Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘sexual assault’

Blasey Ford Caves: Legal Team Shuts Down Further Investigation into Kavanaugh



Reported By Bryan Chai | October 7, 2018 at 9:58am

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/blasey-ford-caves-legal-team-shuts-investigation-kavanaugh/

Christine Ford testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Christine Ford testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee. (ABC News screen shot)

And so the Brett Kavanaugh scandal has ended — not with a bang, but a whimper. That could change, of course, if Democrats continue their crusade to remove the judge should they take the Senate after midterms. But as far as the original accuser goes? Christine Blasey Ford is throwing in the towel.

Ford’s lawyers have told CNN that their client “absolutely does not want him (Kavanaugh) impeached if Democrats take control of Congress.”

Debra Katz, one of Ford’s attorneys, told CNN that Ford has done everything she originally sought to do.

“Professor Ford has not asked for (Democrats to continue investigating Kavanaugh.) What she did was to come forward and testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee and agree to cooperate with any investigation by the FBI and that’s what she sought to do here,” Katz said.

Ford was thrust into the national spotlight after she accused then-Supreme Court nominee Kavanaugh of sexual assault at a party while the two were in high school. Countless accusations and investigations ultimately yielded nothing, and Kavanaugh was sworn in as the 114th Supreme Court justice on Saturday after a 50-48 Senate vote.

Some prominent Democrats, such as House Judiciary Committee ranking member Jerry Nadler, have made no secret of Democrats’ desires to further investigate Kavanaugh should Democrats have a successful midterm.

“If he is on the Supreme Court, and the Senate hasn’t investigated, then the House will have to,” Nadler told ABC News George Stephanopoulos. “We would have to investigate any credible allegations of perjury and other things that haven’t been properly looked into before.”

Nadler’s statements fly directly in the face of Ford’s desires. Considering the accusations that Democrats willfully ignored Ford’s request for anonymity, it’s not exactly surprising that Democrats might ignore her requests again.

“She does not want (Kavanaugh) to be impeached?” CNN’s Dana Bash asked Ford’s lawyers.

“No,” Katz bluntly responded.

It’s totally understandable that Ford wants this ordeal finished and tucked away. Another Ford lawyer, Lisa Banks, stressed that Ford wanted closure but had no regrets.

“I don’t think she has any regrets. I think she feels like she did the right thing,” Banks said.

“And this was what she wanted to do, which was provide this information to the committee so they could make the best decision possible. And I think she still feels that was the right thing to do, so I don’t think she has any regrets.”

Katz hinted that she wasn’t thrilled with how everything played out, but still supported Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s handling of the accusations.

“What I can speak to is when victims of sexual assault and violence go to their Congress people — when they go to their senators and they ask for their information to be confidential, I think that that’s a request that needs to be respected,” Katz said.

“Victims get to control when and how and where their allegations get made public,” she added. “Now, if we want to look at all the things that went wrong in this process, there are many. There are many issues that need to be addressed. But I think Sen. Feinstein respected the process of her constituents, and I think that was the right thing to do.”

It’s certainly up for debate whether or not Feinstein actually “respected the process of her constituents.”

But if Democrats continue the assault on Kavanaugh, they most certainly will not be respecting Ford’s request for this to end.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

If I could have two television shows and two movies on a desert island, they’d be “The Office,” (the American version) “Breaking Bad,” “The Dark Knight,” and “Die Hard.” I love sports, video games, comics, movies and television. And I guess my job, too.

Parents Deploy Their Own Brand of Justice After ‘Mean Girls’ Falsely Accuse Their Son of Sexual Assault


Reported By Lisa Payne-Naeger | October 7, 2018 at

11:29am

There is a reason so many American families supported Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court, despite the left’s best attempts to derail it. Liberals didn’t take into account two things when they orchestrated a campaign to falsely accuse the judicial nominee of sexual assault.

The first is that there would be a majority of Americans across the country who care deeply about the justice of presumed innocence over presumed guilt; the other is that not all women who make accusations of sexual assault are telling the truth.

For those of us who are parents of daughters, our concerns are for their safety and protection, of course.

For those of us who are parents of sons, our concerns are for their safety and protection, of course.

The latter is the focus of another drama that is playing out in Zelienople, Pennsylvania, about 40 miles north of Pittsburgh. And it might also be the outcome all parents of sons feared would escalate if Democrats succeeded in undoing the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh.

