• 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!

Kavanaugh accuser breaks silence about sexual misconduct allegations detailed in letter to Senate De

jet57 said:
Yeah, sure, no idea. You know exactly what would happen dude. This denial business just won't hold water.
Click to expand...

Hey, whatever you say Jet.

Considering that the hypothetical that you post hasn't happened in reality (as a sanity check on reality), that there are a very many number of other independent variables that come into play as well, none of which you've specified . . . .

You know what? Whatever. :roll:
 
TurtleDude said:
The TDS crowd is beyond desperate this allegedly happened when Kavanaugh was 17 MEANING if he had actually been charged with a crime it would have been sealed. ITs complete BS
Click to expand...

Seems pretty typical of the TDS crowd, and the 'new's media, but I needlessly repeat myself.
 
minnie616 said:
Kids vs kids or teens vs teens when it comes to sexual abuse do not tell about the abuse the majority of time.

They try to hide it.

Many women do not even report rape when they are raped by someone they know.
It makes them feel physically sick. They just want to try to forget it and get on their life’s.

But it is always lurking in the recesses of their memory.
And does affect their lives for years and even a lifetime.
Click to expand...

Okay you've gone to the extreme.

Her story is not about "rape," nor was I referring to "rape" in my response.

The definition of rape is very specific. I agree, it is also very traumatic, often hidden for all sorts of reasons.

However, what she describes IS something I believe she would talk about, at the very least to warn other girls to avoid this guy. That's what I was talking about.

Boys brag, girls complain. Reputations get established.
 
eohrnberger said:
Seems pretty typical of the TDS crowd, and the 'new's media, but I needlessly repeat myself.
Click to expand...

how many times did the Clinton fluffers tell us to "MOVE ON" concerning Clinton's far more documented and far closer to his time in office claims of attempted rape? And what about all the Ted Kennedy fan boys who told us Ted's service is what counted, not his drowning a woman?
 
eohrnberger said:
Hey, whatever you say Jet.

Considering that the hypothetical that you post hasn't happened in reality (as a sanity check on reality), that there are a very many number of other independent variables that come into play as well, none of which you've specified . . . .

You know what? Whatever. :roll:
Click to expand...

You got cornered dude.

see 'ya.
 
Captain Adverse said:
Okay you've gone to the extreme.

Her story is not about "rape," nor was I referring to "rape" in my response.

The definition of rape is very specific. I agree, it is also very traumatic, often hidden for all sorts of reasons.

However, what she describes IS something I believe she would talk about, at the very least to warn other girls to avoid this guy. That's what I was talking about.

Boys brag, girls complain. Reputations get established.
Click to expand...

Maybe she did tell a close friend maybe not. It is not unusual not to say a word.

I was saying kids and teens do not usually report sexual abuse.

Ford was not raped and I never said she was.

I mentioned grown women who should know they should report something as serious rape often will not as a contrast to children and teens who wish to hide and try to forget sexual assault.
 
Captain Adverse said:
He didn't.

In fact he said that SCOTUS had settled via the Bill Clinton case that President's can be sued in office.

When it came to whether a seated President should face a criminal indictment, (if I recall correctly) his view was expressed that impeachment should come first, but that this has yet to be settled by SCOTUS. That he cannot say how he would vote until the issue was heard and the points of law discussed with the other members.
Click to expand...

How does a body accumulate the evidence to determine impeachment when the target is said to be exempt from investigation?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
This matter is simply an allegation of long past criminal activity being used as a last ditch effort to delay the inevitable Senate vote. A criminal allegation has been made, he has denied it - that leaves nothing much to discuss.
Click to expand...

Delay to when and for what purpose? There are three months left for the Senate to do their jobs.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
I call BS....... and you know it's BS! The vote will happen next week. Games or no games.
All the Senator wanted to do was muck up the process. For some one who wanted remain in the shadows and out of the spotlight sure has a funny way of doing that.
Click to expand...

An accusation of attempted rape is no game. It is a serious matter which needs full investigation and hearings.
 
JacksinPA said:
It's not a matter of finding him guilty as in a court of law. Ethical standards for SCOTUS associate justices are a different ball of wax. There should at least be hearings with the woman & the male witnesses.
Click to expand...

There was a hearing. Feinstein nor any other Democrat brought this up, although she had the letter for months. Waiting until after the hearing is over to do a publicity stunt demanding a new hearing is a bunch of BS and that's not how it works.
 
JacksinPA said:
If somebody tried to rape me I'd recall the details.
Click to expand...

Her story gets better every time she tells it. That indicates lying for an agenda and is one tactic used to show lying. To the question "But he didn't hurt you," she then remembers "Oh yeah, he could have KILLED ME!" and she feared for her life to make her story better.
 
Last edited:
JacksinPA said:
Good lawyers do what is necessary to protect their clients. Without the polygraph results it's just a 'he said, she said.'
Click to expand...

Even with a polygraph its he said, she said.
 
Atheist 2020 said:
There are two male teenagers who were at the party and they will be coming out in a few days. She had been seeking counseling (2012) about this attempted gang rape -- that's evidence. There is enough evidence to say this event happened. Plus, after it was announced in the first place, he already had a list of 65 women saying during high school he was a nice teenager. Strange, he went to a all boy high school. Why have a list of former high school women in the first place unless the White House and the Republican senate thought it was a good idea.
Click to expand...

That's false. 1.) she was not in counseling for "attempted gang rape." She was in "couples counseling." 2.) the story was out there long before she "went public." 3.) This is an entirely predictable attack by Democrats against any Republican.
 
The hearing is over. But hold a hearing for what? She has told her story. He has denied it. The other man she claimed present also denies it. There is no physical evidence. Therefore, there is NOTHING to be accomplished by another hearing as at 3 how have anything to say have already said it. Thus, there is no basis even to have a hearing as it all has already been heard. Members of the Senate only have to read the newspaper and they have 100% of all the evidence there is.

She says that for over 3 decades she forget that that 2 teenage boys tried to gang rape her - and then later also remembered she feared for her life.
Both of those men say it never happened.

Polygraphs are not admissible. Therefore, everyone in the Senate and all of us have the total evidence. She said it happened decades ago. The two men say it didn't. A polygraph operator her sexual harassment sue-em lawyer arranges claims she passed a polygraph test - the test not released. 2 of the 3 present stated it did not happen and over 60 women said that's not how he behaved. That's it. That's the sum total of evidence. No reason for a hearing when everything is already known.

This is just an after-the-hearing smear campaign and delaying tactic, nothing else.
 
Last edited:
christine-blasey-ford-family.jpg



"[FONT=&quot]The Washington Post reports that she is a “registered Democrat who has made small contributions to political organizations.” [/FONT]She also signed[FONT=&quot] a letter speaking out against Donald Trump’s family separation policy at the border.


She's a registered Democrat who has publicly attacked President Trump. What a surprise, huh?

[/FONT]https://heavy.com/news/2018/09/christine-blasey-ford-husband-russell-family/
 
Her lawyer specializes in suing men for sexual harassment. That's an entire new pocket industry and her lawyer will be get millions in free advertising out of this.

https://heavy.com/news/2018/09/debra-katz/
 
eohrnberger said:
Borking another fully qualified SCOTUS nominee, are we?
:roll:
Click to expand...

Funny you should mention Bork, Brett is the most disliked candidate for the Supreme court since Mr. Bork gained fame in the "word game". :2razz: The Republicans know it too and are trying to rush this all thru before we catch on to the ruse. He's a shill and a liar as well as a suspected abuser of women.
 
I'm not saying her story is false. Rather, that it is worthless. Delaying over 3 decades, then becoming politically involved against Trump and in the #MeToo movement, and then wanting to stay behind the scenes all the way thru the hearing - waiting until AFTER the hearing was over to come forward? No, it just can't be like that.

Imagine criminal trials that way. Both sides have presented all their evidence and made their closing arguments. Nearly all agree the jury will find the defendant not-guilty. For this, the prosecutor says "Wait, your honor, we have evidence we've had for months but the person didn't want to testify. NOW the person does, so we want you to restart the trial." The answer will always be NO. When the trial is over, its over. Prosecutors can not play that game. Nor is that how hearing worked. It was Feinstein's decision to NOT present this in the hearing, though she could have at any time.

When its over, its over.
 
joko104 said:
christine-blasey-ford-family.jpg



"[FONT=&quot]The Washington Post reports that she is a “registered Democrat who has made small contributions to political organizations.” [/FONT]She also signed[FONT=&quot] a letter speaking out against Donald Trump’s family separation policy at the border.


She's a registered Democrat who has publicly attacked President Trump. What a surprise, huh?

[/FONT]https://heavy.com/news/2018/09/christine-blasey-ford-husband-russell-family/
Click to expand...

So she made this all up because it makes her look so good and she wants this attention? Hardly likely. Most of America was against the separation of families, it means nothing.
 
iguanaman said:
Funny you should mention Bork, Brett is the most disliked candidate for the Supreme court since Mr. Bork gained fame in the "word game". :2razz: The Republicans know it too and are trying to rush this all thru before we catch on to the ruse. He's a shill and a liar as well as a suspected abuser of women.
Click to expand...

Boink may be more apprapo for the Kavinator.
 
iguanaman said:
Funny you should mention Bork, Brett is the most disliked candidate for the Supreme court since Mr. Bork gained fame in the "word game". :2razz: The Republicans know it too and are trying to rush this all thru before we catch on to the ruse. He's a shill and a liar as well as a suspected abuser of women.
Click to expand...

No he's not. When he was confirmed to the Court of Appeals, Democrats had filibustered to block 10 Republican nominees in a row.
 
joko104 said:
I'm not saying her story is false. Rather, that it is worthless. Delaying over 3 decades, then becoming politically involved against Trump and in the #MeToo movement, and then wanting to stay behind the scenes all the way thru the hearing - waiting until AFTER the hearing was over to come forward? No, it just can't be like that.

Imagine criminal trials that way. Both sides have presented all their evidence and made their closing arguments. Nearly all agree the jury will find the defendant not-guilty. For this, the prosecutor says "Wait, your honor, we have evidence we've had for months but the person didn't want to testify. NOW the person does, so we want you to restart the trial." The answer will always be NO. When the trial is over, its over. Prosecutors can not play that game. Nor is that how hearing worked. It was Feinstein's decision to NOT present this in the hearing, though she could have at any time.

When its over, its over.
Click to expand...

You just said you think she made it up... I doubt she would do that. What she claims he did is not an easy thing to forget either.
 
iguanaman said:
So she made this all up because it makes her look so good and she wants this attention? Hardly likely. Most of America was against the separation of families, it means nothing.
Click to expand...


Who knows what her motive is. You only have to read this forum and others to recognize that many Democrats make it clear they would say or do ANYTHING to block Trump and anything Trump does. It is a fact that women have lied in such accusations - and men have served years and decades in prison for it, released only because they were lucky enough that there was DNA evidence to prove the woman lied. They never recover the years and decades lost - nor any repercussions for lying.

Her lawyer will get millions in free advertising as suing men is her lawyer's specialty. She gets to see her name in print and becomes a celebrity - and the most famous never-Trumper in the USA for her 15 minutes of national fame. Millions of people are now cheering her as the champion of women's rights. She may well be telling herself she is doing all she can to try to save migrant children from the evil President Trump and his nominee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom