Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 5

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love all these people who think they know how “professionals” respond to false allegations of moral turpitude, when they have no practical experience seeing people so accused.

Reminds me of when people though Amanda Knox was a sex murdress because she did a cartwheel when dealing with the death of her roommate. “That’s not how you act” they chanted, never for a moment reflecting on the basis for their suppositions about how one is to respond to a different situation.

I don’t know what the truth is for Kavanaugh or Ford.

I do know that you cannot divine any great insight from his anger after being accused. In either direction.

Some of us have lived through similar experiences, which we cannot describe in detail because we do not wish to be identified. We all behaved with grace under fire, because this is what upright people do, with jobs and reputation on the line. Sadly, unless it's the EXACT same accusation for the EXACT same position, you will refuse to believe this carries the same weight.

Too bad for you.

Even if what you say is true, I am not sure you can extrapolate from your N of 1.

I've been falsely accused in a very public way, and it made me ANGRY AS HELL.

Now, that doesn't mean I automatically conclude BK is innocent. Simply that very few people can relate to this situation, and postulate from how they imagine they would act. Like how they would act if their roommate was murdered in a foreign country. Foxy Knoxy.

Then you are not Supreme Court material. There are jobs in this world that require a certain character and personality.

Under pressure, I am preternaturally calm without even consciously deciding to be - it's a defense mechanism because I feel I need to have all my wits about me. I couldn't be angry if I tried.

My husband, who was publicly accused in a very contentious and downright dangerous situation, also had the same reaction. He stayed extra calm because there was so much at stake.

Again, different people, different ways of dealing with problems. Some disqualify themselves from certain posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s right out of the play book. Make false and and outrageous accusations then stand back when the person defends themselves and say : I’m calm you’re not.

Isn't that the very definition of gaslighting, a practice frequently talked about on DCUM pages?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yeah lets just keep reading posts on thread 5 that were already posted on threads 1-4. At least this is original.

[Anonymous]

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?

Yeah because that didn't happen in 1987?

Bork, despite his intellect, was in fact unsuited for the court and Kennedy was a better choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serena Williams is being held to a higher standard that Judge Kavanaugh.

Geez, this is sad but true. I saw this and thought "ha, that's stupid"... but its true.

Women are always held to a higher standard, and minorities even more so. Look at our judicial system.

Look at how Rs treat Kavanaugh vs HRC. They crucified her, chanting "lock her up" without any due process. Kavanaugh? All he had to do was shed a few tears and get angry and it was, "oh, look, he seems so genuine..he must be telling the truth. It's that woman Ford who's lying" - with no due process.

Do you remember the women Candidate Donald Trump invited and seated them in the front row for the third and last debate against Candidate Hillary Clinton? This after paying off hush money to - but the world did not know then - Stormy Daniel and Karen McDougal and having been accused of sexual harassment/assault by many more women, and after the Access Hollywood tape revelation. In spite of all that we have President Trump now thanks to the Republicans and Swing/Democrat suburban educated white women voting for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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?

How is this all going to end? I just want to know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s right out of the play book. Make false and and outrageous accusations then stand back when the person defends themselves and say : I’m calm you’re not.

Kavanaugh ought to know how to respond then, because he did it to Clinton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love all these people who think they know how “professionals” respond to false allegations of moral turpitude, when they have no practical experience seeing people so accused.

Reminds me of when people though Amanda Knox was a sex murdress because she did a cartwheel when dealing with the death of her roommate. “That’s not how you act” they chanted, never for a moment reflecting on the basis for their suppositions about how one is to respond to a different situation.

I don’t know what the truth is for Kavanaugh or Ford.

I do know that you cannot divine any great insight from his anger after being accused. In either direction.

Some of us have lived through similar experiences, which we cannot describe in detail because we do not wish to be identified. We all behaved with grace under fire, because this is what upright people do, with jobs and reputation on the line. Sadly, unless it's the EXACT same accusation for the EXACT same position, you will refuse to believe this carries the same weight.

Too bad for you.

Even if what you say is true, I am not sure you can extrapolate from your N of 1.

I've been falsely accused in a very public way, and it made me ANGRY AS HELL.

Now, that doesn't mean I automatically conclude BK is innocent. Simply that very few people can relate to this situation, and postulate from how they imagine they would act. Like how they would act if their roommate was murdered in a foreign country. Foxy Knoxy.

