Rape

Don't Confuse the Kavanaugh Gang Rape Accusation with the Rolling Stone Rape Hoax

Julie Swetnick's charge may well turn out to be untrue too, but there are some significant differences between her story and Jackie's.

|

Kavanaugh
Joshua Roberts/REUTERS/Newscom

Now that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is accused of not just attempted sexual assault and harassment but also of helping to organize a gang rape during his high school years, some people have asked whether the allegations called to mind the infamous University of Virginia gang rape hoax.

But the Kavanaugh accusations, while not totally solid in every way, are significantly more plausible than the story an anonymous victim, "Jackie," told to Rolling Stone in 2014.

Because I was an early skeptic of the UVA gang rape, a few people have asked me whether I am similarly skeptical of the Kavanaugh accusations. The journalist Richard Bradley—who expressed doubts about Jackie even before I did—has received the same queries. Like Bradley, I think there are important differences between what the Kavanaugh accusers—Christine Blasey Ford, Deborah Ramirez, and now Julie Swetnick—have claimed and what Jackie claimed.

First, a refresher: Jackie's story, told only to Rolling Stone's Sabrina Rubin Erdeley, on condition of anonymity, was that her date, an older male student at the University of Virginia, brought her to a fraternity party during the fall of her freshman year. This unidentified male—"Drew" in the story—lured her to a dark second-floor bedroom, where a group of men ambushed her. They knocked her through a glass table and viciously gang-raped her as the glass shards cut up her back. She passed out from the pain and blood loss, recovered consciousness hours later, and fled the room. Her friends told her not to go to the police, out of fear that this could impact their reputations.

Eventually, it turned out the whole story was a lie. "Drew" did not exist at all: Jackie had catfished her friends, and messages sent from Drew to other people were almost certainly sent by Jackie herself. The fraternity hosted no party on the night in question. And Jackie's friends contradicted her account when journalists reached out to them for comment (Erdeley had neglected to speak with them, instead trusting Jackie's memory of their comments).

Two details of the Rolling Stone story had struck me as false after I read it for a second time. For one thing, even a tiny cut from a shard of glass causes a person to bleed profusely; that people could roll around in glass for hours and survive the encounter beggared belief. For another—and this is relevant to the Kavanaugh accusation—Jackie claimed to be sober. The vast majority of campus sexual misconduct disputes involve alleged victims who were incapacitated by alcohol to some degree. Perpetrators rely on victims having a diminished ability to resist or be aware of what is happening. It was very hard for me to imagine a pre-planned fraternity gang rape that did not involve getting the victim drunk enough to make her next-day memory unreliable.

The Kavanaugh accusation is not as outlandish as this. (I'll just discuss Swetnick's claims in this article, since I've already written plenty about Ford's, and Ramirez's is less serious.) For one thing, Swetnick has chosen to out herself, in a sworn statement, which means her claims are more credible. (Jackie hid behind anonymity—and to this day has suffered little consequence for lying: No mainstream news outlet has chosen to name her, even though every journalist who has written about her case knows exactly who she is.) For another, Swetnick has accused a specific person: Kavanaugh. (Jackie refused to tell Erdeley her attacker's real name until after it was too late.)

Swetnick has alleged that Kavanaugh's circle of friends at Georgetown Prep hosted parties in which women were given copious amounts of alcohol, and possibly drinks spiked with sedatives. Swetnick has claimed, "I was drugged with Quaaludes or something similar [was] placed in what I was drinking."

Quaaludes, of course, are the sedatives Bill Cosby—who was sentenced just this week—used to incapacitate his victims so he could rape them. It's possible Swetnick is trying to link Kavanaugh with Cosby here, because even though the use of these drugs to incapacitate people are a real problem, some evidence suggests they aren't used nearly as often as people seem to think. Alcohol, voluntarily consumed, is by far the substance most commonly used to facilitate rape. Swetnick might sincerely think she was drugged, but lots of sexual assault victims have thought the same, when really alcohol was the culprit.

Swetnick has also claimed that the boys at the Georgetown Prep parties—including Kavanaugh—would line-up outside a room containing an incapacitated woman, "waiting for their turn" to rape her. This is a somewhat more difficult circumstance to accept on face value—would the men really just wait outside the door, in a manner that made it obvious they were patiently waiting for their opportunity to commit rape, in full view of other party attendees? Note that the most plausible of the allegations against Kavanaugh, the one made by Ford, involves no such thing: She claimed that Kavanaugh dragged her into a bedroom when she was away from the rest of the group, and attempted to rape her with just his close confidant, Mark Judge, watching. For Ford to be telling the truth, it only requires that Kavanaugh and Judge consumed tons of alcohol and made a spur-of-the-moment, terrible mistake. If Swetnick is telling the truth, a lot of people plotted to do something terrible, were content to make everyone else aware of what they were doing, and waited patiently to do it.

It's the premeditation aspect of Swetnick's story that most strongly resembles the UVa hoax. Fortunately—for the truth's sake, if not any one party's—Swetnick named names, and there should be other witnesses who can shed light on the truth of the matter.

In the meantime, it would be wrong to dismiss the allegation as beyond the realm of possibility. Given the number of people who have accused Kavanaugh and Judge of teen sexual misbehavior and serial alcoholism—misbehavior that Kavanaugh has denied completely, rather than claimed to not remember or at least acknowledged was not unheard of in his private school set—one would have to think that this is essentially a conspiracy to derail his nomination. At this point, I'm not sure conspiracy is the most plausible explanation. We shouldn't accept these accusations on blind faith, but it's starting to seem like blind faith is what Kavanaugh's defenders are requiring of us.

NEXT: Like the Rest of Us, Jeff Flake Is Frustrated and Confused About the Kavanaugh Confirmation Process

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. But the Kavanaugh accusations, while not totally solid in every way…

    …are close enough for government work.

    1. A “story which is not totally solid in every way” is otherwise known as a lie. Robby seems to think as long as an accusation has some believable elements, it should be believed. Yeah, that is some real solid thinking there.

      1. Nobody in the fucking world thinks your opinion is shaped by any facts or evidence other than the (R) after Trump’s name, so why bother talking?

        1. WAAAA. It must be so hard losing every argument the way you do.

          1. The great thing about Trump is he is showing just how false and full of shit the democrats, journalists (including reason), and yes Tony are.

            This “Kavanaugh organized gang rape parties at 15” stories are so obviously a lie. Yet Tony, Robby, et. al. talk about them as if they are plausible.

            What this does is demonstrating just how much Robby, Reason, Tony and the democrats lie about everything else, just how deranged they are, and just how low they are willing to go. It makes it easy it to see how this applies to every other position they take, how they cannot and should not be reasoned with and instead should be ignored and thrown into the dust bin of history.

            Trump will guide the GOP over this nonsense and crush you lunatics in the process.

            1. I can’t believe I considered donating to Reason during the Obama years and am glad I never did. Now I am considering showing up at Robby’s house with a woodchipper.

              1. I have not contributed to Reason and dont plan to.

                Reason is run by anarchists and Lefties and they undermine Libertarianism on a daily basis.

                I come for the libertarians that still comment here.

                1. Same here, but ENB is pretty good. She’s just not as prolific a writer as Robby.

            2. Tony is an excellent drone for the collective.

        2. So you guys finally have something in common?

        3. “your opinion is shaped by any facts or evidence other than the (R) after Trump’s name”

          Based on your own admissioobs of the same, what the fuck are YOU talking for trust fund tony?

            1. *admissiboobs

        4. Nobody in the fucking world thinks you’re anything other than a complete fucking retard, so why bother breathing, you mouth-breathing Okie douchebag?

        5. You poor little thing. Grow up and stop looking for something or someone to blame your own failures on. Mad at the world and driven by immature emotional development.Yep that’s a winner.

        6. You poor little thing. Grow up and stop looking for something or someone to blame your own failures on. Mad at the world and driven by immature emotional development.Yep that’s a winner.

      2. A “story which is not totally solid in every way” is exactly that. It is not necessarily a lie. Most “stories” from decades ago will be imperfect. Just about any story will get modified over time.

    2. The farce is strong with this one….

    3. While the accusations against the green card holder are not solid in every way, he’s still going to be deported…

    4. Headline for tomorrow morning: “Just Because Swetnick Is a Psycho Who Had a Restraining Order Taken Out Against Her Doesn’t Mean She Isn’t Telling the Truth About Going to High School Rape-a-Paloozas While She Was a Legal Adult”

      These are CREDIBLE ACCUSATIONS!

      1. She also magically had a 40k tax lein paid off this year and had been represent by Ford’s lawyer in a sexual harrasment suit levied against the one business she left off her resume for some reason.

        1. Links? Would love to read up on this.

          1. Don’t hold your breath. Psychopathic Trumptards never have links.
            Or they’re to Infowars, Breitbart, Daily Caller and WND.

            1. Hihn, you are truly an idiot.

              This has been reported by the Wall Street Journal.

            2. Sounds like an all night crack binge has ended.

  2. Yeah Soave, it is totally not outlandish for a woman to claim that she kept going to parties where she knew women were being drugged and raped. She never said anything about these rapes at the time. Let the women be raped and kept going to parties anyway. Yeah, that is totally fucking believable.

    This is less believable than the UVA case. Can Robbie’s fan boys please stop insisting people treat him as anything but a complete moron now? Doesn’t this piece pretty much end that debate?

    1. Robby is not a TEAM RED! hack like you are.

      1. Yeah, that totally makes this story believable. We know you believe this because you are a retard who believes anything your team tells you to believe. You don’t need to waste our time reminding us of that.

      2. Robby is not a TEAM RED! hack like you are.

        Right. He’s just a hack.

        He used to take a principled stance against men falsely accused of rape and sexual assault in kangaroo courts. Kavanaugh’s defamation has shown Robby not even to be principled on the one topic he’s halfway competent at covering. Erdely was a sucker and a fanatic, a true believer. Not at all good to be sure, but Robby’s a seasoned cynic walking into the fray with eyes wide open. He gives no shits about his principles or credibility as long as the right people are being defamed.

        1. These stories mostly only make sense if you assume women can’t be held responsible for anything or that they are exceptionally fragile. Two views that feminists normally loathe on full display without a peep.

          1. Right, I’m incredulous that ENB has weighed in on the story as much as she has too.

          2. +1

          3. FemNazis have bigger fish to fry.

            1. Those are fish you smell, but they’re not fried

      3. Real libertarians are Team Red hacks.

        Of course, real libertarians are actually fascists, anyway.

        I’m not kidding. Come down the pipeline sometime, there’s real liberty here!

        1. None of that makes any sense.

          1. look at the handle, perhaps it is all to be taken backward?

      4. These allegations agianst kavanaugh have more gaping holes than a stormy daniels video. In the real world “just take my word for it” doesnt work. So far the only solid evidence agianst Kavanaugh is that he has a dick.

        1. But in the real world… isn’t that proof enough? Haven’t tou been listening to our betters or do you need some re-education?

        2. ” the only solid evidence agianst Kavanaugh is that he has a dick.”

          Pics or it didn’t happen.

      5. God you and Tony are just embarrassing.

    2. A college age young woman went to just under a dozen parties where high school boys gang raped inebriated/intoxicated female guests and didn’t take any stops to stop it.

      What a wonderful person she is.

      I’m curious about who was hosting the parties – was it high school organized parties, college organized parties, or some hybrid? I understand the synergy/social circle overlap between prep high school and the nearby colleges, but are a lot of 10th-12th grade boys really doing/getting away with this stuff at “hybrid” parties or college student run parties?

      If they’re high school organized, are 2nd (or even 1st) year college students really in regular attendance? If so, what kind of 1st/2nd year college student goes to a high school party, witnesses/learns of gang rape of intoxicated attendees and keeps going?

      I have a theory that a lot of this is focused on the years where he was under 18 because the police investigation will go nowhere since there’s next to no chance of him being brought up on charges due to the combination/interaction between statute of limitations and his status as a juvenile.
      If they claim he did this at 18+, the police can investigate at least some of it and I think the accusers fear the outcome of such an investigation.

      1. The alternative is that he realized/was told that he needs to stop this stuff because he’s 18 now and there will be real consequences. This suggests people knew and covered up A LOT of rapes and assaults – a serious matter for the police to investigate, even today.

        If powerful parents covered this up with the assistance of police and school officials, we have a serious criminal conspiracy to uncover and I find it a little hard to believe that not a peep of this came up in the various FBI background checks performed in the past.

        Surely there’s a payoff, school record, victim complaint, police report, something/anything that could corroborate any of this, right?

        1. Its all lies and made up.

      2. Police investigate underage crimes all the time, and you don’t get to be a criminal mastermind without police attention just because you’re not the age of majority. And, while I don’t know what the age of majority is in MD, if he was 17 or functionally close, he can even be tried as an adult, especially for crimes as bad as the ones alleged.

