Blaming the victim – the nuclear option


I had a feeling this was coming. New York Pustule:

Maid cleaning up as ‘hooker’

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.

Everything you need to know about this story is “a source close to the defense investigation said.”

If you think that was bad, try this load of bigoted crap from Jihad Watch:

The migrant from Guinea, who came into the United States on an asylum claim in 2004, has apparently lied from beginning to end. Her story that her husband was killed opposing the regime in Guinea and she was forced to flee her homeland was all a lie. She lied about her finances in order to secure public housing. She claimed a friend’s child as her own in order to increase her Federal tax refund. She has had numerous associations with criminals, including her own boyfriend who is now languishing in an Arizona prison. And her own story of her supposed encounter with DSK has changed over the last six weeks, chock full of inconsistencies. In other words, she’s emerged as about the worse sort of witness imaginable for the prosecution.

Probably the most damning evidence to come to light is the fact that, while DSK’s accuser spoke to her incarcerated boyfriend by phone, she is reported to have said, in effect, that “…DSK has a lot of money and I know what I’m doing.” She attempted to hide these intentions by speaking in an African dialect, but apparently the Feds were listening and eventually had it translated.

This is not the first time a Muslim has tried to run an extortion racket against an ‘infidel’, with the only difference now being that the target was a very high-profile one. Many Muslims have long been noted for their intimate involvement in the criminal underworld, exploiting Westerners, running welfare scams, and in general ‘parasiting’ non Muslims and western society at every opportunity. The case against DSK appears to be but a recent and high-profile instance of ‘stealth’ or ‘legal’ jihad, when Muslims attempt to exploit the infidels’ own laws for maximum advantage.

Why would a Muslim, and a ‘pious, devout’ one at that, be so adept and experienced at lying? Surely Islam has nothing to do with this woman’s pathological lying, and nothing to do with her criminal attempts to extort money from a powerful, rich Jew. Of course.

Jeralyn and Dude Nation are probably planning a victory party as you read this. They’ll hold it in France so Roman Polanski can attend.


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

88 Responses to Blaming the victim – the nuclear option

  1. myiq2xu says:

    If you were worried about poor DSK:

    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.

    Some socialist.

    • Dario says:

      To tie Polanski to DSK is gratuitous.

      • myiq2xu says:

        Did you see any of Jeralyn’s defense of Polanski?

        • ralphb says:

          I did and the tie couldn’t be better.

        • Dario says:

          I don’t read Jeralyn, but it’s irrelevant. The teen abused by Polanski is a victim, but the maid at the hotel who sees screaming rape as a ticket to the U.S. or to sue a rich guy, not so much. That’s how she came to the U.S. She claimed to have been gang raped in her country, but it was just a story.

        • sandress says:

          Dario, how the FUCK do you know this stuff? Who the fuck are you to claim to know what is happening inside this woman’s head, or what has happened to her body? Seriously, what the FUCK is up with you? You are not usually this reprehensibly stupid.

        • Three Wickets says:

          But but…she’s been secretly planning to take DSK down since before 2004. The far left has a thing for conspiracy theories, I understand that. It comes with the anti-establishment territory. But nothing undermines their credibility and marginalizes them faster than when the tinfoil goes off the rails.

      • angienc says:

        To tie Polanski to DSK is gratuitous genius.

        FIFY

  2. imustprotest says:

    I think the DSK Polanski tie is perfect.

    • myiq2xu says:

      Unless the DA dismisses the case I expect DSK to hop on a private jet and skedaddle to France where he can’t be extradited back to the US – just like Polanski did.

    • Three Wickets says:

      The coordinated support for DSK on facebook from the left, right and center is a marvel to watch. It’s like a D-Day landing or something. He sure has some powerful friends.

  3. sandress says:

    You’ve gotta love how the deceitful lying bitch was using an African dialect to hide what she was saying, as opposed to, oh say, speaking her native language to a loved one.

  4. WMCB says:

    I have no idea whether this woman is a scammer or not. Maybe she is. But there seems to be more than enough evidence to LET HER HAVE HER DAMN DAY IN COURT. Instead we have a media pile-on (and we all know how accurate they are once they get in a feeding frenzy), trying the case for us.

    • myiq2xu says:

      The more they attack her the more I’m convinced he’s guilty.

      • ralphb says:

        No shit. That seems to be the general case.

      • WMCB says:

        The “info” about her being a prostitute was an anonymous source on the guy’s defense team, fer chrissakes!! I find it very strange that the police thought there was a case, and now all of a sudden all this crap is flying around in the media all from unnamed sources – trying to make sure that the case is given ample cover to be dropped. That’s fishy.

