The difference in your response to the accused and the why of it, is what we were discussing. Glad you can now see, there is a difference and it’s a BIG one.
What we were discussing were responses to Fairfax v. Kavanaugh. You deflected to which accusation is worse.
If you’re a kidnapper you’re already a kidnapper regardless of how you treat your victim.
So more men didn’t believe women? What proof would satisfy you? Credible testimony and a witness who says she brought it up at the time is plenty to disqualify him from a job. False accusations are rare, especially with guys like Kavanaugh.
Investigate him, for sure.
Are the accusations against Fairfax false and politically motivated?
No they are not.
That is interesting to me as well. If a person is forced, the victim has teeth available to them, to chomp down and make it really hurt. If they do that, the person doing the attack would not be in a position to do anything but scream out loud and bleed profusely. I have no clue on any of this, but it does seem that the perpetrator can make themselves become a victim.
In fact, its a little ironic when you consider that the Dems set on this information for over a month during the original nomination hearing, which is where it should have looked at at all.
"There were three more accusations the committee report found not to be credible. One accuser recanted his story almost as soon as it became public and the committee referred him to the FBI.
The second involved an anonymous letter that alleged Kavanaugh “very aggressively and sexually” pushed a woman he was dating against a wall. U.S. District Court Judge Dabney Friedrich, whom Kavanaugh dated at the time in question, called the story “offensive and absurd.”
On Sept. 25, the panel received a letter from a “Jane Doe” who said Kavanaugh raped her.
Kentucky resident Judy Munro-Leighton later took responsibility for the letter, but the committee “quickly concluded that Munro-Leighton was unlikely to be the author.” Last week, Munro-Leighton admitted she was not Jane Doe and said her claim “was just a ploy” to "get attention, according to the report. "
Yep that’s how rapists get away with it. It’s usually he said, she said and women have to face a choir of men (who likely have their own questionable youthful conquests) who work suspiciously hard to paint them as craven, shrieky, liars.
Ummm…she admitted that her claim “was just a ploy” to “get attention…”.
Ford said it was just a ploy? I don’t remember that…
I’m not the one looking foolish by trying to excuse degrees of sexual assault in order to defend my side.
What was your Kavanagh stand? You stated you weren’t here during the events, so you can claim anything was your stand without any actual proof.
Must reserve judgment in this case!
I’m not trying to excuse an inappropriate action. I’m attempting to not categorize all inappropriate actions into one. Some are worse than others…as in this case. Now if you don’t think so, you’re the one attempting to defend your position by misrepresenting the facts…and it really is that simple my friend.
That’s true and since you’re already convinced my claim is questionable, why give it?
All crimes aren’t created equal but both of these allegations attained the threshold of ‘sexual assault’.
Here is what should happen. The democrats should intiatiate articles of impeachment on Fairfax. His victims have agreed to testify. Rather than go through all of that on national TV, he would probably resign and avoid it. Game over. Good idea?
Must. Defend. DNC. At All. Costs.
This is a stoopid game that applies to both parties equally. Knock it off. You bore me.