Mike's Home Page

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/boy-changed-trump-honored-anti-bullying-organization/story?id=59868158&__twitter_impression=true&fbclid=IwAR0GwawVdKICPsASWaGG7wgdMYhGi48a6PUa0oVZ_KkaOwuwawLMIeao-io

"The 11-year-old boy who changed his last name from "Trump" after he was bullied at school was recognized over the weekend by an anti-bullying organization for his courage."

Joshua, who lives in Clayton, Delaware, began going by his father's last name, rather than his mother's, due to the relentless bullying he experienced after President Donald Trump began campaigning in the 2016 presidential election."

 

"The bullying got so bad the school district agreed to change Joshua's name in the system when he began at Talley Middle School in the fall, WPVI reported."

""This little boy has been victim to relentless bullying simply over his last name that is associated with our 45th President of the United States," the organization wrote on Facebook after the ceremony. "Glad we cold [sic] bring a smile back to his wonderful face.""

~~~
You harassed him over his NAME to the point where he wasn't safe.

You rewarded him for GIVING IN to your vile behavior. 

You told him it took "courage" to give in to your cowardly attacks.

"Tolerant" "liberals", you are DISGUSTING, SUBHUMAN NAZIS, and at some point you will be dealt with the same way the original Nazis were.

And I will fucking cheer.

FOOTNOTE:

And I don't want to hear any "We don't endorse that, but!" because the "But" is that you DO fucking endorse it. You've destroyed statues, edited literature, and acted EXACTLY like the Taliban and the Nazis and similar filth. And there's no excuse of, "Well, that's only some of us."

Because if you continue to belong to a group that acts like this, you ENDORSE it.  It's like the "non-violent" members of the Mafia who don't break legs, only run the numbers. No, they're still fucking Mafioso, and you are still fucking Nazis. 

Right now I'm sure some pathetic piece of shit is wailing on Twitter that, "I wouldn't feel SAFE with this person at a convention!"

NO ONE feels safe around YOU.  Because you are a vile, disgusting mob of subhuman Nazi shit. YOU have committed the violence, the harassment, the lies, the fake victimhood "attacks," the erasure of history, the false narratives.

Everything you claim non-liberals are (because you call all of us "right wingers" regardless of our particular philosophies, because we're "not aryan"), is a projection of your own worthlessness and inhumanity.

You are fucking FILTH. 

EDIT:
Apparently, some readers are failing to read for content and ad homineming that I'm a "Sensationalist right winger."

I'm an immigrant. I'm a 25 year veteran of the US military. I supported marriage equality and gays in the military as far back as the mid 1980s. (I was a minor before that.)  I'm an active supporter of the trans community with references to prove it.  I'm pro-free speech, pro-reproductive choice.  I'm anti-big government.  I'm non-religious.

That's actually the EXACT OPPOSITE of a right winger.

Also, I own several real submachine guns and stuff that feeds ammo from belts.  So I have zero interest or need for an inferior bumpfire stock.

Now, please read for content and actually think.

~~~

Some people think they love it. Some people hate it. Some people think it's just a bit of political maneuvering.

I'm here to explain why, regardless of your feelings about firearms, this little item should utterly terrify you.

Here's the official statement:  https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1046006/download

First, notice the statement is from Jeff Sessions. Now, if you believe (as all rational people do) that pretty much everything that man did was a disaster, you shouldn't be deluded into thinking this was magically better than anything else he did in his crusade to eliminate pain killers, pot and everything except actual criminals.

I draw your attention to the phrase and the claim that a bumpfire stock, "Harnesses the recoil energy."

It does nothing of the kind.  Put a firearm equipped with a bumpfire stock in a block on a bench, pull the trigger, it will fire a single shot only. One. Then it will do nothing. There is no "Harnessed energy." An ACTUAL machine gun will continue to fire until you release or run out of ammo. The bumpfire stock-equipped rifle will, again, fire one. single. shot. And stop.

