Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:BREAKING: Kavanaugh friend Mark Judge says he'll cooperate with any law enforcement agency that investigates `confidentially'

https://twitter.com/AP_Politics/status/1045752974033788928

Good. That should shut up all you liberals

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whatever you believe there is one thing I take away from this:

I'm scared to live in a world where we will believe something just because someone says it (whether you believe Ford or Bk). There is literally no proof in either direction. No witnesses really saying anything substantial on either side.

But regardless half are believing one side and the other half are believing the other side. With literally no proof. Am I the only one who finds this terrifying?

When one party comes across as credible, has taken a polygraph and is open to an FBI investigation and the other tells provable lies and doesn't want an FBI investigation, they don't come across as equally credible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
You are right. All that Kavanaugh has is what you described. No years of job experience, no years of judgeship, no years of marriage, no years of fatherhood, no years of coaching. None of that counts for anything. What counts is some chick who can't even remember which day she took a lie detector test, despite the fact it was an oh so traumatic experience and that she only had two days to choose from.

Coaches, never commit improper sex acts. Nor do fathers. Nor do married men. Nor men with lots of years on the job.

Whatever you are smoking, can I have some?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whatever you believe there is one thing I take away from this:

I'm scared to live in a world where we will believe something just because someone says it (whether you believe Ford or Bk). There is literally no proof in either direction. No witnesses really saying anything substantial on either side.

But regardless half are believing one side and the other half are believing the other side. With literally no proof. Am I the only one who finds this terrifying?

The hearing was framed as if only that single afternoon in the summer before (or after, whatever) BK's senior of high school was important. In that light, if everything happened exactly as Ford said, no, I don't think it would be decisive. But Ford has the weight of MeToo behind her and Kavanaugh has the weight of his past testimony, his past behavior during high school and college, his evasiveness under oath, his aggressive behavior yesterday, and tellingly the absence of his friend Judge. It's more than just a single afternoon in '82.

You are right. All that Kavanaugh has is what you described. No years of job experience, no years of judgeship, no years of marriage, no years of fatherhood, no years of coaching. None of that counts for anything. What counts is some chick who can't even remember which day she took a lie detector test, despite the fact it was an oh so traumatic experience and that she only had two days to choose from.

Are you referring to all of the classified stuff? Or the documents that Feinstein brought up yesterday, or his notes about the Ken Starr line of questioning? Or something else?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BREAKING: Kavanaugh friend Mark Judge says he'll cooperate with any law enforcement agency that investigates `confidentially'

https://twitter.com/AP_Politics/status/1045752974033788928

Good. That should shut up all you liberals

Confidentially? What does that mean? It can't be used? That's absurd. He answers the FBI questions period. That's how it works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whatever you believe there is one thing I take away from this:

I'm scared to live in a world where we will believe something just because someone says it (whether you believe Ford or Bk). There is literally no proof in either direction. No witnesses really saying anything substantial on either side.

But regardless half are believing one side and the other half are believing the other side. With literally no proof. Am I the only one who finds this terrifying?

You've never been in court before, I'm guessing.

Rarely is there direct evidence. Cases are almost always decided on circumstantial evidence. In this instance, the general consensus is that Prof. Ford did not have a motivation to lie, there was some evidence that she mentioned the event well before his nomination, and you got to see her demeanor while testifying. Judge Kavanaugh has a motive to lie, you saw his demeanor at the hearing and on Fox News, and how he answered questions about what he was like in prep. School vs. the picture depicted in his yearbook.

No motive to lie except that LYING WILL DETERMIE THE BALANCE OF THE SCOTUS FOR DECADES. Other than that, no motive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The ABA has urged a FBI investigation

Yeah we know. Even the jesuits have urged an investigation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All witnesses gave written sworn statements under the penalty of felony. That's not good enough for liberals, unless it's to get FISA warrants based on a pee document cobbled together from information from Russians. LOL.

Wut? Is this the new Fox talking point? Do we need to rehash the dozen things you are misunderstanding?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whatever you believe there is one thing I take away from this:

I'm scared to live in a world where we will believe something just because someone says it (whether you believe Ford or Bk). There is literally no proof in either direction. No witnesses really saying anything substantial on either side.

But regardless half are believing one side and the other half are believing the other side. With literally no proof. Am I the only one who finds this terrifying?

