~46~ Lame Duck Unfit Uncle Joe Biden ~46~

[admin]

I agree January 6 is not as big an issue in the midterms as it would be if Trump is the Republican nominee in 2024. But I’m not talking about the midterms.

Don’t know why the fact that Hillary’s husband cheated on her should be held against her. I never understood that argument. On the other hand, you support a guy who has cheated on every wife he has had and has been credibly accused of raping women, including an underage girl. Explain that.

Joe Biden is a pedophile. You support him. Explain that? There is no proof of what you say about Trump, however Clinton is a known cheater and Hillary stayed with him! Talk about woman empowerment! Democrats are truly the party of women!

On top of the obsession with Jan 6 and how out of touch Democrats are with reality and how out of touch they are with 'everyday' Americans, in Pedophile Biden's speech last night he mentioned these issues that greatly affect most Americans ZERO TIMES:

-The invasion at the Southern Border

-Rising Crime in Democrat run cities

-Inflation, which is a tax on us all

-Supply Chain issues

-Gas Prices

-China

-Education during the pandemic, which the Democrats completely botched- hurting minorities and the poorest communities (aka Racism against these grousp)

-Weakening of our military while strengthening other nations who want to harm us

-The War on Cops

-Fentanyl overdoses crippling many communities


Pedophile Biden and the Democrat Party are extremely out of touch with everyday Americans as are most of you elitist leftists on this board. The Red Tsunami is near. Are you prepared for the destruction of the Democrat Party?

Trolling. Penalty

[njbill]

For a governor to be 'detested by a lot of voters', how do you then square Desantis's impending re-election by a (likely) historic margin?

2024 is a long way away. I don't think Desantis is thinking about that to be blunt; he's got an election in four days to handle.

A ton can happen between now and 2024, including Trump's legal issues. I don't know if Trump will be indicted (mostly because I think he's the best gift for the Democratic Party possible, so shutting him up via an arrest would be an unintended own goal). He should be, I think we can all agree on that.

However, if Trump were to be indicted, or even sensed he might be, he's not so dumb as to run third party and risk losing a potential ally (Desantis) in the White House, a guy who could theoretically pardon him should that be necessary. By running third party and helping to elect an opposition party (Democrats), Trump would seal his legal fate. Trump is many things, but dumb like that isn't it; he's a survivor, no more no less.

I understand DeSantis has enough support in Florida to probably get reelected so apparently enough Florida voters don't detest him. But George Wallace and Lester Maddox got elected in Alabama and Georgia yet were detested by many voters nationally. My comment was intended to be more of a national reaction to him.

You must be the only person who thinks DeSantis isn't thinking about 2024. Why else would he pull the Martha's Vineyard stunt?

I think Trump will definitely be indicted by November 2024, and probably convicted of at least the state crimes by then. He may be able to keep himself out of jail while he appeals. Yes, he is a gift to the Dems, but I don't think the prosecutors are going to let him off the hook simply for that reason.

I actually think Trump will run even if indicted, but that is of course an unknown at this point. I stated my reasons above.

The DeSantis angle is interesting and you make some fair points. One could see Trump saying to DeSantis that he'd support him and not run third party if DeSantis would pardon him. That would be illegal which DeSantis would know. Hard to see how that scenario would play out. Would have to be an oral deal from a one on one conversation between the two with no witnesses. Would that be enough for Trump? I don't think so. He'd want firmer assurances. Also if DeSantis reneged, what recourse would Trump have? I don't see it happening. Too risky for DeSantis. I think the two hate each other. Plus I just can't see a losing Trump throwing his support behind anyone. Yes, he'd recognize he'd be handing the election to the Dems, but I don't think Trump cares. He only cares about himself. Doesn't even care about his own family now. By running, he keeps the money faucet turned on and he gets the constant attention and adulation he craves.

Trump might think he'd fare better under a post-2024 Republican Justice Department, but if he has already been convicted, I think the most likely scenario is the new guys keep a distance from Trump. That includes DeSantis who probably wants to see Trump indicted, convicted, and jailed more than most Dems.

[Kismet]

Tom Barrack and associate were just acquitted by a New York Federal jury on illegal foreign lobbying allegations.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/thomas-bar ... ing-trial/

[njbill]

I agree January 6 is not as big an issue in the midterms as it would be if Trump is the Republican nominee in 2024. But I’m not talking about the midterms.

Don’t know why the fact that Hillary’s husband cheated on her should be held against her. I never understood that argument. On the other hand, you support a guy who has cheated on every wife he has had and has been credibly accused of raping women, including an underage girl. Explain that.

Not for nothing but hasn't Hillary's hubby also faced those same " credible " accusations of rape?? There is something rancid about the term " credible accusations" that don't include an arrest and an indictment for the alleged crime. Short of that the term " credible accusations" is a steaming hot pile rubbish that means nothing.

Depends, I guess, on who is making the judgments. As for me, I find the accusations against Trump to be credible. Among other things, he was caught on tape admitting he sexually assaulted women.

Not as sure about Clinton. Not saying the accusations against him aren't credible. Some seem less credible than others. If you think the accusations against Clinton are true and those against Trump are false, that's fine. You are entitled to your opinions. You want to say my opinions are driven in part by my politics, OK. Same applies to you I would say.

I don't feel as strongly as you do about accusations that aren't followed by arrest and conviction, though I get your point. But these are big boys who voluntarily entered the realm of politics which ain't beanbag as they say.

More importantly to me, I have never understood the argument that Hillary should be accountable for any sins her husband may have committed.

[elonmuskrockefeller]

For a governor to be 'detested by a lot of voters', how do you then square Desantis's impending re-election by a (likely) historic margin?

2024 is a long way away. I don't think Desantis is thinking about that to be blunt; he's got an election in four days to handle.

A ton can happen between now and 2024, including Trump's legal issues. I don't know if Trump will be indicted (mostly because I think he's the best gift for the Democratic Party possible, so shutting him up via an arrest would be an unintended own goal). He should be, I think we can all agree on that.

However, if Trump were to be indicted, or even sensed he might be, he's not so dumb as to run third party and risk losing a potential ally (Desantis) in the White House, a guy who could theoretically pardon him should that be necessary. By running third party and helping to elect an opposition party (Democrats), Trump would seal his legal fate. Trump is many things, but dumb like that isn't it; he's a survivor, no more no less.

I understand DeSantis has enough support in Florida to probably get reelected so apparently enough Florida voters don't detest him. But George Wallace and Lester Maddox got elected in Alabama and Georgia yet were detested by many voters nationally. My comment was intended to be more of a national reaction to him.

You must be the only person who thinks DeSantis isn't thinking about 2024. Why else would he pull the Martha's Vineyard stunt?

I think Trump will definitely be indicted by November 2024, and probably convicted of at least the state crimes by then. He may be able to keep himself out of jail while he appeals. Yes, he is a gift to the Dems, but I don't think the prosecutors are going to let him off the hook simply for that reason.

I actually think Trump will run even if indicted, but that is of course an unknown at this point. I stated my reasons above.

The DeSantis angle is interesting and you make some fair points. One could see Trump saying to DeSantis that he'd support him and not run third party if DeSantis would pardon him. That would be illegal which DeSantis would know. Hard to see how that scenario would play out. Would have to be an oral deal from a one on one conversation between the two with no witnesses. Would that be enough for Trump? I don't think so. He'd want firmer assurances. Also if DeSantis reneged, what recourse would Trump have? I don't see it happening. Too risky for DeSantis. I think the two hate each other. Plus I just can't see a losing Trump throwing his support behind anyone. Yes, he'd recognize he'd be handing the election to the Dems, but I don't think Trump cares. He only cares about himself. Doesn't even care about his own family now. By running, he keeps the money faucet turned on and he gets the constant attention and adulation he craves.

Trump might think he'd fare better under a post-2024 Republican Justice Department, but if he has already been convicted, I think the most likely scenario is the new guys keep a distance from Trump. That includes DeSantis who probably wants to see Trump indicted, convicted, and jailed more than most Dems.

I hope Trump is indicted and saddled with too much legal weight to consider running. It's the best outcome for everyone. In advance of that, I'd expect him to announce he's running and dangle dropping out/support in exchange for a pardon down the road. There is no way to paper that, obviously, so the trust factor has to be big, or even the only option (that said, I'm not sold that Desantis would actually pardon him...lol. I think Desantis truly objects to Trump's personal faults).