        1. Just shut up and stop embarrassing yourself.

      3. One explanation/defense put forward for her continuing to attend these parties is that she didn’t know they would be there.

        -If she was going to house parties by the same people, she should have some idea about what they were about. When you see the same people at every “gang rape” party, it should dawn on you what kind of party it is.’

        Imagine a high school sophomore regularly attends 8th grade organized parties where a small group of guys are drugging and ganging raping one or more girls at each party. In what world does this older girl stay silent and just keep attending for two years?

        -If she goes to the party, see the guys, and leaves, how does she know a gang rape happened? If she hears about it, a lot of other people should have as well. The same also goes for not personally witnessing one at a party she’s at – if she’s hearing rumors at the party, so did other people.

        1. The whole thing is clearly bullshit.

          1. Going to high school parties up until your JUNIOR year of college indicates some issues.

      4. -If she is attending different parties with almost all new attendees, this implies that a small gang of high schoolers are floating around various parties of minimally overlapping attendance, drugging one or more guests, gang raping them, and all of this is accepted. This requires an unreasonably large and friendly social circle spanning a number of schools or ‘cliques’.

        How popular could they have been that this was not only allowed, but not spoken of? There would have to be at least a couple hundred people who knew and are still silent.

        In reality, they would be (semi-) outsiders at someone else’s party. Can anyone remember this sort of thing going over well if that outside group did anything but behave nicely?

    3. She never said anything about these rapes at the time.

      …and neither did any of the hundreds of kids who allegedly attended these parties.

      -jcr

      1. There would have to be hundreds of person-incidents to report on – eg., 10 people knew about 10 rapes or 100 people knew about 1.

    4. Absolutely. Far, far less believable. I got raped, it was so horrible that i couldn’t report it, but the same crew is having Snoop Dogg next week, I just gotta go. Robbie is a fucking idiot. Reason needs to fire half its staff and start over.

      1. jdd6y, I feel sorry for you if feel you have to attend a party organized by people who raped you. However, your comment raises a pretty obvious question. Who is the Snoop Dogg (equivalent) that kept Swetnick going back to those parties? Most women would be terrified to attend a party organized by folks running a gang-rape ring.

    5. That’s where the story goes totally off the rails. She stood around partying many times while women in another room where being gang raped and never mentioned it to anyone for 3+ decades. If her story was somehow true, she would be an accessory to many rapes.

      In case anyone could believe that tale, she’s 3 years older than Kavanuagh – what the hell was she doing at high school parties in her 20’s? And why can’t anyone (60 classmates so far) even remember her?

      http://www.twitter.com/esaagar/status/1045049099354079232

      1. Clearly, she was asking for it, but no one was listening…

      2. Umm, she didn’t know why the guys were standing in line until much later.
        Educate yourself/

        1. Have you ever been to a party where people stood in line, except to use the john? BS story

        2. “Umm, she didn’t know why the guys were standing in line until much later.”

          Ok, so how did she find out about it then? Someone would have had to told her. So, who is that person?

        3. Umm, she didn’t know why the guys were standing in line until much later.

          Who educated her? Avenatti?

    6. Fool me into going to a gang rape party once, shame on you.

      Fool me into going to 9 or 10 gang rape parties over the course of 3 years, shame on me.

      Or something…

  3. you guys write this nonsense just to see how quickly you’re called idiots?

    1. Hey, leave the commenters alone.

      1. He wasn’t talking about you Chipper. No need to get testy. And we call you retarded. We would never insult idiots by calling you one. You know that.

      2. I’m here for the commenters. entirely more entertaining.

        1. I’m stalking Christian myself.

          1. Britches or Bust!

          2. excellent job, too.

  4. For one thing, Sweetnick has chosen to out herself, in a sworn statement, which means her claims are more credible.

    On the credibility scale, this does rank of having a higher chance than the other two. But that doesn’t make them credible. Gang rapes seems like something that would be difficult to slip through the cracks of multiple vettings. And much is made of the sworn statement, but really, these accusations are as difficult to disprove as prove, so she’s not really risking a lot more with that.

    1. That is another good point. It being a sworn statement is only meaningful if there is some way to ever prove what she said was a lie. And the way it is worded it, it would be impossible to ever disprove her statement. Robby being a complete moron is incapable of thinking beyond “she gave a sworn statement, so it must be true”.

    2. Having read her actual statement, I think her (and lawyer’s) intent is:

      1. Force Mark Judge to provide more details about his actual HS activities and friendship with Kavanaugh
      2. Make the nomination of Kavanaugh about the subject of was he a virgin in high school or a gang-rape organizer

      As to her actual credibility re her own alleged rape, I think she’s full of shit. At best, she is conflating an event that occurred to her in college at a college frat – with HS preppies at various HS parties. More likely, she’s just part of a ‘resist’ strategy.

      1. The Ford accusation is far more credible to me as something that actually happened. And GOP fumbled the chance to either a)get ahead of a ton of future accusations like that (christ – is politics now going to be about what we did or didn’t do high school?) or b)voice ANY sympathy for women who have been mistreated/harassed/assaulted and then victimized a second time when they report. It’s almost like every Goober is an asshole who doesn’t even talk to his own daughter.

        1. voice ANY sympathy for women who have been mistreated/harassed/assaulted and then victimized a second time when they report.

          We need stop humoring this bullshit.

          If you do not report a rape, you — SPECIFICALLY you — are allowing rapists to go along and rape others. You are a loathesome shit in that case.

        2. JFree, you claim the GOP has showed no sympathy for women who have been abused and then victimized a second time when they report. Your statement has no connection with reality. It is completely false. The Republicans in Congress have bent over backwards to accommodate her and have avoided slamming her. Your comment is either libel or gross ignorance.

      2. She mentions that she can name witnesses who will confirm her account. The intent is to create public demand for another FBI investigation. The Feds will talk to her witnesses, who won’t be able to give any more concrete details than she is, but can point them to some other people to talk to, etc. and drag this out until after the midterms.

        The Democrats have already said that if they retake control of the Senate they won’t confirm any Supreme Court nominee Trump makes.

      3. The only thing these accusers have proven is that democrats are the worst people in the world.

        1. The Democrats have done the GOP the favor of the decade.

          The GOP will pick up so mnay congressional seats this election 2018.

    3. If you read the declaration, it is precisely worded so that there are no accusations of Kavanaugh actually committing a rape or being the person doing something illegal. All it does is paint a picture of him being guilty by association.

  5. “Don’t Confuse the Kavanaugh Gang Rape Accusation with the Rolling Stone Rape Hoax”

    Were we in danger of doing this?

    1. And even if it is not the same story, which is isn’t, only Robby could think that fact makes this story more plausible.

    2. Were we in danger of doing this?

      Nope. The Rolling Stone Rape Hoax was a complete fabrication leveled against adults. These allegations are leveled against a minor 35 yrs. after the fact.

    3. The Rolling Stone hoax involved a single incident with several people in relative secret.

      This accusation spans around 2 years, and involves several people in numerous incidents lining up to commit their rape, in view of at least one non-participant each time.

      In many ways, it’s even more ridiculous.

      1. +1, this story is absolutely unbelievable.

        Frankly, when I first heard it, I thought it might be a Right wing plant to discredit Ford’s story. I had no thought that anyone could think it remotely true after even a moments thought.

        There’s no way a high visibility group of rich kids were doing this routinely at parties for years and nobody ever said anything for 30 years.

    4. “Remember that time I was right about something? Don’t confuse that with my present gullible idiocy.”

      1. “Remember that time I was right about something? Don’t confuse that with my present gullible idiocy.”

        1. Fuck this site. Robby has no desire to write for Rolling Stone, so going after them was easy.

    5. Well, since Robby was smart enough to see the obvious bullshit in that situation while blithely ignoring it now it’s useful to compare the two.

  6. In the meantime, it would be wrong to dismiss the allegation as beyond the realm of possibility.

    It’s not so much that all that is stated in the allegation would be completely impossible, it’s more the reaction – or lack of reaction – throughout the many years since that make it seem improbable.

    1. It’s certainly within the *realm* of possibility that H *really* were going to start executing public officials via woodchipper. Hence, there was a *credible* assassination threat.

      Fortunately, our friendly federal investigators were able to subpoena commentators identities to get to the bottom of the situation. The systems works!

      It’s a wonder that the Reason editors were such crybabies about the whole thing.

  7. Best move for Ford tomorrow: Double down on her own story, but categorically deny that anything like Swetnick’s story happened to her knowledge. Even go so far as to defend Kavanaugh against Swetnick’s allegations, but ‘He still assaulted me’.

    Instant credibility.

    1. That’s a good point, but assuming any testimony at all happens tomorrow, if given the opportunity to comment on Swetnick’s allegations, the urge to use it to “pile on” will be far too great.

      1. I don’t think so. She would have been at those parties. How can she claim there were gang rapes and she didn’t bother mentioning it before

        1. She was usually drugged, but recent rapey therapy included her mind?

    2. Only a best move if the hole thing is a hoax, and you support using that hoax to destroy a good mans reputation and career. If either something happened, but she is mistaken about who the perpetrator is, or if she is telling the entire truth, then sticking with what the truth is is best. If it counters what others are saying or if it supports it either way telling the truth is best for her. If it is a hoax, hopefully she decides perjuring herself is not the wise thing to do either.

  8. Kavanaugh being a space alien is also “plausible” but it isn’t fucking likely. Neither is a 15 year old virgin running a multi-city gang rape ring with his buddies over multiple years without anyone knowing about it for nearly 4 decades and after having passed 6 FBI background checks.

    Also, that accusations of ancient teenage conduct have been refuted by those allegedly present and/or uncorroborated by any living being doesn’t make them more plausible because there are more of them. Zero evidence + zero evidence + zero evidence = NOT CREDIBLE. That’s especially the case when you look at the political motivations of the people making the claims.

    The most plausible explanation is that Democrats are conspiring to outright slander Kavanaugh in an effort to deny him a seat on the SCOTUS because their demented base demands that they “resist” at all costs to save their baby-killing fetish.

    1. The most plausible explanation is that Democrats are conspiring to outright slander Kavanaugh in an effort to deny him a seat on the SCOTUS because their demented base demands that they “resist” at all costs to save their baby-killing fetish.

      There’s also the background noise of the #Metoo movement and the continued advance of victimocracy.

    2. The more the accusations multiply, the more implausible it becomes that he wouldn’t have been exposed at the time if the accusations were true. A guy might get away with a single attack, getting a way with the kind of pattern of behavior they’re trying to paint is utterly implausible.

      In trying to pile on ‘evidence’ of guilt, they’ve undercut their own case. They’re just hoping to stampede people into acting without thinking rationally about it all.

      1. “In trying to pile on ‘evidence’ of guilt, they’ve undercut their own case.” This is
        only if they actually care about the truth. And assumes they are smart enough
        to figure out that it makes it more implausible.

      2. Its a hail mary move, only like if a football team said they should win because the other team dugged them and raped them…on national TV.

        100% ridiculous.

      3. “They’re just hoping to stampede people into acting without thinking rationally about it all.”

        No, their just hoping to taint Kavanaugh enough that 3 Republican’s won’t vote for him. They don’t give a rats ass if the whole story line collapses a day after his nomination is withdrawn.

    3. That sounds plausible.

      1. Was he running this game rape ring out of a DC pizza shop?

  9. Good god, man. You either have the worst case of TDS imaginable, or you are completely brain damaged. There are no other explanations for keeping up this stream of articles giving credit to these “victims”. Any reasonable person can see through the bullshit going on as nothing more than a political ploy to discredit an otherwise easily confirmed Supreme Court nominee.

    BTW, this is from someone who doesn’t even care for Kavanaugh. The guy reeks of GWB and the Patriot Act.

    1. I am bookmarking this article to throw in the face of every Robby fan boy who shows up to whine about me kicking him around and explaining how he didn’t really mean what he clearly says and he is so dreamy anyway. This article proves Soave is even dumber than I thought he was.

      1. I had hopes this morning he would turn it around… The TDS is strong

      2. This article proves Soave is even dumber than I thought he was.

        Dumber is generous. Unprincipled, self-loathing, and underhanded would be more apt. Robby doesn’t care that black guys get punished disproportionately by Title IX, kangaroo courts, and false allegations, he cares that democrats get punished by it.

        1. But will this article get him laid?

      3. Sparky tucked his tail and ran john, he was the last surviving robbie-sucker, and he only comments under his sockpuppet accounts.

      4. Guys, woodchippers. That is what is called for here. Woodchippers.

      5. I am bookmarking this article to throw in the face of every Robby fan boy who shows up to whine about me kicking him around and explaining how he didn’t really mean what he clearly says and he is so dreamy anyway. This article proves Soave is even dumber than I thought he was.

        He advocates withdrawing Kavanaugh and naming anybody else.

