Kavanaugh Accuser reveals her Identity

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“As the Right tries to sell “Bad behavior of a 17 y/o has no bearing on a 53 y/o,” remember they overwhelmingly support policies that treat 17 y/os as adults, sentence 17 y/os to life w/o any possibility of parole, & burden 17 y/os w/ criminal records limiting opportunity forever.”
- public defender Scott Hechinger

And the victim in this case was 15 at the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Man. She is very credible.

Have you ever known or been a high school girl? Here's a little secret: a story like this would have been shared contemporaneously. NOT saved for years. Had she been raped, she might not have shared, but this is the kind of story a girl would share. Hiding in the bathroom, etc.

She doesn't remember what year it was?
She doesn't remember how she left the house?

If it had happened and was that traumatic, she would have remembered.

Have you ever been sexually assaulted? How do you know how a person does or does not behave, or what they would or would not remember?

NP. Yes. And I remember every detail +40 years later.

So you do remember the year, etc?

Of course!

That's good, doesn't discount the experiences of those who don't remember with such specificity.

It actually does. I can remember minor things in college where a guy was grabby and drunk - who cares? But that incident I remember, along with the one my freshman year in college where two townies tried to lock me in my dorm room. My friend Rusty heard through the walls and stopped it cold. When you are in danger, you remember. But then I wasn’t drunk both times, etc.

No it doesn't. That's just you. I had two incidents happen to me, one when I was a tween, and the other in college. I remember some things in great detail, including the people involved, probably because these were etched in my mind by fear. But there's a lot of stuff I don't remember: what happened around the event, the date or time, or what I said exactly to whom about them. For the earlier one I don't even remember the time of year or exactly what age I was.


The fact is that if you don't think anything can be done about what happened to you, you're not going to keep track of exact details so that you can write a memoir 30 years later in case your assailant becomes famous. On the contrary, you just pick up the pieces and move on and try to put the awful memories past you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a tawdry tale, and seems 100% politically motivated. If the story is 100% true, BK is guilty of sexual assault, and his nomination should be withdrawn. There is now so much nuance in the sexual-assault definition, from an unwanted kiss to a drunken, grinding hug, to outright rape, that the line cannot be reasonably drawn.

My guess is the accuser and accused and witness will be heard this week or next and the Committee will report to the full Senate either pro or con, and the full Senate will vote before the SC term begins Oct 1.

Several outcomes:

The story is 100% true and she is a credible witness with no political axe to grind, and the other witness backs up her story, and BK is not credible. Then his nomination will be pulled or go down on the Senate floor.

The story is “he-said, she-said,” the witness is not supportive either way, but she is credible and apolitical. Then I still think he is defeated.

The story is “he-said, she-said,” the witness supports BK’s story, but she is credible and apolitical. Then I think he is confirmed, but narrowly.

The story is “he-said, she-said,” the witness supports BK’s story, it comes out that she and her lawyer are highly political, and some of the Feinstein machinations are exposed publicly. Then I think he is confirmed unanimously by the Republican majority, with some red-state Democratic support as well.

The story is “he-said, she-said,” the witness supports BK’s story, she and her lawyer have a political axe to grind, and there are no contemporaneous witnesses from 35 years ago and no other women have come forward and BK’s female-letter support increases, there are inconsistencies in her story and overall recollection (along with her therapist’s story), then I think she may be perceived as a Cheryl Mangrum (Duke lacrosse farce) or “Jackie” (Rolling Stone hoax, Haven Monaghan) and she loses all credibility, and he is confirmed with over 60 votes.

It is so sad that we have come to this moment politically, with so much animosity on both sides. Recall that Justice Scalia was confirmed unanimously to the SC just 32 years ago (98-0!) before Ted Kennedy delivered his infamous Bork speech in 1987 that initiated the divisiveness. Consider also that this is a Trump nomination; if BK were Obama’s pick, he’d be swiftly confirmed.

A final irony is that BK is slightly right-of center, and Merrick Garland was slightly left-of-center and they agreed on a lot.

Could not read past the bolded. All of what you described is sexual assault. Next.

