“We are aware of significant evidence of multiple house parties in the Washington, D.C. area during the early 1980s during which Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge and others would participate in the targeting of women with alcohol/drugs in order to allow a ‘train’ of men to subsequently gang rape them,” Avenatti said in an email to Mike Davis, chief counsel for nominations for the Senate Judiciary Committee.Gang rape??!!!
Yes, Avenatti wrote "gang rape" in his email to the Committee. And not just one gang rape — multiple gang rapes. What is the sudden, breakout hysteria?!
Avenatti did not disclose any details or identities of his witnesses.All eyes on Avenatti. What a trickster this man is! Let's look at what he dropped on the public last night, just as we were hearing the weird new allegation that came out in The New Yorker. We'd barely had the chance to begin to process the story of a Yale college woman who, while seemingly too drunk to be sure if she was looking at a real penis or a fake one, saw Brett Kavanaugh pulling up his pants and heard — as she remembers it — somebody say his name. And then along came Avenatti to waggle his teaser at us. Boldface added:
Avenatti hinted at the nature of his allegations when he suggested to the Senate Judiciary Committee a series of questions to ask Kavanaugh.Are those the questions Avenatti used when collecting his witnesses — with "rape" never asked about independently from "sex" (or the strange locution "taken advantage of")?
One of his questions: “Did you ever target one or more women for sex or rape at a house party? Did you ever assist Mark Judge or others in doing so?”
Also, Avenatti suggested asking Kavanaugh: “Did you ever attend any house party during which a woman was gang raped or used for sex by multiple men?”
And: “Did you ever witness a line of men outside a bedroom at any house party where you understood a woman was in the bedroom being raped or taken advantage of?”
Avenatti also said Kavanaugh should be asked if he ever tried to prevent men from raping or taking advantage of women at any house party....
Should Kavanaugh opponents welcome Avenatti's entrance onto this scene? I hear in him the echoes of a longstanding fight against fraternities and the accusation that they are a conspiracy of rapists. We got deeply into this issue back when Rolling Stone published its piece on the University of Virginia which turned out into a fiasco for those who sprung at an opportunity to describe a specific incident to stand in for all the bad behavior they wanted to alarm us about. Here we go again. I assume — but what do I know? — that there is horrible sex going on in the context of college drinking parties. I assume a lot of young women and men get hurt. They are used for sex and taken advantage of and — especially if you broadly define the word — raped.
You could cast aspersions on every man who ever belonged to a fraternity that held drinking parties. But should that serious problem be suddenly dumped on Brett Kavanaugh?
What Avenatti is doing resonates with something I wrote on September 18th: "The question that can destroy Brett Kavanaugh: Have you ever been so drunk you could not remember what happened?"
College happened. There is a drinking culture. It's tied to cheap, drunken sex. Can Kavanaugh assure us that he was never anywhere close to that?
Are you and everyone you care about free of the fraternity gang rape stink? If Kavanaugh falls, are you ready for the fall of every man who had drunken sex in college?
Posts
275 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 275 of 275"I think Althouse understands the problem of believing an accuser without allowing exculpatory evidence."
I'm not sure where in her posts on the matter that this understanding is exhibited. Unless "Can Kavanaugh assure us that he was never anywhere close to that?" defines accepted exculpatory evidence.
Anyway: I would love to see a clear quote showing this understanding so that I can reads betters.
I am Laslo.
Not voting for Republicans if they cave is a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? We end up with HIrono or Harris as the Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman?
Steve M. Galbraith said...
"Althouse often goes from first person - her views - to third person - the views of some others. Sometimes it's difficult to tell when she's doing one or the other.
In this case, I think she's making a third person view. Or the view by Kavanaugh's critics. That is, you came out of or were surrounded by a drunken sex culture; prove to us that you didn't yourself practice it."
