The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

wuh oh... Kavanaugh is a #metoo

I don't like him one bit, but I don't agree on impeachment either. That is an extremely serious remedy.

I agree on a thorough investigation, including**** any "meat" behind the Kennedy article that Rareboy posted. If THAT is true, that would be grounds for impeachment. Sexual impropriety 8 or 31 years ago isn't grounds by itself. If anybody needs to be impeached, it's McConnell, who sweeps scandals under the rug routinely and is most likely juiced by tons of Russian money. He is so crooked that if he turned himself into ONE nail, he alone could hold Neverland, the mansion that formerly belonged to Michael Jackson, together in a magnitude 9.8 earthquake.

****Somebody on MSNBC in the audio background here, suggested the exact same thing at that point in my typing, though I already heard this option suggested before and I agreed immediately. We can be blinded easily in a rush to judgment.
 
For the record, this was the second allegation of Kavanaugh with his pants down, touching a second woman with his penis at a drunken party. In total, there were three allegations made- 1) the Ford allegations, 2) the Ramirez allegation and 3) this third allegation (which is the one that the woman involved claims not to recall).

If the NY Times story is to be believed, there are 7 witnesses to the Ramirez incident which Kavanaugh denied under oath in his Senate testimony.

Sen. Chris Coons told FBI last year about Kavanaugh allegation in NYT [Axios]
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) told the FBI last year about a sexual misconduct allegation against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh that was at the heart of a New York Times piece published over the weekend, reports the Washington Post.

Why it matters: Coons' letter to FBI director Christopher Wray described an account from Kavanaugh's Yale classmate Max Stier and was dated Oct. 2, 2018 — days before Kavanaugh was confirmed by the Senate on Oct. 6. The FBI, despite conducting a supplemental background investigation into Kavanaugh after multiple allegations of sexual assault and misconduct, did not investigate the allegation in Coons' letter.

What he said: Coons told Wray that he had "several individuals" contact him to levy allegations against Kavanaugh, but he singled out the Stier allegation as "one individual whom I would like to specifically refer to you for appropriate follow up," per the Post.

Details: Stier, who runs a nonprofit in D.C., said he saw "Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student." The story was corroborated with 2 officials who communicated with him, according to the NYT.
Click to expand...
 
Instead of investigating Kavanaugh again (where even the supposed "victim" doesn't recall the event), how about the investigate the accusators? Or is the point to make ANYONE afraid to accept a Supreme Court appointment from President Trump? Hmm... Smells like bullying to me.
 
mikey3000 said:
Instead of investigating Kavanaugh again (where even the supposed "victim" doesn't recall the event), how about the investigate the accusators? Or is the point to make ANYONE afraid to accept a Supreme Court appointment from President Trump? Hmm... Smells like bullying to me.
Click to expand...

Ah, the blame the victim strategy.

Go back and read the stories that were all over the media about how McConnell told Trump not to nominate Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh worked in the Bush Administration. The Administration withheld his papers from Congress. According to Sen Feinstein's statement, the Judiciary Committee had received only 4 percent of the documents they requested and the Administration provided 42,000 additional pages on the day before the hearing started.

McConnell told Trump not to nominate Kavanaugh. This blew up because they nominated someone who has a serious problem with alcohol and has some serious incidents in his past that seem to be connected to that alcohol use. In the past, we've denied candidates who smoked a joint or didn't pay taxes on their nanny. Putting your penis into a woman's face against her wishes is something on a whole new level.

And what matters in the end is that the Trump Administration knew about the sexual assault incidents and instead of pulling the nomination, they limited the scope of the FBI investigation to prevent the truth from coming out. So, we have someone on the Court who we will always wonder about.

What we do know is that this is someone who has a problem and can't admit that problem. It seems to follow a lifetime of behaviors that would have knocked you or I out of the running for dog catcher.



 
Anyone who couldn't see that Kavanaugh is an alcoholic just isn't paying attention.

Hopefully he has gotten help with this.

And his anger management issues as well.
 
mikey3000 said:
Instead of investigating Kavanaugh again (where even the supposed "victim" doesn't recall the event), how about the investigate the accusators? Or is the point to make ANYONE afraid to accept a Supreme Court appointment from President Trump? Hmm... Smells like bullying to me.
Click to expand...

ACCUSATORS???????????????????????

Is this what 'lawyers' now call them?:rotflmao:
 
mikey3000 said:
Instead of investigating Kavanaugh again (where even the supposed "victim" doesn't recall the event), how about the investigate the accusators? Or is the point to make ANYONE afraid to accept a Supreme Court appointment from President Trump? Hmm... Smells like bullying to me.
Click to expand...

Yeah, how 'bout we investigate the accusations like adults and see how valid they are - which is exactly what didn't happen last time around. Trump has made TWO appointments - no one is bitching about the other guy. So, fail there all'round.

- - - Updated - - -

rareboy said:
ACCUSATORS???????????????????????

Is this what 'lawyers' now call them?:rotflmao:
Click to expand...

Don't you mean Lawyerators?
 
TX-Beau said:
Yeah, how 'bout we investigate the accusations like adults and see how valid they are - which is exactly what didn't happen last time around. Trump has made TWO appointments - no one is bitching about the other guy. So, fail there all'round.
Click to expand...

There were a couple of really interesting exchanges in the hearing that reminded me of "things you learn in kindergarten".

Like, if you have nothing to hide, then you won't be found to be guilty by an investigation into (jump to 3 mins):

Or, truthful answers are usually simple. Lies are usually complicated and you'll have trouble remembering them later:
 
I think it was more reportage and verification than accusing.
 
It is my understanding, that even if Kavanaugh committed an assault, he cannot be impeached unless the assault occurred while he was on the Supreme Court. It sounds absurd, and don't kill the messenger, but that's the law as I'm told. I think that Kavanaugh is a cad, and I'm sick that he got the position.
 
eddielee said:
It is my understanding, that even if Kavanaugh committed an assault, he cannot be impeached unless the assault occurred while he was on the Supreme Court. It sounds absurd, and don't kill the messenger, but that's the law as I'm told. I think that Kavanaugh is a cad, and I'm sick that he got the position.
Click to expand...

The charge would be perjury.
 
FBI policy is that once a nominee is submitted, the White House gets to call the shots on a "re-investigation".

What could go wrong? It's not like if the White House has dirt on a Supreme Court justice that they swept under the rug, that dirt couldn't possibly influence how the judge might rule, say... if a Presidential election is contested?


FBI Admits It Got 4,500 Tips on Brett Kavanaugh—Then Punted Them to Trump Team [Daily Beast]
The FBI has revealed that it received 4,500 tips during its investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct by then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh but only passed some of them along to White House lawyers, ignoring countless others.

In a June 30 letter to Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Chris Coons (D-DE), an FBI assistant director, Jill Tyson, said that “all relevant tips” from a batch of 4,500 received during a 2018 investigation into former President Donald Trump’s top pick for the court were passed off to the office of Trump’s White House counsel Don McGahn, whose handling of them remains unclear.
Click to expand...
 
KaraBulut said:
FBI policy is that once a nominee is submitted, the White House gets to call the shots on a "re-investigation".

What could go wrong? It's not like if the White House has dirt on a Supreme Court justice that they swept under the rug, that dirt couldn't possibly influence how the judge might rule, say... if a Presidential election is contested?


FBI Admits It Got 4,500 Tips on Brett Kavanaugh—Then Punted Them to Trump Team [Daily Beast]
Click to expand...

so what happens with this, he gets off scott free or we gonna revisit the charges?
 
fabulouslyghetto said:
so what happens with this, he gets off scott free or we gonna revisit the charges?
Click to expand...

Well, I'll just point out that "Long Dong Silver" justice Clarence Thomas is the longest serving member of SCOTUS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top