An earlier device with a spring (The Akins Accelerator) was in fact ruled to be a machine gun, by ATF, who ruled that removing the spring made it not a machine gun.  There was much outcry from the users that their $1000 (!) accessory was no longer usable.  But I wrote about that elsewhere. It's also referenced in the letter above, and the two are conflated, because Sessions is either stupid or evil or both.

The bumpfire stock is a stock. If you are experienced and well trained, it is possible with CERTAIN weapons to slightly increase the rate at which you pull the trigger, by shoving with the other hand while pulling the trigger.  If you're a guitarist, think of a hammer-pull combination.  It's not something a noob does to any good effect.

Sessions' description is literally as inaccurate as saying "Alcohol is a narcotic."

The second claim is that, just like a machine gun, it allows firing multiple rounds with a single function of the trigger.  This is also provably false.  Again: Place it on a bench, pull the trigger, it fires one shot.  The trigger must be released before it can shoot again.

This cannot possibly be defined as a "machine gun" that fires more than one shot per pull of the trigger.  Yet, that is what Sessions has done, via a false statement--a lie.

The manufacture of machine guns has been illegal since 1986. Real ones command a high price. The finding of the Firearm Technology Branch was not only that these devices were not machine guns, but that in fact, they are not even firearms.

Sessions has falsely declared it to be a machine gun, and therefore contraband ex post facto, with absolutely no compensation for the "contraband," in complete contradiction to the experts' findings.

ATFE estimates the device and related industry are worth $200 million, which is tiny in business terms. However, every owner, seller, maker has money invested that is being stolen from them. No due process.  No legislative process.

This is an EX POST FACTO TAKING of private property via a false declaration.  You should be afraid. You should be VERY VERY afraid.

Look above again. This decision is precedent for ANY Cabinet head to declare anything...or anyone, illegal, and subject to theft or imprisonment with no due process.

And worse, it was put in place by President Trump. If this stands, then President Trump has precedent to overrule any bureau, any law, just by instructing his cabinet to draft a false statement.

"Alcohol is a narcotic. Therefore, all alcoholic beverages are contraband and the selling of them is illegal. Shut all the liquor stores at the end of the month. No one gets compensated."

Didn't we walk that path already?

"Pot is a narcotic." 

Oh, wait. The government already says pretty much that.  Great idea to have more of it, eh?

"This house is a narcotic. Therefore, it is contraband and we will seize it.  No compensation. Also, you're going to jail." 

You thought asset forfeiture was bad before?

What about when the NEXT president takes office?  What if President Mike Pence says, "All fetuses are people"?  And then after talking to someone who knows what they're talking about says, "All embryos and blastocysts are, too."

What if President Bernie Sanders says, "All income belongs to the collective"?

I bet at least one of those gives you nightmares, right?

If the courts don't utterly destroy this "ruling" at once, it is very literally the end of the legislative authority.  President Falwell will be able to order that, "Any non-Christian church is a political entity, not a religion." 

Still think it's a great idea, or even a not-terrible idea?

~~

EDIT: and apparently a lot of so-called "liberals" do think it's a great idea, because "guns are bad m'kay?"

Due process?  Separation of powers? Constitution?  Hey, this is about guns!

That's exactly the attitude that got us the War on (some) Drugs.

The Federalist agrees with me. http://thefederalist.com/2018/12/19/trump-administrations-new-bump-stock-ban-legal-abomination/ 

 

 

I got a "Thank you for contacting me regarding poor Mr Khashoggi" letter.

~~~

I actually hadn't contacted you on this matter, or any other matter recently.  I'm not sure how this came about.  However. 

Khashoggi was a paid member of the Muslim Brotherhood, a supporter of ISIS, wrote a tear-jerking eulogy of Usama bin Laden, and was generally a terrorist supporting POS.
 
He was a blogger, not a journalist.
 
He wasn't American, he was Saudi.
 
Since they're actually fighting terrorism now, we shouldn't be hindering them, and certainly not crying tears over a terrorist sympathizer.
 
In every correspondence, you simply prove you're utterly unfit for your position and completely unelectable. I'd rather vote for a Dem.
 