I agree with this view of some of Althouse's recent comments. But Avenatti is not talking about Yale frats as Althouse seems to think. Mark Judge is part of this smear went to Catholic University, not Yale so these alleged incidents supposedly took place in the wealthy suburbs around DC in Kavanaugh's and Judge's high school years. Avenatti is saying that the daughters of wealthy, well-connected DC suburbanites were gang-raped without their parents taking any notice.
You might as well say that Michael Corleone's high school daughter and his friends' high school daughters were gang-raped.
It simply would not be passed by and ignored by the lawyers, newspaper editors, politicians and well-off who live in the DC suburbs. Moreover, because of the interconnections in those suburbs some of the editors and journalists printing this garbage would be among those who ignored their daughters' being raped thirty years ago if these accusations were true.
I, as a Canadian, warned you that America too has an unwritten constitution, and that you trash it at your peril.
Meant to say
"You might as well say that Michael Corleone's high school daughter and his friends' high school daughters were gang-raped without retaliation."
Welcome back laslo. You are on fire. But I wonder if Althouse will ever again refer to you as “ace commenter”.
By the way, can you prove you never wore a Brett Kavanaugh mask sometime in the 80s?
Not voting for Republicans if they cave is a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? We end up with HIrono or Harris as the Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman?
Not a butt boy for Republicans -- they have some serious weasels like Flake and Corker and a buncha others.
But on the whole, at this day and time, there is no comparison with the Democrats. The entire Democrat political apparatus is controlled by rich weasels, who want to impose a socialistic, multi-culture on the country.
#metoo has now antagonized half the country. I don't mean men. As a movement, it now has a large and angry opposition.
This is what happened to feminism in general in the 1990s when they sold out to the Democratic party. Women then had to fight over everything because they made enemies of Clinton's political opponents. Persuasion stopped working.
If you want to effect social change, don't sell out. #metoo just sold out.
I went to college a school with 7:1 girls to guys. I cannot tell you how many times I was groped by a drunk girl.
Our Fraternity had a pajama jama party with another sorority at a local bar. The guys were mostly in boxers or sleep pants. The girls figured out if they grinded on the guys, the guys would get hard. To this day, the girls joke about it. Some of the guys like it but others found it legitimately embarrassing. Now, imagine how many lives could be destroyed because we attended that party?
Required reading for the 21st century.
S. 'And ought not these Witches to be Punished?
B. Without question; the Precept of Gods Word is for it: only they must first be so proved.
One of the most remarkable things in American history followed the collapse of the Salem witch hunt. The chief judge *apologized*. He wrote a book about it, he gave speeches, he was contrite and ashamed.
Is there anyone like that in America now? Who was contrite about Duke? Who apologized for McMartin?
If Kavanagh falls you will have more to worry about.
This is the end of feminism.
They will have no more usefulness after their credibility is completely destroyed. Making accusations like this will immediately bring sympathy to the accused in any he said she said scenario.
Have fun with that.
And Kavanagh is going to be a Supreme Court Justice before the election.
This whole business reminds me of a Professional Wrestling match. The Bad Guy uses every dirty move in the book to beat hell out of the Good Guy. Then, just as it looks like the Good Guy is finished, he springs back and, to the delight of the crowd, beats hell out of the Bad Guy. That's the part we're waiting for. Incidentally, Donald Trump knows a thing or two about Professional Wrestling.
Why did the fraternity brothers decide to wear pjs? Did the brothers wear underwear? If not, why not?
Do you think there’s a difference between what you describe and what is alleged now against Kavenaugh?
B. There are two things whereby this Conclusion may be made evident; and any one of them is sufficient: and they are both of them well known, and plentifully spoken to by Authors: it will there be needless now to in|sist on them.
B. The first is, A free and full Confession made by the Accused Person, of the Fact, being in his right mind, and not frighted or forced into it:
B... I now pass to the second ground of Conviction, which is, The Testimony of two sufficient Humane Wit|nesses, to one and the same Individual Fact, as done by the Party Accused.
S.
I see no reason why it is necessary that there should be two Wit|nesses to the same Individual Fact: I thought it had been enough, if it were to the same Fact in Specie: I know Jucicious and Learned Men are of this mind, and tell us, that it is enough to gain Humane Credit; if one man say that he saw Lions in Africa last year, and another comes and says that he saw Lions there this year; though it was not at the same time, nor likely the same Individual Lions: why then may it not do in this Case?
B. The case is vastly different. I may give an Historical Credit to Reports, upon probable grounds, because, if they should prove 〈…〉 man is hurt by it, and therefore, one good credible Author may 〈◊〉 here. But to take away the Names and Lives of Persons on so easy a belief, is not so light a matter. The mistake doth a mischief irreparable. Besides, the moral reason of appointing two Witnesses at least to confirm a matter by, is properly referrible to Individual Facts: for, it is by such that a man is proved guilty: now my denial challengeth as much credit as anothers affirmation against me: and every particular Fact, having my particular denial against him that chargeth me; there is but one to one in that Individual: and the Law of Equity and Charity requires that I be believed in my own Defence, where there is nothing to preponderate.
S. 'If this Rule be always followed, it will be hard to punish Wickedness.
B. If it be not carefully followed, there will be no Security for In|nocence.
THIS IS FROM 1692! We've done this before!
So...that supposed yearbook portraying the innocent God/penis fearing girls as quite predatory seems like so much old news.
"especially if you broadly define the word — raped."
Lets expand it to include the mind rape that all this is.
The Dems are assembling a "train". Keep lube handy.
B. It may be so: but I have further to object against their being suf|ficient Witnesses. Viz. Their incapacity to give a full and clear Testimo|ny, to the face of the Prisoner at the Barr; and yet that is requisite by Law and Reason.
S.
That is because the Witches smite them down with their poisoned Looks.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
B. A poor one too: for you say that the Devil sometimes take away their memory, and it must be refreshed, by putting things to them, and that is enough: sometimes also there must be a great many parcels in the Evidence, and that must make it confused.
S.
But sometimes they are as well as you are, and are they not com|petent Witnesses now?
You can't make this stuff up!
B. It is but a Presumption; and wise men will weigh Presumptions against Presumptions. There is to be no 〈◊〉 without grounds of suspicion. Some persons Credit ought to be accounted too good to be undermined so far as to be suspected on so slight a ground; and it is an injury done them to bring them upon Examination, which renders them openly suspected. I will not deny but for persons already suspect|ed, and of ill fame, it may occasion their being Examined; but if nothing else comes in, nor a Confession be made; the use of such a Presumption any further ceaseth: but if other things of moment appear, a further Legal proceeding may be made.
S.
That is enough for me; we never imprisoned any on a meer Spectral Evidence, or the bare accusation of the Afflicted.
B. Nor Examined any Publickly, who were before of good reputation for Piety? Some think other wise; but what is that to me? I would fain know what the other thing is:
S.
When they have been brought before the Afflicted, they have struck them down with their Eyes, and raised them again with a touch of their hands.
B. You are very uncharitable to say they did it, because there have been such things in concomitancy.
S. 'The very poison of the Witches eyes hath knock't them down.
B. I see you are no Philosopher: I am satisfied that there is Illusion in this as well as the other; I pray do these effects follow meerly on their coming in their sight, or by using of it as an Ordeal?
S.
It was first discovered occasionally, but since hath been used for an experiment, and is found never to fail.
B. The use of this as a Trial, is utterly unlawful, as will ere long be made to appear to the World: and besides, the thing is not evidential, when it is done; but exceedingly fallacious: yea indeed, it is not any whit more a Presumption than the former, if so much.
Mr. D left off one: Kavanaugh was the second shooter on the grassy knoll. Pretty young at the time, but still....
Sorry AA your comment or publishing of same ".....We got deeply into this issue back when Rolling Stone published its piece on the University of Virginia which turned out into a fiasco for those who sprung at an opportunity..." is pure BS. Ever here of the supposed esteemed Senator from NY, Kristen Gillibrand, who's made a career of false "rape accusations", including the Rolling Stone version.
