Avenatti's mystery client "appears" by all accounts to be a woman who dated Mark Judge while they were in high school. She allegedly makes the claim that Judge told her that he and some other boys from that school once got a girl drunk, and then took turn having sex with her. Judge apparently still claims the "train" was consensual.
The ex girlfriend doesn't know the name of the girl, the names of any of the other boys involved, or whether or not Kavanaugh was one of them.
Not sure how that goes from Mark Judge making a claim about a girl, and Brett Kavanaugh being involved in a gang rape ring. It certainly seems a bit odd that over 70 different women who went to school with Brett Kavanaugh would come out as character witnesses for a guy who was actively involved in multiple gang rapes.
Mass hypnosis perhaps?
Apparently the committee is asking Avenatti to supply the evidence that he specifically has against Kavanaugh. He says there are multiple unnamed witnesses that will confirm the "gang rape ring", that he has uncovered secret coded year book signings regarding the "gang rape ring", and he is stating that he will have more information to provide everyone in the coming days.
In the meantime:
- Avanatti has been insistent that Mark Judge be subpoenaed to confirm the "gang rape ring".
- Avanatti is insistent that Kavanaugh be asked about the secret coded yearbook messages regarding the "gang rape ring".
- Avanatti is insistent that Kavanaugh be asked numerous questions about this "gang rape ring".
Reality here folks... if his client is just the ex-girlfriend, then we are looking at a hearsay accusation about a classmate of Brett Kavanaugh. Nothing more and nothing less. The Judiciary committee has no business getting involved with any of that.
If Avenatti really has more to offer, it better be in the form of some sworn statements from actual people willing to testify under oath to first hand knowledge of this so called "gang rape ring". Which of course would mean either a rapist or a rape victim.
20 comments:
one can conclude from the reports of the past few days that the FBI is more incompetent than previously thought.
the FBI has investigated kavanaugh six times. not once in any of these supposedly thorough investigations were they able to uncover the crimes committed against dr. cray cray, this ramirez broad, and the KKK-sponsored rape parties hosted by kavanaugh.
so there you go alky - your beloved FBI who you have held above reproach has been upstaged by a couple of kooks and a creepy porn star lawyer.
no wonder whitey bulger has his way with the FBI. they're fucking morons.
Death by a thousand moon bats
Shelby Steele:
"How did the American left — conceived to bring more compassion and justice to the world — become so given to hate? It began in the 1960s, when America finally accepted that slavery and segregation were profound moral failings. That acceptance changed America forever. ... It is undeniable that America has achieved since the '60s one of the greatest moral evolutions ever. That is a profound problem for the left, whose existence is threatened by the diminishment of racial oppression. The left's unspoken terror is that racism is no longer menacing enough to support its own power. The great crisis for the left today — the source of its angst and hatefulness — is its own encroaching obsolescence. ... Today's left lacks worthy menaces to fight. It is driven to find a replacement for racism, some sweeping historical wrongdoing that morally empowers those who oppose it. (Climate change?) Failing this, only hatred is left. Hatred is a transformative power. It can make the innocuous into the menacing. So it has become a weapon of choice. The left has used hate to transform President Trump into a symbol of the new racism, not a flawed president but a systemic evil. And he must be opposed as one opposes racism, with a scorched-earth absolutism."
https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-the-left-is-consumed-with-hate-1537723198
Democrat party and the mainstream media is one in the same.
The press is writing stories that they can not confirm.
Thursday testimony is off again. Blasy Ford is not about to sit and be question.
The press is writing stories that they can not confirm.
Thursday testimony is off again. Blasy Ford is not about to sit and be question.
Democrat party and the mainstream media is one in the same.
This guy is a clown why are you wasting a post on him?
Democrats call for sitting Supreme Court Justice Clearance Thomas to resign.
In #MeToo, which began in the predations of Harvey Weinstein, Democrats and progressives finally have found a weapon against which there seems to be no defense. It can be used to exterminate political enemies. If one unprovable accusation doesn’t suffice, why not produce a second, or third? It’s a limitless standard.
The Democrats’ broader strategy is: Delay the vote past the election; win the Senate by convincing suburban women that Republicans are implacably hostile to them; seize power; and—the point of it all—take down the Trump government.
This is the “resistance.” This is what Democrats have become. Resistance is a word and strategy normally found in a revolutionary context, which is precisely the argument made by the left to justify its actions against this presidency since the evening of Nov. 8, 2016. Anything goes. Whatever it takes. Brett Kavanaugh is not much more than a casualty of war.
Rather than try to argue or win public issues on substance, the Democrats have become a party that seems to think it can win with muscle alone. Environmentalism emerged in the 1970s as a worthwhile idea that attracted the interest and support of both parties. From Al Gore onward, it became a bludgeon to beat up the other party. Now sexual abuse, an issue originating in utmost seriousness, has been quickly captured and fashioned into a political weapon by the Democratic left.
Politics as trench warfare has relieved the Democrats of the burden of thought. Extending the Pelosi Rule—we have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it—we now have the Gillibrand Standard.
Commenting this week on Ford v. Kavanaugh, New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, another 2020 presidential aspirant, said, “I believe it is disqualifying, given what we know.” In other words, what she believes is based on next to nothing.
Put on defense by these accusations, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley unsurprisingly agreed to a hearing in which Ms. Ford would tell her story and Judge Kavanaugh would speak. Then the senators would vote.
Consider the spectacle: Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination for the U.S. Supreme Court, the embodiment of a modern rule of law, is being decided in the Senate by the medieval practice of trial by ordeal, such as surviving immersion in fire or ice. Trial by ordeal was outlawed by the Lateran Council in 1215.
Or worse, the standards of the mob in the Roman Colosseum, turning thumbs up or down on the combatants. Though unlike the Senate Democrats, the Roman mob at least had an open mind.
Incidentally, the standard trope that Donald Trump has degraded our politics? We don’t need to hear that anymore. Or about the moral certitudes of the religious right.
Is there a sadder figure in the modern Democratic Party than Sen. Dianne Feinstein? Elected to the Senate in 1992, Mrs. Feinstein has produced a creditable career. Her above-it-all reputation was never quite deserved, but she has at least performed with dignity.
Now, seeking re-election at 85, she is getting heat from the progressive-dominated Democratic Party in California, the world capital of identity-only politics. By withholding from the committee the accusatory Ford letter that came into her possession nearly two months ago, Sen. Feinstein ensured the nomination’s descent into such a hapless, cynical moment. This will be the most remembered event in Sen. Feinstein’s career.
The Kavanaugh nomination, “given what we know,” has come down to an undiscoverable accusation. The defeat of a Supreme Court nominee on this basis would be a victory for a level of conscious political nullification not seen in the U.S. for a long time. Republicans in the Senate shouldn’t allow it, and voters in November should not affirm it.
https://outline.com/nytSXt
Is Ballsless Ford going to Testify under Oath?
REV, it believe there is Zero Chance Sen Frankenstien produces the letter to the Committee.
dr. cray cray is now demanding to only be questioned by the male senators.
nah, nothing disingenuous about this request. no siree.
She is going to continue to move the goal posts.
If she does not preform, the US Senate should vote him in with the same level that past Justices.
Bret just gave the Left a Bigly Middle Finger.
brett kavanaugh just told senate judiciary democrats to go fuck themselves.
as did orrin hatch.
nice.
another pederast lie bites the dust -
The chief of police in Montgomery County, Md., says his officers are not looking into sexual misconduct allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, appearing to contradict a local news report that "investigators" were looking at a potential second high school misconduct allegation.
"I have spoken with my chief of detectives, and neither of us have any knowledge of anyone coming forward to us to report any allegations involving Judge Kavanaugh," police Chief J. Thomas Manger told the Washington Examiner in an email.
The Montgomery County Sentinel reported Monday that "Montgomery County investigators" were "looking at" a " potential second sexual assault complaint" dating from Kavanaugh's senior year the Georgetown Prep high school "after an anonymous witness came forward this weekend."
The local publication did not identify the "investigators" as police, but ordinarily county police would investigate an alleged crime before a decision on whether to prosecute.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/maryland-police-arent-reviewing-second-brett-kavanaugh-high-school-allegation-chief-says
"another pederast lie bites the dust -
"
She is so wrong so often.
Kavanaugh holding strong and determined, like the fearless girl in front of the raging bull.
It is cool to see this. He is a real man.
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 36-year-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.
Post a Comment