Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Relevant to this discussion is this piece. https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/1485754002 I know we’re on to the next Kavanaugh scandal, but for all those who doubt Dr. Ford, here’s another account with a very similar situation.

I think this is hard for a lot of women to whom this happened, but who support Kavanaugh, because they really haven’t reframed what happened to them, they still take it on as their fault. I think this is hard for a lot of the men who did this stuff and support Kavanaugh because they can’t accept that what they did when they were teens wasn’t fun stuff, it was sexual assault.

I'm a woman who thinks that something happened but that neither Ford nor Kavanaugh may remember it clearly after all this time. I don't think that's fair to say that men struggle with this because they can't accept that it wasn't just fun, it was sexual assault. I think that teenagers do all sorts of things and ideally learn in the process, and I don't think that actions as teenagers need to be atoned for forever as adults. I think Kavanaugh's response now is the important one, not whatever he did or did not do 30-some years ago.

and his response now is to lie about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted this near the end of thread 3. I’m curious what Kavanaugh supporters think, particularly of the last paragraph.

“I honestly don’t know who is telling the truth. I don’t believe her blindly, but I also don’t think she’s involved in some big conspiracy (even if one is happening around her.) And certainly some people screwed the pooch procedurally here.

All that said, his behavior on Thursday was absolutely horrific and completely unbecoming of a Supreme Court Justice. He is hot tempered and blatantly partisan. Yes, lots of people in the room were being partisan, but he was the only one trying to become a Supreme Court Justice.”

As I’ve said before, if he had been polite and answered the questions cordially and directly, this would all be over. He has humiliated himself and shown he can’t remain calm and impartial in tense situations.”

He was facing people who had called him “evil” and a “threat” and also publicly and proudly announced, “I believe her” before any testimony.
He is an innocent man who was vehemently defending his name, his reputation, his integrity, and his livelihood. This was not a “tense situation.” It was a lynching. It was disgusting.

If you wish to see how he handles himself in tense situations, consider his behavior and demeanor during his 12 years as an appellate judge. There were NO COMPLAINTS.

This is all I need to know.

To the pp, thank you - this helps me to understand how others feel about this. I view the entire affair as a tragedy.

Hyperbole much?

He's trying to be on the Supreme Court. He lied, misled and avoided answering in response to question after question. As a member of the federal judiciary, he is expected to behave beyond reproach. "A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen." He failed.

But, here's an essay by his good friend and colleague Benjamin Wittes who has come to the conclusion that after Kavanaugh's performance at the hearing he no longer supports his nomination.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/why-i-wouldnt-confirm-brett-kavanaugh/571936/

Faced with credible allegations of serious misconduct against him, Kavanaugh behaved in a fashion unacceptable in a justice, it seems preponderantly likely he was not candid with the Senate Judiciary Committee on important matters, and the risk of Ford’s allegations being closer to the truth than his denial of them is simply too high to place him on the Supreme Court.

YOWZERS!!!! Wittes spoke out against the nomination???
Yikes.

He had earlier said that he should withdraw unless he can do it without attacking Ford.

Please tell me, how is that possible?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Relevant to this discussion is this piece. https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/1485754002 I know we’re on to the next Kavanaugh scandal, but for all those who doubt Dr. Ford, here’s another account with a very similar situation.

I think this is hard for a lot of women to whom this happened, but who support Kavanaugh, because they really haven’t reframed what happened to them, they still take it on as their fault. I think this is hard for a lot of the men who did this stuff and support Kavanaugh because they can’t accept that what they did when they were teens wasn’t fun stuff, it was sexual assault.

I'm a woman who thinks that something happened but that neither Ford nor Kavanaugh may remember it clearly after all this time. I don't think that's fair to say that men struggle with this because they can't accept that it wasn't just fun, it was sexual assault. I think that teenagers do all sorts of things and ideally learn in the process, and I don't think that actions as teenagers need to be atoned for forever as adults. I think Kavanaugh's response now is the important one, not whatever he did or did not do 30-some years ago.

