Congressman Matt Gaetz fights back against the accusations made against him

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) plans to burst back onto the scene with guns blazing through a public crusade to take down “RINOs” (“Republicans In Name Only”), along with Democrats, as the feds investigate him for alleged sex trafficking.

Good. I'm glad to see a member of the GOP fight back and stand up to bullies. I hope he mops up the House with them. When he found out the girl was underage he told her what she did was wrong. In other words he was standing up to a woman and displining her when neccessary. That is so awesome. And that she would have to be of legal age to travel with them. IOW she was decepitive and Gaetz rightfully put his foot down. Good for you Congressman Gaetz we at the Men's Rights Blog salute you.

According to Politico, Gaetz is teaming up with far-right extremist Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) to launch an “America First Tour,” where they’ll rail against “the radical left” and Republicans who they believe aren’t loyal enough to ex-President Donald Trump.

"Far right wing extremist" is commie code for "Patriotic American who loves and values the Constituion" over commie crap like Das Krapital".

The spectacle will reportedly begin on May 7 in Florida at The Villages, a prominent bastion of conservative retirees (and also the site of the viral video Trump retweeted last year in which one of his supporters was seen shouting “white power!”). It is not yet known what other cities will be included in the tour.

And who backs the Dems? Black supremacists like Black Lives Matter and commie scum like Antifa.

“There are millions of Americans who need to know they still have advocates in Washington D.C., and the America First movement is consistently growing and fighting,” Gaetz told Politico.

Damn straight, Congressman. Give them hell.

The GOP congressman is also working to make a comeback on TV, and may soon reappear on Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s show, Politico reported.

Gaetz’s upcoming tour marks an apparent strategy to bombast his way through the ever-growing scandal around his alleged payments to women and a 17-year-old minor for sex, along with allegations that he paid to have the minor travel across state lines. The congressman has not been criminally charged in the federal probe, which also now reportedly includes an investigation into his ties to Florida’s medical marijuana industry.

Gaetz has denied all the allegations.

Meanwhile Creepy Joe is on video feeling up little girls and these same people don't have a problem with it. Not only that but the age of consent laws vary from state to state. Some are 18 while others are 14,16 and 21. If Gaetz was haing sex with an 17 year old in a state where the age of consent is 16 then he broke no laws.

The Republican’s renewed push to aggressively defend Trump’s honor against “RINOs” comes even as the ex-president reportedly keeps Gaetz at arm’s length. CNN also reported earlier this month that Trump had rejected Gaetz’s request for a meeting.

Besides insisting that CNN’s report was “completely false” and that Gaetz had never asked him for a pardon, Trump has said little in defense of one of his number one loyalists.

Is what they say about Donald Trump true? Let me ask you this. Has the media ever said nice things about Trump even when Trump deserved the praise? No,they have not.

Click Here

They finally get it

President Trump continued his defense Tuesday of his Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh, mocking one of Kavanaugh's accusers at a Mississippi campaign rally.

The latest move by Trump came just hours after he had highlighted the possibility of false accusations against young men in the midst of a cultural moment brought on in the past year by the #MeToo movement.

"I think that it's a very scary time for young men in America when you can be guilty of something that you may not be guilty of," Trump said Tuesday afternoon outside the White House. "This is a very difficult time."

Kavanaugh's nomination remains in limbo this week, as the FBI looks into allegations of sexual assault made by numerous women. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., vowed again on Tuesday to vote on the nomination by the end of the week, insisting that the results of the FBI inquiry be kept private, for senators only to see.

Late last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee heard from both Kavanaugh, and Christine Blasey Ford, who alleges Kavanaugh drunkenly pinned her down on a bed and groped her against her will at a high school gathering in 1982. Scrutiny has been building this week on Kavanaugh, not only because of the accusations, but because of his testimony at that hearing.

A number of Kavanaugh's classmates have publicly said he misrepresented or lied about his drinking habits when he was in school, while he testified under oath in front of the Senate.

President Trump said that if Kavanaugh did lie to Congress, then "that would not be acceptable," but the White House has said the administration does not feel that Kavanaugh lied under oath.

At the same time, a backlash to that backlash has begun brewing in conservative circles. Many Republican senators have said they view the accusations and subsequent questions as desperate delay tactics on the part of Democrats.

"A vote against Kavanaugh is a 'yes' vote for more of these despicable tactics being used time and time again in the future," said Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas, on the Senate floor Tuesday.


President Donald Trump speaks to the media before departing from the White House en route to speak with electrical workers in Philadelphia, Penn.

President Trump, as well as his family, have raised fears about the possibility of politically motivated false accusations. Trump himself has been accused of a range of sexual misconduct, from harassment to assault. He has denied every accusation.

"You could be somebody that was perfect their entire life and someone could accuse you of something," Trump told reporters Tuesday afternoon. "You are truly guilty until proven innocent."

And the rally in Southaven, Miss., on Tuesday night, Trump went further. He mocked Ford's testimony, noting she said she could remember how many beers she consumed but couldn't remember details about where the house was where she says the assault happened or how she got home that night.

Trump asked a series of questions, acting out both sides of Ford's congressional testimony to laughs and applause from the crowd.

"What neighborhood was it in? 'I don't know.' Where's the house? 'I don't know.' Upstairs, downstairs, where was it? "I don't know but I had one beer that's the only thing I remember!" Trump said. "And a man's life is in tatters! A man's life is shattered."

After Ford's testimony last week, Trump had called her a "very credible witness."

"It's a damn sad situation," Trump told the roaring crowd on Tuesday, after chants of "We want Kavanaugh! We want Kavanaugh!" had quieted.

"Think of your son," Trump said. "Think of your husband."

Michael R. Bromwich, one of Ford's lawyers, called it a "a vicious, vile and soulless attack" in a post on Twitter.

Trump's comments echoed a message his son, Donald Trump Jr., relayed in an interview that aired this week on DailyMailTV. Trump Jr. said he fears more for his sons than for his daughters in the age of #MeToo.

"I got boys and I got girls, and when I see what's going on right now — it's scary," Trump Jr. said. "The other problem is for the people that are real victims of these things, when it is so obviously political in cases like this, I think it diminishes the real claims."

The idea that people in the U.S. are wrongfully "guilty until proven innocent" is an idea that wasn't manifesting itself politically on the right until last week, GOP pollster Frank Luntz told The Washington Post.

"In this era of #MeToo, there are a lot of men — and some women — who believe that justice no longer exists in America," Luntz said.

This raises the possibility of conservatives rallying around the Kavanaugh confirmation fight and cutting into the enthusiasm advantage among Democratic women, many of whom who were politically activated when Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in 2016. NPR's Danielle Kurtzleben reported recently on how women have swung further towards the Democrats this year than in elections going back at least two decades.

An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll from Sept. 23, just a week after the allegations were known, showed interest in the election among white men at 64 percent, higher than in 2010 when Republicans retook the House and 2014 when the GOP took control of the Senate.

Source

This is awareness. The President of the United States of America is addressing our issues. This is what activism can accomplish. Proof it can be done. Don't let anyone tell you you can't do it. You have the power to effect pro-male change,brothers. Are you going to use that power? I am. Are you?

It's about time someone brought this up

'Believe Women' Is Perilous Baloney

By Michelle Malkin
September 19, 2018

I have a message for virtue-signaling men who've rushed to embrace #MeToo operatives hurling uncorroborated sexual assault allegations into the chaotic court of public opinion.
Stuff it.

Your blanket "Believe Women" bloviations are moral and intellectual abominations that insult every human being of sound mind and soul.Br

A certain class of never Trump-harumphers are leading the charge on behalf of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's memory-addled partisan accuser Christine Blasey Ford -- who cannot recall the year she was allegedly traumatized, where it happened, who threw the party that paralyzed her for nearly four decades, how many were in attendance during her claimed assault, how she got there or how she left.
No matter! Bush campaign hack-turned-ABC News analyst Matthew Dowd doesn't need any data to analyze. "Enough with the 'he said, she said'" storyline," he declared this week. "If this is he said, she said, then let's believe the she in these scenarios. She has nothing to gain, and everything to lose. For 250 years we have believed the he in these scenarios. Enough is enough."

Clinton/Kerry flack Peter Daou echoed the unthinking sentiment: "To everyone on the right who says I'm being selective, I BELIEVE WOMEN whether the accused is a Republican or Democrat. And yes, that includes all the names you're throwing at me. My default in these situations is to BELIEVE WOMEN."
Ivy League poobah Simon Hedlin asserted: "Accusers go public not because of any supposed benefits but despite the immense costs." He argued: "When somebody is credibly accused of sexual misconduct, the default should be to believe the accuser."
That is a dumb and dangerous default. The costly toll of "believing women," instead of believing evidence, can be seen in the hundreds and hundreds of cases recorded by the University of Michigan Law School's National Registry of Exonerations involving innocent men falsely accused of rape and rape/murders.

One of those men whose plight I've reported on for CRTV and my syndicated column, former Fort Worth police officer Brian Franklin, spent 21 years in prison of a life sentence after he was convicted of sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl in 1995 who had committed perjury on the stand. Franklin vigilantly maintained his innocence, studied law in the prison library and won a reversal of his conviction in 2016. The jury took less than two hours to acquit him. But his name is still not clear. He recently submitted a 200-page application for a pardon for innocence and cannot do what he wants to do -- return to law enforcement -- unless the members of the Texas board of pardons and paroles (along with Texas constitutional conservatives who pay lip service to truth, justice and due process) do the right thing.

