I have so much good will towards Ford right now. She is a God damn ****ing hero and martyr. I hope that she comes out of this relatively okay.

I heard the allegation on the radio and assumed it was common knowledge and simply linked the first website on the list. And I see now that is IS common knowledge. Wikepedia says:



Ford began teaching at Stanford University in 1988.[19] She works at Palo Alto University teaching students clinical trial design and data analysis.[14] She participates in educational programs with the Stanford University School of Medicine as a member of a consortium group with Palo Alto University.[8][14][19] Through this consortium group, called the Pacific Graduate School of Psychology (PGSP), Ford teaches subjects including psychometrics, study methodologies, and statistics.[8][11] She performed consulting work for multiple pharmaceutical companies.[20] Ford worked as the director of biostatistics at Corcept Therapeutics, and collaborated with FDA statisticians.[18] According to NPR and The Washington Post, Ford is "widely published".[8][7]

Simulated- My dude I know you're real ****ing dumb but like, do you know who said "by any means necessary" and what "means" were the implied subject of that?

Because if it's by any means necessary time, and we are getting closer to that time, it won't be extremely credible rape allegations that the whackjobs come for you with.

Oh man I miss poconder posts getting translated into Russian, quoted and replied to with “no”

Sklanksy is saying the 59% of women who think abortion should be legal, cannot by definition be raped.

Its enough evidence to justify booking the bet on the terms David suggested.

The radio program you were listening to... was the modulation amplitude or frequency? Because I think I can set a line on which of those it was.


Holy **** man do you not understand the very basics here?

it's nyet comrade

That's completely off the subject. Which was that I read some weird website and fall for misinformation. But of course it changes the price at least a little.

That's exactly what I am saying.

David what were the subjects of the articles Ford published about mifepristone and what connection does that have with Bret Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court

DS chasing a "Gotcha."

The “misinformation” that people are making fun of you for is the inference of how much it “changes the price”,, not the factual information about her writing articles on abortion.

It’s not off the subject because the point is that someone who thinks that it changes the price any significant amount is stupid. The people who wrote and published that article are stupid, and the more you credit their position the stupider you are.

So again, how much do you think it affects the chance she is telling the truth?

I’m having a hard time believing that naturalnews.com was the first link or even on the first page of results with those search terms or anything similar if you have no clue what the site is or haven’t looked at it and similar sites before. If what you are saying is true and that was the first link then it’s kind of a tell in regards to what you search for on google and click on

So Grassley's deadline has passed. How long before he's out saying "Ford had her chance, too late now!"? Or maybe he meant PDT?

I can’t tell if they know they’re never going to hold Congress again, they truly believe nothing matters, or they’re doing it for that sweet sweet donor payoff.

So basically when Kavanaugh denied he had no idea who was accusing him, he was lying. There can literally be no doubt he did it.

Some people get smarter as they get older. You got dumber.

Hey look, another suuuuuuuuper scummy hot take. You guys are great.

Fly, ask yourself this question: Which typical leftwinger is more likely to make a false accusation? Today's leftwingers or a leftwinger of ten years ago?

An honest answer from me is that I believe a leftwinger today is much more likely to level a false accusation for ideology because of the vibe left wing people I know give off today that was barely there 10 years ago and non existent 20 years ago.

Further, it doesn't matter who said it originally and what they meant, what is relevant is today meaning and context. The left is slowly destroying its own credibility and unintentionally hurting the credibility of Professor Ford.

lol

No. It's 2018. If you parrot info from an unfamiliar website without doing a bit of due diligence, you're really really really ****ing bad at internetting.



Maybe we should have some sort of test for posting privileges. You know, to weed out the people who can't think.

Its passed but Grassley is still willing to let her testify up until Wednesday if the parties can agree on conditions.

the truth is this whole thing goes back way further than 10 or 20 years ago

https://twitter.com/christinawilkie/...72137677721600

I think some of the younger 2p2ers won't remember this, but there was a time when oldsters didn't trust anything about the internet. They were like "I read in Newsweek that anyone can put anything they like up on the cyberspace!" As far as they were concerned, it was a scary anarchistic place where perverts went to lure young girls and maybe you could find pie recipes. These people still went to bank tellers to withdraw cash because they didn't trust ATMs.

Somehow there was a sea change somewhere in the 90s-00s and oldsters immediately assumed that what they read on naturalnewshealth.com about bitcoin reverse mortgages was completely legit. It's opened up entirely new dimensions for creative scam artists.