Do you Believe Kavanaugh's Rape Accuser?

[Slade3200]

There is no reason not to believe her. People remember what happened 40-50 years ago, when there was no one around to complain to. The current ongoing campaign to smear anyone who comes forward, having lived in anonymity for decades, when they realize that someone who did something evil to them years ago is about to be given a position of power shows that the problem still continues to this day.

BTW: she stopped short of accusing him of rape.

Brett Kavanaugh has been in a position of power for quite a long time. He didn't just become a judge yesterday. If these allegations are true, shame on the accuser for not saying something years ago. However, she only stepped forward when politics became involved. Thus, she is full of shit.

Just because she came forward when politics and the SCOTUS become involved doesn’t prove she is lying. It may have been the catalyst that pushed her to speak out but her story could very well be true.

I can't stop laughing. You're actually trying to push this garbage. LMAO!!!

I’ll tell you what’s funny... thinking that somebody who is making up a story to take down a Judge planted a seed 6 years ago in therapy to use as evidence. That I’m her fictitious story she would implicate two friends instead of just Kavanaugh. That she would go take a polygraph test, that she would insist on an FBI investigation into the matter. Also she has over 200 character witnesses testifying to her character. With all that you still clumsily insist that she is lying for political purposes. What a joke.

 

[hadit]

There is no reason not to believe her. People remember what happened 40-50 years ago, when there was no one around to complain to. The current ongoing campaign to smear anyone who comes forward, having lived in anonymity for decades, when they realize that someone who did something evil to them years ago is about to be given a position of power shows that the problem still continues to this day.

BTW: she stopped short of accusing him of rape.

Brett Kavanaugh has been in a position of power for quite a long time. He didn't just become a judge yesterday. If these allegations are true, shame on the accuser for not saying something years ago. However, she only stepped forward when politics became involved. Thus, she is full of shit.

Nope.

She came forward when the dude was on a list to be nominated. Before he was nominated.

She’s credible.

He was nominated July 10. Feinstein got the letter in late July. Want to restate that?

Nope. She first came forward was BEFORE Feinstein got the letter and BEFORE Kavanaugh was nominated.

You need to do better research.

Let's see. She came forward, thus going public, BEFORE Feinstein got the letter that insisted she wanted to remain anonymous? I'd like to see your source on that.

 

[Slade3200]

There is no reason not to believe her. People remember what happened 40-50 years ago, when there was no one around to complain to. The current ongoing campaign to smear anyone who comes forward, having lived in anonymity for decades, when they realize that someone who did something evil to them years ago is about to be given a position of power shows that the problem still continues to this day.

BTW: she stopped short of accusing him of rape.

Brett Kavanaugh has been in a position of power for quite a long time. He didn't just become a judge yesterday. If these allegations are true, shame on the accuser for not saying something years ago. However, she only stepped forward when politics became involved. Thus, she is full of shit.

Nope.

She came forward when the dude was on a list to be nominated. Before he was nominated.

She’s credible.

He was nominated July 10. Feinstein got the letter in late July. Want to restate that?

Nope. She first came forward was BEFORE Feinstein got the letter and BEFORE Kavanaugh was nominated.

You need to do better research.

Let's see. She came forward, thus going public, BEFORE Feinstein got the letter that insisted she wanted to remain anonymous? I'd like to see your source on that.

Coming forward and going public are two different things, you realize that don’t you?

 

[LoneLaugher]

There is no reason not to believe her. People remember what happened 40-50 years ago, when there was no one around to complain to. The current ongoing campaign to smear anyone who comes forward, having lived in anonymity for decades, when they realize that someone who did something evil to them years ago is about to be given a position of power shows that the problem still continues to this day.

BTW: she stopped short of accusing him of rape.

Brett Kavanaugh has been in a position of power for quite a long time. He didn't just become a judge yesterday. If these allegations are true, shame on the accuser for not saying something years ago. However, she only stepped forward when politics became involved. Thus, she is full of shit.

Nope.

She came forward when the dude was on a list to be nominated. Before he was nominated.

She’s credible.

He was nominated July 10. Feinstein got the letter in late July. Want to restate that?

Nope. She first came forward was BEFORE Feinstein got the letter and BEFORE Kavanaugh was nominated.

You need to do better research.

Let's see. She came forward, thus going public, BEFORE Feinstein got the letter that insisted she wanted to remain anonymous? I'd like to see your source on that.

You are a moron. You have not read the facts of this matter. I won't help you until you try a little bit.

 

[Slade3200]

There is no reason not to believe her. People remember what happened 40-50 years ago, when there was no one around to complain to. The current ongoing campaign to smear anyone who comes forward, having lived in anonymity for decades, when they realize that someone who did something evil to them years ago is about to be given a position of power shows that the problem still continues to this day.

