it. In the trumper mind everything involving bad behavior is balanced, it is not.
Why would she put a third person there? Because it's not possible to prove otherwise, it's just her word against another. How does she pass a lie detector test? Because in her mind she believes something actually happened,(and that's assuming she isn't just lying) which is why lie detector tests are inadmissible. Better questions to ask are, why did she scrub her social media? Why has she waited so long to come forward? Why did the leftists hold on to this in secret for months? Has she been coached by the left as to what she should and should not say? Why has her story changed? And most important, why should we believe her and not the accused along with the supposed third person both of whom are categorically denying all charges?
Not 2 people but 4 people! At least that’s what her therapist allegedly incorrectly wrote down. The whole thing is a circus and Feinstein is Barnum and Schumer is Bailey.
You're full of shit up to your ears. You offer no evidence of anything, as per usual. You leap to crazy unsubstantiated assumptions to support your crazy ideology. And most importantly, you poor dumb motherfucker, you miss the point entirely, that in this climate your past is completely and totally irrelevant. If they say you're guilty, you are, and you somehow don't see the danger in that.
Again, the guilty reveal themselves by protesting too much. Ask any cop. That is what I can tell about YOUR bleating. (and Max E's) Kavanaugh is not your average Joe, he has put himself forward for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. He has no privacy expectations like the average Joe. This is politics not a court. Clarence Thomas got appointed and likely Kavanaugh will also. The reality is a few of the GOP Senators don't want him and are looking for a way out.
So it's suspicious if there are no witnesses, and it's suspicious if there are witnesses. Looks like you have the whole thing sewn up. Are you for or against against a fair and proper hearing? That's what it comes down to. EDIT: And you think this woman has nothing to lose by making false claims? Think about it. Her life and career will change dramatically for the worse if it should come to pass that she made the whole thing up. She's putting herself out on a limb. The least anyone can do is give her the time of day and consider what she has to say.
What about your summary dismissal of your BFF's admission to anally raping a drunk black man with a gun, Fredrika?