Third Woman Comes Forward With Allegations Against Brett Kavanaugh
Less than a day before a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, a third woman has come forward with new allegations involving Judge Brett Kavanaugh.
Less than twenty-four hours before a hearing at which we expect to hear from Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who came forward ten days ago with allegations of sexual assault against Judge Brett Kavanaugh. a third woman has come forward with allegations against Kavanaugh that only seem likely to make an already complicated confirmation process even more complicated:
Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh was accused Wednesday by another woman of having engaged in sexual misconduct at parties while he was a student at Georgetown Preparatory School in the 1980s.
The allegation came from Julie Swetnick, 55, who like Judge Kavanaugh, 53, grew up in the Washington suburbs. In a statement posted on Twitter by her lawyer, Ms. Swetnick said she observed the Supreme Court nominee at parties where women were verbally abused, inappropriately touched and “gang raped.”
She said she witnessed Judge Kavanaugh participating in some of the misconduct, including lining up outside a bedroom where “numerous boys” were “waiting for their ‘turn’ with a girl inside the room.” Ms. Swetnick said she was raped at one of the parties, and she believed she had been drugged.
None of Ms. Swetnick’s claims could be independently corroborated by The New York Times, and her lawyer, Michael Avenatti, declined to make her available for an interview.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Judge Kavanaugh has repeatedly denied allegations that he behaved inappropriately toward women.
On Monday, the judge, with his wife at his side, denied on Fox News that he had ever assaulted anyone, saying he had always “treated women with dignity and respect.”
Asked if he had participated in or was aware of any gang rape at a party he attended, he said: “That’s totally false and outrageous. I’ve never done any such thing, known about any such thing.”
Mr. Avenatti, who rose to fame after his representation of Stephanie Clifford, the adult film actress known as Stormy Daniels who took on Mr. Trump, had been using his Twitter account for days to promote what he said would be explosive allegations against Judge Kavanaugh.
And, immediately after Mr. Avenatti shared what he called a sworn affidavit from Ms. Swetnick, it drew immediate, blanket coverage across social media and cable news as another revelation to rock the confirmation process.
In a brief interview Mr. Avenatti said that he had corroborating witnesses who could back up Ms. Swetnick’s accounts, but was not ready to present them as he waited to see if the Senate Judiciary Committee would launch a full investigation into her claims as he demanded, along with an F.B.I. inquiry.
Mr. Avenatti also said that he was waiting to hear back from the committee before making Ms. Swetnick available for interviews.
(…)
Ms. Swetnick’s claims included Mark Judge, a classmate of Judge Kavanaugh. Mr. Judge, who has written about his alcohol-fueled years at Georgetown Prep, had denied the claim made by Dr. Blasey that he was in the room during an attempted assault by Judge Kavanaugh when they were teens. His lawyer did not immediately respond to request for comment on Ms. Swetnick’s statement.
Ms. Swetnick grew up in Montgomery County, Md., graduating from Gaithersburg High School in 1980 before attending college at the University of Maryland, according to a resume for her posted online. Judge Kavanaugh graduated from Georgetown Prep in 1983.
In her statement, Ms. Swetnick wrote that she met Judge Kavanaugh and Mr. Judge in 1980 or 1981 when she was introduced to them at a house party in the Washington area. She saw them to be “extremely close friends” who were “consistently” together at social gatherings. She said she attended at least 10 house parties in the Washington area from 1981 to 1983, where the two were present. She said the parties were common, taking place almost every weekend during the school year.
She said she observed Judge Kavanaugh drinking “excessively” at many of the parties and engaging in “abusive and physically aggressive behavior toward girls, including pressing girls against him without their consent, “grinding’ against girls, and attempting to remove or shift girls’ clothing to expose private body parts.”
“I also witnessed Brett Kavanaugh behave as a ‘mean drunk’ on many occasions at these parties,” she wrote.
She said that Judge Kavanaugh, Mr. Judge and others would attempt to spike the punch at parties in an effort to intoxicate women, who would be targeted and taken advantage of.
Here are Michael Avenatti’s tweets from earlier this afternoon:
Below is my correspondence to Mr. Davis of moments ago, together with a sworn declaration from my client. We demand an immediate FBI investigation into the allegations. Under no circumstances should Brett Kavanaugh be confirmed absent a full and complete investigation. pic.twitter.com/QHbHBbbfbE
— Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) September 26, 2018
Here is a picture of my client Julie Swetnick. She is courageous, brave and honest. We ask that her privacy and that of her family be respected. pic.twitter.com/auuSeHm5s0
— Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) September 26, 2018
This shows how incompetent the WH is. They must not have been paying attention the last 7 months. Guess their chief information sources are @FoxNews @TuckerCarlson and 4Chan. https://t.co/vG2RjgyjA4
— Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) September 26, 2018
Judge Kavanaugh, meanwhile, has already responded to these new charges with a forceful denial:
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh on Wednesday blasted new allegations of misconduct against him, calling them ”ridiculous and from the Twilight Zone.”