But I guess, if she's a lawyer, blonde, and liberal all is forgiven by the fairer sex? LOL! This entire #metoo movement is burning in front of your eyes, AA, and your propoganda love is ignoring it.
It's quite apparent why the Founding Fathers didn't want women to vote.
The problem is less with the women who vote than the men stumbling over themselves to woo the women who vote.
These wretched, leftwing mutts would have been front and center at the Salem Witch Trials, shaking their corn husk pom pons and baying for witch blood.
Women's credibility is now toast. Hope these bitches are satisfied.
Keep meaning to read I am Charlotte, but that was a while after Kavanaugh and Ramirez. I was a little before them and don't remember the drinking/hook-up culture to have hit the ivies (although Kavanaugh may have brought something like it from GP).
There exists (and existed in the 50s and 60s) a certain set of young girls and women willing to "take on all comers" as it were. They'd "do" the high school football team. A girl in my high school in 1959 allegedly (I never saw it) gave BJs to anyone who would come over to her house in the afternoon (her parents worked). There were a few fraternity TGIF keggers in college (again, not my house) where girls would take on all comers.
Drunken fumbling sex does occur--it did in the 50's and especially after the advent of the Pill, "sport" sex really took off. Some, but not all, women are just as lustful as your average horny teenage boy.
" They'd "do" the high school football team."
How do you think that relates the allegation in this case that a 17 year old sexually assaulted a 15 year old?
Blogger tcrosse said...
This whole business reminds me of a Professional Wrestling match.
No shit Sherlock. #woke
Blogger mockturtle said...
Women's credibility is now toast.
Now??? as if ever. You must be fooled when men nod and smile in agreement. Ignore is bliss
If a woman seems to be distraught, then she is telling the truth.
"Women's credibility is now toast."
-- I don't feel like that's fair. These, particular women's credibility may be/is, but not women in general. What it has done though is do a lot for Republicans to blindly jump aboard "believe all women," which was always a dicey proposition since, sometimes, we *shouldn't* believe all people that fall into any group.
But, yes. The next time the news tells me a woman presents a "credible" accusation, I'm going to weight their evaluation alongside considering Ford and Ramirez as "credible" too, while considering the woman accusing Ellison (whose name I can't even remember she's not reported about enough!) as "not credible," and wonder how they came to their conclusion.
@Mock,
Women's credibility is now toast. Hope these bitches are satisfied
I hope not. This is a leftwing liar women problem, not a general women problem.
But we need women in high places, Sen. Ernst, Sen. Collins, Sen. Murkowski to get off their butts and start hitting back at these BS allegations. Due Process is at stake!
I'm waiting for some brave guy to allege that Nancy Pelosi gave him the clap in 1985.
Bay Area Guy suggests: But we need women in high places, Sen. Ernst, Sen. Collins, Sen. Murkowski to get off their butts and start hitting back at these BS allegations. Due Process is at stake!
But they won't because siding with the woman is more important than siding with truth and justice.
"The question that can destroy Brett Kavanaugh: Have you ever been so drunk you could not remember what happened?"
She should have to answer the same question.
mockturtle said... Mr. D left off one: Kavanaugh was the second shooter on the grassy knoll. Pretty young at the time, but still....
I think Kavanaugh would have to had sex with the second shooter to qualify. Maybe he fired prematurely. Or maybe "grassy knoll" is slang for something I would rather not be able to explain to, well, anyone.
If I was Kavanagh at the next hearing:
Chairman Grassley: Judge Kavanagh, do you have an opening statement?
Kavanagh: Yes Mr. Chairman. Ladies and gentlemen, I'll be brief. The issue here is not whether I broke a few rules, or took a few liberties with my female party guests - I did.