BTW: she stopped short of accusing him of rape.

Brett Kavanaugh has been in a position of power for quite a long time. He didn't just become a judge yesterday. If these allegations are true, shame on the accuser for not saying something years ago. However, she only stepped forward when politics became involved. Thus, she is full of shit.

Nope.

She came forward when the dude was on a list to be nominated. Before he was nominated.

She’s credible.

He was nominated July 10. Feinstein got the letter in late July. Want to restate that?

Nope. She first came forward was BEFORE Feinstein got the letter and BEFORE Kavanaugh was nominated.

You need to do better research.

Let's see. She came forward, thus going public, BEFORE Feinstein got the letter that insisted she wanted to remain anonymous? I'd like to see your source on that.

Ford contacted a state rep about the incident on July 6. Kavanaugh was nominated on July 10. Feinstein received the letter on July 30.

Here is the letter she got detailing the event.

Read the letter Christine Blasey Ford sent accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct - CNNPolitics

 

[LoneLaugher]

Brett Kavanaugh has been in a position of power for quite a long time. He didn't just become a judge yesterday. If these allegations are true, shame on the accuser for not saying something years ago. However, she only stepped forward when politics became involved. Thus, she is full of shit.

Nope.

She came forward when the dude was on a list to be nominated. Before he was nominated.

She’s credible.

He was nominated July 10. Feinstein got the letter in late July. Want to restate that?

Nope. She first came forward was BEFORE Feinstein got the letter and BEFORE Kavanaugh was nominated.

You need to do better research.

Let's see. She came forward, thus going public, BEFORE Feinstein got the letter that insisted she wanted to remain anonymous? I'd like to see your source on that.

Ford contacted a state rep about the incident on July 6. Kavanaugh was nominated on July 10. Feinstein received the letter on July 30.

Here is the letter she got detailing the event.

Read the letter Christine Blasey Ford sent accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct - CNNPolitics

The kids will never learn if we always do the work for them.....

 

[ABikerSailor]

For Christ's sake, why would she wait for 40+ years to do anything about it?

This kind of nonsense is unbelievable, IMO.

Probably the same reason I would be speaking out against my stepfather if he was to run for anything.

From the ages of 5 to 7, my mother was married to a real piece of work. He liked to go out and get drunk when he got off of work, come home, and then start in on my mother, myself, or my younger sister. Because I was the big brother and the oldest, I would generally get him to take his focus off of my sister and mother, and focus all of his anger and energy on me. That would often result in a broken nose, black eye, or severe beating for me. When my mother got divorced from him, she ended up in a car wreck and died when I was 8, and I became an orphan and lived with my Grandparents.

Well, nobody really kept tabs on my stepfather, and nobody knew where he went, but then again, all connections to him were severed when the divorce happened. I don't even know if he's still alive, and really don't care. BUT.........if that idiot were to ever surface and run for national office, I would step up and let everyone know what he did to my mother, sister, and myself during those years of my childhood. Had I ever reported it to the police myself? No. I was 5 to 7 at the time. Did my mother ever report the abuse? No, she was scared to death of my stepfather and didn't want to risk more abuse. When she saw that he would never change, that is when she decided on divorce. But, there is one time that he beat me so bad with a belt buckle, that pictures of my bruised and beaten back were taken by the school, so there is some kind of evidence.

I would also tell about the way he sexually abused my sister in front of me as well.

Sorry to hear that.

Honestly, I could've relate to part of the story, and I wouldn't comment if is not for your last sentence. If something like that happened to my younger bro or sis, I don't think I would wait for his name to pop up somewhere, there would be justice served one way or another.

Apparently, you didn't fully comprehend my post. Yes, I wanted to defend my sister and my mother, but as a 5 to 7 year old kid against a 35 year old man, the odds are kinda stacked in his favor. But, whenever he started in on my mother or my sis, I would get him to focus attention on me and I would take the beatings.

And, exactly HOW is an 8 year old kid supposed to find an adult? Especially when your Grandparents won't have anything to do with him, and they are the one's looking after me.

I guess you think 5 - 7 year old kids are capable of acting like, and doing stuff like an adult could.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Brett Kavanaugh has been in a position of power for quite a long time. He didn't just become a judge yesterday. If these allegations are true, shame on the accuser for not saying something years ago. However, she only stepped forward when politics became involved. Thus, she is full of shit.

Nope.

She came forward when the dude was on a list to be nominated. Before he was nominated.

She’s credible.

He was nominated July 10. Feinstein got the letter in late July. Want to restate that?

Nope. She first came forward was BEFORE Feinstein got the letter and BEFORE Kavanaugh was nominated.

You need to do better research.

Let's see. She came forward, thus going public, BEFORE Feinstein got the letter that insisted she wanted to remain anonymous? I'd like to see your source on that.