Then you are not Supreme Court material. There are jobs in this world that require a certain character and personality.

Under pressure, I am preternaturally calm without even consciously deciding to be - it's a defense mechanism because I feel I need to have all my wits about me. I couldn't be angry if I tried.

My husband, who was publicly accused in a very contentious and downright dangerous situation, also had the same reaction. He stayed extra calm because there was so much at stake.

Again, different people, different ways of dealing with problems. Some disqualify themselves from certain posts.

Sorry, no, taking it up the *ss while being worked over by a bunch of political thugs is not a good trait in a judge. We need someone who is willing to stand up and fight for the rule of law, logic, and reason.

[Anonymous]

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?

Yeah because that didn't happen in 1987?

Bork, despite his intellect, was in fact unsuited for the court and Kennedy was a better choice.

Bork was Nixon's hatchet man in the Saturday Night Massacre. Whatever his qualifications, you don't tarnish the Court by putting a symbol of Nixon's wrongdoing on the bench. That was a stupid nomination.

[Anonymous]

Now, that doesn't mean I automatically conclude BK is innocent. Simply that very few people can relate to this situation, and postulate from how they imagine they would act.

He handled it badly, as if he was trying to appeal to Trump voters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love all these people who think they know how “professionals” respond to false allegations of moral turpitude, when they have no practical experience seeing people so accused.

Reminds me of when people though Amanda Knox was a sex murdress because she did a cartwheel when dealing with the death of her roommate. “That’s not how you act” they chanted, never for a moment reflecting on the basis for their suppositions about how one is to respond to a different situation.

I don’t know what the truth is for Kavanaugh or Ford.

I do know that you cannot divine any great insight from his anger after being accused. In either direction.

Some of us have lived through similar experiences, which we cannot describe in detail because we do not wish to be identified. We all behaved with grace under fire, because this is what upright people do, with jobs and reputation on the line. Sadly, unless it's the EXACT same accusation for the EXACT same position, you will refuse to believe this carries the same weight.

Too bad for you.

Even if what you say is true, I am not sure you can extrapolate from your N of 1.

I've been falsely accused in a very public way, and it made me ANGRY AS HELL.

Now, that doesn't mean I automatically conclude BK is innocent. Simply that very few people can relate to this situation, and postulate from how they imagine they would act. Like how they would act if their roommate was murdered in a foreign country. Foxy Knoxy.

Then you are not Supreme Court material. There are jobs in this world that require a certain character and personality.

Under pressure, I am preternaturally calm without even consciously deciding to be - it's a defense mechanism because I feel I need to have all my wits about me. I couldn't be angry if I tried.

My husband, who was publicly accused in a very contentious and downright dangerous situation, also had the same reaction. He stayed extra calm because there was so much at stake.

Again, different people, different ways of dealing with problems. Some disqualify themselves from certain posts.

Sorry, no, taking it up the *ss while being worked over by a bunch of political thugs is not a good trait in a judge. We need someone who is willing to stand up and fight for the rule of law, logic, and reason.

Then Kavanaugh's your man. He is willing to fight. Read his questions to Clinton. He fights dirty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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?

How is this all going to end? I just want to know.

Entropy will result in the last star fading to black. The universe will be dark and lifeless for eternity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s right out of the play book. Make false and and outrageous accusations then stand back when the person defends themselves and say : I’m calm you’re not.

Kavanaugh ought to know how to respond then, because he did it to Clinton.

+1! It’s ridiculous to cry about how poor liitle Brett is being treated when he did worse himself!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First time the Washington Post has opposed a supreme court nominee since 1987

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/vote-no-on-kavanaugh/2018/10/04/23495e3a-c7f3-11e8-b1ed-1d2d65b86d0c_story.html?utm_term=.f8c5a947bed4

Ouch. This from a paper that endorsed Thomas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First time the Washington Post has opposed a supreme court nominee since 1987

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/vote-no-on-kavanaugh/2018/10/04/23495e3a-c7f3-11e8-b1ed-1d2d65b86d0c_story.html?utm_term=.f8c5a947bed4

Newspapers have no business in either supporting or opposing SCOTUS nominees.
Newspapers should be reporting the news.

Kavanaugh supporters have a new line of attack -- editorial boards shouldn't exist!

To be fair, they are walking the walk. On Fox, they don’t exist the whole station is one long editorial.