Brett Kavanaugh rape allegations
501,082 Views |
5316 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by 93MarineHorn
What alleged rape are you referencing?backintexas2013 said:
alleged rape with few details shouldn't be on SC.
Alleged rape with more details disregard because the guy is going to be president.
One day at a time.
Big Al 1992 said:
If she testifies and gets called out or looks like a loon - and I think Feinstein knows that's the case - she will be discredited.
Don't testify then she's set for life. All that noise about "her career and family are ruined" - bs. She'll be on The View within days, charge thousands to speak at the next Planned Parenthood conference, and be VIP at every women's march going forward.
Look at poor Anita Hill. Half a dozen books, HBO documentary, movies about her, dozens of honorary degrees, hero to the left. She's doing more than ok and this accuser doesn't want to mess up her potential star power.
One day at a time.
She's a homely woman and from what I've seen was homely in HS. She basically did every dude in sight. My guess is she probably met Kavanaugh at some point and came onto him, and he didn't want any part of it. My guess is also Kavanaugh has no recollection of it at all.
johnnyblaze36
Joined:
Oct 25, 2013
Posts:
15,521
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I hate that this is happening and that this one woman's vague allegations can cause this much turmoil. I am horrified that this accusation is enough to forever ruin the reputation of an otherwise exemplary career.
However I don't think it is necessary (although I recognize the irony) to repeat every baseless claim against her either. I know Texags gonna Texags, but I wish we could stick to what is happening with the vote and what the political players are doing, and not her level of attractiveness and what that supposedly implies about her promiscuity in high school when she was 15.
However I don't think it is necessary (although I recognize the irony) to repeat every baseless claim against her either. I know Texags gonna Texags, but I wish we could stick to what is happening with the vote and what the political players are doing, and not her level of attractiveness and what that supposedly implies about her promiscuity in high school when she was 15.
There are many significant differences between the Anita Hill situation and this one. Anita Hill worked for Thomas for a couple of years as his assistant. There was no way Thomas could deny knowing her or being in private situations with her. I'm pretty confident that if the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill situation occurred in 2018 instead of 1991, that Clarence Thomas' nomination would not have survived. Anita Hill was a work-place sexual harassment accusation situation that we've already seen bring down a number of pretty powerful men over the last year. If this Ford woman had been someone like an Anita Hill (a former co-worker of Kavanaugh's accusing him of sexual harassment or assualt), then Kavanaugh would be toast right now. Stick a fork in him.Big Al 1992 said:
Look at poor Anita Hill. Half a dozen books, HBO documentary, movies about her, dozens of honorary degrees, hero to the left. She's doing more than ok and this accuser doesn't want to mess up her potential star power.
Is this why she had her social media accounts professionally scrubbed?
I truly believe Grassley wants her to testify so that they can impugn her with the data collected in the past few days and put it to bed for the nonsense it is. Her lawyers won't let her testify.....they wanted Grassley to say no....they failed.
If the stakes weren't so high,, I'd VERY much like to have to FBI go ahead and begin an investigation into the incident from 35 years ago, AND the one the idiot Yale professors want, along with including the professors in the FBI interviews.
EVERYONE involved in that would absolutely HATE Ford forever. I'm sure it would take a year to complete, and everyone who ever knew Ford, her neighbors, her current friends, and all of her so-called friends from high school and college would have to be interviewed. Of course, that would take into account many of those folks having to lawyer up.
While I'm ot completely sure of the outcome, I'm fairly comfortable with Kavanaugh's nearly perfect reputation for the last 30 years, to suddenly have an outlier incident.
OMG, Ford would be hating life for a long time, and her handlers would go on to the next "victim", because I guarantee you they give two ****s about this one.
EVERYONE involved in that would absolutely HATE Ford forever. I'm sure it would take a year to complete, and everyone who ever knew Ford, her neighbors, her current friends, and all of her so-called friends from high school and college would have to be interviewed. Of course, that would take into account many of those folks having to lawyer up.
