How important is what we did in high school? Kavanaugh accusation

[anatess2]

I love how this old Mormon learned to troll-post with the best of the Gen-Z’s.

 And speaking of Gen-Z’s, seems like 4chan struck again - Avenatti just hid his Twitter... 4chan anons claim they punk’d him with a story about Kavanaugh and Judge running a sex train.  Avenatti vehemently denies it  - big mistake.  That’s 4chan for you - very good at 4D chess.  Doesn’t matter if their claim was true or fake, they got Avenatti.  Avenatti accusing 4chan of false allegations give 4chan a narrative on making Avenatti in the same boat as Kavanaugh.  But that’s just the pawn move.  The kicker is that now, Avenatti will have to prove these women exist otherwise 4chan’s punk’d claim remains credible.  Avenatti has not learned from Shia - when 4chan calls your card, the only viable response is... nothing.

 

Edited September 26, 2018 by anatess2

[Guest Godless]

5 hours ago, anatess2 said:

I love how this old Mormon learned to troll-post with the best of the Gen-Z’s.

 And speaking of Gen-Z’s, seems like 4chan struck again - Avenatti just hid his Twitter... 4chan anons claim they punk’d him with a story about Kavanaugh and Judge running a sex train.  Avenatti vehemently denies it  - big mistake.  That’s 4chan for you - very good at 4D chess.  Doesn’t matter if their claim was true or fake, they got Avenatti.  Avenatti accusing 4chan of false allegations give 4chan a narrative on making Avenatti in the same boat as Kavanaugh.  But that’s just the pawn move.  The kicker is that now, Avenatti will have to prove these women exist otherwise 4chan’s punk’d claim remains credible.  Avenatti has not learned from Shia - when 4chan calls your card, the only viable response is... nothing.

 

4chan is literally the worst. And what happened to Cruz and his family was despicable. 

 

[Just_A_Guy]

9 hours ago, LiterateParakeet said:

. . . but I also thought you might find it mindly interesting that a Latter Day Saint Women's group was mentioned in the NYT.  That doesn't happen every day.   

It surely doesn’t—unless the group falls on the right side of the political spectrum.  I don’t recall their covering Mormon Women Stand in very much depth, for example; even though their following dwarfed the much-ballyhooed Ordain Women movement nearly tenfold.   

Edited September 26, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

It surely doesn’t—unless the group falls on the right side of the political spectrum.  I don’t recall their covering Mormon Women Stand in very much depth, for example; even though their following dwarfed the much-ballyhooed Ordain Women movement nearly tenfold.   

I find it despicable that they're using "Mormonism" to further their political agenda.

How's about we start a group called Mormon Men for the Right To Bear Arms. Mormon Men for Trump. Mormon Men for Right-Winged Whatever.

Appropriate?

Me thinks not.

What the group should be called is: Women for Advancing Unsubstantiated, Un-researched Views that Fit our Leftist Narrative Who Happen To Be Mormon And Are Injecting That To Imply Legitimacy With Other Mormons.

[anatess2]

2 hours ago, Godless said:

4chan is literally the worst. And what happened to Cruz and his family was despicable. 

 

 

Ahhh... the infamous Beto, the latest of the Democrats' poster boy with Democrats and media silent about his drunk-driving hit-and-run police report.  Just another glaring juxtaposition of how the Kavanaugh case is a political hit piece.

[Vort]

54 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I find it despicable that they're using "Mormonism" to further their political agenda.

How's about we start a group called Mormon Men for the Right To Bear Arms. Mormon Men for Trump. Mormon Men for Right-Winged Whatever.

Appropriate?

Me thinks not.

What the group should be called is: Women for Advancing Unsubstantiated, Un-researched Views that Fit our Leftist Narrative Who Happen To Be Mormon And Are Injecting That To Imply Legitimacy With Other Mormons.

Behold The Point.

I bet @LiterateParakeet would not be nearly so keen on a group called Mormon Men for Universal Handgun Ownership or Mormons for Welfare Handouts Reform as she is on the group with which she proudly proclaims membership. She might even consider it an abuse of the term "Mormon" and resent that this group would use a religious label to push an agenda that she disagrees with and perhaps even finds harmful.

But none of that counts if you "skew Left". In that case, all bets are off, and you had better use kid gloves when handling.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

2 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

It surely doesn’t—unless the group falls on the right side of the political spectrum.  I don’t recall their covering Mormon Women Stand in very much depth, for example; even though their following dwarfed the much-ballyhooed Ordain Women movement nearly tenfold.   

I understand your point of view.  Just to be clear, I want NOTHING to do with Ordain Women.  If I thought there were any connection between them and a group I belong to I would leave the group.  I also support and follow Latter Day Women Stand...they changed their name, try to keep up JAG (just teasing.)

[Guest Godless]

58 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

 

Ahhh... the infamous Beto, the latest of the Democrats' poster boy with Democrats and media silent about his drunk-driving hit-and-run police report.  Just another glaring juxtaposition of how the Kavanaugh case is a political hit piece.

The media hasn't given it much attention, but he's been very forthright about it every time it's come up, along with his dropped B&E charge from UTEP.

[Just_A_Guy]

This newest Kavanaugh accuser’s affidavit is pretty nasty.  Will be interesting to see whether the story checks out.  

[NeuroTypical]

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

How's about we start a group called Mormon Men for the Right To Bear Arms. 

Dude, first you didn't know that SOLO was full of alternately-sexual characters, now you don't know that this group hasn't existed since like the early '90's?  You really do need to get out more.

[Just ribbing you, but no really, you want the link?]

 

[carlimac]

13 hours ago, LiterateParakeet said:

LOL, I love it JAG.  @carlimac he's right.  I skew Left as well.  I knew that most here would disagree, but I also thought you might find it mindly interesting that a Latter Day Saint Women's group was mentioned in the NYT.  That doesn't happen every day.   

No it doesn't and this is what makes me feel uncomfortable. It seems disingenuous of the NYT to mention it. Seems they are using this group to push their own script of what is going on. "See? See? If 'Mormons' say this, Kavanaugh must be guilty!"  The group is being exploited and they don't seem to realize it. Or maybe they don't care. Perhaps this is what they want and aspire to?

 

Edited September 26, 2018 by carlimac

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

Dude, first you didn't know that SOLO was full of alternately-sexual characters, now you don't know that this group hasn't existed since like the early '90's?  You really do need to get out more.

[Just ribbing you, but no really, you want the link?]

 

Actually I assumed such a group existed.

[Vort]

17 minutes ago, carlimac said:

The group is being exploited and they don't seem to realize it. Or maybe they don't care. Perhaps this is what they want and aspire to?

Oh, they realize it. Count on it. Your last sentence is probably closest to the truth of the matter.

[anatess2]

2 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

This newest Kavanaugh accuser’s affidavit is pretty nasty.  Will be interesting to see whether the story checks out.  

The claimed 4chan prank gets a face!  Whatcha gonna do now, anons, huh?

Anyway, yeah, this is getting stupider and stupider and getting farther and farther from Kavanaugh.  Rush Limbaugh sums it up eloquently. 

[The Folk Prophet]

Just now, Vort said:

Oh, they realize it. Count on it. Your last sentence is probably closest to the truth of the matter.

Exactly. It's straight up manipulation. Virtue signaling with "Mormonism".

[carlimac]

 

2 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

This newest Kavanaugh accuser’s affidavit is pretty nasty.  Will be interesting to see whether the story checks out.  

But from what I can tell she's not actually accusing him of anything- just his buddies. She can't confirm that he was involved at all. Nothingburger!

[Just_A_Guy]

7 minutes ago, carlimac said:

But from what I can tell she's not actually accusing him of anything- just his buddies. She can't confirm that he was involved at all. Nothingburger!

I read the affidavit.  She says he was involved in “rape trains” of other girls, and that she herself was the victim of one of them at a party where Kavanaugh and Judge were present.  

Ugly stuff.  Though it does beg the question of why she kept going to such parties—and ultimately was herself victimized at one of them—when she knew all along that Kavanaugh and his cronies were routinely spiking the punch and taking full advantage of the incapacitated imbibers.

Edited September 26, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[anatess2]

26 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I read the affidavit.  She says he was involved in “rape trains” of other girls, and that she herself was the victim of one of them at a party where Kavanaugh and Judge were present.  

Ugly stuff.  Though it does beg the question of why she kept going to such parties—and ultimately was herself victimized at one of them—when she knew all along that Kavanaugh and his cronies were routinely spiking the punch and taking full advantage of the incapacitated imbibers.

Another convenient story - give enough detail to smear character but not enough to actually get hit by a defamation counter... "but I did't say Kavanaugh raped women!".

Interestingly, sex trains (like peeing beds) is a 4chan meme.  Coincidence?  Perhaps.

Edited September 26, 2018 by anatess2

[anatess2]

September 24, 2018
The Honorable Charles Grassley
Chairman
Committee on the Judiciary
United States Senate
135 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

The Honorable Dianne Feinstein
Ranking Member
Committee on the Judiciary
United States Senate
331 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

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 
36year-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

 

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

2 hours ago, carlimac said:

No it doesn't and this is what makes me feel uncomfortable. It seems disingenuous of the NYT to mention it. Seems they are using this group to push their own script of what is going on. "See? See? If 'Mormons' say this, Kavanaugh must be guilty!"  The group is being exploited and they don't seem to realize it. Or maybe they don't care. Perhaps this is what they want and aspire to?

