Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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?

This needs to be in the media

Prolific pukers? while that seems to be true, that letter read more like a joke someone on the onion wrote. Also, the handwriting looks somewhat feminine.

The way it touches on all the buzzwords is more than suspicious to me. Just way, way too convenient. And still, no one - even the NYT - has said where this letter was found or who gave it to them.

That’s what I said upthread. I think Brock-Brett-Bart is guilty, but this is waaaaay too many things in one letter. I’m happy to be proven wrong, that it is real, but caution.

Bart confirmed that the letter was real.

https://mobile.twitter.com/davidenrich/status/1047256935370838017

Oh my. He did. Ruh roh!

[Anonymous]

These are screen captures from Ketterer, the 350 pound ex-weatherman/self-identified “Democrat” attacking Swetnick:

https://mobile.twitter.com/kendallybrown/status/1047285477706006528

So yeah, super reliable. /s

All this proves is that Grassley is a Santorum for posting selective excerpts on the SJC website.

[Anonymous]

“And I would have gotten away with it too, if it wasn’t for those pesky reporters.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:After all that has come out in the past couple weeks, I have changed my mind about Dr. Ford and her testimony.

I have thought all along that she had a case of mistaken identify because of trauma she suffered as a youth.

I don’t believe that any longer. I now believe she is making it all up. Why did she do this? I don’t know. But, because she first revealed this in couple’s therapy, she may have been desperate for an reason to attribute her behavior to, and this was an easy explanation. And, as the lie went on, it became more complicated, but she went with the lie to save her marriage.

Just my thoughts.

So, you think that her family being under intense stress now and for the foreseeable future and having virtually everything about their lives upturned with no end in sight is her idea about how to ‘save her marriage?’ Really. You think that a PhD psychologist thought this through and that’s what she came up with. And you think that somehow her marriage is the most important thing in her life so much so that she’d tear apart the country to ‘save it’. That’s what you’re coming up with? You do you I guess but you sound incredibly immature and delusional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After all that has come out in the past couple weeks, I have changed my mind about Dr. Ford and her testimony.

I have thought all along that she had a case of mistaken identify because of trauma she suffered as a youth.

I don’t believe that any longer. I now believe she is making it all up. Why did she do this? I don’t know. But, because she first revealed this in couple’s therapy, she may have been desperate for an reason to attribute her behavior to, and this was an easy explanation. And, as the lie went on, it became more complicated, but she went with the lie to save her marriage.

Just my thoughts.

From the moment her redacted letter was published, you thought she was mistaken about Kavanaugh but was right about Mark Judge? Or did you only think this after Kavanaugh began to float the idea of mistaken identity, after Whalen came up with the elaborate doppelganger theory?

I thought it from the moment she made her allegations and Kavanaugh proclaimed his innocence. Even before Kavanaugh said anything about mistaken identity. The Whelan stuff is crap.

But, not any more. I think she is lying. And, really good at it. I think her psychology training has helped with that.

DP. I don't know if she's lying or not, but I've certainly been giving her psychology background some thought. It seems her expertise is in exactly the kinds of situations she claims to be in - sexual assault trauma. She was eager to offer her professional thoughts on why some memories are buried, etc. It's almost as if she has created the perfect, textbook case of sexual assault/suppressed memories, etc. I'd find her more credible if her background was in something completely irrelevant, like accounting or IT, etc. Just something that doesn't look like she's spouting from a psychology textbook about her own situation.

[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.

Hold the phone...what is this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kavanaugh is getting a seat on the court, and there's nothing any of you can do about it.

And that makes me warm inside.

Murkowski (native rights) and Flake (not running again and says we can’t have his biased behavior on the Court) say LOLOLOLZ. And Trump did himself no favors with Collins tonight at his rally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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?

This needs to be in the media

Prolific pukers? while that seems to be true, that letter read more like a joke someone on the onion wrote. Also, the handwriting looks somewhat feminine.

The way it touches on all the buzzwords is more than suspicious to me. Just way, way too convenient. And still, no one - even the NYT - has said where this letter was found or who gave it to them.

That’s what I said upthread. I think Brock-Brett-Bart is guilty, but this is waaaaay too many things in one letter. I’m happy to be proven wrong, that it is real, but caution.

Bart confirmed that the letter was real.

https://mobile.twitter.com/davidenrich/status/1047256935370838017

Prolific pokers

Come on...

Oh my. He did. Ruh roh!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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?

This needs to be in the media

Prolific pukers? while that seems to be true, that letter read more like a joke someone on the onion wrote. Also, the handwriting looks somewhat feminine.

The way it touches on all the buzzwords is more than suspicious to me. Just way, way too convenient. And still, no one - even the NYT - has said where this letter was found or who gave it to them.

That’s what I said upthread. I think Brock-Brett-Bart is guilty, but this is waaaaay too many things in one letter. I’m happy to be proven wrong, that it is real, but caution.

Bart confirmed that the letter was real.

https://mobile.twitter.com/davidenrich/status/1047256935370838017

Prolific pokers

Come on...

Oh my. He did. Ruh roh!

