Kavanaugh Accuser reveals her Identity

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would flat out suck to be a parent to boys these days.

It's not bad at all. Most guys don't get accused of rape or sexual assault or whatever you want to call Kavanaugh pinning down a girl, grinding against her, trying to pull her clothes off, and covering her mouth. My boy absolutely knows not to do that.

Good parenting then. Bravo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A woman could accuse a man of poisoning her dog too. That doesn't happen because: a) women aren't any more prone than men of randomly accusing people of crimes they didn't commit; and b) dog poisonings are sufficiently rare that we'd immediately be skeptical.

Sexual assault accusations are credible because they're so damn plausible. Women are being assaulted by men frequently.

It's extremely plausible that an early 80s all-boys prep school guy was forcing himself on a 15 year old girl. Is that the same as conclusive? No. But the woman has evidence that she was talking about this to a therapist 6 years ago.

The standard for criminal conviction is "beyond a reasonable doubt."
The standard for civil judgment is "preponderance of evidence."
The standard for confirmation to a lifetime appointment on the nation's most powerful court should be lower than that.
The standard for delaying the confirmation hearings for a thorough investigation is lower still. I think the accuser has met at least this standard.

The bolded. I hate feminism with a passion and your statement is why

Because you're mad that women are speaking up about being assaulted?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A woman could accuse a man of poisoning her dog too. That doesn't happen because: a) women aren't any more prone than men of randomly accusing people of crimes they didn't commit; and b) dog poisonings are sufficiently rare that we'd immediately be skeptical.

Sexual assault accusations are credible because they're so damn plausible. Women are being assaulted by men frequently.

It's extremely plausible that an early 80s all-boys prep school guy was forcing himself on a 15 year old girl. Is that the same as conclusive? No. But the woman has evidence that she was talking about this to a therapist 6 years ago.

The standard for criminal conviction is "beyond a reasonable doubt."
The standard for civil judgment is "preponderance of evidence."
The standard for confirmation to a lifetime appointment on the nation's most powerful court should be lower than that.
The standard for delaying the confirmation hearings for a thorough investigation is lower still. I think the accuser has met at least this standard.

The bolded. I hate feminism with a passion and your statement is why

nobody cares what you hate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:am i the only one who thinks these letters from 65 women in support of him is super shady? think about it. what 50+ year old man knows 65 women from high school well enough that they would write up a glowing testimonial about how great he is to women? think about if you had to come up with character references for a job application. could you produce 65 glowing references in a short amount of time - much less all 65 of the opposite gender, much less all from when you were in high school?

Someone had screenshots of Virginia Hume tweeting with Judge in June about “youthful shenanigans” as well as “oldful shenanigans.”

Color me skeptical that the letter wasn’t prepped and ready to go ahead of time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would flat out suck to be a parent to boys these days.

It's not bad at all. Most guys don't get accused of rape or sexual assault or whatever you want to call Kavanaugh pinning down a girl, grinding against her, trying to pull her clothes off, and covering her mouth. My boy absolutely knows not to do that.

But if just one girl says he did...even 30 years later...

Then their mommies become the world’s loudest champions of well, you know....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:am i the only one who thinks these letters from 65 women in support of him is super shady? think about it. what 50+ year old man knows 65 women from high school well enough that they would write up a glowing testimonial about how great he is to women? think about if you had to come up with character references for a job application. could you produce 65 glowing references in a short amount of time - much less all 65 of the opposite gender, much less all from when you were in high school?

Rs already knew about this accusation and they had this in their back pocket in case it came out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would flat out suck to be a parent to boys these days.

It's not bad at all. Most guys don't get accused of rape or sexual assault or whatever you want to call Kavanaugh pinning down a girl, grinding against her, trying to pull her clothes off, and covering her mouth. My boy absolutely knows not to do that.

But if just one girl says he did...even 30 years later...

In therapy. She told her therapist. Then her husband. Well before Trump was a national nightmare with the power to change the supreme court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A woman could accuse a man of poisoning her dog too. That doesn't happen because: a) women aren't any more prone than men of randomly accusing people of crimes they didn't commit; and b) dog poisonings are sufficiently rare that we'd immediately be skeptical.

Sexual assault accusations are credible because they're so damn plausible. Women are being assaulted by men frequently.

It's extremely plausible that an early 80s all-boys prep school guy was forcing himself on a 15 year old girl. Is that the same as conclusive? No. But the woman has evidence that she was talking about this to a therapist 6 years ago.

The standard for criminal conviction is "beyond a reasonable doubt."
The standard for civil judgment is "preponderance of evidence."
The standard for confirmation to a lifetime appointment on the nation's most powerful court should be lower than that.
The standard for delaying the confirmation hearings for a thorough investigation is lower still. I think the accuser has met at least this standard.

The bolded. I hate feminism with a passion and your statement is why

Congrats? It’s a statement of fact whether you like it or not. DP.

[Anonymous]

PP is partially correct. I don't like him -- not for being conservative -- but for being part of the tribal Republicans who seemed to get really bad when Gingrich came to power. The north star of their politics is hating liberals. Kavanaugh is not a conservative like John Roberts. I don't like Roberts' policy choices, but I don't doubt that he is honorable or motivated by a vision that goes beyond owning the libs. I'd hate it if Obama nominated someone like Roberts. But he was a reasonable choice for a conservative President.