~~~

This would also beg the question of why so many allegedly "tolerant" "liberals" support that terrorist cocksucker.
 
If there was any question as to why liberal cocksuckers would support a terrorist cocksucker.
 

 

I'm seven years older than my sister. In between us, when I was five, my mother had an ectopic pregnancy.  Ultrasound wasn't common back then, if it even existed--1971ish.  The first we knew was my mother waking up late at night screaming in obvious agony, pause for a few moments, scream again.  I heard a door slam, then movement, then the door again.  I think I remember my father coming through to tell me things were okay and something about a doctor.

When I woke up, our neighbor Mrs Seton was in the house, told me my mother was in the hospital, made sure I got fed, kept me occupied--it was school break.  I remember my father coming home, and cooking breakfast the next morning, but he didn't say more than three words.  I remember liking his breakfast better than my mother's, and feeling a bit guilty. Then he was gone again. This lasted several days.

Then my mother came home and had daily visits from the nurse.

So, what had happened was the ectopic pregnancy burst the fallopian tube, destroyed an ovary, and left her dead on the table for almost four minutes before being revived.  Part of it was some cultural legal BS at the time that the doctor wouldn't do what he had to without the husband's permission. Part of it was they didn't know what it was and didn't want to start cutting until they did.

Then they screwed up and used non-dissolving sutures internally, leading to abcesses, hence the home nurse visits. On the one hand, the NHS made those visits possible. On the other hand, their screwup made them necessary. This wasn't our first run-in with the incompetence of state-run medicine, either, but that's for elsewhere.

Jumping forward, on Thanksgiving Day this year my wife started complaining of some pressure and pain on her left side, lots of discomfort, and feared a possible miscarriage. She arranged a blood test for Friday morning, which showed things mostly normal.  "Mostly."

The following Tuesday was previously scheduled ultrasound appointment.

And of course, the universe has to kick things around.

Our four year old daughter woke up gagging and threw up, mostly bile. She was fine until she got on the bus for preschool, then threw up again, then again at school.  So we had to pick her up and take her with us to the appointment.

The clinic and doctor are absolutely first rate. They obviously didn't want a four year old, especially sick, in the clinic area, so the clinic manager herself came out to watch her in the waiting room, since they knew Jess needed me along for support.

The senior tech did the probing, and the doctor was present himself.  I knew that wasn't a good sign, after three previous kids.

And yes, that fuzzy sonar image looked wrong. Too small, too stringy.

The doctor was very gentle and diplomatic, but the end result was that it was an ectopic pregnancy, and at 7 weeks along had to be terminated NOW, before I got to see the other side of a woman screaming in agony as her body rips chunks of itself apart.

The process is chemical:

Methotrexate and vaginal misoprostol. Methotrexate (Otrexup, Rasuvo, others) is rarely used for elective, unwanted pregnancies, although it's still used for pregnancies outside of the uterus (ectopic pregnancies). This type of medical abortion must be done within seven weeks of the first day of your last period, and it can take up to a month for methotrexate to complete the abortion. Methotrexate is given as a shot or vaginally and the misoprostol is later used at home.

~~~

Get that?  The medical treatment for an ectopic pregnancy that might kill the mother is a chemically induced abortion. It's not "because she's lazy" or "because she couldn't keep her legs together."  It's because she might die.

So, in the currently civilized US, the discussion was basically,

Doctor: "We have to do this. Very sorry."

Mother:  "This is terrible, but yes."

Doctor: "Come in first thing tomorrow and we'll get the procedure started."

~~~

Now, in quite a few countries with more restrictive laws than the US--much of Europe, some of South America, Canada before abortion was legalized in the late 1980s--the process is much the same, except the doctor has to file an official note as to what and why.

And in quite a few other nations, they have to wait for the screaming agony, and then do more tests, and then surgical work, and a lot of women die.

This related case is a textbook example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar

THAT is what happens in nations where they obsess over "The life of the unborn." The mother is legally an incubator with no rights.

