Rachel Mitchell statement on Brett Kavenaugh hearing. Detailing her opinion of ford's responses

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

This. This is the stuff that you need to stop doing. You're making it personal. Don't.

 

And Roxas, Dad, don't respond to this. Anyone continuing on with this type of thing will be punished.

You misunderstand me

 

I'm trying to ask Dad (mostly cuz he posted a status about how he enjoyed Kavanaugh's pain) to have some empathy. He refuted it was a lynching. Asking him if he'd be down to be judged by the same standards isn't really making it personal, more of rhetoric device. 

[Dad]

You still think accusation is equivalent to character. Don't talkto me about facts when your "victim" saw to the characte assassination of two dead men by letting off cops who admitted to lying on murder charges.

 

If his character is flawless then I wanna know what that says about his defenders.

 

You'll happily kick around any woman who speaks up -- whether she's telling the truth or not -- before you take any facts into account. You're here now because you feel validated behind someone who has the same motives and beliefs that you do. Don't talk to me about character. You're knee deep in the mud if it comes to character and Kavanaugh.

 

His children don't deserve to suffer for what he's dealing with. Him, I don't feel sorry for.

 

And yes I would be composed. Because I would have no reason to fear you or your accusations. That's what innocent people do.

[vla1ne]

You still think accusation is equivalent to character. Don't talkto me about facts when your "victim" saw to the characte assassination of two dead men by letting off cops who admitted to lying on murder charges.

 

If his character is flawless then I wanna know what that says about his defenders.

 

You'll happily kick around any woman who speaks up -- whether she's telling the truth or not -- before you take any facts into account. You're here now because you feel validated behind someone who has the same motives and beliefs that you do. Don't talk to me about character. You're knee deep in the mud if it comes to character and Kavanaugh.

 

His children don't deserve to suffer for what he's dealing with. Him, I don't feel sorry for.

 

And yes I would be composed. Because I would have no reason to fear you or your accusations. That's what innocent people do.

Did I ever say I agreed with his rulings? No. but this trial is so groundless that nobody calling it credible can even say one thing that hasn’t been destroyed already. I wouldn’t care at all if he got crucified on things he actually did relating to his career as a judge. People are free to disagree with his rulings, but this isn’t about that, this is about him being upset at what are by now, blatantly false allegations. “The funniest part about this thread is Justice Thomas, and all the "he had a right to be angry" bullshit.” “I don't give a funk about another rich white man who's "a father".” Unless you think there’s some way to tell me these are anything close to fair assessments of a man who’s being slandered by a false accuser? His judgement of those cops, has nothing to do with your statements, and has absolutely nothing to do with these allegations.

 

It says his defendants are liars. 6 FBI investigations later, one of which was concluded while Feinstein HAD the documents to use against him, they decide to attack him two weeks before the actual vote. That tells me this was timed. And Ford, if she’s a victim of anything, is the victim of manipulating senators, who are trying to do anything they can to slander the man.

 

No, I’ll kick around any person whose story doesn’t check out. 1^st story has so much against it that you could blow it over like a building of cards, the second one has no corroborators, and two people who were actually a part of that frat, have stepped forwards and stated plainly that she has got the wrong guy, the third… Jesus Christ her story is more funked than the holes she claims she was raped in. At least 15 gang rape parties (she knowingly went there, and kept going even after allegedly being raped) and not one time she, or any other person called the cops? Nor does the FBI pick this up in the past 6 searches? Yeah, according to Occam’s razor, she’s full of more sheet than the other two combined.

 

Well at least we agree on the kids. I don’t feel bad for him either. But I’m defending him, because my stance on this is the same as any other, anybody accused remains innocent until proven guilty, and I remain consistent in that belief. This was one of the largest scandals of the year, so my voice here was pretty much guaranteed as an American.

 

He’s not fearful, he’s upset. There is an absolute difference. And considering he’s a judge that believes in due process, I’d say he has a background that explains that rage appropriately.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Did I ever say I agreed with his rulings? No. but this trial is so groundless that nobody calling it credible can even say one thing that hasn’t been destroyed already. I wouldn’t care at all if he got crucified on things he actually did relating to his career as a judge. People are free to disagree with his rulings, but this isn’t about that, this is about him being upset at what are by now, blatantly false allegations. “The funniest part about this thread is Justice Thomas, and all the "he had a right to be angry" bullshit.” “I don't give a funk about another rich white man who's "a father".” Unless you think there’s some way to tell me these are anything close to fair assessments of a man who’s being slandered by a false accuser? His judgement of those cops, has nothing to do with your statements, and has absolutely nothing to do with these allegations.

 

It says his defendants are liars. 6 FBI investigations later, one of which was concluded while Feinstein HAD the documents to use against him, they decide to attack him two weeks before the actual vote. That tells me this was timed. And Ford, if she’s a victim of anything, is the victim of manipulating senators, who are trying to do anything they can to slander the man.

 

No, I’ll kick around any person whose story doesn’t check out. 1^st story has so much against it that you could blow it over like a building of cards, the second one has no corroborators, and two people who were actually a part of that frat, have stepped forwards and stated plainly that she has got the wrong guy, the third… Jesus Christ her story is more funked than the holes she claims she was raped in. At least 15 gang rape parties (she knowingly went there, and kept going even after allegedly being raped) and not one time she, or any other person called the cops? Nor does the FBI pick this up in the past 6 searches? Yeah, according to Occam’s razor, she’s full of more sheet than the other two combined.

 

Well at least we agree on the kids. I don’t feel bad for him either. But I’m defending him, because my stance on this is the same as any other, anybody accused remains innocent until proven guilty, and I remain consistent in that belief. This was one of the largest scandals of the year, so my voice here was pretty much guaranteed as an American.

 

He’s not fearful, he’s upset. There is an absolute difference. And considering he’s a judge that believes in due process, I’d say he has a background that explains that rage appropriately.

Just add. She apparently went to these HS rape parties, while she was in college. You know, an extra level of authenticity 

[Dad]

Let me be clear: I'm not making any statement about his innocence. Only his character as defined by both sides of this story. If he's innocent, cool. Still an unhinged piece of sheet. If he's guilty, he's an even bigger unhinged piece of sheet. No man with that kind of behavior should sit on the supreme court. There are far more virulent cases that you'll have to sit through. I don't trust his crazy ass to do his job when he can barely serve himself. You can be angry and be composed. That's how I feel right now.

 

The difference is I'm not a brat.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

He was accused of being a serial rapist in front of the country and of being the mastermind of a rape gang.

 

He was pretty composed for a man who had such salacious allegations stated about him as fact 

 

The most partisan thing he said was that the dems wanted to destroy him because they were still salty over Trump beating the wicked witch of the west.

 

Fact check: True

[vla1ne]

Let me be clear: I'm not making any statement about his innocence. Only his character as defined by both sides of this story. If he's innocent, cool. Still an unhinged piece of sheet. If he's guilty, he's an even bigger unhinged piece of sheet. No man with that kind of behavior should sit on the supreme court. There are far more virulent cases that you'll have to sit through. I don't trust his crazy ass to do his job when he can barely serve himself. You can be angry and be composed. That's how I feel right now.

 

The difference is I'm not a brat.

This case directly targets him, and uses such absurd cases that nobody with common sense would believe some of them, even were they granting the benefit of the doubt. His behavior was a direct representation of the death threats, the questions, and the behavior of the people questioning him. Many have made personal threats to his children. He is by no means unhinged, and i would bet money that you would never say the same of a black man at their lowest moment were the public to hang them for any such thing as they saw their children trampled underfoot by the machine of public outrage. He has over a decade on the circuit court of appeals, just one rung lower than the supreme court, and excluding this very case, his temperament has been impeccable as a judge. He has worked his whole life towards this goal, and has countless people testifying to his character. So tell me, what exemplifies his normal character more? decades of court experience where he has been the picture of a model judge? Or a kangaroo case where he is upset with the people making false allegations and slandering him, his friends, and his family, to his face. 