I think it’s imminently fair. Times have shifted. As the article I linked says, we didn’t have the words for this back then and the girls tended to blame themselves for it. What else would men be so angry about, as referenced in the Washington Post article about men’s fear and anger, if they themselves haven’t done these things? My husband hasn’t done this stuff. He has no anger or fear - except anger that once again the victims are being blamed.

Your husband also is not in a he said she said Washington DC circlefest with the media churning false narratives and innuendo to sell web traffic. Keep that in mind.

Nor would he be. The only person responsible for this he said-she said, the only person responsible for the arguments about his credibility, temperment, etc., is Brett Kavanaugh. He may not like it but he is responsible for how he acted and is acting, how others are reacting, and how people are viewing it. No one else. Him.

You may be able to have him rammed through to SCOTUS. But, he will ALWAYS have an asterisk next to his name. As he should. And the GOP will always be the party that put 2 men who were credibly accused of harassing and/or assaulting women on SCOTUS. Congrats on that. I can tell you that, as a result, you've cemented my voting preferences forever.

First of all, I do not care how you vote. You do whatever you do.

The only person responsible for this he said-she said, the only person responsible for the arguments about his credibility, temperment, etc., is Brett Kavanaugh.

No. You have no way of knowing what is the truth. Just like 320 million other people. Do not act like you do.

You obviously have a problem with men just from what you write. That is not my problem.

[Anonymous]

YOWZERS!!!! Wittes spoke out against the nomination???
Yikes.

He's also written that Republicans should vote against GOP candidates if they want to "save" the party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted this near the end of thread 3. I’m curious what Kavanaugh supporters think, particularly of the last paragraph.

“I honestly don’t know who is telling the truth. I don’t believe her blindly, but I also don’t think she’s involved in some big conspiracy (even if one is happening around her.) And certainly some people screwed the pooch procedurally here.

All that said, his behavior on Thursday was absolutely horrific and completely unbecoming of a Supreme Court Justice. He is hot tempered and blatantly partisan. Yes, lots of people in the room were being partisan, but he was the only one trying to become a Supreme Court Justice.”

As I’ve said before, if he had been polite and answered the questions cordially and directly, this would all be over. He has humiliated himself and shown he can’t remain calm and impartial in tense situations.”

He was facing people who had called him “evil” and a “threat” and also publicly and proudly announced, “I believe her” before any testimony.
He is an innocent man who was vehemently defending his name, his reputation, his integrity, and his livelihood. This was not a “tense situation.” It was a lynching. It was disgusting.

If you wish to see how he handles himself in tense situations, consider his behavior and demeanor during his 12 years as an appellate judge. There were NO COMPLAINTS.

This is all I need to know.

To the pp, thank you - this helps me to understand how others feel about this. I view the entire affair as a tragedy.

Hyperbole much?

He's trying to be on the Supreme Court. He lied, misled and avoided answering in response to question after question. As a member of the federal judiciary, he is expected to behave beyond reproach. "A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen." He failed.

But, here's an essay by his good friend and colleague Benjamin Wittes who has come to the conclusion that after Kavanaugh's performance at the hearing he no longer supports his nomination.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/why-i-wouldnt-confirm-brett-kavanaugh/571936/

Faced with credible allegations of serious misconduct against him, Kavanaugh behaved in a fashion unacceptable in a justice, it seems preponderantly likely he was not candid with the Senate Judiciary Committee on important matters, and the risk of Ford’s allegations being closer to the truth than his denial of them is simply too high to place him on the Supreme Court.

YOWZERS!!!! Wittes spoke out against the nomination???
Yikes.

He had earlier said that he should withdraw unless he can do it without attacking Ford.

Please tell me, how is that possible?

If Kavanaugh had had a calendar showing that he summered in Paris, that would have worked. But he didn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted this near the end of thread 3. I’m curious what Kavanaugh supporters think, particularly of the last paragraph.

“I honestly don’t know who is telling the truth. I don’t believe her blindly, but I also don’t think she’s involved in some big conspiracy (even if one is happening around her.) And certainly some people screwed the pooch procedurally here.

All that said, his behavior on Thursday was absolutely horrific and completely unbecoming of a Supreme Court Justice. He is hot tempered and blatantly partisan. Yes, lots of people in the room were being partisan, but he was the only one trying to become a Supreme Court Justice.”

As I’ve said before, if he had been polite and answered the questions cordially and directly, this would all be over. He has humiliated himself and shown he can’t remain calm and impartial in tense situations.”

He was facing people who had called him “evil” and a “threat” and also publicly and proudly announced, “I believe her” before any testimony.
He is an innocent man who was vehemently defending his name, his reputation, his integrity, and his livelihood. This was not a “tense situation.” It was a lynching. It was disgusting.

If you wish to see how he handles himself in tense situations, consider his behavior and demeanor during his 12 years as an appellate judge. There were NO COMPLAINTS.

This is all I need to know.

To the pp, thank you - this helps me to understand how others feel about this. I view the entire affair as a tragedy.

Hyperbole much?

He's trying to be on the Supreme Court. He lied, misled and avoided answering in response to question after question. As a member of the federal judiciary, he is expected to behave beyond reproach. "A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen." He failed.

But, here's an essay by his good friend and colleague Benjamin Wittes who has come to the conclusion that after Kavanaugh's performance at the hearing he no longer supports his nomination.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/why-i-wouldnt-confirm-brett-kavanaugh/571936/

Faced with credible allegations of serious misconduct against him, Kavanaugh behaved in a fashion unacceptable in a justice, it seems preponderantly likely he was not candid with the Senate Judiciary Committee on important matters, and the risk of Ford’s allegations being closer to the truth than his denial of them is simply too high to place him on the Supreme Court.

YOWZERS!!!! Wittes spoke out against the nomination???
Yikes.

He had earlier said that he should withdraw unless he can do it without attacking Ford.

Please tell me, how is that possible?

If Kavanaugh had had a calendar showing that he summered in Paris, that would have worked. But he didn't.

Yep. The calendar places him in Bethesda most of the summer except for a week of rampaging down the shore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hyperbole much?

He's trying to be on the Supreme Court. He lied, misled and avoided answering in response to question after question. As a member of the federal judiciary, he is expected to behave beyond reproach. "A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen." He failed.

But, here's an essay by his good friend and colleague Benjamin Wittes who has come to the conclusion that after Kavanaugh's performance at the hearing he no longer supports his nomination.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/why-i-wouldnt-confirm-brett-kavanaugh/571936/

Faced with credible allegations of serious misconduct against him, Kavanaugh behaved in a fashion unacceptable in a justice, it seems preponderantly likely he was not candid with the Senate Judiciary Committee on important matters, and the risk of Ford’s allegations being closer to the truth than his denial of them is simply too high to place him on the Supreme Court.

From Wittes's editorial can someone explain this to me:

Thursday evening, after the hearing, former FBI Director James Comey tweeted, “Small lies matter, even about yearbooks. From the standard jury instruction: ‘If a witness is shown knowingly to have testified falsely about any material matter, you have a right to distrust such witness’ other testimony and you may reject all the testimony of that witness.’”

In response, I tweeted a passage that had been haunting me all day from a Guantanamo Bay habeas case in the D.C. Circuit called Al-Adahi v. Obama. The passage reads:

Several days later, bin Laden summoned Al-Adahi for another meeting. According to Al-Adahi, at his meeting bin Laden asked him about people he was connected with in Yemen—some of whom were involved in jihad … In the habeas proceedings, Al-Adahi tried to explain his personal audience with bin Laden on the basis that “meeting with Bin Laden was common for visitors to Kandar.” This is, as the government points out, utterly implausible … [Yet] the district court said nothing, despite the well-settled principle that false exculpatory statements are evidence—often strong evidence—of guilt.

The opinion was not written by Kavanaugh, but Kavanaugh was on the unanimous panel that decided the Al-Adahi case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nor would he be. The only person responsible for this he said-she said, the only person responsible for the arguments about his credibility, temperment, etc., is Brett Kavanaugh. He may not like it but he is responsible for how he acted and is acting, how others are reacting, and how people are viewing it. No one else. Him.