Coming forward and going public are two different things, you realize that don’t you?

Exactly. She came forward when she sent the letter to Feinstein, but she also asked to remain anonymous because she knew there would be serious backlash against her.

When they were trying to discount the letter because it was anonymous? That is when she came forward publicly and let people know who she was. And, the backlash she was afraid of is now happening. She has gotten death threats, which is why she is staying out of the public view for now.

 

[Asclepias]

After Feinsteins' statement “can’t say that everything is truthful” it doesn't appear that she believes it either.

Youre either an idiot or youre being paid to play stupid. If someone told you something you didnt witness could you say that everything is truthful about what that person told you?

 

[Asclepias]

I’ll tell ya, if I were going to make up a story about an incident that happened in order to derail a good man’s SC nomination, I’d definitely add to my story by saying that one of his best friends was there to witness it.

That’s really common sense. Right?

That’s smart, going up against two is usually easier than one. You’d probably also take a polygraph and then insist on having the FBI investigate your lie in hopes that they don’t find anything to dispute it. Sounds like a solid plan!

What are the chances the FBI would actually investigate a claim for which there is obviously no evidence to support it? She has a lawyer and Senators to advise her that she can make such a request of the FBI without fear that the FBI would actually investigate her claim against someone they’ve already investigated several times.

The FBI has conducted what? 6 background checks on Kav? In light of this accusation you’re trying to tell me it’s completely out of line for them to follow up on it?

I think the fact that they (FBI) investigated for 3 days in the Anita Hill case provides plenty of precedence.

 

[Asclepias]

Brett Kavanaugh has been in a position of power for quite a long time. He didn't just become a judge yesterday. If these allegations are true, shame on the accuser for not saying something years ago. However, she only stepped forward when politics became involved. Thus, she is full of shit.

Nope.

She came forward when the dude was on a list to be nominated. Before he was nominated.

She’s credible.

He was nominated July 10. Feinstein got the letter in late July. Want to restate that?

Nope. She first came forward was BEFORE Feinstein got the letter and BEFORE Kavanaugh was nominated.

You need to do better research.

Let's see. She came forward, thus going public, BEFORE Feinstein got the letter that insisted she wanted to remain anonymous? I'd like to see your source on that.

Coming forward and going public are two different things, you realize that don’t you?

No he doesnt. I know when I was accused of rape I wanted my name cleared. Weird Kav hasnt demanded the FBI investigate.

 

[Freiheit]

After Feinsteins' statement “can’t say that everything is truthful” it doesn't appear that she believes it either.

Youre either an idiot or youre being paid to play stupid. If someone told you something you didnt witness could you say that everything is truthful about what that person told you?

No I'm not an idiot. However from reading your posts you appear to be a useful idiot. If Ms Feinstein can't vouch for the veracity
of Ms Fords' letter she is a fool for presenting it. Those who defend fools are fools.

 

[Asclepias]

After Feinsteins' statement “can’t say that everything is truthful” it doesn't appear that she believes it either.

Youre either an idiot or youre being paid to play stupid. If someone told you something you didnt witness could you say that everything is truthful about what that person told you?

No I'm not an idiot. However from reading your posts you appear to be a useful idiot. If Ms Feinstein can't vouch for the veracity
of Ms Fords' letter she is a fool for presenting it. Those who defend fools are fools.

Shes a fool for not wanting a potential sexual predator on the SC? See? This is why I think youre an idiot.

 

[Freiheit]

After Feinsteins' statement “can’t say that everything is truthful” it doesn't appear that she believes it either.

Youre either an idiot or youre being paid to play stupid. If someone told you something you didnt witness could you say that everything is truthful about what that person told you?

No I'm not an idiot. However from reading your posts you appear to be a useful idiot. If Ms Feinstein can't vouch for the veracity
of Ms Fords' letter she is a fool for presenting it. Those who defend fools are fools.

Shes a fool for not wanting a potential sexual predator on the SC? See? This is why I think youre an idiot.

Are serious, every person past puberty is a potential sexual predator. Unless there is highly credible evidence allegations
are he/she said nothing more. (The Duke case, and Rolling Stone UVA case come to mind) Unless there is a conviction for a
sexual offense no one can be labeled a sexual predator. That is why I think you, Ms Feinstien and a host of political fanatics are nothing more than stupid fools.

 

[Asclepias]

After Feinsteins' statement “can’t say that everything is truthful” it doesn't appear that she believes it either.

Youre either an idiot or youre being paid to play stupid. If someone told you something you didnt witness could you say that everything is truthful about what that person told you?

No I'm not an idiot. However from reading your posts you appear to be a useful idiot. If Ms Feinstein can't vouch for the veracity
of Ms Fords' letter she is a fool for presenting it. Those who defend fools are fools.

Shes a fool for not wanting a potential sexual predator on the SC? See? This is why I think youre an idiot.

Are serious, every person past puberty is a potential sexual predator. Unless there is highly credible evidence allegations
are he/she said nothing more. (The Duke case, and Rolling Stone UVA case come to mind) Unless there is a conviction for a
sexual offense no one can be labeled a sexual predator. That is why I think you, Ms Feinstien and a host of political fanatics are nothing more than stupid fools.

Are you serious? Every person past puberty is not accused of being a sexual predator and up for a seat on the SC. Thats got to be the most retarded excuse I've seen in the modern era as to why this shouldnt be investigated.

 

[Freiheit]

After Feinsteins' statement “can’t say that everything is truthful” it doesn't appear that she believes it either.

Youre either an idiot or youre being paid to play stupid. If someone told you something you didnt witness could you say that everything is truthful about what that person told you?

No I'm not an idiot. However from reading your posts you appear to be a useful idiot. If Ms Feinstein can't vouch for the veracity
of Ms Fords' letter she is a fool for presenting it. Those who defend fools are fools.

Shes a fool for not wanting a potential sexual predator on the SC? See? This is why I think youre an idiot.

Are serious, every person past puberty is a potential sexual predator. Unless there is highly credible evidence allegations
are he/she said nothing more. (The Duke case, and Rolling Stone UVA case come to mind) Unless there is a conviction for a
sexual offense no one can be labeled a sexual predator. That is why I think you, Ms Feinstien and a host of political fanatics are nothing more than stupid fools.

Are you serious? Every person past puberty is not accused of being a sexual predator and up for a seat on the SC. Thats got to be the most retarded excuse I've seen in the modern era as to why this shouldnt be investigated.

 

[sealybobo]

For Christ's sake, why would she wait for 40+ years to do anything about it?

This kind of nonsense is unbelievable, IMO.

No one accused Kav of rape.

But, we know Kavanaugh's buddy is lying. First he said he didn't do it and then the next day he says he has no recollection of the night in question. Well which is it? Do you not remember this event or do you remember the night and you say this isn't how it went down?

If Republicans Wanted The Truth About Kavanaugh, They Would Subpoena Mark Judge | HuffPost

Judge responded after being contacted by reporters by telling The New Yorker on Friday that he had “no recollection” of any such assault. Later that day, he told The Weekly Standard the accusation is “absolutely nuts,” and claimed, “I never saw Brett act that way.”

Still, Judge wrote a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday in which he stated he had no intention of cooperating with the committee in any way, while reiterating he had “no memory” of the incident Blasey described.

Here’s Judge’s chance to come to the aid of Kavananah, whom he proudly referred to in a Facebook update shortly after his school chum was nominated to the Supreme Court in July (quipping that Kavanaugh has “the same hair as the night I met him” in 1981). But he’s completely backing away. Why?

That the question has to be asked at all is the reason why Judge, as well as others who were present at the party Blasey described, must be subpoenaed by the Judiciary Committee to testify.

Judge may repeat under oath that he has “no memory” of any sexual assault by Kavanaugh. But he can also be asked questions about Kavanaugh’s behavior in high school, including his drinking habits and partying (Blasey said both Kavanaugh and Judge were drunk during the alleged assault) and whether he and Kavanaugh drank so much in those days that they might not remember a sexual assault.

Judge has written several memoirs, including, Wasted: Tales of a Gen X Drunk, in which he discussed being a blackout drunk in high school and attending wild parties with his classmates.

What seems evident, however, is that Republicans on the committee know that Judge would be a disaster as a character witness for Kavanaugh. Not only would there be much focus on his writings about being highly intoxicated at high school parties, but it would open Kavanaugh to questions about the slew of other offensive things Judge has written. For instance, his piece on how some women dressed in a way that might provoke rape

But protecting Kavanaugh from tough questions shouldn’t be the priority here. If Senate Republicans actually cared about getting to the bottom of what happened, they would want Judge’s testimony.

The fact that they don’t, and their rush to make Blasey testify, speaks volumes.

 

[hadit]

After Feinsteins' statement “can’t say that everything is truthful” it doesn't appear that she believes it either.

Youre either an idiot or youre being paid to play stupid. If someone told you something you didnt witness could you say that everything is truthful about what that person told you?

Interesting. You state that Kavenaugh is a sexual predator as if it were proven fact. Can you, in the light of what you just said, continue that practice?

 

[Freiheit]

Asclepias said:
"Shes a fool for not wanting a potential sexual predator on the SC? See? This is why I think youre an idiot."

Crawfish as your might you're the one who brought up "potential sexual predator" and that is what I replied to. You have to be most mentally inept poster on this forum.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The only reason to believe or disbelieve her at this point is merely partisanship and whether or not you want Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court.