Which raises this issue: two Republican Governors are not fearful of Trump and can beat him: Desantis and Youngkin. Glenn is very wealthy in his own right, with incredible reach into the establishment. Very popular with Virginians. Desantis has an absolute gargantuan war chest already, with very high national approval ratings (as opposed to what you said). Both guys know who they are (refreshing, as most politicians are phony). Both are good debaters. Want to know another common characteristic of both that I love (that this board should as well): both guys played D1 sports. That tells me they are competitive...something you need too battle Trump.

2024 for Republicans will not be the slam dunk everyone expects for trump. The 2016 field of Republican candidates was made up of by wishy-washy politicians who had had zero real achievement in life.

I'd pull very hard for either Youngkin or Desantis.

[jhu72]

^^^ likes homophobic fascist book banning politicians

[njbill]

I hope Trump is indicted and saddled with too much legal weight to consider running. It's the best outcome for everyone. In advance of that, I'd expect him to announce he's running and dangle dropping out/support in exchange for a pardon down the road. There is no way to paper that, obviously, so the trust factor has to be big, or even the only option (that said, I'm not sold that Desantis would actually pardon him...lol. I think Desantis truly objects to Trump's personal faults).

Which raises this issue: two Republican Govvernors are not fearful of Trump and can beat him: Desantis and Youngkin. Glenn is very wealthy in his own right, with incredible reach into the establishment. Very popular with Virginians. Desantis has an absolute gargantuan war chest already, with very high national approval ratings (as opposed to what you said). Both guys know who they are (refreshing, as most politicians are phony). Both are good debaters. Want to know another common characteristic of both I love: both played D1 sports.

2024 for Republicans will not be the slam dunk everyone expects for trump. The 2016 field of Republican candidates was made up of by wishy-washy politicians who had had zero real achievement in life.

I'd pull very hard for either Youngkin or Desantis.

Again, a pardon "deal" would be illegal. I don't think DeSantis would touch it. He'd have visions of what happened to his fellow hair helmet head, Rod Blago, dancing in his brain. Plus he hates Trump and wants the legal system to bury him.

Not sold on Youngkin. Haven't heard he wants to run for President, though I guess with Va.'s one term rule, he has to be thinking about his next move. I lived in Va. for ten years, though that was decades ago. While Va. voters have moved to the left since then, there's still a lot of Confederacy prevalent in the state so it didn't shock me that he won. More on point, Va. has a history of toggling between R and D governors. And McAuliffe ran a god-awful campaign. He assumed that because he'd won before, he could simply go through the motions and win again. Voters felt he was taking them for granted, which he was.

I can see DeSantis beating Trump in the primary. I think Trump would crush Youngkin. DeSantis would beat him as well.

DeSantis would not run nearly as well in the Blue Wall states as Trump did in 2016. For some reason, Trump was able to get the "poorly educated" (his words) rural white voters to come out and vote. DeSantis comes across as an angry elitist priss who isn't nearly as appealing to that demographic who frankly will skew even more for Biden than they did in 2020 if his 2024 opponent is DeSantis. That cohort hated Hillary and loved Trump. Trump probably still got the majority of that vote in 2020, but Biden substantially cut into it. Biden would do even better with those voters if DeSantis were to be his opponent.

Wait a minute. Aren't you the same guy who said DeSantis isn't thinking about 2024? Why then the "gargantuan war chest"? Haven't seen polls supporting the high national approval ratings (which in any event mean little two years out). The Martha's Vineyard stunt plus the Dallas Cowboys cheerleader gogo boots will haunt him like Dukakis in a tank or Romney's 47% comment.

Good debaters? Debates are overrated. They don't affect the voting nearly as much as the pundits say. Hillary crushed Trump in the debates, yet he won. I think you'll see Fetterman win on Tuesday even though Oz bested him in the debate.

Played D1 sports? Perhaps your comment was tongue in cheek. Hershel played D1 sports yet he is one of the worst Senate candidates in the history of the country.

I agree the 2024 Republican primary won't be a slam dunk for Trump. In fact, if I were a betting man, I'd bet on DeSantis to win the primary. But Trump will be his main adversary, and the primary will get very nasty. How could it not with two of the nastiest politicians around competing against each other? But after losing, Trump will take his (USFL) football and run as a third party candidate. I'd bet dollars to donuts that Trump has some dirt on DeSantis. That's just the way he rolls. In fact, he hates DeSantis so much, he might just sell the dirt to Biden. Then we'd have the Trump dossier in 2024.