You may be able to have him rammed through to SCOTUS. But, he will ALWAYS have an asterisk next to his name. As he should. And the GOP will always be the party that put 2 men who were credibly accused of harassing and/or assaulting women on SCOTUS. Congrats on that. I can tell you that, as a result, you've cemented my voting preferences forever.

First of all, I do not care how you vote. You do whatever you do.

Anonymous wrote:The only person responsible for this he said-she said, the only person responsible for the arguments about his credibility, temperment, etc., is Brett Kavanaugh.

No. You have no way of knowing what is the truth. Just like 320 million other people. Do not act like you do.
You obviously have a problem with men just from what you write. That is not my problem.

How does the PP sound like she has a problem with men? None of have a problem with self aware men who handle themselves well, without rage, without sexually assaulting women.

And Brett Kavanaugh is completely responsible for his reaction. He couldn’t control himself. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In times of uncertainty, when the world just seems to have gone off its axis, I often reach out to an old neighbor of mine. He's a wise old guy, almost always clad in dusty overalls, drives a beat-up red pick-up with an old bloodhound (named Veteran) usually lounging in the back. He's the real deal. You lay something out for him, something you're struggling with and, why, he'll think on it a spell and then look up at you with those rheumy old eyes and just knock you over with his simple, earthy wisdom.

Although he doesn't go in for all that big-city politicking (as he calls it), he keeps up with what's going on in the world, at least as it relates to town and his farm. Anyway, I ran into him at the general store the other day and we set to talking and after a bit I asked him what he made of all this Supreme Court hubbub. He thought for a second, cleared his throat (he's a gruff old coot) and said, just as clear as day: "Brett Kavanaugh is a sneering, sniveling, conniving, entitled, lying douchebag with a cheesy blow-wave hair-do and an alcoholic's complexion."

And with that he and Veteran took off down the road. Just wanted to share the perspective.

Thanks for sharing Lefty's take...silly old me, I am going with the professionals that have worked in the U.S. judicial system over the last three decades...

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/aba_kavanaugh_testimony/

Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh earned the highest rating of unanimously “well qualified,” members of the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary told the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on Friday.
“We concluded that his integrity, judicial temperament, and professional competence met the highest standards for appointment to the court,” said Paul T. Moxley of Salt Lake City, the chair of the committee. “Our rating of unanimously well-qualified reflects the consensus of his peers who have knowledge of his professional qualifications.”

Standing Committee members solicited input from almost 500 people who were likely to have knowledge of the nominee’s professional qualifications, including federal and state judges, lawyers and bar representatives.

The Standing Committee reached out to 471 judges, lawyers, and professors for information regarding Judge Kavanaugh’s integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament. The committee received more than 120 responses, and the committee conducted interviews with those respondents who had personal knowledge of Kavanaugh through their professional or personal dealings with him.

Tarpley provided the committee with some of the written observations made about Kavanaugh.

“He has the highest personal morality and the highest ethics,” said one.

“He is what he seems, very decent, humble, and honest,” said another.

The Maryland Law school reading group observed that “Judge Kavanaugh is an excellent writer with a flair for making complicated facts understandable.”

As to Kavanaugh’s demeanor, one respondent observed, “He is easy to get along with and has a good sense of humor.”

Tarpley told the committee: “Can you imagine that, a judge with a good sense of humor?”

Noting the ABA’s more than 400,000 members across the country, Tarpley said: “We are a very diverse group of lawyers, and we agree that Judge Kavanaugh meets our highest standard and rated him unanimously well-qualified to serve as associate justice on the United States Supreme Court.”

(Note: As of course was under reported ABA President Bob Carlson was not authorized to speak for the ABA'a standing committee with his last minute hail mary).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Relevant to this discussion is this piece. https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/1485754002 I know we’re on to the next Kavanaugh scandal, but for all those who doubt Dr. Ford, here’s another account with a very similar situation.

I think this is hard for a lot of women to whom this happened, but who support Kavanaugh, because they really haven’t reframed what happened to them, they still take it on as their fault. I think this is hard for a lot of the men who did this stuff and support Kavanaugh because they can’t accept that what they did when they were teens wasn’t fun stuff, it was sexual assault.

I'm a woman who thinks that something happened but that neither Ford nor Kavanaugh may remember it clearly after all this time. I don't think that's fair to say that men struggle with this because they can't accept that it wasn't just fun, it was sexual assault. I think that teenagers do all sorts of things and ideally learn in the process, and I don't think that actions as teenagers need to be atoned for forever as adults. I think Kavanaugh's response now is the important one, not whatever he did or did not do 30-some years ago.

I think it’s imminently fair. Times have shifted. As the article I linked says, we didn’t have the words for this back then and the girls tended to blame themselves for it. What else would men be so angry about, as referenced in the Washington Post article about men’s fear and anger, if they themselves haven’t done these things? My husband hasn’t done this stuff. He has no anger or fear - except anger that once again the victims are being blamed.

Your husband also is not in a he said she said Washington DC circlefest with the media churning false narratives and innuendo to sell web traffic. Keep that in mind.

Nor would he be. The only person responsible for this he said-she said, the only person responsible for the arguments about his credibility, temperment, etc., is Brett Kavanaugh. He may not like it but he is responsible for how he acted and is acting, how others are reacting, and how people are viewing it. No one else. Him.

You may be able to have him rammed through to SCOTUS. But, he will ALWAYS have an asterisk next to his name. As he should. And the GOP will always be the party that put 2 men who were credibly accused of harassing and/or assaulting women on SCOTUS. Congrats on that. I can tell you that, as a result, you've cemented my voting preferences forever.

First of all, I do not care how you vote. You do whatever you do.

The only person responsible for this he said-she said, the only person responsible for the arguments about his credibility, temperment, etc., is Brett Kavanaugh.

No. You have no way of knowing what is the truth. Just like 320 million other people. Do not act like you do.

You obviously have a problem with men just from what you write. That is not my problem.

So he might be a person who sexually assaulted a girl and then lied about it.

Please let us know how you would hire someone who MIGHT have shaken a baby.
A coach who MIGHT have slept with with one his or her students

Go ahead, we will wait.

The facts are, he might have done it. And if he might have done it, he should be out.

[Anonymous]

In the meantime McConnell is planning to hide the FBI report from the public. Does anyone here thinks he would hide it if the report is exculpatory to Kavanaugh?

[Anonymous]

What did Judge say about The Judge? Eerily quiet. America waits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In the meantime McConnell is planning to hide the FBI report from the public. Does anyone here thinks he would hide it if the report is exculpatory to Kavanaugh?

Leading Dems agree with not making it public. Deep breaths before posting, perhaps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hyperbole much?

He's trying to be on the Supreme Court. He lied, misled and avoided answering in response to question after question. As a member of the federal judiciary, he is expected to behave beyond reproach. "A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen." He failed.

But, here's an essay by his good friend and colleague Benjamin Wittes who has come to the conclusion that after Kavanaugh's performance at the hearing he no longer supports his nomination.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/why-i-wouldnt-confirm-brett-kavanaugh/571936/

Faced with credible allegations of serious misconduct against him, Kavanaugh behaved in a fashion unacceptable in a justice, it seems preponderantly likely he was not candid with the Senate Judiciary Committee on important matters, and the risk of Ford’s allegations being closer to the truth than his denial of them is simply too high to place him on the Supreme Court.

From Wittes's editorial can someone explain this to me:

Thursday evening, after the hearing, former FBI Director James Comey tweeted, “Small lies matter, even about yearbooks. From the standard jury instruction: ‘If a witness is shown knowingly to have testified falsely about any material matter, you have a right to distrust such witness’ other testimony and you may reject all the testimony of that witness.’”

In response, I tweeted a passage that had been haunting me all day from a Guantanamo Bay habeas case in the D.C. Circuit called Al-Adahi v. Obama. The passage reads:

Several days later, bin Laden summoned Al-Adahi for another meeting. According to Al-Adahi, at his meeting bin Laden asked him about people he was connected with in Yemen—some of whom were involved in jihad … In the habeas proceedings, Al-Adahi tried to explain his personal audience with bin Laden on the basis that “meeting with Bin Laden was common for visitors to Kandar.” This is, as the government points out, utterly implausible … [Yet] the district court said nothing, despite the well-settled principle that false exculpatory statements are evidence—often strong evidence—of guilt.

