Kavanaugh’s frat had a rape basement

TacoMac

TacoMac

Well-Known Member
SSHZ said:
The woman prosecutor who questioned Ford yesterday said, in a meeting late night meeting with 51 senators last night, that as a seasoned "sex-crime" prosecutor, she believed there would not be enough evidence to ever bring a case as it's a he said, she said case from 35 years ago.
Click to expand...
And yet she, like they, are scared shitless of having the FBI investigate it.

Hmmmmmm...I wonder why...
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
BarryBwana said:
Not according to Ford. Funny how people, in their rush to attack Kavanaugh, just don't even care at all that a survivor of sexual assault was completely exploited to be used as a political weapon.

Let's go over some key facts from the testimony of Dr. Ford herself. I don't know about any of you, but I cared enough to actually watch the whole thing and I am outraged at how she has been treated.

1) She explicitly stated that she never authorized the release of that letter publicly. Twice. First was a kind of vague "I don't think anyone authorized for me" referring to her counsels might have, but the second time was an explicit no she did not give permission to release that letter publicly.... the letter where she literally pleaded for confidentiality.

2) Even after this blew up the Senate offered to do hearings in California and privately. Dr. Ford states she would have preferred this. Dr. Ford also states she was never advised this was an option. Why did her counsel not tell her of this option to their client who they claim was afraid of flying and whom we all know wanted and deserved privacy through this horrid affair?

3) Dr. Ford stated that her counsel was recommended by Senator Feinstein. The same counsel who did not advise her of options she would have preferred. The same Senator Fienstein who publicly broadcasted Dr. Ford's confidential letter without permission. Hmmm.

4) Dr. Ford never once mentioned she was ever consulted on the release of that letter or a time line for its release. Again, she specifically stated she did not authorize its public release. If fogdog maintains it was the appropriate time to release the letter, will he admit that it was appropriate for the objectives of the DNC Senator who did so and not for the sexual assault survivor whose wishes it went against?

5) Not part of Ford's testimony but in that days hearing it was asked of the Chairman if there was a process where people like Dr. Ford could come forward with her information in a confidential matter who her and and her families life's didn't get totally destroyed in the process. The answer was a clear yes, and it's likely a fairly common process for a body that regularly deals with confidential materials. But Ford was never afforded that opportunity by the Democratic senators she confided in even though it was what the sexual assault survivor wanted and even though it was what even a fool would know was best for her and her family. But it wouldn't have made national headlines that are great for the DNC right before the midterms and they felt it might not scuttle the nomination unless it was public. That made it worth destroying the life of a sexual assault victim and her family who literally are in hiding with security, and the people who made it public knew full well this would be the result. It's not right, but it was predictable as the sun rising in the morning and they did it anyways.

6) Dr. Ford testified she came forward to the media days after the unauthorized release of her letter because they were already stalking her. She stated she sent the letter in the first place because she didn't want to go the media route. Sorry Dr. Ford, in 2018 after the #MeToo movement, victims of sexual assault don't get to control their deeply emotional and traumatic stories when they can be used for political gain by the party who respects women and believes all survivors.

Brett Kavanaugh may very well have created a sexual assault victim 36 years ago but with no evidence and witnesses saying it didn't happen, we will truly never know beyond a reasonable doubt.

What we know beyond a reasonable doubt is that prominent members of the Senate of the Democratic Party ruthlessly and knowingly exploited a survivor of sexual assault against their explicit wishes the minute it became politically expedient to do so..... and then they have the audacity to talk about respecting women and survivors. It's sickening. Brett Kavanaugh might fail his job interview, but others in this process have shown they are not fit for their offices but American politics are so sick right now that they'll likely be applauded instead.

Here's the thing, this isn't an if or but situation. Nothing Kavanaugh did over 3 decades ago justifies the disgraceful way Dr. Ford has been exploited over the past few months. These are separate issues and if you find you can't condemn the exploitation of a sexual assault victim because it suited your politics, you need a long hard look in the mirror. You literally do not even get a millimetre of moral high ground to stand on anymore because you're wallowing in a cesspool of putrid false morality.

Almost all acts of evil in politics isn't people who think they are doing the right thing, or that their purpose is so morally just that they can justifiably engage in immoral/evil acts to bring it about.

I'd say exploiting victims of sexual assault for political gain falls into that category. I'm curious to see who will agree with me even though it suited their politics.
Click to expand...
Are you crying?
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
SSHZ said:
The woman prosecutor who questioned Ford yesterday said, in a meeting late night meeting with 51 senators last night, that as a seasoned "sex-crime" prosecutor, she believed there would not be enough evidence to ever bring a case as it's a he said, she said case from 35 years ago. She has no corroborating evidence other than comments she made to her husband in 2002 and other comments to friends in 2010-2016. It's also been brought to light that Ford has a history of mental illness and also had numerous work issues in various teaching positions. Add in she worked for the HILLARY campaign and has been a life long Democrat, she's loony, unstable and her version of the facts are not to be believed.
Click to expand...
I’m gonna rape your momma
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
SSHZ said:
The woman prosecutor who questioned Ford yesterday said, in a meeting late night meeting with 51 senators last night, that as a seasoned "sex-crime" prosecutor, she believed there would not be enough evidence to ever bring a case as it's a he said, she said case from 35 years ago. She has no corroborating evidence other than comments she made to her husband in 2002 and other comments to friends in 2010-2016. It's also been brought to light that Ford has a history of mental illness and also had numerous work issues in various teaching positions. Add in she worked for the HILLARY campaign and has been a life long Democrat, she's loony, unstable and her version of the facts are not to be believed.
Click to expand...
Ford answered every question.

Kavanaugh argued with every Democrat.

Ford was telling the truth. Kavanaugh was just trying to seed doubt. The differences between Democrats and Republicans could not be more distinctly drawn than it was in yesterday's hearing.
 
somebodyhearted

somebodyhearted

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
My daughter said her second word,

"ya sad little incel"
Click to expand...
thats four words bucky, congrats are in order though! she is human, she can speak, she likely is not yours

with a frat house rape room shouldnt be too tough to line up all the victims now....and all their college predators. 20 bucks to anyone providing names of all residents during this Kav period
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
BarryBwana said:
Not according to Ford. Funny how people, in their rush to attack Kavanaugh, just don't even care at all that a survivor of sexual assault was completely exploited to be used as a political weapon.

Let's go over some key facts from the testimony of Dr. Ford herself. I don't know about any of you, but I cared enough to actually watch the whole thing and I am outraged at how she has been treated.

1) She explicitly stated that she never authorized the release of that letter publicly. Twice. First was a kind of vague "I don't think anyone authorized for me" referring to her counsels might have, but the second time was an explicit no she did not give permission to release that letter publicly.... the letter where she literally pleaded for confidentiality.

2) Even after this blew up the Senate offered to do hearings in California and privately. Dr. Ford states she would have preferred this. Dr. Ford also states she was never advised this was an option. Why did her counsel not tell her of this option to their client who they claim was afraid of flying and whom we all know wanted and deserved privacy through this horrid affair?

3) Dr. Ford stated that her counsel was recommended by Senator Feinstein. The same counsel who did not advise her of options she would have preferred. The same Senator Fienstein who publicly broadcasted Dr. Ford's confidential letter without permission. Hmmm.

4) Dr. Ford never once mentioned she was ever consulted on the release of that letter or a time line for its release. Again, she specifically stated she did not authorize its public release. If fogdog maintains it was the appropriate time to release the letter, will he admit that it was appropriate for the objectives of the DNC Senator who did so and not for the sexual assault survivor whose wishes it went against?

5) Not part of Ford's testimony but in that days hearing it was asked of the Chairman if there was a process where people like Dr. Ford could come forward with her information in a confidential matter who her and and her families life's didn't get totally destroyed in the process. The answer was a clear yes, and it's likely a fairly common process for a body that regularly deals with confidential materials. But Ford was never afforded that opportunity by the Democratic senators she confided in even though it was what the sexual assault survivor wanted and even though it was what even a fool would know was best for her and her family. But it wouldn't have made national headlines that are great for the DNC right before the midterms and they felt it might not scuttle the nomination unless it was public. That made it worth destroying the life of a sexual assault victim and her family who literally are in hiding with security, and the people who made it public knew full well this would be the result. It's not right, but it was predictable as the sun rising in the morning and they did it anyways.

6) Dr. Ford testified she came forward to the media days after the unauthorized release of her letter because they were already stalking her. She stated she sent the letter in the first place because she didn't want to go the media route. Sorry Dr. Ford, in 2018 after the #MeToo movement, victims of sexual assault don't get to control their deeply emotional and traumatic stories when they can be used for political gain by the party who respects women and believes all survivors.

Brett Kavanaugh may very well have created a sexual assault victim 36 years ago but with no evidence and witnesses saying it didn't happen, we will truly never know beyond a reasonable doubt.

