Kavanaugh Accuser reveals her Identity

[Anonymous]

Donnie Jr. mocks the Kavanaugh accuser. What a pig. Even Republicans say he's an "uncaring narrow minded idiot" for doing so.

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/406989-joe-walsh-trump-jr-is-an-uncaring-narrow-minded-idiot

Former Republican lawmaker Joe Walsh tore into President Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., for mocking Senate Democrats over their reaction to sexual misconduct accusations made against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

“No matter your take on the accusations against Brett Kavanaugh, I think we all can agree that @DonaldJTrumpJr is an uncaring, narrow-minded idiot,” Walsh said of Trump Jr.

[Anonymous]

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!

I was groped viciously in my crotch by a man in a crowded space sometime in the 90’s. Horrible. Was too shocked to even yell out at the time and never told anyone or did anything about it. I remember exactly how it happened, the space it happened in, and my feeling of shock and dismay, but I couldn’t tell you the exact year or even month or many other details.

How do you NOT remember? I bet you can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Exactly. I can tell you mine happened in July before my 14th birthday in September. I could easily do the math and get a year. In San Jose, a townhome. I can tell you what the room(s) looked like and the expression of disgust towards ME his WIFE threw when he was bagged pushing me against a wall rubbing his erect member on me. Then she walked out of the room - did not help me.

She must've been drunk herself or she would remember more details - she's holding back on something(s) and there's a reason for it.

Just because you remember doesn’t mean everyone can. I know what happened to me in college took place junior or senior year, but I couldn’t be more specific than that. That doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

For me as well.

When you're accusing someone of attempted rape and almost smothering you, these types of facts matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clinical psychologist PP here. Memory is weird, to use a colloquialism. It's not uncommon for someone who has experienced a traumatic event to not recall some key features of the event. Other times, people report remembering aspects of a trauma in excruciating detail.

Trauma and memory is not my primary area of expertise, so I'm not sure which reaction is more common. But I've definitely had patients describe to me both ends of the spectrum, with some experiencing almost a "blackout" where they don't remember any of the trauma, only what occurred before and after. Others remember very minor details, including sounds, smells, etc.

Again, I have no way of knowing whether the woman's account is true. Just wanted to chime in re: the variability in range of recall for stressful/traumatic events.

And often, psychologists fill in the missing details, i.e. "help" their patients remember. Many a life has been ruined by psychologists putting ideas in vulnerable heads.

In a court of law? "I know you assaulted me but I can't say when or where" would not hold up.

Do you think that the standard for judging someone for electing someone to office or for a lifetime seat on the federal bench should be as strict and high as the criminal and even civil thresholds for evidence in a court of law? This is not about reasonable doubt or even preponderance of evidence (though I think the accuser has that preponderance). This is also about character and fitness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Kavanaugh Loses Support From 63 Out Of 65 Women Who Vouched For Him

Following news that Christine Blasey Ford had accused SCOTUS nominee Brett Kavanaugh of physically assaulting her in an attempted rape during a college party in the 1980s, 65 women came forward to sign a pledge in support of Kavanaugh’s character. Now, Ford has provided lie detector results administered by a former FBI agent which appears to verify her story.

It only took a few short days but 63 of the 65 women who initially signed the pledge have backed away from their support of Kavanaugh.

Um, source?

Um, click on the bolded text.

I’m, real source? That (partisan) source provides no documentation. And I’m in the “he should withdraw “ camp.

W

The article states the source is from Politico and provides a link to the original story.

And the Politico story says no such thing, only that most didn’t respond to messages.

Yes it does, although the story has been updated since the article was posted. The updated version says five women responded affirmatively. Ergo, 60 have not because they may not support him any longer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Exactly. I can tell you mine happened in July before my 14th birthday in September. I could easily do the math and get a year. In San Jose, a townhome. I can tell you what the room(s) looked like and the expression of disgust towards ME his WIFE threw when he was bagged pushing me against a wall rubbing his erect member on me. Then she walked out of the room - did not help me.

She must've been drunk herself or she would remember more details - she's holding back on something(s) and there's a reason for it.

Just because you remember doesn’t mean everyone can. I know what happened to me in college took place junior or senior year, but I couldn’t be more specific than that. That doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

For me as well.

When you're accusing someone of attempted rape and almost smothering you, these types of facts matter.

They matter, but not being able to produce them doesn’t mean the event didn’t happen, and that is the argument being made here.

[Anonymous]

So the only thing she remembers for sure is that this stranger she never met before and never again is definitely Brett Kavanaugh, the supreme court nominee.

She is not credible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Kavanaugh Loses Support From 63 Out Of 65 Women Who Vouched For Him

Following news that Christine Blasey Ford had accused SCOTUS nominee Brett Kavanaugh of physically assaulting her in an attempted rape during a college party in the 1980s, 65 women came forward to sign a pledge in support of Kavanaugh’s character. Now, Ford has provided lie detector results administered by a former FBI agent which appears to verify her story.

It only took a few short days but 63 of the 65 women who initially signed the pledge have backed away from their support of Kavanaugh.

Um, source?

Um, click on the bolded text.

I’m, real source? That (partisan) source provides no documentation. And I’m in the “he should withdraw “ camp.

W

The article states the source is from Politico and provides a link to the original story.

And the Politico story says no such thing, only that most didn’t respond to messages.

Yes it does, although the story has been updated since the article was posted. The updated version says five women responded affirmatively. Ergo, 60 have not because they may not support him any longer.

And there is a huge difference between “loses support” and “may no longer support.”

Sorry, but facts matter whichever side you’re on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Additional hearings must be open and televised. Otherwise, it is a cover-up. Where does this dottering old fool Grassley come up with such galactically stupid ideas?

Agree:

When were you sexually assaulted? "I can't recall"
Where were you when you were sexually assaulted? "I can't recall"
Were you under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol? "I can't recall"

But you can specifically recall it was Kavanaugh "I can recall that, yes"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Kavanaugh Loses Support From 63 Out Of 65 Women Who Vouched For Him

Following news that Christine Blasey Ford had accused SCOTUS nominee Brett Kavanaugh of physically assaulting her in an attempted rape during a college party in the 1980s, 65 women came forward to sign a pledge in support of Kavanaugh’s character. Now, Ford has provided lie detector results administered by a former FBI agent which appears to verify her story.

It only took a few short days but 63 of the 65 women who initially signed the pledge have backed away from their support of Kavanaugh.

Um, source?

Um, click on the bolded text.

I’m, real source? That (partisan) source provides no documentation. And I’m in the “he should withdraw “ camp.

Ditto -- I read (somewhere) that only 2 had been reached and responded in the affirmative - there was no implication that the othersnow opposed BK -only that they had not responded.

[Anonymous]

https://twitter.com/jdawsey1/status/1041803346074628096

There will be a public hearing on Kavanaugh next week.

[Anonymous]

She claims there were only four guys and her at the party? And she can't recall the details? And her lawyer states another girl was present but the alleged victim stated only four guys?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/jdawsey1/status/1041803346074628096

There will be a public hearing on Kavanaugh next week.

Good. Let the accuser be heard before giving Kavanaugh a lifetime job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
So the only thing she remembers for sure is that this stranger she never met before and never again is definitely Brett Kavanaugh, the supreme court nominee.

She is not credible.

Wait. She's claiming that was the first time she met Kavanaugh?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
So the only thing she remembers for sure is that this stranger she never met before and never again is definitely Brett Kavanaugh, the supreme court nominee.

She is not credible.

Where does it indicate she didn’t know who he was at the time of the alleged incident?