• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New Accuser Says Kavanaugh Had Role in Sexual Assaults

Renae said:
Or collusion. Here's the thing, he's been a Federal judge for how many years?
Been investigated by the FBI how many times?
Has a whiff of this ever come to light?

Suddenly, at the last minute, after the SCOTUS hearings, and after it was clear he'd be confirmed suddenly "accusations" without evidence fly...


Suspect is the nicest thing one can say.

Evidence free decades old accusations should not ruin a person's career, life or be treated in this manner. It's uncivil, unfair, and unjust. If he's guilty, file police reports, get the proper authorities to investigate. Grandstanding for attention? No. Not credible.
Click to expand...
Now YOU are making wild unsubstantiated claims. There isn’t any hint that these three women have recently spoken to each other.

Your line of defense appears to be a desperate volley to say anything in Kav’s defense. You won’t even consider the possibility that they’re telling the truth. One or more have passed lie detector tests. Kav and the Republicans won’t even form an investigation. Why do you think that is? The obvious answer is that the women are telling the truth and Kav is lying.

How long was Cosby in the public eye? 50 years. Yet, not one woman came forward until a few years ago. Then, after that brave woman, others corroborated. The fact that allegations happen after decades is typical in these cases.
 
Last edited:
 
Lol, this is a bust. I guess we know now why this "story" wasn't snatched up by a credible publication.
 
Trump should ask Kavanaugh to withdraw and nominate Merrick Garland instead.
If memory serves Obama nominated him because he was conservative enough the republicans might support him, or something.
So he wouldn't be too bad from their perspective.

And I'd like to see the democrats come up with an argument against him.
 
Here's her sworn declaration: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...tion-kavanaugh-accuser-julie-swetnick-n913336

The problem I have with this delclaration are as follows:

1. You (Swetnick) knew that the punch was spiked, but did nothing to tell anyone. (ie victims)

2. You knew that the punch was spiked, but kept going to these parties.

3. You admit that you saw people, who, there is an extremely good chance were victims of these spiked punches, being victims of one guy after another raping her. And did nothing.

So, it may be that you are lying about this or you have engaged (arguably) in complicity and a massive moral failure.
 
jmotivator said:
This woman graduated high school in 1980, meaning she would have likely been in college during these teen rape parties... and that she frequented these teen rape parties anyway. And that she is a freaking liar.

Also, bonus points to sleazy Michael Aventi who posts the woman's picture and name and then tells everyone to respect her privacy.

You folks are being played the fool.
Click to expand...
The classic defense used by rapist’s attorneys is to attack the virtue of the victim, as you are doing.
 
Mr. Invisible said:
Here's her sworn declaration: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...tion-kavanaugh-accuser-julie-swetnick-n913336

The problem I have with this delclaration are as follows:

1. You (Swetnick) knew that the punch was spiked, but did nothing to tell anyone. (ie victims)

2. You knew that the punch was spiked, but kept going to these parties.

3. You admit that you saw people, who, there is an extremely good chance were victims of these spiked punches, being victims of one guy after another raping her. And did nothing.

So, it may be that you are lying about this or you have engaged (arguably) in complicity and a massive moral failure.
Click to expand...
Ms. Swetnick has no duty to tell anyone about the punch and not doing so doesn’t relieve the criminals of any complicity.
 
MTAtech said:
After what the GOP did to Merrick Garland .
Click to expand...

Which was what exactly?

Following the rule that the democrats set? Broke? Set? And broke again?

The hypocrisy of the democrats is both vast and wretched.

You got your packed courts out of it. This is the price.
 
MTAtech said:
Ms. Swetnick has no duty to tell anyone about the punch and not doing so doesn’t relieve the criminals of any complicity.
Click to expand...

Edit: Misread your post. I am not saying that not doing so relieves the criminals of their crimes, rather I am saying that Swetnick not telling anyone of the spiked punch arguably makes her complicit in those crimes.

I find it absolutely disgusting that you are defending this behavior.
 
Last edited:
The Mark said:
Trump should ask Kavanaugh to withdraw and nominate Merrick Garland instead.
If memory serves Obama nominated him because he was conservative enough the republicans might support him, or something.
So he wouldn't be too bad from their perspective.

And I'd like to see the democrats come up with an argument against him.
Click to expand...

Meh. Give the enemies of the constitution no ground. MG was a pick because their have to legislate from the bench as their crappy ideas have never worked.
 
MTAtech said:
Now YOU are making wild unsubstantiated claims. There isn’t any hint that these three women have recently spoken to each other.

Your line of defense appears to be a desperate volley to say anything in Kav’s defense. You won’t even consider the possibility that they’re telling the truth. One or more have passed lie detector tests. Kav and the Republicans won’t even form an investigation. Why do you think that is? The obvious answer is that the women are telling the truth and Kav is lying.

How long was Cosby in the public eye? 50 years. Yet, not one woman came forward until a few years ago. Then, after that brave woman, others corroborated. The fact that allegations happen after decades is typical in these cases.
Click to expand...

Shhhh, you're commentary has reached a new level of low.

Cosby's accusers were believable because they could name Time, Place, Witnesses, corroboration of story, evidence...

You know, all the things these three cannot.

Also, I didnt' NOT imply they, the three women were colluding with each other, I said the sudden pop up of salacious tales at the last minute, all by people with a political agenda inline.. Oh oops, your foil is foiled.
 
akyron said:
Which was what exactly?

Following the rule that the democrats set? Broke? Set? And broke again?

The hypocrisy of the democrats is both vast and wretched.

You got your packed courts out of it. This is the price.
Click to expand...
The Democrats never refused to even consider a Republican nominee and anyone who implies that they did is a liar.
 
MTAtech said:
Ms. Swetnick has no duty to tell anyone about the punch and not doing so doesn’t relieve the criminals of any complicity.
Click to expand...

Except for basic human decency. Instead we’re asked to believe that this woman was complicit in the rape of multiple women and attended “well over 10” parties where she stood around watching boys rape girls without ever intervening or saying anything to anyone. What a monster she must be.
 
Renae said:
Here's the thing, he's been a Federal judge for how many years?
Been investigated by the FBI how many times?
Has a whiff of this ever come to light?
Click to expand...

Could it be because the victims did not see his face on TV or in the news until NOW? You think they all have been keeping track of him after HS/Yale? Or would they rather forget what happened? Hmm... But now that this guy is about to have a lifetime appt for SCOTUS, hey - maybe that's somewhat of a reason to speak up despite all the unwanted publicity and danger to themselves and their loved ones?
 
Slavister said:
Could it be because the victims did not see his face on TV or in the news until NOW? You think they all have been keeping track of him after HS/Yale? Or would they rather forget what happened? Hmm... But now that this guy is about to have a lifetime appt for SCOTUS, hey - maybe that's somewhat of a reason to speak up despite all the unwanted publicity and danger to themselves and their loved ones?
Click to expand...

Yeah, he's not been in the new... WAIT, Kavanaughs name did hit the news, in 2012, when Romney suggested Kavanaughs a potential SCOTUS pick... hmm..
 
MTAtech said:
The Democrats never refused to even consider a Republican nominee and anyone who implies that they did is a liar.
Click to expand...

Are you saying BC is being seriously considered? It looks like a clown show from the opening seconds...complete with spirit fingers and spartacus gropers.

When the votes are along party lines are you considering that "serious consideration"?....OR was it a decision made much earlier and potentially finalized over a weekend conference call?


He is not on the supreme court yet the case to impeach is being made...Yeah..Thats consideration all right.
The Case for Impeaching Kavanaugh
 
Last edited:
MTAtech said:
The classic defense used by rapist’s attorneys is to attack the virtue of the victim, as you are doing.
Click to expand...

No, it is the classic attorney defense of attacking the supreme implausibility of the claims, and that the claims, as stated, would be a self indictment by the claimed witness.
 
jmotivator said:
No, it is the classic attorney defense of attacking the supreme implausibility of the claims, and that the claims, as stated, would be a self indictment by the claimed witness.
Click to expand...
You really think it's implausible that entitled rich teens, away from home, who have access to alcohol and drugs, couldn't possibly try to sexually take advantage of young women? This happens all the time.

Or, are you saying that Kavanaugh was such a choir boy that he was above all that? I think he has lost all credibility by portraying his young self as a choir boy, given that many accounts show he was a young alcoholic and got blind drunk.

If you want us to believe that, you might as well have us believe that movie producers wouldn't possibly try to force attractive would-be starlets to have sex with them.
 
Last edited:
 
Renae said:
Yeah, he's not been in the new... WAIT, Kavanaughs name did hit the news, in 2012, when Romney suggested Kavanaughs a potential SCOTUS pick... hmm..
Click to expand...

Lol. Romney? Suggested? There is a big difference between "suggested" by NON-President and being picked for confirmation hearings!
 
Slavister said:
Lol. Romney? Suggested? There is a big difference between "suggested" by NON-President and being picked for confirmation hearings!
Click to expand...

The point is his name came up for Scotus and she magically remembered him as her rapist then, but didn't say **** till he was actually nominated. That doesn't smell like bull**** to you? I guess just being on a "lower court" wasn't good enough for her eh?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom