She had to move out of her house because of unrepentant death threats and arch is asking why she wanted to remain anonymous and didn't come forward.
Add in "it's always lucrative to claim to be a sexual assault victim, I wonder how much she got paid?", and this couldn't have been a more boilerplate creepy reaction.
But we are talking about the "I don't remember Trump saying he sexually assaults women, do you have a link?" guy.
so for those upset over the fact that the lady waited 30 something years.
did yall also expressed outrage when cosby got accused?
how do you feel that he admitted to do that very thing, and now is sentenced to 3-10 years?
apparently its possible to figure out what happened 30 years ago. so i dunno how thats somehow an excuse in defense of kavanaugh.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
so for those upset over the fact that the lady waited 30 something years.
did yall also expressed outrage when cosby got accused?
how do you feel that he admitted to do that very thing, and now is sentenced to 3-10 years?
apparently its possible to figure out what happened 30 years ago. so i dunno how thats somehow an excuse in defense of kavanaugh.
Were you here for that?
"These women are out for a payday" and "they're after him because of his political views" takes were rampant.
They kept with it until like the 30th accuser, then they slunk off.
oh i definitely was. its why i first brought up the cosby angle to Razor when he went on with his post, and he hasn't been back here since.
we have real life examples that clearly contradict the rhetoric being stated around here, and yet once again, people refuse to learn from history.
and whats sad about that history is that the whole situation wasn't even 5 years ago, yet people are ALREADY trying the same tired ass excuses.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
so for those upset over the fact that the lady waited 30 something years.
did yall also expressed outrage when cosby got accused?
how do you feel that he admitted to do that very thing, and now is sentenced to 3-10 years?
apparently its possible to figure out what happened 30 years ago. so i dunno how thats somehow an excuse in defense of kavanaugh.
Were you here for that?
"These women are out for a payday" and "they're after him because of his political views" takes were rampant.
They kept with it until like the 30th accuser, then they slunk off.
oh i definitely was. its why i first brought up the cosby angle to Razor when he went on with his post, and he hasn't been back here since.
we have real life examples that clearly contradict the rhetoric being stated around here, and yet once again, people refuse to learn from history.
and whats sad about that history is that the whole situation wasn't even 5 years ago, yet people are ALREADY trying the same tired ass excuses.
It was barely a year ago that multiple police officers came forward to say that Roy Moore was banned from the local mall and had to have a tail assigned to him for high school football games because he was a pedophile, and they were *still* posting Breitbart articles accusing the women of being money-hungry and out to get Moore for political purposes.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
how do you feel that he admitted to do that very thing, and now is sentenced to 3-10 years?
I'm not certain what you mean here. You're saying Cosby admitted to what he was accused of?
And for the record, I'm taking off soon, won't be back til late Thursday - might be posting then, but I have a busy day Friday as well. So, if I don't post between now and then, I'm not ignoring........I'm just gone.
how do you feel that he admitted to do that very thing, and now is sentenced to 3-10 years?
I'm not certain what you mean here. You're saying Cosby admitted to what he was accused of?
And for the record, I'm taking off soon, won't be back til late Thursday - might be posting then, but I have a busy day Friday as well. So, if I don't post between now and then, I'm not ignoring........I'm just gone.
Guy's gotta work.
yes, he admitted to drugging women.
be safe bro. and look, we didn't call each other names. progress.
Last edited by Swish; 09/25/1803:52 PM.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
'Incredibly Difficult': Ashley Kavanaugh Reacts to Death Threats, Coverage of Husband's Allegations
Ashley Kavanaugh, the wife of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, defended her husband Monday on "The Story" against accusations of sexual misconduct and reacted to the threats her family has faced as the situation intensified.
Martha MacCallum asked Ms. Kavanaugh about the death threats her family has received, as well as how the Kavanaughs' two daughters are handling the increased scrutiny.