        As if evidence-less accusations won’t be unleashed against anybody.

        They keep claiming credibility without explaining how.

        All Ford had was a polygraph test which was laughable by polygraph’s already low standard.

        The other two have even LESS evidence and are either total hearsay or illogical and implausible.

  10. “Julie Swetnick’s charge may well turn out to be untrue too, but there are some significant differences between her story and Jackie’s.”

    So- it’s guilty until proven innocent, then? Nice.

    1. I feel like Robby is playing out a fiction in his head in which he is lead investigator trying to get to the bottom of a much less obvious outcome. In a week it will be:

      “In the end, my hunch was right all along, Kav never did fuck those 19 underage circus clowns under the bridge, as Avanetti suggested. But I’m glad I let it play out, as the evidence could have gone either way”

  11. 2016 caused you all to lose your damn minds.

    If you are like this now, what happens when Trump replaces RBG?

    1. He should probably do a better job at vetting than outsourcing the pick to a rightwing think tank.

      1. He is going to be on the Supreme Court Tony. So, he was vetted just fine. And rumor has it he wasn’t going to overturn Ogberfell but is now because this has pissed him off so much.

        1. He’s gonna punish gay people out of sheer malice because of this rough confirmation process, and you still think he belongs on the court?

          1. We don’t know, but we can always hope he will.

          2. Assuming that he has the same lack of principles that you and Robby do, Tony?

            1. I am the one taking the anti-rape position here.

              1. You are the one advocating guilty until proven innocent. If you were taking the anti-rape position here you would be demanding that Cory Booker resign immediately. He already confessed to sexual assault.

                1. Shush Tony is trying to pretend petting is rape again, just let him emote.

                2. In fact, Booker should take the honorable way out.

                  1. Hari-kari?

              2. Not really.

                I contend that a false accusation of rape is just as much a violation as physical rape, thus equivalent (possibly worse considering the public humiliation of the accusation rather than the private secret one carries, but I wouldn’t presume to know that so we’ll leave it there).
                By firmly siding with belief in unprovable and unfalsifiable accusations, you’ve very much taken a pro rape position.

              3. Tony, you strike me as one who has likely been at least borderline on consent issues yourself. I also consider it likely that you’re a chickenhawk, and have no problem getting some young teen boy drunk or high, then fucking him.

                People like you make good democrats. Sociopathic, no morality, and willing to take advantage of anyone.

                1. Tony is a registered sex offender.

              4. You are raping his reputation.

                You are raping the minds of his young daughters, stealing their childhood and innocence.

                I hope you are proud

              5. You’re taking the “I’m a complete fucking retarded moron” position here as always, you complete fucking retarded moron.

          3. God you’re a dumb fuck

      2. He selected a sitting Federal Judge of impeccable reputation.

        I don’t care how many guys piled out of a short yellow bus into a Waffle House bathroom on the night one is conceived, there is no possible way anyone can have an IQ over 12 and think that a sitting Federal Judge who had been through multiple FBI background checks wasn’t properly vetted.

        So should we call you Old Number 7?

          1. Amongst those of us not conceived within a sea of regurgitated hashbrowns, he still does.

            Too bad for you.

        1. He selected a sitting Federal Judge of impeccable reputation.

          Go Team Red!

          1. I’m not Team Red. The only idiot in this sorry mess I’ve ever voted for is Feinstein. And I would have done so again until she decided to take full advantage of the credulity of the average Democrat. However, I would join Team Red in an instant if the alternative was lining up with the dolts who are pretending to believe this nonsense.

            In your “defense,” when both the Viacom and Comcast stooges you go to for news agree on an issue, what choice does a committed party-bot like you actually have but to follow along?

          2. Good thing you’re totally above the fray and committed to your principles, jeffy.

            1. Libertarians need to give up on the idea that the right produces bad people, bad ideas, or plays politics in any way that remotely resembles the left.

              This is why you guys are losing. If you all went down the pipeline to where the real freedom fighters are, Marxism would be skullfucked into oblivion by now.

              I’m here to skullfuck Karl Marx!!!!

              1. At least you’re more entertaining than jeffy. LeaveTrumpAlone can’t even get his act on the high school stage.

          3. Here we have jeff accepting allegations as fact and wondering why he gets made fun of.

    2. When Trump replaces RBG, they kill the nominee.

      And I’m not joking about that.

      1. There will be bombings. Guaranteed. There people are psychopaths and just need the right issue to fully out themselves.

        Trump picking one more SCOTUS will set the Lefties off. I predict old pros like the weather underground will proudly teach the young bucks how to do some violent communist agitation.

    3. And replaces her with the Notorious ACB!!!

  12. “But the Kavanaugh accusations, while not totally solid in every way, are significantly more plausible than the story an anonymous victim, “Jackie,” told to Rolling Stone in 2014.”

    Says you.

    1. How stupid do you have to be to think it is plausible that some prep school debate team nerd ran a gang rape ring and had tons of girls coming to his parties even though they all new that the booze was spiked and they were going to get raped? And no one ever said anything about this for 35 years and however many FBI background investigations they have done on Kavanaugh?

      You cannot overstate how stupid Soave must be to think this accusation is plausible.

      1. I still am hoping they get Ansel Elgort for him in the Ford movie hagiography. I want them swinging for the fences.

      2. Plausible or not, Kavanaugh was a minor and drunk. The only way this could possibly get more retarded is if she accused him, again without evidence, of mailing her a polaroid of his penis. Then Reason would be undercutting all the work they’ve published with regards to ‘Free Range Kids’/”sexting shouldn’t be a crime” too.

        1. I am not sure we are living well enough to see the spectacle of Reason suddenly deciding teenage sexting is a big deal and should end ruin your life even 35 years later. Rest assured, if someone makes that allegation against Kavanuagh, that is what they would do.

          1. The party line would be, it shouldn’t be a criminal offence, but clearly it’s bad enough that you shouldn’t be a Supreme Court justice.

  13. ” For one thing, Swetnick has chosen to out herself, in a sworn statement, which means her claims are more credible”

    Says you.

    1. I agree. It makes it more credible. Doesn’t make it cross a threshold of credibility though.

    2. All 3 of these accusations are only credible so far as there is some potential that they could have occurred. The problem with each is that they lack corroboration, actually have been disputed by other named witnesses, and are too old to prove or disprove. They are all so nonspecific that he can either agree they are true or deny the events ever occurring. How can you offer an alibi for an event with no time or place named? It would make little sense for him to agree to the worse parts of the accusations and admitting guilt to any aspect of them give the accusers credibility. It’s also dumb to claim that the sworn statements and adding the accusers names adds much to their credibility. The alleged events occurred too long ago to provide any evidence required to convict and are similarly impossible to disprove and therefore leaves them safe from libel or slander suits. What consequences do these women face if Kavanaugh doesn’t confess or corroborating evidence doesn’t appear to support them? I’d suggest they will get more praise than anything. The whole point of this is to delay or deep-six the nomination. The accusations might be possible, but between the timing and details provided I don’t find them credible. It really comes across as a disgusting example of character assassination. What is sad is how eager some are to embrace it.

      1. The politics of personal destruction.

  14. Kavanaugh’s own supporter, Mark Judge, described him as an often helpless drunk — years ago, in his books — almost exactly like the dozen or so sworn affidavits being filed with the committee.

    This is already deadly for Republicans this November. Even worse if they’re crazy enough to actually conduct a vote on Friday, after denying so many witnesses. Grassley and McConnell have been backed into a deadly corner by Trump. Could get bloody.

    For the long haul, Americans see, once again, the total lack of morals or integrity among the core rank-and -file of both parties. Is it the shrinking number of zealots and fanatics (less than 40% combines) corrupting the politicians? That sure seems likely as we see how low Trump must sink. to hold on to his tiny base. Likewise Bernie and Elizabeth.

    Left – Right = Zero.

    1. Fuck off Hihn. They banned you from here for a reason. It is because you are plague on the board and frankly you need to get some professional help.

      1. Why did they ban him? He got the damnatio memoriae, about which I am sad–whereas I didn’t think they moderated at all!

        1. I don’t know. But they did ban the Hihn name. I have not seen that handle since someone, I forget who, told me they did.

          1. It was shortly after his enemies list, which he published online, became known.

            1. On his blog? Hasn’t that been inactive for years? And what is such a big deal about a list of your self-professed “enemies”? More eccentric than anything else I’d say. Were they shocked to discover that about him?

            2. Not that shortly.

              And I’ve only been around since January, and I made the list (first pump!), so he must update it fairly regularly.

              My guess is the real Michael Hihn politely asked Reason to take action. Might’ve been through his lawyers.

              1. I do remember, a year ago or so, someone came into a thread that was being Hihned up and said they knew the actual Hihn. That he had mentioned to him that he had a doppleganger on Reason. That they both, this guy and the supposed real Hihn, found it funny.

                So I don’t know. But I want to believe.

              2. Possibly. Ive never been convinced that whoever posts as him is the real Hihn. If not, I’m sure the real one is none too pleased with this impostor.

                1. How many right-wing psychos can totally avoid the issue for mindless conspiracy theories and personal attacks? Eight. So far.

                  This is what they are so cowardly evading

                  Kavanaugh’s own supporter, Mark Judge, described him as an often helpless drunk — years ago, in his books — almost exactly like the dozen or so sworn affidavits being filed with the committee.

                  This is already deadly for Republicans this November. Even worse if they’re crazy enough to actually conduct a vote on Friday, after denying so many witnesses. Grassley and McConnell have been backed into a deadly corner by Trump. Could get bloody.

                  For the long haul, Americans see, once again, the total lack of morals or integrity among the core rank-and -file of both parties. Is it the shrinking number of zealots and fanatics (less than 40% combines) corrupting the politicians? That sure seems likely as we see how low Trump must sink. to hold on to his tiny base. Likewise Bernie and Elizabeth.

                  Left – Right = Zero.

                  Typical Trump puppets.

                  1. You know what *isn’t* a conspiracy theory, Dumbfuck Hihnsano? You naming me in two different places on your Enemies List.

                    1. How many right-wing psychos can totally avoid the issue for mindless conspiracy theories and personal attacks? Eight. So far.

                      This is what they are so cowardly evading

                      Kavanaugh’s own supporter, Mark Judge, described him as an often helpless drunk — years ago, in his books — almost exactly like the dozen or so sworn affidavits being filed with the committee.

                      This is already deadly for Republicans this November. Even worse if they’re crazy enough to actually conduct a vote on Friday, after denying so many witnesses. Grassley and McConnell have been backed into a deadly corner by Trump. Could get bloody.

                      For the long haul, Americans see, once again, the total lack of morals or integrity among the core rank-and -file of both parties. Is it the shrinking number of zealots and fanatics (less than 40% combines) corrupting the politicians? That sure seems likely as we see how low Trump must sink. to hold on to his tiny base. Likewise Bernie and Elizabeth.

                      Left – Right = Zero.

                      Typical Trump puppets.

            3. Hahahaha that was and is hilarious.

              1. I’ve done some searching on Hihn, because I find him absolutely fascinating. Nothing resembling serious work, just some google searches. But what little I’ve found suggests to me that our resident ranting lunatic is the real deal. Either that, or someone has been impersonating him since at least 2001, and they studied his published writing intensely to get his ideas and mannerisms down. There are just too many common threads between the older writings that are verifiably Michael Hihn and the crackpottery of our Hihn for me to believe he’s a phony. Not that I would stake big money on it, but I’m convinced to my own satisfaction. Of course, he likes to claim that the mere existence of the Liberty Issues blog proves he is who he says he is. As usual, he’s too stupid to grasp why that isn’t so.

                Anyway. Hihn, you’ve got your head up your ass about this issue, just like every other issue. Kavanaugh drank in high school, therefore we have to believe every crazy bitch who says he was a serial rapist? You’ve always looked like a clown, but this might be a new low.

          2. Within a month or so. All his posts disappeared.

            He was listing me and others on his list and shitting up threads with his typical nonsense.

    2. I normally don’t reply to crazy, but just this once, here goes…

      *deep breath*

      This is not any more deadly for Rs than Ds, come November. Both camps will rally their bases with this nonsense, with Rs feeling that it was a game of dirty politics (rightly so), and the Ds happy that their reps stood up to RESIST (whatever the fuck that means). Meanwhile, the middle/unaffiliated will become even more disgusted with all of it. Maybe some will peel off into the left or right bases, but this won’t change a damn thing on the whole.

      1. Most people who give a shit about this have already made up their minds. same goes with government shutdowns, and other kinds of nonsense that doesn’t directly effect the average person.

        And you’re right. When I talk to regular people about this, the democrat’s bullshit does not pass the smell test.