While I'm ot completely sure of the outcome, I'm fairly comfortable with Kavanaugh's nearly perfect reputation for the last 30 years, to suddenly have an outlier incident.
OMG, Ford would be hating life for a long time, and her handlers would go on to the next "victim", because I guarantee you they give two ****s about this one.
Hate is how progressives sustain themselves. Without hate, introspection begins to slip into the progressive's consciousness, threatening the progressive with the truth: that their ideas and opinions are illogical, hypocritical, dangerous, and asinine.
This is backed by data.
This is backed by data.
Yep. Bingo.aginlakeway said:
I'm starting to think she will never testify. Anyone else feel that way?
That way, after Kavanaugh is confirmed, she can go on a media tour and tell her story with no brushback. She can then be called the victim forever and will be worshiped by the left.
CNN is an enemy of the state and should be treated as such.
She may try. All the social media that was "scrubbed" will be dripped out to discredit her.....politics is a dirty business and you have to bring the hammer. Lee A****er was the absolute best at this.
Quote:
She won't testify under oath
Disagree! Justice Thomas prevailed because of the force of his rebuttal testimony! I believe it would likewise survive today for the same reason(s). HE was the difference!Pumpkinhead said:There are many significant differences between the Anita Hill situation and this one. Anita Hill worked for Thomas for a couple of years as his assistant. There was no way Thomas could deny knowing her or being in private situations with her. I'm pretty confident that if the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill situation occurred in 2018 instead of 1991, that Clarence Thomas' nomination would not have survived. Anita Hill was a work-place sexual harassment accusation situation that we've already seen bring down a number of pretty powerful men over the last year. If this Ford woman had been someone like an Anita Hill (a former co-worker of Kavanaugh's accusing him of sexual harassment or assualt), then Kavanaugh would be toast right now. Stick a fork in him.Big Al 1992 said:
Look at poor Anita Hill. Half a dozen books, HBO documentary, movies about her, dozens of honorary degrees, hero to the left. She's doing more than ok and this accuser doesn't want to mess up her potential star power.
Then what's the point? The committee should insist on it or tell her to pound sand.
So the new deadline is 2:30pm est. I'm gonna make a bold prediction here. I know y'all will think I'm out on a limb but I'm pretty sure at around that time her lawyers will ask for another extension.
And Grassley will cave and grant it to them proving they have his balls in a jar on their desk.
And Grassley will cave and grant it to them proving they have his balls in a jar on their desk.
Honestly, if Grassley keeps granting extensions it makes her lawyer look ridiculous. He probably knows she doesn't want to testify under oath so may as well play the media game. He can say we granted an extension x number of times.
Justice Thomas is the freaking GOAT. I'm a young, and was only a toddler when those hearings happened, but as an attorney today, Justice Thomas' opinions and outlook on the law has been an extremely pivotal influence on my judicial philosophy as an attorney.BoerneGator said:Disagree! Justice Thomas prevailed because of the force of his rebuttal testimony! I believe it would likewise survive today for the same reason(s). HE was the difference!Pumpkinhead said:There are many significant differences between the Anita Hill situation and this one. Anita Hill worked for Thomas for a couple of years as his assistant. There was no way Thomas could deny knowing her or being in private situations with her. I'm pretty confident that if the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill situation occurred in 2018 instead of 1991, that Clarence Thomas' nomination would not have survived. Anita Hill was a work-place sexual harassment accusation situation that we've already seen bring down a number of pretty powerful men over the last year. If this Ford woman had been someone like an Anita Hill (a former co-worker of Kavanaugh's accusing him of sexual harassment or assualt), then Kavanaugh would be toast right now. Stick a fork in him.Big Al 1992 said:
Look at poor Anita Hill. Half a dozen books, HBO documentary, movies about her, dozens of honorary degrees, hero to the left. She's doing more than ok and this accuser doesn't want to mess up her potential star power.
Watching those hearings now, and also having met Clarence personally, he's just amazing. ***** smacked the democrats, took the bench, and LITERALLY, as our residents sarcastically put it, "owned the libs".
