Attempted Rapist to be appointed to Supreme Court?

by Original Quill Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:08 pm

First topic message reminder :

Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, a clinical psychologist and professor at the University of Palo Alto, just south of here, has accused Judge Brett Kavanaugh of attacking her and attempting to rape her at a party when they were younger. Judge Kavanaugh, of the DC Circuit Court, is up for an opening on the Supreme Court at present.

Both Dr. Ford and Kavanaugh attended toney private schools in Washington DC, and the schools (Boys School and Girls School) often held joint parties. At one such affair, Kavanaugh and another man kidnapped Dr. Ford, threw her into a bedroom, and on the bed attempted an sexual assault of her. Judge Kavanaugh, when younger, had acquired a reputation for drunkenness and lewd behavior when intoxicated.

The following is an article:

The Independent wrote:Brett Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford 'receiving vicious harassment and death threats'

Emily Shugerman
The Independent•September 19, 2018

The California psychology professor who has accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault is reportedly receiving death threats, as Donald Trump says he will make a decision on his nominee based on her testimony.

The professor, 51-year-old Christine Blasey Ford, has accused Mr Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her at a party when they were both in high school. Mr Kavanugh has categorically denied the allegations.

In the days since Ms Blasey Ford’s name was made public, her attorneys said, her “worst fears have materialised”.

“She has been the target of vicious harassment and even death threats,” attorneys Debra Katz and Lisa Banks wrote in a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee chair Chuck Grassley.

“As a result of these kind of threats, her family was forced to relocate out of their home,” they added. “Her email has been hacked and she has been impersonated online.”

The attorneys asked for an FBI investigation of Ms Blasey Ford’s allegations before she was called to testify publicly in front of the Senate committee. Mr Grassley had previously scheduled a televised hearing on the allegations for Monday.

Cheeto-Faced Ferret-Wearing Shit Gibbon said on Wednesday that it would be “wonderful” if the professor appeared in front of the committee.

“Look, if she shows up and makes a credible showing, that will be very interesting and we’ll have to make a decision,” he told reporters outside the White House.

But Ms Blasey Ford’s attorneys pushed back on the Monday deadline, saying the accuser’s life was “being turned upside down”, and chiding Mr Grassley for suggesting she relive a “traumatic and harrowing incident” at the same table as Mr Kavanaugh.

Democrats quickly spoke out in support of the professor’s wishes, saying the hearing should be delayed until a full investigation could be completed.

“That this brave woman is receiving death threats and has been forced to flee with her family is appalling and heartbreaking,” Senator Dianne Feinstein, the ranking Democrat on the judiciary committee, said in a statement. “This abuse must stop. We’re better than this.”

But Republicans were reluctant to delay the hearing, which could push a vote on Mr Kavanaugh’s confirmation until after the contentious midterm elections. Some pointed to a statement from the Justice Department that noted Ms Blasey Ford’s allegation does not concern a federal crime, and that the FBI “does not make any judgement about the credibility or significance of any allegation”.

Mr Grassley said on Tuesday that the hearing should proceed, regardless of whether or not Ms Blasey Ford decided to testify.

“The invitation for Monday still stands. Dr Ford’s testimony would reflect her personal knowledge and memory of events,” the chairman said. “Nothing the FBI or any other investigator does would have any bearing on what Dr Ford tells the committee, so there is no reason for any further delay.”

Meanwhile, in Ms Blasey Ford’s hometown of Palo Alto, a group of local mothers had gathered together to support their friend. Kirsten Leimroth, whose daughters are part of the same junior lifeguard programme as Ms Blasey Ford’s two sons, said it was “preposterous” to think the professor had invented the allegations for political reasons.

“There’s absolutely no way it’s made up. She can’t even go home,” Ms Leimroth told the Mercury News. “She had to have her kids stay somewhere else. She had to shut down all social media. Why would she do that?”

So many sexual assaults, so little time. Attempted Rapist to be appointed to Supreme Court? - Page 2 2190311264

What is it with Donald Trump, that he is involved with so many rapes, child rapes and random sexual contacts with women? Wasn't it just last year when some 18-women told of his habit of "pussy-grabbing"? Indeed, in October, 2016, he boasted on the Access Hollywood tape how much he liked to "grab pussy".

But, it's also a part of Trump's circle of friends. Last year, Trump supported for the Alabama Senate seat, one Roy Moore, who was accused of attempted child rape earlier when he was a younger lawyer. Additionally, the White House had to terminate one Ron Porter, secretary to Mr. Trump, for not one, but two wives who came forward with claims of spousal beating...one brought pictures!!

Busy, busy.

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 3:01 am

As to your other point on the only witness that has not come forward

Even if the senate issued a subpoena, they do not have to say anything

She has a clear lack of witnesses from a party, where mutiple people were at and not one has come forward to back her claim.

Not one, when again many people would be at this party

Now she claimed others were there and all of them deny her claim

I mean not only does she not even remember what house time or date, but not a single person saw her leave freightened

Not one. She has had a thousand people back her who went to the school over 30 years, none ever knowing the Judge. Yet he has 60 women from the school that knew him and state, he was nothing but kind and would never do such a thing.

I mean, as you claimed earlier and falsely claimed he was a dedicated rapist. Where is all the other women coming forward. Where these days, they have a mountain of support. I mean not one of these women who went to school with him claim he was as was claimed.

Does that not concern you?

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 3:04 am

Original Quill wrote:
gelico wrote:the title in this thread has already put him as guilty. i note you didnt say ''alleged attempted rapist'' but simply ''attempted rapist'' and this is based on one spurious allegation from one woman who cant even remember any details.

You forget, this is not a trial for Kavenaugh. This is a hearing at which the American people, as potential employers, are considering a candidate for a powerful job.

He's not entitled to any rights...all the rights belong to us, the American people. We own this fookin' government, and don't forget it. If he wants employment under us, he'd better do what pleases us. If he doesn't like it, he can pull his resume and take a hike.

Nobody ever told me how to run my law firm. And nobody better tell us, the American people, whom we can hire.

