Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Trump should refuse this blackmail. McConnell should call for a vote and let Collins, Flake, Manchin and MurKowski vote no on the record. This will ensure the defeat of Manchin in November and Collins in 2020. The government can't function like this. The current process will not be fair to future nominees.

Actually this is precisely how our government should function. A senate that takes seriously its Constitutional duty to advise and consent - which involves an honest and thorough vetting of Supreme Court Justices.

No. The government shouldn't conduct public shaming hearings violating both Ford and Kavanaugh's privacy. The process should work like this -- Feinstein forwards the letter to the committee and FBI WHEN she received it -- FBI/committee conduct additional background checks in confidence ensuring anonymity for both the nominee and the accused. The current circus serve no purpose but give cover for career politicians trading favors.

How many times does it need to be pointed out that Feinstein guaranteed confidentiality to Dr Ford? She didn’t have the right to publicize that letter until getting Dr Ford’s go ahead. That didn’t happen until reporters discovered Dr Ford’s dentity and started harassing her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Trump should refuse this blackmail. McConnell should call for a vote and let Collins, Flake, Manchin and MurKowski vote no on the record. This will ensure the defeat of Manchin in November and Collins in 2020. The government can't function like this. The current process will not be fair to future nominees.

Actually this is precisely how our government should function. A senate that takes seriously its Constitutional duty to advise and consent - which involves an honest and thorough vetting of Supreme Court Justices.

No. The government shouldn't conduct public shaming hearings violating both Ford and Kavanaugh's privacy. The process should work like this -- Feinstein forwards the letter to the committee and FBI WHEN she received it -- FBI/committee conduct additional background checks in confidence ensuring anonymity for both the nominee and the accused. The current circus serve no purpose but give cover for career politicians trading favors.

And if they'd privately interviewed Ford, the GOP would be saying the same thing - it's he said/she said and tie goes to Kavanaugh - and gotten away with it. The public hearing (and, no, it wasn't a "shaming") showed the world her undeniable credibility and the GOP couldn't get away with not addressing her allegation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Trump should refuse this blackmail. McConnell should call for a vote and let Collins, Flake, Manchin and MurKowski vote no on the record. This will ensure the defeat of Manchin in November and Collins in 2020. The government can't function like this. The current process will not be fair to future nominees.

Actually this is precisely how our government should function. A senate that takes seriously its Constitutional duty to advise and consent - which involves an honest and thorough vetting of Supreme Court Justices.

No. The government shouldn't conduct public shaming hearings violating both Ford and Kavanaugh's privacy. The process should work like this -- Feinstein forwards the letter to the committee and FBI WHEN she received it -- FBI/committee conduct additional background checks in confidence ensuring anonymity for both the nominee and the accused. The current circus serve no purpose but give cover for career politicians trading favors.

Correct. And now we see in a tweet from Senate Dems that they plan to use Kavanaugh's calendar to corroborate Ford's story. On that calendar is the dates of parties, names and places. She will have sudden recall, cite a bunch of psychobabble to say why it's all clear to her now. And women will fall into line and believe it.

Her story was largely based on Mark Judge's novel. Judge wrote in the novel about working at Safeway. She, with a faulty memory, remembers seeing Judge at Safeway in 1982.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The father of the Parkland shooting victim, the one your dear Brett didn't want to shake hands with, told him that no, his life was not ruined. A life ruined is having your child shot dead.

Don't you dare say that Kavanaugh's life is ruined.

Dr. Ford's life isn't ruined either.

Oh please. Stop with the hyperbole. You are like the person who says that the person who just recovered from a heart attack cannot claim that they almost died because they don't have brain cancer. Or the person who is grieving because they had a miscarriage cannot understand loss because they didn't lose a living child.

The world is not completely black and white. There are degrees to everything. I think both Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford can say that their lives have been ruined.

As I pointed out earlier, Dr. Ford has been chased out of her house, her family is in seclusion under armed guard due to death threats. She cannot go back to her job because the papparazzi have invaded her classrooms and school, harassed her students and coworkers. Her private phone numbers, cell phone numbers, addresses and homes have all been publically distributed.

