Current Events > Right wing websites moving swiftly to attack Kavanaugh accuser

(+) Yeah! (+)

She shouldnt be smeared or called names. However she should be held accountable, investigated and jailed if there is any way to prove shes lying to get someone, potentially, off of the bench of the Supreme Court.

Which brings me back to the off topic point. This is clearly a PR play the Democrats because our party doesnt want him in the seat. Which I agree, neither do I. However it makes us look like a bunch of fucking morons because its pretty god damn obvious to most people exactly what this is.

like okay think about it

if it were really so easy to tank a career as to just make stuff up about a politician then it would be really easy to beat politicians

so even if great effort were expended on finding this lady and convincing her to come forward, the fact that her testimony is the result of oppo research (if that is the case which no one has given us reason to believe except coincidental timing) then it really doesn't change anything
---

Agnostic420 posted...

She shouldnt be smeared or called names. However she should be held accountable, investigated and jailed if there is any way to prove shes lying to get someone, potentially, off of the bench of the Supreme Court.

Which brings me back to the off topic point. This is clearly a PR play the Democrats because our party doesnt want him in the seat. Which I agree, neither do I. However it makes us look like a bunch of fucking morons because its pretty god damn obvious to most people exactly what this is.

You can't just go back in time to forge some therapy notes with some random individual. Every step of that process is locked behind a mountain of red tape and paperwork. Frankly there is no way the Democrats are that cunning.
---

If it were really this easy they would have done it for Gorsuch
---

Balrog0 posted...

like okay think about it

if it were really so easy to tank a career as to just make stuff up about a politician then it would be really easy to beat politicians

so even if great effort were expended on finding this lady and convincing her to come forward, the fact that her testimony is the result of oppo research (if that is the case which no one has given us reason to believe except coincidental timing) then it really doesn't change anything

Doesnt prevent the PR play. So its just a coincidence that in 30 years, now and only now is this being brought up? Cmon now.

Agnostic420 posted...

Balrog0 posted...

like okay think about it

if it were really so easy to tank a career as to just make stuff up about a politician then it would be really easy to beat politicians

so even if great effort were expended on finding this lady and convincing her to come forward, the fact that her testimony is the result of oppo research (if that is the case which no one has given us reason to believe except coincidental timing) then it really doesn't change anything

Doesnt prevent the PR play. So its just a coincidence that in 30 years, now and only now is this being brought up? Cmon now.

If you view this incident in a vaccum and not in a metoo era where he is getting famous and name recongition in the media due to being a high profile federal employeement

waiting for my response, was my previous summary of your outburst toward me incorrect, @Agnostic420

Balrog0 posted...

then it really doesn't change anything

Yeah that's the other thing. He's still the pick. Nobody is thinking he won't be the next Justice.
---

Agnostic420 posted...

Doesnt prevent the PR play. So its just a coincidence that in 30 years, now and only now is this being brought up? Cmon now.

I don't understand your point. Like I said, even if that were true, what does it change?

If you're saying she made it up wholesale, then that seems unlikely and wouldn't work in any case.

If you're saying that she was assaulted but it wasn't Kavanaugh, that also seems unlikely but it is more plausible. But you're also saying that Democrat operatives managed to find someone who was sexually assaulted in the right place and time and in a format that could be at least partially confirmed by some kind of documentation. Which makes me think, how are they so bad at politics the other 99% of the time if they could manage that?
---

Agnostic420 posted...

Balrog0 posted...

like okay think about it

if it were really so easy to tank a career as to just make stuff up about a politician then it would be really easy to beat politicians

so even if great effort were expended on finding this lady and convincing her to come forward, the fact that her testimony is the result of oppo research (if that is the case which no one has given us reason to believe except coincidental timing) then it really doesn't change anything

Doesnt prevent the PR play. So its just a coincidence that in 30 years, now and only now is this being brought up? Cmon now.

They've known about this since the beginning of July, at least. It's only becoming public now.
---

I mean, if she had insurance involved whatsoever in her therapy visits it's next to impossible for anybody to fabricate the evidence just due to the scale you're talking about.
---

Gee, wonder why so many people feel scared to share their stories about being sexually assaulted.

It is an enigma...

Doom_Art posted...

Republicans: "I'm gonna smear this slut. Stupid whore only coming forward for political reasons. What an awful person. Let's dissect her background"

Also Republicans: "Why are assault victims so hesitant to come forward?"

Sephiroth1288 posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

How awful do you have to be to shitpost and mock about an alleged sexual assault victim.

It's best not to quote moddable material.
---

This is what so many on the right are doing.

Not just "innocent until proven guilty", but going out of their way to try to discredit the accuser based on internet sleuthing.
---

Random fact:

In the UK there was a guy who raped 2 women in the early 80s. He grabbed them at knightpoint from behind and they never got a good look at him. With a lack of any leads or evidence the cases had to be closed as unsolved.

Over 30 years later the same guy peed in his neighbor's plant pot. He was arrested for that and when they processed his DNA for that crime they discovered it was a match for the DNA of the 2 rapes in the 80s and arrested him for that too.
---

shockthemonkey posted...

Wouldnt be the GOP if they werent attacking victims

Good. Shes a fucking liar and she gets anything she asks for. One other thing the media tries to say is that she came forward. That is not true. She was doxxed and exposed, and the people are not going to stand for this.

Happy hunting.
---

southcoast09 posted...

Good. Shes a fucking liar and she gets anything she asks for. One other thing the media tries to say is that she came forward. That is not true. She was doxxed and exposed, and the people are not going to stand for this.

Happy hunting.

Actually the people DON'T want Kavanaugh. He's got a pretty damn low rating.
---

DKFjalfe posted...

Doom_Art posted...

Republicans: "I'm gonna smear this slut. Stupid whore only coming forward for political reasons. What an awful person. Let's dissect her background"

Also Republicans: "Why are assault victims so hesitant to come forward?"

---

southcoast09 posted...

Good. Shes a fucking liar and she gets anything she asks for. One other thing the media tries to say is that she came forward. That is not true. She was doxxed and exposed, and the people are not going to stand for this.

Happy hunting.

Y I K E S
I
K
E
S
---

Anteaterking posted...

This is what so many on the right are doing.

Not just "innocent until proven guilty", but going out of their way to try to discredit the accuser based on internet sleuthing.

She was already caught in a lie though. She said that his friend witnessed the entire thing happen, but he spoke recently on the matter and said that this event never happened in the first place. So either two people are lying, or one person is lying...

I can't help but think logically and scientifically, so I'd need to see some physical evidence to believe what the accuser is saying. The fact she was paid by Feinsteine to come forward makes the accusation extremely suspicious. Otherwise, you're deciding the fate of a man's career and life based on a high school rumor that has zero physical evidence behind it, that an "eye-witness" named by the accuser says didn't happen.
---

Wil_Knights posted...

Anteaterking posted...

This is what so many on the right are doing.

Not just "innocent until proven guilty", but going out of their way to try to discredit the accuser based on internet sleuthing.

She was already caught in a lie though. She said that his friend witnessed the entire thing happen, but he spoke recently on the matter and said that this event never happened in the first place. So either two people are lying, or one person is lying...

I can't help but think logically and scientifically, so I'd need to see some physical evidence to believe what the accuser is saying. The fact she was paid by Feinsteine to come forward makes the accusation extremely suspicious. Otherwise, you're deciding the fate of a man's career and life based on a high school rumor that has zero physical evidence behind it, that an "eye-witness" named by the accuser says didn't happen.

He said he didn't recall. And of course he did because otherwise, he'd be publicly admitting to being an accessory to attempted rape. You're talking about science and needing a high level of evidence to prove someone's guilt and destroy their life and reputation. But you're willing to take an inconclusive statement and use it as conclusive proof that the accuser is a politically motivated liar, destroying her life and denying her assault.
---

Wil_Knights posted...

