Former classmate reportedly told FBI of another Kavanaugh allegation

  
Via:  john-russell  •  one month ago  •  177 comments

Former classmate reportedly told FBI of another Kavanaugh allegation
Stier's account bears similarities to an allegation made by Deborah Ramirez, another Yale classmate who accused Kavanaugh of pulling his pants down and thrusting his penis in her face at a DIFFERENT dorm party.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



Former classmate reportedly told FBI of another Kavanaugh allegation



  • A former classmate of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh tried to tip off US senators and the FBI last year to another sexual misconduct allegation,   The New York Times reported   Saturday.

  • The allegation was previously unreported, but came amid a rancorous confirmation battle last fall where Kavanaugh faced allegations from multiple women.

  • This new claim comes from one of Kavanaugh's former Yale classmates, Max Stier, who said he saw Kavanaugh at a drunken dorm party where his friends pushed his penis into a female student's hands.

  • Kavanaugh has denied all previous allegations of sexual misconduct, and refused to answer The Times reporters' questions about Stier's account.



A former college classmate of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh tried to tip off US senators and the FBI last year to another previously unreported sexual misconduct allegation,   The New York Times reported   Saturday.

According to the newspaper, a former Yale student named Max Stier said he saw Kavanaugh at a drunken dorm party where his friends pushed his penis into a female student's hands. Kavanaugh was reportedly a freshman at the time of the incident.

Stier declined to discuss the allegation with The Times, but the reporters said they corroborated details of the story with two officials who spoke about the matter with Stier.

It's unclear from The Times' report if Stier knew who the female student was, and if she has verified that the incident occurred as Stier described it.

Stier's account bears similarities to an allegation made by   Deborah Ramirez , another Yale classmate who accused Kavanaugh of pulling his pants down and thrusting his penis in her face at a different dorm party.

The FBI did not investigate Stier's claims, The Times reported.

5bbbe65a9a4ab8166227a053-750-474.jpg President Donald Trump shakes hands with Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, before a ceremonial swearing-in in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Monday, Oct. 8, 2018. Susan Walsh/AP

Though the FBI did interview Ramirez in September 2018, it did not interview some 25 individuals named by Ramirez as potentially having corroborating evidence of her allegations, according to The Times.

The newspaper added that many of the potential witnesses on Ramirez's list tried, but failed, to reach out to the FBI.

Kavanaugh was   confirmed   to the Supreme Court last October after a rancorous battle over the multiple allegations of sexual misconduct he faced.

Only one of Kavanaugh's accusers, Christine Blasey Ford, was permitted to testify to the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Democrats railed bitterly against Senate Republicans, who limited the scope of the FBI's investigation into the allegations.

Kavanaugh adamantly denied Ford's and Ramirez's allegations. He declined to answer The Times reporters' questions about Stier's story.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
Find text within the comments Find 
 
JohnRussell
1  seeder  JohnRussell    one month ago

A second account of Kavanaugh imposing his dick on someone at a party.  OK he was a drunk 19 year old. 

Lets just stop acting like Kavanaugh was being framed during his confirmation hearings. He was a lout in high school and college and he tried to cover it up. (With enough success that he is now on the Supreme Court.) 

 
 
 
squiggy
1.1  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one month ago

That confirmation  was a year ago and not even a peep from the Daily Bleeding Snowflake?

I should feel badly for them - I get a dick in my face everyday, too.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  squiggy @1.1    one month ago
I get a dick in my face everyday, too.

as long as you like it

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
1.1.2  al Jizzerror  replied to  squiggy @1.1    one month ago
I get a dick in my face everyday, too.

Really?

Are you Kavanaugh's law clerk? 

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
1.1.3  igknorantzrulz  replied to  squiggy @1.1    one month ago

not touching this, or the 'dick' in your face everyday, too.

 
 
 
squiggy
1.1.4  squiggy  replied to  al Jizzerror @1.1.2    one month ago

Actually, you fucked up because his all-female staff has not a derogatory word about the guy. He’s likely an asshole when he drinks but as the stoners excuse and relativize, “What he does off the job is his business.”

 
 
 
MrFrost
1.1.5  MrFrost  replied to  squiggy @1.1.4    one month ago
Actually, you fucked up because his all-female staff has not a derogatory word about the guy.

Do you really think that after the accusations, he would be dumb enough to do the same thing to his current staff? Kavanaugh is a scumbag alcoholic but he isn't dumb. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1.6  Greg Jones  replied to  MrFrost @1.1.5    one month ago

Oh BS!

Not a word was spoken against him, by anyone, including his staff, until he was nominated for the SCOTUS.

Not a shred of credible evidence against him has ever surfaced.

Everyone on the planet knows this is just another stupid leftwing political trick that will fall as flat as the others.

You would think they would learn how to play the game to win by now. They can neither lead nor govern, and this is just more proof of that.

 
 
 
squiggy
1.1.7  squiggy  replied to  MrFrost @1.1.5    one month ago

“...dumb enough to do the same thing to his current staff? “

Excellent point. Yes, because alcoholics repeat the same losing behavior and that is lacking.

 
 
 
Split Personality
1.1.8  Split Personality  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.6    one month ago
Not a word was spoken against him, by anyone, including his staff, until he was nominated for the SCOTUS.

Sort of like, there were few complaints about Bill Clinton or Donald Trump until they wanted to be the Presidential nominee?

What a coincidence./s

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
1.2  al Jizzerror  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one month ago
Lets just stop acting like Kavanaugh was being framed during his confirmation hearings.

I thought Kavanaugh handled the confirmation hearings really well.

512  

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.3  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one month ago

If you check back, Ms Ramirez uncorroborated allegation was known during the confirmation hearings. She was coached for several days to "refresh" her memories and her story has been debunked. At this late date this most recent smear will die a quick death and will have no impact on the presidential race. It seems like the left has not yet learned to simply give up and get on with their wretched lives.

 
 
 
MrFrost
1.3.1  MrFrost  replied to  Greg Jones @1.3    one month ago

The senate put very specific guidelines for the investigation. In other words, it was a sham investigation. Completely rigged by the right wing in order to get Kavanaugh on the bench. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.3.2  Greg Jones  replied to  MrFrost @1.3.1    one month ago

How was it rigged? Ms Ford had more than ample time to make her case, and as time went on it became apparent that she was trying to come up with a credible recollection of 35 year old drunken memories. She couldn't even remember the date, time, or place where this alleged "attack" occurred even after she was coached. The whole stupid fake case was a farce.

 
 
 
squiggy
1.3.3  squiggy  replied to  MrFrost @1.3.1    one month ago

These people were free to cry to the rag of their choice, yet not a sound then or for a year.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.3.4  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  MrFrost @1.3.1    one month ago

Seems to me it was a sham to the left simply because they did not get the results they so desperately desired.

 
 
 
Ender
1.3.5  Ender  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.3.4    one month ago

I am not a fan of Kav the frat bro yet I was kind of upset with the article. To come out a day later and have to add an addendum to the article that completely blows the whole thing out of the water..

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.3.6  Tessylo  replied to  MrFrost @1.3.1    one month ago

It was rammed through and no one really investigated the claims thoroughly or vetted Kavanaugh at all.  A lot of these lodging complaints tried to contact the FBI, etc., as well, but were never ever responded to by the FBI.  

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.3.7  Ozzwald  replied to  Greg Jones @1.3.2    one month ago
How was it rigged?

Please explain how the FBI can investigate a sexual assault accusation, without ever interviewing the suspect.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
1.4  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one month ago
Lets just stop acting like Kavanaugh was being framed during his confirmation hearings.

