Anyone I don't like was a rapist 40 years ago

Gas the hags, sex war now.
thehill.com/homenews/senate/407047-kavanaugh-furor-intensifies-as-calls-for-new-testimony-grow

Attached: kavanaugh.jpeg (700x466, 33.7K)

Tbh this matter needs looked into. It didn’t come completely out of nowhere and despite the fact that she is apparently a Democratic donor she had in fact mentioned this incident in past therapy sessions from years ago. Even if it is politically-motivated if it can be proven to have happened it should disqualify him. Kavanaugh’s a piece of shit regardless

It should have been tried in a court of law 40 years ago. Not the court of opinion at a politically convenient time.

Like I said, if there is more evidence than just beyond her story, it should be looked into. If all we have to go on is her word and nothing else it should go on ahead. It’s pretty funny to see this lady appear all the sudden either way because we all know how bad they want to get this guy on the Court before the Senate elections

so much for the pro sex left!

All they care about is slutting it up. They repress male sexuality.

Attached: 1db3d2948034d7d9226a981d3842e4572b0e0d4efa16adb712402d0534268b9f.png (500x498, 179.26K)

Best case scenario. He gets the job, and is found out to be a rapist afterwords. Delegitimizing the power of the Supreme Porky Court.

The ends justify the means.

Attached: 00f6a473a665cbfb9033359f0475eafdd3d1ad6880e7e705e7a3bcbd82627e70.gif (250x167, 1.1M)

You're in the wrong place bucko

the ends always justify the means, no exception. it's the only materialist position to take.

Attached: mozilla.png (960x960, 395.17K)

Anita Hill 2.0

It's funny you say that because it literally did. 40 years of silence - and she waits until a few weeks before this guy's Supreme Court confirmation to come out and say "ummm, actually i may have been raped 30 years ago". Even if it's true, it's so obviously politically motivated, I dismiss it out of hand.

The ends are shaped by the means. You can't consider the ends and means in isolation.

I have no idea what this thread is about tbh, some #metoo stuff about some yanqui politician?

that's just the non-naive version of consequentialism

I meant “not completely out of nowhere” in the sense that she was documented by her therapist in something like 2012 talking about this incident (though not naming names IIRC).
I don’t think that should be grounds for instant dismissal, even if it is politically motivated (on which I’m declined to agree with you). I don’t think we should have people of shitty character on the Court

It’s over Trump’s appointment of Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. Hearings were going on and a senator said she had an account of Kavanaugh sexually assualting someone while they were in highschool (some forty years ago). Originally the woman was anonymous but reporters found out her identity and she’s some sort of university professor / Democratic donor. That’s the quick rundown

Figures.

I guess you are not old enough to remember the Clarence Thomas confirmation. This shit is a rerun.

Meanwhile, Kavanaugh is likely a war criminal because of his actions during the Bush administration. No outrage over that one though, eh Democrats?

IMO, you forfeit your right to an impartial trial when you use an accusation of criminality purely as a means to slander someone and affect their career advancement. It's one thing if you call out a rape that happened recently, and it happens to have political ramifications. It's something else entirely when you weaponize your accusation, in collusion with the corporate media, to slander someone immediately ahead of an important government confirmation process.
I can't name one Supreme Court justice who isn't a shitty person

.
In cause you are not aware of.
An appointed judge serves as such for the rest of his life.
The congress does the appointment.
There are elections within 2 months.
Dems are trying to postpone his appointment by any means necessary. They hope to gain majority in both chambers.
If they do that guy is toast. Assuming they manage to survive that long.

Yeah, and she tried to do it really backhanded by contacting a major democrat (Feinstein) and ask to be anonymous. The dems making an anonymous claim a few days before confirmation would have looked EVEN WORSE than it does now, like every decision this woman made is worse than the last.

I do feel sorry for her if she really was almost raped

Attached: Akko_2_INT.png (188x264, 76.93K)

I understand the strategy. I do not like the girl who cried rape strategy.

Whatcha doin Zig Forums?

They always do

Attached: ToKeepYouIsNoBenefitToDestroyYouIsNoLoss.jpg (500x408, 29.69K)

We need a female comrade to claim Musk or Bezos raped them.

Absolutely this. Groundless court of public opinion #MeToo bullshit lacking any legal force, which as such can only work on a willing target, distracting from war crimes that could actually bring him down.

Attached: metoo victim.gif (320x320, 4.96M)

Well it goes without saying that supporting and rubberstamping warcrimes is the prereq for being in congress or high government, so why would that tacit consensus bring him down? Only the taint of sex crime has power in the current political moment

Innocent until proven guilty is a good standard for most people.
But if you're a politician or otherwise in a position of power, suspicions with any foundation at all really should be enough to warrant delaying an appointment. These people are much more likely to do some shit anyway, because they have this power and want to use it.

Killing fields are more honest than this feminazi shit.

misogynist pig

this shit hole is Zig Forumslite now I see

...