      • DandyTiger says:

        Bingo.

    • Lola-at-Large says:

      Honk!

    • Dario says:

      Jeebus, the media convicted DSK many times over after he was arrested. All the U.S. had to do is take away his passport and he’d be forced to stay in the U.S., but the DA decided to make it a TV show.

      • myiq2xu says:

        He could board a private jet and flee the country – they wouldn’t check his passport before he boarded and France would let him enter because he is a French citizen.

  5. votermom says:

    Woman accuses powerful man, gets “unexpectedly” ripped apart by media.

  6. Dario says:

    A sexual encounter, not a rape makes. Myiq, you are trying to defend a woman who has no credibility whatsoever. Just from what I’ve read, I say drop the charges. Vance saw the affair as a great TV opportunity and got burned.

    The French are looking to the future:

    The Guardian: Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s return could be a threat to Nicolas Sarkozy

    Strauss-Kahn was the clear favourite to win the 2012 presidential election before he was arrested for allegedly attempting to rape a New York hotel maid in May. He is no longer under house arrest, but still faces seven charges ranging from attempted rape to sexual assault. If he is cleared or charges are dropped, supporters such as former culture minister Jack Lang suggested he could return to France more popular than ever before.
    Strauss-Kahn’s possible return has thrown the Socialist party’s primary race into disarray. The party had presumed his presidential hopes were dead and opened its selection process for another candidate last week. Candidates must declare by 13 July for an October vote, but Strauss-Kahn’s next hearing is scheduled for 18 July.

    • myiq2xu says:

      a woman who has no credibility whatsoever.

      That doesn’t make him innocent.

      • Dario says:

        Screaming “rape” is so easy that any man is at risk unless all measures are taken to ensure that the accuser is telling the truth. She entered the U.S. by lying about rape. This woman has no compunction about lying to get a benefit.

        • myiq2xu says:

          If it’s so easy then why is the conviction rate so low?

          If we accept your argument then anyone can rape this women anytime because she will never have credibility.

        • WMCB says:

          Dario, I am completely disgusted with women who use rape charges against famous/wealthy men as an easy money scam or their route to fame. Or women who use the threat of crying rape or abuse to blackmail men (and yeah, I’ve seen it happen – many times).

          But she entered the US frightened, and parroting a literal script handed to her, that she was told would get her in. I could see a prior false rape claim counting against her if she had set some guy up before and been found to be falsely accusing him. But that’s not what happened here. It was part of an embellished history to get political asylum. And one can argue whether that needs to be acted upon by the govt. But that prior rape lie wasn’t a case of her accusing some individual man of rape – it has not much bearing here.

        • Dario says:

          WMCB, did you not read that she told her boyfriend that she knew what she was doing because the man is rich? At this point, I would not be surprised if she goes to jail after the DA finds all her activities outside the law, such as receiving tainted money from her drug connections.

        • sandress says:

          Thank you, Myiq, for proving to me that reason is not entirely dead.

        • WMCB says:

          Yes, I read that. She might have been thinking that after a conviction, she could also sue. Trying to get some money out of it may be indicative that she’s not a nice person, but here;s the point:

          Not nice women get raped. Bitchy and lying and altogether unsavory women GET RAPED.

          There was not only semen, there were also some bruises and things as I recall. Again, I have no idea IF a crime occurred. But I very seriously doubt that the police dept would have pressed charges in the first place if the ONLY thing they had was a he said/ she said case. Against a man as wealthy and powerful as that? Really? They just ran with nothing but evidence that sex occurred and her word? Knowing how high profile a case it would be? Really?

          Let a jury decide.

        • WCMB said: “But she entered the US frightened, and parroting a literal script handed to her, that she was told would get her in.”

          That account suggested she had a lot of coaching. Who provided it, and why?

          A set up conspiracy against DKS is ridiculous. But this, and the money laundering — who and why? Her shady past does suggest that, finding herself in the spotlight over this, she might have embellished this story. And the immigration fraud reports suggested acting ability.

    • sandress says:

      Oddly, neither a man’s claim nor status does not consensual sex make, either, Dario. The way to establish this is through A TRIAL held by FINDERS OF FACT.

      • myiq2xu says:

        It’s up to a jury to decide whether she is credible or not.

        • Dario says:

          She’ll be torn to pieces by the defense, and she may decide not continue with the charges. The DA will probably drop all charges. He should have already.