[cradleandshoot]

I agree January 6 is not as big an issue in the midterms as it would be if Trump is the Republican nominee in 2024. But I’m not talking about the midterms.

Don’t know why the fact that Hillary’s husband cheated on her should be held against her. I never understood that argument. On the other hand, you support a guy who has cheated on every wife he has had and has been credibly accused of raping women, including an underage girl. Explain that.

Not for nothing but hasn't Hillary's hubby also faced those same " credible " accusations of rape?? There is something rancid about the term " credible accusations" that don't include an arrest and an indictment for the alleged crime. Short of that the term " credible accusations" is a steaming hot pile rubbish that means nothing.

Depends, I guess, on who is making the judgments. As for me, I find the accusations against Trump to be credible. Among other things, he was caught on tape admitting he sexually assaulted women.

Not as sure about Clinton. Not saying the accusations against him aren't credible. Some seem less credible than others. If you think the accusations against Clinton are true and those against Trump are false, that's fine. You are entitled to your opinions. You want to say my opinions are driven in part by my politics, OK. Same applies to you I would say.

I don't feel as strongly as you do about accusations that aren't followed by arrest and conviction, though I get your point. But these are big boys who voluntarily entered the realm of politics which ain't beanbag as they say.

More importantly to me, I have never understood the argument that Hillary should be accountable for any sins her husband may have committed.

Thank you for your response counselor. That phrase " Credible accusations" was the terminology the Bush people used to start a war with another country. The phrase became more bizarre during the nomination process for Justice Kavanough. The woman who testified against JK back in the day admitted she was drunk. Okay, I get that. She didn't remember where she was during the episode, she does not remember even what month it happened. The only thing she remembered under oath was it was BK. Now we can back to the question with no judgement from me... Is that credible??? When Colin Powell told all of us about WoMD Saddam had stashed away in his country. Let me go back and see now... I'm guessing the answer is credible???

[njbill]

We all watched both Ford and Kegger testify. We, the "jury," watched their demeanor as they testified. I found her credible, and he looked and sounded like a lying sack of sh*t to me. Yes, she forgot or mixed up some details from an incident that happened decades ago, but to me that makes her more credible than less. If she purported to remember every single detail, that would suggest to me she was making some things up.

But look. This ship has sailed. Your guy won and he's on the court. He's not coming off until he resigns or gets visited by the Grim Reaper (he ain't getting impeached). My side lost. We have to move on.

BTW, I saw Sam Alito on TV at the WS game last night. Being a Phillies fan is his ONLY redeeming feature. But his attendance at the game is the reason the Phils lost. Bad karma. My two nephews were at the Padres clincher and the homerfest (game 3). But they didn't go the last two nights. Our family should have pooled our funds and gotten them tix.

I'm convinced Alito leaked his draft opinion because he got wind that your boy Brett was playing footsie with the Chief. Alito skates because the investigation didn't include the Justices.

[dislaxxic]

The 2016 field of Republican candidates was made up of by wishy-washy politicians who had had zero real achievement in life.

Interesting.

The list:

Withdrew before the primaries:

George Pataki
Lindsey Graham
Bobby Jindal
Mark Everson
Scott Walker
Rick Perry

Withdrew during the primaries:

ted Cruz
Marko Rubio
John Kasich
Ben Carson
Jeb Bush
Rand Paul
Mike Huckabee
Carly Fiorina
Chris Christie
Jim Gilmore
Rick Santorum

Wishy-Washy alright! Nah, no "life achievements" either! At least none like those achieved by the eventual winner. Tough bar those republicans need to clear...

..

[MDlaxfan76]

^^^ likes homophobic fascist book banning politicians

who played DI sports...which he did not...nor DII nor DIII...

Does Youngkin have a hot wife too?

[jhu72]

^^^ likes homophobic fascist book banning politicians

who played DI sports...which he did not...nor DII nor DIII...

Does Youngkin have a hot wife too?

... learn something new every time I talk to you. Didn't realize whipping homosexuals was a D1 sport.

[cradleandshoot]

We all watched both Ford and Kegger testify. We, the "jury," watched their demeanor as they testified. I found her credible, and he looked and sounded like a lying sack of sh*t to me. Yes, she forgot or mixed up some details from an incident that happened decades ago, but to me that makes her more credible than less. If she purported to remember every single detail, that would suggest to me she was making some things up.