Anteaterking posted...

This is what so many on the right are doing.

Not just "innocent until proven guilty", but going out of their way to try to discredit the accuser based on internet sleuthing.

She was already caught in a lie though. She said that his friend witnessed the entire thing happen, but he spoke recently on the matter and said that this event never happened in the first place. So either two people are lying, or one person is lying...

I can't help but think logically and scientifically, so I'd need to see some physical evidence to believe what the accuser is saying. The fact she was paid by Feinsteine to come forward makes the accusation extremely suspicious. Otherwise, you're deciding the fate of a man's career and life based on a high school rumor that has zero physical evidence behind it, that an "eye-witness" named by the accuser says didn't happen.

What is with the right-wingers and making up blatant bullshit?
---

Agnostic420 posted...

No more emojis and fake softness in your words. Youre shook. Its ok.

We can do dinner sometime. Preferably lunch, maybe Olive Garden. Only Soup, Salad and Breadsticks tho or maybe the mini pasta bowl special but thats it.

Is there an Olive Garden in Hagerstown?
---

Wil_Knights posted...

She was already caught in a lie though. She said that his friend witnessed the entire thing happen, but he spoke recently on the matter and said that this event never happened in the first place. So either two people are lying, or one person is lying...

"He said, she said" isn't being caught in a lie.

And she named Kavanaugh's friend not as a friendly witness, but essentially as an enabler, so it's not at all shocking that he would lie for his own sake as well as his friend.
---

The right is disgusting
---

legendary_zell posted...

Wil_Knights posted...

Anteaterking posted...

This is what so many on the right are doing.

Not just "innocent until proven guilty", but going out of their way to try to discredit the accuser based on internet sleuthing.

She was already caught in a lie though. She said that his friend witnessed the entire thing happen, but he spoke recently on the matter and said that this event never happened in the first place. So either two people are lying, or one person is lying...

I can't help but think logically and scientifically, so I'd need to see some physical evidence to believe what the accuser is saying. The fact she was paid by Feinsteine to come forward makes the accusation extremely suspicious. Otherwise, you're deciding the fate of a man's career and life based on a high school rumor that has zero physical evidence behind it, that an "eye-witness" named by the accuser says didn't happen.

He said he didn't recall. And of course he did because otherwise, he'd be publicly admitting to being an accessory to attempted rape. You're talking about science and needing a high level of evidence to prove someone's guilt and destroy their life and reputation. But you're willing to take an inconclusive statement and use it as conclusive proof that the accuser is a politically motivated liar, destroying her life and denying her assault.

Why didn't this come out much earlier? If it was actually serious or really happened, you think that it would have been brought up... you know, right after it happened? Maybe it didn't happen at all like the accuser said, and it's just a politically-motivated scheme to stop him from being nominated to the SC. Do you have any evidence at all or any source with evidence? The timing is just too perfect for this NOT to be politically-motivated.

What bothers me the most about this whole thing is that these accusations are being trumpeted by The Washington Post, which is essentially a leftist propaganda outlet. It's just a leftist version of Breitbart... they openly said they wanted Hillary to win, so why would I trust what they say about one of Trump's nominees when there is no evidence to back the claim up and it happened so long ago that no one has any recollection of the event?
---

E32005 posted...

The right is disgusting

I mean, so is the left. Making up false rape accusations makes actual victims less likely to be believed.
---

Wil_Knights posted...

legendary_zell posted...

Wil_Knights posted...

Anteaterking posted...

This is what so many on the right are doing.

Not just "innocent until proven guilty", but going out of their way to try to discredit the accuser based on internet sleuthing.

She was already caught in a lie though. She said that his friend witnessed the entire thing happen, but he spoke recently on the matter and said that this event never happened in the first place. So either two people are lying, or one person is lying...

I can't help but think logically and scientifically, so I'd need to see some physical evidence to believe what the accuser is saying. The fact she was paid by Feinsteine to come forward makes the accusation extremely suspicious. Otherwise, you're deciding the fate of a man's career and life based on a high school rumor that has zero physical evidence behind it, that an "eye-witness" named by the accuser says didn't happen.

He said he didn't recall. And of course he did because otherwise, he'd be publicly admitting to being an accessory to attempted rape. You're talking about science and needing a high level of evidence to prove someone's guilt and destroy their life and reputation. But you're willing to take an inconclusive statement and use it as conclusive proof that the accuser is a politically motivated liar, destroying her life and denying her assault.

Why didn't this come out much earlier? If it was actually serious or really happened, you think that it would have been brought up... you know, right after it happened? Maybe it didn't happen at all like the accuser said, and it's just a politically-motivated scheme to stop him from being nominated to the SC. Do you have any evidence at all or any source with evidence? The timing is just too perfect for this NOT to be politically-motivated.

What bothers me the most about this whole thing is that these accusations are being trumpeted by The Washington Post, which is essentially a leftist propaganda outlet. It's just a leftist version of Breitbart... they openly said they wanted Hillary to win, so why would I trust what they say about one of Trump's nominees when there is no evidence to back the claim up and it happened so long ago that no one has any recollection of the event?

It came out in 2012 in private. She's told doctors, her husband, Congress people etc before he was ever nominated. She's taken and passed a polygraph and may even be willing to testify in front of Congress. We know by now that many victims try to move on without reporting or are scared to accuse a powerful person. It makes sense that this is coming to a head now because he's about to be appointed for life to the goddamn Supreme Court and will have power over women's rights and many other things. The timing isn't suspicious, it's exactly what you'd suspect. She talked about it years ago and now she's talking about it to stop the guy from being untouchable.

As for the Washington Post.....everything you posted there is an absolute joke. Breitbart is a white nationalist/alt-right rag aimed purely at stoking conservative prejudice. The Washington Post is a highly respected organization with actual journalistic ethics that exposed Watergate.
---

legendary_zell posted...

Wil_Knights posted...

legendary_zell posted...

Wil_Knights posted...

Anteaterking posted...

This is what so many on the right are doing.

Not just "innocent until proven guilty", but going out of their way to try to discredit the accuser based on internet sleuthing.

She was already caught in a lie though. She said that his friend witnessed the entire thing happen, but he spoke recently on the matter and said that this event never happened in the first place. So either two people are lying, or one person is lying...

I can't help but think logically and scientifically, so I'd need to see some physical evidence to believe what the accuser is saying. The fact she was paid by Feinsteine to come forward makes the accusation extremely suspicious. Otherwise, you're deciding the fate of a man's career and life based on a high school rumor that has zero physical evidence behind it, that an "eye-witness" named by the accuser says didn't happen.

He said he didn't recall. And of course he did because otherwise, he'd be publicly admitting to being an accessory to attempted rape. You're talking about science and needing a high level of evidence to prove someone's guilt and destroy their life and reputation. But you're willing to take an inconclusive statement and use it as conclusive proof that the accuser is a politically motivated liar, destroying her life and denying her assault.

Why didn't this come out much earlier? If it was actually serious or really happened, you think that it would have been brought up... you know, right after it happened? Maybe it didn't happen at all like the accuser said, and it's just a politically-motivated scheme to stop him from being nominated to the SC. Do you have any evidence at all or any source with evidence? The timing is just too perfect for this NOT to be politically-motivated.

What bothers me the most about this whole thing is that these accusations are being trumpeted by The Washington Post, which is essentially a leftist propaganda outlet. It's just a leftist version of Breitbart... they openly said they wanted Hillary to win, so why would I trust what they say about one of Trump's nominees when there is no evidence to back the claim up and it happened so long ago that no one has any recollection of the event?