In Philadelphia, Anthony Wright also served more than two decades behind bars like Franklin. He was convicted in 1993 for a brutal rape and murder of an elderly woman. It was a female prosecutor, Bridget Kirn, who "failed to alert the Court or the jury to what she personally knew was the falsity of [police detectives'] testimony, or otherwise honor her ethical duty to correct it," according to Wright's lawyers with the Innocence Project. They have filed a lawsuit directly aimed at the prosecutor this week to hold her accountable for her criminal falsehoods.
And just this week, Oregonian Joshua Horner, serving a 50-year sentence for sexual abuse of a young girl, was exonerated after a dog that the accuser had claimed he shot dead was found alive. There had been no DNA, no corroborating witnesses and no other forensic evidence -- just the word of girl whose contradictions and memory problems were explained away as "post-traumatic stress" while an innocent man nearly drowned.

The idea that all women and girls must be telling the truth at all times about sexual assault allegations because they "have nothing to gain" is perilously detached from reality. Retired NYPD special victim squad detective John Savino, forensic scientist and criminal profiler of the Forensic Criminology Institute Brent Turvey, and forensic psychologist Aurelio Coronado Mares detail the myriad "prosocial" and "antisocial" lies people tell in their textbook, "False Allegations: Investigative and Forensic Issues in Fraudulent Reports of Crime."

"Prosocial deceptions" involve specific motives beneficial to both the deceiver and the deceived, including the incentives to "preserve the dignity of others"; to gain "financial benefit" for another; to protect a relationship; "ego-boosting or image protection [of others]"; and "protecting others from harm or consequence."

"Antisocial" lies involve selfish motives to "further a personal agenda at some cost to others," including "self-deception and rationalization to protect or boost self-esteem"; "enhance status or perception in the eyes of others"; "garner sympathy"; "avoid social stigma"; "conceal inadequacy, error, and culpability"; "avoid consequence"; and for "personal and/or material gain."
Let me repeat the themes of my work in this area for the past two years to counter the "Believe Women" baloney:
The role of the press should be verification, not validation.

Rape is a devastating crime. So is lying about it.

It's not victim-blaming to get to the bottom of the truth. It's liar-shaming.

Don't believe a gender. Believe evidence.

Source

MeToo movement makes rich men wary of extortion

From The New York Post:

New York City men are protecting themselves from the dark side of the #MeToo movement, including an upswing in false accusations and blackmail, lawyers and private eyes say.

One young technology exec said he has six Nest cams installed inside his swanky downtown condo to “document and provide corroboration for what’s happening in my private life.”

“It’s an insurance policy,” he said.

When he recently brought home a date and realized she was highly intoxicated, he turned to one of the cams and called her a ride home.

“I tried to keep the interaction fully within views of the camera before calling her a Lyft,” he said.

The exec says #MeToo — while giving a voice to victims of sexual assault and harassment — has emboldened other women to falsely accuse well-appointed men for financial gain, fame or vengeance.

“Anonymous accusations are now possible, and the media believes the court of public opinion should not hold itself to anything resembling the court of law,” he said.

He cited an article posted on Babe.net in January that detailed an anonymous woman’s account of her date with comedian Aziz Ansari. The story, which claimed Ansari pressured her into sex, was criticized as a hit piece that undermined the #MeToo movement.

“It’s disconcerting. So you need to have your own documentation to back up your facts,” the exec said.

“Rich men are not the victims, but we may be the targets.”

Private investigator Herman Weisberg agrees, saying he has seen an increase in extortion cases since #MeToo gained widespread attention last year.

“Since October, I’ve gotten about 25 cases of solid extortion threats,” said Weisberg, managing director of Sage Intelligence Group.

“I think in some cases, a few manipulative people are using the #MeToo movement as leverage . . . It gives their baseless, false claims more teeth.”

Weisberg says it has become a common tactic for extorters to e-mail a man with whom they have had relations and demand an apology in writing.

“They claim that their therapist says that’s the important first step,” Weisberg said.

“Let’s just say a high-powered person writes an e-mail back and says, ‘Wow, I’m really sorry you feel that way, and I’m sorry if I did anything,’ they are basically admitting wrongdoing, whether or not they even know what they are apologizing for.”

Weisberg said he considers it a red flag when an accuser seeks money directly from the accused or threatens to go public on social media.

“If you’re going to do it, do it — go on social media. But don’t threaten the person in advance . . . That’s what we call in the business a ‘cash grab.’ ”

On edge over the wave of sexual-misconduct allegations against prominent figures, professional men in New York say they have been avoiding evening outings with female colleagues.

One corporate lawyer scratched his tradition of grabbing Christmas drinks with a female mentee, and opted for the safer alternative of lunch. Another city businessman now brings his lawyer to meetings with women to avoid any misconstrued messages.

“I even think to myself, ‘Should I be meeting someone at my office at 9 o’clock at night when no one else is there?’ ” admitted criminal-defense attorney Jeremy Saland, who has seen an uptick in #MeToo-inspired extortion cases. “Anyone can make an allegation.”

“Our clients are seeking protection from extorters because they are petrified that if a claim is made public, shared with family or reported to employers, perception — not the truth — will carry the day.”

The tech exec, meanwhile, is trying to stay one step ahead with his in-home security system.

“I think that every single man in New York . . . is being a lot more careful now,” he said, “which isn’t necessarily a bad thing.”

Source

No one is blaming you,bro. Every man nationwide is in the same situation you are in. I know it royally sucks and you've done nothing to deserve this treatment. You only "crime" is having too much money from working hard or smart or both and now some woman believes she is entitled to it. That is what is happening. Men nationwide getting fleeced. Be careful,men and watch your back.

Bill Cosby's accusers exposed

Jameis Winston goes after his accusers

Kirby Dick and Amy Herdy
n Orlando law firm representing Jameis Winston and FSU administrators are protesting CNN's decision to air the film "The Hunting Ground" Sunday.

"We are writing to formally caution CNN that the portions of the film 'The Hunting Ground' pertaining to Mr. Winston are false and defamatory to Mr. Winston," Gray Robinson attorney John A. Boudet wrote in a letter to CNN on behalf of the Tampa Bay Bucs starting quarterback. "We urge CNN to reconsider the reckless decision to proceed with the broadcast of this deeply flawed documentary in the face of overwhelming evidence that the film's producers consciously and intentionally failed to adhere to any accepted journalist standards."

The film, which earned positive reviews at the Sundance Film Festival and screened at theaters throughout the country, focuses on sexual violence on college campuses and is set to air at 8 p.m.

While stressing Florida State does not tolerate rape, President John Thrasher wrote in a statement the film "contains major distortions and glaring omissions to support its simplistic narrative that colleges and universities are to blame for our national sexual assault crisis."

Winston's attorney and FSU both cite an email from film producer Amy Herdy to one of Winston rape accuser Erica Kinsman's attorneys that states, "We don't operate the same way as journalists -- this film project very much is in the corner of advocacy for the victims, so there would be no need to get the perpetrator's side." Another email stated the filmmakers planned to "ambush" Winston with cameras after he declined to be interviewed for the film. The emails were obtained during ongoing litigation involving FSU, Winston and Kinsman.

Then you are propagandists and yellow journalists. Bitch,if you think that faggot and you are immune from legal action guess again.

Harvard professors also questioned the accuracy of another incident highlighted in the film and asked CNN not to air it.

Film director Kirby Dick and producer Amy Ziering have promoted themselves as advocates working on behalf of victims of sexual assault on college campuses. They defended the accuracy of their film during interviews and updates posted on the film's twitter account.

"The facts make them look bad, so they don't want people to see the film on @CNN. We'll let viewers judge Sunday," one Tweet attributed to Ziering read.

CNN has not issued a statement in response to the protests.

John Clune, one of Kinsman's attorneys, released a statement that read, "Mr. Winston is apparently in the midst of another PR battle this week due to the release of The Hunting Ground on Sunday. When your lawyers' letters written on Friday are somehow getting printed in the media on Saturday, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what’s going on. His latest attack is an attempt to revive his lawyers' media themes and, as expected, shows no understanding of rape trauma and misrepresents the actual evidence.

"More importantly, Mr. Winston should get used to the rape allegations against him because film or no film, they aren’t going away."

Winston, a former FSU star quarterback and current Bucs starter, is the only person accused of raping a student named in the movie.

Winston was never charged with a crime after an investigation by state attorney Willie Meggs, who noted delays and unusual actions taken by the Tallahassee police were factors in his decision.

An FSU hearing found there was not enough evidence to deem Winston responsible for violations of the school's code of conduct.

The letter from Winston's attorney to CNN closes by stating, "CNN may have persuaded itself that Mr. Winston's status as a public figure insulates your company from a libel judgment. If CNN decides to proceed with this broadcast, we will perhaps have the opportunity to test that legal proposition in a court of law."

Source

Jameis Winston should definitely sue not only the producers and anyone else who were part of creating this film but his accusers as well. You should sue everyone of them into the poor house and make sure they can never find work,have a decent place to live or any good life whatsoever. They are misandrists,they are evil.

13 reasons why women lie about being raped

Women Who Lied About Being Raped And Why They Did It
Janet Bloomfield

Two sensational rape stories in the media have brought to light the question of false allegations, prompting many to wonder just why a woman would lie about rape. In her memoir, Lena Dunham claims that she was raped by Barry, a flamboyant, well-known campus Republican, but her story does not hold up under scrutiny. Jackie, the woman at the center of the Rolling Stone profile on Greek culture at the University of Virginia, claims to have been gang-raped, but the discrepancies in her account resulted in the magazine backing away from the story and questioning Jackie’s credibility. We do not know if either of these women has made false allegations, but false allegations of rape can and do happen. Here are 13 reasons women lie about rape.