 

If you'd like, i can show you what harassment over two weeks over something you have never done looks like. I can pull up countless cases of men who have been arrested and convicted on false sexual allegation charges, and you can watch as each and every one of them has at least one meltdown of absolute rage. Some even going so far as to kill themselves. Brett, as a judge, knows what damage a false allegation can do to his life, he knows what happens to the falsely accused, and while he might not have cared then (i will not assert that he did or didn't) he knows full well what it looks like to be railroaded over ancient claims with no evidence.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Update:

 

"[swetnick] provided four names to NBC News that she said could confirm her descriptions of the parties in the 1980s. NBC News contacted all four: one said they did not remember a Julie Swetnick, one was dead, and two did not respond, per Snow."

 

 

Can we end this clown show?

[Dad]

"Two did not respond."

 

That speaks to both sides. Either she's lying or people were bought off. This is a clownshow until it stops becoming he said she said.

 

That won't happen.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

"Two did not respond."

 

That speaks to both sides. Either she's lying or people were bought off. This is a clownshow until it stops becoming he said she said.

 

That won't happen.

The FBI should nail her ass to the wall for perjury unless she can cough up some proof

[Phantom Roxas]

https://www.newsweek.com/brett-kavanaugh-perjury-lied-oath-hearing-1147604

 

Cool, if we're going to punish perjury, let's make sure we get Kavanaugh for his own offenses as well.

[Dad]

The FBI should nail her ass to the wall for perjury unless she can cough up some proof

Idk man. Something about bringing a charge against a powerful man who can easily have you written off the earth just doesn't seem easy to me.

 

Let's also stop pretending we don't know what this case is actually about.

 

See Gamble v US next month. Kavanaugh getting in Just means none of the people against Trump can be tried. Stacked Court etc.

 

That makes it all even fishier doesn't it?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

https://www.newsweek.com/brett-kavanaugh-perjury-lied-oath-hearing-1147604

 

Cool, if we're going to punish perjury, let's make sure we get Kavanaugh for his own offenses as well.

His college roommate just refuted this case. As as he noted, he never blacked out, there is a difference between blacking out and going to bed after drinking

[vla1ne]

See Gamble v US next month. Kavanaugh getting in Just means none of the people against Trump can be tried. Stacked Court etc.

 

That makes it all even fishier doesn't it?

that's a really fair point, but he is a legitimate nominee atm, I can understand not wanting him in the supreme court, but this goes well beyond reasonable resistance, and besides, members of the supreme court have, in the past, been outside the ring of political influence. even were the court completely one sided, if the evidence is against you, friend or not, person who granted you the nomination or not, the supreme court was (and hopefully remains) the most likely place in politics to consider the facts, and reach an unbiased conclusion. this trial, just might be the foot to the pendulum that is the supreme courts balance, as it ensures that at least one judge will have a strong reason to hold a grudge. I doubt he's the type who would, as he doesn't even claim to hold a grudge against ford, believing her to be innocent in this whole mess (personally i'd counter sue her and the entire democratic senate with the force of a thousand angry lawyers on charges of slander, perjury, and blatant corruption of the democratic process of scotus elections), but this trial, no matter the outcome, definitely shows why he could end up doing so now.

 

it's one of those things where you know they dug the hole and jumped into it, but really hope the guy has enough forgiveness in him to not hit them with the shovel or the dirt.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

https://www.mediaite.com/uncategorized/julie-swetnicks-ex-boyfriend-she-told-me-id-never-see-my-unborn-child-alive/

 

Jesus

 

Where do they find these skanks

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

https://www.mediaite.com/uncategorized/julie-swetnicks-ex-boyfriend-she-told-me-id-never-see-my-unborn-child-alive/

 

Jesus

 

Where do they find these skanks

Where do I even start.

The link you provided is pretty much useless as any sort of argument.

You didn't say anything about it really except for using foul language.

So basically this is the exact opposite of the type of post that is appropriate for this section.

 

This thread has made it clear to me that I need to be more strict. It feels like every few posts there's something problematic. So keep that in mind, everyone, moving forward. I believe "Zero tolerance" was the term that used to be used around here.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Where do I even start.

The link you provided is pretty much useless as any sort of argument.

You didn't say anything about it really except for using foul language.

So basically this is the exact opposite of the type of post that is appropriate for this section.