So nobody accused is entittled to any rights?

Seriously, you just lost what ever little respect you ever had on this forum

You are more and more sounding like a Dictator

Either you back the laws in the US, or you want to automatically pass judgement on people without a trial

Its seriously disturbing your views and to me, its born from identity politics with a hate of people based on their beliefs.

In this case Republican.

by Original Quill Sun Sep 23, 2018 3:11 am

gelico wrote:why dont you care about the truth, quill? is it just because you want to bring down a republican and any one will do

A better question is, why doesn't the US Senate care about the truth? The Senate is our agent in this hiring process, and they are interviewing an accused rapist.

It seems to me if anyone cares to get at the truth, the least they can do is have the FBI investigate the matter. But WTF, they refuse. Is it because the same party nominated him, as will vote on him? Anyone smell a conflict of interest?

No gelico, you don't care about truth. If you did, you would insist on an FBI investigation. But you’re noticeably quiet about that. What don't you and the Senate want us to know???

It can only be that he is guilty!

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 3:18 am

Original Quill wrote:
gelico wrote:why dont you care about the truth, quill? is it just because you want to bring down a republican and any one will do

A better question is, why doesn't the US Senate care about the truth? The Senate is our agent in this hiring process, and they are interviewing an accused rapist.

It seems to me if anyone cares to get at the truth, the least they can do is have the FBI investigate the matter. But WTF, they refuse. Is it because the same party nominated him, as will vote on him? Anyone smell a conflict of interest?

No gelico, you don't care about truth. If you did, you would insist on an FBI investigation. But you’re noticeably quiet about that. What don't you and the Senate want us to know???

It can only be that he is guilty!

See you are not bothered about the truth, are you?

They have made steps for her to testify and bring witnesses, hence they have delayed the hearing for her.

She should file charges against him. Which she has not done

So why would the FBI need to be involved?

Seriously?

One thing I do know about people with traumatic events. Is they need help and therapy to help them remember.

Some already have amasing clarity of such traumatic events, others regress this into the backs on the minds

The more she has therapy, the more detailed the memories become and I would question why this should not be done first to assertain a proper investigation. As at present her memory is, to say the least very hazy

You also have another aspect of psychology with victims of traumatic events. Where the memory becomes more distorted over time and it becomes more and more embellished. This means they remember more traumer than they actually experinced.. Hence to me some therapy is required before anything should progress. To garner more details.

So there is so many factors here that need to be looked into.

Sadly your view is sadly fixated on right and left, tribalism and not for either person in this case.

by Original Quill Sun Sep 23, 2018 3:25 am

Didge wrote:So nobody accused is entittled to any rights?

If he is charged and goes to trial, he's entitled to all the rights afforded by the Constitution, and Maryland law. But this is not the forum for that.

Here, he is a job applicant. If you believe in private enterprise, and freedom of contract, all the rights are co-equal. In an arms-length transaction, each party is entitled to demand whatever they want.

We have questions as to whether he is a rapist. He will either comply with our FBI investigation, or no deal! Remember...in any negotiation, anyone can walk away. Attempted Rapist to be appointed to Supreme Court? - Page 2 2190311264

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 3:26 am

Oh and for the record, he should pull out of being nominated for being a Supreme court Judge, until this has been resolved in my opinion.

by Original Quill Sun Sep 23, 2018 3:28 am

Didge wrote:Oh and for the record, he should pull out of being nominated for being a Supreme court Judge, until this has been resolved in my opinion.

I agree.

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 3:31 am

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:So nobody accused is entittled to any rights?

If he is charged and goes to trial, he's entitled to all the rights afforded by the Constitution, and Maryland law. But this is not the forum for that.

Here, he is a job applicant. If you believe in private enterprise, and freedom of contract, all the rights are co-equal. In an arms-length transaction, each party is entitled to demand whatever they want.

We have questions as to whether he is a rapist. He will either comply with our FBI investigation, or no deal! Remember...in any negotiation, anyone can walk away.

Then why did you say he has no rights?

The thing is his job application has now been tarnished for good, based on a claim, that has little hope of ever finding out the truth on. Being as there is no witnesses. The reality is a mass of the press have published this and with that, comes the stigma with the view, of people then viewing him as guilty. This can be seen by people backing the alleged victim. Stating they believe her.

So he is screwed what ever he does really

So again, why the FBI and not the local authorities with such a crime?

Happy that it is the FBI, but again why has she not pressed charges?

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 3:42 am

The woman accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault has agreed to testify against him next week.

Lawyers for Dr Christine Blasey Ford said she had accepted the Senate Judiciary Committee's request to appear before them to be questioned about the alleged attack at a party in 1982.

A "tentative" deal has been reached for Thursday, US media report.
Judge Kavanaugh has repeatedly denied the allegations.

The truth about false assault accusations
Kavanaugh accuser 'faces death threats'
Could Kavanaugh confirmation be derailed?

The allegations, which emerged in the US media last week, have delayed his confirmation to the Supreme Court.

Some Republicans, including Cheeto-Faced Ferret-Wearing Shit Gibbon, have accused her and Democratic politicians of deliberately trying to delay and obstruct the judge's confirmation, and urged them to push forward the process.

The feelings are strong on both sides - with both Prof Ford and Brett Kavanaugh and his wife receiving threats and rallies of support over the matter.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45615854

by Original Quill Sun Sep 23, 2018 4:32 pm

Didge wrote:Then why did you say he has no rights?

Because it's not the proper forum. If it were, the Senate Judiciary Committee would be violating due process of law by not calling all the witnesses or viewing all the evidence.

It's a job interview. It's a privilege, and rights are unnecessary in that setting.

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 4:50 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:Then why did you say he has no rights?

Because it's not the proper forum. If it were, the Senate Judiciary Committee would be violating due process of law by not calling all the witnesses or viewing all the evidence.

It's a job interview. It's a privilege, and rights are unnecessary in that setting.