Judge Kavanaugh has been painted as guilty by the media. His family and children have also been harassed and he's had to explain to relatively young daughters that he has been accused of sexually assaulting multiple women. Due to the notoriety, he will likely lose his nomination, he may lose his current job as a circuit court judge and he may never be allowed to teach again, something he is fond of. If he is guilty, then this isn't a problem, but it is unlikely that anyone will ever be able to prove conclusively that he is guilty or innocent. But he will be presumed guilty and suffer the consequences of that shadow for the rest of his life.

Let's turn your life completely unside down, threaten your family, privacy, job, home, and children and then tell us that your life is not ruined just because you didn't bury your child.

+1

[Anonymous]

Sarah Sanders

@PressSec
Follow Follow @PressSec
More
Statement from President @realDonaldTrump:
“I’ve ordered the FBI to conduct a supplemental investigation to update Judge Kavanaugh’s file. As the Senate has requested, this update must be limited in scope and completed in less than one week.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Trump should refuse this blackmail. McConnell should call for a vote and let Collins, Flake, Manchin and MurKowski vote no on the record. This will ensure the defeat of Manchin in November and Collins in 2020. The government can't function like this. The current process will not be fair to future nominees.

Actually this is precisely how our government should function. A senate that takes seriously its Constitutional duty to advise and consent - which involves an honest and thorough vetting of Supreme Court Justices.

No. The government shouldn't conduct public shaming hearings violating both Ford and Kavanaugh's privacy. The process should work like this -- Feinstein forwards the letter to the committee and FBI WHEN she received it -- FBI/committee conduct additional background checks in confidence ensuring anonymity for both the nominee and the accused. The current circus serve no purpose but give cover for career politicians trading favors.

How many times does it need to be pointed out that Feinstein guaranteed confidentiality to Dr Ford? She didn’t have the right to publicize that letter until getting Dr Ford’s go ahead. That didn’t happen until reporters discovered Dr Ford’s dentity and started harassing her.

They discovered her identity because her staff leaked the letter. Are you not aware of how this town works?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Trump should refuse this blackmail. McConnell should call for a vote and let Collins, Flake, Manchin and MurKowski vote no on the record. This will ensure the defeat of Manchin in November and Collins in 2020. The government can't function like this. The current process will not be fair to future nominees.

Actually this is precisely how our government should function. A senate that takes seriously its Constitutional duty to advise and consent - which involves an honest and thorough vetting of Supreme Court Justices.

No. The government shouldn't conduct public shaming hearings violating both Ford and Kavanaugh's privacy. The process should work like this -- Feinstein forwards the letter to the committee and FBI WHEN she received it -- FBI/committee conduct additional background checks in confidence ensuring anonymity for both the nominee and the accused. The current circus serve no purpose but give cover for career politicians trading favors.

Correct. And now we see in a tweet from Senate Dems that they plan to use Kavanaugh's calendar to corroborate Ford's story. On that calendar is the dates of parties, names and places. She will have sudden recall, cite a bunch of psychobabble to say why it's all clear to her now. And women will fall into line and believe it.

Yes--and she asked for the FBI to find out when he worked at the Safeway--that way she could remember the month--and the year.

Her story was largely based on Mark Judge's novel. Judge wrote in the novel about working at Safeway. She, with a faulty memory, remembers seeing Judge at Safeway in 1982.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Trump should refuse this blackmail. McConnell should call for a vote and let Collins, Flake, Manchin and MurKowski vote no on the record. This will ensure the defeat of Manchin in November and Collins in 2020. The government can't function like this. The current process will not be fair to future nominees.

Actually this is precisely how our government should function. A senate that takes seriously its Constitutional duty to advise and consent - which involves an honest and thorough vetting of Supreme Court Justices.

No. The government shouldn't conduct public shaming hearings violating both Ford and Kavanaugh's privacy. The process should work like this -- Feinstein forwards the letter to the committee and FBI WHEN she received it -- FBI/committee conduct additional background checks in confidence ensuring anonymity for both the nominee and the accused. The current circus serve no purpose but give cover for career politicians trading favors.

How many times does it need to be pointed out that Feinstein guaranteed confidentiality to Dr Ford? She didn’t have the right to publicize that letter until getting Dr Ford’s go ahead. That didn’t happen until reporters discovered Dr Ford’s dentity and started harassing her.

They discovered her identity because her staff leaked the letter. Are you not aware of how this town works?

Unlikely. Something else is afoot. The FBI should investigate that.

[Anonymous]

KAVANAUGH'S CLASSMATE SAYS SUPREME COURT NOMINEE IS 'BLATANTLY LYING'

Brett Kavanaugh’s Yale University classmate ripped into the Supreme Court nominee for “blatantly lying” during his Senate Judiciary hearing yesterday.

After Kavanaugh spoke at the hearing on Thursday, Lynne Brookes, a self-identified Republican who said she was the roommate of Deborah Ramirez, the second Kavanaugh accuser who claimed the judge once exposed his genitals to her at a dormitory party, told Chris Cuomo on CNN that she and some of her fellow Yale colleagues were “extremely disappointed in Kavanaugh’s characterization of himself and the way he evaded his excessive drinking questions.

“There is no doubt in my mind that while at Yale he was a big partier, often drank to excess,” she said.

“And there had to be a number of nights where he does not remember. In fact, I was witness to the night that he got tapped into that fraternity, and he was stumbling drunk in a ridiculous costume saying really dumb things. And I can almost guarantee that there’s no way that he remembers that night.

“There were a lot of emails and a lot of texts flying around about how he was lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee today,” Brookes continued.

Brookes also told Cuomo that she had drank to “excess many nights with Brett Kavanaugh” and spoke about a particular incident in which the Supreme Court nominee and a friend allegedly barged into a room “where a guy and girl had gone off together and embarrassed that woman.”

“They thought it was funny. The girl was mortified,” she said, before accusing Kavanaugh of “blatant lying.”

When there is so much smoke, how do you ignore it?

[Anonymous]

Once more:

No place.
No time.
No date.
Prior to yesterday, the party developed at the country club--yesterday--not sure.
Doesn't know how she got home.
Told no one until 2002.
Told only therapist and husband in 2012 and had never told anyone else--until we found out yesterday that she told others in recent years.
WAPO reported on therapist notes--but she can't remember if she shared the notes with them or just told them (@2 months ago). Funny, we did not see those notes in the evidence.# of people varied from therapist, WAPO story, and testimony.
All people named have denied any recollection. Her friend said she did not know Kavanaugh.

Lawyer issues:
Lawyers said she couldn't come when they asked because she doesn't fly. (This is a lie.)
She was not aware that the committee had suggested they would come to her --lawyers did not share this with her.
Lawyer ( a noted Dem active and resister) was recommended by Feinstein.

Biggest problem: Feinstein should have turned this over in July.
FBI could have done an investigation and not exposed Ford. They WANTED Ford to testify.

And, by the way, lots of trauma victims get confused--even about who the perp was. Sometimes, you don't want to admit it was someone you cared about.
And, she was scared --but, she was NOT raped. We don't even know if it was an attempted rape by whomever did this.

The woman is sincere and fragile. She also could be delusional. Has anyone looked into her background? Why didn't she turn over the therapist notes?

[Anonymous]

Senator Leahy's hrmmmmphh 44 years on this committee...Winston Churchill moment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Big Brain Brett

https://www.instagram.com/p/BoQ3RYIFEGB/?taken-by=elarapictures

This is what I’ve been waiting for all day!

Just quoting this hilarious thing for people on this page of the thread who might have missed it

SO FUNNY!!!!

When he shuts up Lindsay Graham, I lost it!

I loved the eye roll of the wife over the beer for breakfast.

that was HILARIOUS! She was doing those expressions through the whole thing. I am sure she is a nice person but come on, it is clear she thinks he has a problem with alcohol. Maybe just deep down but it was written all over her face.

That’s not at all the impression I got. She seemed exhausted, as did he. Their lives have been ruined. But it’s nice that ruining someone’s life has provided so much entertainment for you.

The video was funny.

Everyone is sympathetic to her. No one plans to be married to someone who makes choices that get you dragged through the mud (and choosing to go for SCOTUS is like running for president - the mud is there!)

You know who else has had a hard time because they discovered they were married to someone accused of sexual assault:

Camille Cosby
Georgina Chapman
Annette Roque (Matt Lauer's wife)
Stephanie Nassar
Sue Paterno
Hillary Clinton

Let's show all of them compassion. But no, they are not entitled to as much compassion as the actual VICTIMS of sexual assault.