 

This thread has made it clear to me that I need to be more strict. It feels like every few posts there's something problematic. So keep that in mind, everyone, moving forward. I believe "Zero tolerance" was the term that used to be used around here.

Oh bite me, she's been lying about cases for a while now and is also apparently someone who threatens to kill kids. He also mentions she's very sexually active, so I don't feel too bad calling her a skank.

[Phantom Roxas]

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/julie-swetnick-restraining-order/
https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/questions-surround-richard-vinneccy-ex-boyfriend-of-third-kavanaugh-accuser-julie-swetnick-10774688
 
"The court records show two of Vinneccy's wives filed for divorce, the second after only four months. Banks have repeatedly gone after him in court. OneWest Bank placed a lien on his property in Miami after his mortgage was foreclosed upon in 2011. He opened a patio-refinishing business in 2012, but it was closed by the time he filed for bankruptcy in 2014. While Vinneccy at the time held roughly $178,000 in assets on his house, he had roughly $484,000 in liabilities, mainly on his second mortgage and in credit card debt. And the records raise important questions about whether his claim of threats to his "baby" were even possible."

"Additionally, it seems unlikely that if Vinneccy truly felt as threatened as he claimed that he would simply not show up to the hearing where he could ensure the protection order would stay in place."
 
"Though Vinneccy claimed Swetnick was "threatening to do harm to my baby at [the time the injunction was filed]," social media posts from his eldest child, a daughter, indicate he did not have a "baby" at that time."

 

Given how much of this thread has been about jumping at the chance to dismiss Kavanaugh's accusers and mock the idea of believing any woman who makes any accusation against Kavanaugh, I don't see much merit in suddenly taking Vinneccy's words at face value when each of Kavanaugh's accusers are denied the same benefit of the doubt. I'm concerned that Vinneccy's testimony comes from a place of bad faith.
 
Are his claims worth believing because they could be legitimate, as is the case with why I believe Kavanaugh's accusers, or should we believing Vinneccy simply because he can hurt the credibility of one accuser, regardless of whether or not Vinneccy's own claims are themselves true? Keep in the mind that the latter is exactly what the claim that Kavanaugh is being "lynched" hinges on - that these accusations were made solely to smear someone - so I'd like to know how Vinneccy is any different.

 

EDIT: Given how women who makes these accusations are typically met with "Why didn't she come forward?", I'd like to ask the same question about Vinneccy. If he felt threatened by Swetnick, why didn't he come forward until now?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/julie-swetnick-restraining-order/

https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/questions-surround-richard-vinneccy-ex-boyfriend-of-third-kavanaugh-accuser-julie-swetnick-10774688

 

"The court records show two of Vinneccy's wives filed for divorce, the second after only four months. Banks have repeatedly gone after him in court. OneWest Bank placed a lien on his property in Miami after his mortgage was foreclosed upon in 2011. He opened a patio-refinishing business in 2012, but it was closed by the time he filed for bankruptcy in 2014. While Vinneccy at the time held roughly $178,000 in assets on his house, he had roughly $484,000 in liabilities, mainly on his second mortgage and in credit card debt. And the records raise important questions about whether his claim of threats to his "baby" were even possible."

 

"Additionally, it seems unlikely that if Vinneccy truly felt as threatened as he claimed that he would simply not show up to the hearing where he could ensure the protection order would stay in place."

 

"Though Vinneccy claimed Swetnick was "threatening to do harm to my baby at [the time the injunction was filed]," social media posts from his eldest child, a daughter, indicate he did not have a "baby" at that time."

 

Given how much of this thread has been about jumping at the chance to dismiss Kavanaugh's accusers and mock the idea of believing any woman who makes any accusation against Kavanaugh, I don't see much merit in suddenly taking Vinneccy's words at face value when each of Kavanaugh's accusers are denied the same benefit of the doubt. I'm concerned that Vinneccy's testimony comes from a place of bad faith.