It came out in 2012 in private. She's told doctors, her husband, Congress people etc before he was ever nominated. She's taken and passed a polygraph and may even be willing to testify in front of Congress. We know by now that many victims try to move on without reporting or are scared to accuse a powerful person. It makes sense that this is coming to a head now because he's about to be appointed for life to the goddamn Supreme Court and will have power over women's rights and many other things. The timing isn't suspicious, it's exactly what you'd suspect. She talked about it years ago and now she's talking about it to stop the guy from being untouchable.

As for the Washington Post.....everything you posted there is an absolute joke. Breitbart is a white nationalist/alt-right rag aimed purely at stoking conservative prejudice. The Washington Post is a highly respected organization with actual journalistic ethics that exposed Watergate.

You realize Roy Moore passed a polygraph too? Why didn't you defend him? Washington Post... RESPECTED?

LMFAO. Hilarious. Oh my god, that's the dumbest thing I've heard all week. This is the publication that made 30 anti-Bernie articles in 24 hours as propaganda to help Hillary. They're nothing but shills and I don't believe a word of what they say.
---

Wil_Knights posted...

E32005 posted...

The right is disgusting

I mean, so is the left. Making up false rape accusations makes actual victims less likely to be believed.

Defending rape now?
---

If a single leftist can point me to evidence that this actually happened, then I'll eat my (MAGA) hat. Otherwise, it's pretty clear that this is a political stunt to drag Kavanaugh's name through the mud and hurt his chances of being voted into the SC.

Instead of making up false accusations/fake news, why don't you guys just accept that Trump won the election and let him appoint who he wants? Elections have consequences, and he won.
---

E32005 posted...

Wil_Knights posted...

E32005 posted...

The right is disgusting

I mean, so is the left. Making up false rape accusations makes actual victims less likely to be believed.

Defending rape now?

Nope. That woman wasn't raped.
---

Wil_Knights posted...

Nope. That woman wasn't raped.

Y I K E S
I
K
E
S
---

CantKeepMeDown posted...

southcoast09 posted...

Good. Shes a fucking liar and she gets anything she asks for. One other thing the media tries to say is that she came forward. That is not true. She was doxxed and exposed, and the people are not going to stand for this.

Happy hunting.

Actually the people DON'T want Kavanaugh. He's got a pretty damn low rating.

Yeahhhhhhhhhhh, no. The vast majority knows this witch hunt is another lie and nobody believes it. Remember, your beloved poll results are not true. They said Hillary would win by nearly 100%.
---

Doom_Art posted...

Wil_Knights posted...

Nope. That woman wasn't raped.

Y I K E S
I
K
E
S

She said herself she wasn't. So you're admitting that you're just making lies up now?

Yikes.
---

Payzmaykr posted...

CantKeepMeDown posted...

southcoast09 posted...

Good. Shes a fucking liar and she gets anything she asks for. One other thing the media tries to say is that she came forward. That is not true. She was doxxed and exposed, and the people are not going to stand for this.

Happy hunting.

Actually the people DON'T want Kavanaugh. He's got a pretty damn low rating.

Yeahhhhhhhhhhh, no. The vast majority knows this witch hunt is another lie and nobody believes it. Remember, your beloved poll results are not true. They said Hillary would win by nearly 100%.

No, they predicted she would win more votes... which they were spot on about.
---

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-kavanaugh-poll/opposition-to-kavanaugh-grows-support-at-historic-low-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKCN1LZ1WT

@Womp_Womp
---

Payzmaykr posted...

CantKeepMeDown posted...

southcoast09 posted...

Good. Shes a fucking liar and she gets anything she asks for. One other thing the media tries to say is that she came forward. That is not true. She was doxxed and exposed, and the people are not going to stand for this.

Happy hunting.

Actually the people DON'T want Kavanaugh. He's got a pretty damn low rating.

Yeahhhhhhhhhhh, no. The vast majority knows this witch hunt is another lie and nobody believes it. Remember, your beloved poll results are not true. They said Hillary would win by nearly 100%.