 

Whatever the motivation of the NYT is I cannot say.  I am closer to understanding the motivation of Mormon Women for Ethical Government's motivation or at least why I agreed with their statement. They did not say Kavanaugh is guilty, thwy simply said we need to investigate this claim beforw appoint him to the Supreme Court. And they called out the Latter Saint political leaders to help.  

[anatess2]

13 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

Whatever the motivation of the NYT is I cannot say.  I am closer to understanding the motivation of Mormon Women for Ethical Government's motivation or at least why I agreed with their statement. They did not say Kavanaugh is guilty, thwy simply said we need to investigate this claim beforw appoint him to the Supreme Court. And they called out the Latter Saint political leaders to help.  

You do know that Ford was given 8 opportunities to be heard by the committee right?  And that she declined every single one of them?  How do you investigate a claim in a location that is not known, at a time that is not known, with people present who the accuser can't recall except for 4 people who deny it happening under oath and another 4 people claiming they know because the accuser told them and the accuser refusing to testify under oath and relying instead on a letter that the committee can only see a redacted copy of?  You really think this should cause the majority to delay a SCOTUS appointment past mid-term elections?

Edited September 26, 2018 by anatess2

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

3 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

You do know that Ford was given 8 opportunities to be heard by the committee right?  And that she declined every single one of them?  How do you investigate a claim in a location that is not known, at a time that is not known, with people present who the accuser can't recall except for 4 people who deny it happening under oath and another 4 people claiming they know because the accuser told them and the accuser refusing to testify under oath and relying instead on a letter that the committee can only see a redacted copy of?  You really think this should cause the majority to delay a SCOTUS appointment past mid-term elections?

I don't know what you mean.  She accepted this request.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/21/politics/kavanaugh-ford-senate-judiciary-hearing/index.html

Especially now that a second woman has accused him, I really think we need to investigate further before giving him an appointment to the highest court in the land.  IF he did it, there are people far more qualified for that position.  For me the mid-term elections don't factor into this at all.  If he is innocent, then he needs that to be proven as much as possible before he takes that position as well.  
 

[Just_A_Guy]

3 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

I don't know what you mean.  She accepted this request.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/21/politics/kavanaugh-ford-senate-judiciary-hearing/index.html

Especially now that a second woman has accused him, I really think we need to investigate further before giving him an appointment to the highest court in the land.  IF he did it, there are people far more qualified for that position.  For me the mid-term elections don't factor into this at all.  If he is innocent, then he needs that to be proven as much as possible before he takes that position as well.  
 

Accusers 1 and 2 don’t bother me much—I’m willing to hear what they have to say, but at this point I don’t think their stories need much more investigation unless they bring up something novel in their sworn testimonies.

Accuser 3, though . . . Sworn statement, from someone with former “secret” security clearance?  Sounds much more impressive, on the face of it . . . We’ll see.

[anatess2]

Just now, LiterateParakeet said:

I don't know what you mean.  She accepted this request.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/21/politics/kavanaugh-ford-senate-judiciary-hearing/index.html

Especially now that a second woman has accused him, I really think we need to investigate further before giving him an appointment to the highest court in the land.  IF he did it, there are people far more qualified for that position.  For me the mid-term elections don't factor into this at all.  If he is innocent, then he needs that to be proven as much as possible before he takes that position as well.  
 

You missed my post from yesterday.  Her lawyers accepted that NINTH offer after Grassley said "you have until 2:30PM to accept the invitation to testify on Thursday".  They accepted at 2:35PM.  Diane Feinstein then released a statement last Monday that - "because of the new allegations that came up over the weekend, the Thursday hearing should be postponed".  Grassley, of course, ignored it.  The 8th offer was rejected by Ford because she said she is scared of flying and will have to take the time to drive from California to DC.  She also demanded that she will not talk to anybody else besides committee members, and would not accept questions from lawyers and that Kavanaugh has to be interviewed first.  Grassley offered to fly the committee to California in the 9th offer if necessary.  So, you think she'll show up tomorrow?  We'll see.  They're trying to set up the scene where they can portray the hearing as all these old white men bullying a poor sexually assaulted woman.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Just now, Just_A_Guy said:

Accusers 1 and 2 don’t bother me much—I’m willing to hear what they have to say, but at this point I don’t think their stories need much more investigation unless they bring up something novel in their sworn testimonies.

Accuser 3, though . . . Sworn statement, from someone with former “secret” security clearance?  Sounds much more impressive, on the face of it . . . We’ll see.

I guess I haven't been following this closely enough, I didn't realize a third accuser had come forward.  I'm off to google...  Thanks.