Nonsense yet again

He has rights like everyone else

by Original Quill Sun Sep 23, 2018 4:54 pm

Didge wrote:The thing is his job application has now been tarnished for good, based on a claim, that has little hope of ever finding out the truth on.

He has avenues to present his story. First, there is his opportunity for rejoinder in the Senate. Second, he can file a defamation lawsuit. Third, he can go on all the talk shows and tell his story.

The real point is, this is not Kavanaugh vs. Dr. Ford. Kavanaugh is not in a Senate hearing to plead his case; he is there seeking a job. Alternatively, Dr. Ford is not there smear Kavanaugh, nor to promote the cause of the opposition; Dr. Ford is there as a witness to present facts.

The purpose of Dr. Ford's testimony is to provide evidence, however the chips may fall. Now, we all know the facts are not good for Mr. Kavanaugh, but that is not Dr. Ford's fault. Kavanaugh should have thought of that before he thought rape was a good idea. Or, perhaps his parents should have taught him better. The point is, this is not the forum for fault, but truth: is this a good candidate for the job?

Keep in mind the aims of a Senate confirmation hearing. This is not one witness vs. another witness, but evidence overall to provide a Senate committee grounds to make a good decision.

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 5:00 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:The thing is his job application has now been tarnished for good, based on a claim, that has little hope of ever finding out the truth on.

He has avenues to present his story. First, there is his opportunity for rejoinder in the Senate. Second, he can file a defamation lawsuit. Third, he can go on all the talk shows and tell his story.

The real point is, this is not Kavanaugh vs. Dr. Ford. Kavanaugh is not in a Senate hearing to plead his case; he is there seeking a job. Alternatively, Dr. Ford is not there smear Kavanaugh, nor to promote the cause of the opposition; Dr. Ford is there as a witness to present facts.

The purpose of Dr. Ford's testimony is to provide evidence, however the chips may fall. Now, we all know the facts are not good for Mr. Kavanaugh, but that is not Dr. Ford's fault. Kavanaugh should have thought of that before he thought rape was a good idea. Or, perhaps his parents should have taught him better. The point is, this is not the forum for fault, but truth: is this a good candidate for the job?

Keep in mind the aims of a Senate confirmation hearing. This is not one witness vs. another witness, but evidence overall to provide a Senate committee grounds to make a good decision.

You see how badly you distort things

We do not know the facts, so to claim she is going to make facts, when already she has a very hazy recollection to the events. Shows that your claim has little validity. As she cannot remember the time, place and date

So we do not know if she is telling the truth or lying

One thing that is clear, is if she is lying, this could be deduced by the fact she is a Democrat and this could be a ploy by Democrats to try to stop his chace of obtaining becoming a Supreme court judge. So there is certainly a motive there, fo this to be possible.

No she has zero witness. The people she stated were there, of which she accused two, all 3 deny being there. That leaves her story on shady grounds. Plus the fact the other person she named has not stepped forward, which even more damages her claim.

So again I am open minded on this very much so

What is evident to all here, is you do not give one care in the world for the alledged victim

This is all about your hate of Republicans

I mean I posted a thread on a Democrat accused of abuse and not a peep out of you on that

by Original Quill Sun Sep 23, 2018 5:17 pm

Didge wrote:The reality is a mass of the press have published this and with that, comes the stigma with the view, of people then viewing him as guilty. This can be seen by people backing the alleged victim. Stating they believe her.

So he is screwed what ever he does really

There are means to redress this. If the press have been untruthful and malicious, lawsuits may be filed. If it is merely political, he might make the rounds of talk shows to present his case.

Consider: how can he be harmed by a truthful exposition? He’s already got a lifetime appointment to the DC Court of Appeals. He is only hurt reputationally…and there are lawsuits for that.

Didge wrote:So again, why the FBI and not the local authorities with such a crime?

Because it is a Senate hearing, and the FBI is the proper agency to conduct background investigations. The local police will start a criminal investigation, should they believe there is probable cause.

Didge wrote:Happy that it is the FBI, but again why has she not pressed charges?

We don’t know that she hasn’t. But in any case, the ball is in the court of Montgomery County to initiate charges. Keep in mind, criminal justice is the state vs. the accused, not the victim vs. the accused. The offended party is the state. The victim is only a witness.

In reality, a victim does not “press charges” as much as she proffers evidence that frame the basis for charges. The agency rests with the police.

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 5:18 pm

You are just repeating yourself

Seriously

by Original Quill Sun Sep 23, 2018 5:34 pm

Didge wrote:You are just repeating yourself

Seriously

Actually, look closely. I am only responding to your one post, way up above.

Then why did you say he has no rights?

The thing is his job application has now been tarnished for good, based on a claim, that has little hope of ever finding out the truth on. Being as there is no witnesses. The reality is a mass of the press have published this and with that, comes the stigma with the view, of people then viewing him as guilty. This can be seen by people backing the alleged victim. Stating they believe her.

So he is screwed what ever he does really

So again, why the FBI and not the local authorities with such a crime?

Happy that it is the FBI, but again why has she not pressed charges?

Recognize it? I have just broken it down to points you raised, and devoted a responsive post to each. I haven't begin to discuss your posts today...haha, you've been talking to yourself. Laughing

So, if it's a repeat, well it's your singular post...

Again, I'm amazed you don't recognize your own words when I quote them. Lack of concentration! You go in for quantity (of words), and not quality of ideas.

Indeed, your habit is to go through a host of arguments, and then, presumably, when you think we have forgotten them, you start at the top again. I just tolerate your foibles and paddle along behind you. So I'm not surprised that you recognize the repetition, but don't know the source.

Concentrate! It's key to processing.

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 5:40 pm

I dont need to concentrate, you are simple offering up waffle and its got intently boring with your bias on this. Your views are subjective and not based on any facts.

So four witness and all deny ever being at this alledged party

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 5:43 pm

CNN wrote:Meghan McCaleb, a high school friend of Kavanaugh's, who helped put together a letter of support for Kavanaugh, told CNN's Jim Sciutto that this was not an accurate portrayal of the Supreme Court nominee in the 1980s.

