Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 4

[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.”

Up until this morning I felt the same way as you, I didn't necessarily know who was telling the truth. After the Rachel Mitchell memo I am inclined to believe BK. there are too many loopholes in her story some of which make me think she is intentionally being dishonest. That being said I think his explanations of the meanings of his yearbook statements amounts to perjury and he probably did himself in on that alone. However, I do not believe he assaulted Christine Ford.

The Rachel Mitchell memo is insignificant. You are falling for political BS. She is saying she doesn't have the evidence to take it to court. And how would she? She was not even permitted to have an interview with Kavanaugh? do you know how many cases where there IS evidence that the prosecutor refuses to take to court? The only take things where they are pretty sure they will get a conviction.

She never ever ever says that she thinks he is innocent.

You should read this article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/opinions/arlington-texas/?utm_term=.5ba1f80d92bc

Most sexual assaults are not reported. The ones that are mostly NEVER go to trial. It DOES NOT MEAN THEY DID NOT HAPPEN.

In this case, he could have done it. He should not be on the SC if he could have done it. We don't give positions to people who could have done it. Would you hire a tutor who MAYBE slept with his/her last student? Would you hire a housekeeper who MAYBE stole jewelry from her last employer?

NO YOU WOULD NOT.

And, to the poster who wanted to know why the future is scary for young men.....

Read the bolded paragraph above. It is all about IF. If he could have done it. If he is guilty. If, If, If.....
Despite the fact that the only 3 people who were reportedly there have failed to corroborate her claims, and her dear friend doesn’t even know Kavanaugh.....he should be subject to penalty because.... IF.
This is why young men should be scared. Because, all it takes is an allegation.

Enough with all young men being scared. All men don't have to be scared. The people who are scared are the men who behaved like they were in Animal House when they were younger. Too drunk to control themselves. Mistreated women. Any guy who acted like the stuff they are saying BK did is getting nervous? Fine with me.

Women and POC have been scared for years...decades...centuries, putting up with men who mistreat them for their own amusement and having little to NO recourse.

So pardon me while I don't cry a river for some white dude who acted like an ass in his teens and twenties having a moment of fear about what he might have done.

I have a father, brothers, male cousins, sons that I love. I'm not worried for them. They don't act like assholes.

Nor do they need to. All it takes is one false accusation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's only been two days of FBI investigation. Imagine what else is going to come out.

Your guy is TOAST. Trump hates drunks!

The FBI is wrapping up. They're just about done.

Murkowski seems less convinced than you do.

https://mobile.twitter.com/matthewdalywdc/status/1047179686651088904

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's only been two days of FBI investigation. Imagine what else is going to come out.

Your guy is TOAST. Trump hates drunks!

The FBI is wrapping up tomorrow according to NYT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's only been two days of FBI investigation. Imagine what else is going to come out.

Your guy is TOAST. Trump hates drunks!

The FBI is wrapping up. They're just about done.

Murkowski seems less convinced than you do.

https://mobile.twitter.com/matthewdalywdc/status/1047179686651088904

NYTimes is reporting they are completing tomorrow.

[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.”

Up until this morning I felt the same way as you, I didn't necessarily know who was telling the truth. After the Rachel Mitchell memo I am inclined to believe BK. there are too many loopholes in her story some of which make me think she is intentionally being dishonest. That being said I think his explanations of the meanings of his yearbook statements amounts to perjury and he probably did himself in on that alone. However, I do not believe he assaulted Christine Ford.

The Rachel Mitchell memo is insignificant. You are falling for political BS. She is saying she doesn't have the evidence to take it to court. And how would she? She was not even permitted to have an interview with Kavanaugh? do you know how many cases where there IS evidence that the prosecutor refuses to take to court? The only take things where they are pretty sure they will get a conviction.

She never ever ever says that she thinks he is innocent.

You should read this article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/opinions/arlington-texas/?utm_term=.5ba1f80d92bc

Most sexual assaults are not reported. The ones that are mostly NEVER go to trial. It DOES NOT MEAN THEY DID NOT HAPPEN.

In this case, he could have done it. He should not be on the SC if he could have done it. We don't give positions to people who could have done it. Would you hire a tutor who MAYBE slept with his/her last student? Would you hire a housekeeper who MAYBE stole jewelry from her last employer?

NO YOU WOULD NOT.

And, to the poster who wanted to know why the future is scary for young men.....

Read the bolded paragraph above. It is all about IF. If he could have done it. If he is guilty. If, If, If.....
Despite the fact that the only 3 people who were reportedly there have failed to corroborate her claims, and her dear friend doesn’t even know Kavanaugh.....he should be subject to penalty because.... IF.
This is why young men should be scared. Because, all it takes is an allegation.

