Democrats simply couldn’t have created a worse poster child for sexual assault than Julie Swetnick.
I’m not sure how the Democrats will handle the obvious credibility gap of a woman who claims to have witnessed 10 gang rapes, but reported none of the activities or victims to authorities.
I really can’t imagine #MeToo women are too happy to learn that one of their own didn’t report 10 gang rapes, including her own. But then again, consider the hundreds, possibly thousands of Hollywood women who gladly ascended the casting couch, only to report of their “traumas” when their careers waned.
As for Swetnick and her lack of empathy for the supposed victims of violent gang rapes, I quipped,
Trending: Is the Inauguration CANCELLED?
“You’d think that after the third gang rape Swetnick attended, she would ask her date if they could just go see a movie or have dinner?”
How exactly does one end up at a gang rape anyway? Craigslist? Being a good friend of Bill Clinton? That’s not exactly something posted in The Weekender.
Despite this crazy and yes completely fabricated story, Democrats offered Swetnick up as a “victim” of Kavanaugh.
Then Holy Mother of Avenatti, the genius “victim” declared, “I watch Kavanaugh wait his turn” at one of her TEN gang rapes scenarios.
Far be it for me to throw a monkey wrench (racially insensitive pun intended) in the Democrats’ narrative, but I’d like to know why Swetnick was watching the gang rape in the first place?
Let me offer the Democrats some help here. Swetnick was sworn to secrecy or Kavanaugh would HAVE HER KILLED!
In Phase II of “Selling Swetnick’s Farce”, Democrats trotted her out to a willful media.
NBC recently interviewed Julie Swetnick, despite being unable to verify her claims. And it’s hard to believe, but contradicted the claims she made in a sworn affidavit.
NBC News’ Kate Snow highlighted Swetnick’s claims during the interview, noting the variations of the new claims from her written declaration. Snow also noted that the network could not verify any of Swetnick’s claims.
For example, Swetnick claimed that she “became aware of efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh, and others to ‘spike’ the ‘punch’ at house parties” she attended.
That story changed, as Swetnick then claimed that she saw them near the punch but did not actually see them “spike” the punch with alcohol.
But where Swetnick really loses credibility centers around Kavanaugh and the gang rapes. Swetnick initially claimed:
“I also witnessed efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to cause girls to become inebriated and disoriented so they could then be ‘gang raped’ in a side room or bedroom by a ‘train’ of numerous boys. I have a firm recollection of seeing boys lined up outside rooms at many of these parties waiting for their ‘turn’ with a girl inside the room. These boys included Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh.”
Interviewer: In your testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, you described a range of behavior. You say you saw Brett Kavanaugh do these things.
Swetnick: He was very aggressive, very sloppy drunk, very mean drunk. I saw him go up to girls and paw on them, try to, you know get a little too handsy, touching them…in private parts.
Uh, I saw him try to shift clothing.
I saw him push girls against walls. He would pretend to stumble, and stumble into them and knock them against walls. He’d push his body against their, and grope them.
This doesn’t sound remotely like “waiting on his turn” at a gang rape. School boy shenanigans, at best.
Swetnick likely understood where this line of questioning goes.
For example, “Who were the other boys waiting for their turn at gang rape at not just one, but the ten gang rapes you attended?”
Next, “Who were the girls? Surely Democrats want to get those women their day in a Senate hearing against Kavanaugh?”
Here’s how National Review put it:
Of all the dispiriting things that have occurred since the start of the Brett Kavanaugh sexual-assault controversy, the overwhelmingly credulous and furious response to Julie Swetnick’s gang-rape claims is perhaps the most disappointing. Her claim was wildly implausible on its face, featuring her repeated attendance at parties where women were being gang-raped, personally witnessing Kavanaugh in line to rape a woman, and claims that Kavanaugh personally drugged or “spiked” the punch at these parties to facilitate rape.
These things allegedly happened in full view of many non-victim witnesses. There were allegedly multiple victims. Yet the only person to come forward was Swetnick, through none other than Michael Avenatti — lawyer for porn star Stormy Daniels. She didn’t tell her story through a reputable news outlet…didn’t allow a team of reporters to vet her claims. She used Avenatti’s vast Twitter reach to drop an explosive sworn declaration on Twitter, the day before Kavanaugh’s Senate testimony, and the world responded exactly as Avenatti hoped it would.
Sadly, Democrats know this attack on Kavanaugh is a farce. But they don’t know how to quit.
They invested in destroying Kavanaugh. Thus, they must see that the destruction through until the end.
Their only problem is it will be too late before they figure out what really got destroyed.