It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kavanaugh Accuser Says, "I Thought He Might Inadvertently Kill Me "

page: 12
10
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 07:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: shawmanfromny

She was going to let it go like many women do, but she felt obligated since he was up for a SCOTUS appointment.

THE QUESTION IS WHY WOULD SHE LIE?


My question is why would she wait? Kavanaugh isn't just some schmo off the street. He's been rising through the judicial system for decades now. She obviously remembers his name because he doesn't look like a teenager anymore.

WHY NOW?




posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 07:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Teikiatsu

And why would Feinstein sit on it for almost a year?

And what does Congress think they will achieve besides naval gazing?



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 07:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You seem to want to investigate anything, no matter how ridiculously far fetched and no matter how much recent history has shown it to be a complete boondoggle.

Exactly what "boondoogle" investigations do you think I supported exactly?


Sure. "Investigate" a 35 year old allegation that no law enforcement agency seems willing to investigate. Seems like a great use of tax dollars. That is what we pay legislators to do, right? Its why they can issue arrest warrants and incarcerate people. Its right there in the constitution.

LMAO

We paid Congress to investigate Hillary Clinton over 9 times all to find nothing substantial against her. I think we can spare a dime or two to hear out these allegations.



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 07:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ketsuko

No. That isn't what is happening here. Kavanaugh's confirmation hasn't been revoked because of any of this. It was just delayed to investigate the allegations. Stop misrepresenting reality.


The point is that by giving weight to the allegation on this level where they will investigate, you set the stage for what I mentioned. The only difference is that if you are about to get hired, or promoted and this sort of #MeToo thing pops out of the woodwork on you, do you think they'll stop to investigate or just quietly show you the door?

Ironically, the public nature of this lynching is protecting Kavanaugh, but yours won't be televised, so you'd just be chucked out.



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 07:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Krazysh0t

So you'll be perfectly content and happy when, some years from now you're about to get a job and suddenly the person or people about to hire you walk and say, "Sorry, we have to rethink this. Some anonymous woman from your past ... junior high ... sent us a letter saying you almost killed her at a party by trying to rape her. I'm sorry, but I'm sure you understand why you might not be the best fit for us."

Because that it exactly what you're cheering on here.


That is not what is being presented here and that is a huge false equivalence.


No, that is exactly what is being presented here.



No, it is not.

He has not been denied the job and was not about to be hired. Not to mention the woman has come forward.

Huge false equivalence.



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 07:50 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

If I'm about to serve in a position as a public servant I would fully expect my political enemies to dig up whatever dirt they can to take me down. It is literally politics 101. Yet you guys are pretending like this is not normal for this guy. It's ridiculous.



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 07:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Teikiatsu

And why would Feinstein sit on it for almost a year?

And what does Congress think they will achieve besides naval gazing?


They think they'll run out the clock and stall the nomination in the hopes that they'll be able to vote him down after the election. They're playing for time. Democrats hope they'll retake the Senate.



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 07:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ketsuko

If I'm about to serve in a position as a public servant I would fully expect my political enemies to dig up whatever dirt they can to take me down. It is literally politics 101. Yet you guys are pretending like this is not normal for this guy. It's ridiculous.


*Digging* it up, or *Making* it up?



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 07:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ketsuko

If I'm about to serve in a position as a public servant I would fully expect my political enemies to dig up whatever dirt they can to take me down. It is literally politics 101. Yet you guys are pretending like this is not normal for this guy. It's ridiculous.


*Digging* it up, or *Making* it up?

That's what the investigation is for. To find out the answer to that question.



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 08:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Investigating Hillary was them doing their job in overseeing the executive branch after the death of an ambassador at the hands of a terrorist organization.

This is them helping to dig up ancient bones that have no evidence to support them. The best evidence: she mentioned someone unnamed in a clinical session in 2012.



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 08:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Investigating Hillary was them doing their job in overseeing the executive branch after the death of an ambassador at the hands of a terrorist organization.

That excuse may hold up for the 1st time they investigated her, but after investigating once, finding nothing and then opening more investigations is redundant and partisan. Not to mention a waste of tax money.


This is them helping to dig up ancient bones that have no evidence to support them. The best evidence: she mentioned someone unnamed in a clinical session in 2012.

It's better than most accusations of this sort.

BTW: Are you familiar with the case of Clarence Thomas? The GOP put him on the court in the early 90's. Prior to the confirmation a sexual assault allegation came forward. He was confirmed anyways. The following election was known as the year of the woman as the House and Senate so a boost in a historic boost in women politicians. This year is already shaping up to be a similar situation thanks to the overly misogynist Trump admin, but these allegations aren't going to help. That's why the GOP Congress blinked yesterday. They see the writing on the wall even if you don't.
edit on 18-9-2018 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 08:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ketsuko

If I'm about to serve in a position as a public servant I would fully expect my political enemies to dig up whatever dirt they can to take me down. It is literally politics 101. Yet you guys are pretending like this is not normal for this guy. It's ridiculous.


So you admit it's all politics and *not* about job qualification and *not* about justice for anything.

Thank you.



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

I never claimed it wasn't. It's clearly a case of politics, but that doesn't mean the allegations aren't true and shouldn't be investigated.



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Oh, yes, we're familiar with both Thomas and Bork. Bork's case is so infamous that it spawned it's own slang term -- borking.

Why is it always and only GOP nominees that have to undergo this type of process? It isn't because Dem nominees are saints. It's because the Dems fight dirty.



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 08:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ketsuko

If I'm about to serve in a position as a public servant I would fully expect my political enemies to dig up whatever dirt they can to take me down. It is literally politics 101. Yet you guys are pretending like this is not normal for this guy. It's ridiculous.


So you admit it's all politics and *not* about job qualification and *not* about justice for anything.

Thank you.


This nomination shouldn't be about politics, but in this case I believe it is all about politics.



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 08:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ketsuko

I never claimed it wasn't. It's clearly a case of politics, but that doesn't mean the allegations aren't true and shouldn't be investigated.


I heard you burned a dozen cats alive. I can produce a letter about it from an anonymous eye witness.

Doesn't mean it's not true and shouldn't be investigated ...



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 08:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Oh, yes, we're familiar with both Thomas and Bork. Bork's case is so infamous that it spawned it's own slang term -- borking.

Why is it always and only GOP nominees that have to undergo this type of process? It isn't because Dem nominees are saints. It's because the Dems fight dirty.

What are you smoking? Bill Clinton's impeachment trial. The many investigations into Hillary Clinton. Obama's birth certificate. Don't pretend like the GOP doesn't pull these petty political games to undermine their opponents. The difference is that you fully supported investigating THOSE allegations, but don't support it when Democrats do the same.



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 08:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ketsuko

I never claimed it wasn't. It's clearly a case of politics, but that doesn't mean the allegations aren't true and shouldn't be investigated.


I heard you burned a dozen cats alive. I can produce a letter about it from an anonymous eye witness.

Doesn't mean it's not true and shouldn't be investigated ...

Knock yourself out. Turn it over to the police and see if they care. I'm not worried they will and am confident they'll laugh you out of the station since you wouldn't even be able to identify my appearance, let alone my name. Hell you don't have any identifying characteristics about me.

Though cases of the justice department ruining people's lives due to trumped up charges are rampant and many.
edit on 18-9-2018 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 08:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ketsuko

If I'm about to serve in a position as a public servant I would fully expect my political enemies to dig up whatever dirt they can to take me down. It is literally politics 101. Yet you guys are pretending like this is not normal for this guy. It's ridiculous.


So you admit it's all politics and *not* about job qualification and *not* about justice for anything.

Thank you.


This nomination shouldn't be about politics, but in this case I believe it is all about politics.


By definition, the process is political.



posted on Sep, 18 2018 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Ah, but this hasn't been turned over to any police now, has it?

Oh, that's right ... it can't be. Statute of limitations. It's over and done with now. She waited too long. The only people who care about this are the ones who are making political hay about it.




top topics



 
10
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join