1. Women lie about rape to cover up their infidelity

One night, Nicola Osborne got a bit drunk and ended up in bed with a man and they enjoyed “extensive sexual activity.” The episode was entirely consensual and the two swapped phone numbers after they were through. On the way home, it occurred to Osborne that her husband might not think very highly of her “activities” and she became flustered and visibly upset. When passers-by came to her aid, she told them that she had been forcibly abducted and raped by a stranger, sparking a massive police response to find the rapist. A subsequent DNA test led police to the man whom she had slept with and he was arrested and held for 12 hours. Once the truth came out that the encounter has been consensual, Osborne was charged with filing a false report and sentenced to 18 months in prison. Women lie about rape to cover up their infidelity.

2. Women lie about rape to explain why they are looking at porn

When Elizabeth Coast’s mother discovered her looking at porn on the internet, Coast explained that her actions were the result of sexual abuse she had experienced at the hand of a neighbor. Coast testified that when her neighbor was 14, and she was 10, he had sexually molested her. Her testimony was compelling enough to secure the man’s conviction. He was sentenced to seven years and served four of those until Coast’s guilty conscience became too much to bear and she admitted that she had lied about an innocent man. Coast was sentenced to two months in prison for her lie and must pay the man $90,000 restitution. Women lie about rape to explain why they are looking at porn.

3. Women lie about rape because they are mentally ill

Rosanne England scratched her face, tore her clothing and concocted a story about a man asking to use her telephone and then violently raping her. She gave police a detailed description that happened to match a 59-year-old father of two teenaged daughters who had no alibi as he had been walking his dog in the woods when the rape allegedly occurred. The man was arrested and held for 28 hours until DNA tests finally cleared him. He continues to face suspicion from his neighbors about his guilt. England gave no justification for the accusation other than she suffers from “mental illness.” Women lie about rape because they are mentally ill.

4. Women lie about rape because they feel guilty

Kelly Harwood had a few drinks and decided that sleeping with her friend’s son was a good idea. Upon reflection, she decided that she had betrayed her friend by doing so and reported her friend’s son for rape. She told police that she had been raped while sleeping, and her friend’s son was subjected to an “intrusive medical examination and interviewed under caution.” Two days later, Harwood relented and admitted that she had lied about the rape. She suffers from depressive illness, exacerbated by the amount of alcohol she had consumed. Women lie about rape because they feel guilty.

5. Women lie about rape if the sex is bad

Lynette Lee arranged to meet a man whom she had contacted through a dating site. They went on a date, which ended with consensual sex in a motel room. Lee then reported the man for forcible rape. He was interviewed by police, who then re-interviewed Lee, who confessed to lying about the rape because “she did not enjoy the sex” and “it was bad.” Women lie about rape if the sex is bad.

6. Women lie about rape when they fail school exams

Rhiannon Brooker knew her party lifestyle was catching up with her when the law student failed her bar exams. She told her exam committee that her performance was affected by “extenuating circumstances” and had her boyfriend charged with multiple counts of rape and assault, including punching her so hard in the stomach that she miscarried. She faked her own injuries to support the charges. The accused spent 36 days in jail before police confirmed that he was at work and had alibis for each of the alleged rapes. Brooker was sentenced to three and a half years for false allegations. Women lie about rape when they fail school exams.

7. Women lie about rape because of psychiatric medication complications

Katherine Bennett had consensual sex with a national guardsman but then reported to police that he had abducted her from a parking lot, taken her to his house and drugged her and raped her at knifepoint before she was able to escape. The police were able to establish that the story had been fabricated but not before the guardsman lost his job and had his reputation seriously damaged. Bennett’s attorney said that Bennett suffers from depression and obsessive-compulsive disorder and “although her condition and complications from medication were not an excuse for the false report, they were contributing factors.” Women lie about rape because of psychiatric medication complications.

8. Women lie about rape when they want attention

Gemma Gregory, desperate for attention from police officers, filed eight false rape charges, accusing seven different men over a period of six years. Former boyfriends were subjected to DNA tests and interviews and huge amounts of police time were wasted so that Gregory could have the attention she craved. After recording hundreds of calls with Gregory, the police arrested and charged her with false allegation offenses. Women lie about rape when they want attention.

9. Women lie about rape to get sympathy

Linsey Attridge was having some relationship problems with her boyfriend and needed to win some sympathy from him. She trolled Facebook and found a picture of a 26-year-old man and his 14-year-old brother whom she had never met and reported them both for a violent rape. To make her story more credible, she punched herself in the face, ripped her clothing and told police that the two men had broken into her house while her boyfriend was away and subjected her to a brutal attack. Both were arrested and had their lives turned upside down as word of the charges spread throughout the community. Attridge eventually admitted to making the whole thing up and was sentenced to 200 hours of community service. She has never apologized. Her boyfriend dumped her. Women lie about rape to get sympathy.

10. Women lie about rape to make boyfriends jealous

Hannah Bryon was mad at her boyfriend for breaking up with her. Wanting some attention from him and to make him jealous, she told him that a man whom she had been flirting with attacked her on a bridge, raped her and then threw money at her to get a taxi. The man whom she identified as her rapist was arrested and put through a stressful examination and questioning but was able to provide police with evidence that he had not attacked Bryon. Bryon was given a suspended sentence and 150 hours of community service. Women lie about rape to make boyfriends jealous.

11. Women lie about rape for revenge

When Cori Lynn Osiecki’s boyfriend broke up with her and started “spreading rumors,” she decided to exact revenge on him by filing a rape charge. She was taken by ambulance to the hospital, where a rape kit was collected and an investigation was started. Eventually Osiecki admitted that she had lied about the assault because she “wanted to get back at him.” Women lie about rape for revenge.

12. Women lie about rape because they are “moody”

Isabella Himmel was at a bar and her friend wasn’t paying attention to her, which left her feeling “moody,” so she told another friend that she had been gang-raped by a group of male students at the University of Connecticut. That friend believed her story and reported it to police, triggering an action alert to more than 30,000 students and a considerable amount of distress on campus. Surveillance video, however, showed no attack. Himmel then agreed that she might not have been grabbed by the hair and gang-raped by five men, but she might have been kicked or she might have just fallen. Himmel must complete a program that could lead to the dismissal of the false rape report charges against her. Women lie about rape because they are “moody.”

13. Women lie about rape when their friends get mad at them

Biurny Peguero was extremely drunk, out at a bar with friends, and impetuously accepted a ride in a van with three men. When she realized where she was, she became frightened and hysterical. The men took her back to the bar, and that’s when the trouble started. The friends she had left behind were angry with her and a brawl broke out among the women, who punched and bit one another. When a friend demanded to know if the men had raped Peguero, she said that they had. The bruises she had sustained in the fight with her friends were accepted as evidence of rape, and one man spent four years in jail on the charge. Women lie about rape when their friends get mad at them.

Shockingly, this is not even a complete list of the reasons women lie about rape, but if anything is clear, it is that women do lie.

Source

All men are rapists

One Day, All Men Will Be Considered RapistsJANUARY 13, 2015, 5:06 PM 41

One of the things defenders of feminism continue to vehemently deny is that it contains elements of outright man hatred. “It’s just about equality”, they’ll say. Even if there are reams upon reams of evidence of feminist theoreticians from the 1970s until today attacking heterosexual men as such, that’s not representative of what most who identify as feminists, most of whom “only want equality”, believe.

To which I will reply: nice try. One need only look at how public and policy discussions of inter-gender violence don’t even bother to ask about women’s violence towards men. A good example of this is domestic violence, which has been shown time and again in non-feminist surveys and studies to come from both directions, but in public campaigns, it is always only the men who abuse. Another example of this bias is rape.

Rape is a horrific and execrable crime. To the extent that it is possible within the confines of the law and due process, rapists can and should be punished to the maximum. But moral panic about rape, fueled by claims of “rape culture” and anti-male stereotypes has turned the campaign against criminals into one which paints as many men as possible – most of them innocent – as criminals.

The worst example of this thus far is the often touted statistic of “1 in 5″ women are raped on college campuses, with the implicit hint that as many as 1 in 5 men are rapists. This is a statement based on single and highly problematic study, which greatly expanded the definition of sexual assault beyond even what the respondents considered to be such. It has been debunked and picked apart time and again; more responsible and thorough studies by the American Department of Justice put the number far lower. Yet the meme of “1 in 5″ lives on.

Now that number threatens to become worse. A recent study even more distorted than the first is now being reported, with the blazing headlines on feminist sites that fully 1 in 3 (!) men would rape a women if they faced no consequences for doing so. Critics can and will point to the small sample size, the even more distorted method of questioning and the fact that asked about a theoretical and impossible consequence-free world – most men and women would admit to wanting to commit all manner of crimes and horrific acts.

But to the feminist activists, all means are legitimate in the fight against patriarchy, rape culture and heterosexuality. All that matters to them is that 1 in 5 will soon become 1 in 3. Pretty soon, it will be 1 in 2. You know what comes next.

This is not a debate about gender roles. It is not about economics or the esoterica of hateful radicals in an ivory tower. This is a war, an ideological campaign to smear all men as moral monsters. It is not a war against “patriarchy” or some imagined evil rich guy. This is a war on men as such – of all races and social classes. It is a war against your brothers, sons, fathers, friends and relatives. And right now, the bad guys and girls are winning.

