Blasey Ford, Yes or No; Kavanaugh, Yes or No?

Page 4 of 4 [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

Darmok
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,940
Location: New England

02 Nov 2018, 6:53 pm

#BelieveAllWomen?

Hoo boy. The Senate has referred another of Kavanaugh's "accusers" for possible criminal prosecution after she admitted her story was completely made up — a "ploy" to derail the nomination.

On September 25, 2018, staffers for Senator Harris, a Committee member, referred an undated handwritten letter to Committee investigators that her California office had received signed under the alias “Jane Doe” from Oceanside, California. The letter contained highly graphic sexual-assault accusations against Judge Kavanaugh. The anonymous accuser alleged that Justice Kavanaugh and a friend had raped her “several times each” in the backseat of a car. In addition to being from an anonymous accuser, the letter listed no return address, failed to provide any timeframe, and failed to provide any location — beyond an automobile — in which these alleged incidents took place.

Committee investigators began investigating Ms. Munro-Leighton’s allegations. Given her relatively unique name, Committee investigators were able to use open-source research to locate Ms. Munro-Leighton and determine that she: (1) is a left-wing activist; (2) is decades older than Judge Kavanaugh; and (3) lives in neither the Washington DC area nor California, but in Kentucky. In order to investigate her sexual-assault claims, Committee investigators first attempted to reach her by phone on October 3, 2018, but were unsuccessful. On October 29, Committee investigators again attempted contact, leaving a voicemail. In response, Ms. Munro-Leighton left Committee investigators a voicemail on November 1, 2018.


But it was a leftist fraud from the beginning:

She further confessed to Committee investigators that (1) she “just wanted to get attention”; (2) “it was a tactic”; and (3) “that was just a ploy.” She told Committee investigators that she had called Congress multiple times during the Kavanaugh hearing process – including prior to the time Dr. Ford’s allegations surfaced – to oppose his nomination. Regarding the false sexual-assault allegation she made via her email to the Committee, she said: “I was angry, and I sent it out.” When asked by Committee investigators whether she had ever met Judge Kavanaugh, she said: “Oh Lord, no.”

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/me ... 20Referral)%20with%20redacted%20enclosures.pdf

Lock her up.


_________________
 
There Are Four Lights!


Darmok
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,940
Location: New England

03 Nov 2018, 11:56 pm

(Took me a minute to find this thread. I had to filter through eleven others, almost all created by one person.)

Senate Judiciary Committee Summary Report (more than 400 pages long):
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/me ... Report.pdf

This memorandum summarizes the Committee’s work and provides a status update on the Committee’s ongoing efforts to review and address additional matters that arose during the course of the investigation, including potential violations of Senate rules, potential witness tampering, and potential false statements made to the Committee in violation of federal law....

After an extensive investigation that included the thorough review of all potentially credible evidence submitted and interviews of more than 40 individuals with information relating to the allegations, including classmates and friends of all those involved, Committee investigators found no witness who could provide any verifiable evidence to support any of the allegations brought against Justice Kavanaugh. In other words, following the separate and extensive investigations by both the Committee and the FBI, there was no evidence to substantiate any of the claims of sexual assault made against Justice Kavanaugh.


_________________
 
There Are Four Lights!


cberg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,380
Location: Boulder CO

03 Nov 2018, 11:58 pm

Jeepers Mr. Darmok what a classy thing you've chosen to whine about!


_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos :mrgreen:


Darmok
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,940
Location: New England

22 Aug 2019, 8:49 pm

The Left is accustomed to having no consequences for their criminal actions, so I hope these people will be successful. "Punch back twice as hard," as a famous man once said.


Mississippi prof, who went to Georgetown Prep with Brett Kavanaugh, sues HuffPost

A Gulfport professor and advocate is suing the national news website HuffPost alleging defamation involving a September 2018 story on U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh's days at Georgetown Prep school.

Derrick Evans’ lawsuit was filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Gulfport against HuffPost and its former journalist, Ashley Feinberg.

The lawsuit said HuffPost and Feinberg repeatedly defamed Evans and friend Douglas Kennedy to a nationwide audience on multiple occasions in September 2018 by falsely asserting that they helped arrange the purchase and delivery of cocaine at Georgetown Prep that resulted in the April 1984 death of David Kennedy, Douglas’ brother and the son of the late U.S. attorney general and senator, Robert F. Kennedy.

“These statements were not only false and defamatory, but outrageously so, and were published by defendants with knowledge of their actual falsity or in reckless disregard of the truth for the apparent purpose of creating a salacious story designed to drive internet traffic to HuffPost’s website,” the lawsuit said.


https://www.clarionledger.com/story/new ... 078341001/


_________________
 
There Are Four Lights!


Magna
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jun 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,786

25 Aug 2019, 10:40 am

^ There should be a focus on the media in general in this regard to "clean it up"; meaning, any form of slander and defamation by the media should be met with law suits that would be truly punitive. It's obvious that it's common for the media to be outright reckless to push a narrative or agenda. That should stop.

I would say at least once per year I'll do a search/update on Blasey Ford because I want to know if that little girl voice is truly her own. Perhaps it is. However, perhaps it isn't (I suspected right off that it was a fake voice). Maybe ten years from now there will be a candid Youtube vid where she's talking normally. That's the kind of thing I'm interested in checking up on.


_________________
"There is no love of living without despair of life." - Albert Camus

"Ain't nothing but a stranger in this world
I'm nothing but a stranger in this world" -Van Morrison

AQ-43 (32-50 indicates a strong likelihood of Asperger syndrome or autism).
EQ-14 out of 80
Rdos: Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 173 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 39 of 200
You are very likely neurodiverse (Aspie)


The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,633
Location: Reading, England

25 Aug 2019, 3:37 pm

Magna wrote:
^ There should be a focus on the media in general in this regard to "clean it up"; meaning, any form of slander and defamation by the media should be met with law suits that would be truly punitive. It's obvious that it's common for the media to be outright reckless to push a narrative or agenda. That should stop.

Believe me, that's a terrible idea. It sounds attractive on the surface but in practice it is really chilling for freedom of speech, while also not really making the issue any better. People need to be able to speak out against other people who have told lies, about people who have abused positions of power, about corporations doing shady business.

There's obviously a balance to be struck but you do NOT want to go down the British route. At the very least, judges should be empowered to consider the public interest, and both judges and publishers should always consider the potential good against the potential harm.

In the UK, newspapers can be sued for reporting the truth. They probably won't be ruled against, but they might have to pay legal costs. This has had a chilling effect, particularly for scientists reporting on the effectiveness of medical treatments.

Keep the government out of the news as much as possible. The freedom of the press is essential to the freedom of the people. Not to say that defamation isn't a real issue, because it is, but clamp down on it too hard and you start to look like China.