The opinion was not written by Kavanaugh, but Kavanaugh was on the unanimous panel that decided the Al-Adahi case.

He's saying Kavanaugh helped decide and author a decision on a case that found a 9/11 criminal guilty based on his 'small lie' because that 'small lie' was meant to be exculpatory. IE, he lied to frame his meeting with bin Laden as NBD. In order to show that he had no association with OBL.

If I am reading it write they found that that lie was actually incriminating because of the principle that 'false exculpatory statements are evidence - often strong evidence - of guilt.' So basically a lie like this isn't just neutral, it is evidence that you are guilty.

And that is KAVANAUGH'S legal argument in that case. Which today, when applied to himself, wouldn't be a good result for him. Basically, irony. If not the real kind at least the Alanis Morissette kind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In times of uncertainty, when the world just seems to have gone off its axis, I often reach out to an old neighbor of mine. He's a wise old guy, almost always clad in dusty overalls, drives a beat-up red pick-up with an old bloodhound (named Veteran) usually lounging in the back. He's the real deal. You lay something out for him, something you're struggling with and, why, he'll think on it a spell and then look up at you with those rheumy old eyes and just knock you over with his simple, earthy wisdom.

Although he doesn't go in for all that big-city politicking (as he calls it), he keeps up with what's going on in the world, at least as it relates to town and his farm. Anyway, I ran into him at the general store the other day and we set to talking and after a bit I asked him what he made of all this Supreme Court hubbub. He thought for a second, cleared his throat (he's a gruff old coot) and said, just as clear as day: "Brett Kavanaugh is a sneering, sniveling, conniving, entitled, lying douchebag with a cheesy blow-wave hair-do and an alcoholic's complexion."

And with that he and Veteran took off down the road. Just wanted to share the perspective.

Thanks for sharing Lefty's take...silly old me, I am going with the professionals that have worked in the U.S. judicial system over the last three decades...

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/aba_kavanaugh_testimony/

Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh earned the highest rating of unanimously “well qualified,” members of the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary told the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on Friday.
“We concluded that his integrity, judicial temperament, and professional competence met the highest standards for appointment to the court,” said Paul T. Moxley of Salt Lake City, the chair of the committee. “Our rating of unanimously well-qualified reflects the consensus of his peers who have knowledge of his professional qualifications.”

Standing Committee members solicited input from almost 500 people who were likely to have knowledge of the nominee’s professional qualifications, including federal and state judges, lawyers and bar representatives.

The Standing Committee reached out to 471 judges, lawyers, and professors for information regarding Judge Kavanaugh’s integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament. The committee received more than 120 responses, and the committee conducted interviews with those respondents who had personal knowledge of Kavanaugh through their professional or personal dealings with him.

Tarpley provided the committee with some of the written observations made about Kavanaugh.

“He has the highest personal morality and the highest ethics,” said one.

“He is what he seems, very decent, humble, and honest,” said another.

The Maryland Law school reading group observed that “Judge Kavanaugh is an excellent writer with a flair for making complicated facts understandable.”

As to Kavanaugh’s demeanor, one respondent observed, “He is easy to get along with and has a good sense of humor.”

Tarpley told the committee: “Can you imagine that, a judge with a good sense of humor?”

Noting the ABA’s more than 400,000 members across the country, Tarpley said: “We are a very diverse group of lawyers, and we agree that Judge Kavanaugh meets our highest standard and rated him unanimously well-qualified to serve as associate justice on the United States Supreme Court.”

(Note: As of course was under reported ABA President Bob Carlson was not authorized to speak for the ABA'a standing committee with his last minute hail mary).

So basically what you are saying is, if you have a done a good job, it doesn't matter if tried to rape someone. Again, let's point to Cosby and Sandusky. They did a good job at their job. And they were freaking monsters!