Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Fresh8686

Members
  • Posts

    1,272
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Fresh8686

  1. 10 minutes ago, twa said:

    Kav was criticized in the press for not being emotional to accusations, before he was criticized for being too emotional.

     

    tough crowd

     

     


    It's not that tough to be balanced and self-restrained while also emoting with authenticity in such a way that your humanity and character is properly displayed.

    Well, it's not that tough if that's actually who you are and have lived. But, if you're trying to fake it...

    • Like 1
  2. I hate this. I hate how ****ed up people are in this country. This kangaroo court ass **** is so disgusting. What’s the end game here? Do they really think all this **** will make them happy. What do they want the world to look like? Is there even a vision behind all this destruction, corruption, and petty ass ****. 

     

    Is all this really worth having all the money you want and people doing what you want? That **** isn’t going to make them happy. They’re too ****ing unhealthy to even know what happiness is. They’re just ****ing addicts to comfort and power. 

     

    I hate that our our country is being controlled by these weak ass people. 

    • Like 2
  3. 6 minutes ago, Zguy28 said:

    Not really. Those who hated the choice because he is a conservative jurist still hate him. Those who support him mostly don't post here, and a few people who were undecided may have changed their minds or don't have the mental energy to care.


    How about the people who are focused on making sure the process is legitimate, wherever it may lead? How come that is never an option when people are creating categories for the different "teams" involved in all this nonsense?

    Is there anyone else on Team Process? Team Truth? Team Country over Party? Or Team "Let's not act like a ****ing banana republic with a kangaroo court"?

     

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 3
  4. 41 minutes ago, B&G said:

    Liberals are of one mind on this issue and that is deeply troubling.

     

    I would really love to hear just one liberal tell me what evidence they have that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Dr. Ford.  Not an emotionally charged diatribe but real evidence.

     

    Testimony from the victim is evidence. More evidence is available if there is a will to investigate, which the republicans do not have. You’re bull**** argument about evidence holds no water given these two facts. 

     

    Further, according to the jury handbook if a witness lies on the stand the rest of his or her testimony can be ignored in the consideration of a verdict. 

     

    Guess which one lied on the stand yesterday. Here’s a hint, it wasn’t dr Ford. 

     

     

  5. 1 minute ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

    in Kavanaugh's case, but he is what we underprivileged people are talking about when we say that.

     

    Some of us are born down 0-2 at the plate and hoping for the best, while others are already safely on first. Kavanaugh was born on 3rd but still thinks he worked as hard as the person who was born down 0-2.

     

    No doubt, I agree. He's a bubble boy, he knows no other world, than one with a high level safety net. Thinking that just having to work hard is some huge challenge. They don't get it. They don't know what it's like to have allllll the extra **** on top of having to work your ass off and risk everything you have, because you have to. You'll straight up die if you don't and you're feeling half dead anyways because there is no help, no leverage to lighten the load. But, you just deal with it and climb, while suffering the fools who whine in their diamond fishbowls.

  6. 21 minutes ago, Gibbit said:

    no im not. intended sexual assault is not sexual assault...so this is basically a question about his character

     

    which I can understand....but don't lock him up for rape

     

    What Kavanaugh allegedly did to Dr. Ford qualifies as attempted first degree rape, per Maryland criminal code. The especially salient factors are the choking/smothering of her mouth to the point she feared death and the reasonable assumption that there was intent for penetrative vaginal intercourse, drawn from the alleged action of trying to take off her bathing suit. I posted the Maryland criminal code sections specifically laying out the criteria quite a few pages back.

  7. 2 minutes ago, B&G said:

    I agree with you.

     

     

    Don't be so hard on the Democrats....

     

    Republican, democrat, **** those words.

    If you lack humanity, integrity, if you think this **** is a game, if you will rape and abuse women for your own pleasure, and then laugh about it later as entitlements come to you, then I ****ing hate you and I ain't afraid to be the one to balance your scale.

     

    **** those who support this ****, this misognystic power dynamic, this lack of self-awareness and empathy. 

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
    • Confused 1
  8. 17 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

    Good thread on the culture Kavanaugh grew up in.

     


    Overly sheltered, entitled people living in unnatural bubbles of life, built upon wealth accumulated by others are some of the most monstrous human beings you can ever come across.

    There is a natural process to life and growth, that if you stray from, shortcut, and leverage too much it voids your humanity.

    • Like 3
  9. 35 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

    I accept that I dont know the legal definition.  A quick look back through this thread will show the reaction to the initial claims.  A few people asking what "sexual misconduct" meant.


    Here you go. Now we both know the legal definition. What do you think now? If you want you can follow the link below and check out the subsections for 1st-4th degree Sexual Offense, but in my view that hinges on whether there was intent for vaginal intercourse and if the allegations are true about him trying to get off Dr. Ford's one piece at the bikini line area, one could reasonably assume that vaginal intercourse was the intent and attempted rape is the correct category of accusation.