Silent disapproval of this campaign is nowhere near enough. Anyone who truly cares about men, anyone who means what they say when they claim they are for all genders, must openly, vocally and repeatedly fight back and help turn the tide before it’s too late.

As for those of you who truly believe that all men are guilty as charged when accused of rape regardless of evidence or circumstances and that they are all truly monsters – may I suggest you practice wearing white sheets, because there is no moral difference between your attitude and that of racists who used to hang innocent Black men from trees on false rape charges. You are a bigot. Kindly own it.

The time for action is now. I know where I stand. The question is: do you?

Source

That last sentence was something I would have wrote and he's right. What you go to do about it? I'll fight on my feet before I'll live on my knees. That's what I'm going to do about it.

Alan Dershowitz stands up to false rape accusation

Famed attorney Alan Dershowitz fights accusations of sexual assault
BY ASHE SCHOW | JANUARY 2, 2015 | 12:29 PM

Unlike other celebrities and politicians who have allowed sexual assault accusations to ruin their careers, attorney Alan Dershowitz is fighting back early — and hard.

Dershowitz, a Harvard Law professor and outspoken critic of how colleges have been handling sexual assault, was accused of having sex with an underage girl by a former witness against billionaire investor Jeffrey Epstein.

Dershowitz categorically denied the allegation, calling it “totally, unequivocally and completely false.”

The woman, identified in court papers as Jane Doe #3, made the allegations last Tuesday against Dershowitz and several prominent Europeans — including Britain’s Prince Andrew.

Jane Doe #3’s complaint accuses Dershowitz and others of taking part in Epstein’s transgressions. Her lawsuit accuses federal prosecutors in Florida of violating the law by not consulting with Epstein’s victims before arranging a deal requiring the investor to be sentenced to 18 months in prison.

Jane Doe #3 mentioned several occasions in which she allegedly had sexual relations with Dershowitz. Dershowitz says he has documentation to prove he couldn’t have been in the same place as Jane Doe #3 at the times she claims, except once. And in that one instance, he was there with his family.

"I'm planning to file disbarment charges against the two lawyers who signed this petition without even checking the manifests of airplanes or travel itineraries, et cetera," Dershowitz told Politico. "I'm also challenging the young woman and the lawyers to level those charges against me outside of the courtroom, so that I can sue them for defamation. ... Finally, I’m challenging the woman to file criminal charges against me because the filing of false criminal charges is a crime."

Source

Go,Alan,go. Nail their asses to the wall. That's what I like about Dershowitz he takes no shit and he especially goes after feminazis,that is why they hate him. If feminazis hate him he is alright in my book.

Woman uses man to sexually assault another woman

A woman who used sex chatrooms to try to arrange the ‘stranger rape’ of a former work colleague has been jailed for six years.

Joanne Berry, 30, posed as the woman online and invited a man to come to her house and attack her, but the plan failed.
Berry had recently lost her temporary job after displaying "increasingly erratic behaviour" at work, and a judge said she may have held the victim responsible.

Aggrieved, the university-educated mother of one resolved to exact some form of "revenge or retribution".
She began contacting a man online over a period of time, pretending that she enjoyed “rape scenarios” and engaging in role play.

Eventually she gave him her ex-colleagues address, telling him it was her own, and persuaded him to knock on the door and rape her.

The unwitting man tried to barge his way in to the woman's home to act out the rape, but aborted the plan after realising he had been set up.

Berry, of Grove Park, south-east London, was convicted in May of putting a person in fear of violence in 2012.
At Maidstone Crown Court, Judge David Griffith-Jones QC said Berry had developed an "irrational vendetta" against the victim who had only shown kindness towards her.

She was convicted of committing an assault with the intention of committing a sexual offence, common assault and attempting to cause a person to engage in sexual activity without consent.

Judge Griffith-Jones said the combination of direct and circumstantial evidence against Berry at her trial was "compelling and the jury was not fooled", and described her behaviour as "wicked and calculating".

He went on: "That (the victim) was not in fact raped or seriously sexually assaulted is entirely fortuitous.
"That is plainly what you intended. As it is, however, the trauma inflicted upon her was, as can only be imagined, very substantial indeed."

Part of a victim impact statement was read out at court in which the victim described how the ordeal had left her suffering panic attacks.

She now refuses to sit out in the garden on her own because she fears men may force their way in, and she panics when someone knocks on her door.

The judge said the man involved should also not be forgotten as he was "duped" into acting in a way which could have had repercussions for him.

In mitigation, defence counsel James Manning said Berry - who has one previous conviction for shoplifting in 2004 - was of good character up until now.

She had also not committed any offences while on bail and she was a woman educated to degree level who had a child.
Mr Manning told the court: "This is an offence which is highly out of character for the defendant."

Berry remained impassive as she was jailed, and told she must sign the sex offenders register indefinitely and may be barred from working with children.

Source

Federal court gives men a weapon to fight back against false accusers

Students Accused of Rape Can Fight Back // Court OKs Suits Against University, Employees, and Female

With so much attention focused on alleged failures to prosecute students accused of date rape, the problem of universities whose judicial proceedings are unfair to the accused have been largely overlooked

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

PRLog (Press Release) - May 19, 2014 - WASHINGTON, D.C. -- WASHINGTON, D.C. (May 19, 2014): With so much attention focused on the alleged failures of many universities to forcefully prosecute male students accused of date rape and sexual assault, the problem of universities whose judicial proceedings are unfair to the accused, and/or are overzealous because of pressure from female students or otherwise, have been largely overlooked.

But now a new judicial ruling gives those wrongly convicted a powerful new weapon - they can sue the university, the employees who participated in the proceedings, and even the accused herself in federal court for substantial monetary damages and other remedies, notes public interest law professor John Banzhaf, who was twice called a “radical feminist.”

After a school tribunal at Saint Joseph's University found a male student to have committed sexual assault arising out of an incident of allegedly consensual sexual intercourse, he took legal action, says Banzhaf, who has been successful in over 100 sex discrimination proceedings.

The federal court held that he was entitled to sue the private university under the state's Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, and that he could also sue the university, university employees, and the female complainant for defamation (slander), with the court holding that their accusatory statements about him were not legally privileged.

Interestingly, the court said that he could also sue the female complainant for intentionally interfering with his contractual relations with the school; an important ruling, suggests Banzhaf, because for such an intentional tort he can seek much higher punitive damages in addition to general damages. Also, the court ruled that the mere fact that the tribunal found that the male student had committed the wrongful act complained of was not conclusive as to his guilt or innocence, and did not shield the female complainant from this type of legal liability.

Several additional claims by the plaintiff were not accepted by the court on the basis of the complaint which had been filed, but the court said that the male student was not precluded from bringing up these claims again, provided they were properly pleaded.

These claims included, said Banzhaf: breach of contract, violation of Title IX (discrimination against him by the school on the basis of his gender), negligence, making public statements which place him in a false light, and intentional infliction of emotional distress (which might also warrant punitive damages).

"Female university students in 'he said, she said' rape and sexual assault cases, who were dissatisfied with the way the school handled the situation, are increasingly seeking legal remedies.

But now men who feel that the pendulum has swung too far, or that they were not treated fairly in school judicial proceedings, suddenly also have powerful legal weapons on their side.

Also, says Banzhaf, it is likely that some attorneys will take these cases on a contingency fee basis, so that both rich and poor students can go after both the universities and any women who improperly accuse them. Female students, knowing that they may have to repeat their allegations under oath in open court, may think carefully before bringing any unfounded charges, he predicts.

Source

Well shut my mouth. This is a blessing,it truly is. It's about time someone in government took action and gave men a legal remedy to fight against the injustice of being falsely accused. This is what activism and making our concerns known accomplishes. There are lots of twists and turns on this road but if it yields victories such as this one then it is worth it.

Feminist oppression of children

We fear Carina Kolodny’s children, and so should your sons

January 10, 2014 By John Hembling (JtO)

I fear Carina Kolodny’s children, and so should you.

Why, you may wonder, should you fear them, and for that matter, who on Earth is Carina Kolodny?

According to her byline at the Huffington Post, she’s a writer, media activist, and sex educator. Apparently, she also holds a Masters in Social Media & Social Change. In other words, she’s a professional Social Justice Warrior (SJW). For some readers, that may seem like a positive appellation.

For clarity this is an individual who repeatedly engages in arguments on “social justice,” often in a shallow or poorly reasoned way, for the purpose of raising their own personal reputation. A Social Justice Warrior, or SJW, does not necessarily believe anything they say, or even care about the groups they are fighting “on behalf of.” The term also connotes an established tendency to advance arguments based solely on the immediate utility of moral one-upmanship, and completely unattached to reality, truth, or any core moral principals such as non-initiation of violence.

But returning to Kolodny’s children, and why fear is an appropriate response to them: they’re rapists and violent criminals. Does that sound hyperbolic? It’s worse than you think. Kolodny’s children, those children, teenagers, and in time, the adults they will become are not simply her actual offspring. In fact, Carina Kolodny doesn’t have children. Rather, they are all the children and teenagers raised to believe in the same popularized narrative Kolodny perpetuates in her writing, media activism, and sex education.

What narrative? This one; “It is a young woman’s responsibility to safeguard herself from rape, assault, harassment, stalking and abuse because boys will be boys and some of them just can’t help themselves.”

There are two separate and contradictory ideas at play in Kolodny’s quote, so we will examine each one independently. The first is that of self-responsibility. Apparently, when contemplated for women or girls, the Social-Justiciar and sex-educator Carina Kolodny finds it objectionable. Protecting yourself is not girls’ jobs, it is society’s job to protect girls (and apparently no one else).