"I've been friends with him for years and I was one of the people who gathered women together ... 65 women ... all said that he always was a gentleman, always respected women and nothing like that has ever happened," she said.

"He would have a couple of beers, but he never, ever was out of control ever, and I always felt he was one of the more mature ones of that group of friends."

by Original Quill Sun Sep 23, 2018 5:49 pm

Didge wrote:I dont need to concentrate, you are simple offering up waffle and its got intently boring with your bias on this. Your views are subjective and not based on any facts.

Nice dodge.

Didge wrote:So four witness and all deny ever being at this alledged party

Many more that four, and they all remember the party and the subsequent story that the Kavanaugh and Mark Judge spread around, bragging about their rape. Curious that Mark doesn't want to testify, eh? It would look so bad today, pleading the 5th. Embarassed

Curiouser still, that the Senate Republicans don't want to hear from dear old Mark. He's so clever and entertaining...just look at the signatures he wrote in those yearbooks about he and Brett doing “the triangle” [two guys raping one girl]. Embarassed

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 5:50 pm

USA Today wrote:Mark Judge, the friend who was allegedly in the room with Kavanaugh and Ford, denied having any recollection of the party. And in an email obtained by USA TODAY, a lawyer for a woman Ford also said was at the house said she didn't know Kavanaugh and that she did not remember the party.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/09/23/brett-kavanaugh-allegation-sen-lindsey-graham-has-doubts-ford/1403189002/

So that is all four people she stated in her letter and none have any recollection of this alleged party

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 5:52 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:I dont need to concentrate, you are simple offering up waffle and its got intently boring with your bias on this. Your views are subjective and not based on any facts.

Nice dodge.

Didge wrote:So four witness and all deny ever being at this alledged party

Many more that four, and they all remember the party and the subsequent story that the Kavanaugh and Mark Judge spread around, bragging about their rape. Curious that Mark doesn't want to testify, eh? It would look so bad today, pleading the 5th.

Curiouser still, that the Senate Republicans don't want to hear from dear old Mark. He's so clever and entertaining...just look at the signatures he wrote in those yearbooks about he and Brett doing “the triangle” [two guys raping one girl].

Sorry, what story about them bragging?

This was not even a a claim of rape, but sexual assualt

So how could they brag about something, even Ford claims did not happen, that she was raped?

Why should they need to hear from those mentioned in the letter, when all have stated, they have no recollection of the party she claims. It would be a complete waste of time calling them before the senate

by Original Quill Sun Sep 23, 2018 6:13 pm

Didge wrote:
Sorry, what story about them bragging?

This was not even a a claim of rape, but sexual assualt

So how could they brag about something, even Ford claims did not happen, that she was raped?

Under the law attempted rape is rape unfulfilled. The criminal intent is still there.

Didge wrote:Why should they need to hear from those mentioned in the letter, when all have stated, they have no recollection of the party she claims. It would be a complete waste of time calling them before the senate

Attempted Rapist to be appointed to Supreme Court? - Page 2 3489511464

Because they heard the two boys bragging about it. Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, Role 802, that bragging is an admission. What a Face

Better than a witness, wouldn’t you say?

Kavanaugh better be careful. He will have to deny this crime. But, lying to Congress is a felony. At the very least, committing a felony will be grounds for impeachment of him as a Judge on the DC Circuit...possible subsequent prosecution.

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 6:18 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:
Sorry, what story about them bragging?

This was not even a a claim of rape, but sexual assualt

So how could they brag about something, even Ford claims did not happen, that she was raped?

Under the law attempted rape is rape unfulfilled. The criminal intent is still there.

Didge wrote:Why should they need to hear from those mentioned in the letter, when all have stated, they have no recollection of the party she claims. It would be a complete waste of time calling them before the senate

Because they heard the two boys bragging about it. Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, Role 802, that bragging is an admission. Better than a witness, wouldn’t you say?

Kavanaugh better be careful. He will have to deny this crime. But, lying to Congress is a felony. At the very least, committing a felony will be grounds for impeachment of him as a Judge on the DC Circuit...possible subsequent prosecution.

It does not matter what the law is in regards to your absurd unfounded claim they were bragging

So you claim two men are bragging, never actually raping her and do so based on the law?

One moment

Attempted Rapist to be appointed to Supreme Court? - Page 2 3489511464

So your claim is shockingly and utter bullshit

Where is the evidence of a claim to them bragging?

Who heard them bragging?

As stated, she placed the names of four people at this claimed party

All have no recollection and even she has no idea when it was, where or what date

Seems her story is lacking credability all the time.

Its now based solely on her hazy testamony

by Original Quill Sun Sep 23, 2018 6:41 pm

Didge wrote:It does not matter what the law is in regards to your absurd unfounded claim they were bragging

Absurd? Unfounded? Adjectives are not arguments. You would have to present independent facts that they were untruthful, even if boasting.

An admission is proof of the underlying facts...

Wiki wrote:In the USA, a party admission, in the law of evidence, is any statement made by a declarant who is a party to a lawsuit, which is offered as evidence against that party. Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, such a statement is admissible to prove the truth of the statement itself...

Embarrassing, huh? One minute you're boasting about raping a 15-year old girl, then the next...gotcha! Only if he presented facts of someone in the bedroom, that what they were bragging about didn't in fact happen, could he refute it. Who could that be?

Mark was the only other one in the bedroom, and he doesn't want to testify. You can't force him, because that would be self-incrimination in violation of the 5th Amendment. And if he pleaded the 5th, that would be doubling down on the admission. Maybe you could convince Mark to lie, but that would be suborning perjury and witness tampering.

“Oh, what a tangled web we weave...when first we practice to deceive.”

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 6:47 pm

Yes you are embarressing yourself

Again, where two men have claimed to have bragged about a rape, when no rape happened. Why would they brag about something that never happened?

Going off what the law says, would mean nothing to 15 year old boys.