Exactly. Democrats are scraping the bottom of the barrel for any filthy trick they can manage to hurt Trump. It's actually disgusting... can you imagine being falsely accused of something just because the fine people on the "other side" are willing to sink to the lowest of levels in order to score political points?
---

Oh what a coincidence, you're posting on your alt again
---

Wil_Knights posted...

If a single leftist can point me to evidence that this actually happened, then I'll eat my (MAGA) hat. Otherwise, it's pretty clear that this is a political stunt to drag Kavanaugh's name through the mud and hurt his chances of being voted into the SC.

Instead of making up false accusations/fake news, why don't you guys just accept that Trump won the election and let him appoint who he wants? Elections have consequences, and he won.

Can you point to the evidence that this is clearly a political stunt and that it's a false accusation?
---

Heineken14 posted...

Payzmaykr posted...

CantKeepMeDown posted...

southcoast09 posted...

Good. Shes a fucking liar and she gets anything she asks for. One other thing the media tries to say is that she came forward. That is not true. She was doxxed and exposed, and the people are not going to stand for this.

Happy hunting.

Actually the people DON'T want Kavanaugh. He's got a pretty damn low rating.

Yeahhhhhhhhhhh, no. The vast majority knows this witch hunt is another lie and nobody believes it. Remember, your beloved poll results are not true. They said Hillary would win by nearly 100%.

No, they predicted she would win more votes... which they were spot on about.

Except she didn't win, so I guess they weren't quite spot on about that. Kind of funny that she based her strategy around winning the popular vote while Trump went for the electoral. And Hillary voters thought she was smarter than Trump... why, exactly?
---

Heineken14 posted...

Payzmaykr posted...

CantKeepMeDown posted...

southcoast09 posted...

Good. Shes a fucking liar and she gets anything she asks for. One other thing the media tries to say is that she came forward. That is not true. She was doxxed and exposed, and the people are not going to stand for this.

Happy hunting.

Actually the people DON'T want Kavanaugh. He's got a pretty damn low rating.

Yeahhhhhhhhhhh, no. The vast majority knows this witch hunt is another lie and nobody believes it. Remember, your beloved poll results are not true. They said Hillary would win by nearly 100%.

No, they predicted she would win more votes... which they were spot on about.

Nice backpedaling.
---

Heineken14 posted...

Wil_Knights posted...

If a single leftist can point me to evidence that this actually happened, then I'll eat my (MAGA) hat. Otherwise, it's pretty clear that this is a political stunt to drag Kavanaugh's name through the mud and hurt his chances of being voted into the SC.

Instead of making up false accusations/fake news, why don't you guys just accept that Trump won the election and let him appoint who he wants? Elections have consequences, and he won.

Can you point to the evidence that this is clearly a political stunt and that it's a false accusation?

It's happening a few days before he's sworn in as a SC justice. Why didn't this happen a few days after? Or a few years after? Or after he's already a judge? The timing is just so perfect.

Anyway, I don't need to provide any evidence to support Kavanaugh since in America, it's innocent until proven guilty. Can you point to the evidence suggesting that what the accuser is saying is true?
---

Payzmaykr posted...

Heineken14 posted...

Payzmaykr posted...

CantKeepMeDown posted...

southcoast09 posted...

Good. Shes a fucking liar and she gets anything she asks for. One other thing the media tries to say is that she came forward. That is not true. She was doxxed and exposed, and the people are not going to stand for this.

Happy hunting.

Actually the people DON'T want Kavanaugh. He's got a pretty damn low rating.

Yeahhhhhhhhhhh, no. The vast majority knows this witch hunt is another lie and nobody believes it. Remember, your beloved poll results are not true. They said Hillary would win by nearly 100%.

No, they predicted she would win more votes... which they were spot on about.

Nice backpedaling.

How is that back peddling? That's literally what they did....
---