Former classmate reportedly told FBI of another Kavanaugh allegation
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
- 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.
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
Who is online
43 visitors
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.)
I thought Kavanaugh handled the confirmation hearings really well.
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.
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.
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.
Seems to me it was a sham to the left simply because they did not get the results they so desperately desired.
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..
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.
Please explain how the FBI can investigate a sexual assault accusation, without ever interviewing the suspect.
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.
yeah, 3 months was really "rushing" it.
LOL.
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.
Thankfully he'll be on the court for generations.
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
Meh, maybe but he is a hard core drinker, his liver won't last long.
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.
Plenty of time to disrupt the radical leftist agenda.
There were only two or three other relevant "witnesses" to the alleged grope, and none of them could corroborate Ford's flawed memories/
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.
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.
Yeah, waiting made it all so much more believable!!
Say, is this just a deflection from the clown show of Democratic hopefuls?
LMFAO!
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.
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!🤣
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.
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.
By all means, Greg, list the lies and proof that they are lies.
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
So you got nothing. Can't prove the lies. How shocking. LOL
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?
Another worm crawls from the woodworks.
Yawn.
Another hit piece against a conservative.
Must be a day ending in "y".
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.
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.
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.
Tell you what. If he pulls his pants down in front of Justice Ginsberg he deserves to be impeached.
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.
No Tex, most women, as well as many men, found her more believable than penis nose.
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?
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?
I suppose desperate times for Democrats require desperate measures.
Truth and sanity obviously not required.
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.
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.
And?
Of course not. You can continue to endorse slander and participate in it all you wish.
Why would he even bother to mess with something so trifling?
Did we time-warp into another "I Hate Trump"
screed?
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!
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..."
You have absolutely zero knowledge of that.
If you're honest you'll admit you give zero fucks whether or not there was any sexual abuse between Kavanaugh and Ford.
Riiiiight. We should just believe whatever women say. At least until they admit they completely made it up .
Well, it seems that Bill Clinton set the pace for that, but, as has been said "Boys will be boys".
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."
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 ...
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.
It is remarkable how gullible some can be. The NYT publishes and they believeth.
STORY DEBUNKED...NO STORY HERE.
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.
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.
prove it
Did they call you on the phone, or what?
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.
Do you know me? No?
Maybe they did...
[deleted]
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.
Awwwwwww, look. A liberal with no cohesive response goes to vulgarity.
I'm surprised....said nobody...ever...
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...
you wouldn't understand a cohesive response from me
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.
I've seen many of your responses. I can count on one hand how many were cohesive...or coherent.
as i said, you wouldn't , nor couldn't, understand what i'm saying
As I said...I don't attempt to understand gibberish
And yours are totally all intelligent?
Never said they were. Your point?
BTW...It was still a stupid reply.
When did we switch the topic to Bill Cosby?
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.
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.
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:
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:
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.
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 .
Was wondering how long the Democrats would wait before bringing out another "accuser".
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.
We already know Ford's story isn't plausible. She proved that herself.
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.
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.
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.
That's hardly an excuse to fabricate allegations of sexual assault.
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?
Because Obama was never a junkie or a drunk
if i remember,
i'll drink to that !
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.
Chew on this.
I know, right? It's not like he was a highly qualified judge with years of experience and an outstanding record.
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.
Oooh! Oooh! I know. Pick me. It will be a binding SCOTUS ruling.
Including people who later admitted they made the whole thing up.
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?
Defined as "nominated by a Democratic president".
It's a temporary shiny object that we're only talking about now because somebody wants to sell copies of their new book.
Tell us exactly why Judy Munro-Leighton deserves better treatment?
It will. Regular, hardworking, apolitical, normal, sane, centrist women are pretty much done with angry vagina hats screaming at the sky.
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?
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?
Got anything pertaining to Kavanaugh?
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.
No. It doesn't. Despite your repeated attempts to hold Brett Kavanaugh responsible for every sexual assault on every woman in history.
"All women" are not involved. This isn't about "all women".
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.
You tell us. Can you see past the "people call women liars so we should burn Brett Kavanaugh at the stake"?
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.
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.
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.
Oh sweetie....sell that to somebody who might actually believe you.
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.
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.
As soon as somebody proves one.
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.
I consider emotions an appallingly terrible basis for decisions that impact our entire country.
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.
"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
Yes. Your rampant emotional reactions without regard to established facts.
When one of the "victims" has already admitted she fabricated the entire episode, yes...I blame and shame.
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.
In other words you can't actually cite things from your emotions and imagination.
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.
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.
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.
[Removed]
I'm sure tRump sicked Putin's dick many times.
There's no book about it yet.
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.
Kavanaugh in a paragraph. GOP, party of woman haters and abuser apologists and supporters.
Brett Kavanaugh is NOT some proxy abuser for every woman who has ever been assaulted. We have enabled that batshit lunacy far too long.
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.
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.
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.
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.
You guys speaking from personal experience...?
Sure sounds like it.
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.
Make that predators, not predictors.