According to WPXI News in Pittsburgh, Michael J. and Alecia Flood, the parents of a high school-aged boy identified only as T.F., filed a civil lawsuit on Monday in U.S. District Court in Pittsburgh against the Seneca Valley School District in Butler County, District Attorney Richard Goldinger, and the parents of five teenage “mean girls” who falsely accused the boy of sexual assault.

The suit alleges “that school officials and Goldinger’s office didn’t take any action against the girls even after learning their accusations were false,” according to WPXI.

https://w3.cdn.anvato.net/player/prod/v3/anvload.html?key=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%3D

The parents who filed the suit say the “mean girls” conspired to falsely accuse their son of sexual assault, which resulted in several unfair consequences.

The girls “conspired in person and via electronic communication devices to falsely accuse T.F. of sexual assault on two occasions,” WXPI reported.

T.F. was reportedly fired from his job at the Zelienople Community Pool where he was employed at the time of the allegations and “forced to endure multiple court appearances, detention in a juvenile facility, detention at home, loss of his liberty, and other damages until several of the girls reluctantly admitted that their accusations were false.”

“The suit also alleges that the boy was subjected to months of bullying from other kids at school,” according to Breitbart.

The Harrisburg Patriot-News reported one example of bullying listed in the suit the boy suffered: “The lawsuit said students last year placed masking tape with the word ‘PREDATOR’ written on it on his back without his knowledge during choir practice.”

In the original 27-page complaint filed against T.F., the teen girls accused him of two different instances of sexual assault — one at the Zelienople Community Pool and another at a private home.

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette quoted the Floods’ attorney Craig Fishman on Thursday as saying, “The system right now is biased against men.”

As a father of two adult daughters, according to the newspaper, Fishman said he supported the advancement of the #MeToo movement, but said in this case, things had gone too far.

“They discriminated against the boy based solely on his gender,” Fishman told the Post-Gazette.

And isn’t that what is going through the minds of many parents of boys?

If they could take down a highly qualified Supreme Court nominee with mere accusations that had no basis in physical evidence or fact, it would certainly be a cake walk to ruin lives with false accusations against boys, men across the country. What a frightening possibility.

The left went too far in believing it could rally in the court of public opinion the advancement of an agenda that collapses the constitutional principles and the presumption of innocence.

Let’s hope justice prevails in Pennsylvania.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

An enthusiastic grassroots Tea Party activist, Lisa Payne-Naeger has spent the better part of the last decade lobbying for educational and family issues in her state legislature, and as a keyboard warrior hoping to help along the revolution that empowers the people to retake control of their, out-of-control, government.

Identity of Woman Who Screamed at Flake in Elevator Revealed, Soros Connection Uncovered


Reported By Karista Baldwin | September 29, 2018 at

3:09pm

The woman who yelled at Republican Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona while he was in the confines of an elevator Friday has also been vocal since then, revealing her name to be Ana Maria Archila. She and another woman in the elevator, Maria Gallagher, have been dubbed “heroes” by many on the left.

But Archila is an experienced activist with ties to George Soros. She is co-executive director of the left-wing Center for Popular Democracy, a New York-based organizing group that gets much of its money from the liberal billionaire.

“George Soros is one of the largest funders to the CPD,” The Washington Free Beacon reported in 2017. “Soros provided the CPD with $130,000 from the Foundation to Promote Open Society in 2014 and $1,164,500 in 2015. Soros provided an additional $705,000 from the Open Society Policy Center in 2016.”

On Friday morning, Flake made his way to the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing after announcing that he intended to vote to confirm Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Archila and Gallagher were among the women who confronted him while blocking the door to the elevator he was on.

“This is not tolerable!” they screamed at him.

“You have children in your family. Think about them! I have two children. I cannot imagine that for the next 50 years they will have to have someone in the Supreme Court who has been accused of violating a young girl. What are you doing, sir?!” Archila shouted at Flake.

An aide asked her if she would talk to a staffer outside, to which Archila snapped, “No. I want to talk to him. Don’t talk to me.”

Gallagher said Flake’s decision had personal significance for her, telling Flake that she was sexually assaulted and nobody believed her.

“I didn’t tell anyone, and you’re telling all women that they don’t matter, that they should just stay quiet because if they tell you what happened to them you are going to ignore them. That’s what happened to me, and that’s what you are telling all women in America, that they don’t matter,” Gallagher said in the emotional confrontation.

“Look at me when I’m talking to you,” she demanded. “You are telling me that my assault doesn’t matter, that what happened to me doesn’t, and that you’re going to let people who do these things into power. That’s what you’re telling me when you vote for him. Don’t look away from me.”