    Article - Criminal Law
    Attempted First Degree Rape
    §3–309.  
    (a)   A person may not attempt to commit rape in the first degree.
    (b)   A person who violates this section is guilty of a felony and on conviction is subject to imprisonment not exceeding life.
    First Degree Rape
    §3–303.  
    (a)   A person may not:
    (1)   engage in vaginal intercourse with another by force, or the threat of force, without the consent of the other; and
    (2)    (i)   employ or display a dangerous weapon, or a physical object that the victim reasonably believes is a dangerous weapon;
    (ii)   suffocate (hand over mouth can be seen as either suffocation or quieting), strangle, disfigure, or inflict serious physical injury on the victim or another in the course of committing the crime;
    (iii)   threaten, or place the victim in fear, that the victim, or an individual known to the victim, imminently will be subject to death, suffocation, strangulation, disfigurement, serious physical injury, or kidnapping;
    (iv)   commit the crime while aided and abetted by another; or
    (v)   commit the crime in connection with a burglary in the first, second, or third degree.
    (b)   A person may not violate subsection (a) of this section while also violating § 3–503(a)(2) of this title involving a victim who is a child under the age of 16 years.
    (c)   A person 18 years of age or older may not violate subsection (a) of this section involving a victim who is a child under the age of 13 years.

     

    Second Degree Rape

    §3–304.  
    (a)   A person may not engage in vaginal intercourse with another:
    (1)   by force, or the threat of force, without the consent of the other;
    (2)   if the victim is a substantially cognitively impaired individual, a mentally incapacitated individual, or a physically helpless individual, and the person performing the act knows or reasonably should know that the victim is a substantially cognitively impaired individual, a mentally incapacitated individual, or a physically helpless individual; or
    (3)   if the victim is under the age of 14 years, and the person performing the act is at least 4 years older than the victim.
    (b)   A person 18 years of age or older may not violate subsection (a)(1) or (2) of this section involving a child under the age of 13 years.
  10. 24 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

     

     

     

    I linked them all, and bolded the portions that read to me like they are in response to one another.

     

    Yea, I see what you mean. When I responded that Kilmer was wrong I was writing under the assumption that both of his paragraphs were referring to Dr. Ford, since he made no mention of Ramirez by name in the second paragraph. My first post that you quoted was intended to be seen as a line by line rebuttal of his previous post.



     

  11. 4 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

    I am not the one characterizing her allegation that way.  She is.  After she made the allegation, it has morphed into "attempted rape".  She did not characterize it that way initially.  I can have empathy for those that have experienced this (or any) type of traumatic event while also taking a rationale look at the facts as presented. Especially when there is so little other than personal statements.  And if BK did it, he should pay the penalty.  

     

     

    Show me the quote of this initial statement, because Yoire track record so far is not looking good. 

     

    Second, the way the allegation is described and currently stands for dr Ford is qualifiiably attempted rape. Do you dispute that?

  12. 59 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

    You asked him about Ramirez, his first sentence is about Ford, his second paragraph about Ramirez.

     

    No, you’re making incorrect assumptions about my post. Go back and reread. 

     

    And again his first post about dr Ford is wrong to anyone who is reasonable and intellectually honest about the allegations she is bringing forward. Her allegations pass the bar for being termed as attempted rape. 

    • Like 2
  13. 47 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

    We were always talking about Ramirez.  I was referencing Ford only as help for you to have more things to be mad about as being misrepresented.

     

    If Trump is leaking this, BK might be done anyway.

     

    No, my post is in reference to this whole ordeal and your continued pattern of misrepresenting and misconstruing the information that comes out for all of these women. If you don’t think what allegedly happened to dr Ford isn’t attempted rape, I don’t even know what to say to you. 

     

    Sexual misconduct for allegedly putting your hand over a 15 year old girls mouth and trying to force her bikini off while another turns up the music? That is way more than sexual misconduct. 

     

    If you really want to help me and the people who live through this trauma every day then exercise some ****ing empathy and sympathy. Let that be the focus for a second instead of this weird ass assumption of yours that all these women are working from corrupt intent. 

     

    This is not a political game for a lot of us. This is a ****ed up power dynamic we want to see rooted out that has destroyed the lives of many. 

     

    Can you get that? Can you at least try for one moment to consider that we are reacting to this in good faith and not political gamesmanship? 

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  14. Just now, Kilmer17 said:

    Sort of like the people that have taken Fords initial claim and have morphed into "attempted rape"?  Maddening for you Im sure.

     

    Her statement only identifies BK as being there and seeing his "hips coming forward like when you pull up your pants"  She also admits that there are significant gaps in her memories.  Nobody has come forward to even say they were at this party.  Only people claiming to have heard about it. 

     

     

     


    Dude, you're ****ing wrong again.

    Get your victims straight. That's Ramirez not Dr. Ford.

    • Like 3
  15. Just now, Kilmer17 said:

    Ford claims there were 6 people at the party including her.  4 of the others she said were there deny it.  She cant remember the time, place etc.  I'd like something more than just her accusation.

     

    Ramirez says herself she didnt see who did what she alleges.  And noone else has come forward yet to even say they were there when it happened.  Only people that say they "heard about it".

     

    I'd like to have something more than 35 year old drunken memories.  Neither of these accusations are he said she said.  They are both she says and nobody agrees.


    The way you keep twisting information is really ****ing pissing me off.

    Others didn't deny it, they said they couldn't remember the party. BIG ****ing difference.

    Bring the quote where Ramirez says she didn't see who did what, because if you can't then you're just talking out of your ass.

    Again there are people who agree, stop ****ing misrepresenting this ****.

     

    Do you know how ****ing infuriating it is to see you twisting information for alleged sexual assault when people on here have wives and family and friends who are victims of rape and gas-lighting?

    Stop that **** man. Get your facts straight and either post with direct quotes or don't post at all.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...