But look. This ship has sailed. Your guy won and he's on the court. He's not coming off until he resigns or gets visited by the Grim Reaper (he ain't getting impeached). My side lost. We have to move on.

BTW, I saw Sam Alito on TV at the WS game last night. Being a Phillies fan is his ONLY redeeming feature. But his attendance at the game is the reason the Phils lost. Bad karma. My two nephews were at the Padres clincher and the homerfest (game 3). But they didn't go the last two nights. Our family should have pooled our funds and gotten them tix.

I'm convinced Alito leaked his draft opinion because he got wind that your boy Brett was playing footsie with the Chief. Alito skates because the investigation didn't include the Justices.

FTR counselor BK is not my guy. I think many of the accusations thrown at him were nothing short of dispicable. There were US Senators insinuating he might have been a serial rapist. I don't blame the man for getting ticked off. I probably would have been equally as ticked off. How would you react counselor under the same circumstances?? IMO and I say so with much sadness that these theatrics are the new normal for the political harassment all nominations to the SCOTUS will have to go through from now on.

[njbill]

Sure sounds like you support the guy. If not, what do the words you type mean?

Don’t recall anybody claiming he was a serial rapist. He was not accused of raping Ford. As I said, I found her account credible and his not. If you disagree, so be it.

He got caught with his pants down and tried to lie about it so he could get on to the Supreme Court. It’s really that simple. I might’ve had a little more respect for him if he had owned up, told the truth, and apologized for what he might been able to characterized as a teenage indiscretion when he was drunk. But he didn’t do that. He chose to lie from beginning to end.

[MDlaxfan76]

^^^ likes homophobic fascist book banning politicians

who played DI sports...which he did not...nor DII nor DIII...

Does Youngkin have a hot wife too?

... learn something new every time I talk to you. Didn't realize whipping homosexuals was a D1 sport.

[SCLaxAttack]

I agree January 6 is not as big an issue in the midterms as it would be if Trump is the Republican nominee in 2024. But I’m not talking about the midterms.

Don’t know why the fact that Hillary’s husband cheated on her should be held against her. I never understood that argument. On the other hand, you support a guy who has cheated on every wife he has had and has been credibly accused of raping women, including an underage girl. Explain that.

Not for nothing but hasn't Hillary's hubby also faced those same " credible " accusations of rape?? There is something rancid about the term " credible accusations" that don't include an arrest and an indictment for the alleged crime. Short of that the term " credible accusations" is a steaming hot pile rubbish that means nothing.

Depends, I guess, on who is making the judgments. As for me, I find the accusations against Trump to be credible. Among other things, he was caught on tape admitting he sexually assaulted women.

Not as sure about Clinton. Not saying the accusations against him aren't credible. Some seem less credible than others. If you think the accusations against Clinton are true and those against Trump are false, that's fine. You are entitled to your opinions. You want to say my opinions are driven in part by my politics, OK. Same applies to you I would say.

I don't feel as strongly as you do about accusations that aren't followed by arrest and conviction, though I get your point. But these are big boys who voluntarily entered the realm of politics which ain't beanbag as they say.

More importantly to me, I have never understood the argument that Hillary should be accountable for any sins her husband may have committed.

Thank you for your response counselor. That phrase " Credible accusations" was the terminology the Bush people used to start a war with another country. The phrase became more bizarre during the nomination process for Justice Kavanough. The woman who testified against JK back in the day admitted she was drunk. Okay, I get that. She didn't remember where she was during the episode, she does not remember even what month it happened. The only thing she remembered under oath was it was BK. Now we can back to the question with no judgement from me... Is that credible??? When Colin Powell told all of us about WoMD Saddam had stashed away in his country. Let me go back and see now... I'm guessing the answer is credible???

Hit a deer while driving a few years ago. I know it was in the fall and on the Adirondack Northway, but for the life of me I can't remember the date or what exit I was near.

But I'm absolutely sure I hit a deer. I'd state that under oath. I even remember where it hit on my car, watching its left eye bulge in disbelief, and looking back through my rear view mirror as it flew over the hood of my car.

Just sayin'.

[NattyBohChamps04]

Hit a deer while driving a few years ago. I know it was in the fall and on the Adirondack Northway, but for the life of me I can't remember the date or what exit I was near.

But I'm absolutely sure I hit a deer. I'd state that under oath. I even remember where it hit on my car, watching its left eye bulge in disbelief, and looking back through my rear view mirror as it flew over the hood of my car.

Just sayin'.

Smoked up 4 or 5 times in high school (to impress a girl.) Got raked over the coals in my TS polygraph because I didn't know exactly how many times and when I had committed such a heinous crime 6 or so years prior. Suggested I must not take breaking the law very seriously.

[cradleandshoot]

I smashed my 1968 Pontiac Tempest into a telephone pole. I know it was on a Sunday night in the month of June way back in 1978. I was at the intersection of Sherman St and Emerson St and it happened about 3am in the morning give or take a few minutes. It was the first wreck I ever had with a car. I remember the cop saying I was lucky to be alive. That was 45 years ago and I still remember it like it was yesterday. You folks are twisting yourselves into pretzels trying to come up with an analogy that makes sense. I'm not going to judge Ms Ford outside the fact I think she was too confused about what happened when she was chitfaced at a party 30 years previous. That I can relate to. I've been pretty chitfaced at parties growing up.

[MDlaxfan76]

I smashed my 1968 Pontiac Tempest into a telephone pole. I know it was on a Sunday night in the month of June way back in 1978. I was at the intersection of Sherman St and Emerson St and it happened about 3am in the morning give or take a few minutes. It was the first wreck I ever had with a car. I remember the cop saying I was lucky to be alive. That was 45 years ago and I still remember it like it was yesterday. You folks are twisting yourselves into pretzels trying to come up with an analogy that makes sense. I'm not going to judge Ms Ford outside the fact I think she was too confused about what happened when she was chitfaced at a party 30 years previous. That I can relate to. I've been pretty chitfaced at parties growing up.

And do you remember which party, which month, which address, someone at the party called you an a-hole? Or which one the police were called and you ran... Or where you puked all over the floor, or in a sink not toilet, or garage can or behind a tree? Or where some other idiot did...

Come on...it happened right?
We're not talking back-out drunk, just inebriated a bit.

I recall the night of my bad accident in HS too, 1976 New Year's morning 6AM going to get some eggs, car slid off the road in snow and hit a tree...car totaled, police report, ambulance...two blocks from home.

But which party something happened at, where a fight broke out, where police came, etc...nah, hazy. Happened for sure, but exact details...

[cradleandshoot]

I smashed my 1968 Pontiac Tempest into a telephone pole. I know it was on a Sunday night in the month of June way back in 1978. I was at the intersection of Sherman St and Emerson St and it happened about 3am in the morning give or take a few minutes. It was the first wreck I ever had with a car. I remember the cop saying I was lucky to be alive. That was 45 years ago and I still remember it like it was yesterday. You folks are twisting yourselves into pretzels trying to come up with an analogy that makes sense. I'm not going to judge Ms Ford outside the fact I think she was too confused about what happened when she was chitfaced at a party 30 years previous. That I can relate to. I've been pretty chitfaced at parties growing up.

And do you remember which party, which month, which address, someone at the party called you an a-hole? Or which one the police were called and you ran... Or where you puked all over the floor, or in a sink not toilet, or garage can or behind a tree? Or where some other idiot did...

Come on...it happened right?
We're not talking back-out drunk, just inebriated a bit.

I recall the night of my bad accident in HS too, 1976 New Year's morning 6AM going to get some eggs, car slid off the road in snow and hit a tree...car totaled, police report, ambulance...two blocks from home.

But which party something happened at, where a fight broke out, where police came, etc...nah, hazy. Happened for sure, but exact details...

I disagree with your analysis. Neither one of us was allegedly the victim of a traumatic sexual assault. The only thing Professor Ford remembers from being pretty well chitfaced by her own admission is that BK was the guy who assaulted her. She can't remember diddly jack chit outside of that one fact. She can't remember the month, she can't remember whose house she was at hell outside of BK she does not even remember who else was at this drunken teenage bash. You are able to find credibility where none exists outside the fact you need desperately to believe what she claimed. For snips and grins she magically has her foggy memories of her drunken party come back to her with immaculate clarity when the only person she remembers is sitting in front of the Senate committee taking testimony to determine if he should sit on the SCOTUS. Since this entire episode happened 30 years ago the recollections of an admittedly highly intoxicated person somehow become credible in the eyes of so many people. This falls right in place with Anita Hill and the pubic hair on the coke can that offended her to such a degree that she FOLLOWED Justice Thomas when he changed jobs.