Flake listened to their shouting silently, occasionally nodding in response.  When the women finished and allowed him to pass, he continued to the committee hearing.

“I wanted him to feel my rage,” Archila said in an interview Friday with The New York Times. Her opportunity to express it to him came after she had spent all week in Washington protesting Kavanaugh’s nomination.

After private meetings with Senate Democrats, Flake told the panel that he would only vote for Kavanaugh on the condition that the Senate vote be delayed and another FBI investigation be conducted.

Archila claimed responsibility for Flake’s request to delay the vote. “His reaction shows the power that we have, together, when we chose to tell our stories and stand up for our vision of an inclusive society,” she wrote in an Op-Ed for USA Today on Saturday. “When we take action, we breathe new life and possibility into our democracy.”

It seems that there was more at play for the protesters than just rallying around in support of sexual assault survivors. Archila may have been as much against Kavanaugh for his politics as for the allegations. In her USA Today commentary, she revealed her political views, writing, “Brett Kavanaugh is not fit to serve.”

“Much of his record on civil rights, worker protections, health care and reproductive justice is an abomination. So, too, is his personal history of treating women as less deserving of respect and control over our lives, as these accusations against him have shown,” Archila wrote.

It doesn’t come as much of a surprise that the activist had political motives for the confrontation, but the revelation of her ties to Soros falls in line with concerns that many Kavanaugh protesters are paid players in the political arena.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Karista Baldwin has studied constitutional law, politics and criminal justice at the University of Dallas and the University of Texas at Dallas.

Today’s TWO Politically INCORRECT Political Cartoons by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Flake

Jeff Flake flakes out on Kavanaugh enticed by the seductiveness of trying to please the Leftist media and the Democrats.

Jeff Flake Flakes on KavanaughPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2017.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Blown Away

The Democrat party has now weaponized the #MeToo movement devastating equal justice under the law along with the presumption of innocence.

#MeToo Injustice for KavanaughPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

A.F.Branco’s New Coffee Table Book <—- Order

take our poll – story continues below
  • Whom do you consider to be the most corrupt Democrat Politician?

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

Ford Polygraph Results Released. Did They Just Blow a Huge Hole in Her Story?



Reported By Benjamin Arie | September 26, 2018 at

3:37pm

The narrative that liberals have hung their hopes on to stop Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is falling apart. There are now so many holes in the story, it’s incredible Democrats are still running with it.

Christine Blasey Ford is the woman who accused Kavanaugh of drunkenly groping her at a party way back when he was 17 years old, but she has been largely unable to produce solid evidence or witnesses to back up her serious claims.

One of the only points in her favor was that she took a “lie detector” polygraph test, which was widely reported by the media as supporting her story by showing that she wasn’t lying.

That is, until now. On Wednesday, the actual details from that polygraph were released to the public — and they make her already-flimsy story seem downright unbelievable.

The biggest problem with the so-called “lie detector” results are that the examiner never actually asked questions about Kavanaugh during the polygraph test.

Bizarrely, the person conducting the polygraph — who was a third-party examiner and not a law enforcement official — had Ford scribble down her nearly 40-year-old memory of the drunken party, and then asked her two vague questions.

Those two questions were: “Is any part of your statement false?” and “Did you make up any part of your statement?”

This is absolutely important to understand: Again, the polygraph test didn’t actually ask the main accuser any questions about Kavanaugh. His name was never brought up by the interviewer. Instead, Ford was simply asked if she believed her own hand-written statement.

It gets even more strange, as nowhere in that written statement does the name “Kavanaugh” appear, either.

And, to make matters worse, the statement from Ford that she was then asked about by the polygraph examiner directly contradicts different versions of the alleged event that the accuser has also given.

“Ford’s polygraph letter contradicts letter she sent to Feinstein,” pointed out Charles C. W. Cooke, the editor of The National Review.

“Polygraph letter says ‘4 boys and a couple of girls’ were at party. Letter to Feinstein says ‘me and four others,’” he continued. “No way to reconcile the two — irrespective of whether she’s counting herself in polygraph letter.”

It’s important to remember that fundamental facts such as how many people witnessed the alleged incident and what their genders were have been up in the air already. Even journalists from the left-leaning Washington Post are seemingly unable to keep the details straight.

“July 30 (to Dianne Feinstein): It was me and four other people. August 7 (to polygraph examiner): There were four boys and a couple of girls. September 16 (to Washington Post reporter): There were three boys and one girl,” The Federalist co-founder Sean Davis posted to Twitter, summarizing the inconsistencies.

Here’s another huge point: The fact that Ford “passed” the polygraph based on a statement that she later herself contradicted while telling the story to other people shows how unreliable this “evidence” truly is.

Contrary to how it’s shown in the movies, a polygraph can’t actually determine if a person is lying or not. All it can do is indicate how calm or stressed somebody is compared to a baseline. It can be used to indicate deception, but a completely delusional person can also “pass” a polygraph.

In other words, Ford may believe that something happened at a party four decades ago, and she may be confident that some version of her story is true, but the vagueness and unscientific nature of this process proves absolutely nothing. The problems with this accuser’s story don’t stop there. Buried in the release of the weak polygraph results was the fact that Ford was in Maryland — on the other side of the country from her home in California — to take that test.

But the supposed reason she couldn’t appear to testify in front of the Senate and answer questions about her accusations was that she’s afraid of confined spaces, which means she won’t travel by plane.

“The GOP has been told that Ford does not want to fly from her California home to Washington … which means she may need to drive across the country,” reported Politico just five days ago. “Ford has reportedly told friends she is uncomfortable in confined spaces, indicating a physical difficulty in making the trip by plane.”

Yet the letter from Ford to Senator Feinstein made no mention of this difficulty, and casually mentioned that she planned to be back in California from the East Coast in less than three day’s time. It takes at least 42 hours of nonstop driving to go from Maryland, where the polygraph was administered, to Palo Alto, California, where Ford lives and teaches at a university.

This borders on being humanly impossible: Anybody who has done long road trips knows that a realistic daily limit is about ten hours of driving a day before exhaustion sets in. USA Today has recommended that people set aside between four and six days to do this arduous drive.

When none of the details add up or pass even the most basic sniff test, something is wrong.

This entire ordeal looks increasingly like a slimy and desperate effort to delay Kavanaugh’s confirmation at any cost. But the truth always has a way of coming out, and it doesn’t even need a polygraph.

HERE IS THE POLYGRAPH REPORT:

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Benjamin Arie has been a political junkie since the hotly contested 2000 election. Ben settled on journalism after realizing he could get paid to rant. He cut his teeth on car accidents and house fires as a small-town reporter in Michigan before becoming a full-time political writer.


Report: Insider Grassley Emails Blow Apart Ramirez Accusations


Reported By Ben Marquis | September 26, 2018 at

1:36pm

A second accuser came forward against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh over the weekend, a former Yale classmate named Deborah Ramirez, who alleged that a drunken Kavanaugh had exposed himself in her face at a dorm party in either 1982 or 1983.

But her allegations, published by The New Yorker when several other outlets reportedly passed on the story, were admittedly vague, and nobody alleged to have been at the party where this incident was said to have occurred have any recollection of such an event.

Still, Ramirez, her attorneys and the Democrats cheering them on have demanded that a full FBI investigation be opened and Kavanaugh’s confirmation be further delayed, prompting Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, led by chairman Chuck Grassley, to once again scramble to accommodate another accuser and arrange a time for her to present her evidence to them so it can be considered by the committee, the proper venue for an investigation into allegations against a judicial nominee.

Ramirez’s attorneys had asserted through the media that committee Republicans were giving them the run-around, but a pair of tweets from CNN’s senior congressional correspondent Manu Raju would seem to indicate that Ramirez’s attorneys aren’t exactly telling the whole story, at least in regard to the level of cooperation they’ve received and reciprocated with the committee.

“Internal emails show Grassley staff asking Debbie Ramirez’s attorneys six times for evidence of her claims to New Yorker on Kavanaugh,” Raju tweeted Tuesday. “They also show Dem aide raising concerns that GOP was seeking precondition before having a call – all while Ramirez’s counsel calls for FBI probe.”

A follow-up tweet from Raju summarized, “Basically this shows GOP at a standstill with Debbie Ramirez’s attorneys, as Rs say they haven’t been given any evidence to back her claims and her side saying they’re refusing to back an FBI probe. It’s a clear sign the committee won’t get to hear Ramirez’s story before votes.”

As previously noted, the FBI has no jurisdiction over this alleged crime — if any law enforcement agency does, it would be local — and the proper venue for an investigation of allegations against a judicial nominee — including to the highest court in the land — would be the Senate Judiciary Committee, meaning the calls for an FBI investigation are a distraction and irrelevant.

The fact Ramirez’s attorneys are insistent upon an FBI investigation and have refused repeated requests to provide any relevant evidence of the alleged incident to the committee would seem to suggest that there is little, if any, additional information they can provide that wasn’t already included in the New Yorker article.

Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberley Strassel delved even deeper into the matter and published several informative and explanatory tweet threads on Tuesday with regard to the developing situation around Ramirez’s allegations.

A short three-tweet thread highlighted why the demands for an FBI investigation were nothing more than a delay tactic, followed a few hours later by a 12-tweet thread that exposed the back and forth emails between Grassley’s staff and Ramirez’s lead attorney, John Clune.

Strassel noted that Clune had appeared on CNN and accused Republican committee members of “game playing,” but called that particular accusation “downright false” in light of the contents of the emails.

Starting Sunday evening, just hours after the New Yorker article was published, committee staff began to request a time when Ramirez could be interviewed so the committee could investigate. The attorneys responded by insisting on an FBI investigation and attempted to schedule conference calls for details on a potential hearing.

But the committee staff repeatedly asked for the provision of any actual “evidence” — outside of the disputed and gap-ridden article — Ramirez may have prior to there being any phone calls arranging a hearing or interview. Indeed, they asked for evidence no less than six separate times over the course of two days, all of which were avoided, ignored or summarily dismissed by Ramirez’s attorneys.

“This is a serious accusation. No law enforcement would commence investigation without such statement — this is basic request, in line with any committee probe. Yet every polite request for basic on record statement is ignored, rebuffed, delayed, denied. GOP has bent backwards,” Strassel tweeted.

To conclude her thread, Strassel wrote “Finally, as you can read, claim by Clune that GOP ‘blew off scheduled call’ (CNN headline) is flat out falsehood. Majority always said testimony/evidence first. Says something that an attny resorts to such deceptions. And that CNN (would) report w/o checking.”

So there you have it. Republicans have been begging Ramirez’s attorneys for any evidence in support of her claims, to no avail. Keep these facts in mind over the next several days as Democrats and the media caterwaul about Republican “games” or accuse them of not taking Ramirez’s allegations seriously.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

Writer and researcher. Constitutional conservatarian with a strong focus on protecting the Second and First Amendments.

Army Col. Awarded $8.4 Million After Woman’s Sex Assault Allegations Blown Apart


Reported By Jack Davis | September 24, 2018 at

6:01pm

As official Washington is captivated by the drama surrounding decades-old allegations of sexual misconduct against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, a former soldier whose career was cut short by similar allegations is trying to get out a message that accusations are not the same as the truth.

Back in 2013, Wil Riggins was an Army colonel who had been nominated for general, when Susan Shannon wrote on her blog that Riggins raped her at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point back in 1986, according to the Daily Mail.

Four years later, after Riggins had been denied his promotion based on the claim, a jury heard Riggins’ suit against Shannon and awarded him $8.4 million in damages, according to The Washington Post.

With that as the background, Riggins has been using his Twitter account to remind those rushing to judgment in the Kavanaugh case that regardless of what an accuser says, the truth may be very different.

Most of his posts are retweets of others who cite his case as a cautionary tale against believing any accuser at face value.

Riggins said that even though he was exonerated, he still suffered irreparable damage from the false claim.

This journey we’ve been on the last four years,” Riggins said, “it’s been a nightmare. … The large dollar amount is meaningless. All I was looking for was the opportunity to be vindicated, to set the record straight, to take every action to get my reputation back to where it was before the 15th of July, when she published that false accusation.”

Shannon entered West Point in 1983 and resigned in 1986. She never mentioned being raped until 2013. In a blog post, she named Riggins as her rapist and said she was drunk at the time. Despite Riggins’s denials, she has maintained that she told the truth in her blog post.

“Frankly the day I started saying his name was the day I started blaming him instead of myself,” Shannon told WJLA.

Riggins admitted he and Shannon had a sexual encounter in 1983, but had no relationship after that time. Shannon called that “a compete fabrication”  and said Riggins “smugly admitted he did indeed rape” her.

However, after the verdict she did take down the posts she made about Riggins.

Stephen Horvath, Riggins’s lawyer said Riggins was able to win because,  “Everything in that blog post was provably false and could not have happened.”

Riggins said that his effort to fight back was aimed at sending a message to those who make false accusations.

“This will discourage other false accusations but would not discourage legitimate accusations of sexual assault,” he said.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Jack Davis is a free-lance writer. Writing as “Rusty” Davis, he is a Spur Award-nominated writer whose first two novels, “Wyoming Showdown” and “Black Wind Pass” were published by Five Star Publishing.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: