Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 5

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Live look at Chevy Chase Club:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=50s[/youtube]

Please repost this with a good link--this link is dead.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=50s&v=qzNxrVo8kcQ

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ford’s lawyers did her no favors refusing to supply her therapy notes, polygraph tests etc.

She agreed to supply those to the FBI, not the Senate, which is selectively leaking information. FBI chose not to accept her offer.

Do you have a cite for this? People send things like this to the FBI all the time and it would be unusual for them not to accept.

There have been over 100 news articles in the past 3 days about people who have been trying to get interviewed by the FBI over Kavanaugh. The FBI was instructed to limit the interviews to a select group of people. If you don't know this, then you are not getting your news from reliable sources.

[Anonymous]

These threads have become ridiculous. Rehashing of old news. Same people making snarky remarks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ford’s lawyers did her no favors refusing to supply her therapy notes, polygraph tests etc.

She agreed to supply those to the FBI, not the Senate, which is selectively leaking information. FBI chose not to accept her offer.

Do you have a cite for this? People send things like this to the FBI all the time and it would be unusual for them not to accept.

There have been over 100 news articles in the past 3 days about people who have been trying to get interviewed by the FBI over Kavanaugh. The FBI was instructed to limit the interviews to a select group of people. If you don't know this, then you are not getting your news from reliable sources.

Limited interviews--yes. But they were not instructed to limit receipt of written information.

[Anonymous]

The Guardrails of our democracy are being shattered by the GOP

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/the-guardrails-fall/572242/

To the GOP/Kavanaugh supporters, do you agree or disagree with this article?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ford’s lawyers did her no favors refusing to supply her therapy notes, polygraph tests etc.

She agreed to supply those to the FBI, not the Senate, which is selectively leaking information. FBI chose not to accept her offer.

Do you have a cite for this? People send things like this to the FBI all the time and it would be unusual for them not to accept.

There have been over 100 news articles in the past 3 days about people who have been trying to get interviewed by the FBI over Kavanaugh. The FBI was instructed to limit the interviews to a select group of people. If you don't know this, then you are not getting your news from reliable sources.

Limited interviews--yes. But they were not instructed to limit receipt of written information.

The FBI would literally not accept information people were trying to drop at field offices. So, you are wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So... Kavanaugh deserved due process but HRC didn't.

Kavanaugh deserved due process, but even though the Central Park Five was exonerated as part of our due process, Trump still insists they are guilty.

Hm.. I see a pattern here.

Hey, at least people accused of being in the country illegally are afforded extensive due process and enjoy a presumption of innocence that the government must overcome before being deprived of their liberty or separated from their children.

So...illegal immigrants deserve due process but HRC, an American, doesn't?

I'm not a HRC fan, but the hypocrisy of Rs, especially male Trumpsters, on this issue (and others) is so blatantly obvious.

I was being sarcastic. People accused of being here illegally are detained and separated from their children without much process at all.

missed the sarcasm.. but you know Trumpsters will say, "well, they shouldn't have been here in the first place", much like how they would tell a woman she shouldn't have worn such a slutty outfit or drinking in the first place, then she wouldn't have been attacked.. that kind of logic reigns supreme in Trumplandia.

I suppose we could say to Kavanaugh, "well, you shouldn't have been drinking underage at a party in the first place, then this accusation would've never occurred."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ford’s lawyers did her no favors refusing to supply her therapy notes, polygraph tests etc.

She agreed to supply those to the FBI, not the Senate, which is selectively leaking information. FBI chose not to accept her offer.

Do you have a cite for this? People send things like this to the FBI all the time and it would be unusual for them not to accept.

There have been over 100 news articles in the past 3 days about people who have been trying to get interviewed by the FBI over Kavanaugh. The FBI was instructed to limit the interviews to a select group of people. If you don't know this, then you are not getting your news from reliable sources.

Limited interviews--yes. But they were not instructed to limit receipt of written information.

How do you know this?

[Anonymous]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1048196883464818688

Amazing, Trump is citing Soros here. Uh, how much has the Federalist Society and the Judicial Network and the NRA pumped into Kavanaugh? The last number I saw was over $55M.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These threads have become ridiculous. Rehashing of old news. Same people making snarky remarks.