The point you glaringly miss. I mean you think that if true, that because its claimed as attempted rape, that they would based on the law, then believe they have raped her>

That has to go down as the most dumbest thing that you have claimed

What is embarressing even further is yet again you offer zero evidence for this claim of bragging

You simple invented that

Now Mark does not have to testify, as he states, as do all the other people she mentioned. That they have no recollection of such a party

Now post up your evidence to the bragging

Best you do, as I am going to continue to take the piss out of your dishonesty yet again on this thread.

by Original Quill Sun Sep 23, 2018 6:57 pm

Didge wrote:Yes you are embarressing yourself

Prove it.

Didge wrote:Again, where two men have claimed to have bragged about a rape, when no rape happened. Why would they brag about something that never happened?

They haven't claimed to be bragging. It's the others who will testify to the bragging. Brett denies the whole thing, and Mark conveniently says he doesn't remember.

Didge wrote:Going off what the law says, would mean nothing to 15 year old boys.

They weren't 15-year olds. I said Dr. Ford was 15. The two boys were seniors at the time, just shy of their 18th birthdays, the age of majority.

To an adult, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 7:03 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:Yes you are embarressing yourself

Prove it.

Didge wrote:I just easily did, based on your invented nonsense around two 15 year old boys, you claim went around bragging about a rape and showed it was so absurd and baseless, as the woman never claimes to have been raped

They haven't claimed to be bragging. It's the others who will testify to the bragging. Brett denies the whole thing, and Mark conveniently says he doesn't remember.

Didge wrote:WHO claimed this, what witness?

They weren't 15-year olds. I said Dr. Ford was 15. The two boys were seniors at the time, just shy of their 18th birthdays, the age of majority.

To an adult, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Where is the evidence for that?

You are just making this up as you go along

There is no witnesses at this hearing, so this claim you make on bragging is something you invented in your own head

No such view has been put forward by Ford or the media

You simple invented this, just as you did when accusing Kavannagh of being a dedicated rapist

by Guest Sun Sep 23, 2018 7:09 pm

So now a third lie by Quill

Ford was born in 1966 and kavanaugh in 1965

So if she was 15, there is no way he was just shy of his 18th birthday

How many more times is Quill going to continue to lie on this thread?

by Original Quill Mon Sep 24, 2018 12:09 am

Didge wrote:So now a third lie by Quill

Ford was born in 1966 and kavanaugh in 1965

That's not correct. NBC has her 15, and him late-17 on the year of his graduation, when the incident happened. Her age doesn't matter; if they charge and prosecute him, his age will be of great importance.

If the state decides to arrest and try Kavenaugh for sexual assault, they will try him as an adult. States typically try sex crime juveniles, above 13, as adults.

If he is tried as an adult, the adult presumptions will apply. One of those presumptions is that he is fully aware of the law. There'll be no escape because he is spoiled and rich (Affluenza defense).

You are so consistently wrong on this story. Perhaps you should take a day and just read up, before you post again. I hate beating on you, day after day, like a drum. Evil or Very Mad

by Guest Mon Sep 24, 2018 3:47 am

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:So now a third lie by Quill

Ford was born in 1966 and kavanaugh in 1965

That's not correct. NBC has her 15, and him late-17 on the year of his graduation, when the incident happened. Her age doesn't matter; if they charge and prosecute him, his age will be of great importance.

If the state decides to arrest and try Kavenaugh for sexual assault, they will try him as an adult. States typically try sex crime juveniles, above 13, as adults.

If he is tried as an adult, the adult presumptions will apply. One of those presumptions is that he is fully aware of the law. There'll be no escape because he is spoiled and rich (Affluenza defense).

You are so consistently wrong on this story. Perhaps you should take a day and just read up, before you post again. I hate beating on you, day after day, like a drum.

Seriously, NBC?

Attempted Rapist to be appointed to Supreme Court? - Page 2 3489511464

So their dates of birth are incorrect, you claim and NBC is your source

So no evidence either for your lie around bragging

You are done here

Not going toi further entertain your busllhit any longer on this thread

by Original Quill Mon Sep 24, 2018 3:59 am

No, the dates are correct.

What do you think of the 2nd and 3rd allegations of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh? The guy can't keep his pants up, can he?

Attempted Rapist to be appointed to Supreme Court? - Page 2 1681210668

Attempted Rapist to be appointed to Supreme Court? - Page 2 1681210668

by Guest Mon Sep 24, 2018 4:04 am

Original Quill wrote:No, the dates are correct.

What do you think of the 2nd and 3rd allegations of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh? The guy can't keep his pants up, can he?

No you were wrong on the dates.

So where is the evidence for the new claim, that was suddenlly found by Democrats investigating?

I read one about a claim he exposed himself, and that her claim is not based on recognition, but claiming someone said, "oh look Brett exposed himself.

Is this the extent of the claim?

Again I see there is no other witnesses to this claim

Not seena any third claim and it does begin to look like this is a smear campaign being orchestrated by some within the Democrats

by Original Quill Mon Sep 24, 2018 4:24 pm

Didge wrote:No you were wrong on the dates.

So where is the evidence for the new claim, that was suddenlly found by Democrats investigating?

No, I was right on the dates.

The new claim, by Debora Ramirez, was originally submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee Republican Chair, the old and white male, Chuck Grassley. That was before Ms. Ramirez thought that the Republicans in charge of the Committee would attempt to bury it.

It wasn't until Debora was put in touch with the Democrats on the Committee, that the truth was heard.

Interesting that you go through the same rotine with Ms. Ramirez that you did with Dr. Ford: not concerned about the truth of the claim, but worried about the timing.

Of course if you are raped by a used car salesman you want to forget it (67% do not report rapes). But when it turns out your rapist is vying for a Supreme Court position, you ask yourself if such a sleaze should be given such an important position. The context brings the issue to the fore.

So it's quite natural that these truths lie dormant for so long, but come forth when the stakes are more important.

