Keith Ellison

[*bfine32*]

(12-19-2018, 09:33 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: So when SSF said "talking about Kavanaugh" he actually meant "defending him". 

:andy:

You'll have to discuss it with SSF; I'm just responding to the post when you put my name in your mouth.

I have not discussed Kavanaugh, the person, at all. 

Dino is the one that's trying to twist into some sort of defense for Kavs and his action. If you cannot see the difference; I cannot help you. 

[*bfine32*]

(12-19-2018, 12:53 PM)fredtoast Wrote: There is no hypocrisy in my position.

Well coming from an unbiased source such as yourself; who can deny it? 

[fredtoast]

(12-19-2018, 06:59 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Well coming from an unbiased source such as yourself; who can deny it? 

You have tried but failed.  I have clearly explained my reasoning on both cases.  There is no hypocrisy.

[*bfine32*]

(12-19-2018, 07:19 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You have tried but failed.  I have clearly explained my reasoning on both cases.  There is no hypocrisy.

Of course there is:

You say Monahan is a liar because she won't release a video she stated she had. She says it's too humiliating because of her appearance in the video. Can I call Ford a liar because she said she was afraid to fly, but has flo0wn quite a bit?

You say Ford is more believable because she shared details, while she shared less details than Ford.

Monahan has witnesses that say she has confided in, including a supervisor, her son posted a very detailed FB account of the situation, she has presented medical records, ect...

You saying I failed carries as much weight as you saying you are not hypocritical.

If I were a lefty I might suggest that this hypocrisy comes from Ford being light haired and skinned; while Monahan is not. But it's obvious it's because one has accused a liberal and the other has accused a conservative. But don't fret you have company; however, I am gladdened to see not too much from this forum. 

[fredtoast]

(12-19-2018, 07:27 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course there is:

You say Monahan is a liar because she won't release a video she stated she had. She says it's too humiliating because of her appearance in the video. Can I call Ford a liar because she said she was afraid to fly, but has flown quite a bit?

You say Ford is more believable because she shared details, while she shared less details than Ford.

Monahan has witnesses that say she has confided in, including a supervisor, her son posted a very detailed FB account of the situation, she has presented medical records, ect...

You saying I failed carries as much weight as you saying you are not hypocritical.

If I were a lefty I might suggest that this hypocrisy comes from Ford being light haired and skinned; while Monahan is not. But it's obvious it's because one has accused a liberal and the other has accused a conservative. But don't fret you have company; however, I am gladdened to see not too much from this forum. 

Ford's fear of flying never affected the investigation or her testimony.  But I can see where you might think it stains her credibility.  If Monahan presents the video tape the way Ford flew to Washington then I will no longer accuse her of being a lair.

I never said anything about "details".  Both women gave details.

Ford also had witnesses that she confided in.  Monahan's records of being treated for anemia prove nothing about abuse.

[*bfine32*]

(12-19-2018, 08:17 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Ford's fear of flying never affected the investigation or her testimony.  But I can see where you might think it stains her credibility.  If Monahan presents the video tape the way Ford flew to Washington then I will no longer accuse her of being a lair.

I never said anything about "details".  Both women gave details.

Ford also had witnesses that she confided in.  Monahan's records of being treated for anemia prove nothing about abuse.

So your big difference is Monahan won't release a video that she says shows her in a humiliating position (aka lying) and Ford said other people were there that don't remember it?

As that's the only difference. If Monohan would have just said someone was there that doesn't know what she's talking about it'd be even steven.

White Privilege is a real thing isn't it? 

Let's see if we can get any honest answers from the onlookers: Pat has been quick to police the thread, but not share his input on the matter at hand. 

[fredtoast]

(12-19-2018, 08:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So your big difference is Monahan won't release a video that she says shows her in a humiliating position (aka lying) and Ford said other people were there that don't remember it?

As that's the only difference. If Monohan would have just said someone was there that doesn't know what she's talking about it'd be even steven.

White Privilege is a real thing isn't it? 

Let's see if we can get any honest answers from the onlookers: Pat has been quick to police the thread, but not share his input on the matter at hand. 

The witnesses that Ford named never said she was lying.  They just said that they do not remember.  In fact one said she believed Ford.  That is totally different from lying about a video.

[GMDino]

(12-19-2018, 06:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Dino is the one that's trying to twist into some sort of defense for Kavs and his action. If you cannot see the difference; I cannot help you. 

I mentioned Kavanaugh and Ford because SSF brought up the situation by trying to make Cruz a martyr and democrats as hypocrites. (Tongue in cheek...of course. )

I'm just responding to the post when you put my name in your mouth.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(12-19-2018, 11:04 PM)GMDino Wrote: I mentioned Kavanaugh and Ford because SSF brought up the situation by trying to make Cruz a martyr

Not a martyr, don't put words in my mouth, liar.  Cruz is included only because his assailers stated "we believe survivors" (plural).

Quote: and democrats as hypocrites.  (Tongue in cheek...of course.   )

No, the hypocrisy is very self evident to anyone not completely partisan. 

Quote:I'm just responding to the post when you put my name in your mouth.  

Oh no, my friend, you've responded to considerably more than that.

[*bfine32*]

(12-19-2018, 10:53 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The witnesses that Ford named never said she was lying.  They just said that they do not remember.  In fact one said she believed Ford.  That is totally different from lying about a video.

And those that support Monahan never said she was lying. Only a middle-aged white man in this forum. You have no idea if she had/has a video. 

Monahan's son said he believes her and provided examples of why he did; but that pales to someone saying: I have no idea what she's talking about, but I believe her. 

Roll with it if you want, perhaps someone here will allow their rationality to trump their bias and let you know; but I hold out little hope. 

[GMDino]

(12-19-2018, 11:13 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Not a martyr, don't put words in my mouth, liar.  Cruz is included only because his assailers stated "we believe survivors" (plural).

Oh! Someone's touchy! Don't worry, I don't expect you to admit it.

(12-19-2018, 11:13 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No, the hypocrisy is very self evident to anyone not completely partisan. 

So it's not self evident to you?

(12-19-2018, 11:13 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Oh no, my friend, you've responded to considerably more than that.

So I guess you didn't even know why I said that. Adorable.

[BmorePat87]

(12-19-2018, 06:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You'll have to discuss it with SSF; I'm just responding to the post when you put my name in your mouth.

I have not discussed Kavanaugh, the person, at all. 

Dino is the one that's trying to twist into some sort of defense for Kavs and his action. If you cannot see the difference; I cannot help you. 

Good thing I said "Fred and Bfine have also been referencing his allegations for multiple pages" and "Fred and Bfine have been engaged in a back and forth regarding Ford and Ellison's accuser."

And, again, SSF only said "talking about" not "twist into some sort of defense".

But I appreciate every time I get one of your patented nonsensical responses. No doubt you didn't "engage in a back and forth regarding Ford" when you posted that thing about her presenting an award asking when Ellison's accuser would.

[fredtoast]

(12-19-2018, 11:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You have no idea if she has a video or not.

It is her choice. She knows everyone will think she is a liar unless she provides the video. There is no logical reason for her to refuse to release it after she threatened to release it. If she was never going to release it then she should never have made the threat.

[fredtoast]

(12-19-2018, 11:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Monahan's son said he believes her and provided examples of why he did; but that pales to someone saying: I have no idea what she's talking about, but I believe her. 

I don't know what you mean by "pales to". I'd say they both carry the exact same weight. Neither proves a lie or proves the truth.

[BmorePat87]

(12-20-2018, 11:37 AM)fredtoast Wrote: It is her choice. She knows everyone will think she is a liar unless she provides the video. There is no logical reason for her to refuse to release it after she threatened to release it. If she was never going to release it then she should never have made the threat.

There absolutely is a logical reason. She was emotional in her threat but realized that having her abuse shown to the entire world would open up wounds that she had tried to close, making it much harder to forget it. There's a reason why abuse victims often push these things down, refuse to come forward, and/or repress memories and construct false realities.

Not saying this is the case for her, but it could be. 

[*bfine32*]

(12-20-2018, 11:37 AM)fredtoast Wrote: It is her choice. She knows everyone will think she is a liar unless she provides the video. There is no logical reason for her to refuse to release it after she threatened to release it. If she was never going to release it then she should never have made the threat.

Perhaps she thought the threat of her releasing a Video would motivate Ellison to admit guilt; who knows.
 
But you and others will call her a “proven liar” when she decided not to release the video to avoid public humiliation. Perhaps you guys cannot bully her into doing so; but will freely slur her. I don't think she's a "proven liar", I do think she has failed to prove Ellison's guilt.

Is Ford a proven liar because no one knows anything about the party she refers to? I'll bet your answer is no.

 
There are plenty logical reasons for her not to release the video, but there's no logical reason to assert she's more likely lying about her assault than Ford. 

Folks can see your rationale is feeble and most likely tied to who was accused, than any burden of proof. But as I said a Lefty might see it as you extending White Privilege to a fellow fair haired/fair skinned individual. After all Ford  is a much more wholesome, American name.

[*bfine32*]

(12-20-2018, 11:48 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: There absolutely is a logical reason. She was emotional in her threat but realized that having her abuse shown to the entire world would open up wounds that she had tried to close, making it much harder to forget it. There's a reason why abuse victims often push these things down, refuse to come forward, and/or repress memories and construct false realities.

Not saying this is the case for her, but it could be. 

Kudos to you. Crossing the Aisle.

[GMDino]

The continued fantasy that some of the people (who say they are unbiased) continue to post in this thread is entertaining.

No one accused Ellison's accuser of "being a liar" when the accusation came out.  Several people accused Ford of lying for political purposes.

After both were heard some said Ford didn't have any proof and Ellison's accuser claimed to have proof but never showed it (giving multiple reasons why she did/would not.)

But the "unbiased" folks continue to say "the left" believed one over the other...for purely political reasons.

It's funny.  And it's sad.

Frankly I'm just happy the usual suspects din't simply add "I'd hit it" to the end of any of these posts while claiming THEY hold the moral high ground for defending accusers. 

[BmorePat87]

(12-20-2018, 02:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Kudos to you. Crossing the Aisle.

No reason we should put politics first in these incidents. 

[*bfine32*]

(12-20-2018, 02:37 PM)GMDino Wrote: The continued fantasy that some of the people (who say they are unbiased) continue to post in this thread is entertaining.

No one accused Ellison's accuser of "being a liar" when the accusation came out.  Several people accused Ford of lying for political purposes.

After both were heard some said Ford didn't have any proof and Ellison's accuser claimed to have proof but never showed it (giving multiple reasons why she did/would not.)

But the "unbiased" folks continue to say "the left" believed one over the other...for purely political reasons.

It's funny.  And it's sad.

Frankly I'm just happy the usual suspects din't simply add "I'd hit it" to the end of any of these posts while claiming THEY hold the moral high ground for defending accusers. 

Someone in this very thread has stated the Monahan accuser is a proven liar; yet Ford is more "believable" because she listed witnesses that do not know what she is talking about. Of course it would take an unbiased person to see the hypocrisy in that.

The rest is just more Dino BS.