[winks at Diane Feinstein]
Kavanagh: But you can't hold me responsible today for the behavior of a young, drunken teenager. For if you do, then shouldn't we blame the whole Patriarchy? And if the whole Patriarchal system is guilty, then isn't this an indictment of our educational institutions in general? I put it to you, Chuck - isn't this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do whatever you want to us, but I'm not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America. Gentlemen!
And then I'd get up and leave.
I hope not. This is a leftwing liar women problem, not a general women problem.
But we need women in high places, Sen. Ernst, Sen. Collins, Sen. Murkowski to get off their butts and start hitting back at these BS allegations. Due Process is at stake!
Good luck, we can't even get our hostess, a trained lawyer to do that. Instead we get explanations as to why due process isn't necessary because feelings.
So the "system" only spits out men who assault women? Is that right? And that it's ok not to have to account of past actions?
"I was a little before them and don't remember the drinking/hook-up culture to have hit the ivies (although Kavanaugh may have brought something like it from GP)."
OMG, all by himself? The man's an evil pied piper he is! How did he hide it all these subsequent decades? What made him go straight?
"And that it's ok not to have to account of past actions?"
-- People should have to account for past actions; people should not have to account for things no one can prove they did.
rcocean said...
Of course, if McConnell had supported Roy Moore instead of trying to defeat him, we'd have an extra 2 vote margin, instead of 1 vote margin.
It's worse than that. McConnell wanted Strange to win (notwithstanding Strange's unpopularity due in large part to the appearance that he got appointed as part of a corrupt bargain with the gov) so in the primary he & his PAC directed all their fire against Mo Brooks, the Tea Party guy, and drove him out of the race. They did that with the expectation that Moore would be much easier for Strange to beat...'cause the career Establishment GOP guys are just that smart. Despite outspending him something like 10-1 Strange lost big, Moore got the nomination, and the rest is history.
Honest question: do the smart GOP establishment types prefer a Democrat holding the seat to a Tea Party-style Republican? I really don't know!
So McConnell, call the vote. If Kavanaugh doesn’t pass, urge Trump to nominate Amy Barrett and call another vote, immediately. The anti-Christian, multi-million dollar Grifter from California has already had a go at Barrett to no avail.
An intelligent, solid, Catholic Irishwoman will be a great antidote for the wise latina and the old, secular progressive Jew abortion lover. (I still have some hope for Kagan. I’m not sure why.)
Women's credibility is now toast. Hope these bitches are satisfied
No. No diversity. No color judgments.
My experience watching the Supreme Court was that Kagan was the brightest bulb of them all, without a doubt.
Well, at least this shitshow has slapped some sense into some of the weak cucks around here. With any luck, they'll vote against Democrat party members come the next election.
I'm glad I didn't attend college in the era of "That's not Funny!"
Random PG stories from the co-ed dorms, 35 years ago:
1. At bedtime, the girls next door to us would loudly read from Penthouse Letters, through the thin walls, and then end each evening with a hearty "Good night, Boys!" to me and my roommate.
2. At the secret Santa gift exchange, 3 girls pooled their resources to hire a stripper, who performed, publicly, on our floor, with the approval of our female RA. The stripper took most of it off, but tastefully kept her thin lingerie on.
3. We had two large bathrooms on the floor, one for the girls and one for the boys. On "Sauna Night," the girls would don their swimsuits (or t-shirts), come into the boys' shower room, turn on all the nozzles at the highest heat possible, and create a huge co-ed steam bath, with dancing and frolicking. This happened 5 or 6 times that year, but we had to stop for risk of flooding.
I could continue on with 10 or more such stories, and various hook-ups and relationships, some R and X-rated, but you get the gist. Fun, happy, healthy young women, with great senses of humor.
Judged by today's oppressive pseudo-puritanical standards imposed by uptight leftist women? We'd all be toast.
It's quite apparent why the Founding Fathers didn't want women to vote.
The Constitution does not contain a diversity provision. The Constitution did not discriminate by color or sex. The Nineteenth Amendment was only necessary to establish a uniform voting right.
Blogger MayBee said...
