• 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

joko104 said:
The reviews tell of her being a control freak, manipulator and psychologically vicious and unstable person.
Click to expand...

Can you please present her arrest and conviction record?
 
minnie616 said:
I will wait for the testimony before I form an opinion or whether or not I think Ms Ford comes across as believable.
Click to expand...

Its not relevant. its nothing more than a smear
 
Barnacle said:
"Martha G. Kavanaugh, the mother of Brett Kavanaugh was a Maryland district judge in 1996. In an amazing coincidence, Martha Kavanaugh was the judge in a foreclosure case in which Christine Blasey-Ford’s parents were the defendants.

... Martha Kavanaugh, Brett’s mother was Montgomery County Circuit Court judge from 1993 until she retired in 2001. During a 1996 foreclosure case, Martha Kavanaugh ruled against the parents of Christine Blasey-Ford in a foreclosure case.

The foreclosure case against Paula K. Blasey and Ralph G. Blasey was opened on August 8, 1996. The case number is 156006V. ..."



https://archive.fo/69gvf#selection-511.0-523.1
Click to expand...

What's the chances of that! Wow. I'm sure that will come out in the questioning of Ford since it sounds like she is going to testify before the judiciary as will Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh released a statement this morning and he is not backing down. He emphatically denies the allegations.

Ford is being represented by Debra Katz, a liberal Democrat activist lawyer who has publicly touted that she is part of “the Resistance” to President Trump and his agenda. Ford is a registered Democrat and has donated to Sanders campaign and has a history of donating to leftist activist organizations linked to "the Resistance". Feinstein's delayed theatrics and the leaking of the letter to the WaPo amounts to a political drive by shooting by the Democrats.

Erick Erikson pointed out this morning that there are contradictions in the Post story and the statements made by Ford's attorney.
https://www.themaven.net/theresurge...ristine-ford-s-lawyer-AFLVa7hSNEKYwrAtuuMB1Q/
 
joko104 said:
Friends confide in each other. Telling family and law enforcement is another thing.

If this flies, the new reality is that any woman can destroy any man instantly merely by making any accusation - no evidence or proof required.

The long term effect will not be a good one. As for myself, I used to always stop if I saw a woman seemingly alone broke down. That changed about a year ago or so except for elderly. The risk is far too great. The position now is to arrest the man merely for the accusation - no proof required - and then if he is lucky $50,000 later in attorney fees and his reputation destroyed he MIGHT be found not guilty. But as we see on these threads, there is a growing number of people whose opinion is that women always tell the truth.

For those innocent men who have served years to decades in prison - lucky enough that DNA evidence later proved them innocent - and those innocent men not so lucky? No one gives a damn about them.

Where is the #MeToo for men falsely imprisoned and falsely accused by women when it becomes known she lied? NOTHING is ever done to such women. Accusations, even deliberately false accusations, have no consequence other than to minimally harm the man's reputation.
Click to expand...

Ooh I was not aware he was convicted?

He may be guilty or he may not be guilty, evidence will show that. And if someone passed a polygraph, well that is one more thing that makes her story believable.

And she may have confided in someone or written down something at that time about this. Maybe other women will come forward from that party, we will have to wait and see but the least that can be done is postpone the confirmation hearings and the progress of his nomination.
 
vesper said:
What's the chances of that! Wow. I'm sure that will come out in the questioning of Ford since it sounds like she is going to testify before the judiciary as will Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh released a statement this morning and he is not backing down. He emphatically denies the allegations.

Ford is being represented by Debra Katz, a liberal Democrat activist lawyer who has publicly touted that she is part of “the Resistance” to President Trump and his agenda. Ford is a registered Democrat and has donated to Sanders campaign and has a history of donating to leftist activist organizations linked to "the Resistance". Feinstein's delayed theatrics and the leaking of the letter to the WaPo amounts to a political drive by shooting by the Democrats.

Erick Erikson pointed out this morning that there are contradictions in the Post story and the statements made by Ford's attorney.
https://www.themaven.net/theresurge...ristine-ford-s-lawyer-AFLVa7hSNEKYwrAtuuMB1Q/
Click to expand...

I saw somewhere that Ms. Blasey scrubbed her twitter account.
I don't have a twitter account so I don't know, but how many people do you know ever find the need to scrub their twitter accounts?
 
bubbabgone said:
I saw somewhere that Ms. Blasey scrubbed her twitter account.
I don't have a twitter account so I don't know, but how many people do you know ever find the need to scrub their twitter accounts?
Click to expand...

I saw this too, and it screams set up.
Perhaps she's too stupid to realize that the internet is forever.
 
bubbabgone said:
I saw somewhere that Ms. Blasey scrubbed her twitter account.
I don't have a twitter account so I don't know, but how many people do you know ever find the need to scrub their twitter accounts?
Click to expand...

I didn't know anything about twitter but I did read that she had scrubbed her Facebook page. :)
 
bubbabgone said:
I saw somewhere that Ms. Blasey scrubbed her twitter account.
I don't have a twitter account so I don't know, but how many people do you know ever find the need to scrub their twitter accounts?
Click to expand...

