Kavanaugh hearing

[Brian Peacock]

What circuit court judge? The recovering alcoholic who can’t remember dozens of women he assaulted? Hypocrite.

Will answer you this once, and once only:
The circuit court judge: Brett Kavanaugh.
Dozens of women he assaulted? No: the dozens of children that Julie Swetnick confessed to raping and/or aided in being raped.

The above two points are facts. The rest of your insinuations are your fantasies. Keep believing fantasies. I KNOW you will

You've really got to substantiate this charge with more than YouTube conspiracy rants and unsourced bollocks from Russian troll-farms. And as I said to you a few days ago, rather than swallowing this arse gravy wholesale you should be applying that super-human intellect of yours to the claims of Mr Kavanaugh as well. I've never had you down as a crackpot right-wing ideologue who reflexively leaps to the defence of anyone - so what's changed? BTW Jim runs a course in critical thinking which you might find useful - and I happen to know he has a few spare places, and his rates are very reasonable. Very reasonable (in both senses of the word).

[Forty Two]

Seabass - Look at what pervin wrote - and then look at what Brian wrote - that's what I'm responding to.

What are they talking about? Beers. A bit of bar room brawling. Did they refer to anything else? No.

There certainly are other issues besides his drinking - but pervin here and Brian both sarcastically referred to the bar room brawl and drinking allegations. Pervin sarcastically referred to as "normal" - meaning he's really suggesting it isn't normal.

I didn't say anything about drinking. Don't misrepresent what I said for your dodgy rhetorical purposes.

God alfuckingmighty. I said you referred to the fucking bar room brawling, and Brian referred to the drinking. The bar room brawl incident involved drinking, too, by the way. I was very clear, and quoted you both. Fuck the fuck off.

[Rum]

I thought you knew. Jim is in the pay of you know who. He can't be trusted.

[Animavore]

Good point.

[Forty Two]

Hate speech laws have been in effect for decades. Where have they been used to silence political opponents? If they haven't been used so far, what would make you think they all of a sudden would be?

MANY AMERICANS WHO long for Europe’s hate speech restrictions assume that those laws are used to outlaw and punish expression of the bigoted ideas they most hate: racism, homophobia, Islamophobia, misogyny. Often, such laws are used that way. There are numerous cases in western Europe and Canada of far-right extremists being arrested, fined, or even jailed for publicly spouting that type of overt bigotry.

But hate speech restrictions are used in those countries to suppress, outlaw, and punish more than far-right bigotry. Those laws have frequently been used to constrain and sanction a wide range of political views that many left-wing censorship advocates would never dream could be deemed “hateful,” and even against opinions which many of them likely share.

France is probably the most extreme case of hate speech laws being abused in this manner. In 2015, France’s highest court upheld the criminal conviction of 12 pro-Palestinian activists for violating restrictions against hate speech. Their crime? Wearing T-shirts that advocated a boycott of Israel — “Long live Palestine, boycott Israel,” the shirts read — which, the court ruled, violated French law that “prescribes imprisonment or a fine of up to $50,000 for parties that ‘provoke discrimination, hatred or violence toward a person or group of people on grounds of their origin, their belonging or their not belonging to an ethnic group, a nation, a race or a certain religion.'”

https://theintercept.com/2017/08/29/in- ... iewpoints/

While I, personally, am generally a supporter of Israel's right to exist and to defend itself, I think it is an abomination for there to be a law restricting persons from provoking discrimination, hatred or violence toward a peron or group on the ground of their origin, etc. - as it necessarily will include allegations that boycotting Israel, or Palestine, or saying white power, or black power, is doing just that. We need a world where Louis Farrakhan is allowed to spew his hate, not because he gets a special right to talk shit to power because he's a member of a disfavored group, but because each "individual" has the same right to speak as everyone else.

[Joe]

Funny thing about that bar room brawl. It corroborates the accounts of people who said Kavanaugh misrepresented his drinking in his Senate testimony, and rather than just being a memory, there's a police report that documents that an altercation took place and Kavanaugh was involved.

That's probably not enough for most GOP Senators, but might influence some of the waverers. Who knows?

[Galaxian]

What circuit court judge? The recovering alcoholic who can’t remember dozens of women he assaulted? Hypocrite.

