Otherwise, you look like you are either horribly misinformed or dishonest. I say this because I don't think it is your goal to be either of these things...but you are coming across that way.

First, I want to quickly address the questions I asked you because you did not. You cited two bogus stories in your earlier post. One about Keith Ellison and the second about a spy working for Senator Feinstein. I asked you to explain them because I wanted to know the degree to which you had been conned by these stories. You often stated that you never spoke to any Russians...well, at least one of these stories has ties to the Russians and likely was developed by them and it was spread around the internet by them...and it reached you and you repeated it. So, Russians do seem to have your ear. That's fine because Right Wing media nuts on FOX and Breitbart and other clowns also ran with this propaganda so...feel good you were not the only one taken in.

My guess is you did not answer my questions because you maybe went and looked and discovered how bogus those stories were. So, moving on...

"FBI report says they found no corroboration."

This is not true. The FBI did not offer an opinion on what they did. They conducted 9 interviews and filed what was said in the interviews. That's it. The FBI has not said anything about what they found nor would they in this case.

"And the Judiciary committee gave those senators what they wanted (a limited FBI investigation) but yet here we are people going crazy (including dim senators) saying that wasn't enough. WTF?"

They did, you are correct here. Also I stated and you could see from a mile away that the FBI Supplemental Background Check would yield nothing. This was a given and everything about it relied on Mark Judge who was a longtime drug and alcohol abuser that had severe health problems and was one of Bart's (aka Weepy Brett) best buddies.

"What does your party need as proof exactly?"

I don't have a party and there never was going to be "proof" of the attack on Dr. Ford particularly 36 years after the fact. This was not a trial, it was a job interview and Weepy Brett failed it miserably. Sadly, the focus here has been placed on "proving the attack" which was never the issue and this is why the Republicans focused on that. This is in part why they were so confident and granted the supplemental background check. They hung their hat on that. Plus, they don't need a single Democrat to vote for Kavanaugh to confirm him. Hence, go ahead and interview the 10 people we put on this list. None of the 10 will provide anything that corroborates Dr. Ford's story. This is why Lindsey Graham bragged he did not even need to read the report.

"Reg 7 FBI investigations have shown no signs of Dr. Ford's, Ramirez or even crazy porn lawyer's witness having any credibility at all."

That's not true. These women and their stories, focusing on Ford and Ramirez because that's who the FBI was told to focus on, have credibility, have people that corroborate the behavior of Weepy Brett but the FBI was told not to interview them. College roommates of Bart/Weepy Brett were not interviewed in previous background checks so, quite likely none of this came up in any previous background check. None of this has an impact on the credibility of the women.

"It is clear to most conservatives that this shit show your party has created and I predict it will backfire on your party in a pretty major way."

Again, I have no party and you could be right but I am not so sure. Trump's victories were not by huge margins. Remove a horrible candidate like Hillary Clinton, that both Democrats and Independents ran away from in droves, and we could see Democrats do quite well. I won't count any chickens here until they hatch.

"Your party now believes that just an allegation is good enough especially from a woman."

This is nonsense. I don't know a single person that believes that including all the women I know that see this whole thing as a horror show. I stated and so have many others, in a court of law Dr. Ford's case would be tossed out. Period. The thing is here, we are not at all dealing with a court of law and Kavanaugh's performance after Dr. Ford testified was a pathetic disgrace. He looked more guilty than ever and put on a disgusting pity party for himself. I can tell you most men, if accused of something they did not do, would not sit there blubbering and weeping and babbling like a child. They would say "Look, whatever way we need to do this, whether it is through an FBI investigation, whomever needs to be involved, whomever needs to be called into this room to testify here or anywhere else, I want that done NOW."

Instead, when directly asked by Durbin if he would support an FBI investigation, Weepy Brett sat silent, and then waffled and avoided the question. Were that me and I was innocent, I would have said immediately "Hell yes, get the FBI on it right now."

He appeared to lie over and over about his past, his yearbook entries, and his behavior. Why?

He did lie when asked about when he found out about the Ramirez allegations. He and his "team" had already been working on heading those allegations off PRIOR TO the New Yorker article coming out. Again, why did he lie?

I would say he lied because he did these things. Same reason Bill Clinton lied.

"And a lot of conservative women are saying "oh hell no" because you just degraded them too even if they are REAL survivors."

Trump certainly degraded all sexual assault victims at his rally and claimed men are the real victims. That was hideous. Democrats have not degraded anybody in this way.

"What ever happened to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty Reg?"

Simple, Weepy Bart/Brett was not on trial and was presumed innocent. He was not being charged with a crime. He was on a job interview. This is the same guy that wanted to ask Bill Clinton how many times he ejaculated into Monica's mouth and said in a case like this "The hard questions must be asked!" and what did he do when they asked him the hard questions? Cried like a baby and boy, did he ever look guilty doing that.

"And why did Feinstain sit on this until the last minute if she believed it? She had a one on one interview with Kavanaugh after all. Why didn't she ask him about it? Or better yet demand an FBI investigation July?"

That was answered so this question is sort of pointless. She sat on it because Dr. Ford specifically said she did not want this out and was undecided about if she wanted to talk about it publicly. So, Feinstein did what she was asked. Sat on it until Dr. Ford came to terms with being willing to testify because until she was willing to do that nothing could be done with it.

"This was all about delay and stall until the midterms"

Yes, of course it was about delay and stall. The Republicans delayed and stalled Obama for over a year until he was out of office. So what? Are you going to say something about that being an issue? The only option the Democrats have is to try to delay and stall because they don't have the votes or power to do anything else. I see no problem with delaying or stalling in that case the decision of a LIFETIME appointment to the Supreme Court.

There was no reason to rush the nomination. There was no great hurry for it except the midterms. So, both side were doing this. So what?