        1. That’s what I’ve been seeing. Aside from die hard Democrat partisans anyone I’ve talked to or encountered talking about it sees it as complete bullshit and is disgusted. The interesting side of that is that the women who I’ve heard speak about this are even more outraged than the Republican partisans. Incredible claims of sexual assault on such a large public stage hurts women more than anything because of the cry wolf effect.

          1. Or they know the bad precedent it sets and they don’t want it happening to their sons or husbands

          2. Yup. If men dont believe sexual victims like they used to, it sets back sexual assault victims by decades.

            Men and women should outraged about unsupported sex allegations. Rape means something very bad and should be treated as such. Same thing calling people pedophile.

            calling someone shady is one thing. Calling someone a criminal is worse. Calling someone a sex offender is worse than that. Saying someone is a pedo is the worst thing.

        2. Most people who give a shit about this have already made up their minds.

          No, those are the tribal assholes. On both sides.

          Left – Right = Zero
          And less than 40% of Americans, combined

    3. Kavanaugh being a helpless drunk really cuts against the idea that he was, from age 15, the co-mastermind behind a criminal enterprise focused primarily on gang-rapes of high school and college-aged girls, no?

      1. It must be like how GW Bush was simultaneously the dumbest man alive and also the world’s most diabolical genius.

    4. “Kavanaugh’s own supporter, Mark Judge, described him as an often helpless drunk, capable of organizing rape gangs and keeping it secret for nearly four decades, even through multiple federal background investigations.”

      1. Dumbfuck Republicans don’t know what’s involved in those background checks.
        Lying cocksuckers “forget” that Clarence Thomas’s was reopened for the Anita Hill charges, an FBI investigation that lasted there days. But today’s GOP base are plug-ugly stoopid and eager to be brainwashed and manipulated, Puppers on a string.

        1. FBI investigated Thomas because it involved a federal work place you dumb fuck.

          1. (laughing at the trumptard psycho — says federal workers have more rights than anyone else — despite the 14th amendment)

            whoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh

            1. No, the FBI has jurisdiction over Fed crimes, not local crimes. You are a partisan idiot.

    5. Hihn, one of the few trolls banned by reason.

      Hhn Comes back with multiple socks.

    6. Translation: men, if you ever drank 2 beers in one day then get ready for your rape trial ? where you will be found guilty of rape because you drank alcohol.

  15. “In the meantime, it would be wrong to dismiss the allegation as beyond the realm of possibility”

    Says you.

    1. I’m just wondering when the evidentiary standard shifted from ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ to ‘within the realm of possibility’

      1. When the same shit failed to take down Trump

        1. Umm, Trump has already been taken down. (sneer)
          Only 32% of Americans believe him, including nearly half of all Republicans.
          Keep deluding yourself. And snarling. And lying. Just like Trump.

          Trump, the fucking lifelong DEMOCRAT who has ALREADY added more 8-year debt than Obama added AFTER 8 years. (Obama actual vs CBO forecast debt for 2024, on current tax and spending laws)

          Today’s GOP .. the ONLY time the deficit has increased … over 50% …; in a single year (2018) .,, with a booming economy!

          Welcome to the Republican New Deal! Fiscal treason. WORSE THAN OBAMA, sucker!

          1. Hihnsano – dumbfuck = 0

  16. “Given the number of people who have accused Kavanaugh and Judge of teen sexual misbehavior and serial alcoholism?misbehavior that Kavanaugh has denied completely, rather than claimed to not remember or at least acknowledged was not unheard of in his private school set?one would have to think that this is essentially a conspiracy to derail his nomination. ”

    Says you.

    1. This guy gets it. Any statement that makes the left look like anything other then the totalitarian monsters they are is a lie.

      1. Left – Right = Zero
        BOTH totalitarian thugs. Now less than 40% of Americans, combined.

        Libertarians have been calling out their bullshit for a half-century

  17. Surreal – utterly surreal. An adult from a public high school attended parties thrown by high school students from private high schools at which she knew they were gang raping students, and her thought was to keep going to the parties? She didn’t report it (even though she was an adult who was NOT raped until later). She didn’t try to warn anybody. And you find that story plausible? Now we learn that Ford’s polygraph does NOT match her latest story because, I guess, the polygrapher made a “mistake.” And the other accuser knows its Kavanaugh because somebody told her it was Kavanaugh by shouting out his complete name! And it couldn’t be a conspiracy because people can’t spontaneously organize something when they share a common goal – no, they’ve got to meet and plan it out through an explicit agreement. Are you a libertarian? We believe that virtually everything can be spontaneously organized through commonly-held concepts of self-interest; certainly, 3 pro choice libs could “agree” to make similar attacks w/o a conspiracy. Mind boggling… It’s like you’ve never read REASON.

    1. Okay, which fat piece of shit rightwing Republican pundit put this talking point out there so that it is appearing across the internet simultaneously?

      1. Which part of the logic are you contradicting? Jesus fucking christ, you’re dumber than the author.

        1. There’s logic? I see a lot of outlandish accusations and conspiracy theories. As long as Trump gets off the hook, no evidence needed?

          1. Trump isn’t nominated for the Court. He is President you half wit.

            1. He’s literally the laughingstock of the world.

              1. And he is going to be your President for the next six years and transform the courts and the entire country. It is his world. You are just a particularly dumb subject in it.

                1. You’re sounding as retarded as LC right now. Take your pills.

                  1. Tony has has a tough year with all his nightmares coming true: trump as president, hillary losing, gorsuch, kavanaugh, RBG will croak….

                2. He will–and then the Democrats will turn around and pack them, and give statehood to Puerto Rico, the second they gain control of the Senate (which even I think will be difficult for them, but may be within possibility in the best years). They are through fucking around. They are not stupid like the Republicans. All this hysteria we are now seeing has a purpose; it is to have such a culture permeate their base and normalize anything that might be done, anything that might be appropriate if this country were perpetually in the last days of Weimar. Two years ago the idea of children voting for President was something nearly all Democrats considered insane, regardless of what advantages might accrue; this fall it will be instituted in DC and the other blue states are not far behind as everyone is educated as to what is at stake and that our republic’s fabric is already in tatters anyway due to the ruthless Republicans. And so forth.

                  Policy to be affected as well as process of course. The new generation of Dem legal scholars will seek to release us from our barbaric, exceptionalist free-speech extremism, which we already can see has enabled the rise of Hate (not to mention been abused by corporations). And they will sit on the newly expanded benches created by the next Congress they control fully.

                  1. Either a great parody, or pure insanity.

              2. “He’s literally the laughingstock of the world.”

                And YOU CARE SO MUCH!!!

                Which is truly fucking pathetic.

              3. Maybe he should bomb Libya like your Lord and Savior Obama so people take him seriously.

                1. Maybe Trump should NOT increase the 8-year debt by MORE than Obama did AFTER 8 years.

                  The current REPUBLICAN New Deal is the first EVER to increase the deficit … by MORE than 50% … in a SINGLE year … with a booming economy, FISCAL TREASON.

                  Got any more irrelevant GOP talking points that you robotically recite?

              4. That’s pretty rich coming from you, you fucking retard. My god, please kill yourself, you useless turd.

            2. Maga

      2. Looks like it came from hot air which is in fact a right wing source.

        But assuming they got the facts correct it does clearly make ford appear to be a liar who can’t get her story straight.

      3. I advanced a similar theory because it’s the first thing that would be brought up in any other case.

        Someone who graduated high school in 1980 is still attending parties in 1982 where high school age boys are attending and/or organizing house parties wherein female attendees are gang raped while intoxicated. Are college students allowing high school students to rape their guests, or is the accuser an adult attending high school parties where other high schoolers are raping guests?

        Either way, it’s perfectly reasonable to ask her why she took no steps to stop the high school rape gang parties and instead kept attending.

        1. Someone who graduated high school in 1980

          How mind-fucking STUPID can you be?

          still attending parties in 1982 where high school age boys

          Kavanaugh is two years older than her. That means if he was still in high school, but she had graduated …. how fucking stupid is he?

          Can you grasp what I showed you?
          This is why the majority of Americans now ridicules you goobers.

          Left – Right = Zero

          1. Swetnick is older than Kavanaugh

            The hostile imbecile thing is not a good look

          2. Fuckstick, Swetnick is 55 years old, Kavanaugh 52.

          3. Nice try goober.

            Swetnick graduated high school in 1980, Kavanaugh in 1983. She was ~3 years older and apparently a regular attendee of high school parties where girls were drugged/spiked and gang raped, and she kept attending without doing or saying anything to stop it.

      4. Tony, it’s coming out this way since many of us normal people who like fucking the opposite sex went to parties and drank and fucked in high school. So it isn’t a republican talking point so much as something we all just know.

        Maybe you were dancing at some fag club while underage and jacking 50 year old chickenhawks off in the alley behind the club, like so much Ian Gallagher, but the rest of us know how high school parties work.

        They don’t work anything like the way these bitches are saying.

        1. One

          Sick

          Fuck

        2. +1

          Men and women engaged in partying that involved drugs, alcohol, sex, Fun.

    2. Are you a libertarian?

      This has nothing to do with libertarianism. There are women out there who have been brutally raped. They won’t ask for, nor receive, and FBI investigation into their violent attacks. There are boys out there who have been falsely accused by women not for any crime but to clear their consciousness and cleanse the stains from their cloth. There are men and women out there with lifetimes of honest work and good deeds under their belt whose merit should be judged not on the allegations of harmless childhood indescretions, but on the objective product of their labor. These allegations and the farcical acceptance of all of it is a slap in the face to all of them. Men, women, and children should be insulted by this shitty kabuki.

      1. Mark Judge’s book says you’re full of shit. Along with Nardz and Aloysious
        That’s why they don’t dare let him testify. He’d have to explain his PUBLISHED depiction of Kavanaugh as a total drunkard who, in one scene, pukes into a car and then passes out … as the sworn affidavits are now showering into the Judicial Committee … only to be suppressed.

        Anything else, Sluggo?

      2. +2

  18. For one thing, Sweetnick has chosen to out herself, in a sworn statement, which means her claims are more credible.

    What it means is that they are claims. If someone is willing to swear to something it makes it, however outlandish the claims, officially something to be considered. They certainly deserve more attention than someone who is not willing to make any official claims at all (mir?ndote a ti, mamacita). I don’t know why on an occasion of this seriousness and importance Robbie has been reaching for supermarket magazine interviews for his standards of comparison. Seems like a bit of a straw man to me.

    1. Kavanaugh has given a sworn statement, too. Apparently his is not credible to Robby.

  19. We shouldn’t accept these accusations on blind faith, but it’s starting to seem like blind faith is what Kavanaugh’s defenders are requiring of us.

    ?\_(?)_/?

    1. What is Robby saying there other than if you can get enough people to repeat the same lie it must be true? Since when does the number of people saying something make up for the quality of whatever they are saying?

      It doesn’t require blind faith to disbelieve absurd allegations. It requires thinking rationally. And it takes no more faith to dismiss the 100th one than it does the first one. Moreover, it never occurs to Robby that the number and absurdity of allegations is also evidence for there being a coordinated smear campaign. That is a much more reasonable hypothesis than saying “well sure they are all completely absurd but there are a bunch of them so something must be true”.

      God Robby is an appalling moron.

      1. What’s absurd about the allegation that a prep boy douche slapped his dick in women’s faces against their will? I think the choir boy thing is the absurd claim. And oh, look, his own calendar showed a bunch of partying and fucking. His yearbook gave him the award for most puking at Beach Week.

        1. What is absurd about the allegation that you raped a teenage boy? You are a queer aren’t you?

          That is pretty much the caliber of your thinking here Tony. The absurdities of all of these stories has been outlined at length. You convince yourself of them being true because you are stupid and depraved. The rest of us are not. So stop pretending we are and go away.

          1. Nobody thinks your opinion is shaped by any facts or evidence other than the (R) after Trump’s name.

            Now, I’m hardly any better, but at least I’m not the one defending gang rape.

            1. No one here is buying this bullshit except for you and shreek. They don’t need me. They just need brains. Try getting one.

            2. Now, I’m hardly any better, but at least I’m not the one defending gang rape.

              You’re not denying that you raped a barely teenage boy either.

              1. Busy preparing my slander case.

                1. Busy preparing my slander case.

                  Because we’re holding up your nomination? Because you can otherwise prove demonstrable harm?

                  1. Good point. It really only tickles me when John gets red-faced and bigoted. I should encourage him more.

            3. “I’m not the one defending gang rape”

              No you’re defending the destruction of a person because of politics, by using a fabricated allegation of gang rape.

              1. I don’t know if they’re fabricated and neither do you. Let’s have the FBI check it out.

                1. They already did. 6 times.

                  Which is one the reasons I do know they are fabricated.

                  1. No they didn’t you lying fuck. You know you’re lying. You know you’re regurgitating rightwing horseshit talking points.

                    The whole point of another background check would be to look into these allegations, which weren’t looked into before.

                    They now have plenty of witnesses to interview.

                    1. Maybe you should stop regurgitating leftwing talking points like the prissy little drama queen that you are.

                    2. What a miserable, insufferable douchebag fag-tool you are.

        2. I’m starting to envy his early days.

        3. Damn some people went on Spring Break trips in high school? I used to think the ones who went for college were some lucky bastards. This shit I never even imagined.

          1. My spring breaks were to the wonderful world’s of the PS1.

          2. Yes. There were decent sized groups in my high school who went to Daytona, Destin, etc. during spring break – they had someone rent a room or stayed in a parent/friend’s condo or similar accommodations. Many also made summer trips as a group to Cancun.

            This was a thing, at least in the late 90s where I went to high school.

        4. And oh, look, his own calendar showed a bunch of partying and fucking.

          It showed partying. The “fucking” part is all your imagination.

          1. Goobers believe 17-year-olds record their activities on a calendar
            And save it for 36 years
            Until it appears … over a week after he needed it!

            1. At least it is a piece of physical evidence that can be evaluated objectively by testing the paper, ink, etc. unlike all the blabbering vague accusations.

            2. Like that Roy Moore yearbook signature, amirite?

      2. What is Robby saying there other than if you can get enough people to repeat the same lie it must be true?

        They’re call witnesses, chump. But to Trumpards, the more proof there is. the larger the conspiracy they fantasize. And your severe denial is a mental affliction.

        God Robby is an appalling moron.

        Wipe the drool from your chin.

      3. Robby has outdone himself with stupidity this time.

        I think the Lefties are just as into religion as typical religious people except Lefties want to enslave us by worshipping idols.

  20. A college aged woman knew high school girls were regularly being targeted, drugged, given grain alcohol, taken to a side room, gang raped, and did nothing about it. Didn’t even warn the targeted girls that they were being set up for a gang rape. And in fact, kept going to parties where she knew this would happen to other young girls. And did nothing. There’s the hero of today’s Democratic Party.

  21. “Given the # of people who have accused him.” 3. Three people

    Given the # of people who have sworn they’ve been kidnapped & annally-probed by space aliens, you’d have to believe there’s a conspiracy to fabricate alien abductions.

    Given the # of people who have sworn they saw a 2nd shooter in Dallas, you’d have to believe there’s a conspiracy to fabricate an alternative theory for the JFK assassination.

    Given the # of people who swear Socialism is great, you’d have to believe there’s a conspiracy to derail capitalism.

    This is so idiotic. When did 3 like-minded people with the same political motive become a conspiracy? Ugh, the stupidity used against Kavanaugh hurts.

  22. But I’m with you: let’s replace Kavanaugh with anyone who won’t be attacked by at least 3 people. All we need is someone who won’t be attacked by more than 2 people — that should be easy. Again, this stupidity hurts. 3 people can derail a nomination because 3 people is an impossibly-large #? In a nation of more than 300 million people, you can find 3 people to swear to anything. Give me a few hours, I’ll find you 3 people to swear they saw Elvis last week in Cleveland — would that mean there must be a conspiracy to hide Elvis from the public? Ugh.

  23. The simple request is for an FBI background investigation. The bullshit excuses for why this can’t happen have been different from the bullshit conspiracy theories about the accusers.

    1. How many 36 year old alleged rape cases has the FBI investigated over the years? Where’s the federal crime they are investigating?

      If you want to be honest and admit it’s a stalling tactic, then do so. Otherwise, fuck off.

      1. Let’s start with the ones involving appointees to the supreme court.

        It’s a tactic to make sure we don’t put a drunk rapist on the supreme court. I don’t think Democrats are competent enough to pull off a conspiracy this complex.

        1. We’ll never know until there is a thorough investigation. There are serious allegations that Cory Booker sexually assaulted women. He MUST resign immediately until an investigation can be completed. Diane Feinstein had a Chinese spy in her inner circle for 20 years. She MUST resign immediately and we need a full counterintelligence investigation to determine exactly what acts of treason she committed.

          1. Tony won’t respond to any of that. It’s all ‘whataboutism’ anyway.

        2. None of the allegations actually involve Kavanaugh raping anyone though.

          So, why do you keep lying about that?

          Do you think openly lying bout things not even the accusers allege does anything other than make you look even more partisan and moronic?

          1. He’s just following the Goebbels playbook. Unsurprisingly.

        3. Tony, if you and your treasonous friends were serious about any of this, it would have been brought up in July when they received the information. Feinstain waited until now on purpose.

          So too bad, so sad.

      2. *”alleged attempted rape cases”

      3. Just tell Tony no.

        Just like the Senate will tell the flase accusers- no.

        Kavanaugh will be confirmed.

        Then RBG will be replaced. clarence Thomas will retire and be replaced. breyer will be replaced. All by Trump.

    2. If the allegation that Kavanaugh participated in a long series of gang rapes is credible, then the fact that it didn’t show up in any of the FBI’s previous six background investigations of Kavanaugh is proof that FBI background investigations are worthless, and only a total moron would want the FBI to do another background investigation.

      On theother hand, if the allegation is not credible, then it doesn’t justify any investigation by anyone.

      So, Tony, are you a total moron, or are you demanding an unjustified investigation?

      1. So, Tony, are you a total moron, or are you demanding an unjustified investigation?

        Total moron, this has been explained to him before.

        Hill’s investigation was part of procedure as Hill worked for Thomas and both worked for first the DoE and then the EEOC at the time of the alleged incident. None of these women were in any way obligated to be in the same room as Kavanaugh at any point and none of them were employed by any government office, let alone a federal office, at the time of the incident(s).

        Saying the FBI should investigate is essentially advocating for the reversal of Lawrence v. Texas.

    3. That can be done after he’s confirmed. If this stuff is as serious as the Democrats say, I’m sure they won’t drop the matter and will pursue it with the intensity and vigor that they still are with the Trump rape accusations and Roy Moore sexual abuse allegations.

      We’re talking about a decent sized conspiracy involving a high school and nearby college wherein potentially dozens of high school girls had their drinks spiked or drugged, were gang raped, and this was all covered up or simply ignored. Should these facts actually be corroborated, I would support an impeachment hearing of SCOTUS Justice Kavanaugh.

      1. That’s an interesting point. Assuming he can be voted in now, what is to stop them from holding the investigation and impeaching him if ANYTHING that rises to the level of proof arises?
        The mission creep of how the allegations are being blown up into Kavanaugh raping women is disturbing. It’s like a game of telephone where everyone knows what was said but feels the need to 1-up it anyway. The allegations are:
        1. He messed around with a girl in a way that she felt was sexual assault (debatable though this is my charitable take)
        2. He pulled his dick out in front of some girl’s face while both were drunk for an unknown reason (though she isn’t even sure it was him)
        3. There were gang rapes at parties he had been to that he may have participated in (no clear statement that he had raped, been involved in orchestrating it, or even knew about such things occurring)

        People like Robby need to shut the fuck up and re-read what the claims actually are before exaggerating them far beyond what the accusers have even stated.

    4. what do you expect an FBI investigation to accomplish? They already did the background checks. FBI reports don’t draw conclusions from them and don’t make recomendations, they just give the same facts the previous reports gave.

      1. It delays the kavanaugh confirmation and that is the goal.

        He will confirmed soon instead.

      2. It’s just a talking point. It’s the same as demanding an investigation by Batman.

        If you didn’t hate women, you would have had Batman investigate.

    5. Why not ask for it in July?

      Oh, that’s right. Because you could care less about whether anyone was actually raped and a whole lot about delaying an SC nomination until after you lose even more seats in the Senate in November.

    6. “I said from the beginning, this is about whether or not sexual harassment occurred. And lastly, Judge, with me, from the beginning and at this moment, until the end, the presumption is with you. Now we are going to hear more witnesses. They are going to come in and corroborate your position and hers. And we will find out whether they are telling the truth or not, as best as we are capable of doing, just like you as a judge are when you look them in the eye and make a judgment.”

      “Judge, this is less directed at you than it is to my pontificating colleagues, Democrat and Republican alike, so, Judge, I have not made my judgment, based upon this proceeding, because we have not heard all the evidence”

      “The last thing I will point out, the next person who refers to an FBI report as being worth anything, obviously doesn’t understand anything. FBI explicitly does not, in this or any other case, reach a conclusion, period. Period” “The reason why we cannot rely on the FBI report , you would not like it if we did because it is inconclusive. They say, ‘He said, she said, and they said. Period.”

      “So when people wave an FBI report before you, understand they do not, they do not reach conclusions”

      – Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley

      no, wait, Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Joe Biden, 1991

  24. “Swetnick has also claimed that the boys at the Georgetown Prep parties?including Kavanaugh?would line-up outside a room containing an incapacitated woman, “waiting for their turn” to rape her. This is a somewhat more difficult circumstance to accept on face value?would the men really just wait outside the door, in a manner that made it obvious they were patiently waiting for their opportunity to commit rape, in full view of other party attendees? ”

    Which also means she is indicting the entire social circle Kavanaugh hung out with that was supposedly attending these parties, without specifically naming them, but this would likely be at least a dozen to a few dozen people. How many of whom are also prominent figures in the DC area?. She is inviting a rather large defamation suit.

    1. It’s like you people never went to an elite prep school. Or even a state college with fraternities.

      1. Just because they all turned down your invitation for them to gang rape you doesn’t give you the right to hold a grudge forever. Get over it.

        1. We all got blasted on a regular basis in college, but I didn’t know any mean drunks or rapey drunks, because those guys don’t have any friends except among other colossal douchefucks.

          1. So they would have been easy to find during 6 background checks?

            1. And as we know, 6 is the constitutional limit.

              1. How many could you pass?

                1. Bring them on. I did plenty of partying in my day without ever needing to be part of any douchecanoe rape club.

                  1. We have multiple, credible accusations against you.

                  2. So you committee your rapes ‘a cappella’?

              2. If none of this came up in 6 investigations, what do you expect a 7th to find?

                1. If he’s innocent, then it should find that. Why would you be against that?

                  1. If he’s guilty and any evidence is finally submitted which shows this, he can always be removed. Why would you be against that?

                  2. if he needs a 7th to prove his innocence, then why not 8. Why would anyone be against that? How about 9?

                  3. The previous 6 pretty much covered that.

                    I’ll compromise. They can investigate after he’s confirmed. If they come up with something, bring it to the Senate for impeachment.

      2. I am familiar with both.

        The point is, there are implicitly a lot people who would have been involved in what she is describing, both boys and girls, who she is suggesting covered up rather lurid crimes for 30 years.

        1. So provide evidence of the conspiracy you’re implicitly alleging. Which Democratic operative hired these women to lie? Should we get the FBI on that question perhaps?

          1. Feinstein would be a good place to start, her handling of the initial accuser was unethical, one way or the other.

            Though I am not accusing of a specific conspiracy, just pointing out that once you start involving large numbers of perpetrators and victims who have been silent for decades it starts looking a bit fantastical.

            1. Conspiracy is a straw man. Groupthink explains the phenomenon just as well without the independent parties needing to conspire.

              #WMDsinIraq
              #MeToo

              1. That’s a new one. WMDs = rape victims are liars. Props.

                1. Hey, it all involves propaganda and lies. That it bothers you with it’s accuracy is actually pretty funnyl!

                  1. Just to be straight, you think it’s propaganda and lies because Republicans are suffering politically. Correct?

                    1. Just to be straight, you think it’s truth because Democrats are benefitting politically, correct?

                    2. No, because it’s propaganda and lies. Duh.

                2. Except they’re not rape victims. Not by BK anyway. Maybe you should be more concerned for those young boys you sodomized after drugging them.

          2. That’s the beautiful thing, there’s no conspiracy needed here, just a people weaponizing #metoo against the nominee of the other political party.

            I fully expect to hear about his super secret college human sacrifice ring in a week or so. Unless he withdraws, at which point we’ll never hear from any of these people ever again.

          3. Which is more of a conspiracy? Kavanaugh and friends were serial sexual abusers and rapists for several years more than 30 years ago. Or Democrats politically needed to stop his nomination and failing to do so through normal methods found one person to slime him with unverifiable allegations? Whether Democrats sought out “fake” accusers or they came forward through their own desires to see a political end doesn’t necessitate a conspiracy. Hiding a teenage rape gang’s activities does suggest a conspiracy. I also won’t say it’s implausible that Democrats knowingly are pushing false hysteria in order to resist a Trump action by any means necessary.

      3. ‘Or even a state college with fraternities.’

        come to think of it…I did hear stories. My god, the accusations must all be true!

      4. This is what you’re down to? Claiming that every male at every prep school and every fraternity in the country lines up to rape unconscious girls in bedrooms and anyone who doesn’t believe that is…what, poor?

        1. Well now, a lot of those guys were or ended up as republican, and are almost certainly mostly white. So of course they’re rapists.

    2. Whoa, a class action defamation lawsuit. Is there such a thing?

    3. “Hey, Billy, will you go get me another Bartles and James?”
      “Oh, c’mon, baby, I’m up to 3rd in the Rape Line. Can it wait 10 minutes?”
      “Ughhhhhhh, HURRY UP allready, this is so boring, I want to go to the mall”

    4. “Hey, Billy, will you go get me another Bartles and James?”
      “Oh, c’mon, baby, I’m up to 3rd in the Rape Line. Can it wait 10 minutes?”
      “Ughhhhhhh, HURRY UP allready, this is so boring, I want to go to the mall”

    5. “Hey, Billy, will you go get me another Bartles and James?”
      “Oh, c’mon, baby, I’m up to 3rd in the Rape Line. Can it wait 10 minutes?”
      “Ughhhhhhh, HURRY UP allready, this is so boring, I want to go to the mall”

  25. You’re in someone else’s house and you see a line of boys standing outside a closed door. Which is more likely:
    1. They are waiting outside a bedroom door for their turn to be rapey?
    2. They are waiting outside a bathroom door for their turn to pee?

    1. “Why not both?”

      –Donald Trump

      1. Not bad, I definitely laughed.

      2. Tony is known for raping toilets and using toilets.

    2. And if you thought they were raping someone, what do you do?

      1. Run away in horror and tell your parents or call the police?
      2. Go get another beer and continue with your evening and come back to the party they are having next weekend?

      But Robby finds this shit plausible.

      1. Have a lot of experience being a female victim of gang rape?

        1. YEs I do. I prosecuted a ton of rape cases when I was a prosecutor. And I did a shit ton of training on how victims actually act. And no, Tony this is not plausible. It is fucking absurd and anyone who with any sense and certainly has ever been around actual rapes knows it.

          I actually know a few things. You in contrast are a neurotic, hateful idiot. So, don’t even pretend you can speak about this subject.

          1. Okay, so what about the two other known accusers?

            1. Kill yourself, loser

            2. Kill yourself, loser

          2. Why are more seasoned ADAs not speaking out against this bizarre radical-feminist narrative, now mainstream, that sex is a sui generis social interaction, and rape a sui generis crime, such that the standard institutions of liberal law and justice are uniquely inadequate to such cases? Therefore freely given consent cannot be trusted to be freely given consent, victims of violence cannot be expected to act anything whatsoever like victims of violence, and so forth? We can hardly expect such things in the face of systemic enslavement of women, a cultural order that is itself an act of rape, and so forth.

            This is one division, perhaps the leading one, in a multifront assault on liberalism–from a Left that has long operated under the view that its system of abstract individual rights is a philosophy of the fortunate–proffered to justify their inequities and iniquities against the oppressed classes. They are succeeding in their incrementalism because useful idiots, who perversely regard themselves as the guardians of liberalism against various lesser and sometimes wholly imaginary threats from the Right, abound. Where is the #Resistance to that?

            1. Its rapid desperation.

              All the other tricks to stop Trump and what he represents have failed so far.

              Plan B is utterly defame people, shout them down, and then move to violent Lefty treason.

        2. Have a lot of experience being a female victim of gang rape?

          Good idea. Separate but equal justice systems for men and women. I’m sure we’ll get less hearsay, grudges, and vindictive behavior when only women are involved.

      2. Is Julie Swetnick’s alma mater Penn State? That’s the only way I’m even giving it a second look.

  26. Well one good thing is going to come out of this. Even if a male justice is the next to vacate not RBG, you can bet your ass Coney Barrett is getting the nod next time!

  27. >>>the boys at the Georgetown Prep parties?including Kavanaugh?would line-up …

    fake news! nobody lines up everybody crowds around to watch.

  28. The actual accusation is that Kavanaugh spiked the punch at a house party.

    She then claims she was gang raped at one of these parties and yet continued to attend them.

    So perhaps a more plausible story is that college women liked to get drunk and bang a bunch of high school boys. I think I knew some of those women in college.

    1. It is better than that. She claims she saw other women being raped and continued to attend the parties. If she had been raped and continued to attend the parties, that would actually be believable. Women do strange things after they are raped. But to claim she wasn’t raped but knew other women were being raped and she continued to go to the parties is totally unbelievable.

      1. She felt left out and kept going back until the cool guys jumped her?

        1. Poor Julie Sweatnick, always a bridesmaid, never a bride.

  29. You gotta be pulling my leg here Robbie. What the fuck. Is there any story about Kavanaugh you wouldn’t believe? “Brett Kavanaugh is an alien reptile man from Mars!”, “Brett Kavanaugh did 9/11!”, “Brett Kavanaugh eats babies for breakfast! Black jewish babies!”

    1. Man, took me too many swipes for the Michael Jackson Thriller video one to pop up.

  30. Love Robbie’s revisionist history and ignored facts here.

    His initial story on Jackie completely believed her on all counts. Not until he was savaged for being a credulous ignoramus did he change his story into being skeptical of the incident, much like these 3 cases.

    While Jackie may have initially tried to remain anonymous, so did Ford and the other two accusations only came about once her story started to fall apart.

    All 3 of the current accusations have no basis beyond the accusation itself and guilt by association (people or climate) and denials from literally everyone else with possible first hand knowledge. The best you come up with for “corroboration” is a husband and 3 friends who claim to have been told it was Brett by Ford but none of them knew her until decades after the fact.

    I guess the Robbie needs new business cards: Robbie Soave, Witch Hunter Extraordinaire

    1. That business card would be too rad. Don’t give him that.

  31. Robby wants to fit in with his Huffington Post pals.

  32. Was Nifong prosecuted? That’s a problem.

  33. Let’s do get one thing straight. The only people with any power are the handful of Republican senators who are at risk of going wobbly over this. John et al should direct their fear and ire at them, not some phantom Democratic plot.

    Of course you could just pick the team with better people in it. Obama would drop a nominee to chief dog catcher if he so much as hired an illegal nanny.

    1. You mean like Timmy Geithner, tax cheat and Sec. of the Treasury?

      1. He made the US Treasury whole once the mistake was discovered. Also he helped save the Republic. If I say he should have been sacked, what will you say about Kavanaugh? Four allegations now!

        1. So it’s OK if you say you’re sorry? And how did he save the republic? All I see is a mountain of debt and more entitlement programs.

          If I say he should have been sacked, what will you say about Kavanaugh?

          I thought you said that Obama would drop a nominee to dog catcher. So you were lying.

        2. Did he immediately demand a pardon for everyone that did what he did but got prosecuted?

  34. New charges just out from 1998 – rapey rough-handling stuff again from Kavanaugh.

    John start your rape apologist shit up now!

    1. The sender of the complaint described an evening involving her own daughter, Kavanaugh and several friends in 1998.

      “When they left the bar (under the influence of alcohol) they were all shocked when Brett Kavanaugh, shoved her friend up against the wall very aggressively and sexually.”

      “There were at least four witnesses including my daughter.” The writer of the letter provided no names but said the alleged victim

      NBC News

      1. PUSSY GRABBERS UNITE!

        1. Sarah Palin’s Buttplug grabbed my cock without permission and I have 3 witnesses who will testify to this macro aggression

          1. It’s weird that you call your penis macro.

          2. Make it four, I’m in.

        2. Buttplug fucked my dog. After spiking the food and water dishes.

      2. It’s an anonymous claim.

        But the claim includes ‘witnesses.’

        Ok then.

  35. “Oh, no! The first two stories are flimsier than Hillary’s pretense at competence! Quick, find someone who can make up a story too lurid for the National Equirer to believe!”

    -jcr

    1. they never respond to the incredulity with facts, it’s always just…. “whoa! look over there! another crazy person!”

  36. Reason Republicans, two weeks ago:
    “The FBI is full of imbeciles, idiots, corrupt cops, and deep state moles! They’ve lost all credibility with me!”

    Reason Republicans, today:
    “Surely an allegation as serious as gang rape would have been uncovered by the diligent and competent professionals at the FBI in their thorough background checks! Yet one more reason to disbelieve the allegations against Kavanaugh!”

    1. Jeffy two weeks ago:
      “The FBI is incompetent.”

      Jeffy now:
      “We need an FBI investigation.”

      1. I’m sure Skippy can find the comment where I said that the FBI as a whole is incompetent, or where I said that the FBI should investigate the accusers’ claims against Kavanaugh.

        1. Any urge to expand your thoughts on the situation?

        2. Just like you can find the comments from two weeks ago that you claim were made.

          Of course since you apparently think the FBI *is* competent you can explain why you don’t find the 6 background checks convincing and instead find the completely unsubstantiated accusations credible enough to sit on the fence.

        3. I said that the FBI should investigate the accusers’ claims against Kavanaugh.

          And I agreed. Such an investigation should have started with a tough, lengthy questioning of Ford, by the FBI or in front of Congress to determine what she is actually saying. Unfortunately, she has refused so far.

          I think she should have been subpoenaed and held in contempt if she didn’t show up.

    2. Even a broken clock is right once or twice a day.

      After six investigations over a period of years, some of this should have come up. If it didn’t, what makes the Democrats calling for a seventh investigation think anything will come of it?

      1. That depends. Is it the FBI that is full of bumbling corrupt deep state moles, or is it the FBI full of selfless diligent professionals?

        1. Would those be the ones that vette all of those refugees so that none of them could ever commit a crime in the US, or the ones who do the background checks on federal appointees? Surely it is just the ones that you need to be authorititative.

    3. Um, fuckwit, if they weren’t corrupt, they would have found it. If they were corrupt, they would have found it.

      Either way… THEY DIDN’T FIND IT.

      Are you EVER going to get tired of making people think you’re dumber than Tony…

    4. Surely an crime as repeated, serious as gang rape…

      … would have left a police record somewhere.

    5. Little Jeffy, run along, adults are talking here. Go back to the kid’s table and eat your ketchup and mustard sandwich on wonder bread.

  37. The problem with the Kavanaugh accusation(s) is the systematic absence of falsifiable details. At least the U of V hoax had enough details that you could prove it wrong.

    It’s not that anybody is claiming the allegations are impossible. Just that there’s precious little reason to believe them.

    1. The problem with the Kavanaugh accusation(s) is the systematic absence of falsifiable details.

      That’s not a bug but a feature.

  38. Yes, just like the McMartin Preschool defendants asked the jurors to have “blind faith” in their innocence…..

  39. What s the best way to refute or discredit Ford’s claims?
    A- argue the facts and merits of the accusations relying on who has the most witnesses?
    B-bury her claims under a deluge of outlandish, laughably refutable claims that taint hers through association and reduce credibility.

    At this point i think avenatti is working for Trump as a foil and media distraction tool or is being punked by someone as claimed before from 4chan.

    1. Since none of the witnesses support her claims, go with A. B is just the deranged left / news media doing what it does.

  40. What does the NYT have to say?

    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.

    Mr. Avenatti said he had witnesses who could back up Ms. Swetnick’s accounts, but was not ready to present them because he was waiting to see if the Senate Judiciary Committee would begin a full investigation into her claims as he demanded, along with an F.B.I. inquiry.

    Reason likes the NYT. Any comment on that excerpt, aside from the fact that the complete lack of corroboration is exactly the same for the other two accusations? That makes it more credible, right?

  41. This Kavanaugh guy is like batman and jack the ripper all rolled into one. He can sexually assault and gang rape women in total view of multiple witnesses and none of the “witnesses” can remember any of it. Even the “victims” can’t remember the details of the incidents in question or the identity of the perp. Kavanaugh must be the greatest evil genius of all time, but only for a few years in high school and college.

    1. Your memory of news from the last week is more selective.

      1. somewhat reductio absurdum but pretty much factual

      2. Just like the accusers.

        1. this guy is raping and pillaging at will in places were there should be plenty of witnesses and nobody knows nothing. my original statement still stands. kavanaugh is either an evil genius who has somehow manipulated, intimidated or eliminated all of the potential witnesses or the stories we have heard so far are bogus.

          1. My reply was to the fascist, not you.

      3. One things about rapists, they stop when they become federal judges.

        More power means less rapes. Unless youre Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, jeff Epstein, bill cosby….

  42. Plausible story? 35 years in Law Enforcement tells me that it is quite plausible you are a fucking idiot. Yup, I started police work when the “alleged incident” happened. What a bunch of gynocentric crap to allow a 35 year old allegation come up and even be considered. democrats are rotten to the core, Republicans need to get their testicles out of the pink votive box, refuse to hear her, and vote the guy in. Clarence Thomas on the lynching, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZURHD5BU1o8

  43. I woke up and Reason turned into the PuffingtonToast.

    1. Is it Reason’s fault that articles on daily trivial fluff gets 200+ comments, but articles on serious issues (like voting reform for ex-felons in Florida, for example) can barely get 50?

      1. There isn’t much disagreement on those issues. On things like immigration, or this, idiots like you turn out and argue like idiots no matter how much logic or facts you’re confronted with.

        1. This. Aside from truly surprising stories like that so long as the author doesn’t go too far outside of libertarian principles or reasonable commentary there’s little for us to say in the comments. It’s when unreasonable leaps to judgement and inconsistent logic are used regarding contentious issues in libertarian circles that we get more comments.

        2. There is not much disagreement on this issue either. Normal people are outraged about escalating false and unsupported allegations of a polticial nature. Trolls do the trolling. Reason interns use socks to increase web traffic.

          Its Reason SOP.

    2. They know how their bread is buttered.

      1. Certainly they as much as any should know if economic incentives. Though I wonder how much of their viewership is actually commenters. I think we probably overall our own importance.

        1. The number of comments on an article generally do not reflect the number of views.

  44. Oh hey I wonder what the cosmofags are up to these days …

    Swetnick has also claimed that the boys at the Georgetown Prep parties?including Kavanaugh?would line-up outside a room containing an incapacitated woman, “waiting for their turn” to rape her. This is a somewhat more difficult circumstance to accept

    Alrighty then. Later, guys.

  45. I was an early skeptic of the UVA gang rape

    glol

  46. What this story has in common with Jackie’s is that you only have to read them to know, with almost complete certainty, that they did not happen as described. They are both, frankly, lunatic. I’d agree that that’s not the case with the Ford story.

    Swetnik’s story is utterly incredible on its face, but in addition if it is literally true there must be hundreds of witnesses and dozens of both victims and rapists. Yet somehow no news outlet has run across even a whisper of it? It’s not as if they haven’t been trying to talk to anyone they could find who knew Kavanaugh back then. When the Weinstein dam broke there were dozens of people coming forward, despite the fact that Weinstein committed his depredations in private. If Swetnik’s story were true in all its details we would have seen something similart when Ford’s allegations were made public, of not earlier.

    That’s not to say that something untoward involving Kavanaugh did not have happen at some house parties in the 80s. Just as it wasn’t possible to be sure just from reading Jackie’s story that _something_ didn’t happen. But when one part of a story is clearly untrue we ought to start from a position of skepticism about the whole of it.

  47. New Tulpa has way better bantz than the original.

  48. According to the WSJ there’s a connection between Ford and Swetnick, the same lawyer is behind this. Swetnick has sued before for sexual harassment with ties to Ford’s lawyer.

    1. Sweatnick is likely mentally unstable. My guess is this will come out in the next few days.

      1. This story isn’t even a good lie. It is something only a crazy person would say

  49. Where to start.

    So once you are at zero credibility like where we are now with these accusations how low can you go?

    Is this Robby’s point. So this woman went to HS gang rape parties when she was 3 years graduated because of course they were the thing?

    And she thinks this looks good on her?

    And Robby is making UVA Jackie comparisons.

    I mean it’s like Big Foot vs the Loch Ness monster

    Geez!

  50. Politico is reporting ex-boyfriend of 3rd accuser is saying he filed restraining order against her and has lots of dirt on her.

    1. So what we know of Swetnick so for:

      – She sued her former employer for sexual harassment.
      – Her ex-boyfriend filed a restraining order against her.
      – She knew about gang rape occurrences and said nothing.

      Sounds legit to me!

      1. But doesn’t this just prove that she was gang raped and the trauma caused her to go coo-coo?

        (You know you will hear this argument tomorrow.)

        1. Most likely her dad/stepdad/uncle fucked her when she was 10-13 and instead of going the coked up stripper route, she turned into a bitter man hating bitch feminazi democrat.

        2. She claims her rape happened in 1982, while the parties she attended spanned 1981-82.

          She was willfully attending these HIGH SCHOOL gang rapes parties for more than a year before it happened to her.

          What initial trauma caused her to keep going to these parties when she knew what was happening?

  51. Even if you #believeeverything this time around Kavanaugh was just there with no indication that he knew what was going on.

  52. The Kavanaugh accusation is not as outlandish as this.

    Are you kidding? A college girl chooses to go ten times to high school parties where she says women are repeatedly drugged and raped? All with no record, no confirmation, no charges, nothing, for thirty years?

    For one thing, Swetnick has chosen to out herself, in a sworn statement, which means her claims are more credible. For another, Swetnick has accused a specific person: Kavanaugh. (Jackie refused to tell Erdeley her attacker’s real name until after it was too late.

    Swetnick’s “sworn statement” and her accusations are vague and unfalsifiable.

    Robby, how utterly gullible can you be?

    1. There is a not so fine line between gullible and credulous.

    2. The beginning of your first sentence is my biggest question “A COLLEGE girl chooses to go ten times to HIGH SCHOOL parties . . .” On what freaking planet? Usually once a girl is a senior, the only guys she even looks at are in college. Could you imagine a college girl showing up to meet her friends and saying ” This is John, he is a junior in high school” ROFLMAO!!!!

  53. Are we sure that Robby’s articles aren’t satire?

    For that matter is Reason an Onion knockoff

    1. It certainly is plausible.

      Maybe Soave is a covert agent – sent by the combined HR departments of WaPo, NYT, Politico, HuffPo, Vox, et.al. – in order to destroy
      the publication and thereby reduce the number of resumes that Reason authors keep spamming them with.

  54. If you think the attacks on Kavanaugh are bad now, just consider that this is just in reaction to the imminent reversal of Roe v. Wade. When you consider that Kavanaugh’s real goal is repealing the 13th, 14th, 15th and 19th Amendments, you won’t be surprised by the stories of how he kept black women chained up in his basement. These people are bat-shit insane.

    1. It is what Mitt Romney wanted. Joe Biden said so.

      1. Kavanaugh is plotting to take away women’s tampons too.

        1. YOU monster! Why should women have to pay for their own tampons or birth control?

  55. Julie Swetnick, the third woman to accuse Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, was accused of domestic violence by a former boyfriend in 2001, according to Florida court records.

    Vinneccy, a registered Democrat, said he had evidence that might disprove Swetnick’s claim about Kavanaugh.
    Comments

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

    Seems pretty credible.

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

      Vinneccy made clear that he did not believe her story.

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

      Avenatti said called the reporting “outrageous” and accused the press of “digging into the past” of a woman who stepped forward and is willing to testify under oath.

      “I am disgusted by the fact that the press is attacking a sexual assault victim,” Avenatti said.

      When asked if the allegation of a restraining order were true, Avenatti said: “I don’t know one way or another,” adding he would research it further.

      This is beyond plausible. We have documented evidence based on the court filings. What comes after credible?

      1. Robby will find some way to use this as evidence that she is even more credible.

        Given the logical pretzels he has twisted himself into so far, it’s not that far fetched.

  56. Let me summarize the accusers
    Ford Dumb
    Ramirez Dumber
    Swetnick Dumbest

  57. No need to get the FBI involved. As Joe Biden once said:

    “The next person who refers to an FBI report as being worth anything obviously doesn’t understand anything. FBI explicitly does not, in this case or any other case, reach a conclusion, period. Period.”

  58. I’m giving an over-under of 12 rape accusations against Kavanaugh by Monday. Any takers?

    Disclaimer: survivors and their friends, family members, and lawyers are not eligible.

    1. I’m still waiting for the college accusers to come out. He either turned things around completely, OR ran a secret human sacrifice ring.

  59. Jeeze, Robbie. I could see why you’d want a gig at WaPo, The Atlantic, or even Vox, but Jezebel is even beneath you.

    I’ll add a few quick cultural history things for you wet-behind-the-ears whippersnappers:

    “Pulling a train” in any context I ever heard it is a woman having voluntary consensual sex with multiple male partners.

    You didn’t have to “spike” or “slip” someone a Quaalude. People eagerly took them. Women particularly liked them as a “social drug”.By late 1981-early 1982 the Colombian boots were almost always benzodizepene and the only “real ones” could be found in the pocket of some winter coat you hadn’t worn since ’79 or’80 or maybe a fuzzy one lurking with lost coins and candies inside a couch.

    1. Sounds like you’ve led an interesting life.

    2. Yeah. There were no Qualudes left in the 80s much less at high school parties. Only someone as dumb as Robby could believe this

      1. I was wondering that. My understanding is that they weren’t being made past ’78.
        Wikipedia claims that Lemmon bought the rights to it and that the drug was discontinued in ’85. It tells me nothing of production. If it was still being made until 85 then I suppose it’s possible for the boys to get their hands on some even without considering years old ones that had been lying around.
        I wasn’t born until 85, so at best I can only know how reasonable the account is by what info I’m seeing online.

        1. Pharma ones were common in the mid- 70s and replaced by Colombian counterfeits in the secondary market by the end of the decade. By early ’81 having a line on methaqualone-containing boots was a profitable opportunity. The DEA succeeded in killing the bulk supply and the counterfeit pill-pressers switched to benzos and nobody wanted that shit.

          Manufacturing must be difficult because people loved that shit and there is no sedative/hypnotic like it on the market, legit or black, now.

        2. A rough timeline:

          1978 still pharma Rorers (might of been very high quality boots)
          1980 good counterfeit Lemons.
          1981 dosage dropped but you could still get the “stuff”, out of Miami anyways
          1982 counterfeits switched to benzo
          1983+ even the bad fakes were gone

          1. Informative! That timeline makes me believe it is at least possible that they could have been used. Good to know when I was under the assumption it wasn’t.

          2. That’s pretty much how I remember it. Last time I saw Lemon 714s was 1982, and that was in SW Florida.

      2. Yup. By 1980-1982, The only “714”s you could get were a picture on a T shirt. Mannies and other downers were the choice. Swetnick is a liar and her allegation proves it on so many levels. Besides, when all this supposedly happened, she was a 19-20 yr old college student. Are we supposed to believe she was such a loser, she had to date high school boys? Amazes me no one has pointed out this one GLARING question about her claim, the timeline. It only works for Kavanagh, not her

  60. Given the number of people who have accused Kavanaugh and Judge of teen sexual misbehavior and serial alcoholism?misbehavior that Kavanaugh has denied completely, rather than claimed to not remember or at least acknowledged was not unheard of in his private school set?one would have to think that this is essentially a conspiracy to derail his nomination.

    Bullshit. Copycatting is another explanation (probably more plausible than conspiracy).

  61. A high-school kid organizing a gang-rape ring that produced no evidence of criminality of any kind is possibly credible but the idea of a pedophile ring made up of top Democratic ops is so crazy as to make anyone who does believe it an absolute loon?

    1. +++

      And this case doesn’t even have suspicious conversations and disturbing tastes in art

      1. I know that I, like all Americans, spend hours of my time writing hundreds of e-mails discussing cheese pizza.

  62. Knock it the fk off. Really? No, hey, gey, we gotta hear her out too.
    No. As a woman, if I had this experience I would not go TO THE CREEPY FRICKIN PORN LAWYER GUY AS MY SAFE PLACE. Come. On. Not her.
    Lol. That’s terible. But funny. Honestly. This is horseshiite. Oh decades of fbi background check jobs and all this rabid history of ASSAULT is completely missed.
    Moral-fbi failed again. How’d they let this predator amongus to teach our best and brightest to cast judgement upon us. But yea. Ya witnessed train rapes weekendly and 40 yrs later tell a porn guy. Got it…

    1. This is all too sleazy for even Gloria Allred.

  63. It my experience, it was not uncommon for high school girls to go to college parties.

    The reverse, college girls going to high school parties is basically unheard of.

    I’m not saying it’s never happened in the history of mankind, but it goes against typical behavior.

    1. Yeah. I never saw a college girl at a high school party or ever heard of such a thing ever. This women is a lunatic looking for attention.

  64. Reason has been very disappointing covering this whole situation. They’re schtick of trying to play the middle ground has made them facile.

    1. Except they really aren’t in the middle ground.

      Does anyone really doubt that, when the tables are turned, and it’s someone they prefer getting Kavanaughed by unprovable accusations they’ll say “but this time the rules are different” while simultaneously accusing everyone else of both ‘whataboutism’ and being hypocrites?

  65. “…while not totally solid in every way, are significantly more plausible than the story an anonymous victim, “Jackie,”…”

    No they are not. Jesus Christ how can you even write that?

  66. Robby soave is a…hoping and he has been all day- I mean he is a has-been.

    Kavanaugh will be confirmed no matter what your liars in the media print.

  67. Why wpuld women keep going to gang rape parties where women are knowingly incapacitated and then raped? No women noticed what was going on and came to the aid of the in danger women? No men did?

    Women returned party after party?

    I call BULLSHIT on most of this victim hyping utter crap and certainly on the reporting of it.

  68. Hmm, if Christina Ford is afraid of flying, why did she take her polygraph test in Maryland at a hotel right next to the airport? None of these accusers have any credibility.

    1. And now that we know the details of how the polygraph was performed, and what specific questions were asked we now know the whole thing was a charade.

  69. According to that right-wing rag Politico the third accuser is a total psycho whose ex had to slap her with a restraining order to protect himself and his new wife and child.

    Apparently Avenatti didn’t bother to research her background much because he wasn’t aware of this.

    A fourth accuser who accused Kavanaugh of raping a woman on a boat off Rhode Island in 1985 also accuses Trump of murder and thinks the Russians are about to invade the US.

    These are the people Robby considers to be “credible”.

    1. Yup, heard the same thing about her ex. The fact that she is a total psycho will help vindicate him on the other less obvious lies from the other lying whores.

    2. I agree with almost everything you said except one small thing. Politico is a “right wing” rag? Are you serious? Politico is a left wing, not right wing rag. The only way Politico is right wing is if you are comparing it only to Salon, Vox, Daily Kos, or The Daily Beast. In that instance, The Huffington Post is a right wing rag as well.

  70. Two details of the Rolling Stone story had struck me as false after I read it for a second time.

    You misidentified the tells which is why you aren’t seeing the connection. The two biggest tells in the UVA case were:

    1. Jackie claimed one attacker referred to her rape as an initiation ritual implying everyone who joined the fraternity participated in a similar event. It’s insane to believe hundreds of men would be pressed to participate and not a single one would refuse. Not one. This is absurd BUT the sort of myth sexual assault hysterics tell each other and come to believe since no reasonable people are around to explain the absurdity.

    2. There are three kinds of rapists: those who don’t realize they are committing rape, those who plan to use a consent argument to escape the law, and those who expect to never be identified. Since the rape was pre-planned the first is out. Since her attacked invited her to the party the last is out. So they must have planned a consent argument, which they immediately ruin by punching her in the face. This is an internal inconsistency which showed she was pulling elements from different types of crimes, something that would not exist in an actual crime.

    1. Continued:

      You write Kavanaugh is accused of organizing a gang rape. This is false, he is accused of organizing many gang rapes ten of which the accuser attended. Like item one above the multiple occurrences is pulled in to horrify the listener but it just shows the result is impossible. No guys objected to all these gang rapes? Its absurd but the sort of myth an extreme activist believes. This is just like item 1 above.

      Plus we’re supposed to believe the girls kept showing up to parties where this is occurring as the accuser claims to have done at least ten times? It’s possible one wouldn’t speak up, but ten? They don’t even warn their friends away or stop going themselves? Internal inconsistency just like #2 above.

  71. I wonder if this is accelerating the #walkaway movement.

    1. From Democrats or “libertarians?”

      1. Democrats. Didn’t know there was a Libertarian walkaway thing.

      2. From Libertarians to “none of the above”. Or back to Republicans, given the Democrat’s antics.

        1. I thought that libertarians in general are more inclined to vote “none of the above” than for an actual candidate

  72. “…but it’s starting to seem like blind faith is what Kavanaugh’s defenders are requiring of us.”

    A mostly reasonable article until the last sentence. What you call blind faith, I’d call Occam’s razor. I don’t like Trump at all, so I’m not a Kavanaugh defender. But the last-minute barrage of personal character assaults was utterly predictable. I knew this would happen as soon as protesters were waving “STOP KAVANAUGH” signs minutes after Trump selected him. Obviously, similar signs were already printed up for everyone on Trump’s short list. The hapless Democrat Senators are just doing what their particular mob demands. Ironically, the ‘left” could do much worse, and Trump will be appointing Kennedy’s replacement anyway.

    1. So there’s a lot of signs that didn’t get used? I wonder if they got donated to third-world countries like the gear from teams that lost the World Series or Superbowl.

      1. No, they probably go to some MoveOn warehouse. You never know what sort of public role any of those folks might try to pursue next.

    2. I like Trump a lot (as far as elected politicians go) but Kavanaugh was the 2nd or 3rd worst pick on his “list”. Tomorrow might show he was 1st worst. I’d be defending anyone in Kav’s current circumstances right now.

  73. This is just sad now.

  74. I’m convinced Soave is actively working to destroy what little remains of Reason’s subcriber base.

    1. As someone above said, they need to fire half the staff and start over.

      Personally, I believe the place went to shit when KMW took over. Nick was forever stuck in the 90s and thinks those Democrats are the same as today. Welch, while being a pussy that rolls over for progressives, is still a libertarian.

      KMW has trashed the magazine.

      1. I expect they will fire half the staff and start over.

        It’s just, they’ll fire the half of the staff who are still libertarians.

  75. I hope everyone got a box of popcorn bags for tomorrows show.

    1. I have a bag of boxes.

  76. Congratulations, Robby, you have somehow done the impossible.

    All libertarians agree that you’re a fucking hack.

    1. +1

  77. The only major difference between this and UVA is the fact the accusers did not entirely hide entirely in anonymity. But even that might be splitting hair, because other than revealing their identity and naming a few potential witnesses they have not been forthcoming and has appeared shifty, JUST LIKE Jackie. Ford almost certainly lied about her fear of flying, refuses to share doctor’s notes, and her polygraph was done very recently.

    And robby’s outlining of the differences here is mostly splitting hair. Jackie claimed that she was raped inside a dark room and cut herself on broken glasses on the floor. That’s REALLY outlandish, since there would have been DNA evidence at that location. BK’s accusers insist the rape occurred at public events, but not a single witness has confirmed it. That makes their claim …. not AS outlandish, but still very outlandish. It’s nonsensical to believe multiple rapes can happen before dozens of people and cannot be confirmed anyone supposedly there.

    The question is – if Jackie revealed her identity and identified her assailant in a more timely and transparent manner, would that have boosted her credibility? No. Because in the end, her rapist didn’t exist, and she offered no proof or corroborating witnesses. The woman who wrongly accused Brian Banks named him quickly. So what?

  78. I guess the lead counsel for the UVA administrator in the defamation suit against Rolling Stone confused that situation with the Kavanaugh accusations (Libby Locke in the Wall Street Journal). Maybe she should read this Reason article…

  79. This is retarded. If you believe Swetnick there are hundreds of victims and possibly thousands of rapists. It’s the height of absurdity that this would go unnoticed.

  80. Robby has the hots for Diane Feinstein

    1. The Chinese spies sure do love them some Diane Feinstein.

    2. Robby has gone the Full Dalmia.

      Never go the Full Dalmia.

  81. I’m glad this psycho came out. Her story is so preposterous it will throw doubt on the other slightly less ridiculous, but almost surely false, accounts. That she has a history of being a psycho who had a restraining order put on her by an ex will help.

    Anyone who could believe a chick would go to 10 parties where they said they saw women get gang raped is an idiot. They’d probably call the cops the first time… If they were too timid to do that, they’d at least stop going to gang rape parties themselves after the first time. No sane person could believe this ridiculous yarn.

    I’m gonna LOVE watching the left flip out when Kav gets appointed.

    1. Also on what planet do college age girls go to parties with high school aged boys? She graduate the year (1980) before the parties supposedly started occurring. The fact Swetnick is connected to Avenatti is another reason to question not only her credibility, but her sanity.

      1. Yeah. The age thing is weird, but not 100% impossible. I mean I hung out with a few chicks that were out of high school sometimes when I was still in, but it’s not common.

        As with most of these things, it’s not any ONE point that makes it unbelievable, it’s the fact that there are a TON of things that ALL don’t make any sense to a reasonable person.

  82. The only thing plausible about this claim is that the woman who made it, claims it occurred on planet earth science proves it does exist. Everything else is BS.

  83. Robby’s right, this doesn’t sound like Rolling Stone… it sounds a lot more like the whole Mattress Girl fiasco. Lots of accusers coming out of the woodwork that all have different stories which the evidence doesn’t back up. I wonder if at the end of this Ford will also try to say it was all to “raise awareness”.

  84. Seriously? First, I want to point out when all these “parties” supposedly happened, Swetnick was an adult and she was at parties with underage minors. She graduated in 1980 and claims the parties occurred in 1981-82. she would have been 19-20 yrs. old. Kavanagh gradated in 1983, he was 16-17 at the time all of this supposedly happened. The author references Cosby and that is also a red flag. Weinstein and Cosby prove one fact that cannot be questioned. A rapist does not quit until caught. How was Kavanagh a rapist in high school and then stopped when he left for college? That is not possible if you consider the pathology required to become a rapist. It is not about sex, but power. In addition, I think these allegations are EXACTLY like the UVA case because none of the accusers has produced a single shred of evidence or a corroborating witness. Kavanagh has been accused of rape. There is no statute of limitations on rape as was proven by the conviction of Cosby. If we blindly accept these allegations as true, the result is far more than just keeping him off the SCOTUS, it will destroy his entire life.

  85. I haven’t commented here in forever, but had to just to say no, she is not any more believable. She’s less believable.

    Both stories are movie tropes, but while Jackie’s was Law and Order SVU, this other one is an Afterschool Special. Probably starring Willie Aames and Kristy McNichol. Who the hell served “punch” that needed to be spiked at a party when 18 was the drinking age.?

    1. It went to 21 in ’81.

  86. A more fruitful comparison than to the Virginia case might be to the Columbia mattress case. Several people accused Paul Nungesser of various things, but none of the allegations was especially credible.

  87. The Left “Libertarians” at Reason, not quite willing to join the Leftist lynch mob, but they will hold the Leftist’s coats while they lynch him.

  88. So the standard is no longer a reasonable doubt or even a preponderance of evidence. It’s “more plausible than Jackie and Drew”. Jackie succeeded admirably.

  89. Is there any evidence that the gang raped women exist?

    Police reports back then or them coming forward to support the story now?

    Aside from that, given the size of the US population, mental health statistics, the press adulation of #MeToo, and TDS, this probably shouldn’t surprise anyone.

    If the odds of a nut job creating a false memory of rape are 1 in a million, and there are 15 million woman near Kavanuagh’s age, we can probably expect another dozen woman to come out of the woodwork.

    It kind of makes it tough for the real victims out there. And yeah, there may be some in this story…

  90. “one would have to think that this is essentially a conspiracy to derail his nomination. At this point, I’m not sure conspiracy is the most plausible explanation. We shouldn’t accept these accusations on blind faith, but it’s starting to seem like blind faith is what Kavanaugh’s defenders are requiring of us.”

    Whether the accusations are true or not that is quite definitely a conspiracy involved in this mess; The Democrat Establishment. The Democrat Party Establishment has shown, over the last several decades, that they are a criminal conspiracy prepared to lie, cheat, and steal to hold power. It may just be that IN THIS CASE they haven’t found it necessary to lie, but in an unverifiable accusation like this, a group of serial scofflaws like the Democrats will have to convince me that they are NOT pulling a fast one. This stinks to high heaven, front to back.

  91. I appreciate that this time you actually give reasons why you think Ford’s accusations are credible – instead of just asserting that they are.

    But for FFS man, what sort of college did you go to?

    This is a somewhat more difficult circumstance to accept on face value?would the men really just wait outside the door, in a manner that made it obvious they were patiently waiting for their opportunity to commit rape, in full view of other party attendees?

    *This*? That they were supposed to be waiting their turns? *This* is what sound credulous to you?

    Men don’t run trains. And they sure as shit don’t run them on unconscious women. That’s shit that happens in movies and the more exploitative pornography. And when they do run trains, yes, they have the self-control and politeness to line the fuck up.

    You know who does rape unconscious women? Men who find them in isolated places. A dude by himself who can close the bedroom door. Nobody stands in a line and says ‘hey that chick’s blacked out and covered in cum and puke, I think I’ll take a turn at this’.

    1. Swetnick has chosen to out herself, in a sworn statement, which means her claims are more credible.

      Why? What’s going to happen to her if she’s been found out to be lying? Nothing. Same as happens to 4/5 rape accusers who are proved to be lying. Prosecutors simply don’t want to touch that wire. Let’s not forget that Swetnick was attending parties where she *observed* minors being raped – her own testimony here – while a 20 year old adult.

      And she didn’t sign a ‘sworn’ statement at all. She signed a statement. To her lawyer. Lying on that holds no criminal or civil liability at all. There’s literally no reason why these statements, made at this late date, attesting to despicable crimes – crimes the witness herself ignored at the time and for decades later – should be more credible.

      1. Fortunately?for the truth’s sake, if not any one party’s?Swetnick named names,

        *Ford* named names. And those people threw up their hands and said ‘I don’t know what the hell she’s talking about’.

      2. I dunno, I think one could have grounds for a slander/libel suit if one really wanted to. If Kav were smart he would have filed such a suit before the hearing on Thursday to make a point that it was bullshit, and he was going to follow it through all the way to the end to clear his name, whether he got on the SC or not.

        That’s the kind of thing that needs to happen with these political smear jobs more often. It would make liars think twice before making false claims.

  92. So why did she keep attending these rape parties?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.