Prolific pokers

Come on...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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?

This needs to be in the media

Prolific pukers? while that seems to be true, that letter read more like a joke someone on the onion wrote. Also, the handwriting looks somewhat feminine.

The way it touches on all the buzzwords is more than suspicious to me. Just way, way too convenient. And still, no one - even the NYT - has said where this letter was found or who gave it to them.

That’s what I said upthread. I think Brock-Brett-Bart is guilty, but this is waaaaay too many things in one letter. I’m happy to be proven wrong, that it is real, but caution.

Bart confirmed that the letter was real.

https://mobile.twitter.com/davidenrich/status/1047256935370838017

Prolific pokers

Come on...

Oh my. He did. Ruh roh!

Prolific pokers

Come on...

Prolific Pukers... they all have weak stomachs... can't handle the spicy foods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holy Smoke. Just read the beach rental letter. That has to be fake. Is it fake? "Bart"? "Welcomed with open _________"? FFFF. OMG. OMG. Where did they get this letter? Is it really from 1983?

I know, I would like to see that corroborated somewhere else, too. It just hits too many of the same notes -“fffff” “Bart,” etc. If it’s real though

It is real.

Source? Who hung onto it all these years? Who supplied it to the media?

I'm guessing Mark Judge and his lawyer.

It'll be great when this is resolved. I'm weak and check this thread a ton and I'm sick of "multiple," "honey, there are many of us," who are totally gonna "walk away," and of course the classic "I'm A Woman," "different" and of course totally unique posters attacking Ford, Ramirez, Swetnick, and Feinstein.

One could certainly say the same about "all" the "I believe her!" "We always believe women!" "Republicans are repulsive!" "If you're taking his side, you're a rape apologist!" posters. You do realize that your cynical doubting that there could possibly be many people who want to give Kavanaugh the benefit of the doubt - at least until there's some actual corroborating evidence - just makes you look stupid, right?

I suggest you step out of your echo chamber one of these days and observe those who don't agree with you. Take those blinders off. You might be surprised.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well now that we know that Brett called himself "Bart" I'm going to re-post the link to this law school admissions message board where someone with the name "Bart O'Kavanaugh" was posting about giving his girlfriend a wine enema (ie: "boofing") in 2012. Its got to be either him or Mark Judge right? Does anyone know how long that poster had been around?

http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=2005720&mc=3&forum_id=2

If ever there was a post that should be deleted... you are sick.

DP. Did you click through to that link? It’s literally like Fairfax Underground for people nominally connected to law. The screenname “Bart O Kavanaugh” isn’t proof it was him writing, but it seems most likely to be him or Judge. Probably not a lot of Mark Judge superfans.

Yes, I did click the link and regretted it immediately. This is the kind of unsubstantiated crap that should not be put out there unless it's actually true. Do you people understand that?

I don't believe you have standards. You're probably a Gateway Pundi fan, so.

Never read Gateway Pundit, so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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).

Keep up DP - The ABA revoked it's support about 2 days ago. It was a full and comprehensive revocation.

Are you simply lapping up the BS you are fed from political hacks on TV - pay attention!

ABA President Carlson (Clinton donor) went rogue and did not speak for the ABA or have any effect on their rating:

https://biglawbusiness.com/kavanaugh-uproar-casts-uncomfortable-spotlight-as-aba-struggles/

The judicial review committee quickly underscored that it had not changed Kavanaugh’s “well qualified” rating, quickly posting an explanation online. To some, Carlson had overstepped.

“It was not his role or his place and is seen to undermine the standing committee,” said Ronald Cass, a legal consultant who has worked for diverse groups, including the Heritage Foundation and the ABA.

Kathleen Clark, a law professor specializing in ethics and whistleblowing, praised the ABA’s recommendation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

THE BEACH WEEK LETTER HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY NONE OTHER THAN BRETT KAVANAUGH.

"Through his lawyers, Judge Kavanaugh declined to comment for this article, other than to say of his letter: “This is a note I wrote to organize ‘Beach Week’ in the summer of 1983.” "

Excerpt from underground newspaper at Georgetown Prep, written by BK's friend MJ:

Well I’ll be....

Renate Alumnius meant one kiss! YOU'RE THE BLACKOUT DRUNK!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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?

This needs to be in the media

Prolific pukers? while that seems to be true, that letter read more like a joke someone on the onion wrote. Also, the handwriting looks somewhat feminine.

The way it touches on all the buzzwords is more than suspicious to me. Just way, way too convenient. And still, no one - even the NYT - has said where this letter was found or who gave it to them.

That’s what I said upthread. I think Brock-Brett-Bart is guilty, but this is waaaaay too many things in one letter. I’m happy to be proven wrong, that it is real, but caution.

Bart confirmed that the letter was real.

https://mobile.twitter.com/davidenrich/status/1047256935370838017

Prolific pokers

Come on...

Oh my. He did. Ruh roh!

Prolific pokers

Come on...

Prolific Pukers... they all have weak stomachs... can't handle the spicy foods.

pokers
Clearly it refers to their snazzy skills at the hokey pokey.

Just my thoughts.