Love his concurrences and I wish he was immortal. Clarence Thomas is a national treasure.
CNN is an enemy of the state and should be treated as such.
houag80 said:
I truly believe Grassley wants her to testify so that they can impugn her with the data collected in the past few days and put it to bed for the nonsense it is. Her lawyers won't let her testify.....they wanted Grassley to say no....they failed.
As etcetera would say, "Boom!" Double Boom. They have all the goods on this "survivor" and her testifying would allow the R's to bury this ***** and make the dims look like the snakes they are.
If that bottom picture is her I would have done that in High School.
I just received a push notification that says the dems are floating the idea of impeaching Kavanaugh even if he gets voted into the SCOTUS. Is this really a precedent they want to set?
I hope they try it. Talk about backfire!
If they take the House they can formally impeach Kavanaugh which is merely the bringing of charges. The Senate would have to conduct the trial and have a 2/3 vote to remove him. Which isn't happening. Would not be surprised to see House Dems do this anyway just for the drama and virtue signaling value of it.
Yes it is, because they think that once they get power, it will never be taken away again and they can do anything they want.SpiDer09 said:
I just received a push notification that says the dems are floating the idea of impeaching Kavanaugh even if he gets voted into the SCOTUS. Is this really a precedent they want to set?
And even if they impeach him, the Senate will not convict.
She won't testify under oath. She'll back out again.
She knows she can't prove any allegations and won't stop the nomination.
She will settle for 2nd Prize: Left Wing Heroine, Martyred by The Patriarchy.
She knows she can't prove any allegations and won't stop the nomination.
She will settle for 2nd Prize: Left Wing Heroine, Martyred by The Patriarchy.
https://thehill.com/homenews/news/407907-kavanaugh-accuser-considered-moving-to-another-country-husband-saysQuote:
Christine Blasey Ford, the woman accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault, considered moving to another country following Justice Anthony Kennedy's retirement earlier this year, her husband says.
"She was like, 'I can't deal with this. If he becomes the nominee, then I'm moving to another country. I cannot live in this country if he's in the Supreme Court,'" her husband, Russell Ford, told The Washington Post for a story published Saturday. "She wanted out."
Kavanaugh was long considered a potential future nominee for the high court, being on a list Trump released during his 2016 campaign of people he would consider picking for the Supreme Court should a vacancy arise.
If she said this, she's a lunatic, but I would not be surprised if this us just one more lie.
They can impeach a sitting justice all they want. Kavanaugh won't step down and he won't get convicted. The dems will look petty and childish trying to do so. Another tactic that will backfire. She accept that you lost elections bigly in 2016. This is the price you pay. Next time don't run the most unpopular, untrustworthy, and unlikable figure in American politics.
Quote:
"She was like, 'I can't deal with this. If he becomes the nominee, then I'm moving to another country. I cannot live in this country if he's in the Supreme Court,'" her husband, Russell Ford, told The Washington Post for a story published Saturday. "She wanted out."
She'd be gone already if you could drive to the UK.
Kavanaugh should file civil charges of defamation of character. His attorney could then put her on the stand. That would take the choice of testifying under oath away from her.
End this charade once and for all.
End this charade once and for all.
Impeachment is an interesting idea to float ahead of the election; I'm not sure which party it would help more.
This is a dangerous road.
This is a dangerous road.
Odds on whether or not Grassley grants another extension at 10:00 tonight? I'm thinking 3:2...
Has anyone else seen the pic a female classmate released on Twitter of Ford? Bear in mind, it's twitter, but if it's authentic, not good.
FireAg said:
Odds on whether or not Grassley grants another extension at 10:00 tonight? I'm thinking 3:2...
He probably will and I'm fine with it because it continues to make her and her lawyer look ridiculous.
Featured Stories
See All
17:09
9m ago
288
18:53
36m ago
839
Michael Earley joins TexAgs Live to recap A&M's showing at Daikin Park
by Ryan Brauninger
7:48
13h ago
12k
Photo Gallery: Texas A&M men win 2025 SEC Indoor Championship
by Will Huffman