Kavanaugh is different. He's part of the Clinton-killed-Vince-Foster club that did so much to poison this country's politics. So, you're right. That's enough for me.

But, maybe there are others for whom a shady political background isn't a deal breaker. Maybe their line is at a guy who forced himself on a 15 year old girl when he was 17 and should have known better.

So, let's investigate it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even the White House is not standing by Kavanaugh. They provided "no comment" - normally, they would reaffirm support and claim the nominee did nothing wrong.

So if Trump isn't standing by him, why is anyone here standing by him?

Not an official statement, but per Politico:

A lawyer close to the White House said the nomination will not be withdrawn. “No way, not even a hint of it. If anything, it’s the opposite. If somebody can be brought down by accusations like this, then you, me, every man certainly should be worried.”


Ok, so the suggestion is, every man has done this. Uh, no. Only in GOP Trump World is this the case.

But that's the thing - I could accuse your husband of sexual assault. I could accuse your sons. I don't need any proof whatsoever, just my word against theirs. So the lawyer quoted above is correct. ANY man can be brought down by accusations like this. Doesn't matter if they're true or false. All it takes is the accusation. So ask yourself - if your husband or sons were accused of sexual assault and deny it, are you going to insist they're guilty? Without any proof or witnesses - just the accuser's word?

Do you know me, or my sons?
Were you ever in a compromising place with me or my sons?
Are there any contemperaneous witnesses?
Any medical records or other notes?
Any 3rd party?

If the answer to these is "no" then no, you can't just make the claim.

In this case, if the victim hadn't passed a polygraph and notes from a psychiatrist from 6 years ago, then there really wouldn't be anything to go on at all, but that isn't the situation, now is it? It would certainly be better if the victim had a parent or peer who could vouch for it from the time in question, the way the Roy Moore accusers did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would flat out suck to be a parent to boys these days.

It's not bad at all. Most guys don't get accused of rape or sexual assault or whatever you want to call Kavanaugh pinning down a girl, grinding against her, trying to pull her clothes off, and covering her mouth. My boy absolutely knows not to do that.

Most guys aren’t Trump nominees. You liberals don’t give not one crap about what you have done to his wife and daughters with your unhinged revenge fantasies. You are no friend to women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would flat out suck to be a parent to boys these days.

It's not bad at all. Most guys don't get accused of rape or sexual assault or whatever you want to call Kavanaugh pinning down a girl, grinding against her, trying to pull her clothes off, and covering her mouth. My boy absolutely knows not to do that.

Good parenting then. Bravo.

Pretty sure it's the bare minimum. But thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only independent witness to this alleged crime says she is lying. So there is that.

He’s not independent, according to her account.

And let’s think this through. If he was a witness, then there was an incident, but they differ on describing what happened? So what does this “witness” (to what?) think happened, specifically?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even the White House is not standing by Kavanaugh. They provided "no comment" - normally, they would reaffirm support and claim the nominee did nothing wrong.

So if Trump isn't standing by him, why is anyone here standing by him?

Not an official statement, but per Politico:

A lawyer close to the White House said the nomination will not be withdrawn. “No way, not even a hint of it. If anything, it’s the opposite. If somebody can be brought down by accusations like this, then you, me, every man certainly should be worried.”


Ok, so the suggestion is, every man has done this. Uh, no. Only in GOP Trump World is this the case.

What is astonishing is this lawyer close to the white house is not arguing that it is not true, but that men need to stick up & defend this

Does this really surprise you?

This is classic conservative spin. Everyone questioning the character of the victim is a republican. They basically believe any BS their party feeds them. Everything is fake news and liberal lies.

While the WH might want to move forward, Kavanaugh will not. He won't put his family through this. They'll spin it to preserve his reputation, but they won't proceed with the Supreme Court nomination.

Here's a question for you: Why do you believe the 30+ year old, fuzzy recollection of ONE woman? Understandable if there were multiple accusations, but there is one. And it's from decades ago. At any time during Kavanaugh's career, she could have come forward. Why is it that you believe her over him?

because they want him gone

Trump should have nominated someone with a clean background

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes

We all know it's not his background that's concerning liberals. You didn't want him in the first place, and you'll attack any conservative nominee.

Yes, its as if we created one set of rules for Dem presidential appointees, and another for Republican... oh wait, that's your boy McConnell.

I'll repeat; it's not his background that's your concern.

there's plenty in his background that's of concern. but there are other threads about that.

Since the day he was nominated, liberals have been trying desperately to find a reason not block his confirmation---and for no other reason than he's more conservative. They think they now have a way to successfully stop him. Perhaps they do, but it's not because they have concerns about his background. They don't like his political views.

Plenty of "other" reasons. For me the biggest one is that he is a partisan. Has a long track record of being a partisan. That's not the characteristic of a Supreme Court judge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would flat out suck to be a parent to boys these days.

It's not bad at all. Most guys don't get accused of rape or sexual assault or whatever you want to call Kavanaugh pinning down a girl, grinding against her, trying to pull her clothes off, and covering her mouth. My boy absolutely knows not to do that.

Most guys aren’t Trump nominees. You liberals don’t give not one crap about what you have done to his wife and daughters with your unhinged revenge fantasies. You are no friend to women.

you are really reaching here.