You can’t really put Kavanaughs wife and Clinton in the same boat. She met Kavanaugh when he was already in his 30s and had no clue about this while Hillary was aware of her husbands actions the whole time and even helped intimidate his accusers

We don't know what either of them knew.
We don't know how many more victims Kavanaugh has.

So much we don't know!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess we have a debt of gratitude to the ABA for sticking up for name of the nation's highest court.

A person close to the White House described those working on the confirmation process as "shellshocked" by Friday's events.

"As of last night, everyone was in a good mood," the person said, saying the view was that Dr. Ford's testimony was "good" but Judge Kavanaugh's was "great." As of 10 p.m. Thursday, the person said, "everything was locked and loaded."

Then, shortly before midnight on Thursday, the American Bar Association issued a letter urging the Senate Judiciary Committee to vote on Judge Kavanaugh's nomination only after a "thorough" FBI investigation. After that, the person said, "It kind of fell apart."

The person said there was "enormous anger" at the ABA from the White House counsel's office and other lawyers working on the confirmation process, describing the letter as a pivotal development that prompted strong discomfort in particular from Ms. Murkowski.

Ms. Murkowski said Friday morning before the Senate committee vote that she remained undecided on the nomination.

The White House isn't expected to talk to any other candidates for the Supreme Court nomination next week while the FBI investigation is under way, the person said.

On the previous thread, when the ABA news broke, someone asked if the ABA is partisan.

No. They're not.

Only the president, not the ABA committee.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Once more:

No place.
No time.
No date.
Prior to yesterday, the party developed at the country club--yesterday--not sure.
Doesn't know how she got home.
Told no one until 2002.
Told only therapist and husband in 2012 and had never told anyone else--until we found out yesterday that she told others in recent years.
WAPO reported on therapist notes--but she can't remember if she shared the notes with them or just told them (@2 months ago). Funny, we did not see those notes in the evidence.# of people varied from therapist, WAPO story, and testimony.
All people named have denied any recollection. Her friend said she did not know Kavanaugh.

Lawyer issues:
Lawyers said she couldn't come when they asked because she doesn't fly. (This is a lie.)
She was not aware that the committee had suggested they would come to her --lawyers did not share this with her.
Lawyer ( a noted Dem active and resister) was recommended by Feinstein.

Biggest problem: Feinstein should have turned this over in July.
FBI could have done an investigation and not exposed Ford. They WANTED Ford to testify.

And, by the way, lots of trauma victims get confused--even about who the perp was. Sometimes, you don't want to admit it was someone you cared about.
And, she was scared --but, she was NOT raped. We don't even know if it was an attempted rape by whomever did this.

The woman is sincere and fragile. She also could be delusional. Has anyone looked into her background? Why didn't she turn over the therapist notes?

Trump ordered the investigation, so three cheers that your innocent questions will be answered! You must be so happy! I’m happy for you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Once more:

No place.
No time.
No date.
Prior to yesterday, the party developed at the country club--yesterday--not sure.
Doesn't know how she got home.
Told no one until 2002.
Told only therapist and husband in 2012 and had never told anyone else--until we found out yesterday that she told others in recent years.
WAPO reported on therapist notes--but she can't remember if she shared the notes with them or just told them (@2 months ago). Funny, we did not see those notes in the evidence.# of people varied from therapist, WAPO story, and testimony.
All people named have denied any recollection. Her friend said she did not know Kavanaugh.

Lawyer issues:
Lawyers said she couldn't come when they asked because she doesn't fly. (This is a lie.)
She was not aware that the committee had suggested they would come to her --lawyers did not share this with her.
Lawyer ( a noted Dem active and resister) was recommended by Feinstein.

Biggest problem: Feinstein should have turned this over in July.
FBI could have done an investigation and not exposed Ford. They WANTED Ford to testify.

And, by the way, lots of trauma victims get confused--even about who the perp was. Sometimes, you don't want to admit it was someone you cared about.
And, she was scared --but, she was NOT raped. We don't even know if it was an attempted rape by whomever did this.

The woman is sincere and fragile. She also could be delusional. Has anyone looked into her background? Why didn't she turn over the therapist notes?

You are taking sound bites that aren't facts and portraying them as facts. Don't quit your day job!