“I don’t know who this is and this never happened,” Kavanaugh said in a statement circulated by the White House.
Kavanaugh pushed back after a third woman came forward to accuse President Trump’s Supreme Court pick of misconduct stemming from his time in school in the early 1980s.
A woman named Julie Swetnick came forward with a sworn declaration earlier Wednesday alleging that Kavanaugh was present for a “gang rape” of which she was a victim during a high school party in the 1980s.
Swetnick does not accuse Kavanaugh of attacking her but says in the declaration that he was present at a party where she was drugged with “Quaaludes or something similar” and attacked.
President Trump also responded to the charges on Twitter by attacking Avenatti, and of course Avenatti responded:
Avenatti is a third rate lawyer who is good at making false accusations, like he did on me and like he is now doing on Judge Brett Kavanaugh. He is just looking for attention and doesn’t want people to look at his past record and relationships – a total low-life!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 26, 2018
Trump pretends he is a tough guy. He is nothing of the kind. He grew up spoiled with a silver spoon in his mouth and a gold toilet under his butt. He was handed everything. That is why the majority of America & the UN laughs at him and calls him a con. But at least Putin is a fan
— Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) September 26, 2018
It’s important to point out that Swetnick does not specifically allege that either Kavanaugh or his friend Mark Judge committed any kind of violent act, although she does say they were present at a party during which she was apparently drugged and gang-raped by a group of men that she can’t specifically identify. Thus her allegations against Kavanaugh are different from those that have been made by Christine Blasey Ford and Deborah Ramirez, both of whom have specifically accused Kavanaugh of having engaged in acts that arguably constitute sexual assault against them at different times and in different locations. What Swetnick does do, however, is alleging that Kavanaugh was often a participant in other sexual misconduct that she was a witness to several occasions on which Kavanaugh and Judge were both highly intoxicated and engaging in sexual activity involving other girls at parties that she was present, including incidents that appear to be similar to the drugged rape that she describes in the final paragraphs of her statement, which I’ve embedded below.
All of this comes, of course, on top of the allegations made ten years ago by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and just a few days ago by Deborah Ramirez regarding sexually inappropriate and drunken behavior by a young Brett Kavanaugh. It also comes mere days after Kavanaugh himself appeared on Fox News Channel for an interview in which he denied having engaged in, participated in, or witnessed such activity. Taking all of these allegations together, it seems clear at this point that the only appropriate thing to do is to pause the proceedings, have the Federal Bureau of Investigation look into the charges made by all three of these women, and then vote. If that means keeping the seat open until after the midterms and dealing with it during the lame duck session, then so be it. This is a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court, and it ought to be taken seriously. As I noted this morning, though, it seems clear that Republicans have no intention of doing that. Whether that remains the case in the face of tomorrow’s hearing and these new allegations is unclear but it is clear that if they think they can get away with it none of this is going to stop them from confirming Kavanaugh as quickly as possible.
Here’s the statement from Julie Swetnick:
Julie Swetnick Declaration by on Scribd
All three accusers demand an FBI investigation.
Kavanaugh and his boys reject investigation.
All three accusers would like to call corroborating witnesses.
Kavanaugh’s defenders on the committee refuse.
Dr. Ford has passed a lie detector. Ramirez says she’s willing to take one, if Kavanaugh does as well.
Kavanaugh’s defenders say no.
All three accusers want to take the time to get to the truth.
Kavanaugh’s people refuse and insist on a rush vote.
I believe the women. In fact, everyone believes the women, including Grassley and Hatch, theyall know. That’s why they reject investigation and witnesses and adequate time to get at the truth.
Brett Kavanaugh was a nasty little piece of work in high school and into college. And he has perjured himself. He may have reformed, but there is no redemption without confession and contrition.
There are many things about this controversy which are arguable. The fact that what Ford and Ramirez described constitutes sexual assault isn’t one of them.
The first two don’t have any “corroborating witnesses”. One has witnesses who will say she talked about it six years ago. One has a witness who heard it third hand.
Lie detectors are junk science and she was asked two questions.
I do agree this should be investigated. Kavanaugh is either a serial predator or the victim of one of the worst political smears in history. Either way, it needs to be cleared up before a vote. I said before that Ford’s allegation didn’t sound implausible, whether it was true or not. This allegation is crazy. That doesn’t mean it’s false, but it means we should remain skeptical pending further inquiry.
For the record, here are the questions Ford answered on the polygraph:
“Is any part of your statement false?”
“Did you make up any part of your statement?”
Even by lie detector standards, that’s really weak. Again, not saying she’s lying. I’m saying “she passed a polygraph” has about as much relevance to the current question as “She’s a Sagittarius.”
When next you hear a Republican criticize the Catholic church over sex abuse scandals, remind them their party resorted to the exact same kind of cover up.
@Hal_10000:
Yup.
So is the fact that a Michigan State doctor was able to rape hundreds of young gymnasts over a couple decades.
It’s a crazy fvcking world. Hell, the POTUS has a mushroom dick and sleeps with porn stars, who say he is less than impressive.
I do agree with you about the polygraph being junk science.
@Daryl and his brother Darryl:
Yeah, people are making that comparison. It’s a legit one and why I agree this should be investigated. If it’s true … there’s a lot more people than Kavanaugh who are going to be wrecked. And good riddance.
@Hal_10000:
1) For the record, they were listed as the two ‘relevant’ questions. I am certain the examiner gave her baseline questions. So she gave her statement, and asked asked whether it was entirely true, she was shown as non-deceptive.
2) That’s not admissible in court, but lie detector tests are used regularly within the intelligence agencies to test employees. They are not junk science.
3) A rhetorical question: why would a person who intended to lie risk a polygraph in the first place?
4) There are corroborating witness, possibly including Mr. Judge, who is evidently unwilling to repeat his exoneration under oath. Wonder why?
5) You reject the circumstantial evidence outright – one party wants the FBI, the other doesn’t. One party (three now) has nothing to gain and a lot to lose. Kavanaugh has everything to gain. I think you’re bending over into beyond a reasonable doubt, because the preponderance of the evidence – assuming the accusers give the testimony expected – is that Kavanaugh did it and lied about it, and continues to lie about it.
I’m not saying this is 100%, but it’s getting into the 75% range.
Kavanaugh’s supposed to be a lawyer, right? Well, maybe he knows something I don’t, but it seems to me he dug himself a perjury trap and then fell in it.
When he denies all these allegations categorically and under oath, it becomes perjury if he is lying about them. While if he had invoked the kind of answer many here have proposed, involving an alcoholic haze and loss of memory (I couldn’t tell you all, or much, I did the two times I ever got drunk; the last being in 1985), even if that was a lie, it cannot be proven as perjury.
That’s an additional possibility as to why he doesn’t want any kind of investigation.
Now, if he gets confirmed, and all or some of the accusations are proven, what excuse would there be not to impeach him for perjury, remove him from the Court, and try him in a Federal court? Other than “he’s in our team,” that is.
Due to being considered for sensitive positions, Brett Kavanaugh has been scrutinized closely by the FBI no fewer than 6 times. I submit, if they could not find serial sexual assault in his past to this point, the FBI is in the wrong business.
@Hal_10000:
He might just be a very weak man who was trusted by his friends to go along and never narc. And it paid off for him. Look at where he is now…
Regarding these parties, he doesn’t need to have done a thing. It’s just as bad to be invited to these parties. They trust you not to snitch. This woman was from a normal high school school. She wasn’t prep. Trust me when I tell you these guys had cover stories that were designed to last decades. They kept this under some sort of wrap, so that people like you are astonished about this behavior.
Anyway, @Michael Reynolds is right. Everybody believes this right now. Judge’s girlfriend who was quoted in the New Yorker wants to talk to the FBI. The article about Judge fleeing to Rehobeth is spooky. It sounds near-suicidal.
@Modulo Myself:
Yep. It really makes you wonder about the “joke” he told at a public event:
Sounds like more of a reminder than a joke to me. “We’ve held firm” and “that’s been a good thing for all of us”.
One of the things I’ve come back to frequently in past the several years is that David Chase wrote the scene where Ralph murders the stripper because he was horrified that fans of the Sopranos weren’t able to recognize the psychopathic behavior in all of the characters. Decades later, it’s telling that a huge number of Americans don’t have any abilities to examine right or wrong, or complicity or even relationship to power. The people defending this as a he said/she times three said have no idea what they actually think. Their minds are black boxes, and I have to assume Kavanaugh is a similar person.
@Eric Florack:
Bill Cosby was in the public eye for decades.
If you thought Kavanaugh was being wronged, you’d demand an FBI investigation which would expose these ‘false’ accusations. But you don’t, because you know damn well they’re very likely to be true, but you don’t care about young girls being molested.
@Kathy:
The Democrats on the Committee – if not the Republicans – can totally set Kavanaugh up by forcing him to deny both the specific and the more general allegations in the same categorical manner he has done so in the media. If Kavanaugh backs up on his denials, he has a problem. If he sticks with them, he has lowered the bar to an eventual perjury charge. It’s time to make a record.
With regard to the background checks, consider that those were done in the past, before #MeToo, and by agents who probably did many of the same things in high school and college and may not have considered that “childish” behavior terribly relevant to their inquiry.
@Kathy:
We’ve discussed how hard it will be to get 67 Senators to remove Trump from office, no matter what comes out about him. Doing it to Kavanaugh would be much harder. Many if not most elected Republicans, I’m convinced, would be more than happy to get rid of Trump and make Pence president if they thought they could get away with it; they’re just terrified of the hardcore cultists who make up much of the party’s voting base. But if Kavanaugh is seated and then conclusive evidence emerges that he’s committed impeachable offenses, virtually all Republicans–not just hardcore Trumpists–would be in no mood to remove him. Shifting the SCOTUS to the right has been the Holy Grail of conservatives for generations. Once they get a rightist filling the Kennedy seat, they’re not going to do anything to risk undoing this momentous achievement (as they see it)–especially if they lose their Senate majority. They’ll weather any short-term political damage to maintain long-term power.
@Eric Florack: you may not know this but if you do not where to look you are unlikely to find anything. FBI investigations and security clearance investigations are notoriously weak and self serving. They ask questions to character witnesses that the subject himself provided and they also look at public records. I doubt very much that they looked at BK’s yearbook and its trove of information.
What did I say a week ago? He did it.
@TM01: You have no idea about the pressure of peer groups, do you?
Especially the pressure of peer groups when a part of it (rich and privileged) can say “no one’s gonna believe you; you’re just a slut from the wrong side of the tracks; you shouldn’t have gotten drunk and it’s all your own fault. My dad’s a lawyer and will sue your family into bankruptcy if you say anything.”
@TM01:
Biden was wrong.
The world has moved on in the last 28 years. Grown. Adapted. You know, the way people do unless they’re brain dead. Right? Maybe you could try it. Glance up in the right hand corner of your monitor. See the date up there? Yeah, it’s 2018. If you run real fast you may yet catch up.
@TM01:
Then you didn’t read what she said: “I observed Brett Kavanaugh drink excessively at many of these parties and engage in abusive and physically aggressive behavior toward girls, including pressing girls against him without their consent, ‘grinding’ against girls, and attempting to remove or shift girls’ clothing to expose private body parts…. During the years 1981-82, I became aware of efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to ‘spike’ the ‘punch’ at house parties I attended with drugs and/or grain alcohol so as to cause girls to lose their inhibitions and their ability to say ‘No’…. I witnessed efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to ‘target’ particular girls so they could be taken advantage of…. I also witnessed efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to cause girls to become inebriated and disoriented so they could then be ‘gang raped’ in a side room or bedroom by a ‘train’ of numerous boys. I have a firm recollection of seeing boys lined up outside rooms at many of these parties waiting for their ‘turn’ with a girl inside the room. These boys included Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh…. In approximately 1982, I became the victim of one of these ‘gang’ or ‘train’ rapes where Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh were present.”
Please explain to me how the above description shows Kavanaugh as not “having done anything.”
Keep plucking that chicken, Republicans.
Another accusation just came out. It seems as if it was leaked by Republicans in the Senate. Might be it.
As of 1800, there looks to be a 4th woman: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/senate-probing-new-allegation-misconduct-against-kavanaugh-n913581
This allegation supposedly happened in 1998 and again involved alcohol. If pans out, then this is not a youthful indiscretion.
@Kylopod:
I think that’s what I meant by “he’s in our team.”
My other question is: can a sitting associate justice of the Supreme Court be arrested, tried, convicted and imprisoned?
@Michael Reynolds: I’m sure Cosby poses a conundrum for this particular Trumper. On the one hand “Bitchez be lyin’”. On the other hand Cosby is black.
@Scott: Of course it could be a youthful indiscretion. Remember Henry Hyde, the godfather of youthful indiscretions:
While Hyde was spearheading the impeachment of President Bill Clinton in the Monica Lewinsky affair, it was revealed that Hyde himself had conducted an extramarital sexual affair with Cherie Snodgrass who was also married. Hyde admitted to the affair and attributed the relationship as a mere “youthful indiscretion”. He was 41 years old and married when the affair occurred. Hyde said the affair ended when Snodgrass’ husband confronted Mrs. Hyde. At the time, Snodgrass was also married and had three children.
I think the elephant in the room is the president himself. He bragged about being a serial sexual assaulter, more than a dozen women came forward , and Trump’s base thinks they are all liars or they don’t care. The modern Republican party just doesn’t take sexual assault seriously, at least when it is committed by one of their own. Which means they just don’t care. It fits in perfectly with their attitude toward reproductive rights.
@MarkedMan: You may recall that a few years ago the one commenter here defending Cosby was Jenos.
As far as I can tell, Cosby was always a Democrat, possibly even a lefty. He publicly supported candidates ranging from Jesse Jackson to Dennis Kucinich. But over the years he attracted many conservative admirers, partly because his approach to combating stereotypes in The Cosby Show and other works was to downplay race entirely (which appealed to the kind of whites who liked to think of themselves as “colorblind”), and partly because of his later, harsh criticisms of African American youth. Cosby was the kind of black celebrity that white conservatives liked to point to to prove their nonracism, rather than a boogeyman like Al Sharpton.
Now it seems like Cosby’s people are making a direct pitch to the Trumpists. Just the other day his publicist claimed that both he and Kavanaugh are victims of a “sex war.” His lawyer made the Trumpian–and unbelievably ignorant–statement that the trial was “the most racist and sexist trial in the history of the United States.” (The lawyer also described Cosby as “one of the greatest civil rights leaders in the United States for over the past 50 years.”)
I haven’t heard Trump himself opine on the Cosby conviction yet. I think it’s only a matter of time before he does.
@Kathy:
He sure can. The president is the only public official where there’s any question of whether he can be indicted while in office. Even the vp can be indicted (Agnew almost was).
For Democrats, from a strategic standpoint, it seems that it would be better for them if he were confirmed, after all, Republicans will make sure to put some Federalist Society zombie in that seat no matter what, and if it’s Kavanaugh, he’ll be damaged goods, in much the same way that leaving Trump in the White House is better for his political enemies than having Pence take his place…certainly if he gets confirmed, that will generate a lot of energy that will be directed at electing Democrats and not Republicans…
Check that. They’re leaking crap, trying to discredit the non-anonymous accusations.
Another accusation reported over in RawStory.
How many accusations have to come out before you start wondering if there’s actually something there? 15? 20? 50?
@Kylopod:
Wait, is Florack Jenos? I’ve lost track…
Is there someone counting? There are so many accusations that I’ve lost count.
Lest anyone think that this is all a 1980’s thing, there was an incident in the school district I lived in during the late ’00s and early 10’s. The district had a lot of wealth, but there was definitely a Shoreline vs. Above-The-Highway divide. One of the wealthy families decided it was OK for their high school senior son to have a keg party and invite anyone he wanted. They then left everyone completely unsupervised. A younger girl from the ATH side of the district ends up getting slobbery drunk (or maybe she had a little chemical help from one of the guys) and a bunch of the boys started grabbing her and then the son raped her. The girl remembered and was, of course, tremendously traumatized. Police were called in and there were plenty of witnesses and the son was arrested.
What was interesting (in a festering wound kind of way) was the parents reaction. They were livid. White hot rage. At the girl. At the witnesses. They made it clear that anyone in their circle that didn’t immediately cast out the witnesses, and help in tearing down the girl, calling her a slut, and “everyone knew” she slept around, and all the usual stuff. I had heard some news of this but was not 100% tuned in and didn’t directly know anyone involved. A month or so later I was at a town or school district meeting about something completely different (I think there was a speaker talking about how we may be putting too much pressure on our kids to succeed). And when it came time to take questions from the audience, this woman gets up, obviously dressed in expensive clothes and sporting a $200 hair cut, and you can tell she is holding back an incendiary rage and starts going off on how people destroy kids reputations because they are jealous. It was hard to tell what she was going on about but after a while my wife goes “Aha..” and she leans over and tells me its the Mom from the party. This woman wasn’t defending her son. She didn’t think she had to. She was taking this opportunity to tell the whole school district what a nasty little tramp the accuser was, of course without actually naming any names to protect herself legally.
…and now there’s a fourth.
You’ve been listening to Joe Biden. He said basically the same thing on the Senate record after the FBI didn’t find anything in the Clarence Thomas investigation.
I think it’s up to 5 accusers now.
@MarkedMan:@MarkedMan:
I doubt it, but you never know. As I mentioned a few weeks ago, there was a weird moment recently in which Jenos responded to my criticism of a Bung comment as if he himself had made the comment, though they do not seem to have similar styles, and I never previously suspected them of being the same person. Florack is even more different than those two (who are among other things way more verbose than he). My sense of Florack is that he isn’t an intentional troll, just a narrow-minded extremist. But you never know.