I beg to differ. The cure for an unwanted kiss, or even an attempted kiss, used to be a hard slap across the face. The nuance has emerged since women became much more sexually active (pre-marriage) than they were formally because they had so much more to lose, pre-Roe and pre-Pill. Clearly what BK is accused of constitutes unwanted sexual assault, but I would argue even many women have experienced something similar, and it many not have traumatized many as much as the current accuser. Men stil generally pursue women in the vast majority of cases, but the signals from the pursued are markedly different than they were 50-60 years ago.

The "cure" as a hard slap doesn't discount that a nonconsensual kiss is assault. Plenty of men -- old and young -- don't have a problem with figuring out whether they have consent for a kiss, touching, sex, etc.

And JFC - at what point while she was held down with his hand over her mouth and his friend cheering him on was she supposed to slap him? And what - say "how dare you!"? It sounds like many of you sickening apologists are saying he shouldn't even have been ashamed of what he did - just locker room attempted rape, could have been committed by anyone, right? Boys being attempted rapist boys and all that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/NBCPolitics/status/1041751731598700544

Sen. Hatch says Kavanaugh is “honest” and “straightforward,” and he thinks woman who has brought accusation is “mixed up.”

Aide for Sen. Hatch says Hatch had just gotten off phone with Kavanaugh, and Kavanaugh denied to him that he was at the high school-era party in question

.

Who is surprised that the white old GOP leader seems to be calling the woman accuser crazy!

Who is surprised that the "woke" lib is making derisive references to skin color and age.

[Anonymous]

Wait, Kavanaugh was 17 at the time, and the drinking age in Maryland at the time was 21.

So someone was flagrantly breaking the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Man. She is very credible.

Have you ever known or been a high school girl? Here's a little secret: a story like this would have been shared contemporaneously. NOT saved for years. Had she been raped, she might not have shared, but this is the kind of story a girl would share. Hiding in the bathroom, etc.

She doesn't remember what year it was?
She doesn't remember how she left the house?

If it had happened and was that traumatic, she would have remembered.

Have you ever been sexually assaulted? How do you know how a person does or does not behave, or what they would or would not remember?

NP. Yes. And I remember every detail +40 years later.

So you do remember the year, etc?

Of course!

That's good, doesn't discount the experiences of those who don't remember with such specificity.

It actually does. I can remember minor things in college where a guy was grabby and drunk - who cares? But that incident I remember, along with the one my freshman year in college where two townies tried to lock me in my dorm room. My friend Rusty heard through the walls and stopped it cold. When you are in danger, you remember. But then I wasn’t drunk both times, etc.

Oh yes, now hearing your story convinces me that the experiences of others who don't recall all the specifics never happened, including my own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:From twitter:

Thank you, that is what I was looking for to post from 20+ pages back. Can you post the tweet link? Did the tweeter post an original link?

[Anonymous]

She can’t even say what YEAR this allegedly took place in! Give me a break!

[Anonymous]

Oh, this bring backs such wonderful memories of Bush saying he'd asked Clarence Thomas if the allegations were true, and Thomas said no.

Unfortunately for Kavanaugh, he cannot use the "hi tech" lynching line.

Trump should have nominated that Catholic woman and this would have been done and confirmed.

I actually feel badly for both Kavanaugh and the accuser here. There's no way to determine where the truth lies at this juncture, this many years later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From twitter:

Thank you, that is what I was looking for to post from 20+ pages back. Can you post the tweet link? Did the tweeter post an original link?

No, I did not see it either...but there is a chatter on twitter today that there is another victim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a big Trump supprorter and liked Kavanaugh, but these allegations are deeply troubling to me, and I would support the President withdrawing his nomination at this time. We simply don’t have enough time before the midterms for this to play out with any guarantee that we can still get a reliable conservative through in case the balance in the House shifts, not to mention the trouble this is causing for the swing votes in the Senate. It’s just not worth the risk given the number of alternates that are available. Time to move on in my opinion. The focus needs to be on confirming an air tight nominee and winning in November, not on this sideshow. Sorry Brett.

That is the strategic play, though I wouldn't be surprised if Trump and/or the Senate GOP dug in their heels. If they were smart, they'd withdraw Kavanaugh, and nominate someone much more confirmable, if conservative. Then if Democrats fought it they could suggest they were being real obstructionists.

He could nominate Merrick Garland.