'Incredibly Difficult': Ashley Kavanaugh Reacts to Death Threats, Coverage of Husband's Allegations
Ashley Kavanaugh, the wife of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, defended her husband Monday on "The Story" against accusations of sexual misconduct and reacted to the threats her family has faced as the situation intensified.
Martha MacCallum asked Ms. Kavanaugh about the death threats her family has received, as well as how the Kavanaughs' two daughters are handling the increased scrutiny.
The top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee acknowledged Tuesday she can’t guarantee the woman accusing Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault will show up to testify at a looming hearing, as her attorneys raise concerns about the format.
The news comes as Republicans scheduled a Friday morning Judiciary Committee vote on whether to recommend Kavanaugh's confirmation to the full Senate -- a move the ranking Democrat on the committee, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., called “outrageous.”
“For Republicans to schedule a Friday vote on Brett Kavanaugh today, two days before Dr. Blasey Ford has had a chance to tell her story, is outrageous,” Feinstein said in a statement. “First Republicans demanded Dr. Blasey Ford testify immediately. Now Republicans don’t even need to hear her before they move ahead with a vote.”
It is not necessary for Kavanaugh to secure a majority vote by the committee in order for the full Senate to vote on his confirmation. In 1991, Clarence Thomas was confirmed by the Senate after the Judiciary Committee passed on recommending him.
On Monday, Christine Blasey Ford’s attorney Michael Bromwich specifically complained about Republicans hiring outside counsel to question his client during the public hearing set for Thursday morning. In a late Monday letter to the committee, Bromwich requested the prosecutor’s resume “immediately” and asked to meet with the lawyer.
Sources told Fox News that committee Republicans hired a female prosecutor who specializes in sex crimes in preparation to hear Ford’s testimony -- though it remains unclear whether she would lead the committee’s questioning. The planning, though, prompted the letter of concern from Bromwich, once again throwing into doubt whether the hearing will go forward.
As of Tuesday afternoon, a Republican aide told Fox News the committee reserves its right to have counsel ask questions of Ford but beyond that has not determined how to proceed.
Feinstein, for her part, could not guarantee Ford would attend if the prosecutor were to lead questioning on behalf of Republican members.
“I have no way of knowing,” Feinstein told Fox News.
Meanwhile, Fox News confirms that Senate Judiciary Committee staffers interviewed Kavanaugh Tuesday about the sexual misconduct allegations by another woman, Debbie Ramirez, that appeared Sunday in The New Yorker. A source familiar with the interview tells Fox News Republican staffers led the phone interview and Democratic aides listened in, but did not ask any questions. Kavanaugh again denied the allegations.
Fox News is told Democrats were told about the call only about 15 minutes before it happened and had effectively no time to prepare.
In his letter Monday, Bromwich took issue both with plans for the outside counsel as well as fiery comments made by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., accusing Democrats of a “smear campaign.”
“We are finding it difficult to reconcile your letter and [staff member Mike Davis'] note with the Majority Leader’s speech this afternoon on the Senate floor,” wrote Bromwich.
“You said in your letter that you intend to provide a ‘fair and credible’ process ... Yet earlier today, the Majority Leader dismissed Dr. Ford’s experience as a ‘smear campaign,’ claiming mistakenly that the witnesses’ statements to the Committee constitute ‘a complete lack of evidence,’ implying that there has been a thorough investigation,” the letter read.
Bromwich then raised concerns with an email from Davis that apparently suggested an outside counsel would question Ford.
“This hearing plan that Mr. Davis described does not appear designed to provide Dr. Blasey Ford with fair and respectful treatment,” Bromwich wrote. “In our view, the hiring of an unnamed ‘experienced sex crimes prosecutor,’ as Mr. Davis described in his email, is contrary to the Majority’s repeated emphasis on the need for the Senate and this Committee’s members to fulfill their constitutional obligations.”
He added: “It is also inconsistent with your stated wish to avoid a ‘circus,’ as well as Dr. Blasey Ford’s requests through counsel that senators conduct the questioning. This is not a criminal trial for which the involvement of an experienced sex crimes prosecutor would be appropriate.”
