ANYONE OUT THERE BELIEVE THAT THE FBI “INVESTIGATION” OF THE DR. FORD ACCUSATIONS WILL LAST ONE WEEK OR LESS?
AND, IF YOU ARE A BELIEVER, DO YOU THINK THE “INVESTIGATION”, WHETHER OR NOT IT FAILS TO PROVIDE CORROBORATION OF Ms. FORD’S ACCUSATIONS WILL THEN TOTALLY SATISFY THE DEMOCRATS’ “CONCERNS”…AND THE CONFIRMATION VOTE WILL PROCEED?
Well then, if you do believe either or both of these, welcome to the “Jeff Flake School of the the Ignorant, Naive, and Devious” (Unlike some of the school’s alum, its founder, Senator Flake is neither ignorant nor naive. He’s just an unprincipled, cowardly, weak-willed target of great opportunity for the Democratic Party. If nothing else, the members of that party, like the predators they are, know how to identify the “weakest of the herd”).
Someone identified (columnist Michael Goodwin, I believe) Flake “As popular as a rattlesnake in Arizona” (Rattlesnakes are incensed…comparing them to Jeff Fake…oops, I mean FLAKE!).
At any rate, let us know if you think the Democrats will be satisfied and ‘gracious’ to learn if the FBI finds no corroboration. Let us know if you think Democrats won’t continue to ask “why the rush to judgement?”, or “Ramirez and/or Swetnick have made ‘credible’ accusations, and must be heard”, or, “there seems to be genuine questions about whether Judge Kavanaugh might have “passed out” from drinking 35 to 40 years ago”.
Another Veritaspac reader, Doctor Pries (JD), with more credibility than anyone yet produced by the Democrats, has already noted (and we agree) that Dr. Ford’s testimony would have been totally and humiliatingly destroyed in a court of law:
“I have prosecuted a lot of liars in my day and she fits the bill: 1) phony voice inflection trying to be the little Miss Innocent – bet you she has an entirely different style while lecturing; 2) can’t look the committee attorney in the eye; 3) answers only the questions she wants to answer, doesn’t know jack shit on the ones she doesn’t want to answer; 4)pretends stupidity about the English language so she can gain time with her lawyers telling her how to answer 5)inconsistencies in the “facts” she herself has alleged; and the list goes on. This woman has been coached and recoached.”