Kavanaugh vote postponed. Judiciary Committee hearing on Sexual Assault complain Monday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They picked Monday because they don’t want to leave time for any more info to come out, or for more accusers to come forward. They want to make it a simple he-said-she-said situation, and then just jam the nomination through.

We should have higher standards for a Supreme Court Justice. Can’t they find someone who *hasn’t* tried to rape a fifteen year old girl?

A week is an eternity in Trump time.

I’m a former (female) federal law clerk, and my grapevine says there are female law clerks out there. Wow, would it be tough to come forward though. Your career would be over.

You don’t think so, law is a pretty liberal profession.

This last comment is too funny. No way is the law a “pretty liberal profession.” No way.

[Anonymous]

Reading through some of these posts and reminded that A) misogyny is alive and well in this country and B) victims of sexual assault are incredibly brave to speak out against their attackers. The way some of the PPs have attacked this woman and attempted to discredit her is really gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good for the hearing and airing this matter. I expect the woman thinks she is right but is in fact confused on the details of the incident including the people involved.

The GOP: when you just can’t help but vilify women.

NP. How are these accusations fair to Judge Kavanaugh’s wife and daughters?

When you commit an assault, you don’t really get to complain about collateral damage.

How about when you *don't* commit an assault? Do those people have any rights at all, or are they guilty once the allegation has been made.
Liberals: you don't know whether he did or did not do this. He has denied it. Perhaps you should back it up just a tad and realize YOU are not judge and jury of this man.

I do believe in lie detectors though.

And in American politics, I vote for the people who serve as his Judge and Jury— at least on the issue of whether he is named to SCOTUS. So yeah, I kinda am. He must HATE that, me being a omen and all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This means the republicans are very confident about Kavanaugh't denial.

They may know the woman is lying.

Or they’re hoping against hope no more victims emerge.

There’s already chatter about additional people.

Links? Sources? Didn't think so.

There certainly have been many rumors today. Wait and see. Quite a few posters here yesterday were insisting Professor Ford would not go public.

To bad she didn't go public years ago, when there could have been a full investigation, either implicating him or clearing his name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have you all already discussed the alleged fact that she only told her shrink about this assault in 2012, right after the New Yorker Magazine did a feature on Mitt Romney that alluded to him picking Kavanaugh to replace RBG were Mitt to win (and he was in position to nominate a USSCJ)?

And how did replacing RBG go?

[Anonymous]

The fact of the matter is, we should all lean towards believing victims of sexual assault, when the stakes are so high and the whole country is watching and listening.
Why?
Because no woman in her right mind (or man) would consent to such intrusive dissection and vilification if they had not actually suffered what they say they've suffered.

I don't care who is in power. I will go against my own party to support an alleged victim of sexual assault in such situations, because in the recent past they've all been credible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She didn't even tell his name to the therapist.

This story just does not ring true.

Would you believe it if there were pics? No, I didn't think so. Because you think women are dirt.

Also why you're so eager to confirm a man hell-bent on repealing women's reproductive rights.

DP. You sound truly unhinged. If I told you your husband did something similar to me when I was 15 and he was 17, would you believe me? Without any evidence at all, just my word against his? Didn't think so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This means the republicans are very confident about Kavanaugh't denial.

They may know the woman is lying.

Or they’re hoping against hope no more victims emerge.

There’s already chatter about additional people.

Links? Sources? Didn't think so.

There certainly have been many rumors today. Wait and see. Quite a few posters here yesterday were insisting Professor Ford would not go public.

To bad she didn't go public years ago, when there could have been a full investigation, either implicating him or clearing his name.

Sorry that the trauma she went through wasn’t on a convenient timeframe for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They picked Monday because they don’t want to leave time for any more info to come out, or for more accusers to come forward. They want to make it a simple he-said-she-said situation, and then just jam the nomination through.

We should have higher standards for a Supreme Court Justice. Can’t they find someone who *hasn’t* tried to rape a fifteen year old girl?

A week is an eternity in Trump time.

I’m a former (female) federal law clerk, and my grapevine says there are female law clerks out there. Wow, would it be tough to come forward though. Your career would be over.

You don’t think so, law is a pretty liberal profession.

This last comment is too funny. No way is the law a “pretty liberal profession.” No way.

Lawyers might be risk averse types, but most are quite liberal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This means the republicans are very confident about Kavanaugh't denial.

They may know the woman is lying.

Or they’re hoping against hope no more victims emerge.

There’s already chatter about additional people.

Links? Sources? Didn't think so.

There certainly have been many rumors today. Wait and see. Quite a few posters here yesterday were insisting Professor Ford would not go public.

To bad she didn't go public years ago, when there could have been a full investigation, either implicating him or clearing his name.

Indeed, well too bad people slander and drag accusers through the mud, slut shame them, ask about what they were wearing and whether they were drinking, suggest they had it coming or deserved it, suggest they encouraged it, suggest they just wanted sex and then changed their minds afterward, to name a few. Once that changes maybe more will come forward at the time of their attacks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good for the hearing and airing this matter. I expect the woman thinks she is right but is in fact confused on the details of the incident including the people involved.

The GOP: when you just can’t help but vilify women.

NP. How are these accusations fair to Judge Kavanaugh’s wife and daughters?

When you commit an assault, you don’t really get to complain about collateral damage.

How about when you *don't* commit an assault? Do those people have any rights at all, or are they guilty once the allegation has been made.
Liberals: you don't know whether he did or did not do this. He has denied it. Perhaps you should back it up just a tad and realize YOU are not judge and jury of this man.

If you didn’t commit assault, you sue for libel. Just like Roy Moore claimed he was going to. And Trump claimed he was going to. Oddly, they didn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She didn't even tell his name to the therapist.

This story just does not ring true.

Would you believe it if there were pics? No, I didn't think so. Because you think women are dirt.

Also why you're so eager to confirm a man hell-bent on repealing women's reproductive rights.

DP. You sound truly unhinged. If I told you your husband did something similar to me when I was 15 and he was 17, would you believe me? Without any evidence at all, just my word against his? Didn't think so.

Here's the thing. You assume that others are just as blindly partisan as you, and act accordingly. Well, some of us are not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They picked Monday because they don’t want to leave time for any more info to come out, or for more accusers to come forward. They want to make it a simple he-said-she-said situation, and then just jam the nomination through.

We should have higher standards for a Supreme Court Justice. Can’t they find someone who *hasn’t* tried to rape a fifteen year old girl?

A week is an eternity in Trump time.

I’m a former (female) federal law clerk, and my grapevine says there are female law clerks out there. Wow, would it be tough to come forward though. Your career would be over.

You don’t think so, law is a pretty liberal profession.

This last comment is too funny. No way is the law a “pretty liberal profession.” No way.

+1

Just because so mamy Republicans have been breakimg the law, that does not mske it a liberal profession.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They picked Monday because they don’t want to leave time for any more info to come out, or for more accusers to come forward. They want to make it a simple he-said-she-said situation, and then just jam the nomination through.

We should have higher standards for a Supreme Court Justice. Can’t they find someone who *hasn’t* tried to rape a fifteen year old girl?

A week is an eternity in Trump time.

I’m a former (female) federal law clerk, and my grapevine says there are female law clerks out there. Wow, would it be tough to come forward though. Your career would be over.

You don’t think so, law is a pretty liberal profession.

This last comment is too funny. No way is the law a “pretty liberal profession.” No way.

Lawyers might be risk averse types, but most are quite liberal.

You need to broaden your horizons beyond fed lawyers in the DMV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good for the hearing and airing this matter. I expect the woman thinks she is right but is in fact confused on the details of the incident including the people involved.

The GOP: when you just can’t help but vilify women.

NP. How are these accusations fair to Judge Kavanaugh’s wife and daughters?

When you commit an assault, you don’t really get to complain about collateral damage.

How about when you *don't* commit an assault? Do those people have any rights at all, or are they guilty once the allegation has been made.
Liberals: you don't know whether he did or did not do this. He has denied it. Perhaps you should back it up just a tad and realize YOU are not judge and jury of this man.

If you didn’t commit assault, you sue for libel. Just like Roy Moore claimed he was going to. And Trump claimed he was going to. Oddly, they didn’t.

+2