At this point, the female prosecutor’s identity has not been revealed.
Bromwich’s letter is the latest twist in the tumultuous talks between the committee and Ford. Her story first emerged in the media, though was relayed over the summer to Feinstein, who has since faced GOP criticism for sitting on the accusations citing Ford's initial desire for confidentiality.
Ford accused Kavanaugh of covering her mouth and trying to remove her clothing at a party in the early 1980s, when both were in high school.
The committee has offered for Ford to share her testimony in public or private, or over the phone. She and her team previously accepted an invitation to testify Thursday.
Meanwhile, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., called on McConnell to apologize for describing the accusations against Kavanaugh as part of a “smear campaign” by Democrats.
McConnell on Tuesday expressed his confidence that Kavanaugh will be confirmed to the high court.
“Our goal is to have a respectful hearing,” McConnell said. “It’s not uncommon to have outside counsel to do questioning for this type of hearing. Once the hearing is done, we plan to move forward in the very near future.”
McConnell added that “everyone understands there is a presumption of innocence,” and that “we should go into these hearings with a presumption of innocence.”
“I am confident we are going to win and he will be confirmed in the near future,” McConnell said. “I believe he will be confirmed.”
Kavanaugh has denied Ford's allegation, as well as that of another woman who alleges he exposed himself to her while at Yale University.
“What I know is the truth, and the truth is I've never sexually assaulted anyone,” Kavanaugh told Fox News' Martha MacCallum in an exclusive interview on Monday.
Kavanaugh also told MacCallum that he would not withdraw his name from consideration over the allegations.
“I want a fair process where I can defend my integrity, and I know I'm telling the truth,” the judge said. “I know my lifelong record and I'm not going to let false accusations drive me out of this process. I have faith in God and I have faith in the fairness of the American people.”
The Senate Judiciary Committee announced Tuesday that it had rescheduled a vote on Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination for Friday morning.
The vote is scheduled to take place at 9:30 a.m. ET one day after Kavanaugh and sex assault accuser Christine Blasey Ford are due to testify before lawmakers. Ford has claimed that Kavanaugh tried removing her clothes during a party when they were in high school. Kavanaugh denies her accusation.
Ford sent a letter making her accusation against Kavanaugh to Judiciary Committee ranking member Dianne Feinstein in July. On Tuesday, Feinstein said the committee's action in scheduling a vote was "outrageous."
"First Republicans demanded Dr. Blasey Ford testify immediately. Now Republicans don’t even need to hear her before they move ahead with a vote," she said in a statement. "It's clear to me that Republicans don’t want this to be a fair process."
A successful vote Friday is not necessary to advance Kavanaugh's nomination to the full Senate. Current Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas received no recommendation from the Judiciary Committee in 1991, but was still confirmed by the Senate. Conversely, Robert Bork received an unfavorable recognition from the committee in 1987, though his nomination was rejected by the full Senate.
The allegations by Ford, who went public with her claims Sept. 16, have caused cracks in what appeared to be a smooth path to confirmation for Kavanaugh. Multiple Republican senators have told Fox News that they want to hear Ford's testimony before deciding which way to vote on Kavanaugh's nomination.
Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, a key undecided Republican, told reporters she will be "glued to the television" during Thursday's hearing.
However, GOP lawmakers sounded more bullish about Kavanaugh's chances on Tuesday, with some discussing keeping the Senate in session this weekend so that they can begin the process of confirming Kavanaugh right away.
"I go into the hearings with very positive feelings about him, and I hope Thursday goes well," Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., told reporters.
The debate took another twist Sunday night when the New Yorker magazine published claims by Deborah Ramirez, a Yale classmate of Kavanaugh who says he exposed himself to her while drunk at a college party in the 1980s. Kavanaugh has denied that allegation as well.