Will answer you this once, and once only:
The circuit court judge: Brett Kavanaugh.
Dozens of women he assaulted? No: the dozens of children that Julie Swetnick confessed to raping and/or aided in being raped.

The above two points are facts. The rest of your insinuations are your fantasies. Keep believing fantasies. I KNOW you will

You've really got to substantiate this charge with more than YouTube conspiracy rants and unsourced bollocks from Russian troll-farms. And as I said to you a few days ago, rather than swallowing this arse gravy wholesale you should be applying that super-human intellect of yours to the claims of Mr Kavanaugh as well. I've never had you down as a crackpot right-wing ideologue who reflexively leaps to the defence of anyone - so what's changed? BTW Jim runs a course in critical thinking which you might find useful - and I happen to know he has a few spare places, and his rates are very reasonable. Very reasonable (in both senses of the word).

I presume the charge you're speaking of is that Julie Swetnick is a rapist &/or aided in gang rape of minors. Already did substantiate it in my first post on this, right here:
https://thecelebscloset.com/julie-swetn ... y-age-job/
Let me spell it out: She was an adult at the time of attending these, "over 10", gang rape sessions. In LAW, if an adult is present at a rape of children (the boys were juveniles) and does nothing, but simply keeps returning to further rapes of the under-age (both the girls and the boys), then that adult is complicit in the pedophilia, or the Statutory Rape. Furthermore, this wicked person alleges that people were drugged & made drunk at these events. And she did NOTHING!

See for example: https://www.saps.gov.za/resource_centre ... 07_eng.pdf
Or this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_rape
Or this: https://aspe.hhs.gov/execsum/statutory- ... quirements

There. Galaxian has substantiated it. I'm sure that 42 can support this reading of the statutes.

[Tero]

Good point.

It’s about abortion. Trump has to get his base angry enough to vote. If Kavanaugh loses, even better. Trump is betting on surviving 2 years with a GOP congress. Democrats win house: no wall. Trump gets close to impeached.

[Forty Two]

Back on the Kavanaugh issue. I read this article about some awful stuff Kavanaugh supposedly did -- https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/my-bat ... pritchard/

In this article Ambrose Evans-Pritchard recounts an event in the mid 1990s where Kavanaugh worked on the "Starr" commission, which was after Bill Clinton at the time. Special prosecutor shenanigans, as we are seeing today. Pritchard says that Kavanaugh cross examined a witness "wildly" and included a "wayward" discussion of genitalia.

The witness, Mr. Knowlton, was a crime sene witness in the death of Vince Foster, the White House aide and ex-law partner of Hillary Clinton. Pritchard had tracked down Mr. Knowlton and discovered that the Star probe had never once spoken to Knowlton, even though he ahad been the first person at the Fort Marcy death location and had highly relevant information. Pritchard showed Knowlton his "witness statement from an earlier (described as superficial) Fiske probe - and Knowlton said the witness statement contradicted his express assertions, and that the FBI had repeatedly badgered him into changing his story on key facts.

Odd. The FBI investigating the death of Vince Foster badgered a witness to change key facts about the death? Knowlton agreed to go public and accused the FBI of falsifying his witness statement.

Knowles was then subpoenaed to testify. Before testifying Pritchard says Knowles suffered two days of what appeared to be systematic intimidation by a large surveillance team. Two other witnesses "observed" this.

The evidence Pritchard says was suppressed - Mr. Kowlton's real story - was that Vince Foster did not commit suicide, but was actually shot in the neck.

Pritchard says Kavanaugh made a choice - go with the establishment rather than stick up for a colleague - and by "go with the establishment" Pritchard is referring to Kavanaugh participating in shutting down the part of the Starr probe investigating Vince Foster's death. Pritchard implies that Kavanaugh was involved in witness tampering, witness intimidation, and other misconduct which was designed not to implicated the Clintons in anything, but to silence an investigation about the Vince Foster death (which would point to the Clintons).

I find the allegations puzzling. Wouldn't the staunch partisan Republican Kavanaugh want to smear the Clintons? Wouldn't the Starr investigation want to get something really good about the Clintons? Wasn't that what they were after?

[Forty Two]

What circuit court judge? The recovering alcoholic who can’t remember dozens of women he assaulted? Hypocrite.

Will answer you this once, and once only:
The circuit court judge: Brett Kavanaugh.
Dozens of women he assaulted? No: the dozens of children that Julie Swetnick confessed to raping and/or aided in being raped.

The above two points are facts. The rest of your insinuations are your fantasies. Keep believing fantasies. I KNOW you will

You've really got to substantiate this charge with more than YouTube conspiracy rants and unsourced bollocks from Russian troll-farms. And as I said to you a few days ago, rather than swallowing this arse gravy wholesale you should be applying that super-human intellect of yours to the claims of Mr Kavanaugh as well. I've never had you down as a crackpot right-wing ideologue who reflexively leaps to the defence of anyone - so what's changed? BTW Jim runs a course in critical thinking which you might find useful - and I happen to know he has a few spare places, and his rates are very reasonable. Very reasonable (in both senses of the word).

I presume the charge you're speaking of is that Julie Swetnick is a rapist &/or aided in gang rape of minors. Already did substantiate it in my first post on this, right here:
https://thecelebscloset.com/julie-swetn ... y-age-job/
Let me spell it out: She was an adult at the time of attending these, "over 10", gang rape sessions. In LAW, if an adult is present at a rape of children (the boys were juveniles) and does nothing, but simply keeps returning to further rapes of the under-age (both the girls and the boys), then that adult is complicit in the pedophilia, or the Statutory Rape. Furthermore, this wicked person alleges that people were drugged & made drunk at these events. And she did NOTHING!

See for example: https://www.saps.gov.za/resource_centre ... 07_eng.pdf
Or this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_rape
Or this: https://aspe.hhs.gov/execsum/statutory- ... quirements

There. Galaxian has substantiated it. I'm sure that 42 can support this reading of the statutes.

I agree with your facts - that Swetnick says she attended something like 10 parties at which she said (in one of her stories...) that young girls were drugged and raped and that Kavanaugh participated (in varying ways, depending on the day she tells the story), and that she kept coming back to these parties over and over again, until she was raped, then she stopped.

That doesn't make her a rapist, though, herself. It makes her full of shit.

In her latest version, she says she can't even say anyone was being raped, or drugged. She just saw jerk boys standing around with plastic cups, and laughing and sometimes pawing over girls, and she thought something was going on in those rooms she wasn't in, and boys were referring to girls inappropriately, and such. So, she knows what those boys were up to...

...more garbage.

[Tero]

He should go to being a lawyer. Ambulance chaser would fit well. Must be a few rapisrs out there. He could badger the victims to admit they like...beer.

[Forty Two]

Despite the repeated claims to the contrary in this thread, Mark Judge never claimed that Blasey Ford's accusation is false. He said he "does not recall" the incident.

Despite the repeated claims to the contrary in this thread, Mark Judge did claim that Blasey Ford's accusation is false when he said, and I quote, "“I never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes."

If he claims that he doesn't recall the incident, then it follows that he can claim that he never saw it happen. It's a lawyerly circumlocution in which Judge avoids definitively stating that Blasey Ford's accusation is false.

As for the assertion that Blasey Ford is an activist, what is its basis? Beyond signing a letter protesting family separation pursuant to "zero tolerance" at the border, what qualifies her as an activist?

It's not circumlocution - or if it is, it is terrible circumlocution. He said "I never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes." He also said he has no recollection of the party in question. That sounds completely reasonable to me. I, too, went to a bunch of parties in the mid-1980s, and there was a lot of beer drinking at them. I don't, of course, recall every party - I am sure there are parties I was attending, and I have no recollection of ever being there. I can also say that I did not see my best friend ever - who was at a lot of these parties with me - act in the manner Dr. Ford describes, ever.

But, whatever -- the FBI talked to him now, so I'm sure they asked him probing questions.

She actively particated in activist activities, like marching with brain pussy hats at anti-Trump rallies. But, really, is she an activist or not? I guess it depends on how active you have to be to be called an activist. It doesn't matter to me if she is or isn't one. Her story makes zero sense and she's told different versions of it.

[Tero]

All women are activists! Thanks Trump! You made your own downfall. Stand up routine in Mississippi was the last straw.

[laklak]

I heard he and his buddies butt fucked puppies at the animal shelter.

[laklak]

All women are activists!

Well, not ALL women. Some of them just lie around the trailer smoking meth and drinking Nattie Light.