Enough with all young men being scared. All men don't have to be scared. The people who are scared are the men who behaved like they were in Animal House when they were younger. Too drunk to control themselves. Mistreated women. Any guy who acted like the stuff they are saying BK did is getting nervous? Fine with me.

Women and POC have been scared for years...decades...centuries, putting up with men who mistreat them for their own amusement and having little to NO recourse.

So pardon me while I don't cry a river for some white dude who acted like an ass in his teens and twenties having a moment of fear about what he might have done.

I have a father, brothers, male cousins, sons that I love. I'm not worried for them. They don't act like assholes.

Agree with this.

Also this is for the supreme court, not for the guy who flips burgers at Denny's. If there is a question that you might have tried to rape someone or that your flung your penis in someone's face, you should not be there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump mocking Christine Ford tonight at his rally, ending with "they want to destroy people, really evil people"

https://twitter.com/andrewkimmel/status/1047285291730460672

So he’s quadrupling down, eh? He must feel Mueller’s breath at the back of his cotton candy pompadour.

#LeftyLies again.
He was mocking the process, the Democrats, and the liberals.

For her - he simply talked about Rachel Mitchell’s assessment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Brett never heard of Bart. Nope never they called him that. Swore to Congress, he did. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, as they say.

Wow, this is hysterical. Done in by his own documents.

Brett kavanaugh, aka Bart o'kavanaugh And his prolific poker is fffffinished. Not my words, but his.

Nope.
You folks have “screwed the pooch;” “overshot your wad;” “cried wolf one too many times.” Choose your idiom.

After all the false allegations of sexual assault and gang rape, then the allegations of being an alcoholic or someone with anger control issues, and the worst of all - he threw ice at someone in a bar - All the research you liberals and the media have done to find SOMETHING - ANYTHING to derail this nomination, we JUST AREN’T BUYING IT. The media are actively trying to track down something incriminating. I somehow think this was one of the reasons the Democrats were looking for a delay.
You are now trying to take a letter written by this man over 30 years ago, indicating he had a good sense of humor, was self-deprecating, and quite the planner and organizer, and making something of it because you will do “whatever it takes.”

Nope. Not buying it.

(PS Another allegation was sent to Chris Coons. Look for it. Then, look at Senator Grassley’s letter to Coons. This has become utterly ridiculous)

I agree 100%. And now we have people submitting salacious stories saying they have no idea if Kavanaugh was even present, but he *might* have been - better investigate!! This is truly a new low that even I didn't think possible.

[Anonymous]

BK's claims that the Beach Week Ralph Club joke had to do with a weak stomach related to spicy food strains credulity. Well, unless he had norovirus that weekend.

Associations: Mark Judge was apparently a very good buddy back then, even if they drifted out of contact after prep school. If Brett was the guy who stayed pretty much sober and babysat while Judge got trashed, there would have been some indication of it on those yearbook pages. And of course the claim as to the meaning of the mutual "have you boofed yet?" joke between him and Mark--flatulence also strains credulity.

Funny how busy a weekend social life you can have while "grounded".

Not a single Sunday entry on the calendar mentions church.

Saw something put out on Twitter regarding the Rainbow Inn and the Devil's Triangle in Richmond. I think a three-way is far too kinky for most teenagers, but somewhere along the line there could have been a might fun road trip.

As to the calendar--we all know that "if it's not written down, it didn't happen". Certainly a way of attempting to erase an embarrassing memory--I'm perfectly willing to believe that if the incident Ford alleges happened as she recalls it, BK would have (assuming he did remember it) felt regretful and embarrassed and wanting to forget all about it.

If you look at BAC charts and symptoms of various levels of alcohol consumption, there is a strong correlation between vomiting and blackouts, and even lower than those levels there is a strong correlation between memory loss and aggressive behavior and consumption. Basically, to have no chance of either, he would have to have NEVER had "too much beer". He would have had to consistently remain below .08% BAC. I think it is fairly unlikely a teen drinker, especially a male drinker, is going to manage that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Brett never heard of Bart. Nope never they called him that. Swore to Congress, he did. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, as they say.

Pp who posted this, do you have more info about where the letter came from?

It’s addressed to PJ; does that mean that PJ is volunteering evidence that BK is lying about the extent of his drinking, etc?

[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.”

Up until this morning I felt the same way as you, I didn't necessarily know who was telling the truth. After the Rachel Mitchell memo I am inclined to believe BK. there are too many loopholes in her story some of which make me think she is intentionally being dishonest. That being said I think his explanations of the meanings of his yearbook statements amounts to perjury and he probably did himself in on that alone. However, I do not believe he assaulted Christine Ford.

The Rachel Mitchell memo is insignificant. You are falling for political BS. She is saying she doesn't have the evidence to take it to court. And how would she? She was not even permitted to have an interview with Kavanaugh? do you know how many cases where there IS evidence that the prosecutor refuses to take to court? The only take things where they are pretty sure they will get a conviction.

She never ever ever says that she thinks he is innocent.

You should read this article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/opinions/arlington-texas/?utm_term=.5ba1f80d92bc

Most sexual assaults are not reported. The ones that are mostly NEVER go to trial. It DOES NOT MEAN THEY DID NOT HAPPEN.

In this case, he could have done it. He should not be on the SC if he could have done it. We don't give positions to people who could have done it. Would you hire a tutor who MAYBE slept with his/her last student? Would you hire a housekeeper who MAYBE stole jewelry from her last employer?

NO YOU WOULD NOT.

And, to the poster who wanted to know why the future is scary for young men.....

Read the bolded paragraph above. It is all about IF. If he could have done it. If he is guilty. If, If, If.....
Despite the fact that the only 3 people who were reportedly there have failed to corroborate her claims, and her dear friend doesn’t even know Kavanaugh.....he should be subject to penalty because.... IF.
This is why young men should be scared. Because, all it takes is an allegation.

Enough with all young men being scared. All men don't have to be scared. The people who are scared are the men who behaved like they were in Animal House when they were younger. Too drunk to control themselves. Mistreated women. Any guy who acted like the stuff they are saying BK did is getting nervous? Fine with me.

Women and POC have been scared for years...decades...centuries, putting up with men who mistreat them for their own amusement and having little to NO recourse.

So pardon me while I don't cry a river for some white dude who acted like an ass in his teens and twenties having a moment of fear about what he might have done.

I have a father, brothers, male cousins, sons that I love. I'm not worried for them. They don't act like assholes.

Agree with this.

Also this is for the supreme court, not for the guy who flips burgers at Denny's. If there is a question that you might have tried to rape someone or that your flung your penis in someone's face, you should not be there.

See. You are proving pp’s point. All it takes is an accusation to ruin a reputation or destroy a career. “If there is a question”....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's only been two days of FBI investigation. Imagine what else is going to come out.

Your guy is TOAST. Trump hates drunks!

The FBI is wrapping up. They're just about done.

Highly unlikely. But in any event, The New York Times and other investigative media outlets are still very busy and keep exposing him as a liar - forget the sexual assault charges. The country is finding out he is unfit and he now has the lowest public approval rating of any SC nominee ever.

I read the NY Times every day and am truly shocked that such an unbiased news source would continue to stay busy trying to find anything they can that might possibly bring him down. Shocked!

[Anonymous]

The risk to a man of false accusation is miniscule compared to the risk of sexual assault to a woman. It would be great if we could reduce the risk to women without increasing the risk to men. But, given that men are primarily the perpetrators of sexual assault and that the risk will still be very, very small; I'm ok with increasing the risk of false accusations if it puts a dent in sexual assault to women.

I only know of maybe 5 false sexual assault cases - and those are from the news. I know at least twice that many women personally who have been assaulted. (And the number who have been sexually harassed in one way or another is close to 100%.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it permitted to say that I think Ford is lying though her teeth? Not confused, not traumatized, not mixed up, just stone-cold lying.

But why on Earth would she do this! Did you see her? I'm dumbfounded at the cruelty people have directed at her.

Not the PP, but are you serious? I haven't seen anything cruel written about her. Quite the opposite, actually. Lots of fawning.

[Anonymous]

Anyone who wonders why women don't tell about these assaults, just watch the president's speech tonight and the reactions from the audience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Brett never heard of Bart. Nope never they called him that. Swore to Congress, he did. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, as they say.

Wow, this is hysterical. Done in by his own documents.

Brett kavanaugh, aka Bart o'kavanaugh And his prolific poker is fffffinished. Not my words, but his.

Nope.
You folks have “screwed the pooch;” “overshot your wad;” “cried wolf one too many times.” Choose your idiom.

After all the false allegations of sexual assault and gang rape, then the allegations of being an alcoholic or someone with anger control issues, and the worst of all - he threw ice at someone in a bar - All the research you liberals and the media have done to find SOMETHING - ANYTHING to derail this nomination, we JUST AREN’T BUYING IT. The media are actively trying to track down something incriminating. I somehow think this was one of the reasons the Democrats were looking for a delay.
You are now trying to take a letter written by this man over 30 years ago, indicating he had a good sense of humor, was self-deprecating, and quite the planner and organizer, and making something of it because you will do “whatever it takes.”

Nope. Not buying it.

(PS Another allegation was sent to Chris Coons. Look for it. Then, look at Senator Grassley’s letter to Coons. This has become utterly ridiculous)

I agree 100%. And now we have people submitting salacious stories saying they have no idea if Kavanaugh was even present, but he *might* have been - better investigate!! This is truly a new low that even I didn't think possible.

That was the letter to Chris Coons. Turns out, the guy who wrote the letter produces movies where people take off their clothes while dancing. Seems like a charmer.