Third Woman comes forward against Kavanaugh; Accuses Gang Rape

[FATCAT 60,886]

Attorney Michael Avenatti on Wednesday named Julie Swetnick as his client who has made allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

"I have a firm recollection of seeing boys lined up outside rooms at many of these parties waiting for their 'turn' with a girl inside the room," she said in the statement. "These boys included Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh."

Swetnick said in the 1980s, she witnessed efforts by Kavanaugh and Mark Judge to get teenage girls "inebriated and disoriented so they could then be 'gang raped' in a side room or bedroom by a 'train' of numerous boys."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/26/brett-kavanaugh-confirmation-michael-avenatti-julie-swetnick/1431133002/

[FATCAT 60,886]

This is a new allegation that has been whispered across Washington for a few days. 

She's been vetted by the FBI many times and has received security clearances over the years. So, at face value, she's credible.

Doesn't spell well for Kavanaugh's confirmation. Hopefully this will push Trump and Republicans to signal for an FBI investigation into all three allegations.

[TheodoreRx 1,540]

God, I am disgusted. The Republicans didn't believe the first accuser even though she told her therapist and husband about it a decade ago. Wow, what an insane plot to plant info a decade prior just in case he gets appointed to the supreme court. 

[Economy 52,834]

6 minutes ago, TheodoreRx said:

God, I am disgusted. The Republicans didn't believe the first accuser even though she told her therapist and husband about it a decade ago. Wow, what an insane plot to plant info a decade prior just in case he gets appointed to the supreme court. 

Did she have proof tho? I don't know the story from 10 years ago

[TheodoreRx 1,540]

2 minutes ago, Economy said:

Did she have proof tho? I don't know the story from 10 years ago

The proof was that she had been in therapy for it, and had told many people years ago, but came out with it publicly now. Witnesses confirmed her story as well. 

[FATCAT 60,886]

2 minutes ago, Economy said:

Did she have proof tho? I don't know the story from 10 years ago

Her therapist took notes and is willing to testify under oath, under threat of perjury. 

Her husband also remembers her bringing up his name when confiding in him about the acts. He too wants to testify under oath.

[Brainiac 11,171]

Why isn’t this being reported by mainstream news networks yet?

[TheodoreRx 1,540]

I can't believe Repubs are willing to push a gang rapist through confirmation just to have the supreme court lean to their side. They really are evil. No low is too low. 

[FATCAT 60,886]

21 minutes ago, Brainiac said:

Why isn’t this being reported by mainstream news networks yet?

MSNBC was just reporting it, but most networks won't report something unless they've somehow independently verified something themselves.

 

21 minutes ago, TheodoreRx said:

I can't believe Repubs are willing to push a gang rapist through confirmation just to have the supreme court lean to their side. They really are evil. No low is too low. 

Well, the allegations aren't proof, but Republicans should, at the very least, ask for an FBI investigation, delay any vote, and extend the hearings to allow all accusers to speak under oath at the Senate Judiciary Committee.

[Economy 52,834]

48 minutes ago, TheodoreRx said:

The proof was that she had been in therapy for it, and had told many people years ago, but came out with it publicly now. Witnesses confirmed her story as well. 

 

48 minutes ago, FATCAT said:

Her therapist took notes and is willing to testify under oath, under threat of perjury. 

Her husband also remembers her bringing up his name when confiding in him about the acts. He too wants to testify under oath.

Ok satisfactory

 

Many ppl these days suggest a victim should just simply be believed which I don't agree with because it would be too easy to frame people that way, or to make threats off telling such a story to rich people to try and get money out of them

 

Even if were 90% sure a victim is telling the truth, a 10% chance an innocent person could be locked behind bars is unacceptable. For legal purposes the guilty must be proved guilty

[BUtterfield 8 41,816]

Thought I would add this to the thread 

The truth will come out 

[Whispering 18,865]

3 hours ago, Economy said:

 

Ok satisfactory

 

Many ppl these days suggest a victim should just simply be believed which I don't agree with because it would be too easy to frame people that way, or to make threats off telling such a story to rich people to try and get money out of them

 

Even if were 90% sure a victim is telling the truth, a 10% chance an innocent person could be locked behind bars is unacceptable. For legal purposes the guilty must be proved guilty

This isn't for money, and it's not about putting anyone behind bars. 

It's about electing people with exemplary moral character to the Supreme Court. A person with a history of highly questionable moral behavior should not be given a lifetime position on the highest court of the country. 

[Economy 52,834]

29 minutes ago, Whispering said:

This isn't for money, and it's not about putting anyone behind bars. 

It's about electing people with exemplary moral character to the Supreme Court. A person with a history of highly questionable moral behavior should not be given a lifetime position on the highest court of the country. 

I agree with that if that's all your referring to.