The hearing was framed as if only that single afternoon in the summer before (or after, whatever) BK's senior of high school was important. In that light, if everything happened exactly as Ford said, no, I don't think it would be decisive. But Ford has the weight of MeToo behind her and Kavanaugh has the weight of his past testimony, his past behavior during high school and college, his evasiveness under oath, his aggressive behavior yesterday, and tellingly the absence of his friend Judge. It's more than just a single afternoon in '82.

She has the weight of a contemperaneous calendar entry and of evidence from Mark Judge's book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whatever you believe there is one thing I take away from this:

I'm scared to live in a world where we will believe something just because someone says it (whether you believe Ford or Bk). There is literally no proof in either direction. No witnesses really saying anything substantial on either side.

But regardless half are believing one side and the other half are believing the other side. With literally no proof. Am I the only one who finds this terrifying?

You've never been in court before, I'm guessing.

Rarely is there direct evidence. Cases are almost always decided on circumstantial evidence. In this instance, the general consensus is that Prof. Ford did not have a motivation to lie, there was some evidence that she mentioned the event well before his nomination, and you got to see her demeanor while testifying. Judge Kavanaugh has a motive to lie, you saw his demeanor at the hearing and on Fox News, and how he answered questions about what he was like in prep. School vs. the picture depicted in his yearbook.

No motive to lie except that LYING WILL DETERMIE THE BALANCE OF THE SCOTUS FOR DECADES. Other than that, no motive.

Then why did she bring it up first BEFORE he was nominated? Which would have enabled the WH to nominate someone else?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was a little scary that those women were able to harass Flake in an elevator. He didn’t sexually assault anyone. Where was security? They should seek therapy and protest through legal channels rather than harassing and cornering an innocent man in an elevator. Excuse me if I don’t think that these bullies were heroes. And BTW, I say this as a sexual assault victim.

I had assumed she was a sexual assault victim, but no, she is the Co-Director of leftest Center for Popular Democracy, based in NYC which works on immigrant rights. She got the media to fly her down, protest and storm the building w their press pass -- all on camera, of course.

Nice. Another fun day at work living off the donor funds!

She's pretty active in the gay and hispanic immigrant population here in New York. Checks all the boxes.

Shameful behavior. But, don’t put anything pass these liberal activists. They will do “whatever it takes.”

You know... Alyssa Milano had a sign she had snuck into the Senate hearing room yesterday confiscated. She’s a loon.

[Anonymous]

The real crime here is the contorted face of our Democracy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whatever you believe there is one thing I take away from this:

I'm scared to live in a world where we will believe something just because someone says it (whether you believe Ford or Bk). There is literally no proof in either direction. No witnesses really saying anything substantial on either side.

But regardless half are believing one side and the other half are believing the other side. With literally no proof. Am I the only one who finds this terrifying?

What is more terrifying is that one side knows this and was yet willing to put someone on the Supreme Court without a formal investigation into these allegations. Ford wanted the FBI to investigate and interview relevant persons, even if the FBI finds her account inaccurate. K and the Republicans don’t want the truth to come out. They are more afraid of what an FBI investigation could uncover than losing a appointment who supports Trump

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whatever you believe there is one thing I take away from this:

I'm scared to live in a world where we will believe something just because someone says it (whether you believe Ford or Bk). There is literally no proof in either direction. No witnesses really saying anything substantial on either side.

But regardless half are believing one side and the other half are believing the other side. With literally no proof. Am I the only one who finds this terrifying?

You've never been in court before, I'm guessing.

Rarely is there direct evidence. Cases are almost always decided on circumstantial evidence. In this instance, the general consensus is that Prof. Ford did not have a motivation to lie, there was some evidence that she mentioned the event well before his nomination, and you got to see her demeanor while testifying. Judge Kavanaugh has a motive to lie, you saw his demeanor at the hearing and on Fox News, and how he answered questions about what he was like in prep. School vs. the picture depicted in his yearbook.

No motive to lie except that LYING WILL DETERMIE THE BALANCE OF THE SCOTUS FOR DECADES. Other than that, no motive.

Then why did she bring it up first BEFORE he was nominated? Which would have enabled the WH to nominate someone else?

Suddenly she will have gone to high school with that super conservative female judge with like 10 kids, and will say that she saw her smoking marijuana in the bathroom. She clearly laid the groundwork to have aplan to bring down any conservative nominees, and she got them documented in her medical records before hillary lost the election so she would be ready in 2018!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The real crime here is the contorted face of our Democracy.

Nope, doesn't quite work. Keep at it, though. You'll get a good one.