Fox News has learned that Judiciary Committee staffers interviewed Kavanaugh by phone about the Ramirez allegations on Tuesday. A source familiar with the call told Fox News that Republican staffers led the interview, while Democratic aides listened without asking any questions. Another source told Fox News that Democratic staffers were told about the call with Kavanaugh 15 minutes before it took place, giving them no time to prepare.
I'm gonna need more than that to destroy a mans life.
Spare me the "ruin a man's life" hysterics.
Worst case, he continues his highly lucrative lifetime circuit appointment.
First off, you all haven't proven anything yet. Second, if you do, he shouldn't be on the bench at all.
Quote:
What kind of financial claims is he making?
I'm too lazy to look up the exact numbers, so they may not be exact, but his asset/debt/liquidity ratio has gone off the charts in a manner only explained by impropriety and/or gambling.
Morally, I have no qualms with that stuff, but high-end positions deserve scruinity in that regard.
If you're not going to reach into your peacock feathers and offer proof of your allegations, don't make them.
Quote:
And you also know that women have lied and ruined mens lives with false accusations
Let's play a game.
For every "false accusation that ruined a man's life" you provide, I will provide 100 horrific and absolute cases everyone pretended didn't happen.
Want to play?
I'm sure you could, all I'm asking for is that you all be reasonable and get this beyond a reasonable doubt. Clearly not too much to ask.
Quote:
Not really interested in whatever you've done with anyone. No, men aren't violent perverts in general. Are there more than there should be? There shouldn't be any so that's an easy answer but as usual you all wanna cry wolf and say it's worse than it is 'in general'.
Before Kavanaugh's first accuser came forward, Kavananaugh's people researched her, and got caught doing so.
What does that tell you?
Remember when you used to cry about the fact that 40 didn't post links before you took your hiatus? It tells me you're gonna have to do your leg work and offer proof.
WE DON'T NEED A QB BEFORE WE GET A LINE THAT CAN PROTECT HIM my two cents...
I didn't see YTown ask for proof in his post. I saw him ask for revenge.
Quote:
What happens the next time the Democrats have the Senate, and a Democrat President nominates a candidate for the Supreme Court. You guys don't think that the Republicans are going to have a long memory, and play the revenge game right back?
It's a very ugly post.
No, you can't read. He's not asking for revenge. He's warning of what's to come.
WE DON'T NEED A QB BEFORE WE GET A LINE THAT CAN PROTECT HIM my two cents...
A post from YTown about accused rapers, who aren't judges, but instead minorites. See if you can spot the difference in tone.
Originally Posted By: YTownBrownsFan
These 5 young men gang raped an 18 year old woman. That is an incredibly brutal and violent thing to do to a woman. Rape is not about sex, it is about power, and abuse. It is about causing another pain. You think that 5 punks like this would have just gone running if a 51 year old man came running at them? In my case, my best bet is that they would have fallen down laughing at the thought that I was somehow going to kick all their asses.
These kids wanted to feel strong and powerful. That's what rape is about. It's not about sex. It's about a person who feels powerless in some aspect of his life feeling powerful. It's not a sex thing, it's a "I showed her/them" thing.
We need to quit blaming the victim. The daughter was a victim, and so was the father. In many ways, he may even suffer more in the long run that she will. I feel horrible for both of them, and I hope those kids don't see the light of day for a very long time to come.
If you're trying to make the case that Ytown was trying to make an excuse for what these people did with what he wrote here you've failed miserably.
WE DON'T NEED A QB BEFORE WE GET A LINE THAT CAN PROTECT HIM my two cents...
I didn't see YTown ask for proof in his post. I saw him ask for revenge.
Quote:
What happens the next time the Democrats have the Senate, and a Democrat President nominates a candidate for the Supreme Court. You guys don't think that the Republicans are going to have a long memory, and play the revenge game right back?
It's a very ugly post.
No, you can't read. He's not asking for revenge. He's warning of what's to come.
Obviously, one of the best things about the United States is that our courts assume that the defendant is innocent. However, just because our courts assume that, doesn't mean the private sphere needs to. If your boss as to disappear, and you were the prime suspect, you could safely safe that you wouldn't have your job any longer, despite you not being charged. Government loves to put the ball out of the hands of the public, which is also a good thing. This allows people to come to their own conclusion when crimes occur. My problem is with people who love to remind us that in the US you're innocent until proven guilty, is that very rarely they take their own advice. Instead they give innocence until proven guilty as a privilege for their protected class. Whether it be for the rich, powerful, older or white. Everyone else who falls outside of those protected classes are not offered the privilege of the benefit of the doubt.
That's why it's so heartbreaking to see YTown who has gone to bat for people he thinks are victims of rape and violent crimes, now say that we're all innocent until proven guilty. Just look at the YTown post I quoted. Never in a million years would you assume that the boys who were arrested were only suspects the way YTown talks about them. Actually, they're less than suspects... After a brief investigation, the NYPD found that the boys actually witnessed the Dad having sex with the daughter.
Who gets the privilege of innocent until proven guilty?
Well, this throws the last post in a different light. Should've put both these things in the same post.
WE DON'T NEED A QB BEFORE WE GET A LINE THAT CAN PROTECT HIM my two cents...
I didn't see YTown ask for proof in his post. I saw him ask for revenge.
Quote:
What happens the next time the Democrats have the Senate, and a Democrat President nominates a candidate for the Supreme Court. You guys don't think that the Republicans are going to have a long memory, and play the revenge game right back?
It's a very ugly post.
No, you can't read. He's not asking for revenge. He's warning of what's to come.
So he's threatening revenge? Even worse.
It's what both sides have been doing for years. You don't think it will happen? Not like Ytown will be bringing it about, but you know it will happen.
WE DON'T NEED A QB BEFORE WE GET A LINE THAT CAN PROTECT HIM my two cents...
A post from YTown about accused rapers, who aren't judges, but instead minorites. See if you can spot the difference in tone.
Originally Posted By: YTownBrownsFan
These 5 young men gang raped an 18 year old woman. That is an incredibly brutal and violent thing to do to a woman. Rape is not about sex, it is about power, and abuse. It is about causing another pain. You think that 5 punks like this would have just gone running if a 51 year old man came running at them? In my case, my best bet is that they would have fallen down laughing at the thought that I was somehow going to kick all their asses.
These kids wanted to feel strong and powerful. That's what rape is about. It's not about sex. It's about a person who feels powerless in some aspect of his life feeling powerful. It's not a sex thing, it's a "I showed her/them" thing.
We need to quit blaming the victim. The daughter was a victim, and so was the father. In many ways, he may even suffer more in the long run that she will. I feel horrible for both of them, and I hope those kids don't see the light of day for a very long time to come.
If you're trying to make the case that Ytown was trying to make an excuse for what these people did with what he wrote here you've failed miserably.
No, that's not at all what I'm saying. The kids and this father and daughter literally had all the same evidence that that the women have against Kavanaugh, which is their word. However, YTown doesn't wait till innocent until proven guilty, he casts them as monsters. If you want to see political bias, here it is in Ytown's actions.
What happens the next time the Democrats have the Senate, and a Democrat President nominates a candidate for the Supreme Court. You guys don't think that the Republicans are going to have a long memory, and play the revenge game right back?
I laughed out loud at this.
Merrick Garland.
Quote:
It is a sad time for our Republic. I am for protecting victim's rights, but this is so plainly political, and none of this woman's so called witnesses witnessed anything like she states. There is no evidence, anywhere.
Why were they doing oppo research on this woman before she came forward?
Not the same, Garland should've gotten a down vote at least. But the GOP wasn't dragging his name through the mud without proving it first.
WE DON'T NEED A QB BEFORE WE GET A LINE THAT CAN PROTECT HIM my two cents...
ummm, we aren't talking about that case with the 5 teens in new york city, are we?
cause i've tried to stay quiet about this, but is this the case we're talking about here?
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Why are my replys being deleted? Are the refs all leftys?
lmfao. please stop. if they were all leftys,my DT prison terms would be way shorter than what they are.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
A post from YTown about accused rapers, who aren't judges, but instead minorites. See if you can spot the difference in tone.
Originally Posted By: YTownBrownsFan
These 5 young men gang raped an 18 year old woman. That is an incredibly brutal and violent thing to do to a woman. Rape is not about sex, it is about power, and abuse. It is about causing another pain. You think that 5 punks like this would have just gone running if a 51 year old man came running at them? In my case, my best bet is that they would have fallen down laughing at the thought that I was somehow going to kick all their asses.
These kids wanted to feel strong and powerful. That's what rape is about. It's not about sex. It's about a person who feels powerless in some aspect of his life feeling powerful. It's not a sex thing, it's a "I showed her/them" thing.
We need to quit blaming the victim. The daughter was a victim, and so was the father. In many ways, he may even suffer more in the long run that she will. I feel horrible for both of them, and I hope those kids don't see the light of day for a very long time to come.
If you're trying to make the case that Ytown was trying to make an excuse for what these people did with what he wrote here you've failed miserably.
No, that's not at all what I'm saying. The kids and this father and daughter literally had all the same evidence that that the women have against Kavanaugh, which is their word. However, YTown doesn't wait till innocent until proven guilty, he casts them as monsters. If you want to see political bias, here it is in Ytown's actions.
Yeah, as you should see from the post following this one, I should've read your following post before responding.
WE DON'T NEED A QB BEFORE WE GET A LINE THAT CAN PROTECT HIM my two cents...
The forgotten man... apparently we forgot the pervs. We forgot to keep a closer eye on them. We get called baby killers for supporting a woman's choice. They get called good and honorable men for being accused of sexual assault. This is the credo of the forgotten man...?
You said it yourself, ACCUSED. Gotta prove it.
WE DON'T NEED A QB BEFORE WE GET A LINE THAT CAN PROTECT HIM my two cents...
Michael Avenatti denied rumors that he had been tricked by 4Chan users into representing a fictional woman with allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Avenatti locked his Twitter account earlier on Tuesday, making it impossible to retweet any of his tweets.
Avenatti, who is considering a presidential bid in 2020, has said in recent days that he is representing a woman with credible claims of sexual assault against Kavanaugh, who faces allegations of sexual misconduct from two other women, both of which he has vehemently denied.
A 4Chan user posted on Tuesday that his girlfriend had called Avenatti on a burner phone and claimed to be a woman who had been assaulted by Kavanaugh in high school. He claimed that he and his girlfriend also pretended to be another person who could confirm the fictional woman's story. 4Chan is an internet message board which has been linked to the alt-right.
Avenatti told CBS News' Nancy Cordes on Tuesday that the post was false.
"There's nothing wrong! I had to go online to look, and I read this post, and I'm laughing. None of that happened. It's a complete fabrication. There's zero truth to it. When I say zero truth, I mean zero truth. Not a single thing in that is true," he said. Avenatti also said that his client was not having second thoughts about coming forward, saying that she is "remaining strong."
Avenatti tweeted on Sept. 23 that he and his client "will be demanding the opportunity to present testimony to the committee and will likewise be demanding that Judge and others be subpoenaed to testify. The nomination must be withdrawn."
Avenatti has said that his client will be coming forward shortly. Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Deborah Ramirez have accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault during their high school and college years, respectively.
He said he locked his Twitter account Tuesday "because the bots and Trump trolls are out in full force due to my representation re Kavanaugh. I will change this back as soon as I am able."
Avenatti is also the attorney for Stormy Daniels, the adult film actress suing President Trump for allegedly not signing a nondisclosure arrangement that his lawyer had arranged. Avenatti has become a fixture on cable news, and has openly expressed his interest in running for president.
He has made trips to Iowa and New Hampshire recently, states traditionally visited by presidential candidates.
It's reasons like that which make me believe women aren't taken seriously by those in power. The kits would get processed ASAP if women were taken seriously. At least you should see that.