Maybe she needed to make room for the death threats that likely are already coming from the right. I value my privacy enough that I have neither Twitter nor Facebook accounts.
 
minnie616 said:
I will wait for the testimony before I form an opinion or whether or not I think Ms Ford comes across as believable.
TurtleDude said:
Its not relevant. its nothing more than a smear
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Thank you for your open-mindedness.
 
JacksinPA said:
Maybe she needed to make room for the death threats that likely are already coming from the right. I value my privacy enough that I have neither Twitter nor Facebook accounts.
Click to expand...

Before her name was made public the accounts had long been scrubbed.
 
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/406940-flake-says-he-is-not-comfortable-voting-yes-on-kavanaugh

Flake says he is 'not comfortable voting yes' yet on Kavanaugh

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) on Sunday said he is "not comfortable voting yes" on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh until the Senate Judiciary Committee learns more about the sexual assault allegation against him.

"We need to hear from her," Flake told Politico hours after Kavanaugh's accuser identified herself publicly. "And I don't think I'm alone in this."


Flake told The Washington Post that he does not believe the Judiciary Committee should move ahead with its Thursday vote on Kavanaugh until the senators hear more from Christine Blasey Ford, the California psychology professor who went public with her accusation against Kavanaugh in a Post article published on Sunday.
====================================
Flake is leaving the Senate ar the end of his term so this is a great spot for him to be in politically.
 
gdgyva said:
And of course there is a police report on this...right?

She reported it to school authorities?

Other than her word, is there anything else?
Click to expand...

I doubt the police would have done much about it. I think this stuff is more common than most people would believe. Having known of such situations as a teen, we often told our girl friends, but did not go to the police. It's just not the way teens think, and also creates more trouble for the victim and drags the whole thing out, even publically. It's also not simple when it's just your word against his. Telling your girl friends and moving on, the the fastest way of putting it behind you.
 
vesper said:
What's the chances of that! Wow. I'm sure that will come out in the questioning of Ford since it sounds like she is going to testify before the judiciary as will Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh released a statement this morning and he is not backing down. He emphatically denies the allegations.

Ford is being represented by Debra Katz, a liberal Democrat activist lawyer who has publicly touted that she is part of “the Resistance” to President Trump and his agenda. Ford is a registered Democrat and has donated to Sanders campaign and has a history of donating to leftist activist organizations linked to "the Resistance". Feinstein's delayed theatrics and the leaking of the letter to the WaPo amounts to a political drive by shooting by the Democrats.

Erick Erikson pointed out this morning that there are contradictions in the Post story and the statements made by Ford's attorney.
https://www.themaven.net/theresurge...ristine-ford-s-lawyer-AFLVa7hSNEKYwrAtuuMB1Q/
Click to expand...


This not all ... somebody has an explanation why she went to couples therapy in 2012 - not any other year.

Below is a small excerpt from that guy's article, who, coincidentally, just had his twitter account blocked after connecting the dots.

The second link takes you to a 2012 article by The New Yorker that explains why the dems "feared" Kavenaugh ... in 2012. Pay attention to the last paragraph in The New Yorker article.


"... In 2012, Romney ran against Obama. Up until his 47% gaffe, Romney was doing well. He actually had a shot of winning.

For the Democrats, as has been the case since Bork, having a Republican in the White House, especially with the ever-aging but never retiring Ruth Bader Ginsburg a perpetual risk, raised the specter of a conservative judge getting appointed to the Supreme Court. With that in mind, one Twitter user, who must have an amazing memory, remembered something interesting he’d read back in 2012. ...

March 2012, the left was preparing for a possible Romney win. They assessed that Kavanaugh would be his Supreme Court pick and this accusation was ready to go. Then Obama won so the story died. Now its reemerged. Read last few lines of this 2012 article ..."

Is the accusation against Kavanaugh the culmination of a set-up from 2012? *UPDATED* - Bookworm Room


https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/03/26/holding-court
 
TurtleDude said:
Its not relevant. its nothing more than a smear
Click to expand...

Sexual assault is sexual assault and it is relevant. Concider yourself fortunate if you never had a close teenage relative who has been through a sexual assault and has had flashbacks years later.
 
Barnacle said:
"Martha G. Kavanaugh, the mother of Brett Kavanaugh was a Maryland district judge in 1996. In an amazing coincidence, Martha Kavanaugh was the judge in a foreclosure case in which Christine Blasey-Ford’s parents were the defendants.

... Martha Kavanaugh, Brett’s mother was Montgomery County Circuit Court judge from 1993 until she retired in 2001. During a 1996 foreclosure case, Martha Kavanaugh ruled against the parents of Christine Blasey-Ford in a foreclosure case.

The foreclosure case against Paula K. Blasey and Ralph G. Blasey was opened on August 8, 1996. The case number is 156006V. ..."



https://archive.fo/69gvf#selection-511.0-523.1
Click to expand...

The property is still owned by the family and in the families name.
 
Atheist 2020 said:
Interesting, but the foreclosure was going to happen regardless of the judge. I trust the woman and support the #metoo movement.
Click to expand...

Also the property is still owned by the family and in the families name.
 
minnie616 said:
Sexual assault is sexual assault and it is relevant. Concider yourself fortunate if you never had a close teenage relative who has been through a sexual assault and has had flashbacks years later.
Click to expand...

its bs-she's a tool of the TDS scum. If it was serious enough for her to call it "assault" she is a moron for not reporting it. I know damn well if a boy has that sort of nature

a) we'd have more reports subsequent to this alleged assault

b) and girls tell their friends-"watch out for this guy-he groped me"

for her to never tell anyone for years is just too hard to believe.
 
minnie616 said:
Sexual assault is sexual assault and it is relevant. Concider yourself fortunate if you never had a close teenage relative who has been through a sexual assault and has had flashbacks years later.
Click to expand...

And apparently there is no statute of limitations for felony sexual assault charges in the state of Maryland.

Kavanagh was a student at Georgetown preparatory school at the time of the “sexual misconduct” he is accused of.
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profil...-brett-kavanaugh-face-criminal-charges-maybe/
 
Buzz62 said:
What complete horse kaka.
A. After 30 years this woman all of the sudden feels she needs to do the #MeToo thing? Man is there no level too low for the Democrats?
B. Taking therapy? For a grope at a high school pool party? Either she's an incredibly unstable person, or...she's ****in' lying. I'm siding with the later.
C. There is absolutely no proof. This is all just another #MeToo moment, brought to you by the butt-hurt Earth-crawlers at the DNC.
Click to expand...

Well I’m sure something happened to her that she referenced at therapy, but that doesn’t mean she also realized it was just close enough to Kavanaugh to adapt it to stop a nomination.

She doesn’t know how she got to this party that she doesn’t know the location of, but clearly remembers only one beer and the identies of the two (or four depending upon the chosen adaptation) attackers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Peter King said:
You mean in the eighties when women who got into positions like that were treated and insulted as being total whores and men would be found completely innocent because women are not to be believed?

Like Anita Hill came forward and was not believed, the man she accused still got his nomination validated.

You think in that period women would come forward to friends and family? I seriously doubt it.
Click to expand...

No, women were not regarded as whores for making rape complaints. That is a myth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
JacksinPA said:
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/...-about-sexual-misconduct-allegations-detailed

The woman who has accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct has identified herself and is speaking publicly about her allegations against Kavanaugh for the first time, according to a Washington Post investigation published Sunday.

Christine Blasey Ford, now a 51-year-old professor at Palo Alto University in California, described an incident between the two in high school, alleging that Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed one summer in the 1980s and forced himself on her.

Ford told the Post that Kavanaugh "groped her over her clothes, grinding his body against hers and clumsily attempting to pull off her one-piece bathing suit and the clothing she wore over it."

She also said Kavanaugh put his hand over her mouth when she attempted to scream for help.
================================================
This SCOTUS nominee is a real class act. A drunken attempted rapist. What a man!

She should be given the chance to testify before the nomination vote.
Click to expand...

Conservatives are all about values and morals. They nominated and appointed Clarence Thomas, despite Anita Hill's forceful and credible testimony. Not sure what would keep them from getting this upright family values guy into the SCOTUS as well. They really know how to pick "the best people", don't they? :lamo
 
JacksinPA said:
Maybe she needed to make room for the death threats that likely are already coming from the right. I value my privacy enough that I have neither Twitter nor Facebook accounts.
Click to expand...

I have a Facebook account to look at the pictures of my relatives family.
I seldom post anything on the account. Maybe a post or share a post once a month.
I use the privacy settings and keep my friends list to under 30 mostly close relatives and just a couple of close friends.

I don’t have a twitter account nor do I follow any twitter accounts.

I know data companies are recording everything posted on this board and on all social media in the US.

So even scrubbing will not erase what you said , it only prevents the average person from looking up non cashed posts.
 
Barnacle said:
This not all ... somebody has an explanation why she went to couples therapy in 2012 - not any other year.

Below is a small excerpt from that guy's article, who, coincidentally, just had his twitter account blocked after connecting the dots.

The second link takes you to a 2012 article by The New Yorker that explains why the dems "feared" Kavenaugh ... in 2012. Pay attention to the last paragraph in The New Yorker article.


"... In 2012, Romney ran against Obama. Up until his 47% gaffe, Romney was doing well. He actually had a shot of winning.

For the Democrats, as has been the case since Bork, having a Republican in the White House, especially with the ever-aging but never retiring Ruth Bader Ginsburg a perpetual risk, raised the specter of a conservative judge getting appointed to the Supreme Court. With that in mind, one Twitter user, who must have an amazing memory, remembered something interesting he’d read back in 2012. ...

March 2012, the left was preparing for a possible Romney win. They assessed that Kavanaugh would be his Supreme Court pick and this accusation was ready to go. Then Obama won so the story died. Now its reemerged. Read last few lines of this 2012 article ..."

Is the accusation against Kavanaugh the culmination of a set-up from 2012? *UPDATED* - Bookworm Room


https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/03/26/holding-court
Click to expand...

Eriick Erickson touched on the significance of 2012 but that was a good link Barnacle. Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom