Time To Smear Kavanaugh's Good Name...

[Cow Poke]

It is the implication of what you asked CP.

I'm done, Jim.

[ke7ejx]

Is there a reason for the bitter diatribe on display? This is so unlike you, Ox.

[oxmixmudd]

Is there a reason for the bitter diatribe on display? This is so unlike you, Ox.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not bitter. Can you tell my why you see bitterness in what I've posted? As far as I can tell, I'm just trying to make the case that the counselling session of Ford's 5 years ago is very strong support for the idea she is telling the truth as she understands it. What I see is that each attempt I make to lay out the logic of the case is being taken as some sort of personal attack, and I have no idea why that is the case.

Jim

[Tassman]

I have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not bitter. Can you tell my why you see bitterness in what I've posted? As far as I can tell, I'm just trying to make the case that the counselling session of Ford's 5 years ago is very strong support for the idea she is telling the truth as she understands it. What I see is that each attempt I make to lay out the logic of the case is being taken as some sort of personal attack, and I have no idea why that is the case.

Jim

You have made a clear case, Jim, they just don't want to hear. It's inconvenient to their narrative.

[Tassman]

No, Tass. They weren't. Numerous holes in her story.

No. This is what you choose to believe. OTOH there are plenty of holes in Kavanaugh's story when one compares the choirboy, virginal image he presented on Fox with what numerous contemporaries have to say about his behaviour at Yale.

Tass, I don't drink, but I've been around PLENTY of people who are in "blackout" from alcohol. They're usually lying on the floor in their own vomit or urine or both (or worse).

That's simply incorrect. High functioning alcoholics, as Kavanaugh appears to be, are perfectly capable of presenting well when sober. But when drunk they can be belligerent, aggressive and frequently have no memory of their behaviour. This would account for Dr Ford's credible testimony and Kavanaugh's denial of it. He just doesn't remember what he did.

There will be no "he's innocent" or "he's guilty" -- there will be a pile of FD-302s over which the partisan bickering will begin anew, and will probably last for days, if not weeks or months.

What’s at issue, over and above the credible reports of sexual aggression, is whether or not Kavanaugh is a liar and unfit on these grounds alone for such high office. Two of Kavanaugh's friends from Yale say he was not being honest when he testified about how much he drank. Liz Swisher spoke out because "there can be no blurring between truth and falsehood. Brett was a sloppy drunk, and I know because I drank with him. I watched him drink more than a lot of people. He’d end up slurring his words, stumbling. There’s no medical way I can say that he was blacked out. . . . But it’s not credible for him to say that he has had no memory lapses in the nights that he drank to excess.” There are otter similar accounts, e.g. Lynne Brookes says she will stand by her public statements if the FBI questions her.

In short, Kavanaugh lacks the moral integrity for the Supreme Court.

[Cow Poke]

No.

Yes.

[Tassman]

Yes.

You surpass yourself.

[Cow Poke]

You surpass yourself.

Thanks.

[Cow Poke]

Julie Swetnick: Credible but needs investigation and clarification before a judgement could be made.

THIS Swetnick?

Julie Swetnick, one of the women accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, faced allegations of her own misconduct during a short stint at a Portland tech company 18 years ago.

.....

Swetnick worked at Portland-based Webtrends for a few months in 2000, according to a civil suit the Portland company filed against her late that year. The company said she was hired as a professional services engineer to work off-site. It's not clear whether she ever worked in Webtrends' Portland office.

In the suit, Webtrends alleged Swetnick claimed to have graduated from Johns Hopkins University but the company said it subsequently learned the school had no record of her attendance. Webtrends said she also "falsely described her work experience" at a prior employer.

The suit also alleges Swetnick "engaged in unwelcome, sexually offensive conduct" while at Webtrends and "made false and retaliatory allegations that other co-workers had engaged in inappropriate conduct toward her."

Source - Oregon Live

[Tassman]

THIS Swetnick?

Julie Swetnick, one of the women accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, faced allegations of her own misconduct during a short stint at a Portland tech company 18 years ago.

.....

Swetnick worked at Portland-based Webtrends for a few months in 2000, according to a civil suit the Portland company filed against her late that year. The company said she was hired as a professional services engineer to work off-site. It's not clear whether she ever worked in Webtrends' Portland office.

In the suit, Webtrends alleged Swetnick claimed to have graduated from Johns Hopkins University but the company said it subsequently learned the school had no record of her attendance. Webtrends said she also "falsely described her work experience" at a prior employer.

The suit also alleges Swetnick "engaged in unwelcome, sexually offensive conduct" while at Webtrends and "made false and retaliatory allegations that other co-workers had engaged in inappropriate conduct toward her."

Source - Oregon Live

THIS Swetnick: "This lawsuit never had any merit as evidenced by how quickly it was dismissed," Avenatti wrote. "It was originally filed in retaliation for my client making claims against the company." ...from your own link.

You need to find a better way to attack the victim.

[rogue06]

Julie Swetnick: Credible but needs investigation and clarification before a judgement could be made.

The one who claims that she kept going to High School parties well after she graduated where she knew that girls were being systematically drugged and gang raped until she was eventually raped at the 10th such party after accepting some drugged punch? You have an incredibly low bar for credible there

[Psychic Missile]

Have you missed the high profile cases that were proved false or do you ignore those and only focus on the ones that whisper sweet nothings into your ear? Sorry, but a story where major details are not given and where named witnesses contradict what is told raises questions about the story accuracy. Let me guess, this not about justice at all and just a desperate Hail Mary pass so the Democrats can delay till November, in the hopes they can take the senate and hold onto their power? IÂ’m sorry, but these are red flags and yelling that we need to believe her, without question, because most sexual assault claims are true doesnÂ’t change anything.

A few high profile stories in the news has no significance as to its commonality. I'll refer you to post #961 for statistics.

Do you have any evidence you’re not a rapist?

Are those the magic words that make truth and reason disappear?

[rogue06]

Unfortunately media reports today are saying the White House is tying the FBI's hands on this one. It's not "you have 7 days to investigate these claims FBI, go do it." It's a "we, the White House, will be the arbiters of exactly who you, the FBI, are allowed to talk to, you are not allowed to go seeking any corroborating evidence, you may interview ONLY the people we list and you can just write down what they tell you."

Are these the same media sources that were proclaiming that Trump announced he wouldn't let the FBI investigate even though he specifically said they could if they wanted to?

[Cow Poke]

THIS Swetnick: "This lawsuit never had any merit as evidenced by how quickly it was dismissed," Avenatti wrote. "It was originally filed in retaliation for my client making claims against the company." ...from your own link

That's her lawyer's statement, Tass -- he has a propensity for drama, kinda like you.

You need to find a better way to attack the victim.

The ALLEGED victim.

[Cow Poke]

THIS Swetnick: "This lawsuit never had any merit as evidenced by how quickly it was dismissed," Avenatti wrote. "It was originally filed in retaliation for my client making claims against the company." ...from your own link.

You need to find a better way to attack the victim.

From Politico....

A Miami-Dade County court docket shows a petition for injunction against Swetnick was filed March 1, 2001, by her former boyfriend, Richard Vinneccy, who told POLITICO Wednesday the two had dated for four years before they broke up.

Thirteen days later, the case was dismissed, not long after an affidavit of non-ability to advance fees was filed.

According to Vinneccy, Swetnick threatened him after they broke up and even after he got married to his current wife and had a child.

“Right after I broke up with her, she was threatening my family, threatening my wife and threatening to do harm to my baby at that time,” Vinneccy said in a telephone interview with POLITICO. "I know a lot about her.”

"She’s not credible at all,” he said. “Not at all.”

And...

“My phone has not stopped since this morning. Everyone is calling,” Vinneccy said.

Vinneccy, 63, is a registered Democrat, according to Miami-Dade County voting records.

Swetnick was identified on Wednesday by Avenatti, who produced a sworn statement asserting that she met Kavanaugh in the 1980-1981 time period and subsequently attended more than 10 house parties where she said Kavanaugh and a close friend of his, Mark Judge, attended.

Swetnick does not accuse Kavanaugh himself of sexually assaulting her in the sworn statement. But she asserts Kavanaugh was present when she was the victim of a “gang rape” by multiple boys at one party.

Vinneccy made clear that he did not believe her story.

“I have a lot of facts, evidence, that what she’s saying is not true at all,” he said. “I would rather speak to my attorney first before saying more."

Naturally, Swetnick's lawyer says this is all made up too.