I was more skeptical of Ramirez's story seeing as how she herself wasnt sure that kavanaugh was the offender in her story until she sat down with a
democrat lawyer for 6 days.
But I feel both women had the right to testify to senate and be heard.
And I feel the same about avenattis client, ms. swetnick.
However, I look at her claims far more skeptically than I did the previous two women.
There are many reasons to question her claims, and she comes off as not a very good person at all.
1. She claims to have attended these parties from 81-83. She also claims to have been drugged and gang raped at a party in 1982. Now she doesnt say
that kavanaugh or judge participated in the rape, but they were there.
Why would this woman continue to then go to parties until 1983 if she had been gang raped there?
Now people will say sometimes victims dont realize the abuse until later. But she is not saying this was sort of consensual sex that went too far;
she is saying she was drugged and raped by multiple men against her will.
Even if she was afraid and didnt tell anyone (she says she told two people I think) or go to the police, why would you put yourself back in that
situation? This alone is devastating for her account.
2. She is actually two years older than Kavanaugh. This means she would have been 20 in 1983 (if my math is correct) hanging out getting drunk at a
high school party.
Thats not a huge deal, but if she was giving alcohol to minors or engaging in sexual activities, that would be a problem . Doesnt mean her story cant
be true, but it reflects on her character and credibility.
3. Maybe most damning.
This woman claims she knew of these poor girls being gang raped. Yet she went back to these parties, again and again and again, and drank with these
girls, and didnt warn them they were about to be raped.
That is horrible! What credibility does a person like that have?
Now people say "So what, she is saying kavaugh did the same thing" But is she?
She admits to basically being an accessory to rape. The only proof she offers that Kavanaugh knew of the rapes was that she saw him in a line of guys
once, and assumed that line was to have sex with a girl. That doesnt prove it was rape, and doesnt even prove it was sex. She never claims to see
kavanaugh or these guys in the line having sex.
So it is entirely possible to think that even if these gang rapes were occurring, Kavanaugh didnt know. The only person we know for sure knew was ms
Now you may say if these rapes happened, kavanaugh and everyone at the party would have had to have known. I disagree. I have been to parties where
people had sex, and had no clue whatsoever until told later.
Kavanaugh may have been a drunk just boozing it up, unaware that rapes were occurring. And just because he was seen in a line doesnt prove he raped
But we do know that swetnick by her own admission helped facilitate the gang rape of young girls, or at least allowed it to happen over and over again
while she drank with them and had fun.
4. There are other little things that raise suspicion. Why wait 30 years (i know I know, some people wait because of the trauma but still worth
asking). Why not file a police report in maryland, where the statute of limitations is still open to investigate rape? Why go to someone like
avenatti, someone who even politico said serious dems were backing away from?
Why wait until after kavanuagh would have been confirmed to bring this up? Had there not been delays, she would have been too late to stop him with
Maybe she waited to the last minute because it was political? Maybe she wanted to get as much detail from what kavanaugh would say before she made
Like how the only one party she remembers by name or anything was one that occurred on "Beach week", something kavanuaghs released calander just
happened to claim he was at.
5. Another damning fact,
her claims are so huge that it almost defies reason that during three years of gang rape parties, with many victims, perpetrators, and probably other
witnesses at these parties, this never came up in 6 fbi background investigations into kavanuagh.
How can that be? Are the fbi that incompetent? She was personally at ten gang rape parties. I would assume there were many more over those three
years that they had.
She said there were lines of guys raping girls. How many people are covering this up? How was the fbi not able to get wind of this with 6
None of this is proof she is lying. But given that there is no physical evidence, her credibility matters. And given the above, I dont find her very
But lets take everything she says as true.
She never claims to have seen kavanaugh rape anyone. Never claims to seen him have sex. She never even says she saw him spike the punch, just heard
he was doing it.
She says he made crude jokes, was a mean drunk, and grabbed girls inappropriately and grinded on them (she says without there consent, but how does
So he, like cory booker, groped at girls.
If thats true, yeah its bad, but worth keeping off the court? Are we going to go back to make sure every public servant never bumped or grinded on
Due to what I think is a very uncredible accuser, with no physical evidence, I dont think this should delay the process.
She should be welcome to file a statement with the senate, file an official police report in maryland, and allow the process to move on.
This seems very like an attempt to weaponize an sexual assault allegation for political purposes.
As a person who was ALWAYS verbally against sexual assaults, since the first allegation I am trying to keep an open mind and believe all of these
delays, demands, lack of evidence and/or witnesses to corroborate and details of the incidents, are just an amazing coincidence.
It could happen. She could've suffered some kind of trauma and sat on it for 40 years. It happens. I was ready to believe her after her testimony.
I'm not anymore. One, because she WON'T SHOW UP. And two because this is being orchestrated by the Democrats to delay the nomination until the
mid-terms. It's pretty evident right now after this third woman. You've covered well all of the details that contributes to the skepticism.
I'm sure more will come forward 'till Friday. They won't stop now until they delay the nomination.
edit on 26/9/2018 by vinifalou because: (no reason given)
WASHINGTON—Rod Rosenstein, the U.S. deputy attorney general, has asked federal prosecutors to help review the government documents of Judge
Brett Kavanaugh, U.S. President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, according to a letter obtained by the New York Times on Wednesday.
Rosenstein’s request was an unusual insertion of politics into federal law enforcement. While the Justice Department has helped work on previous
Supreme Court nominations, department lawyers in Washington typically carry out that task, not prosecutors who pursue criminal investigations
I know you’re playing the devils advocate, but even entertaining these ideas is taking it a step farther than I feel we should allow it to go. In
other words, he denies even being at these types of parties and why shouldn’t we believe him?
Just by entertaining these ideas puts the thought in people’s heads that he was a hopeless drunk and from what I’ve heard he doesn’t even
I’m not one of them, but there’s people out there that have never even smoked a cigarette
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.