Thar pretty much sums all of DCUM politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ford’s lawyers did her no favors refusing to supply her therapy notes, polygraph tests etc.

She agreed to supply those to the FBI, not the Senate, which is selectively leaking information. FBI chose not to accept her offer.

Do you have a cite for this? People send things like this to the FBI all the time and it would be unusual for them not to accept.

There have been over 100 news articles in the past 3 days about people who have been trying to get interviewed by the FBI over Kavanaugh. The FBI was instructed to limit the interviews to a select group of people. If you don't know this, then you are not getting your news from reliable sources.

Limited interviews--yes. But they were not instructed to limit receipt of written information.

How do you know this?

She doesn't, because it isn't true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we truly believe the Supreme Court should be above politics and not subject to public whims, campaigning for the position should be disqualifying.

Up until now, it was

Good try but no. How about the three interviews RBG gave in July 2016, including with the NYT and CNN, disparaging Trump?

RGB went too far and apologized. But she didn't go on a rant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BK is obviously not suitable for the supreme court

The question is only.. how low will the senators go? Will they preserve the legitimacy of the supreme court or will they turn it into another partisan and untrustworthy branch of government?

Low. Very low. He will likely be confirmed. And we can all mourn the day he ruined the Supreme Court. Way to go Brett!

Here's the thing - if he were truly an upstanding, for the good-of-the-country, non-partisan guy, he would recognize that his appointment to the S.Ct. is going to undermine the institution, perhaps very significantly and for very long time, he will always have an asterisk next to his name just like Thomas (though I suppose, like Thomas, he figures he can just hang with his boot-licking Federalist society guys to make himself feel good), and his nomination is tearing this country apart. If he weren't out for anyone but himself, he would withdraw for those reasons. But, Exhibit A - Brett himself - establishes that he is only out for himself and to hell with the country.

Yes, this! It’s not just the Democrats calling for him to withdraw. It’s the National Council of Churches, 650+ law professors, editorial boards, colleagues of his, and those who until supported him. Plus a former SC Justice.

It is over 2300 law professors now, just FWIW.

Law professors are worth NADA. Bunch of liberal idiots most of whom have never practiced the discipline they teach -- UNLIKE medical professors who actually have to know how to practice the trade they teach.

And remember, at least some of these law professors were responsible for the instruction of Brett Kavanaugh. Liberals should at least have mixed feelings about the opinions of such professors.

If they can produce a Brett Kavanaugh, who also taught at Harvard, then they are not a bunch of liberal idiots who should be dismissed out of hand.

You can't have it both ways, Sparky. Either he's your poster boy for all that is good and decent or he is a product of liberal idiots. Get your talking points straight.

Produced BK? You don't know people like him. His brain is wired for law. He could have read it on his own from books.

Yup, none of us who went to Ivy League law schools have ever met a stable genius such as Brett.

LOL. Man, some people really have been hoodwinked by this DB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ford’s lawyers did her no favors refusing to supply her therapy notes, polygraph tests etc.

She agreed to supply those to the FBI, not the Senate, which is selectively leaking information. FBI chose not to accept her offer.

Do you have a cite for this? People send things like this to the FBI all the time and it would be unusual for them not to accept.

There have been over 100 news articles in the past 3 days about people who have been trying to get interviewed by the FBI over Kavanaugh. The FBI was instructed to limit the interviews to a select group of people. If you don't know this, then you are not getting your news from reliable sources.

Limited interviews--yes. But they were not instructed to limit receipt of written information.

The FBI would literally not accept information people were trying to drop at field offices. So, you are wrong.

Did someone outside the FBI instruct them to not accept or was this an internal FBI decision to avoid being deluged by a mountain of paper?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Live look at Chevy Chase Club:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=50s[/youtube]

Please repost this with a good link--this link is dead.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=50s&v=qzNxrVo8kcQ

Ok, I don't think BK is suited for the SC, but this is a low effort dumb post. Just stop.