“Not voting for Republicans if they cave is a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? We end up with HIrono or Harris as the Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman?”
Trump’s judicial nominations will define the soul of America in the future. Godless, soulless Democrats understand this. If Repubs can’t get the job done on confirmations, they are of no value. Tax cuts notwithstanding, Democrats have mostly gotten their way since 2016: Obamacare stands, no wall, excessive spending, etc.
Except for the judiciary it does not matter who’s in charge of Congress. It is the heart of the swamp.
1. At bedtime, the girls next door to us would loudly read from Penthouse Letters, through the thin walls, and then end each evening with a hearty "Good night, Boys!" to me and my roommate.
How does that relate to an allegation of sexual assault?
HT is the perfect disciple of Alinsky...force the Right to live up to standards of behavior rejected by the Left.
Brett Kavanaugh's letter:
Dear Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Feinstein:
When I testified in front of the Senate three weeks ago, I explained my belief that fair process is foundational to justice and to our democracy.
At that time, I sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee for more than 31 hours and answered questions under oath. I then answered more questions at a confidential session. The following week, I responded to more than 1,200 written questions, more than have been submitted to all previous Supreme Court nominees combined.
Only after that exhaustive process was complete did I learn, through the news media, about a 36- year-old allegation from high school that had been asserted months earlier and withheld from me throughout the hearing process. First it was an anonymous allegation that I categorically and unequivocally denied. Soon after the accuser was identified, I repeated my denial on the record and made clear that I wished to appear before the Committee. I then repeated my denial to Committee investigators—under criminal penalties for false statements. All of the witnesses identified by Dr. Ford as being present at the party she describes are on the record to the Committee saying they have no recollection of any such party happening. I asked to testify before the Committee again under oath as soon as possible, so that both Dr. Ford and I could both be heard. I thank Chairman Grassley for scheduling that hearing for Thursday.
Last night, another false and uncorroborated accusation from 35 years ago was published. Once again, those alleged to have been witnesses to the event deny it ever happened. There is now a frenzy to come up with something—anything—that will block this process and a vote on my confirmation from occurring.
These are smears, pure and simple. And they debase our public discourse. But they are also a threat to any man or woman who wishes to serve our country. Such grotesque and obvious character assassination—if allowed to succeed—will dissuade competent and good people of all political persuasions from service.
As I told the Committee during my hearing, a federal judge must be independent, not swayed by public or political pressure. That is the kind of judge I will always be. I will not be intimidated into withdrawing from this process. The coordinated effort to destroy my good name will not drive me out. The vile threats of violence against my family will not drive me out. The last-minute character assassination will not succeed.
I have devoted my career to serving the public and the cause of justice, and particularly to promoting the equality and dignity of women. Women from every phase of my life have come forward to attest to my character. I am grateful to them. I owe it to them, and to my family, to defend my integrity and my name. I look forward to answering questions from the Senate on Thursday.
Sincerely,
Brett M. Kavanaugh
> The CIA recruits nearly 100% Democrats and has done so for decades.
Yep, it is a cushy job with good benefits. I've always considered preponderance of Democrats as the primary explanation of their ongoing analytical incompetence.
Avenasti gives pond scum a bad name.
And no, that's not a typo.
Blogger HT said...
‘So the "system" only spits out men who assault women? Is that right? And that it's ok not to have to account of past actions?’
Care to reiterate? This is unintelligible.
What is so funny is to see the time I grew up referred to in language I used to associate with the 1950s in terms of … whatever this is - wordlessness?. And that it was unique in that injustices like sexual assault no longer exist. Whenever I’m in a group of women talking about this, there is always someone in her 20s who testifies that underage “dating,” sexual assault still indeed happen (of course they do!). It's strange to see the 80s viewed as "a time when..." Oh well. Age.
There’s a book called When All the World Was Young.# I recommend it.
That it’s necessary to recognize that things are changing, does not mean we cannot mourn the loss of a time when we thought we were more disciplined to bear it (or if not, being ok with being ignored).
#Acclaimed writer Barbara Holland, whom the Philadelphia Inquirer has called "a national treasure," finally tells her own story with this atmospheric account of a postwar American childhood. When All the World Was Young is Holland's account of growing up in Washington, D.C., during the 1940s and '50s, and is a deliciously subversive, sensitive journey into her past. Mixing tales of an autocratic stepfather, a brilliant, reclusive mother, and a houseful of siblings with jump-rope rhymes and dangerous sled runs, teachers both wise and weird, and a child's-eye view of war, Holland gives readers a unique and sharp-eyed look at history and the world of childhood as it used to be.
Well, you can do whatever you want to us, but I'm not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America. Gentlemen!
He'd get Sen. Blutarsky's vote.
"I'm waiting for some brave guy to allege that Nancy Pelosi gave him the clap in 1985."
I was on business in the SF area in 1985. I met Ms. Pelosi at a Chamber of Commerce meeting. I was an organizational consultant working on business development, so I chatted her up.
She made it clear that I had to "pay to play" if I wanted her business contacts. Hence, we took a hotel room. She was all over me like a wild animal. I feared for my life because she was so intense. When I screamed in pain (maybe it was pleasure but I was too traumatized to tell the difference) she covered my mouth.
Her Chief of Staff was in the room because Pelosi wanted a three-way. My erection sputtered when he took off his clothes. He jumped on her and I made my escape.
My sex life has been damaged since that traumatic incident. I told nobody because I was married and embarrassed. My therapist and lawyers have since helped me understand that she is a sexual predator and needs to face the consequences for her actions.
I will be forwarding a letter to Congress. Ryan (as House Speaker) in order to spark a federal investigation. Until that is concluded, I expect her to step down from her seat in Congress.
Since making these accusations, I have had to leave my home because of internet death threats that have greatly upset me and my family.
"Kavanaugh was a drunken party animal."
-- There is no proof of this. In fact, thus far, everyone who was at either of these alleged drunken parties says they didn't see Kavanaugh there or these events happen (either in college OR high school.) Only one witness says they "heard" someone say Kavanaugh was at the party -- literally, you've only got hearsay at this point. And two victims who are hurting for credibility, deeply.
@Althouse,
Since Ms. Pelosi has denied these allegations, does your gut tell you that I am more likely to be telling the truth than her?
I appreciate your support.
College is a place to learn and prepare for life and work. College isn't a place to get drunk and have sex. Many tragically waste their time in college by not studying, and being a party animal.
Kavanaugh was a drunken party animal. He apparently crammed to pass his classes, and was smart enough to get away with it. "What happens at Georgetown Prep stays at Georgetown Prep," according to Brett. Kavanaugh sets a BAD example for all students male and female alike. Keep the white, pampered, rich entitled male monkey off the Supreme Court, and save the cuntry from the likes of Trump & his hard-right nominees with dirty little secrets.
You right-wing hacks and trolls make me want to puke, and I didn't have a single drink. I'm perfectly sober, but you're not.
Again ignoring the awful sexism on the board, the Republican play seems to be to take time to suss this out, let the FBI find the facts, and let Kavanaugh enter the Supremes not under the cloud of Thomas. The extent that they want to not investigate and hurry this along belies their fears that it's true or there's something else out there.
Not every man. Just the white ones and conservative men of color. Nathan McCall, who recounts running a brutal gang rape “train” on a 13 year old virgin (he lured her to the rape scene but avoided prison by testifying against the other rapists) and committing a serious, violent gang assault on a white male child because he was white, according to McCall himself, received literary prizes, a job with an elite newspaper, and a prestigious professorship — because of a book in which he discloses these crimes and blames white America for making him do them (he was of course raised in a comfortable middle class home).
The book is Makes Me Wanna Holler. The newspaper that hired him for being an out and proud admitted gang rapist is the Washington Post. And the university is Emory, where I was in grad school when he was hired to head the journalism department and every member of the school was made to read and teach his sicko, white hating, rape validating memoir as the community book of the year. So the entire school was placed in the position of praising a gang rapist for being a gang rapist because he is black. And, oh yeah, the women’s studies ladies ate that up, even as they were simultaneously preparing to try to pass legislation in Georgia expanding definitions of sex crime dramatically in order to make the courts accept their definitions of date rape sexual misconduct — a retooling they finally achieved extra-legally through the DOE.
Perhaps Avenatti is having Stormy work off some fees through creative writing, auteur that she is.
"College isn't a place to get drunk and have sex."
Yes it is.
Goes right back to the very invention of colleges.
Carmina Burana
This seems like a strategy to take the Catholics out of the running for SC.
I have not forgotten AA's comment that the real trap door is all the irresponsible drinking. I share the expectation that a lot of the questioning will be on "how much did BK drink and how can he know what he, or others did"? Given all we know from Christine Ford and all we know about Judge's drinking, who was a best friend of BK's, how can BK be so sure something did not happen.
College happened. There is a drinking culture. It's tied to cheap, drunken sex.
And putting your penis in the face of a woman passed out on the floor where everyone had congregated. Wonder what Althouse would say if someone did that to her.
If Kavanaugh falls, are you ready for the fall of every man who...
...who wants to pretend they're good and rare and virtuous enough to decide the rights and fates of hundreds of millions? Jesus Christ. Let's have some standards. When the minority gender of men is fighting a war to force pregnancies to term on its women, let's not have a guy who pulls out his penis and puts it in the face of a passed out woman on the bench deciding those issues. Let's just not do that.
You people have no standards at all.
What I like is the very subtle smear that Althouse is once again trying to portray. "Sigh, even if Kavanaugh did not gang rape THIS group of girls, drunken heartless sex is so damaging" in the hopes that we unthinkingly agree with such a preposterous assertion (that Kavanaugh was somehow guilty of this) and that what she said actually has any truth in her assertion (some truth perhaps...but not a lot)
But all of that is irrelevant. Allow me to grant, for the sake of argument, because we certainly have NO EVIDENCE of this, that Kavanaugh might be a drunken, broken rake...despite the clear testimony of DOZENS of women who assert otherwise...whom Althouse ignores.
WHO. CARES!
I am NOT hiring Kavanaugh to be sober or chaste and his sobriety and chastity are irrelevant to his job description: judicial rulings.
Just like General Grant, a raging alcoholic, was actually a good general.
Except the Victorian Era sycophant of McClellan, in trying to smear Grant about his alcoholism, has one up on Victorian Althouse: He actually had witnesses to Grant's alcoholism.
Althouse has NO ONE credible who can assert that Kavanaugh ever did what she attempts to insinuate he did.
If I could get RBG to rule similarly to Kavanaugh, I'd be sending her strippers and Smirnoff all week!
Evolution:
President Pee-Pee Tape said... [hush][hide comment]
College happened. There is a drinking culture. It's tied to cheap, drunken sex.
And putting your penis in the face of a woman passed out on the floor where everyone had congregated.
The Toothless Revolutionary said...
I take the red pill every day on gender and identity politics. It didn't take me long into college and then the work world to realize that American women hate their bodies and will take that out on American men ..
Fido, a measure of good would probably come from sending strippers and Smirnoff to Justice Ginsburg. I dislike her politics and I dislike her public behavior, but all of these mandarins would benefit from any contact with ordinary people.
Like male strippers. The average male stripper is probably more socially adjusted than a Supreme Court Justice. Absolute power is the only force stronger than sex.
Fido, a measure of good would probably come from sending strippers and Smirnoff to Justice Ginsburg. I dislike her politics and I dislike her public behavior, but all of these mandarins would benefit from any contact with ordinary people.
Like male strippers. The average male stripper is probably more socially adjusted than a Supreme Court Justice. Absolute power is the only force stronger than sex.
Post a Comment