“It is a young woman’s responsibility to safeguard herself from rape, assault, harassment, stalking…”

Kolodny is being sarcastic, but why? Yes every young woman (and old woman, and every young man, and old man) has a personal responsibility to mitigate risk, to make responsible decisions about attire, displays of wealth, and to generally avoid stupid, unnecessary risk of criminal victimization. This is not to suggest that any individual falling prey to criminal victimization is at greater fault than whatever violent perpetrator may have committed such victimization–but being an adult means taking responsibility for oneself. That this needs to be explicitly stated is one more indictment of the modern ideology of gender flying under the big “F” brand name. Women apparently are not to be treated like adults: that appears to be the sarcastic underlying assumption of Kolodny’s humor.

But now, let’s return to her opinions on the propensities of boys and girls. The reason, unfortunately, that women have to safeguard themselves against rape – you know, as if they are adults — is because “boys will be boys” and they “Just cant help themselves.”

That’s right, if your son, your brother, or yourself happens to be male – he’s not a human being, he’s a rape-inclined animal, and only the careful guidance of a right-thinking feminist will prevent him from his inevitable realization of his “true nature”: a violent sexual predator.

What is more devious about this formulation of hers, however, is that it’s ultimately a lie. Kolodny would undoubtedly object and claim she doesn’t believe men are “that way” by nature, but rather that they are socially conditioned to behave that way, and that the rest of her remarks are ironic or sarcastic. But our culture does not teach men that rape is OK, it has never taught men that. Since boys and men are not taught that rape is OK and never have been in this culture, the only reasonable conclusion she and those of her ideological ilk can therefore reach is that, whether the cause is “natural” or “socially constructed,” boys and men are inherently rapey and have to be taught otherwise.

This whole confusing ideological Gordion Knot of Kolodny’s fucktardery can be cut cleanly with one statement: she’s an ignorant bigot and only an ignorant bigot would say the things she’s saying, even supposedly in jest. Boys aren’t inherently rapey, and neither are they taught to be, you stupid bigoted asshole. All your garbage does is teach them to hate their natural sexuality and believe themselves to be potential rapists when the vast majority of them are not and never will be so inclined. In fact, news flash you stupid bitch: even if you encouraged boys to rape, most of them would recoil and refuse.

Kolodny’s article continues on with her hatemongering bigotry with various admonitions and advice to be imparted to young men by their mothers, and possibly, if they were properly socialized, maybe even their fathers.

I have had quite enough of Carina Kolodny and every other fuck who subscribes to the ideology of gendered hatred she promotes. Fuck Kolodny’s open letter to the mothers of boys, and fuck every other vile, hateful garbage-spewing ideologue singing from the same songbook. My patience for those who heap hate, disdain and contempt on men and boys is exhausted. No, Social Justice Warriors, boys are not innately rapey, nor are they taught by our society to be rapey. Both are hateful disgusting deplorable lies, and fuck you for spreading either one of them.

There is really no point in further criticizing or attempting to converse with such hatred than to just identify it as what it is.

However, we do have a few suggestions to offer the mothers and fathers of boys growing up in what is now a feminist-dominated culture. Here’s a few words of advice on that score:

When you speak to your son, teach him that his identity is his own. It will be his own choice to be the man he wants to be. Not the man other people may demand him become because of his utility to them, or his convenient disposability, or his need to be shamed for things supposedly in his character that aren’t actually there. Teach him to beware of those who will confer an identity on him, especially in such a manner as Kolodny does. Tell him he is not a “good” man, nor a “bad” man, as both of those ideas are traps designed to control him. Those intellectual traps are for the convenience of those who disregard and even deny his fundamental humanity. If some stupid fuck tells you you’ve got a “rape switch” tell him to go to Hell. If some stupid fuck tells you your inconvenient erection means you’re “objectifying women” tell them to go fuck themselves. If someone tells you it’s your job to “stop rape,” tell them it’s their job to stop murder first and otherwise go fuck themselves.

You may also want to teach your son something he will never learn from this culture’s mainstream feminist narrative. Admittedly, he may figure this out himself, but why not give him a heads-up when he’s 10, rather than when he’s in his 30′s and sorts it out for himself? His sexuality, particularly his sexual desire, is his own. Nobody is entitled to it. No, he is not required to fuck just because a girl wants to. No, he is not inferior if he finds a particular girl (or boy) unattractive. No, he is not to be shamed if he has standards in women. No, his penis is not a dancing pony expected to fuck on demand. And his right to say “no” to a sexual encounter is every bit as vital and real as a girl’s right to the same.

This, of course runs against the populist public narrative. In the popular narrative, it is not merely assumed that masculine sexuality is predatory, exploitive, and 95 other negative adjectives. It is also flatly assumed that the sexuality, and the sexual desire of men, is a public resource to be not merely condemned and criticized, but used as a lever of control over, either through direct exploitation or through shame.

Your son’s penis is not simply not a weapon, as it it characterized by mainstream propaganda. It is also an intimate part of a boy’s body to which nobody else has a right. He will be living in a world where women assume ownership of his sexuality and desire. The idea that a man is always on, always eager, that he really doesn’t even have a right of refusal, is common; that he has a right of refusal is something he isn’t even taught to consider. He should be taught to consider it in the face of a culture that endlessly suggests otehrwise.

Your sons should know that he should command his own sexual self-ownership. A few useful phrases for your son to add to his repertoire might include variations of “talk to the hand bitch”, and “look sweety, I’m not actually gay, but for tonight, you should assume I am.”

“My cock is fabulous, but do not ever assume you’re entitled to it, or entitled to my wallet for another of whatever sugary shit your drinking tonight.”

You might also want to convey to your son that nobody has any right to initiate violence against him. We’re all familiar with the common admonition to “never hit a woman.” This carries the implied, but false, implication that women can rightfully initiate violence against him. This includes feminine incitement to other compliant men acting on the behalf of members of the leisure caste. Your son will need to know explicitly that he has a right to his own integrity and freedom from coercion or other violence. Indeed, his explicit moral right to self defence even against members of “the weaker sex.” If a girl slaps him, he probably shouldn’t slap back (in a just world this would be allowed, but we don’t live in a just world), but he should never accept it and should probably forever terminate his relationship with any woman who does that to him.

Your son will also likely be bombarded by public messaging admonishing him to “respect women.”

Not respect people. Not respect other men. No. Just respect women. But of course, this doesn’t actually mean respect women as individuals, because individuals have to earn respect. No, the respect they mean is like the respect that Indian peasants were supposed to have toward white British colonialists: the “respect for women” they want is the respect of an inferior to a superior. Don’t give it to them. Real respect is something earned, not commanded by fiat. The common admonition to young boys to respect women is actually a command to demonstrate obeisance – while also invisibly acknowledging the fraudulent doctrinal conception of female-as-inferior. Why else would respect for individuals of a particular social caste require the common command for respect?

Aside from respecting the fundamental respect for basic rights and courtesy due to all human beings until they demonstrate otherwise, your son should only respect those who earn his respect. You should tell him to do so with or without instruction from public opinion-crafters. If the “respect” publicly propagandized to boys and men of “women” were the respect of humans as individuals with basic human rights, they would say “people,” and not merely the social caste “women.” Teach him to recognize this for what it is: a demand for unearned. And teach him that this hateful “respect for women” canard is all the proof he will ever need that feminists lie when they say “feminism is about equality.”

On the matter of sex between men and women, you might also want to acquaint your son with the increasing, absurd and amoral public ethic of feminine non-accountability.

This idea, increasingly popular, is that women, distinct from men, are held exempt from any concept of responsibility in matters sexual. This is important knowledge of the mine-field that gender ideologues have chosen to create for members of the disposable social caste to negotiate.

If your son makes any decision, or takes any action – whether drunk or sober – he will be held responsible for it. In the legal and popular culture today, this is the reality: a woman is – due to the ideology of her inferiority as a human – explicitly not a responsible actor in her own life. For example, if a man and woman are both intoxicated during a sexual encounter – SHE is a victim, and HE is a victimizer. Yeah, that makes sense, right? If two people are drunk, the one with a penis is automatically the rapist.

It doesn’t end there either. Increasingly, any withdrawl of her consent makes you her rapist, even if it’s days or even weeks later.

Your son, when he is very young, may not understand this. Most young children are actually far more rational than most adults. As young people, they are not yet acculturated to many of the widely accepted stupidities and insanities people like Carina Kolodny buy into and peddle to an unthinking public. So it will be up to you to teach him that BECAUSE of MAGIC, or Fairies, or Wizards, or Aliens from planet X – that women are uniquely incapable of having opinions or making choices – particularly after drinking a grey goose martini.

Or, maybe just tell him that hateful bigoted nutjobs who think like this are in control, and he needs to be aware of it.

Your son, as he matures from a child into a sexually mature and active person, will be well-advised to demand evidence of mature accountability and self-responsibility from the women he allows into his life. We live in a world contorting reality into pretzels to exempt women from personal responsibility. It is rare to find those few women who demand their own realized adulthood, which includes personal responsibility. Your son will need a tool-kit to detect the real adults among a vast majority of female victim-toddlers whose irresponsible whims and moody tantrums are used to justify the suppression of the rights of others, and even justify violence on her behalf.

Such a toolkit is being developed by the various current practitioners of MGTOW – although details of the same are outside the scope of this discussion.

Advise your son to exclude women who fail these tests from his life.

Last but not least, while there may be many other important talks to have with your sons, you will also wish to discuss the various meanings and social values of words like “slut” and related terminology. As a parent taking on the task of describing sexual relationships in the real world of today you must remember that words like “slut,” “whore,” and even “rapist” take on different meanings when used by different people. If you can’t be honest about the real world with your child then you have no business engaging in such conversations. Leave that to others who are more capable.

“Slut” has several different meanings, three of which will be mentioned here:

The most currently popular of these is the use by gender ideologues of slut as a “positive” label. This is the reclamation by feminists of what they assert was once a condemning insult. In this application, it is claimed that slut means a sexually liberated, free-spirited and unashamed woman positively exercising her sexuality. Picture the proud self-identifying sluts of the emergent public parades known as “slut-walks” around the world. In reality, the term “slut” used in this context really means “grifter.” A self-identifying feminist slut is as sex-denying, as condemning, and as hatefully judgemental as a klansman opining on issues of the black community. Just ask a slut-walker if they’d like to go for a quick shag, and see that sluttiness precipitate into a shower of false outrage. “Sexually irresponsible jackass” might be another, more accurately descriptive, way to phrase it.

The term “slut” is also used to condemn a woman of truly open sexuality. But interestingly, this condemnation is often from another female. The sexual openness of one woman is, in this context, treated as de-valuing the woman offering that condemnation. This is also likely why among a certain subset of the feminist mainstream, sex-workers are criminalized and marginalized. Female prostitutes, by providing sexual access for a finite exchange of money, break the sexual trade-union of state feminism. A slut who, within the reasonable limits of hygiene personal capacity, will fuck just “anyone” (or the whole hockey team) is seen by sexually-withholding women as a threat to the control of the market.

The final use of the term “slut” to be mentioned here is the usage of the term by men. In this instance it is a term of admiration for women who place high value on honesty in their own sexual communication, as well as physical affection, openness and sexual disinhibition. This is by far the least-commonly used of the three different meanings of slut. But it is also a genuine term of admiration and affection – even among men who themselves are sexually insecure, or sexually cautious.

Related to the multi-definitioned term “slut” are two other words, namely “whore” and the aforementioned “grifter.” “Whore” of course is a much-misused term. Opportunist lawyers, politicians, attention seekers and other bottom feeding creatures are regularly labeled as whores, in an abuse of the word, and a failure to understand the nature of actual pay-for-sex merchants. Actual whores – of the type practicing their business honestly, are arguably a valuable part of their community. They provide a useful service, often under very difficult conditions. Much of the world still criminalizes the independent practice of sex for money, creating a criminalized environment of escalated harm for sexual service providers as well as their customers.

“Grifter” is of course a term somewhat out of fashion in modern usage. This may be because the practice of grifting so closely resembles what is the populist ethical practice of sex, and manipulation through access control.

A fourth term, “rapist,” is perhaps the most troubling of these terms. Among the gender ideologues presently dominating public narrative – like Carina Kolodny – a rapist is any man who is labeled one based on no more than the whim of a female accuser. The term once meant a sexual criminal, including women sexually abusing minors or anyone else who couldn’t reasonably consent to sex. However, “rape,” while it retains the powerful stigma and condemnation of violent sexual victimization is increasingly coming to mean any sexual activity in which a member of the disposable sex participates.

The disposable sex being you, my son.

But of course, in the practice of parenting – particularly of boys, these are just a few of the talks a responsible and loving parent will have to have. It is boys now being raised with an awareness of this culture’s need to control them through shame and coercion who will grow into men who cannot be controlled, or manipulated to their own self-destructive utility to others.

What the gender ideology of State Feminism always promised, namely a humanitarian, equalist society, is coming. But it is not coming from feminism. Even so, it’s coming with the inevitability of gravity, and it will be boys going their own way – and the men they become who bring it. These men, some of whom exist now as MGTOWs, are not men allowing themselves to be defined by their utility, or by their approval by women. They are not the tamed lap dogs that even radical feminists privately find repulsive just as they publicly demand continued male obedience.

It is not the point of this article to establish the thesis that boys are not naturally any of the evils routinely heaped onto them as if defining masculine identity. For the real parents of boys, this simple reality requires no exposition except for you to explain to them that the popular narrative lies about them and subjects them to unearned hate, to to teach them to be aware of it without accepting the hate. The talks you, the parent of a boy will have, will arm him to defend against the self-hatred they want him to absorb, and arm him to be ready to define himself by his own compass, and to armour himself against a poisonous wind which would warp him into a man of conditional identity rather than sovereign adulthood.

Your son should know that a boy taught to be a “good man” by feminist standards is one whose public personhood depends on consensus of utility and approval by dysfunctional women and their lapdogs. His identity to them is dependent, and referential. A “real man” is based on the (stated or unstated) agreement of his mother’s friends. And boys raised by mothers to be these pleasing slaves, so that they may one day be approved of by their female contemporaries, eventually becoming the cooperative beasts of burden we typically call husbands and fathers. Do your son a favour and teach him not to allow himself to become a compliant servant of men and women who would use him as a disposable utility.

Finally, teach your boy to use his own best judgement, and to seek only the counsel of those who first prove that they believe he is a sovereign adult and that women should be treated as no less and no more than that. Otherwise, teach him to beware those who would confer on him any identity he himself does not gladly accept or, better yet, craft for himself.

Teach him also of the ideologues who hate him based only on an aspect of biology, and to recognize them. And let him learn to fuck their shit up.

Source

I love how JTO fucking nailed it. He described men's liberation perfectly. My hats off to him this is the best stuff I've read in a long time and I'm glad someone else is saying it too.

Tell Congressman Cantor to insist upon presumption of innocence in VAWA

From SAVE Services:

The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which is being discussed by House Leader Cantor and VP Biden could include this proposed definition: "sexual assault means any nonconsensual sexual act proscribed by Federal, tribal or State law, including when the victim lacks the capacity to consent."

Due to changes in state laws, innocent men have been convicted of sexual assault and imprisoned, even though there was no DNA, no witnesses, and no forensic evidence. Learn more here: click here

Do we really want VAWA to shift the burden of proof to the defendant? No law should remove the presumption of innocence.

Call House Leader Eric Cantor right now! (202) 225-2815 Tell him to restore the Presumption of Innocence in VAWA!

Thank you for your attention to this matter,

teri

Teri Stoddard, Program Director
Stop Abusive and Violent Environments
www.saveservices.org

Let's tell Cantor to back us on this one. You can email him as well and let him know to uphold the presumption of innocence in VAWA. Too many falsely accused men have gone to prison as it is. Let's let him know about David Bedoya's situation. About Vladek Filler and his ordeal. The more of us that let Cantor we're serious about this the better.There are facebook forums that deal with false accusations of domestic violence:here,here and here. Let him know about those at well.Also tell him to free David Bedoya. Email today.

Don't fuck with an MRA

Tiffany Marie Smith, the ex-wife of men’s advocate Gordon Smith is now sitting in jail after having been arrested on three counts of false accusation and one felony count of making a false statement to police investigators.

She was arrested this morning in Dover, Delaware by the Dover Police Department.

Her arrest came at the end of a Kafkaesque saga for Mr. Smith, who was arrested 8 times on a total of 13 allegations from Tiffany Marie, all of which stemmed from a bitter custody dispute. During that time, Gordon Smith was arrested once at gunpoint, jailed several times, forced to wear a GPS monitoring device around his ankle, and was in fact arrested twice when the monitoring device proved that he was nowhere near Tiffany Marie Smith at the times she alleged he violated a protective order. The allegations involved a range of crimes. including sexual assault, physical assault and terroristic threats.

The ordeal has cost him untold thousands in legal fees and severely compromised his professional life.

As a result of her arrest, all of the seven remaining charges against Mr. Smith were dropped, and his legal fight for his freedom is over.

It appears that the writing was evident on the wall to police officials, and the prosecution against Mr. Smith folded after the Dover State News (DSN) picked up on the story from A Voice for Men. DSN reporter Craig Anderson covered the story involving a felony charge against Gordon Smith being dropped, and reportedly began investigating other aspects of the case due to AVfM’s coverage.

An elated Mr. Smith had a message for readers of AVfM, who reacted to the story of his struggle by pressing it to officials and to the media.

“Words cannot describe the emotions I feel for every one of you at AVfM who made phone calls and sent emails and prayed for me during this time.”

More information will follow on this case after the holiday, when state offices are open.

*Update from Dean Esmay* Official statement from Dover, Delaware police department:

“Tiffany Smith 29 reported several domestic related crimes to the Dover Police and Delaware State Police over a period of time in August in which she stated she was victimized by her ex-husband Gordon Smith 47. On August 18 the Dover Police arrested Mr. Smith on several charges relating to a domestic incident. After the arrest Tiffany Smith continued reporting that Mr. Smith was stalking her and on one occasion had physically attacked her. A joint investigation by Dover Police and the Delaware State Police found that Tiffany Smith falsified all the complaints she made against Mr. Smith. Tiffany Smith was arrested on three counts of falsely reporting an Incident and one count of providing a false statement. All charges against Gordon Smith have been dismissed at the request of the Dover Police Department.”

Special recognition to the Dover Delaware Police for having the guts and the decency to do their jobs and do it right and to pressure the Delaware State authorities to do the their jobs. Special thanks to Dover PD Lieutenant Alan Rachko, who wins the Big Brass Balls of the year award in my eyes. –DE

Source:click here

Good for Gordon Smith for standing up to her it's good to see a fellow MRA prevail and Deleware of all places. I suggest we keep a close eye on this one because the Attorney General of Deleware is Joe Biden III,son of our mediocre vice president Joe Biden Jr. so this can "get lost" real easy so we need to be vigilant.