What we know beyond a reasonable doubt is that prominent members of the Senate of the Democratic Party ruthlessly and knowingly exploited a survivor of sexual assault against their explicit wishes the minute it became politically expedient to do so..... and then they have the audacity to talk about respecting women and survivors. It's sickening. Brett Kavanaugh might fail his job interview, but others in this process have shown they are not fit for their offices but American politics are so sick right now that they'll likely be applauded instead.

Here's the thing, this isn't an if or but situation. Nothing Kavanaugh did over 3 decades ago justifies the disgraceful way Dr. Ford has been exploited over the past few months. These are separate issues and if you find you can't condemn the exploitation of a sexual assault victim because it suited your politics, you need a long hard look in the mirror. You literally do not even get a millimetre of moral high ground to stand on anymore because you're wallowing in a cesspool of putrid false morality.

Almost all acts of evil in politics isn't people who think they are doing the right thing, or that their purpose is so morally just that they can justifiably engage in immoral/evil acts to bring it about.

I'd say exploiting victims of sexual assault for political gain falls into that category. I'm curious to see who will agree with me even though it suited their politics.
Click to expand...
the wolf's out of the bag? if it didn't happen we'd have a serial rapist drunk on SCOTUS.
 
TacoMac

TacoMac

Well-Known Member
somebodyhearted said:
thats four words bucky,
Click to expand...
Let's review what he said:

UncleBuck said:
My daughter said her second word, ya sad little incel
Click to expand...
Now, since you're a 5th grade dropout, let me explain what he said. He said that his daughter has said her second word and that you are a sad little incel.

If he had meant that the 4 words were what his daughter had said, he would have typed it in quotations:

My daugther said her second word, "you sad little incel".

Now, the quotation marks are these little things " ". What is typed inside of those is what someone has actually said.

I hope that sorts it out for you, you poor, sad, uneducated little man. Don't worry too badly about how stupid you feel. It's typical of people like you and there are quite a few of you out there, so you're not alone.
 
Last edited:
somebodyhearted

somebodyhearted

Well-Known Member
TacoMac said:
Let's review what he said:



Now, since you're a 5th grade dropout, let me explain what he said. He said that his daughter has said her second word and that you are a sad little incel.

If he had meant that the 4 words were what his daughter had said, he would have typed it in quotations:

My daugther said her second word, "you said little incel".

Now, the quotation marks are these little things " ". What is typed inside of those is what someone has actually said.

I hope that sorts it out for you, you poor, sad, uneducated little man. Don't worry too badly about how stupid you feel. It's typical of people like you and there are quite a few of you out there, so you're not alone.
Click to expand...
i am sorry about your penis really I am. Its obvious to only the adept, my post was a simple humorous jab at a semi perplexing statement. I hope you feel like a really smart fella there
 
TacoMac

TacoMac

Well-Known Member
somebodyhearted said:
i am sorry about your penis really I am.
Click to expand...
First off, dropout, the first word of every sentence should be capitalized and "I" being a proper noun is always capitalized.

Secondly, constantly talking about other men's penises doesn't really show you in a good light. Might want to rethink having other guys dicks on your mind all the time.
 
somebodyhearted

somebodyhearted

Well-Known Member
TacoMac said:
First off, dropout, the first word of every sentence should be capitalized and "I" being a proper noun is always capitalized.

Secondly, constantly talking about other men's penises doesn't really show you in a good light. Might want to rethink having other guys dicks on your mind all the time.
Click to expand...
are you here to show your grammatical skills? like name calling right out of the gate? thats pretty slick man, you a smarty I just can tell. please though, continue name calling I am amused at your sophomoric attempts to flex your masculinity here, priceless.
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
'drank heavily' -former yale classmate Liz Swisher





As Kavanaugh's testimony was winding down Thursday, Sen. Kamala Harris, a California Democrat, asked Kavanaugh whether he had taken a polygraph examination after being accused of sexual misconduct.

Kavanaugh said he'd be willing to do whatever the Judiciary Committee wanted, but added that polygraphs can't be used in federal court because "they're not reliable."

But the judge wrote in 2016 that polygraph tests were an "important law enforcement tool."


above is the face of a nasty alcoholic..
 
Last edited:
TacoMac

TacoMac

Well-Known Member
somebodyhearted said:
are you here to show your grammatical skills?
Click to expand...
One thing is certain: you aren't.

You're a sock puppet that came in to insult people. The funny part is you type with the same horrible grammar on this account that you do all your others. No matter who you pretend to be, you're still an uneducated idiot.

Don't want to look stupid? Do it only once. This is about your 12th account that I know of and you look like the same complete idiot on all of them.

I would have thought you would have grown tired of having that pointed out by now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top