 

Are his claims worth believing because they could be legitimate, as is the case with why I believe Kavanaugh's accusers, or should we believing Vinneccy simply because he can hurt the credibility of one accuser, regardless of whether or not Vinneccy's own claims are themselves true? Keep in the mind that the latter is exactly what the claim that Kavanaugh is being "lynched" hinges on - that these accusations were made solely to smear someone - so I'd like to know how Vinneccy is any different.

 

EDIT: Given how women who makes these accusations are typically met with "Why didn't she come forward?", I'd like to ask the same question about Vinneccy. If he felt threatened by Swetnick, why didn't he come forward until now?

Uh, he claims he had a restraining order filed?

 

---

 

NBC interview: Swetnick alters her story on gang rape parties & punch spiking, admits she doesn’t know what Kavanaugh did/didn’t do

 

C'mon, people are debasing themselves by believing this crap

[Phantom Roxas]

He had a restraining order filed, but it was not granted because he failed to show up for court. It frankly doesn't seem that he took the matter all that seriously.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

Winter you're using a testimony without any evidence or legal merit as proof. Do you not realize the hypocrisy there?

[Dad]

Uh, he claims he had a restraining order filed?

 

---

 

NBC interview: Swetnick alters her story on gang rape parties & punch spiking, admits she doesn’t know what Kavanaugh did/didn’t do

 

C'mon, people are debasing themselves by believing this crap

Do you know how memory works? That is, before, during, and after trauma is introduced.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Do you know how memory works? That is, before, during, and after trauma is introduced.

Yeah, which is partially why I am uncomfortable ruining people's lives based on foggy poly-decade recollections from partisan hacks

He had a restraining order filed, but it was not granted because he failed to show up for court. It frankly doesn't seem that he took the matter all that seriously.

Which is more than Ford or the rest of them ever did

Winter you're using a testimony without any evidence or legal merit as proof. Do you not realize the hypocrisy there?

We have here  a case of man who had his infant threatened with death by this woman of dubious sexual practices, he filed a restraining order and then didn't show up to court. He could have easily been afraid for his family's life. 

 

The accusers didn't even have the drive to report these heinous acts of rape and gang rape

 

It's a clownshow

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

 

We have here  a case of man who had his infant threatened with death by this woman of dubious sexual practices, he filed a restraining order and then didn't show up to court. He could have easily been afraid for his family's life. 

 

The accusers didn't even have the drive to report these heinous acts of rape and gang rape

 

It's a clownshow

Imma make this crystal clear. You can't have it both ways. Either making claims like this without evidence is fine to do or it isn't.

Look what you just said. "He says this happened" "He could have been afraid" "Dubious sexual practices.

Now look at what you've been railing against. "She says this happened" "She was too afraid to come forward" "Dubious drinking practices"

 

C'mon how can you not see the problem here?

 

Basically, either you make a post where you say that it's fine to say Kavenaugh is guilty because of what Ford says happened, and that her words are enough evidence, or you stop this ridiculous "argument".

If you don't say that it's fine then I will treat any more posts arguing that this ex-boyfriend's claims are enough evidence as spam and punish you as such. Because if you're going to use the exact argument you are arguing against then that's just as bad as spamming.

[vla1ne]

Besides winter, there's more than enough against her claim without using his statement. He may well be right, but he's an ex boyfriend, and any value the word of an ex who never showed up to court for his restraining order has is pretty low.

 

As for her own testimony,The one person who responded after she named them claimed it never happened. Unfortunate about that dead one, and two never responded. That's the exact same as a 0 for 4 testimony in a court of law. And if she's only got 4 names after going to 15+ parties, that says quite a bit about her accusation. Namely she kept going to underage gang rape parties knowingly, and somehow didn't even take the time to remember who was hosting, where they hosted (you should at least have one or two places in your head to check out) and i don't think any of the other apparent victims of this "event" would stay silent after such a thing occurred. she claims it went on for at least a year. that's at least 55 victims that year alone assuming they missed a couple nights of rape, and only gang raped one person a weekend. You'd think with 55 people raped in a single year, at least one person would have contacted authorities in a timely manner (if she was able to go even after being raped, which she claims to have done at least five times after, then security much have been rather loose at these rape parties). That's enough to throw the case out on the basis of plausibility alone. Any lawyer with reasonable logic wouldn't even touch her case.