And as I've referenced here before http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/index.php?itemid=433 we live in a nation where the Dept of Education has a fucking SWAT TEAM to collect on arrears student loans.  So I'm not taking a bet that if a law here said that "only if the mother's life is in danger," there'd be too few, or too procedural, or too assholish of bureaucrats, and we'd have to wait for my wife to scream in agony and start hemorrhaging before anything was done.

This is one of many reasons I support absolutely unlimited abortion access, discussed between doctor and patient (and pretty much no doctor will perform the largely mythical just-before-birth abortion unless the mother really IS going to die, because doing so is very dangerous and worse than delivery, if delivery is an option at all, and there's no fucking time to have a bureaucrat sign papers).

Because today a late stage embryo, barely a fetus, dies before any brain to speak of exists, and my very much alive little girl will still have a mother, and my very much alive wife will stay that way, and have a lot of emotional anguish, because we really wanted another child and we're both reaching age limits.

And not to put too fine a point on it, it's also one of the many reasons I support the 2nd Amendment, because if it comes down to my wife's life vs dead bureaucrats and politicians, you get one guess how I vote.

Mexico has national health care, just like Canada.

Mexico has even stricter gun control than Canada.

Mexico has easier access to abortion than Canada.

Mexico has readily available pot.

Mexico has a low cost of living.

Mexico has an economy that would benefit from their financial input (Assuming any.  Canada's better if you're a welfare leech, IF you can persuade them to take you. They're not as lenient as the US).

But, no.  Liberals who whine about elections always threaten they'll move to Canada because they're fucking racists.

Liberals are innately more logical and sciencey than conservatives, as liberals inform me all the time. So it's wonder they can't see the logical flaws in this claim:

"The US is very right wing. If you compare it to Europe, the most left wing American politician is still only center right."

A: This assumes Europe is the baseline, not the US.  Looked at the other way, every nation* in Europe is extremely left wing, which is obviously a far more reasonable conclusion (Because I say it is).

2: This confuses mean and median.  Do you even statistic, bro?

c} Why do you assume the US and Europe are even on the same scale? You're comparing apples and rutabagas here, given the cultural backgrounds of most of Europe--civic minded subjects of monarchies, vs the background of the history of the US--rebels, refugees, transportees, slaves and their descendents, and adventurers.

IV) Europe is a continent of smaller nations, with actually quite a variety of political orientations. Are you claiming Russia is left wing these days? Do you even know what Poland's politics are? Or are you focusing on Scandinavia--several very small nations, France, Germany and the UK to the exclusion of the rest?  Using that logic, California, New York and Illinois prove the US is actually quite a bit further left than your own claims.

E] What about all the other nations in the world? Why aren't they counted?  You're choosing majority-white Europe out of deep-seated, inherent racism.

A liberal can ALWAYS choose the postulates he wants to prove he's correct, even when he's talking out of his ass.

And will usually be racist in the process.





*The nations the liberal deems relevant, not those inconvenient non-liberal nations.

Way back in the early 1990s at a sci fi con I attended regularly, on a circuit I attended regularly, I was hanging out with a bunch of friends. One was a woman who we could call a friend with benefits.  Another would be later.  Three guys who also threw themed parties, a DJ and his assistant, two other women, and one who is the person in question.

She was mutual friends with my FwB, the guy she was with, and another. We'd interacted, hung out, been at convention parties.

That evening, it became obvious she was interested.  A couple of hours later, we were back in my room. Making out, chatting, making out some more.  I lost my shirt. 

A few minutes later, she was sitting astride my hips, and peeled her dress over her head.  No bra--she had the youth and stature that didn't need one, and she did not have small breasts, either.  She was quite well built in all dimensions.

We both finished undressing, and had sex in several positions. Oral each way, she astride me, missionary, from behind, missionary again.  A good time was had by all.

We lay there for a while, talking some more, quick rinse in the shower together, clothes back on, and back out to socialize with the rest.

She disappeared.

Two hours later, my FwB shows up with her current date.

"What happened tonight, Mike?"

"What, with ___?"

"Yes."

"What do you think happened?" (I generally try not to share specifics with others unless cleared to.)

"How did her dress come off, Mike?"

At this point I had a massive adrenaline surge. I mean, you saw the list, it was obvious to me it was all consensual...I thought. Did I miss a signal? No, she asked for several things specifically.

"Um....she took it off...while astride me."

There was silence, and I asked, "Is this going to be a problem?"

FwB says, sigh, "No, she's done this before."

Get that? She'd done this BEFORE.

I ascribe some of this to hangover societal puritannical bullshit (though the Puritans demanded sex be an active part of marriage both ways), compounded by Victorian bullshit.

You see, Nice Girls don't do things like that.  So if a woman has absorbed this belief, but actually likes a load of cum in her face, or being fucked in the ass, or shoved against a wall and her skirt yanked up, or two cocks at once, then she's a slut. 

But, if she wasn't really into it, and she was just going along with it, then she wasn't really a slut, so it's okay.

But there's a line between misplaced puritanical guilt over enjoying yourself and A FALSE ACCUSATION OF RAPE.

PART TWO:

An acquaintance is an EEO officer for a large military installation. Divorce is sadly common in the military due to relocations, duty cycles, separations for deployment, and occasionally for things like infidelity (less than you might expect. There's a half-joke about "Are you married?" "No, I'm temporary duty." And a lot of couples tolerate or enjoy that just to take some of the stress off, with the understanding that once those months or years of separation are done, they're a couple)(they're not asking for your moral judgment, so stuff it).

He reports that several times a MONTH, a woman (spouse) filing for divorce would come in, and accuse the service member of abuse, violations, etc.

He could immediately tell which ones were fake. They were literally word for word from a popular TV show episode about this.

But, every one of these cases must be "investigated," which pulls someone off duty for questioning, and impedes anything in their mission that involves a security clearance, and costs YOU, the taxpayer, tens of thousands of dollars.

Because some lying whore wants a bigger cut of a pension, or to fuck someone's career over and hurt them for life because they're angry at how their life isn't a fairy tale.

You know who else suffers from this?

ACTUAL VICTIMS AND SURVIVORS of abuse and sexual assault, who try to speak, and get a response of (eyeroll), oh, god, not this shit again.

So when Christine Ford can't remember if it was 2, 4, or 6 people present at a party where she admits she was drinking underage, or where it was, or how she got there, or how she got home, and didn't tell anyone, and 6 of the 4 witnesses say it never happened, and she couldn't get to Congress on Monday because she's terrified of flying, but has 100,000 frequent flyer miles from vacationing in the Pacific...

It's reasonable to assume she's LYING about remembering absolutely that it was a candidate she opposes politically, who belongs to a party she's publicly vowed to hinder in any way possible.

And stop with the bullshit that she has "nothing to gain," because she's already gained $500,000 from a gofundme, notoriety, headlines, and may even get a book deal. And most importantly, might fuck with our constitutional process to make it easier for her Nazi fucking Demorrhoid Party to control the government.

She's a lying whore, and anyone with any analytical sense has known that from the beginning.

This is a working hypothesis of mine and it's well supported by my research.

Recently:

Liberal: Trump is anti-semitic, and his son makes secret anti-semitic signs on TV!

Me: Wait, how do you know about these secret signs?

Liberal: We have a list!

Me: 70% of Trump's cabinet are Jews, so is one son in law.  He recognized Israel's right to exist, to have Jerusalem as their capital. How is he anti-Semitic?

Liberal: He's just using those Jews for his advantage.

Me: What advantage?  Why have a cabinet full of people you allegedly hate?

Liberal: He's only got Jews on the cabinet because they're good at banking strategies and money handling. They're making him rich.

Me: Wait, what? Did you just stereotype an entire religion and culture? And imply they're corrupt?

Liberal: No, not all Jews, just those Jews.

Me: Then why bother with Jews if he hates Jews? Are you saying he can't find other bankers?

Liberal: FUCK YOU!

 

~~~

Then there's the liberal claim that they're not anti-semitic, just anti-zionist.

Me: So, you don't oppose Jews, just a Jewish national state.

Liberal: Yes.

Me: But a Palestinian national state is okay?

Liberal: Yes, because they were there first.

Me: The Jews have been there for 3000 years.

Liberal: Yeah, but they left and came back.

Me: No, some of them left. There have definitely been Jews there for 3000 years.

Liberal: Well, they need to stop being terrorists.

Me: How many suicide bombs has each side set off?

Liberal: FUCK YOU!

~~~

Please help test my hypothesis.

FACT:  Kavanaugh and Christine Blowme Ford were minors.

FACT:  The crime of "sexual assault" did not cover groping in that place and time.  "Simple assault" or "battery" are the only credible legal claims.

FACT:  As they were minors, any such charge would have vacated by now.

FACT: Even if he was 18, statute of limitations is DECADES past.*

FACT: Per her own reports, they were both intoxicated.  We have no evidence to support her claim he was, but she has confessed to a criminal act.

FACT: 6 of her 4 witnesses call bullshit.

FACT: Without something more substantial than "somewhere, sometime, and I have no idea how I got there," no charges are possible.

FACT: She admits she went to a "party" with two or four, she's not sure, males and no females, to get intoxicated and...do what?  At a place with no chaperonage.

FACT: The FBI only investigates federal or interstate crime, and this would have been neither. They cannot investigate it.

FACT: Regardless of what may have happened, the claim is unsupportable bullshit.

FACT: We've now reached a point only seen in bad satirical movies of the 1990s (The Running Man: "She had sex with three, sometimes FOUR men in the same YEAR!") for condemnation of men.

FACT: If you believe any of her bullshit, you cannot possibly claim to be logical or deductive.

FACT: If you're "literally made ill" by this lying drunken slut's bullshit, you better be petitioning for Keith Ellison to be deposed on the ACTUAL POLICE REPORTS and ACTUAL HOSPITAL RECORDS of his ex girlfriend, and of the several women who have accused Bill Clinton of not groping, but FORCIBLE RAPE, and open the records on Teddy Kennedy's "forgetting" there was a woman drowning in his car when he crashed it in a river while intoxicated, and somehow was never punished, and ask your party WHY they re-elected Klansman Robert Byrd for life, and tolerated his utter racism to the end (he voted against EVERY black judiciary candidate, even when his party endorsed them).  Because if not, you're a vile, rape-endorsing, domestic violence-endorsing, fucking RACIST.

You are not logical, you are not deductive, you are not even human fucking beings.  You are utter fucking filth, and we really do need to invest in Caterpillar D9 bulldozers.

 

 

 

*FACT: In America, we don't retcon crimes to suit the modern day. Ex Post Facto.  It's covered in the Constitution, and you subhuman, anti-American, anti-intellectual, worm-ridden pieces of cholera-infected maggot shit need to read it. Ask an educated 12 year old (HINT: their parents didn't vote for the D) explain the big words to you.

 

A Timeline of Events
Sep 23, 201810:53PM

Category: Politics

1 January, 1991, 0130

That's a very close approximation of time I fought off sexual assault.

I'd been raped previously, but that's not this discussion.

About 1900 on the 31st, an acquaintance from the mixed group of gamers, SCAdians, SF fans and others called me at my Rantoul, IL apartment, asked if I was doing anything for New Years'. He was having a small party, he said. He asked if I wanted to come over.

I'm not naming the party because it's a common enough name I don't want anyone getting harassed or mistaken, and as far as I know he's never amounted to anything.

I drove down to Champaign, to an apartment I'd have to find on a map, if it's still there, but is easy enough to find. I arrived about 2000. He let me in, we talked for a bit, I had a beer that I opened myself.  I asked where the others were, he said they were coming later. He brought out some sandwiches and other snacks.

Looking around, he had Kodak pictures of a couple of the teenagers (I was 23ish.  I don't give out my exact birthday) in the youth fighting group he helped sponsor. It seemed a bit odd to have photos of a single teen standing in a field, with no context or activity.

There was the usual TV New Year's entertainment, and about 2200 I opened another beer.  I asked when the rest were showing up, and he said they were going to be last minute, doing stuff.

About 2300 he brought through a drink for me.  I don't recall what it was supposed to be, but it was liquor and mixer.  It tasted slightly strong, but not out of line.

Then I started feeling completely plastered drunk.

I remember asking when the others were arriving, and him saying, "I guess they're not coming."

Midnight, the ball dropped, and I was half asleep.

He sounded so supportive as he said, "Look, if you're that tired, you should just sleep here."

He suggested I undress, but I'm actually quite comfortable sleeping in a field jacket--years of military experience.  I lay down on the only bed and passed out.

I have no idea what he did until 0130 to amuse himself.  I'm afraid to speculate.

I remember being rolled onto my back, a fat, sweaty, half-bald-half-stringy haired thing I wouldn't touch intimately even if I swung that way, shorts halfway down the crack of his ass, sitting astride my chest and unbuckling my pants.

I woke up very, very fast.

I said "No. Stop." Rather loudly, in fact.

"I'm not going to stop, Mike, so you may as well enjoy it."

In nine seconds, I was able to express the point that even if he outweighed me two to one, I was going to put his face through the wall in five seconds, and he'd already used up three.

He sighed dramatically, flounced off the bed, and shouted, "FINE!" 

Then he turned on what he apparently thought was the guilt trip.  "It's not fair. I invite you over, feed you, then you come to bed in a field jacket, for Christ's sake. Do me a favor and lose my number!"

Yeah, we have to remember who the real victim is here, right?

I drove home, half asleep or intoxicated, I'm not sure which, very carefully because I'd be the one in jail, through very quiet streets, in subzero temps.

I did not file a police report because what would be the point? There wasn't a mark on me, and no witnesses.

I did tell a close friend the next day. I told the boss I contracted to (now deceased), who, being in the same circle, called the guy who ran that youth combat group (still alive). I told him.  Mr X was then told he was no longer affiliated with the group. The next convention, I told another friend of mine.  The next year I had a long-term girlfriend, eventually a wife. She knows. (Though she may not remember due to memory loss from a medical condition.)  My current wife knows (and has known for some time).

Several years later, (this is slightly hazy because I did a LOT of conventions professionally then, but I can certainly date it from their records if need be) I was in the dealer room of a Midwest convention and I heard, "Hey, Mike!"

I turned around and it was the vile fat fuck who tried to molest me, apparently having forgotten the "Lose my number!" bit, or maybe he'd been hoping it would cause me to beg to come back to his greasy hands, or maybe he was just desperate at that point.

He was selling gaming supplies and sounded very cheerful and just thrilled to see me.

I unassed the area, found friends on staff, and informed them, "That asshole drugged me and tried to rape me. Now, I don't expect you to remove him based on my say-so, but I would recommend watching him very carefully around teenage boys and young men."

They took the advice seriously. He was watched.

So if there's ever another incident, not only can I testify to his (lack of) character, a dozen other people can testify that I told them.

Which is why when a certain professor says, "Oh, yes, by the way, sometime between 1978 and 1982, I'm not sure, but I was 15, I was drunk at a party somewhere with 2 or 4 guys, but I don't remember where, or how I got there or home afterward, but anyway, one of them tried to force himself on me, and I don't know why none of the several witnesses say it never happened, but it didn't matter until 2012 when some 'therapist' recovered the memories, but then she wrote them down wrong, but I don't care that this guy's a federal judge, my only concern is that he not get to SCOTUS because I say he was a drunken ass in high school,"

I say, "Bullshit, you politically-motivated whore.  There are REAL victims out there, and you're degrading all their credibility with your narcissistic ploy for attention and money."

Because I guarantee there'll be money, even beyond the $350K gofundme she has.