* * * * *

Bye-the-bye, just out of curiosity, why is it that these sexo-perverts always come from the Tory/Republican side? OMG, it was just a few years back that Dennis Hastert, our Republican Speaker of the House, was sentenced to prison for toying with the genitals of little boys.

Dennis Hastert Sentenced to 15 Months, and Apologizes for Sex Abuse

Curious. Do you think RW'rs hold classes in this sort of thing?

by Guest Mon Sep 24, 2018 5:12 pm

No you were wrong on the age and a simple check on their dates of birth confirm you utterly lied

Just as you lied over a claim on bragging

So yeah I have seen the Democrats managed to find someone else at short notice to try and prevent this Judge from ever being a supreme court judge

Again this person is even more hazy over the past and has zero witnesses

So its very natural this is a complete set up by the Democrats

by Original Quill Mon Sep 24, 2018 6:13 pm

Didge wrote:No you were wrong on the age and a simple check on their dates of birth confirm you utterly lied

No, unfortunately you are wrong about that. But it makes little difference, because the only issue is Kavanaugh's age at the time. You were saying he should be excused his indiscretions--all of which apparently are preoccupied with sexual misconduct--because of his youth. As if under-aged men cannot rape!

While I hold that young men can be held accountable for sexual abuse, it is also true that he was a senior in high school at the time, which would put him at or around age 18. That is the age of majority in most states, and means he is also of the age of responsibility.

by Guest Mon Sep 24, 2018 6:28 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:No you were wrong on the age and a simple check on their dates of birth confirm you utterly lied

No, unfortunately you are wrong about that. But it makes little difference, because the only issue is Kavanaugh's age at the time. You were saying he should be excused his indiscretions--all of which apparently are preoccupied with sexual misconduct--because of his youth. As if under-aged men cannot rape!

While I hold that young men can be held accountable for sexual abuse, it is also true that he was a senior in high school at the time, which would put him at or around age 18. That is the age of majority in most states, and means he is also of the age of responsibility.

Actually its you wrong and anyone can easily check their dates of birth

Which means he would have been a minor also

Never claimed if guilty he should be excused of any crime

That is you lying again for a fourth time

So that is now four times you have been found lying

Still waiting for this imaginary evidence you have to witnesses cliaming to overhear them bragging

by Original Quill Mon Sep 24, 2018 6:28 pm

Didge wrote:Just as you lied over a claim on bragging

Not just bragging, but open admissions by Brett Kavanaugh and his co-rapist, Mark Judge, that they attempted to rape Dr. Ford at a high school party. Plenty of witnesses for that.

Incidentally, the news gets worse for your cause. While Mr. Judge says he doesn't remember (ie, trying to avoid testifying under oath), a girlfriend of his now reports that he (Judge) told her the same story while they were dating.

Hmmm...Mr. Judge's memory seems to be off and on, at convenience. Yes, while a student at Catholic University, Mr. Judge was a bit more candid to his then girlfriend. He told the girlfriend all about the attempted rape of Dr. Ford by Judge and Kavanaugh. This may make Mr. Judge an obstructor of justice as sure as Mr. Kavanaugh's testimony constitute obstruction of justice and perjury before Congress. Nice start for a candidate to the Supreme court.

The truth tightens around Kavanaugh's neck, innit?

by Original Quill Mon Sep 24, 2018 6:33 pm

Didge wrote:Again this person is even more hazy over the past and has zero witnesses

Plenty of witnesses to the event. Everyone remembers seeing Kavanaugh's penis...they even nicknamed it, Brett's Bits. Attempted Rapist to be appointed to Supreme Court? - Page 2 3489511464

by Original Quill Mon Sep 24, 2018 6:38 pm

Didge wrote:So yeah I have seen the Democrats managed to find someone else at short notice to try and prevent this Judge from ever being a supreme court judge

So curious that you are so worried about a rich man's political vulnerability, but you don't give a sheit about--what is it now--three assaults to three different women's bodies.

What do your wife and daughters think about that?

by Guest Mon Sep 24, 2018 6:39 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:Again this person is even more hazy over the past and has zero witnesses

Plenty of witnesses to the event. Everyone remembers seeing Kavanaugh's penis...they even nicknamed it, Brett's Bits.

Where are these imaginary witnesses that none have come forward to the exposure claim?

So now that is the fifth lie you have made

Are you going for Trumps record on number of consecutive lies in one day?

by Original Quill Mon Sep 24, 2018 7:39 pm

Didge wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Plenty of witnesses to the event. Everyone remembers seeing Kavanaugh's penis...they even nicknamed it, Brett's Bits.

Where are these imaginary witnesses that none have come forward to the exposure claim?

Why, they are all over the news...don't you read? They have all come forward, as their civic duty, as these issues have become important. People do talk, and while we acknowledge that women who have been raped are reluctant to come forward for themselves, they do recognize their civic duty. They don't want a rapist/pedophile on the Supreme Court.

Didge wrote:So now that is the fifth lie you have made

The Fifth Amendment comes up because people don't want to incriminate themselves. However, once a person pleads the fifth, it is clear that he did it. He just won't admit it. In legal proceedings, it’s as good as an admission. For example, by pleading the Fifth, Mark Judge as much as admits that he and Kavanaugh did try to rape Dr. Ford. A Senate hearing is not a criminal trial, but he opens himself up to criminal proceedings if he doesn't plead the Fifth.

Didge wrote:Are you going for Trumps record on number of consecutive lies in one day?

My heavens, he's got quite a record, hasn't he?

USA Today wrote:The number of Trump lies just hit 3,000

Cheeto-Faced Ferret-Wearing Shit Gibbon has averaged 6.5 lies per day — but that number has shot up in the last two months.

Cheeto-Faced Ferret-Wearing Shit Gibbon has hit a milestone: He has told more than 3,000 lies in nearly 16 months in office. He has also nearly doubled his average of lies told per day.

According to a tracker kept by the "Washington Post," Trump hit 3,001 lies on May 1 — and the pace has accelerated markedly in recent days. Since taking office, Trump has told 6.5 lies per day. When the "Post" began tracking falsehoods during the president's first 100 days, Trump was averaging 4.9 lies a day. In the past two months, Trump that average has increased to 9 lies daily.

