Did Christine Blasey Ford appear to be credible?

Originally posted by @philokalia
Wow, look at this internet tough guy -- we're better all watch out or Handy Andy will take a break from his fulfilling & busy life to insult us.

i'm quakin' in mah boots.

Andy doesn't waste his time on mediocre cowards.

Originally posted by @wolfe63
I watched the first two and a half hours of what I expected to be a theatric spectacle.

However, my impression: The "15 year old girl" within the grown-up Professor, exuded nothing but fear and honesty.

Thus, I'm more convinced: A "blacked-out" Brett Kavanaugh could have done this. Will he now continue the charade, one of pubescent piety?

Trump's calling her credible.
I guess he is covering all bases.

Originally posted by @tom-wolsey
She seemed credible and sincere. Kavanaugh seemed credible and sincere. Lindsey Graham seemed credible and sincere.

Thank you Tom for your insight.
What's your opinion on the sun rising tomorrow?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Alright, so this is a much lower standard...

Basically, if someone can simply convincingly hold together a fragment of a story without any details against someone, they should be disqualified from office?

Is that what you are saying?

OR what is the standard, Duchy?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I already stated that it doesn't mean she lied about everything, but it shows she is dishonest and that takes away from her credibility. If a person (especially a psychologist) wants to be believed they should not lie about things that are completely optional and for manipulation purposes only.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/juanita-broaddrick-brett-kavanaugh_us_5bad86ffe4b0b4d308d17cd7

The fact that nobody said they heard about Blasey’s assault around the time it occurred, Broaddrick said, is why she finds it unbelievable. “You compare that with mine ― data, dates, people I told, injuries,” she said, referring to her claim that Clinton bit her lip.

“I think she’s casting a very dark shadow on real victims,” Broaddrick said.

Originally posted by @philokalia
Alright, so this is a much lower standard...

Basically, if someone can simply convincingly hold together a fragment of a story without any details against someone, they should be disqualified from office?

Is that what you are saying?

OR what is the standard, Duchy?

People who lie under oath should not be on the Supreme Court

Originally posted by @athousandyoung
People who lie under oath should not be on the Supreme Court

Lawyers who don't lie? LOL!