A Pimp and His Stable of Political Whores
"A Pimp and His Stable of Political Whores"
Ms. Stormy Daniels' legal pimp, Michael Avenatti, is expanding his “Stable” with a new client, Julie Swetnick. She is the woman who is offering the latest allegation against Judge Kavanaugh, dating from 1982. According to Ms. Swetnick, she went to a party where a gang rape of multiple women occurred. These women were given drugs and alcohol, while a group of teenage boys repeatedly raped them. At the time, Ms. Swetnick was in her 2nd year of college. The boys in question were still in high-school.
After the 1st gang rape, Ms. Swetnick went to a 2nd party with the same bunch of boys, who, once again, drugged a group of girls and gang-raped them. According to Ms. Swetnick, Brett Kavanaugh was the ringleader, even though, she claims to have never seen him do the actual raping. “He was in charge, though,” she offered.
Now, after two gang rapes, you’d think this college-age woman would’ve sworn off going to parties with this same bunch of high-school boys. But, no, Ms. Swetnick went to a 3rd party and a 4th one. Then, she went to 5th, a 6th, a 7th, an 8th, a 9th, and possibly, even a 10th such party. At each of these parties—according to Ms. Swetnick—drugs, alcohol, and gang rape were the reoccurring theme.
Eventually, I guess, she caught on, and put 2 + 2 together, recognizing that repeatedly going to the same kind of parties, with same the group of rape-crazy boys—where gang rape was as common as a spin on the dance floor—just might be a bad idea.
Does this sound rational?
The 1st two women who accused Judge Kavanaugh of sexual assault were contradicted by every one of the known witnesses, leaving only their word, and no corroborating evidence.
None.
The request for an FBI investigation, which, to some, indicates their honesty, is a smokescreen. Since the lead Democrats know, without hesitation, that this is not The FBI’s job, making the request a kind of meaningless pantomime. Meaningless legally, but very meaningful for its theatrical value, I might add. And, of course, as a way of fundraising for politicians who would crucify their own mothers to gain even an ounce more power.
Don’t believe it, though. Not without real, tangible evidence. And don’t ask me how I’d feel if it were my daughters. The same way I’d feel if it was my son or grandsons, is my answer.
Justice isn’t supposed to be color coded. It’s not gender coded. It’s supposed to be color blind.
Otherwise, it isn't really justice at all.
Mark Magula
Ms. Stormy Daniels' legal pimp, Michael Avenatti, is expanding his “Stable” with a new client, Julie Swetnick. She is the woman who is offering the latest allegation against Judge Kavanaugh, dating from 1982. According to Ms. Swetnick, she went to a party where a gang rape of multiple women occurred. These women were given drugs and alcohol, while a group of teenage boys repeatedly raped them. At the time, Ms. Swetnick was in her 2nd year of college. The boys in question were still in high-school.
After the 1st gang rape, Ms. Swetnick went to a 2nd party with the same bunch of boys, who, once again, drugged a group of girls and gang-raped them. According to Ms. Swetnick, Brett Kavanaugh was the ringleader, even though, she claims to have never seen him do the actual raping. “He was in charge, though,” she offered.
Now, after two gang rapes, you’d think this college-age woman would’ve sworn off going to parties with this same bunch of high-school boys. But, no, Ms. Swetnick went to a 3rd party and a 4th one. Then, she went to 5th, a 6th, a 7th, an 8th, a 9th, and possibly, even a 10th such party. At each of these parties—according to Ms. Swetnick—drugs, alcohol, and gang rape were the reoccurring theme.
Eventually, I guess, she caught on, and put 2 + 2 together, recognizing that repeatedly going to the same kind of parties, with same the group of rape-crazy boys—where gang rape was as common as a spin on the dance floor—just might be a bad idea.
Does this sound rational?
The 1st two women who accused Judge Kavanaugh of sexual assault were contradicted by every one of the known witnesses, leaving only their word, and no corroborating evidence.
None.
The request for an FBI investigation, which, to some, indicates their honesty, is a smokescreen. Since the lead Democrats know, without hesitation, that this is not The FBI’s job, making the request a kind of meaningless pantomime. Meaningless legally, but very meaningful for its theatrical value, I might add. And, of course, as a way of fundraising for politicians who would crucify their own mothers to gain even an ounce more power.
Don’t believe it, though. Not without real, tangible evidence. And don’t ask me how I’d feel if it were my daughters. The same way I’d feel if it was my son or grandsons, is my answer.
Justice isn’t supposed to be color coded. It’s not gender coded. It’s supposed to be color blind.
Otherwise, it isn't really justice at all.
Mark Magula