Maybe you should have read the entire New York lying Times article JR.   Towards the end, they actually admitted that the ALLEGED VICTIM doesn't remember any incident like that.

So, we have yet one more, I don't remember, I can't recall bullshit piece.  

Come on back when you and/or the Times actually have FACTS to support the BULLSHIT.  Rumor, supposition, conjecture, hyperbole, innuendo, fantasies are NOT//NOT facts.

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.4.1  It Is ME  replied to  XDm9mm @1.4    one month ago
Towards the end, they actually admitted that the ALLEGED VICTIM doesn't remember any incident like that.

Must ….. Seed …….. Doubt...….anyway. jrSmiley_79_smiley_image.gif

" Wise men , when in doubt whether to speak or to keep quiet, give themselves the benefit of the doubt, and remain silent. " Napoleon Hill

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.4.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  XDm9mm @1.4    one month ago
Maybe you should have read the entire New York lying Times article JR.   Towards the end, they actually admitted that the ALLEGED VICTIM doesn't remember any incident like that. So, we have yet one more, I don't remember, I can't recall bullshit piece

The accusation isnt about her remembering it. It is about someone else remembering it. 

According to the newspaper, a former Yale student named Max Stier said he saw Kavanaugh at a drunken dorm party where his friends pushed his penis into a female student's hands. Kavanaugh was reportedly a freshman at the time of the incident.

I would assume the girl was too drunk to remember. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
1.4.3  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @1.4.2    one month ago
The accusation isnt about her remembering it. It is about someone else remembering it.

Well, when she remembers something even the ALLEGED VICTIM doesn't remember, I'll posit that someone is FULL OF SHIT.  And that someone is trying to sell a fucking book on the word of a liar and at the expense of the reputation of yet someone else.

And of course, you bought it hook line and sinker.

PS:  The NYTs even modified the OPINION piece you're using to include the information that the alleged VICTIM doesn't remember anything like that happening.

 
 
 
bugsy
1.4.4  bugsy  replied to  XDm9mm @1.4.3    one month ago

It doesn't matter, XD. The NYT reported something anti Trump and anti Kavanaugh. Simply because of that, John will believe it. Publishing a correction that essentially states the original article is bullshit.means nothing to those that have hatred so hard they completely bypass common sense.

Because the clown bus declared their wish to impeach Kavanaugh because of this article, they are going to continue to run with their bullshit. Kinda like pretty much everything they have accused Trump of, and later found the accusation was bullshit. They will not recant their hatred.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.5  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one month ago
graham.jpghttps://www.rawstory.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/graham-76x41.jpg 76w, https://www.rawstory.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/graham-615x329.jpg 615w, https://www.rawstory.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/graham-768x411.jpg 768w" sizes="(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px" >
  • Share
  • Tweet
A new report reveals that Deborah Ramirez, a woman who claims Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her while she was a student at Yale University, may have had evidence to corroborate her story — but that Republicans created a process which would stifle her account so that Kavanaugh could be confirmed.

This article first   appeared in Salon.

Deborah Ramirez, who alleged that she was assaulted by Kavanaugh at a Yale party when she was an underclassman, had her legal team provide the F.B.I. with a list of at least 25 people who could have had evidence to corroborate her story, but   the bureau ultimately interviewed none of them , according to The New York Times. The publication also learned that many of the individuals who could have corroborated Ramirez’s story attempted to reach the F.B.I. on their own but were unable to do so.

According to The New York Times, Ramirez claims to have been sexually assaulted by Kavanaugh during a dormitory party when she was a freshman at the Ivy League school.

During the winter of her freshman year, a drunken dormitory party unsettled her deeply. She and some classmates had been drinking heavily when, she says, a freshman named Brett Kavanaugh pulled down his pants and thrust his penis at her, prompting her to swat it away and inadvertently touch it. Some of the onlookers, who had been passing around a fake penis earlier in the evening, laughed.

The Times adds that “at least seven people, including Ms. Ramirez’s mother, heard about the Yale incident long before Mr. Kavanaugh was a federal judge. Two of those people were classmates who learned of it just days after the party occurred, suggesting that it was discussed among students at the time.”
 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.5.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @1.5    one month ago
Deborah Ramirez, who alleged that she was assaulted by Kavanaugh at a Yale party when she was an underclassman, had her legal team provide the F.B.I. with a list of at least 25 people who could have had evidence to corroborate her story, but  the bureau ultimately interviewed none of them , according to The New York Times.
 
 
 
gooseisgone
1.6  gooseisgone  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one month ago
Lets just stop acting like Kavanaugh was being framed

Yeah.......lets believe some a story that the supposed victim doesn't even acknowledge happened.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
1.7  Freedom Warrior  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one month ago

 At this point we have no reason to believe  any of the accusations made against Kavanaugh, in fact pretty much the opposite, none of them appear to be true and I would say none of them are true.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2  seeder  JohnRussell    one month ago

NBC news is reporting via AM JOY  that there were over 20 potential witnesses to the story of Kavanaugh exposing himself at college parties that were not interviewed by the FBI. 

There was a rush to vote Kavanaugh through to the SC. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2    one month ago
There was a rush to vote Kavanaugh through to the SC. 

yeah, 3 months was really "rushing" it.

LOL.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1    one month ago

Kavanaugh was a punk and a jerk and to an extent a predator as a teenager and college age. 

We all have to just hope he has improved since then. 

 
 
 
Cerenkov
2.1.2  Cerenkov  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1    one month ago

Thankfully he'll be on the court for generations. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
2.1.3  Greg Jones  replied to  Cerenkov @2.1.2    one month ago

And I am sure he will not going out of his way to be kind to the leftists in any of his future decisions. I can't believe how stupid the libs are to bring this pack of lies up again. Rameriz's coached memory recall was debunked at that time

 
 
 
MrFrost
2.1.4  MrFrost  replied to  Cerenkov @2.1.2    one month ago

Thankfully he'll be on the court for generations. 

Meh, maybe but he is a hard core drinker, his liver won't last long. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.5  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1    one month ago
yeah, 3 months was really "rushing" it.

The FBI was given something like three DAYS to investigate the sex related allegations against Kavanaugh and did not interview all the pertinent witnesses. 

Nice try though. 

 
 
 
Cerenkov
2.1.6  Cerenkov  replied to  MrFrost @2.1.4    one month ago

Plenty of time to disrupt the radical leftist agenda.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
2.1.7  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.5    one month ago

There were only two or three other relevant "witnesses" to the alleged grope, and none of them could corroborate Ford's flawed memories/

 
 
 
squiggy
2.1.8  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.1    one month ago

“We all have to just hope he has improved since then. “

There. Wipe it off and pull ’em up - time for progress.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
2.1.9  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.1    one month ago
Kavanaugh was a punk and a jerk and to an extent a predator as a teenager and college age.

And you'll be permitted to address him as Justice Kavanaugh until he retires or dies.  He's the man sitting on the United States Supreme Court, not you JR.

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.5    one month ago

Come on. Get real. This wasn't Kavanaugh's first time to be confirmed.

Some on the left are just still pissed that he is a conservative appointed by Trump. Just being appointed by Trump is enough to get some fools to hate him.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.11  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.10    one month ago

It's the first time he was confirmed for the Supreme Court.  The woman who accused him of ripping her clothes off specifically said she waited until he was nominated for the Supreme Court before she said something. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.12  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.11    one month ago
The woman who accused him of ripping her clothes off specifically said she waited until he was nominated for the Supreme Court before she said something. 

Yeah, waiting made it all so much more believable!!  

Say, is this just a deflection from the clown show of Democratic hopefuls?

LMFAO!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.13  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.12    one month ago

Trump is probably happy. If people talk about this they wont talk about what an idiot he is for a day or so. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.14  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.13    one month ago
Trump is probably happy. If people talk about this they wont talk about what an idiot he is for a day or so. 

Well, of course the President is happy that his pick is sitting on SCOTUS right now while others whine and cry about it.

Democratic Presidential hopefuls are probably glad that something else is in the headlines rather than their sick little campaigns.

 
 
 
WallyW
2.1.15  WallyW  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.14    one month ago

It  looks like the "'hopefuls" have fallen into the trap. Some  excerpts  from  the  article

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democratic-candidates-demand-kavanaughs-impeachment-after-new-allegation-in-times-piece/ar-AAHkWwC?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp#page=2

"The political fallout from the new allegation suggested the divisions surrounding Kavanaugh’s nomination last year will continue to be felt in the 2020 campaign. Republicans denounced the Times report as an effort by the media to smear Kavanaugh. Some seized on the fact that the story — labeled as a news analysis — did not mention that, according to the book, the woman involved in the alleged incident has told friends she does not recall it.

“Even if we did receive an allegation from Mr. Stier as described by the New York Times reporting, it is difficult to see how this unsubstantiated hearsay, ‘corroborated’ by anonymous sources, involving an alleged victim who other unnamed sources said does not even remember the event, would have changed the outcome of the confirmation vote,” said Davis, who now leads the Article III Project, an advocacy group that promotes Trump’s judicial picks.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
2.1.16  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.1    one month ago

Never proved in a court of law. The progressive liberal left just tried to crucify him in the court of public opinion and got their butts handed to them!🤣

 
 
 
Greg Jones
2.2  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @2    one month ago

Too late now, John.

The left wingers are stuck with him

I would suspect the voters are getting very tired of this ongoing campaign of lies and hate being perpetuated by the left. It could cause the Democrats a lot of lost voters.

Can't wait for Amy Coney Barrett to be confirmed during Trump's second term when Ginsburg expires.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.2.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @2.2    one month ago
I would suspect the voters are getting very tired of this ongoing campaign of lies and hate being perpetuated by the left.

A more accurate suspicion would be that the voters are tired of Donald Trump.  That never occurs to you though for some reason. 

It now appears likely that Kavanaugh was rushed through the Senate even though he was of low character when he was younger. As I said we all have to now hope he has improved as he got older. 

His behavior at the hearings is not encouraging though. 

 
 
 
MrFrost
2.2.2  MrFrost  replied to  Greg Jones @2.2    one month ago
lies and hate being perpetuated by the left

By all means, Greg, list the lies and proof that they are lies.

512

 
 
 
Greg Jones
2.2.3  Greg Jones  replied to  MrFrost @2.2.2    one month ago

How cute.

How about you providing any kind of proof about the allegations of Ford, Ramirez, or that prostitute that Avennatti (sp) represented. being true.

Tick-Tock, Tick-Tock

 
 
 
loki12
2.2.4  loki12  replied to  Greg Jones @2.2.3    one month ago

This is low functioning world where allegations are enough, if there is an R behind your name.

I'm sure Gloria Allred will get justice for those poor girls that Herman Cain abused any day now.

Maybe she is still to busy working on the case against Roy Moore?

Blowsey Fords named witnesses  said she lied. But the dumbasses still believe her. just like there is proof of Russian collusion! Just ask Adam Schit!

 
 
 
MrFrost
2.2.5  MrFrost  replied to  Greg Jones @2.2.3    one month ago
How about you providing any kind of proof about the allegations of Ford, Ramirez, or that prostitute that Avennatti (sp) represented. being true.

So you got nothing. Can't prove the lies. How shocking. LOL 

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.2.6  Texan1211  replied to  MrFrost @2.2.5    one month ago
Can't prove the lies.

yeah, and we are STILL waiting for some nutjob to prove that Kavanaugh ever did any of the crap some left wing nutjobs have accused him of.

Will we ever see ANY proof?

 
 
 
loki12
2.2.7  loki12  replied to  Texan1211 @2.2.6    one month ago

No,

 
 
 
Texan1211
3  Texan1211    one month ago

Another worm crawls from the woodworks.

Yawn.

Another hit piece against a conservative.

Must be a day ending in "y".

 
 
 
squiggy
3.1  squiggy  replied to  Texan1211 @3    one month ago

Every day is Dickday.

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  squiggy @3.1    one month ago

Too much information there squiggy.  What you do on your own time is your business.  

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
3.1.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.1    one month ago

It was TMI when he posted that he had a dick in his face everyday.

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
4  al Jizzerror    one month ago

800

 
 
 
squiggy
5  squiggy    one month ago

Why is it these witnesses show up when there’s a book to be sold? Wasn’t disclosure important a year ago?

 
 
 
loki12
6  loki12    one month ago

Now I'm 100% sure that the democrats won't vote to confirm him...............The changes everything.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
6.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  loki12 @6    one month ago

The what changes everything or did you mean to say "this"?

 
 
 
loki12
6.1.1  loki12  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @6.1    one month ago

Yes a typo, thank you!

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
7  Sean Treacy    one month ago

What the partisan propaganda  NYT  failed to include is that the supposedly victimized woman has no memory of this happening. Omitting that fact is shameful. 

This whole story is based on one guys uncorroborated memory.  That's it.

 

 
 
 
CometRider
8  CometRider    one month ago

You can be sure the Democrats will launch an investigation into the latest allegations. Kavanaugh is number two on their impeachment hit list right after Trump.

 
 
 
WallyW
8.1  WallyW  replied to  CometRider @8    one month ago
 
 
 
IceMan
8.1.1  IceMan  replied to  WallyW @8.1    one month ago

Castro oil slicked hair has spoken.

 
 
 
lib50
9  lib50    one month ago

Kavanaugh is a liar appointed by Trump, a liar. 

Guess what?!  Justices can be impeached too!  This time they can do it properly, not stopped by the AG, actually interviewing witnesses. Of course Kavanaugh can sue as well, that is an exciting prospect,  I hope he does. He is a coward though, of course he won't, that would require the truth to come out.  Proof?  It comes with a real investigation, not a white wash.  Bring it on.  Most women know damn well Ford was telling the truth and Kavanaugh wasn't.  Won't give him a free ride like Clarence Thomas got. 

 
 
 
WallyW
9.1  WallyW  replied to  lib50 @9    one month ago

Drunken memories from 35 years ago aren't acceptable evidence.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
9.2  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  lib50 @9    one month ago

Tell you what. If he pulls his pants down in front of Justice Ginsberg he deserves to be impeached.

 
 
 
loki12
9.2.1  loki12  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @9.2    one month ago

Or a medal.

 
 
 
Texan1211
9.3  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @9    one month ago
Most women know damn well Ford was telling the truth and Kavanaugh wasn't.  

That asinine statement is a monument to inanity.

Most women "know" because Ford said so?

Yeah, fucking right.

What a crock!

Ford was evidently lying or grossly misremembered, since no one could corroborate her tale of woe.

Time for Democrats to either PUT up or SHUT up about Kavanaugh. 

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
9.3.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Texan1211 @9.3    one month ago
Most women "know" because Ford said so?

No Tex, most women, as well as many men, found her more believable than penis nose.

 
 
 
Texan1211
9.3.2  Texan1211  replied to  igknorantzrulz @9.3.1    one month ago

WTF was believable about her?

her memory of the date?

Her memory of the place?

her memory of others allegedly there?

What exactly was it that fooled so many?

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
9.3.3  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Texan1211 @9.3.2    one month ago

What exactly was it that fooled so many?

asks a Trump defender.............?

 
 
 
loki12
9.3.4  loki12  replied to  Texan1211 @9.3.2    one month ago

"Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford," 

Sucks when your best friend says you are a liar, I guess she wasn’t believable to the people that knew her, just to the sheep who will believe anything. RUSSIA!

 
 
 
Texan1211
9.3.5  Texan1211  replied to  igknorantzrulz @9.3.3    one month ago
asks a Trump defender.............?

Oh, wait.

Hell, am I posting on yet another "I Hate Trump" article?

My bad.

I thought the title kind of gave  clue as to the topic.

Is this about Trump or some asshole who "remembers" something that happened 30-something years ago which is negative about a member of SCOTUS?

 
 
 
Texan1211
9.3.6  Texan1211  replied to  loki12 @9.3.4    one month ago

I suppose desperate times for Democrats require desperate measures.

Truth and sanity obviously not required.

 
 
 
lib50
9.3.7  lib50  replied to  Texan1211 @9.3    one month ago

No, Kavanaugh was obviously LYING and deflecting.   I give zero fucks if you care or understand women's experiences with sexual abuse.  Don't have to put up or shut up about anything, by the way, have a real investigation instead of a gop whitewash.  Let Kavanaugh sue and bring on the trial and a real investigation.  And your pathetic whining about 'proof' is old.  Believing and pushing Trump lies daily shows who has a grasp on truth and reality.  Not to mention all those old attacks on democrats with nothing but a Trump fart behind them.  Suck it up, buttercup. If Kavanaugh really has nothing to hide, he will welcome a real investigation.  Bring it on.

 
 
 
Texan1211
9.3.8  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @9.3.7    one month ago
No, Kavanaugh was obviously LYING and deflecting. 

Fine. Then it should be easy for you to prove it. But I notice all the proof you can offer is "She said it happened". Phffft.

I give zero fucks if you care or understand women's experiences with sexual abuse.  

And?

 Don't have to put up or shut up about anything, by the way, have a real investigation instead of a gop whitewash.  

Of course not. You can continue to endorse slander and participate in it all you wish.

Let Kavanaugh sue and bring on the trial and a real investigation.

Why would he even bother to  mess with something so trifling?

Believing and pushing Trump lies daily shows who has a grasp on truth and reality.  Not to mention all those old attacks on democrats with nothing but a Trump fart behind them. 

Did we time-warp into another "I Hate Trump"
 screed?

If Kavanaugh really has nothing to hide, he will welcome a real investigation.  Bring it on.

The FBI did investigate, even though you simply won't admit it. Just like the FBI investigated other things you seemed to be fine with based on the outcome of the investigation. You just seem mad because you don't like how it turned out. Too bad!

 
 
 
bugsy
9.3.9  bugsy  replied to  igknorantzrulz @9.3.1    one month ago
most women, as well as many men, found her more believable than penis nose.

I think what you meant to say was "most liberal women, and most liberal men, who many identify closer to women than men, found her more believable..."

 
 
 
Jack_TX
9.3.10  Jack_TX  replied to  lib50 @9.3.7    one month ago
No, Kavanaugh was obviously LYING and deflecting.

You have absolutely zero knowledge of that.

I give zero fucks if you care or understand women's experiences with sexual abuse.

If you're honest you'll admit you give zero fucks whether or not there was any sexual abuse between Kavanaugh and Ford.  

And your pathetic whining about 'proof' is old.  

Riiiiight.  We should just believe whatever women say.  At least until they admit they completely made it up .

 
 
 
MUVA
9.4  MUVA  replied to  lib50 @9    one month ago

More fake news and you fell for it.

 
 
 
lib50
9.4.1  lib50  replied to  MUVA @9.4    one month ago

Says someone who constantly defends and believes Trump lies. 

Looks like Kavanaugh isn't going to get that smooth ride the gop hoped he'd get. 

 
 
 
MUVA
9.4.2  MUVA  replied to  lib50 @9.4.1    one month ago

I don’t defend Trump nor do I fall for very hate Trump story that comes down the line.

 
 
 
lib50
9.4.3  lib50  replied to  MUVA @9.4.2    one month ago

Horseshit.

 
 
 
MUVA
9.4.4  MUVA  replied to  lib50 @9.4.1    one month ago

It looks like you are the one that defends lies if you saying you are ok with these types of personal attacks 

 
 
 
MUVA
9.4.5  MUVA  replied to  lib50 @9.4.3    one month ago

Pointing out sanctimony and hypocrisy isn’t defending Trump there is a difference.

 
 
 
Texan1211
9.4.6  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @9.4.1    one month ago
Looks like Kavanaugh isn't going to get that smooth ride the gop hoped he'd get. 

Looking far more like Democrats won't be able to impeach him after failing to block his confirmation.

To bad for them. They will simply have to learn to live with it.

 
 
 
It Is ME
9.4.7  It Is ME  replied to  lib50 @9.4.3    one month ago
Horseshit.

Cows seem to be more the "IN THING" these days. Try that !

 
 
 
squiggy
9.4.8  squiggy  replied to  lib50 @9.4.1    one month ago
Looks like Kavanaugh isn't going to get that smooth ride...

I'm thinking he's gonna get the job.

 
 
 
bugsy
9.4.9  bugsy  replied to  lib50 @9.4.1    one month ago
Looks like Kavanaugh isn't going to get that smooth ride

He's still on the SCOTUS, right. Seems like a smooth ride to me.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
9.4.10  Jack_TX  replied to  MUVA @9.4.2    one month ago
I don’t defend Trump nor do I fall for very hate Trump story that comes down the line.

You're forgetting, the new leftist definition of "defending" is "refusing to join in hysterical group hatred".

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
10  Buzz of the Orient    one month ago

Well, it seems that Bill Clinton set the pace for that, but, as has been said "Boys will be boys".

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
11  Vic Eldred    one month ago

The strategy seems to still be to bolster one random unproven allegation with another - all to stop a Conservative Justice. There is only one good element to this. Most people see right through it and think it's disgusting.

I believe John Ekdahl said it best:

"The Kavanaugh railroad is the most politically clarifying event in my life, and it is why, as the New York Times seems intent on reminding us, I will crawl over broken glass to vote for a guy I don't particularly like next year."

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @11    one month ago
, I will crawl over broken glass to vote for a guy I don't particularly like next year."

LOL. So he likes "a little" someone who is a pathological, liar, cheat, crook, bigot , and moron. Unbelievable.

John Ekdahl on Twitter: "Here is my current political ...

https:// twitter.com / johnekdahl /status/1019057132593975296

Jul 16, 2018  · Here is my current political breakdown, and I think there are many like me:   Republican , but don't like Trump and didn't vote for him. Like some things about he's done, hate others

====================================================================================

John Ekdhal would never vote for the Democrat. He would find reasons to hold his nose and vote for Trump. He might as well be Lindsey Graham for all the "doubt" he has. lol. 

 
 
 
loki12
12  loki12    one month ago

oops............

The New York Times suddenly made a major revision to a   supposed bombshell piece  late Sunday concerning a resurfaced allegation of sexual assault by Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh — hours after virtually all 2020 Democratic presidential candidates had cited the original article as a reason to   impeach Kavanaugh.

The   update  included the significant detail that several friends of the alleged victim said she did not recall the purported sexual assault in question at all. The Times also stated for the first time that the alleged victim refused to be interviewed, and has made no comment about the episode.

The only firsthand statement concerning the supposed attack in the original piece, which was published on Saturday, came from Clinton-connected lawyer   who claimed to have witnessed it.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
12.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  loki12 @12    one month ago

Allow me to add what the seeder of this false story should have.

From the New York Times (last night):

EEluOarXUAUzC70?format=jpg&name=small

 
 
 
loki12
12.1.1  loki12  replied to  Vic Eldred @12.1    one month ago

Russia!

 
 
 
cms5
13  cms5    one month ago

It is remarkable how gullible some can be. The NYT publishes and they believeth.

STORY DEBUNKED...NO STORY HERE.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
14  seeder  JohnRussell    one month ago

How many of you have read the NYT article? 

I did. 

The article is an excerpt from a book that is coming out soon. 

There are TWO elements to this article, that are in the book, that are new to most people's understanding of this story.  

1. Deborah Ramirez gave the FBI (during the Kavanaugh hearings ) a list of 25 people she said could help corroborate her story that Kavanaugh had stuck his dick in her face at a college party. 

In their rushed "investigation" at that time, the FBI didnt interview any of those people. 

2. Another individual, a Yale classmate of Kavanaugh, a guy, says he saw Kavanaugh' s dick inserted into a females hand, at a college party. 

Nothing anyone has said on this thread contradicts either of these two points. 

 
 
 
bugsy
14.1  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @14    one month ago

Actually, there are three. The first two have been proven as bullshit, the third is the reason why the second is bullshit.

1.. Most of those that Ramirez claimed could corroborate her story plain and simple said they did not know what she was talking about. The FBI confirmed no one could back up her story.

2. The second is an obvious hit piece to sell books.

3. The book cited above clearly states the woman they claim made the allegations told friends she did not remember any such incident. The NYT failed to cite this little inconvenience to them in the oped.

Keep it up libs. Even moderate democrats are getting tired of the loons of the far left hijacking their party. They will vote for someone that aligns closer to their beliefs, and that person looks like it is Donald Trump.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
14.1.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  bugsy @14.1    one month ago
The FBI confirmed no one could back up her story.

prove it

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
14.1.2  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  bugsy @14.1    one month ago
The FBI confirmed no one could back up her story.

Did they call you on the phone, or what?  

 
 
 
bugsy
14.1.3  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @14.1.1    one month ago
prove it

This is hilarious coming from someone that has seeded literally hundreds of "I hate Trump" articles, with absolutely NO PROOF, over the years. I have constantly asked you to provide proof of ANY of your seeds and all you do is tuck your tail, run away and report me.

If the FBI found Ramirez accusation to be CREDIBLE, it would have come out. Nothing came out except more accusations against the FBI...with again  no proof.

Face it, John, you will be saying President Trump until 2025. No amount of "I hate Trump" seeds will change that.

 
 
 
bugsy
14.1.4  bugsy  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @14.1.2    one month ago
Did they call you on the phone, or what?  

Do you know me? No?

Maybe they did...

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
14.1.5  igknorantzrulz  replied to  bugsy @14.1.4    one month ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
14.1.6  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  bugsy @14.1.4    one month ago

Do you know me? No?

I have no idea who you are, Sugar.  What I do know is that you seem to think a man that drugs women who would otherwise say no to his advances, and flops his pecker out at parties is a really cool guy.  I'd rather not know anything else about you. 

 
 
 
bugsy
14.1.7  bugsy  replied to  igknorantzrulz @14.1.5    one month ago
did you put your dick in her hand as well ?

Awwwwwww, look. A liberal with no cohesive response goes to vulgarity.

I'm surprised....said nobody...ever...

 
 
 
Raven Wing
14.1.8  Raven Wing  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @14.1.6    one month ago
What I do know is that you seem to think a man that drugs women who would otherwise say no to his advances, and flops his pecker out at parties is a really cool guy.  I'd rather not know anything else about you. 

jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_12_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
bugsy
14.1.9  bugsy  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @14.1.6    one month ago
I have no idea who you are, Sugar.

1.  Not your Sugar.

2. How about doing us all a favor and give us the evidence you have of what you accuse Kavanaugh of?

Also, when you make your feeble attempt, please do not give us he said/she said third party bullshit, or accusations of someone who can barely remember what decade these "accusations" happened, or accusations from "victims"who have friends that say they don't even know what the "victim" is talking about.

In addition, can you explain to us why these far left loons that wrote the latest article, and cited the book THEY read, did not include the little inconvenient liberal tidbit that the "victim" did not recall the "incident" in question.

One more thing...your feeeeeeeeelings don't count.

Thanks...

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
14.1.10  igknorantzrulz  replied to  bugsy @14.1.7    one month ago

you wouldn't understand a cohesive response from me

 
 
 
bugsy
14.1.11  bugsy  replied to  Raven Wing @14.1.8    one month ago

It was a stupid reply from someone who believes someone that has absolutely no proof of what they accuse, much less one barely remembering what decade the so called "event happened".

Also, why would anyone believe an "accuser" whose lawyers came out a year later and said the only reason why Ford came out with her "accusation" was to put an asterisk next to Kavanaugh's name when it comes to abortion rulings.

Blasey-Ford was a fraud from the get-go...and so are every "accuser afterward.

 
 
 
bugsy
14.1.12  bugsy  replied to  igknorantzrulz @14.1.10    one month ago
you wouldn't understand a cohesive response from me

I've seen many of your responses. I can count on one hand how many were cohesive...or coherent.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
14.1.13  igknorantzrulz  replied to  bugsy @14.1.12    one month ago

as i said, you wouldn't , nor couldn't, understand what i'm saying

 
 
 
bugsy
14.1.14  bugsy  replied to  igknorantzrulz @14.1.13    one month ago

As I said...I don't attempt to understand gibberish

 
 
 
Raven Wing
14.1.15  Raven Wing  replied to  bugsy @14.1.11    one month ago
It was a stupid reply 

And yours are totally all intelligent? jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_72_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
bugsy
14.1.16  bugsy  replied to  Raven Wing @14.1.15    one month ago
And yours are totally all intelligent?

Never said they were. Your point?

BTW...It was still a stupid reply.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
14.1.17  Jack_TX  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @14.1.6    one month ago
What I do know is that you seem to think a man that drugs women who would otherwise say no to his advances, and flops his pecker out at parties is a really cool guy.

When did we switch the topic to Bill Cosby?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
14.1.18  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  bugsy @14.1.3    one month ago

Bugsy , I have never reported you. If you keep saying that I asked the moderators to bar you from commenting to me, which is not true, they will delete your comments. 

 
 
 
bugsy
14.1.19  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @14.1.18    one month ago

Then why was I barred, as were you, from responding to each other's posts or posting on each other's seeds?

I didn't report anything and I have been told that mods will not delete anything unless a request was made.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
14.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @14    one month ago

Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly wrote the much-discussed and later-corrected essay in The New York Times making a new sexual misconduct allegation against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. The two reporters failed to mention that the alleged victim of the physically improbable tale had never made such a claim, and denied any memory of it through “several” friends. They also failed to note that the accusation came from a prominent Democrat who had defended Bill Clinton during the Whitewater investigation on which Kavanaugh served.

A new Atlantic-published, adapted excerpt of the book attempts to resurrect Pogrebin and Kelly’s anti-Kavanaugh smears but once again has a major error. “ We Spent 10 Months Investigating Kavanaugh. Here’s What We Found ” was published in the Atlantic.

Their reporting must not have been thorough. In a section explaining why they believe the accusers despite the lack of any evidence, they write that their emotional reaction to the claims was that the claims rang true. But they get major facts wrong:

Using Martha’s common-sense test, the claims of Deborah Ramirez, while not proven by witnesses, also ring true to us. Ramirez, who was a Yale classmate of Kavanaugh’s, said he drunkenly thrust his penis at her during a party in their freshman-year dormitory, Lawrance Hall. The people who allegedly witnessed the event—Kavanaugh’s friends Kevin Genda, David Todd, and David White—have kept mum about it. Kavanaugh has denied it. If such an incident had occurred, Kavanaugh said, it would have been the “talk of campus.”

It is not true that the alleged witnesses kept mum. This is another major error by The New York Times reporters.

In the   original, much-mocked New Yorker article   putting forth Ramirez’s then-shaky claims (she has since firmed up her memories, according to Pogrebin and Kelly), Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer wrote:

One of the male classmates who Ramirez said egged on Kavanaugh denied any memory of the party. ‘I don’t think Brett would flash himself to Debbie, or anyone, for that matter,’ he said. Asked why he thought Ramirez was making the allegation, he responded, ‘I have no idea.’ The other male classmate who Ramirez said was involved in the incident commented, ‘I have zero recollection.’ In a statement, two of those male classmates who Ramirez alleged were involved in the incident, the wife of a third male student she said was involved, and one other classmate, Dan Murphy, disputed Ramirez’s account of events: ‘We were the people closest to Brett Kavanaugh during his first year at Yale. He was a roommate to some of us, and we spent a great deal of time with him, including in the dorm where this incident allegedly took place. Some of us were also friends with Debbie Ramirez during and after her time at Yale. We can say with confidence that if the incident Debbie alleges ever occurred, we would have seen or heard about it—and we did not. The behavior she describes would be completely out of character for Brett. In addition, some of us knew Debbie long after Yale, and she never described this incident until Brett’s Supreme Court nomination was pending. Editors from the New Yorker contacted some of us because we are the people who would know the truth, and we told them that we never saw or heard about this.’

Pogrebin and Kelly’s work has a pattern of omitting exculpatory evidence that supports Kavanaugh’s consistent claim that he never sexually assaulted anyone. The Atlantic piece is excerpted from the book, which has the same error. Oddly, the book quotes the statement on page 140 and page 141, which they characterize as disloyal to Ramirez.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/17/witnesses-defended-kavanaugh-nyt-authors-falsely-claimed-they-were-silent/

 
 
 
cms5
14.2.1  cms5  replied to  Vic Eldred @14.2    one month ago

I think that people are also upset that the FBI didn't talk to every single person. It's pretty simple, they were looking for people with FIRSTHAND knowledge. The Senate Committee's report is extensive regarding interviews, etc.

Ms. Ramirez refused seven requests from the Senate Judiciary Committee for any evidence, including witness statements. She also refused to speak to Committee investigators or to provide a written statement. She did speak to the FBI.

Here's the Senate Committee's Report .

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
15  Jeremy Retired in NC    one month ago

Was wondering how long the Democrats would wait before bringing out another "accuser".  

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
15.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @15    one month ago

Not even new...  Just recycling a story   that  Bill Clinton's impeachment lawyer told the Senate about last year.

The only actual  news in this story is that Ford's friend and supposed witness was threatened by Ford's allies and she  doesn't think ford's  story is even plausible.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
15.1.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Sean Treacy @15.1    one month ago

We already know Ford's story isn't plausible. She proved that herself.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
16  Freedom Warrior    one month ago

None of this is of any consequence.

 
 
 
bugsy
16.1  bugsy  replied to  Freedom Warrior @16    one month ago
None of this is of any consequence.

You're probably right. Liberals will continue to make baseless accusations, and their masters, the media, will never correct them.

Thank God we have a president who is not afraid to call the dumbasses out.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
16.1.1  Freedom Warrior  replied to  bugsy @16.1    one month ago

Right on!

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
17  Buzz of the Orient    one month ago

I admit that when I was 5 or 6 years old the little girl of similar age who lived a couple of houses away and I played doctor and nurse in our garage where we looked at and, God forbid, TOUCHED each other's private parts.  So the upright little virtuous pussies who have posted on this article should write to Queen Elizabeth II who appointed me a Queen's Counsel (One of Her Majesty's Counsel Learned in the Law) to demand that she should strip me of that honour.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
17.1  Freedom Warrior  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @17    one month ago

Thanks for the humor here

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
17.1.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Freedom Warrior @17.1    one month ago

It's a true story.  Her older sister caught us in the act and wanted to take part in our little tryst.  According to some members of NT who feign being the purest angels I'm damned for life for doing what little kids do, and Kavanaugh is damned for life for doing what college kids do.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
17.1.2  Freedom Warrior  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @17.1.1    one month ago

 Well I didn’t do that in college but I’m sure there are things that would fit the description 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
18  Sean Treacy    one month ago

It turns out the New York Times News section rejected this story and so did the Washington Post's last year. It was only published by the "Review" section that has looser editorial standards that allowed it to be "juiced up."

Not only did the Times embarrass itself, but so did all the Democratic presidential nominees who immediately wanted Kavanaugh impeached based only on this regurgitated  non story that had to be "juiced up" just to be published.

This trash story , like Michael Avenatti who was championed by many on this site, are probably the best things that could happen to Kavanaugh.  It's reveals how crazy and dishonest his critics are.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
18.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @18    one month ago

Brett Kavanaugh was a drunk and a lout when he was young. Stop kidding yourself. 

One of the senators asked him if he ever drank so much he couldnt remember the next day.  He said no, that had never happened.  He was lying. 

Everyone who drinks to excess has times where they forget what they did or said when they were drunk. 

My faith that Kavanaugh was honest with the committee is zero. 

 
 
 
WallyW
18.1.1  WallyW  replied to  JohnRussell @18.1    one month ago
You have no idea of what Kavanaugh's drinking history was or is.
Probably no worse than yours, or others of your kind who see
so eager to label and demean others falsely.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
18.1.2  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @18.1    one month ago
Brett Kavanaugh was a drunk and a lout when he was young. Stop kidding yourself. 

That's hardly an excuse to fabricate allegations of sexual assault.

 
 
 
bugsy
18.1.3  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @18.1    one month ago
Brett Kavanaugh was a drunk and a lout when he was young

So was Obama, in addition to doing Coke, when he was young. Difference is he admitted to it in his books, whereas there is absolutely NO proof of Kavanaugh doing anything he is being accused of.

Why did you not screech and moan for 8 years that Obama was a junkie and a drunk?

 
 
 
Tessylo
18.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  bugsy @18.1.3    one month ago

Because Obama was never a junkie or a drunk

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
18.1.5  igknorantzrulz  replied to  JohnRussell @18.1    one month ago
Everyone who drinks to excess has times where they forget what they did or said when they were drunk. 

if i remember,

i'll drink to that !

 
 
 
MUVA
18.1.6  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @18.1    one month ago

I have the same faith in your post.

 
 
 
lib50
18.2  lib50  replied to  Sean Treacy @18    one month ago

Kavanaugh should  have NEVER been put on the court. Since he is, and he came with a lot of heavy baggage, it won't go away.  It just won't, wait for a ruling against women and see what happens.  The guy LIED to congress.  He was accused by MULTIPLE people, including witnesses of the incidences.  Now we know Trump likes misogynists and abusers, self admitted one that he is, but by flipping women the bird he will get what he deserves - we won't forget and it will be discussed and investigated by journalists since Trumpublicans put a stop to that before he got confirmed. I hope he enjoys the notoriety he will be getting.  A justice to the SC should be above reproach.  Kavanaugh most definitely is not, and nobody will let you all forget it.  And the way they (and you all here are doing it) treat victims is disgusting.   I hope the blowback next year comes from women.  There are ramifications when you push a lying misogynist on the country.  This ain't the old Clarence Thomas days anymore.  Young women aren't having this shit.  Pick a shitty scotus, enjoy the shit that comes back.

 
 
 
MUVA
18.2.1  MUVA  replied to  lib50 @18.2    one month ago

KDS is the same as TDS regardless what young women think. 

 
 
 
lib50
18.2.2  lib50  replied to  MUVA @18.2.1    one month ago

Chew on this.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/1st-sexual-experience-rape_n_5d81db23e4b070d468c3c92a

Almost 7 percent of women surveyed said their first sexual intercourse experience was involuntary; it happened at age 15 on average and the man was often several years older.

Almost half of those women who said intercourse was involuntary said they were held down and slightly more than half of them said they were verbally pressured to have sex against their will.

“Any sexual encounter (with penetration) that occurs against somebody’s will is rape. If somebody is verbally pressured into having sex, it’s just as much rape,” said lead author Dr. Laura Hawks, an internist and Harvard Medical School researcher.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
18.2.3  Jack_TX  replied to  lib50 @18.2    one month ago
Kavanaugh should  have NEVER been put on the court.

I know, right?  It's not like he was a highly qualified judge with years of experience and an outstanding record.

Since he is, and he came with a lot of heavy baggage, it won't go away.

I think we should have a new federal law that makes every American's next promotion based on what emotionally unstable people claim they did in HS.

  It just won't, wait for a ruling against women and see what happens.

Oooh!  Oooh!  I know.  Pick me.  It will be a binding SCOTUS ruling.  

  The guy LIED to congress.  He was accused by MULTIPLE people, including witnesses of the incidences.

Including people who later admitted they made the whole thing up.

  Now we know Trump likes misogynists and abusers, self admitted one that he is, but by flipping women the bird

Nominated exceedingly qualified centrists (he's already sided with the liberal judges against the conservatives) is "flipping women the bird".....  Riiiight.  What color are the trees in this imaginary world?

  A justice to the SC should be above reproach.

Defined as "nominated by a Democratic president".

  Kavanaugh most definitely is not, and nobody will let you all forget it.

It's a temporary shiny object that we're only talking about now because somebody wants to sell copies of their new book.

  And the way they (and you all here are doing it) treat victims is disgusting.

Tell us exactly why Judy Munro-Leighton deserves better treatment?

   I hope the blowback next year comes from women.

It will.  Regular, hardworking, apolitical, normal, sane, centrist women are pretty much done with angry vagina hats screaming at the sky.

  There are ramifications when you push a lying misogynist on the country.  This ain't the old Clarence Thomas days anymore.  Young women aren't having this shit.  Pick a shitty scotus, enjoy the shit that comes back.

Saturday, Michigan will play Wisconsin in front of 80,000 college football fans. 78,000 of those people cannot name all the justices on the SCOTUS.   60,000 of those people can't tell you how many there are.

You really imagine...with everything else going on in this world...that people with real lives are somehow going to fixate on who is on the Supreme Court?   Or are we back in the imaginary world again?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
18.2.4  Jack_TX  replied to  lib50 @18.2.2    one month ago
Almost half of those women who said intercourse was involuntary said they were held down and slightly more than half of them said they were verbally pressured to have sex against their will.

So.....getting talked into sex and later regretting it is now "rape". 

We've just left sanity completely behind. 

Out of curiosity, if I get talked into buying something and later regret it, have I been robbed? 

If I get talked into helping a neighbor and later regret it, have I been enslaved?

How far down the looking glass are we falling here?

 
 
 
Texan1211
18.2.5  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @18.2.2    one month ago
Almost 7 percent of women surveyed said their first sexual intercourse experience was involuntary; it happened at age 15 on average and the man was often several years older.
Almost half of those women who said intercourse was involuntary said they were held down and slightly more than half of them said they were verbally pressured to have sex against their will.
“Any sexual encounter (with penetration) that occurs against somebody’s will is rape. If somebody is verbally pressured into having sex, it’s just as much rape,” said lead author Dr. Laura Hawks, an internist and Harvard Medical School researcher.

Got anything pertaining to Kavanaugh?

 
 
 
MUVA
18.2.6  MUVA  replied to  lib50 @18.2.2    one month ago

What does your post have to do with Kavanaugh?

 
 
 
lib50
18.2.7  lib50  replied to  MUVA @18.2.6    one month ago

When the comments denigrate and call the victim a liar, I rebutted it, it has EVERYTHING to do with Kavanaugh.  He and he sycophants want to act as if all women are lying about this and I'm showing you all it is a common experience to girls. Is it possible for you to see more than one thread of an issue?   If you read the comments you will see the victims called liars and worse right here on this seed, and I am proving how common it is to women. 

 
 
 
MUVA
18.2.8  MUVA  replied to  lib50 @18.2.7    one month ago

Ford is a liar she shouldn't be lumped in with real victims.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
18.2.9  Jack_TX  replied to  lib50 @18.2.7    one month ago
When the comments denigrate and call the victim a liar, I rebutted it, it has EVERYTHING to do with Kavanaugh.

No.  It doesn't.  Despite your repeated attempts to hold Brett Kavanaugh responsible for every sexual assault on every woman in history.

  He and he sycophants want to act as if all women are lying about this

"All women" are not involved.  This isn't about "all women".  

and I'm showing you all it is a common experience to girls.

This isn't about "common experiences".  This is about experiences you had nothing to do with and you know nothing about.  Were you at the party with Dr. Ford?  Were you ever at a frat party with Brett Kavanaugh?  Then you have no clue what actually happened there.

Is it possible for you to see more than one thread of an issue?

You tell us.  Can you see past the "people call women liars so we should burn Brett Kavanaugh at the stake"?

   If you read the comments you will see the victims called liars

Judy Munro-Leighton admitted that she lied.  What would you call her?  We're talking about a woman who completely fabricated a story in an attempt to destroy a man she's never met and subvert our democracy.  Liar isn't a harsh enough term.

and worse right here on this seed, and I am proving how common it is to women. 

Which has zero to do with Brett Kavanaugh, apart from your emotions.

 
 
 
lib50
18.2.10  lib50  replied to  Jack_TX @18.2.9    one month ago
Which has zero to do with Brett Kavanaugh, apart from your emotions.

Oh, Jackie, I'm not emotional about this, you should go back and watch Kavanaugh's emotional tirade during the hearings if you want emotions.  And AGAIN,  sexual abuse of women has EVERYTHING to do with Kavanaugh and this topic.  Try widening that perspective, blinders are not your friend.

 
 
 
Texan1211
18.2.11  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @18.2.10    one month ago

NOT EMOTIONAL?

LMFAO!

You seem to have been on your little soapbox for days about Kavanaugh.

Sadly, all you have produced is your feelings about him--not any evidence he ever did anything wrong.

That might earn you a spot in the Democratic Party hierarchy.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
18.2.12  Jack_TX  replied to  lib50 @18.2.10    one month ago
Oh, Jackie, I'm not emotional about this,

Oh sweetie....sell that to somebody who might actually believe you.

  And AGAIN,  sexual abuse of women has EVERYTHING to do with Kavanaugh and this topic.  Try widening that perspective, blinders are not your friend.

You wish it did.  Your idea of "widened perspective" is a transparent attempt to make Brett Kavanaugh suffer for the sins of all the men who got away with whatever you imagine it is they got up to.  

You believe it has "everything" to do with countless women who accused someone of sexual assault and were not believed, or countless other women who were convinced they would not be believed and so never reported their assaults.  Kavanaugh was accused, therefore he must be deemed guilty...because your emotions say so.

But that's not how America works.  One person does not pay for the crimes of others.

 
 
 
lib50
18.2.13  lib50  replied to  Jack_TX @18.2.12    one month ago

Kavanaugh should suffer his own sins, and you can stop putting words into my mouth.

I note you and others throw out that accusation of being 'emotional' a lot.  Can you elaborate on that?  Do you consider emotional a bad thing?  If so, can you explain your affinity for Trump's emotional outbursts? 

Knee jerk defense of perps because you like their politics is all we get.  Trump lies get defended, Trump misogyny gets defended.  Do you really think conservatives have the slightest clue what this is even about?  The immediate defense and victim blaming and shaming say no.  You defend and support a freaking pussygrabber who treats women like chattel.  Chew on that.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
18.2.14  Jack_TX  replied to  lib50 @18.2.13    4 weeks ago
Kavanaugh should suffer his own sins,

As soon as somebody proves one.

I note you and others throw out that accusation of being 'emotional' a lot.  Can you elaborate on that?

Emotion causes people to believe, do and say highly irrational things.  Far too many people fail to control their emotions and are instead controlled by them.

  Do you consider emotional a bad thing?

I consider emotions an appallingly terrible basis for decisions that impact our entire country.

  If so, can you explain your affinity for Trump's emotional outbursts? 

Why would you imagine I have any affinity for anything Donald Trump has ever done or said?   

Emotions are an appallingly terrible basis for decisions impacting our entire country.  That is true without regard for ideology or party.  

Knee jerk defense of perps because you like their politics is all we get.

"Perps", that you cannot prove have actually done anything.

  Trump lies get defended,Trump misogyny gets defended.

Do cite me doing either of those things

  Do you really think conservatives have the slightest clue what this is even about?

Yes.  Your rampant emotional reactions without regard to established facts.

  The immediate defense and victim blaming and shaming say no.

When one of the "victims" has already admitted she fabricated the entire episode, yes...I blame and shame.

  You defend and support a freaking pussygrabber who treats women like chattel.  Chew on that.

Do show us an example of me defending Trump.  Or are we back to your "feelings" again?

 
 
 
lib50
18.2.15  lib50  replied to  Jack_TX @18.2.14    4 weeks ago
Do show us an example of me defending Trump.  Or are we back to your "feelings" again?

Read your posts about anything that is about Trump.  My feelings must be in your head, but I can't help that.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
18.2.16  Jack_TX  replied to  lib50 @18.2.15    4 weeks ago
Read your posts about anything that is about Trump. 

In other words you can't actually cite things from your emotions and imagination.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
19  1stwarrior    one month ago

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tessylo
19.1  Tessylo  replied to  1stwarrior @19    one month ago

So President Obama smoked pot.  So President Obama drank/drinks beer.

So what?

I have never heard of him being a stumbling bumbling black out rapist drunk.  

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
19.1.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  Tessylo @19.1    one month ago

By the standards applied to Kavanaugh, it's a fact that Obama was a coke whore who sucked dick for blow.

There's even a book about it.  

 
 
 
WallyW
19.1.2  WallyW  replied to  Tessylo @19.1    one month ago

No one ever heard of Kavanaugh being a stumbling bumbling black out rapist drunk....

till the lying ladies showed up

 
 
 
MUVA
19.1.3  MUVA  replied to  Sean Treacy @19.1.1    one month ago

He did blow then blew.

 
 
 
katrix
19.1.4  katrix  replied to  WallyW @19.1.2    one month ago
till the lying ladies showed up

Funny how you refuse to believe any allegations against any Republicans - but you instantly believe anything bad claimed about a liberal.

Partisan hypocrisy at its finest.

 
 
 
Tessylo
19.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  Sean Treacy @19.1.1    one month ago

[Removed

 
 
 
WallyW
19.1.6  WallyW  replied to  katrix @19.1.4    one month ago

Allegations have to be supported by credible evidence

Show us anything credible about any of Kavanaugh's accusers

 
 
 
Tessylo
19.1.7  Tessylo  replied to  Sean Treacy @19.1.1    one month ago

I'm sure tRump sicked Putin's dick many times.

There's no book about it yet.  

 
 
 
lib50
19.1.8  lib50  replied to  WallyW @19.1.2    one month ago

Your remarks are so misogynistic, really disgusting actually   Do you know how many women are assaulted?  Do you even care? 

Conservatives brought this on themselves by forcing a lying abuser on the country. They don't care if that kind of person is on the court, in fact they WANTED that type of asshole.  So now you can all live with the fallout.  And don't expect it to go away over time.  Every time he rules negatively on women this will blow back. 

https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh25-1/43-51.htm

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/09/16/first-sexual-experience-women-rape-study/2347264001/

The first experience with sexual intercourse for more than 3 million U.S. women, many in their teens, was forced or coerced, according to a study published Monday.

Those women faced more long-term health consequences compared with peers who had a voluntary first experience, according to the study in JAMA Internal Medicine .  

Researchers based their analysis on an annual survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which asked women ages 18 to 44 if they chose to have sex for the first time. Of the respondents who answered no, sometimes reporting multiple types of coercion, about 56% described being verbally pressured, 46% said they were held down and 25% said they were physically harmed. 

Kavanaugh in a paragraph.  GOP, party of woman haters and abuser apologists and supporters.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
19.1.9  Jack_TX  replied to  lib50 @19.1.8    one month ago
Do you know how many women are assaulted?  Do you even care? 

Brett Kavanaugh is NOT some proxy abuser for every woman who has ever been assaulted.  We have enabled that batshit lunacy far too long.

 
 
 
Texan1211
19.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @19.1.8    one month ago

You should probably try to get used to Kavanaugh on SCOTUS.

He isn't going anywhere--much like Democrats' rather pathetic attempts to impeach him.

It is time to suck it [up deleted,] and realize when you are tilting at windmills.

 
 
 
lib50
19.1.11  lib50  replied to  Texan1211 @19.1.10    one month ago

And you should probably get used to Kavanaugh's sexual proclivities being brought up regularly.  Stick a misogynist asshole in a position of power over women, it will continue to blow back on him and his sycophants, who denigrate women at every opportunity.  Winning strategy for next year? Guess we'll see how pissed off women are.

 
 
 
Texan1211
19.1.12  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @19.1.11    one month ago

Yeah, I am already used to the lies thrown out by the left.

And the silly stream of "witnesses" who can't remember pertinent details.

And now some women are pissed off?

B.F.D.

 
 
 
lib50
19.1.13  lib50  replied to  Texan1211 @19.1.12    4 weeks ago

You obviously have a problem identifying lies since you repeat Trumps ad nauseam, and an obvious disdain for women who don't properly know their place and make life difficult for men.  Republicans will see how much of a bfd it is.  Women were pretty impactful in 2018, and not in a good way for the gop.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
20  igknorantzrulz    one month ago

You guys speaking from personal experience...?

 
 
 
Tessylo
20.1  Tessylo  replied to  igknorantzrulz @20    one month ago

Sure sounds like it.  

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
21  Paula Bartholomew    one month ago

Look people, let's face it.  Sexual predictors get elected/appointed into high positions.  This includes the highest office to the lowest.  Until we start vetting these people more closely, they will continue to inhabit the swamp.  Until we call bs on false promises and ignore past deeds, we get what we deserve for being complacent.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
21.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @21    one month ago

Make that predators, not predictors.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Tacos!
FLYNAVY1


27 visitors