My point about Cosby is that conservatives aren’t necessarily going to oppose him simply because he’s black, because for many of them he’s the good kind of black, the Clarence Thomas kind who’s the victim of a “high-tech lynching” by the libtards. Despite his lack of history as a political conservative, he’s come to occupy a certain conservative space in American culture, and now his team seems to be making a direct appeal to the Trumpist right, the group most receptive to dismissing allegations of sexual assault.
Please rescue my comment from moderation. And damn, moderators, please think of revamping the site so our comments don’t get so easily caught in the filter. This had only one link.
@Kylopod:
Yes and no. The problem is there are Democrats and then there are Democrats.
first of all perhaps you’re unaware of this but Cosby was being considered for head of the n-double-acp some years ago.. Pants on the ground and so on.
Encouraging blacks to stand on their own and not be dependent upon government as he did was the final straw. And suddenly Bill Cosby became a liability of the Democrat Party , and its ability to retain and increase its power.
@JKB: or maybe it’s the targets that the FBI is being directed at.
Consider if you will the dichotomy of a 16 year old getting frisky with his date ( and that assumes that the story isn’t totally fabricated) vs someone who drowns his date who isn’t even his wife and goes on to be elected to congress 50 years running.
@Scott: Yeah, saw that. But again, it’s not really admissible (even in the court of public opinion) unless the victim comes forward.
Wow. I was being humorous when I implied that our Trumpers would have trouble with Cosby because a) Bitchz be Lyin’ but b) he’s black. I mean, what human being could defend Cosby at this point? But one of our Trumpers just went all in defending Cosby. The guy is actually taking Cosby’s side, you know, the same Cosby who actually admitted to drugging and then having sex with multiple women, and did so in court in front of a judge. But Bitchz be Lyin’ it is… or maybe our Trumper is going with “But she really wanted it and he was doing her a favor”?
One thought I had tonight. I remain skeptical of this story, but … if it did turn out to be true:
Think about just how many of our political and economic elites went through these DC area prep schools. IF this story turns out to be true, you’d be talking Catholic Priests level scandal. That’s also a reason to be skeptical — hard to imagine something that big being covered up for so long. But let’s just be clear on what’s being alleged.
Number Four: https://nypost.com/2018/09/26/kavanaugh-accused-of-shoving-woman-aggressively-and-sexually-in-the-90s/
That’s how you are defending Kavanaugh? Pathetic…
funny what happens when you investigate this stuff. It turns out that are accusing number 3 10 years ago sued her employer for sexual harassment. Her Law Firm at the time? The one attached to Debra Katz… Who in case you’re not following the bouncing ball is the lawyer that’s representing accuser number one.
Gee…
Additionally it turns out that accuser number threes former boyfriend had to get a restraining order against the woman because she threatens his wife and new baby.
So in essence were dealing with a nutcase.
@TM01:
If I read the affidavit correctly, she was 17-20 when all this happened. She attended “house parties” not high school. Most likely there were a mix of ages – teens to college students – there, but that’s one of those things we’ll have to find out.
As I said in the other thread, an extraordinary accusation like this needs extraordinary evidence. It should be investigated, if there’s evidence of her accusation it should be found.
Two points.
1. https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/26/ex-boyfriend-filed-restraining-order-against-kavanaugh-accuser-845348
2. Brett Kavanaugh is now being accused of involvement in the drugging and gang raping of teenage girls. If this accusation is credible enough to keep him off the Supreme Court, THERE IS NO WAY HE CAN CONTINUE TO BE A FEDERAL JUDGE. You cannot have a federal court judge who stands credibly accused of gang rape. As Hal_10000 has pointed out, this is now much, MUCH bigger than just Kavanaugh. If this is a credible story, it is impossible for it to end with a withdrawal or a “no” vote in the Senate on a Supreme Court nominee.
Well, it’s not impossible. Bill Clinton was far more credibly accused of being a rapist and it didn’t stop him from getting standing ovations at the last five Democratic National Conventions, nor did it prevent millions of people from voting to make him America’s first First Gentleman. But you know what I mean.
Mike
@Eric Florack:
The people of Massachusetts believed the survivor
@Eric Florack:
In fact, the head of the NAACP at the time Cosby made those comments, Kweisi Mfume, stated that he agreed with everything Cosby said. Cosby was also staunchly defended by Jesse Jackson. The themes he covered have also been echoed by Barack Obama many, many times. For example, here’s what Obama said in 2004: “Go into any inner city neighborhood, and folks will tell you that government alone can’t teach our kids to learn. They know that parents have to teach, that children can’t achieve until we raise our expectations and turn off the television sets and eradicate the slander that says a black youth with a book is acting white.”
Ta-Nehisi Coates has noted that there have been several right-wing screeds falsely attributed to Cosby and circulated across the Internet, which Cosby has denounced. As Coates explains:
https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/11/what-bill-cosby-means-to-the-white-populist-mind/248738/
Coates also links Cosby’s outlook directly to Obama’s (and is critical of both):
What I find fascinating is the way you and other conservatives have claimed Cosby as one of your own while dismissing other African Americans with virtually identical positions. You do it by imagining differences that don’t exist, so that you can construct a myth of Cosby as the “good” kind of black while those like Jackson, Mfume, and Obama as the “bad” kind. It’s a reflection of your caricatured understanding of mainstream liberalism as well as the African American community–but it’s also ironic when conservatives start rallying around Cosby in light of the (extraordinarily well-established) sexual assault charges against him, simply because they think he’s one of them when he talks about “personal responsibility.”
@Hal_10000:
But that’s exactly what’s been happening. I live in the greater DC area (Annapolis). And there has been a steady stream of prep school horror stories.Nor surprisingly, it turns out that a lot of these prep schools had a horrible confluence of incredibly powerful rich parents, creepy teachers that took sexual advantage of students, horrible incidents of student on student abuse including sexual abuse, and an administration that was willing to do just about anything to cover it up. I’d say a new revelation comes out 2-3 times a year since I’ve returned to the area 3 years ago. But it’s considered a local story and seemingly doesn’t make national news. Honestly, until you made this comment, it never occurred to me just how many politicians and government officials are products of these schools.
This blog is rapidly becoming an Inside the Beltway rag. Mataconis now believes guilty until proven guilty is the law. Some lawyering they do here.
I urge caution on this. Don’t get ahead of it. If what’s alleged is true, evidence supporting it will come out. Until it does, I don’t think it makes sense to do more than call for an investigation.
@Kylopod:
The phrase ‘pearls before swine’ comes to mind.
@Kylopod: Cosby being one of my own? I made no such claim. I simply stated that he was a threat to the Democrats. That’s a little different scenario than the one you painted here.
My point here is not whether or not Cosby is guilty. The question I’m raising is about equality of enforcement of those ideas he’s being jailed for.
As a parallel, don’t you find it the least bit suspicious that it’s only the conservative judges that the Democrats go after for sexual improprieties?
I’m suggesting that this ends up being a tool of the Democrats to get rid of people who are a problem for them. I would further suggest that had Cosby continued to miles undying support for the extreme left of the party, these charges against him would never have come to light.
Tell me, do you remember the people that came with accusations against Herman Cain? No? That’s because they disappeared as soon as he was out of the way. Do you remember what happened to Clarence Thomas? Samuel Alito? Robert Bork? Maybe you remember what happened to Jim traficant?
the charges of improprieties against each didn’t show up until such time as they were a threat to the Democrats. Prior to that everything was fine and the goose hang High.
Cosby’s real crime was being too white… Too willing to give up the idea that one has to be a slave on the donkey Plantation to be black.
@Eric Florack:
Fair enough. But you (and other conservatives, including J*nos) greatly exaggerate how controversial he ever was among Democrats. You implied he became a persona non grata on the mainstream left, something there’s no evidence of. Indeed, until 2015 he was an almost universally beloved figure in Hollywood and the media, despite the fact that the sexual assault allegations had been around for decades.
Moreover, in your attempt to argue a double standard, you lump together many different kinds of allegations. So-called “sexual misconduct” (a fudge word if I ever heard one) covers a broad range of actions, from full-blown rape to various levels of unwanted touching and groping to verbal harassment all the way down to crude conversation. What makes Cosby stand out is that it’s hard to think of another public figure charged with sexual assault whose guilt has been more flippingly obvious (he is rivaled only by Harvey Weinstein). He has amassed around 60 different accusers, who have described more or less the same acts (usually involving being drugged and raped), and a great deal of evidence has surfaced to corroborate at least some of these accounts.
In any case, I see no evidence to support your assertion that MeToo is being used selectively to target conservatives. Many–if not most–of the casualties of the movement have been liberals and Democrats. Yes, it led the firing of Roger Ailes and Bill O’Reilly, but also to Charlie Rose and Matt Lauer. Most of the Hollywood personalities to become targets of MeToo (including a few that are pretty questionable, such as Aziz Ansari) have been liberals. One of the most notable casualties among politicians is Al Franken, more or less forced into retirement by members of his own party for charges well below rape. Roy Moore lost an election in deep-red Alabama due to assault allegations–but entirely despite a GOP that nominated him and mostly stuck with him in the general election (where his defeat was far more due to independents and Democrats). Meanwhile, the GOP elected–and rallied around–a president who bragged on tape about groping women, and who was accused of assault by over a dozen women, including two rape charges.