      • Dario says:

        Not necessarily. If the evidence is not there, a trial is not necessary. It’s done all the time when there’s lack of evidence. In this case, all that can be said, is that he spilled semen into the carpet. She cleaned herself after the fact. How on earth does a 62 year old, a little heavy, force a strong young woman to a bj? I don’t get those who want to believe the woman. I don’t. Never did.

        • ralphb says:

          I don’t get those who want to believe the woman. I don’t. Never did.

          That’s obvious.

        • Dario says:

          Yes. I don’t believe a bj could be forced without undue force in a hotel where a person can run out or scream, not without a bite, if you know what I mean.

        • sandress says:

          Dario, a HUGE number of rapes occur without screaming, without force, without running away. You appear to be laboring under the delusion that rape is only rape if he ends up with his dick bitten off. This is not true. The fact that not only do you not know how rape occurs, but that you seem to have NO INTEREST in finding out says something about how married to this story you are. Now the real question is Why. Why do you so desperately want to believe that this rape is not real, so much so that you are willing to erase a HUGE number of very real rapes that happened to very real women (including ones associated with this website, ones you know)? Why do you want to erase the reality of rape? Are you so married to DSK that you cannot conceive of his guilt? So married to the cause of socialism that you believe that every one of its proponents is a paragon of virtue? Or do you just have something against women, or immigrants, or the poor, or victims of crimes?

        • Dario says:

          Sandress, because the accusation has been all along that she was forced to perform a bj. A man is at risk of being seriously hurt in that situation with an unwilling giver.

        • sandress says:

          So, you believe that a man would never put his dick into the mouth of something that could bite it off, if he thought that doing so would make that thing mad?

          Because you’re mistaken. Forced oral sex is common in rape scenarios (http://pandys.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=88537). Sometimes it does end with a dick being bitten off (http://wendyista.blogspot.com/2010/12/lady-bites-off-husbands-penis-stabs-him.html), and sometimes it doesn’t (http://www.wctv.tv/news/headlines/UPDATE_Tallahassee_Man_64_Accused_of_Sexually_Assaulting_Teenager.html). The fact remains that threats and coercion are enough to make it rape, regardless of if she screams loud enough to avoid being stoned to death (Deuteronomy 22:20-ish).

    • Lola-at-Large says:

      I could be wrong, but I don’t think Myiq is defending the woman so much as the process. In the case of a rape charge, it’s fair to see the the thing through to a jury, especially if there is physical evidence to back it up. I’m in agreement.

      The process is fucked up and scary, and sometimes victims lie. I was molested by the father of a boy I liked as a teenager. I told my mom about it. She called the cops. When the cops got there I told them it didn’t happen, because I was ashamed of admitting it to a strange adult male I didn’t know. That didn’t change the fact that I was molested, just because I lied to a police officer. However, it did effect the court proceedings. His punishment was to move from my neighborhood and that’s it. We moved into his new neighborhood a year later.

      • Dario says:

        The only thing for sure is that DSK spilled semen on the carpet. That’s it. I’ve not read that there’s a blue dress here.

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          Well, aside from the fact that a woman claimed she was raped. That’s for sure, too.

        • Dario says:

          I believe DSK has said that he didn’t. Why the desire to believe her and not him?

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          I didn’t say I did, but that demonstrates how you are basing your defense of DSK on assumptions. I want a jury to decide, not low-information citizens following the fucked up media.

        • sandress says:

          Apparently his perspective is worth listening to, and hers is worth nothing. I wonder why?

        • WMCB says:

          Sandress, in all fairness, the burden of proof is on the accuser. I just think she ought to be given the opportunity to make her case is all.

    • ralphb says:

      Is there anything other than politics to offer in the man’s defense? I guess anonymous leaks from his defense team are truth?

      • Dario says:

        Unfortunately, and that’s how it is, a man only needs to show that the woman is lying. I’m not defending DSK, as much as looking at what we know to be true, and there’s no way DSK should go to trial. Is established that the woman has gained by lying about rape. That doesn’t help. Then the other lies she made about the story makes a super liar.

        • ralphb says:

          You are defending the man. You certainly are not defending any kind of due process. Not in the US court system.

        • Dario says:

          I don’t like it when cases are judged by the masses. DSK was convicted by the media before he had a chance to defend himself. Rape is a serious charge that should be handled correctly, and I don’t believe Vance did a good job. He deserves to fall for the mishandling of it.

        • sandress says:

          And there you have it folks: Bitches, Whores, and Liars can’t be raped! Have at it boys, every woman you know is now fair game as a cum receptacle!

        • WMCB says:

          Okay, I’m going to bow out now. But despite the fact that I’ve been vociferously arguing with Dario, I think you’re now painting him/her with an awfully broad brush.

    • angienc says:

      You know what, even if this woman is lying, I don’t like your vehemence against her. I, at least, am very clear on your position that this was a set up & she is a lying whore. You can stop now.

      • Dario says:

        The woman is a liar. The DA has said that much. And you don’t like the vehemence against her, so I should stop. And do you have the authority to command it?

        • angienc says:

          Yes, as a matter of fact, I have the authority to express my opinion that I understand your position, that your vitriol against her is sickening to me and you can stop repeating yourself ad nauseum because we get it. If you don’t like that, you can kiss my ass.

        • Dario says:

          LOL

        • sandress says:

          I’m a mod here, so yeah, I DO have the authority to command it. I’m not going to (can’t speak for the other mods). But you’re officially losing credibility for clinging blindly to this one. And you’re making yourself look like a misogynist. Care to defend yourself from that accusation? Can you, or have you ever lied before, thus killing your credibility?

        • angienc says:

          Sandress — I know you can read, so I know I don’t have to defend myself but just to be abundantly clear: I wrote in my initial post: “I, at least” which makes it clear that I was speaking for myself, not the board. Dario obviously didn’t “get” that, just like he can’t “get” that a liar/whore/slut can be raped.

        • sandress says:

          I got that angie. I’m just getting testy.

      • WMCB says:

        I think that’s a bit much, actually. Dario is not being offensive. No need to try to shut her down.

        • angienc says:

          Actually, I think it is a bit much to claim I tried to shut Dario down. I clearly stated that I got it.

        • WMCB says:

          Telling someone to shut up and stop speaking is pretty much trying to shut them down, whether you have the authority to enforce it or not.

        • sandress says:

          Dario is being offensive to ME. I find it really offensive to suggest that a woman is a liar and an opportunist and that her claims of rape are total bs based on very little evidence. I find it offensive in that it perpetuates vicious stereotypes and memes related to victim-blaming and discrediting in rape cases. It IS offensive. That said, offensive isn’t off-limits around here, to my knowledge. I may not be being nice, but I’m not banning or silencing anyone. I’m just hitting back.

        • angienc says:

          WMCB — I don’t believe you have any more “authority” on this board then I do, so thank you very much for your “board etiquette” suggestions, but you need not worry about me.
          IMO, Dario is dominating the discussion, every time someone, ANYONE posts anything on this topic, he swoops in & starts the whole “how can a man force a woman to give him a bj; she’s a lying whore” thing ALL OVER AGAIN. I have the right to tell him his vitriol against this woman is disgusting & annoying to me & ask him to STFU about it. If you have a problem with that, I’d like to help you, but I can’t.
          Again, thank you oh so much for worrying about me, but I got this.

    • Three Wickets says:

      No offense Dario, but I’m curious whether you’re speaking and thinking for yourself, or you’re lobbying for someone’s side. And if it’s the former, your strong predisposition to see DSK as the poor victim and the woman as the lying bitch is frankly sexist in my view, given the evidence for sexual assault that’s been made available so far to the public. You’re sounding like fucking Ben Stein. Let them go to trial so the actual evidence can outweigh the speculations.

  7. JeanLouise says:

    Frankly, I’m shocked at your attitude, Dario. As far as I can tell, the only thing the prosecutor has done wrong was the perp walk. I don’t believe in giving the press anything if it can be avoided. You’re past denying that DSK has done anything at all.

    Women are raped. Even women who have lied or have criminal connections are raped. The fact that a woman’s not pure as snow does not make her any less the victim of rape. As for why this woman didn’t yell or bite him, she’s virtually an illegal alien. I can very easily see her being threatened by a rich powerful man and coerced into sexual activity.

    • Dario says:

      Agree. But a bj is a different matter.

      • myiq2xu says:

        No, it’s not. If it was impossible then it wouldn’t be a crime.

      • Three Wickets says:

        I can pretty much guess your views on date rape and sexual harrassment.

      • sandress says:

        Why? Seriously, Dario. Why is a bj a different matter? Everyone from rape victims to cops to pornographers seem to understand that a woman can be forced to give a blowjob without a gun to her head. Why can you not grasp this?

  8. myiq2xu says:

    New post up on the same topic

  9. As for getting her day in court: even without a conviction, or even if it never comes to trial, the maid can still file a civil suit (as the victim’s family did with Simpson).

    I expect Gloria Allred is getting in touch with her.

Comments are closed.