Diallo claims Strauss-Khan refused to pay for services rendered

Dominique Strauss-Kahn 'refused to pay' hooker maid for sex
By BRAD HAMILTON and CATHY BURKE

Last Updated: 12:01 PM, July 3, 2011

Posted: 1:09 AM, July 3, 2011

She had dollar signs in her eyes.

Before she ever walked into Dominique Strauss-Kahn's dazzling suite at the Sofitel, his accuser was well aware of his VIP status -- and planning to get her hands in his deep pockets, sources told The Post.

"She figured he's a rich dude, and she would get paid," said a source close to the defense investigation. "She was told by the crew she ran with that this was a gold mine."

The maid, who routinely traded sex for money with male guests, parked her cleaning cart outside Suite 2806 on the morning of May 14 and keyed her way into the room -- knowing what he looked like from a photo hanging in a maid closet that identified him as an important guest.

Multiple versions have emerged of what happened next, but nobody disputes that the 32-year-old maid performed oral sex on the Frenchman known as "the Great Seducer."

Sources now tell The Post that when the two were finished, the woman demanded cash from Strauss-Kahn -- but he refused to pay.

"There was an expectation of money after the fact, but he was dismissive," the source said.

And not gently, the source said -- DSK brushed off the maid's request as he turned his back and got dressed.

She pressed her case.

"She remained in the room with him while he got dressed for at least nine minutes," the source said.

The humiliating exchange sparked the maid's anger, prosecutors suspect.

The woman's lawyer has charged that DSK angrily grabbed her breast and vagina, leaving her with bruises to the groin area.

The fight also apparently prompted DSK to bolt the Sofitel in such a hurry that he left behind a cellphone.

Unraveling the explosive events became more complicated with the accuser's varying versions of what happened both in the hotel suite and afterward, prosecutors say.

In the hours following the incident, she told cops Strauss-Kahn chased her, grabbed her, locked the suite's door and then dragged her into a bedroom to force her to perform oral sex.

She claimed she broke free only to be dragged into a bathroom to complete the sexual encounter -- and that at one point Strauss-Kahn tried to pull off her pantyhose and rape her.

She also claimed she didn't know who her alleged attacker was.

"She didn't know who Dominique Strauss-Kahn was at the time of the incident. I was the one who explained to her," a relative told AFP.

Yet within a day, the maid was recorded speaking on the phone with a jailed drug dealer, reportedly crowing about a potential windfall if she pursued charges.

Her lies then caught up with her.

"In the weeks following the incident charged in the indictment, the complainant told detectives and assistant district attorneys on numerous occasions that, after being sexually assaulted . . . she fled to an area of the main hallway of the hotel's 28th floor and waited there until she observed the defendant . . . entering an elevator," reads a letter from prosecutors.

She said she then alerted her supervisor and waited for him.

She repeated this version to cops and a grand jury -- but finally admitted she later cleaned a nearby room and DSK's suite before reporting the incident to her supervisor.

The DA's case has fallen into turmoil, and DSK was freed of his strict bail conditions.

"The investigation is continuing. It may lead to dismissal. It may not," a senior prosecutor involved in the case said yesterday, adding the DA's Office has not decided whether to go forward with the case.

DSK enjoyed his newfound freedom yesterday by leaving his swanky TriBeCa town house at 3 p.m. in one of a small fleet of limos.

After a brief stop at the TimeWarner Center in Columbus Circle, he and wife Anne Sinclair went to the Museum of Modern Art, dining in the fifth-floor café that overlooks a lush garden, workers said. They were back home at around 5:30 p.m.

"He looked extremely happy -- he's free," said one museum worker.

At the Sofitel, one worker was mystified by the sullied maid's web of sex and lies, and doubted others would ever follow suit. "Why would they risk that?" he said.

Source:click here

Now it's making sense. He tried to rip her off and she screamed "rape" to get back at him. Did money come up prior to the act? If not why not? However when one listens to what she said to her jailed boyfriend and the fact that she knew Strauss-Khan was a VIP and she had his photo means that she was going to extort money from him. I wonder how many other men she done this do regardless of if she's had sex with them or not. All a woman has to do is scream "rape" against a man and watch his career,family,friends and life go down the drain. It's that easy.

This DA should drop the charges but he won't because he wants Strauss-Khan to plead guilty to something so the DA doesn't lose face. He and the cops got played for suckers and if I were him I would want this to go away as soon as possible and the best way to do that is dismiss the charges and give Strauss-Khan his passport back. I would also prosecute Diallo to the full extent of the law but don't expect Vance to do it anytime soon.New York City already looks bad with the mayor on down taking a big bite of a shit sandwich.

Nafissatou Diallo:maid and hooker

Maid cleaning up as 'hooker'
* Big tips for extra 'turndown service' * Prosecutors list litany of lies, scams
By LAURA ITALIANO

Last Updated: 2:41 PM, July 2, 2011

Posted: 1:57 AM, July 2, 2011

Dominique Strauss-Kahn's accuser wasn't just a girl working at a hotel -- she was a working girl.

The Sofitel housekeeper who claims the former IMF boss sexually assaulted her in his room was doing double duty as a prostitute, collecting cash on the side from male guests, The Post has learned.

"There is information . . . of her getting extraordinary tips, if you know what I mean. And it's not for bringing extra f--king towels," a source close to the defense investigation said yesterday.

The woman was allegedly purposely assigned to the Midtown hotel by her union because it knew she would bring in big bucks.

"When you're a chambermaid at Local 6, when you first get to the US, you start at the motels at JFK [Airport]. You don't start at the Sofitel," the source said. "There's a whole squad of people who saw her as an earner."

The woman also had "a lot of her expenses -- hair braiding, salon expenses -- paid for by men not related to her," the source said.

Allegations that she worked as a hotel hooker may explain why Strauss-Kahn insists their encounter was consensual. His defense attorneys refused yesterday to comment on the damning evidence -- or say whether he paid her for sex.

Sources also told The Post Strauss-Kahn's probers uncovered evidence that she was part of a pyramid scheme that targeted immigrants from her native Guinea.

"We have people who have been victimized, who have claimed she ripped them off. Nice working people from her neighborhood," a source said.

The stunning new info surfaced yesterday as the accuser was unmasked as a pathological liar and scam artist by prosecutors whose rape case has unraveled.

Strauss-Kahn -- who was under house arrest with a $5 million bond -- was released without bail after the Manhattan DA's Office admitted that the maid repeatedly lied to them about the alleged attack and her personal history.

Most damning to the case is that she flat-out lied on her asylum application that she was the "victim of a gang rape" in Guinea -- memorizing a cassette tape that coached her on what to say, according to a letter prosecutors sent to the defense.

"She reiterated these falsehoods when questioned about her history and background, and stated that she did so in order to remain consistent with the statement that she had submitted as part of her application," prosecutors said in the letter.

"Presently, the complainant states that she would that she was raped in the past in her native country but in an incident different than the one that she described during initial interviews."

To get tax benefits, she also claimed she had a second child. She only has one, a 15-year-old daughter.

"She also admitted to misrepresenting her income in order to maintain her present housing," the letter said.

Prosecutors said the woman lied to a grand jury by testifying she immediately alerted a supervisor about the assault.

The maid actually cleaned a neighboring suite on the 28th floor and then scrubbed Strauss-Kahn's room before she reported the incident to her boss.

Twenty-eight hours after the alleged sexual assault, the woman talked to her boyfriend in an immigration jail in Arizona -- saying "words to the effect of, 'Don't worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I'm doing,' " The New York Times quoted an official saying.

The bombshell disclosures will likely force the DA to drop all charges against the banking big shot.

"I understand that the circumstances surrounding the case have changed substantially," Judge Michael Obus said as he ordered Strauss-Kahn's $1 million bail and $5 million bond returned and gave permission for him to travel anywhere in the United States without restriction.

His passport was not returned.

"In the meantime, there will be no rush to judgment in this case," said Obus, adding, "I expect the process will go on in a manner that is fair as can be."

Strauss-Kahn, considered before his May 14 arrest to be a leading candidate for the French presidency, happily strode out of Manhattan Supreme Court holding hands with loyal wife Anne Sinclair after the brief, dramatic hearing.

"On the eve of Independence Day, we get to celebrate with Mr. Strauss-Kahn and his family a bit of personal independence," said his lawyer, Benjamin Brafman. "This is a giant step in the right direction. The next step will lead to complete dismissal of the charges."

Strauss-Kahn's first taste of freedom came last night at the cozy -- and pricey -- Upper East Side Italian eatery Scalinatella, where he sipped red wine with his wife and a security detail at a celebratory meal that cost $700.

Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance Jr., said that although his investigators have "raised concerns about the complaining witnesses' credibility . . . today's proceedings did not dismiss the indictment, or any of the charges."

The maid's lawyer, Kenneth Thompson, blasted Vance, accusing prosecutors of sabotaging their own case despite strong evidence of rape.

"Our concern is that District Attorney Vance is too afraid to try this case," Thompson said. "We believe he's afraid he's going to lose this high-profile case" like he did the trials over an alleged cop rape and the Deutsche Bank Building fire.

Thompson called allegations about her call to a jailed friend -- and that she had a bank account that contained $100,000 deposited by several people over two years -- "a lie."

When asked about the maid supposedly cleaning the rooms before reporting that she had been attacked, Thompson said she was very upset at the time and "did not know what to do."

The lawyer said there was other evidence against Strauss-Kahn, including hotel security video that shows him looking "nervous" afterward with "toothpaste smeared outside of his mouth."

Thompson admitted she lied on her asylum application but said she did so because "the victim is also a victim of female genital mutilation" and was desperate to shield her daughter from the same fate.

A spokesman for the hotel union denied it placed the victim at the Sofitel.

"These allegations are absurd," spokesman Josh Gold said. "She never registered at our hiring hall. We never sent her for a single interview. We absolutely did not place her at the hotel and we do not track tips."

The Lies She Told

“I cowered in fear after DSK’s attack.” She told a grand jury under oath that after she was sexually assaulted in DSK’s hotel Suite No. 2806, she fled down the hall, where she cowered until she saw him leave for the elevator. She then immediately told her supervisors of the attack, she said.

TRUTH: She eventually confessed to prosecutors that what she really did after the “attack” was clean two rooms, including Suite No. 2806. Only then did she tell hotel staff what had “happened.”

“I was gang-raped by Guinean soldiers.” DSK’s 32-year-old accuser swore in asylum paperwork that in retaliation for her family’s political opposition to Guinea’s dictatorship, she had been beaten and raped by a mob of soldiers. Prosecutors say she sobbed and “appeared distraught” as she recounted the ordeal.

TRUTH: “In subsequent interviews, she admitted that the gang rape had never occurred,” prosecutors told defense lawyers in legal documents. “Instead, she stated that she had lied about its occurrence and fabricated the details.”

“I have two children.” Prosecutors say that for the past two tax years, DSK’s accuser declared she had two children as dependents on her tax returns.

TRUTH: “She declared a friend’s child in addition to her own as a dependent on her tax returns for the purpose of increasing her tax refund beyond that to which she was entitled,” prosecutors say in court papers. She is actually the mother of only one child, a 15-year-old girl.

Source: click here

Why doesn't the DA let go of this case? He and the cops were played for fools. It is Diallo's fault not Strauss-Khan's. If you hate his politics fine but don't make false accusations. This is well past "old" by now.

Strauss-Khan accuser admits to extortion plot

Strauss-Kahn Accuser’s Call Alarmed Prosecutors
By JIM DWYER and MICHAEL WILSON
Published: July 1, 2011

Twenty-eight hours after a housekeeper at the Sofitel New York said she was sexually assaulted by Dominique Strauss-Kahn, she spoke by phone to a boyfriend in an immigration jail in Arizona.

Investigators with the Manhattan district attorney’s office learned the call had been recorded and had it translated from a “unique dialect of Fulani,” a language from the woman’s native country, Guinea, according to a well-placed law enforcement official.

When the conversation was translated — a job completed only this Wednesday — investigators were alarmed: “She says words to the effect of, ‘Don’t worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I’m doing,’ ” the official said.

It was another ground-shifting revelation in a continuing series of troubling statements, fabrications and associations that unraveled the case and upended prosecutors’ view of the woman. Once, in the hours after she said she was attacked on May 14, she’d been a “very pious, devout Muslim woman, shattered by this experience,” the official said — a seemingly ideal witness.

Little by little, her credibility as a witness crumbled — she had lied about her immigration, about being gang raped in Guinea, about her experiences in her homeland and about her finances, according to two law enforcement officials. She had been linked to people suspected of crimes. She changed her account of what she did immediately after the encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn. Sit-downs with prosecutors became tense, even angry. Initially composed, she later collapsed in tears and got down on the floor during questioning. She became unavailable to investigators from the district attorney’s office for days at a time.

Now the phone call raised yet another problem: it seemed as if she hoped to profit from whatever occurred in Suite 2806.

The story of the woman’s six-week journey from seemingly credible victim, in the eyes of prosecutors, to a deeply unreliable witness, is drawn from interviews with law enforcement officials, statements from the woman’s lawyer and a letter from prosecutors to Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s defense team released in court on Friday. Some of the events were confirmed by both law enforcement officials and the women’s lawyer; others rely solely on law enforcement officials. In the end, it was the prosecutors’ assessment of the housekeeper’s credibility that led them to downgrade their confidence in the case and agree on Friday that Mr. Strauss-Kahn could be freed from house arrest.

In the beginning, her relationship with prosecutors was strong. Her account seemed solid. Over time, the well-placed official said, they discovered that she was capable of telling multiple, inconsistent versions of what appeared to be important episodes in her life. After the encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn, she asked her supervisor at Sofitel, “Can any guest at the hotel do anything they want with us?” her lawyer, Kenneth P. Thompson, said during a sidewalk press conference on Friday defending her.

The supervisor called security, and officers, finding semen on the floor and wall, called the police, setting off the quick chain of events that led to police officers escorting Mr. Strauss-Kahn off an Air France plane set to depart Kennedy International Airport.

Suspicions of the woman’s associations arose relatively quickly: within a week of Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s arrest, the authorities learned of a recorded conversation between the subject of a drug investigation and another man, who said his companion was the woman involved in the Strauss-Kahn matter, according to another law enforcement official.

Prosecutors and investigators interviewed the woman at length.

Her immigration history was a focus. At first, she told them what she told immigration officials seven years ago in her accounts of how she fled Guinea and her application for asylum on Dec. 30, 2004. She described soldiers destroying the home where she lived with her husband, and said they were both beaten because of their opposition to the regime. She said her husband died in jail.

But then, in a subsequent interview with Manhattan prosecutors, she said the story was false, one she had been urged to tell by a man who gave it to her on a cassette recording to memorize. She had listened to the recording repeatedly.

The housekeeper also told investigators that she had been gang raped in Guinea. She cried and became “markedly distraught when recounting the incident,” according to a letter to the defense from prosecutors released Friday. But she later admitted that that, too, was a lie, once again one she had told to help her application for asylum. She said she was indeed raped in Guinea, but not in the way she had described.

Her lawyer, Mr. Thompson, said she was desperate to leave Guinea, and had been encouraged to embellish her application for asylum.

The boyfriend in the Arizona detention center was another issue. He had been arrested while bartering counterfeit designer clothing from Manhattan’s Chinatown for marijuana in the Southwest, the well-placed law enforcement official said. Her lawyer said she did not know the man was “a drug dealer.”

Meanwhile, as the interviews continued, the relationship grew more strained. During a meeting at the district attorney’s office on June 9, the woman wept as she was questioned closely after Mr. Thompson had left for another engagement. Her 15-year-old daughter, who was waiting outside, noticed that her mother was upset and called a relative to alert Mr. Thompson. The lawyer called the prosecutors and demanded an end to the questioning. He said on Friday that the daughter heard them shout, “Get out! Get out! Get out of here!” at her mother. The authorities say there was no shouting.

At another meeting, the woman threw herself to the floor in response to questions, the well-placed official said.

Then, for some 10 days, prosecutors were unable to get Mr. Thompson to bring her in; the lawyer said she was being treated for a shoulder injury that she suffered in the attack, an injury she had not reported earlier.

The final meeting occurred on Tuesday in the seventh-floor offices of the district attorney at 1 Hogan Place. It began at 11 a.m. and lasted five or six hours, except for a short lunch break, around an oval table in a conference room in the offices of the Public Integrity Unit.

It was devastating. In recent weeks, investigators collected bank records showing deposits of thousands of dollars in Arizona, Georgia, New York and Pennsylvania to an account in her name.

The woman had repeatedly said that the Sofitel was her only source of income.

Now, investigators confronted her with the bank records.

The woman, silent, turned to Mr. Thompson, seemingly pleading for direction on how to respond. He seemed startled.

“He was speechless,” the well-placed official said.

The district attorney’s office said the woman had lied about her income to maintain her public housing, and had claimed a friend’s child as her own dependant to increase her tax refund.

At the same meeting, the woman gave a new version of what she had done immediately after the encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn. In testimony before the grand jury in May, she said she had fled Suite 2806 to an area in the main hallway and waited until she saw Mr. Strauss-Kahn leave in an elevator. She has said that her supervisor arrived a short time later, and that she told her supervisor what had happened.

On Tuesday, the well-placed official said, she told investigators new details, stating, “I forgot to tell you this.”

In fact, she said, she left Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s room and entered another room — her lawyer said it was Suite 2820 — and cleaned it, and then returned to Suite 2806 and cleaned it until her supervisor arrived.

“She did not know what to do,” her lawyer said. “She did not want to lose her job. She knew that her supervisor was going to be coming upstairs momentarily. So, she went into another room.”

And yet, even this version was not corroborated by card-key data obtained by investigators on Friday, which indicated that the housekeeper went to the other room only after she had finished Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s room.

Some within the district attorney’s office suggested that the rush to bring the case to a grand jury may have contributed to its current, weakened state.

Early on, there appeared to be disagreement in the office over how to proceed — whether to agree to a bail package for Mr. Strauss-Kahn and take more time to investigate before seeking his indictment, or whether to try to keep him locked up and quickly take the case to the grand jury for an indictment, according to three people involved in the case.

The office chose to seek a quick indictment, but a Manhattan judge let Mr. Strauss-Kahn out on bail anyway.

Mr. Thompson said that the housekeeper’s account of what took place in Suite 2806 is the only one that matters, and said that in the jail recording, she recounted a version of the encounter that matched what she had told the police.

“It’s a fact that the victim here has made some mistakes, but that doesn’t mean she’s not a rape victim,” Mr. Thompson said Friday.

The woman has been crushed that her inconsistent statements have been brought to light, Mr. Thompson said. “I will go to my grave knowing what this man did to me,” she told him on Friday, he said.

Source: click here