Kavanaugh accuser Swetnick had misconduct allegations in her past

The circus will be back in town next week, so stay tuned. Meanwhile it has been discovered that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's third woman accuser of sexual misconduct has some misconduct in her own past. In fact, she faced "inappropriate conduct" allegations during her short-term employment with an Oregon tech company, according to reports.

Webtrends, the Portland-based tech company filed a lawsuit in 2000 alleging that Julie Swetnick, 55, falsely claimed to be a Johns Hopkins University graduate and falsified her work experience, The Oregonian reported. The suit was voluntarily dismissed one month later.

Swetnick's asshat lawyer, Michael Avenatti, called the case "completely bogus," as if he was there when it happened.

"The lawsuit never had any merit as evidenced by how quickly it was dismissed," the bald-headed finklefuts told the paper in an email. "It was originally filed in retaliation for my client making claims against the company."

The Kavanaugh accuser worked for Webtrends off-site for several months in 2000 as a professional services engineer, wrote The Oregonian.

The allegations included: engaging in unwelcome sexually offensive conduct and making false and retaliatory allegations that other co-workers had engaged in inappropriate conduct toward her. The suit claimed she engaged in unwelcome sexual innuendo with two male employees at a business lunch with clients present, and that she claimed two other co-workers sexually harassed her.

The company determined Swetnick acted inappropriately but she could not prove the allegations against her co-workers. [This appears to be habitual behavior on her part.]

Swetnick took a leave of absence during her employment for sinus issues in July 2000. She received short-term disability payments, according to The Daily Caller.

A week after the disability payments stopped in mid-August, Webtrends received a note from Swetnick's doctor claiming she suffered a nervous breakdown and needed to take another leave of absence.

Then a few weeks hence, Webtrends learned that she had applied for unemployment benefits in Washington, D.C. She never told Webtrends' human resources staff why she applied for the benefits and claimed they had illegally tried to obtain her medical information protected under the law.

The following year, after she left the company, her ex-boyfriend, Richard Vinneccy, filed a restraining order against her in Florida, according to Politico.

Vinneccy claimed Swetnick threatened him and his family when he ended their four year relationship.

"She was threatening my family, threatening my wife and threatening to do harm to my baby at that time," he told Politico.  "I know a lot about her. She's not credible at all. Not at all."

Avenatti said Vinneccy's statement against Swetnick is "complete nonsense," according to the report. But why only believe the woman and not believe the man? It's the new trend. It's the MeTooScrewYouDude movement.

"No truth to this at all," Avenatti said without actually knowing if he was telling the truth.

Swetnick, who was in college at the time, attended a high school party where boys were allegedly lined up outside a room waiting for their "turn" with a drunk girl.

Swetnick's statement reads: "In approximately 1982, I became the victim of one of these 'gang' or 'train' rapes where Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh were present. During the incident, I was incapacitated without my consent and unable to fight off the boys raping me. I believe I was drugged using Quaaludes or something similar placed in what I was drinking."

A college woman, a young adult, going to a high school party is strange. To go to ten of these 'gang rape' parties is hard to imagine, and then to be raped after the tenth one you've attended is incredible.

Personally, I believe Vinneccy's claim. She sounds like a crazy deadbeat.


Click the "Follow Posts" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page.



Tweet

Fauxcahontas will most assuredly run for POTUS

Sen. Elizabeth Warren [aka: Pocahontas, aka: Fauxcahontas, aka: Princess Summer Fall Winter Spring] (D-MA) is taking a "hard look" at running for President and thus, running the United States of America into the ground.

She says she'll seriously consider a presidential run after the November midterm elections, and after a pow-wow with her tribe.

"Let's face it, Donald Trump is taking this country in the wrong direction," she told a Holyoke town hall audience, as she referred to Trump's lower taxes, the appointment of a record number of conservative judges to the bench, the appointment of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, a relationship with North Korea that has never been this hopeful, better trade deals, historically lower unemployment for Blacks and Hispanics, a stronger military, an ending of the Iran nuclear debacle, and a total butt-kicking of Islamic State.

Warren sent her statement to The Daily Beast, according to a spokesperson.

"Working people have taken one punch to the gut after another," Warren said, without saying "How," a word she often uses in greeting. "And I am worried down to my bones about what Donald Trump is doing to our democracy."

This should have gotten a laugh from her audience, but they weren't bright enough to understand the humor in it because they are progressives.

She had to be kidding about the punch to the gut for working people. More money in their paychecks and fewer regulations and more jobs is anything but a punch to the gut.

"And then this week, I watched 11 men who were too chicken to ask a woman a single question," she said, evidently referring to her 10 Democrat colleagues who just made speeches and threw Dr. Ford compliments at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing for SCOTUS nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh.

"I watched as Brett Kavanaugh acted like he was entitled to that position [much like Hillary acted in 2016] and angry at anyone who would question him."

No Faux, [may I call you Faux?] he was angry about being accused of something he probably didn't do. He was angry at the lack of corroborating evidence that, as a judge, he's used to seeing and relying upon. He was angry at the way idiots like Kamala Harris and Spartacus Booker questioned him while trying to earn presidential cred. He has every right and reason to be angry at the freak show put on by the Democratic Party. But if he wasn't angry, the left would have said he was 'robotic' and therefore guilty of what he's being accused.

Warren bloviated on: "I watched that and I thought time's up. Time's up. It's time for women to go to Washington and fix our broken government and that includes a woman at the top. So here's what I promise, after November 6, I will take a hard look at running for President."

Of course, that's a lie. She has already decided to run, but she's watering the plants known as Democrats.


Click the "Follow Posts" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page.



Tweet

Liars Kamala Harris and Planned Parenthood get caught taking Kavanaugh out of context

Politician Kamala Harris (D. Calif.) and abortion factory Planned Parenthood have been slammed for lying about Judge Brett Kavanaugh by omitting words he used in a statement about birth control during the SCOTUS confirmation hearing.

Harris and the abortion factory accused Kavanaugh of describing contraceptives as "abortion-inducing drugs." He never said that--he was summarizing the position of a pro-life group.

The charge came Thursday when Kavanaugh was asked about a case that involved Priests for Life, a group challenging Obamacare's contraceptive mandate that violated their religious beliefs.

"That was a group that was being forced to provide certain kind of health coverage over their religious objection to their employees. And under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the question was first, was this a substantial burden on the religious exercise? And it seemed to me quite clearly it was," Kavanaugh explained.

He continued, "It was a technical matter of filling out a form in that case. In that case, they said filling out the form would make them complicit in the provision of the abortion-inducing drugs that they were, as a religious matter, objected to" [my italics].

So what did Harris and anti-Kavanaugh liars do? They seized on the words "abortion-inducing drugs" but edited a video cutting out his reference of "they said," and that it was not his view he was referring to. She and Planned Parenthood were hoping nobody would notice--after all, they were only two words.

Harris claimed Kavanaugh chose his words carefully saying, "This is a dog whistle for going after birth control," implying that if she can hear it as such, she must be a canine.

"He was nominated for the purpose of taking away a woman's constitutionally protected right to make her own health care decisions," the tweet said, referring to a mother's right to kill her unborn baby. "Make no mistake--this is punishing women." Of course the mistake that was made was by Harris because Kavanaugh never said those words.

Overwhelmingly, abortions are not "health care decisions." They are most often used as birth control. The 3 most common reasons for abortions are:

1. Negative impact on the mother's life. 

2. Financial instability

3. Relationship problems/unwillingness to become a mother

Health care for the mother is bull crap, but the claim is that having the child will cause emotional harm on the mother, and the abortions are then allowed.

Planned Parenthood [which is an oxymoron when you think of it--they should be called "Planned Singlehood"] in a press release, also somehow left out the words "they said," and later acknowledged the "error," according to the Compromised News Network (CNN). But they still had the audacity to say that Kavanaugh used what they thought was suspect language.

But of course, they weren't specific in what gave them that "thought."

Have you noticed that mistakes only go against the right and never the left?

The fact that the video was selectively edited to leave out those crucial two words is not a mistake by any stretch of the condom.

White House Deputy Spokesman Raj Shah, [an Indian, and a member of the racial group that Joe Biden spoke about regarding their accent] said the video was an "obvious act of deception."

Of course it was.

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) said the controversy was proof that Kavanaugh had performed well at the hearing.

"If Senate Democrats are resorting to editing videos of Judge Kavanaugh's answers to make him look bad, then he mush have done well," Hatch tweeted.


Please follow Brain Flushings and take a moment to visit the sponsors on this page. Thank you.




Tweet