Trump has a greatest-hits playlist he turns to time and again. "Trump has a proclivity to repeat, over and over, many of his false or misleading statements. We’ve counted at least 113 claims that the president has repeated at least three times, some with breathtaking frequency," the paper says. Those include: The claim that Trump passed the biggest tax cut in history (told 72 times) and the assertion that a wall is necessary to stop the flow of drugs from Mexico (told 34 times and rebutted by the DEA). Thirteen times in the past three weeks, Trump has repeatedly stated that "the Wall" is already being built; in reality, Congress wouldn't give him the funding and nixed the prototypes he had built.

https://www.metro.us/president-trump/trump-lies-just-hit-3000

But the most relevant lies, for the herein purposes, are the lies he tells about his infidelities and sexual misconduct. And what a surprise (!)...he also appoints pedophiles and rapists to the Supreme court.

by Guest Mon Sep 24, 2018 8:32 pm

So still 5 lies

Still no evidence for the claimed bragging

Still no witnesses that remember either event

by Original Quill Tue Sep 25, 2018 3:23 am

Didge wrote:So still 5 lies

Still no evidence for the claimed bragging

Still no witnesses that remember either event

There are no lies...these women have as much right to be taken seriously as the candidate for the Supreme Court.

Dr. Blasey-Ford holds a doctorate, FGS. As a researcher in scientific methodology, she knows the truth a lot better than most lawyers, who are skilled in twisting meaning, and bending truth to their client's advantage.

The evidence for the claimed bragging is the fact that everyone knew. Now, Dr. Ford has said she told no one, so how do you think it got out? Besides, people have said the boys were bragging.

There are plenty of witnesses to the aftermath of both events. But they are witnesses to admissions by the guilty boys, much better that percipient witnesses. Rapes don't take place in public normally, and the one witness to the event in Dr. Ford's case doesn't want to come forward. Sounds like he has something to hide.

He should be compelled to testify under threat of contempt of Congress, else the Senate should admit they don't give a damn about the integrity of the Supreme Court.

With two sexual abusers on the Court, no question could come before it involving women, gender bias or criminal cases involving sexual assault, without judicial recusal. Those two justices would have to remove themselves or their rulings would forever be suspect. If their rulings are suspect, the pronouncements of the Supreme Court would be degraded in the minds of the public.

With the degradation of the Congress already, and the chaos of the White House, the degradation of the Supreme Court would mean that no one is in charge. That is a condition ripe for anarchy or despotism...quite possibly a coup.

Not a pretty picture.

by Guest Tue Sep 25, 2018 3:58 am

So still 5 lies by Quill

Still no evidence for the claimed bragging, even Ford and her Lawyers make such claim or claim any witnesses heard any such bragging. Which as seen makes no sense, as she admits she was never raped. And thus why would boys brag about raping someone they never raped. Hence a complete and utter lie by Quill, invented to try and make the case against the Judge more convincing and still has not produced one link to back this lie on bragging

Still no witnesses that remember either event

One of the witnesses is a woman named by Ford and has no recollection of the party.

USA Today wrote: And in an email obtained by USA TODAY, a lawyer for a woman Ford also said was at the house said she didn't know Kavanaugh and that she did not remember the party.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/09/23/brett-kavanaugh-allegation-sen-lindsey-graham-has-doubts-ford/1403189002/

That is four people named and all four people have no idea what Ford is talking about

Ford has no idea when she claimed this happened, no idea where this happened

That means nobody has come forward to back her allegation

Nobody has come forward to back the allegation for the woman who claims the Judge exposed herself

She also admits to having a poor recollection of the past event

BBC wrote:The article says Ms Ramirez acknowledges gaps in her memory caused by alcohol that night.

The New York Times said it had been unable to corroborate her story, despite "several dozen" interviews.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45629767

And

Daily Mail wrote:One of the male students who was alleged to have been egging Kavanaugh on told The New Yorker that he doesn't remember the judge exposing himself to Ramirez.

'I don’t think Brett would flash himself to Debbie, or anyone, for that matter,' he said.

A group of Yale classmates alleged to have been involved in the incident have come out with a statement in support of Kavanaugh.

Two of the male classmates involved in the incident who were named by Ramirez released a statement disputing her account.

That statement was supported by the wife of a third male student that Ramirez said was involved as well as three other classmates - Dino Ewing, Louisa Garry, and Dan Murphy.

'We were the people closest to Brett Kavanaugh during his first year at Yale,' the statement read.

'He was a roommate to some of us, and we spent a great deal of time with him, including in the dorm where this incident allegedly took place.

'Some of us were also friends with Debbie Ramirez during and after her time at Yale.

'We can say with confidence that if the incident Debbie alleges ever occurred, we would have seen or heard about it - and we did not.

'The behavior she describes would be completely out of character for Brett.

'In addition, some of us knew Debbie long after Yale, and she never described this incident until Brett’s Supreme Court nomination was pending.

'Editors from the New Yorker contacted some of us because we are the people who would know the truth, and we told them that we never saw or heard about this.'

The wife of the third male student named by Ramirez said she and Ramirez were close friends during their days at Yale and that this incident was never mentioned.

'This is a woman I was best friends with,' she said.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6201835/Michael-Avenatti-makes-new-explicit-allegations-against-Kavanaugh-yearbook-entry.html

She has no witnesses

The only thing this Laywer Avenatti claims to have is on a yearbook statement

That really is clutching at straws

by Original Quill Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:34 am

Didge wrote:Still no evidence for the claimed bragging, even Ford and her Lawyers make such claim or claim any witnesses heard any such bragging

It depends on what you mean by claim. She’s not on trial. She has no obligation except her commitment as a citizen. She is just an honest American trying to keep her Senators from making a grave mistake.

Didge wrote:And thus why would boys brag about raping someone they never raped.. Which as seen makes no sense, as she admits she was never raped.