No, I said reliable conservative. Just dust off the short list. As I recall, there was an excellent female judge from Indiana who we could confirm in no time. Probably the best choice at this point. Every nomination is highly dependent on timing, and we are at a critical juncture this late in the year. Garland was the last President’s choice, and he got nowhere because of timing and the political climate at that time. It was a real strategic win for Republicans, and they need to be smart and strategic again to assure another win this time around.

No, Obama’s seat was stolen by the Republicans. Not “timing.” Not “the political climate at that time.” The Republicans. If they’d like to start making that up to the country, nominating Merrick Garland would be a start, because knowing Trump’s choices, we’d get someone worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wait, Kavanaugh was 17 at the time, and the drinking age in Maryland at the time was 21.

So someone was flagrantly breaking the law.

He's an illegal. Deport him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She can’t even say what YEAR this allegedly took place in! Give me a break!

The point is, she may or may not be telling the truth. We don’t have time to figure it out. Kavanaugh is expendable and if there are other reliable conservatives who we can confirm more easily, then we absolutely need to do so. This is not the time for President Trump or Orrin Hatch to stick it to the MeToo movement. Who cares. Just move on. Even if there is a 90% chance that they will confirm Kavanaugh versus a 100% chance for the female judge from Indiana or another reliable conservative, we cannot take the risk. We are talking about the next 40 years of Supreme Court precedent. This is not the time for stubbornness!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Man. She is very credible.

Have you ever known or been a high school girl? Here's a little secret: a story like this would have been shared contemporaneously. NOT saved for years. Had she been raped, she might not have shared, but this is the kind of story a girl would share. Hiding in the bathroom, etc.

She doesn't remember what year it was?
She doesn't remember how she left the house?

If it had happened and was that traumatic, she would have remembered.

Have you ever been sexually assaulted? How do you know how a person does or does not behave, or what they would or would not remember?

NP. Yes. And I remember every detail +40 years later.

So you do remember the year, etc?

Of course!

That's good, doesn't discount the experiences of those who don't remember with such specificity.

It actually does. I can remember minor things in college where a guy was grabby and drunk - who cares? But that incident I remember, along with the one my freshman year in college where two townies tried to lock me in my dorm room. My friend Rusty heard through the walls and stopped it cold. When you are in danger, you remember. But then I wasn’t drunk both times, etc.

I'm glad your friend was able to stop it. Ford remembers the details of the alleged event, just not the precise time. She recalls it being when she was 15.

Again, there are multiple posters in this thread alone (and hundreds more posting their stories on social media anonymously and named) who had similar incidents happen and don't recall the precise timing. Just because you might remember those details, doesn't mean THEIR experiences didn't happen. Period.

Not sure why that is so difficult for people to understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a big Trump supprorter and liked Kavanaugh, but these allegations are deeply troubling to me, and I would support the President withdrawing his nomination at this time. We simply don’t have enough time before the midterms for this to play out with any guarantee that we can still get a reliable conservative through in case the balance in the House shifts, not to mention the trouble this is causing for the swing votes in the Senate. It’s just not worth the risk given the number of alternates that are available. Time to move on in my opinion. The focus needs to be on confirming an air tight nominee and winning in November, not on this sideshow. Sorry Brett.

That is the strategic play, though I wouldn't be surprised if Trump and/or the Senate GOP dug in their heels. If they were smart, they'd withdraw Kavanaugh, and nominate someone much more confirmable, if conservative. Then if Democrats fought it they could suggest they were being real obstructionists.

He could nominate Merrick Garland.

No, I said reliable conservative. Just dust off the short list. As I recall, there was an excellent female judge from Indiana who we could confirm in no time. Probably the best choice at this point. Every nomination is highly dependent on timing, and we are at a critical juncture this late in the year. Garland was the last President’s choice, and he got nowhere because of timing and the political climate at that time. It was a real strategic win for Republicans, and they need to be smart and strategic again to assure another win this time around.

No, Obama’s seat was stolen by the Republicans. Not “timing.” Not “the political climate at that time.” The Republicans. If they’d like to start making that up to the country, nominating Merrick Garland would be a start, because knowing Trump’s choices, we’d get someone worse.

Sorry honey, we don’t care about making it up to you. You lost that one, and you lost the last election. You need to move on. This is our time.