Yes, Bill Clinton survived an impeachment, but Clarence Thomas was appointed to the Supreme Court, and Kavanaugh may well be.
Of course many people are going to view individual allegations through a partisan lens, but Dems have proven time and again that they’ve been far harsher against their own than Republicans, who seem to make a habit of rallying around accused assaulters they view as being on their own “team.”
@TM01:
It goes both ways. Robert Mueller is considered a left-wing Democrat by the Trumpists, despite the fact that he’s a known Republican.
Looks like the fifth accuser recanted. When I read the story over at RawStory, it did seem to not be firmly established. (Identifying an individual you don’t personally know from a TV photo? Hmmm.)
@TM01:
How do you explain the kids under Jim Jordan being abused for years?
How do you explain Larry Nassar raping hundreds of gymnasts for over two decades?
How do you explain Penn State?
You can’t because you aren’t very smart.
And your quote from Biden is out of context.
If you really want to play here, you should try to up your game…or just keep looking like a fool.
@Eric Florack:
Being raped can do irrecoverable psychological damage (shame, depression, emotional “coldness”, anger, aggression, suicide attempts…), so her being a “nut” does not undermine her story like you seem to think it does.
@TM01:
Again…you keep proving that you aren’t very smart.
This is not a trial and is not about guilt. It’s about determining if Kavanaugh is suitable for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land.
You probably should only comment on websites with other Dunning Kruger poster-children.
Where guilty until proven innocent rules the day
TrumpWorld: Where sexual perverts are innocent even after a confession of guilt is the New Republican Mantra.
“Grab them by the pussy.” Donald Trump. REPUBLICAN President of the United States.
@rachel: it doesn’t, particularly when you start that way. Many among us have had experiences with such women. I had one for example call me the day before my scheduled wedding and tell me she was going to show up at the ceremony and raise hell.
Trust me I know what goes on inside such a mind.
To rest of you, let’s consider another little connection here that nobody in this thread has even mentioned as yet….
Jill Strzok, is Peter Strzok’s sister-in-law.
Jill Strzok works with Thomas Blasey, who is Christine Ford’s brother in law.
It’s all just a coincidence, right?
Yeah right.
@TM01:
I’d be curious if anybody had said any such thing, because they would indeed be pretty stupid.
As far as I’m aware, the major items that lefties and Dershowitz disagree on are: 1) Israel, and 2) how far Mueller’s probe should be allowed to reach. Personally, I understand his positions but respectfully disagree.
@Eric Florack:
First you’d have to convince me that there’s something wrong with Peter Strzok. And then you’d have to very carefully explain why somebody that is five degrees of separation from him has the exact same attributes. (Note: I’m counting in-laws as two degrees, the first being the spouse and the second being the sibling. If you disagree, it’s still three degrees of separation.)
@Eric Florack: So, do you have their pictures up on the wall in your basement, connected together with red string? Perhaps linked in with Hillary Clinton and the Illuminati?
Just askin’
Franklin I don’t expect an answer to this but I have to wonder what it would take to convince you.
And where are you at the editor open let’s discuss another set of connections that nobody has bothered to examine…
https://mobile.twitter.com/paulsperry_/status/1045362332455628801
Go ahead and tell me how this isn’t a setup. Tell me why we are to ignore the small mountain of evidence that this whole thing is a sham.
But you go ahead and continue acting like a sheeple.
But before you go, consider something…
“In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is…in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control.”
(attributed to Theodore Dalrymple)
#Kavanaugh #Feinstein
@Eric Florack:
Convince me of what exactly? That it’s a “sham”? I have no argument with the fact that Democrats are playing politics (again, boo hoo). But to say it’s a sham is specifically saying that Ford is lying. Personally I don’t put much stock in lie detectors. But if she’s lying, she is damn good at it.
@TM01:
Many people, both inside and outside of this Administration do believe that Trump is deranged.
@Franklin:
I don’t. The man has sold out and become a full-blown Fox News Democrat–a type of concern troll who claims to support Democrats and to hold Democratic positions, but who in practice spouts GOP talking points on virtually everything that matters. We’ve seen this breed many times.
@Eric Florack: Shorter Florack: We should put a rapist on the Supreme Court because I hate Ted Kennedy.
@MBunge: Shorter Bungles: We deserve to have a rapist on the Supreme Court because I hate Bill Clinton.
@Kylopod: “Indeed, until 2015 he was an almost universally beloved figure in Hollywood and the media, despite the fact that the sexual assault allegations had been around for decades.”
By everyone except those who had actually worked for/with him…