She was never raped, but not because the boys didn’t try. That is the reason why ‘attempted’ crimes and actual crimes bear the same penality. The boys spread it all around that they attempted to rape her, and the evidence is out there to prove it. Now the evidence comes back to haunt them. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

Didge wrote:Hence a complete and utter lie by Quill, invented to try and make the case against the Judge more convincing and still has not produced one link to back this lie on bragging

You sound desperate. Is that because of your obsession to win, or because you have money on the game? You sure aren’t doing Kavenaugh any good. Lol. He is trying to get a job, and you’re treating it like he’s on trial for rape. Maybe you are right, and he should be on trial. Twisted Evil

by Guest Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:41 am

Original Quill wrote:n by claim. She’s not on trial. She has no obligation except her commitment as a citizen. She is just an honest American trying to keep her Senators from making a grave mistake. She was never raped, but not because the boys didn’t try. That is the reason why ‘attempted’ crimes and actual crimes bear the same penality. The boys spread it all around that they attempted to rape her, and the evidence is out there to prove it. Now the evidence comes back to haunt them. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

You sound desperate. Is that because of your obsession to win, or because you have money on the game. You sure aren’t doing Kavenaugh any good. Lol. He is trying to get a job, and you’re treating it like he’s on trial. Maybe he should be.

Its yet to be seen if she is being honest and with four people she named, none of them corroborate her story.

Either she is lying or then all four people she mentioned are lying, including a woman, who never even knew Judge Kavannaugh. That leads to the reality that her story lacks any credability. It could also mean, based on how hazy her recollecting this event is. She simple has mistaken the people who she claims sexually assualted her. So there is many problems with her story and more so how she cannot recollect many facts for this claim. Its very sketchy to say the least.

Again you have zero evidence and presented zero evidence to back your claim they bragged about raping her

It does not make any sense they would in light of the fact, Ford claims they never rape her

You simple invented this lie, to make your poor case of this sound credible. Until I expose the fact you were clearly lying

Now with the other claimed case of exposure. A number of people have been interved that were claimed to have witnessed this claim of exposure. None corroborate this and even one of her best friends, states. That no such claim was ever made to her.

Thus also damaging her allegations

by Original Quill Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:42 pm

Didge wrote:Its yet to be seen if she is being honest and with four people she named, none of them corroborate her story.

Now you see the difficulty…the reason Dr. Ford didn't want to come forward in the first place? Now, the witnesses are reluctant to come forward, too. Nobody wants to be inside this imbroglio. Only Dr. Ford’s sense of civic duty caused her to become involved. Remember Orwell’s Animal Farm: when others are quiet, the pigs take over.

Notice, the non-corroboration is not a direct denial. Mark Judge says he does not remember--a convenient way to dodge the issue. He does willingly state that the behavior sounds typical of the Brett Kavanaugh he knew: drunken, belligerent and brash.

What is more telling is that Mr. Judge doesn't want to be interviewed. How curious for one who doesn't remember anything; all he would have to do is say, I don’t recall. With my 35+ years of experience cross-examining people, I know this sentiment: I don't want to tell the same lie under oath. To some, meh...a lie is a lie. To many, however, they fear getting caught on a perjury charge, and serving 5-years.

Mark Judge already has admitted the truth of the attempted rape story to his girlfriend in college, Elizabeth Grayson. She says Mark told her the story, bragging over their (he and Brett) exploits in school. Were the FBI to hear her story, it would mean a 5-year prison term for Mr. Judge and the collapse of the Kavanaugh appointment.

Now do you see why the Republican Senate does not want to call in the FBI to pursue an investigation? They say: It's my way or the highway.

Republicans want power, not cooperation or negotiation. It’s their modus operandi, their brand. They will only accept obeisance. That's why people like you and Les are wrong to call for unity with the right; in the end, such a fusion will only mean complete surrender to the swamp standards of the RW. Look at Trump, who finds it acceptable to openly grab “the pussy” of women. Kavanaugh is just another version of the same cretin. That’s the RW new world.

by Original Quill Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:35 pm

Attempted Rapist to be appointed to Supreme Court? - Page 2 Qwd73RS

I thought this was an appropriate message to send to the Senate Judiciary Committee amid these Kavanaugh hearings.

Right now, it's he-said, she-said, and the Committee only wants to hear from the two sides. Why don't they want to get to the resolution of the matter? What's so horrible about actually doing an investigation to learn the truth?

It appears they already know the answer is bad.

by Guest Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:39 pm

So after all that waffle and spin by Quill

Where is a single witness to corroboate the claims, to even being at either party?

The answer is none and its looking more and more like a set up by the Democrats

I mean, you have made loads of views on this case and are abolsutely silent with the Democrat acused of abuse

All you have done is continued to lie throughout this debate

Hence its pointless debating this further with someone so intent with bias, he cannot even look at this impartially

If ford did try to have this investigated, she knows it will go nowhere, as all the people she stated, have no idea what she is talking about and one of them is a woman.

Now considering you continue to avoid my points, questions and fail to provide evidence

You yet make more claims, with yet again not a single link to evidence. The reason is you just made it up again about now a woman called Elizabeth Grayson claiming that Mark Judge told her, he did attempt to rape

That is lie number 6

You are just making so much bullshit up its embarressing

You are now out of the debate

Enjoy your usual babble, trying to convince yourself

by Original Quill Wed Sep 26, 2018 3:37 am

Didge wrote:Where is a single witness to corroboate the claims, to even being at either party?

They're all over the place. Hundreds...one direct, percipient witness, and as many as 500 corroborating witnesses.

Now there is Debora Ramirez, who tells the story of Kavanaugh flashing his junk to her at a dormitory party at Yale University. Such class, eh?

Then, Kavanaugh's roommate at Yale says that while he wasn't there at the flashing celebration, Kavanaugh had the reputation of being fiercely drunk most of the time while at Yale. The roommate says it was the kind of thing that Brett would typically do.

So strange...the Republicans don't want to even interview them. Wonder why?

by Sponsored content