Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also a very slimy, nasty guy went by "Bart O'Kavanaugh' on a prelaw chat board that is nasty.
No way for us to know if it was Brett Kavanaugh or not.

That was so disgusting.

They can find out if he wrote it if they want to.

It had to be him. Why would someone else in his circle use his name?

I don't think anyone in his circle from gp became a lawyer.

[Anonymous]

Someone posted the pages from it way back. I don't have the original images. I think it was on thread 2.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let me be clear: I don't really care how much Kavanaugh drank in the early 80s. I don't care whether or not he puked it up, threw ice, or said crass things about girls then either.

The ONLY reason it was even brought up in the hearing, was to try and imply that Kavanaugh could have gotten blackout drunk and assault Ford. It was ruse to sow doubt, and to try and get him to admit he was a choir boy, which he didn't do.

Ford, on the other hand, got to tell her story in a formal hearing in front of the whole world, was questioned by an expert in the field, and determined to not have enough detail or information to be deemed credible in her accusations against Kavanaugh.

Meanwhile, highly laughable individuals have come forward to take their turn at bat, one admitting she was wholly drunk and could not be sure herself, and the other with a sketchy history of lies, who backtracked on her own story.

And the latest is more of the same. And is making Democrats seem completely unhinged.

Let me repeat: I don't give one rat's a$$ about his high school years. Not one iota.

I don’t care one iota about your rape apologist ranting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you people have to say about the president mocking Dr.Ford today?

I have a problem with the President of the United States attacking any private citizen. It harms the office. I don’t care which party you are from, the POTUS should not be personally attacking people. The POTUS is supposed to be the President of the country, not just the head of his party.

Ronal Regan was big on the decorum that should be afforded the office. I remember thinking he was just being imperial, but over time I realized he was right. Americans need to be able to respect the office even if they don’t after with or even like the person who is the POTUS.

+ 1 million

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let me be clear: I don't really care how much Kavanaugh drank in the early 80s. I don't care whether or not he puked it up, threw ice, or said crass things about girls then either.

The ONLY reason it was even brought up in the hearing, was to try and imply that Kavanaugh could have gotten blackout drunk and assault Ford. It was ruse to sow doubt, and to try and get him to admit he was a choir boy, which he didn't do.

Ford, on the other hand, got to tell her story in a formal hearing in front of the whole world, was questioned by an expert in the field, and determined to not have enough detail or information to be deemed credible in her accusations against Kavanaugh.

Meanwhile, highly laughable individuals have come forward to take their turn at bat, one admitting she was wholly drunk and could not be sure herself, and the other with a sketchy history of lies, who backtracked on her own story.

And the latest is more of the same. And is making Democrats seem completely unhinged.

Let me repeat: I don't give one rat's a$$ about his high school years. Not one iota.

You must be crestfallen that Kavanaugh chose to lie about something so insignificant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me be clear: I don't really care how much Kavanaugh drank in the early 80s. I don't care whether or not he puked it up, threw ice, or said crass things about girls then either.

The ONLY reason it was even brought up in the hearing, was to try and imply that Kavanaugh could have gotten blackout drunk and assault Ford. It was ruse to sow doubt, and to try and get him to admit he was a choir boy, which he didn't do.

Ford, on the other hand, got to tell her story in a formal hearing in front of the whole world, was questioned by an expert in the field, and determined to not have enough detail or information to be deemed credible in her accusations against Kavanaugh.

Meanwhile, highly laughable individuals have come forward to take their turn at bat, one admitting she was wholly drunk and could not be sure herself, and the other with a sketchy history of lies, who backtracked on her own story.

And the latest is more of the same. And is making Democrats seem completely unhinged.

Let me repeat: I don't give one rat's a$$ about his high school years. Not one iota.

You must be crestfallen that Kavanaugh chose to lie about something so insignificant.

She doesn't care because she is hoping to get a AG appointment out of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let me be clear: I don't really care how much Kavanaugh drank in the early 80s. I don't care whether or not he puked it up, threw ice, or said crass things about girls then either.

The ONLY reason it was even brought up in the hearing, was to try and imply that Kavanaugh could have gotten blackout drunk and assault Ford. It was ruse to sow doubt, and to try and get him to admit he was a choir boy, which he didn't do.

Ford, on the other hand, got to tell her story in a formal hearing in front of the whole world, was questioned by an expert in the field, and determined to not have enough detail or information to be deemed credible in her accusations against Kavanaugh.

Meanwhile, highly laughable individuals have come forward to take their turn at bat, one admitting she was wholly drunk and could not be sure herself, and the other with a sketchy history of lies, who backtracked on her own story.

And the latest is more of the same. And is making Democrats seem completely unhinged.

Let me repeat: I don't give one rat's a$$ about his high school years. Not one iota.

Democrats unhinged? Are you sleeping with Lindsey Graham (I certainly hope not whether you are a man or a woman).

You sound as angry as Brett/Bart. An innocent person would not behave like Brett/Bart.

You are a jacka$$, PP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also a very slimy, nasty guy went by "Bart O'Kavanaugh' on a prelaw chat board that is nasty.
No way for us to know if it was Brett Kavanaugh or not.

That was so disgusting.

They can find out if he wrote it if they want to.

It had to be him. Why would someone else in his circle use his name?

I don't think anyone in his circle from gp became a lawyer.

+1 on it had to be him. Considering he put so much focus on Bill Clinton's ejaculate, he seems obsessed with bodily fluids. I would not be surprised one iota if it was him. Not one iota.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also a very slimy, nasty guy went by "Bart O'Kavanaugh' on a prelaw chat board that is nasty.
No way for us to know if it was Brett Kavanaugh or not.

That was so disgusting.

They can find out if he wrote it if they want to.

It had to be him. Why would someone else in his circle use his name?

I don't think anyone in his circle from gp became a lawyer.

+1 on it had to be him. Considering he put so much focus on Bill Clinton's ejaculate, he seems obsessed with bodily fluids. I would not be surprised one iota if it was him. Not one iota.

where are you seeing this???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also a very slimy, nasty guy went by "Bart O'Kavanaugh' on a prelaw chat board that is nasty.
No way for us to know if it was Brett Kavanaugh or not.

That was so disgusting.

They can find out if he wrote it if they want to.

It had to be him. Why would someone else in his circle use his name?

I don't think anyone in his circle from gp became a lawyer.

+1 on it had to be him. Considering he put so much focus on Bill Clinton's ejaculate, he seems obsessed with bodily fluids. I would not be surprised one iota if it was him. Not one iota.

where are you seeing this???

oh wait you are talking about clinton's impeachment, sorry!

[Anonymous]

I can't believe these words are coming out of our President's mouth.

President Trump at a rally on Tuesday night mocked testimony from Christine Blasey Ford, one of the women accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct.

"36 years ago, this happened," Trump said at the rally in Mississippi, referring to the party in 1982 where Ford alleges Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her.

Trump then launched into a mocking imitation of Ford as she testified at last week's hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, prompting applause and laughter from the audience.

"How did you get home?" Trump said. "I don't remember. How'd you get there? I don't remember. Where is the place? I don't remember. How many years ago was it? I don't know."

"What neighbourhood was it in?" he continued, as the crowd cheered and clapped. "I don't know. Where's the house?' I don't know. Upstairs, downstairs, where was it?' I don't know, but I had one beer. That's the only thing I remember."

[Anonymous]

Now Kavanaugh's clerks are affirming that this investigation is a good thing.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/409598-three-former-kavanaugh-clerks-tell-senate-they-are-deeply-troubled-by

Three former law clerks for Brett Kavanaugh who wrote the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this year expressing support for his nomination have written to clarify they are "deeply troubled" by the allegations of sexual assault against him.

In a letter to the Judiciary panel reported by HuffPost on Tuesday, former clerks Will Dreher, Bridget Fahey and Rakim Brooks said that an expanded FBI investigation into allegations from Christine Blasey Ford and two other women is merited.


"We write to clarify that, like many Americans, we have been deeply troubled by those allegations and the events surrounding them and were encouraged by the initiation of a formal FBI investigation," the three wrote in their letter.

"We hope, for the good of everyone involved, that the investigation will be independent and thorough," they continued.

[Anonymous]

Here it is.
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/3450/755157.page

The link to the forum and the screen shot of the forum are on that page.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let me be clear: I don't really care how much Kavanaugh drank in the early 80s. I don't care whether or not he puked it up, threw ice, or said crass things about girls then either.

The ONLY reason it was even brought up in the hearing, was to try and imply that Kavanaugh could have gotten blackout drunk and assault Ford. It was ruse to sow doubt, and to try and get him to admit he was a choir boy, which he didn't do.

Ford, on the other hand, got to tell her story in a formal hearing in front of the whole world, was questioned by an expert in the field, and determined to not have enough detail or information to be deemed credible in her accusations against Kavanaugh.

Meanwhile, highly laughable individuals have come forward to take their turn at bat, one admitting she was wholly drunk and could not be sure herself, and the other with a sketchy history of lies, who backtracked on her own story.

And the latest is more of the same. And is making Democrats seem completely unhinged.

Let me repeat: I don't give one rat's a$$ about his high school years. Not one iota.

The prosecutor was there to do a job for her clients, the Republican members of the committee. She did it so badly, Ford was deemed credible at the time and they fired her before she could discredit Kavanaugh. So she tried to salvage her usefulness with a butt-covering memo.

I don't care about what he did in high school either. I care that he repeatedly lied to Congress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you people have to say about the president mocking Dr.Ford today?

He’s an ignorant ass with the mind of a 3 year old? Nothing’s changed - why comment?

I absolutely think that Trump's behavior mocking Ford is serious shit. Here, today we have a President who authorized the FBI investigation or should we say continued background check on ole Bart. He definied the scope of the investigation, as per the acane rules of the SC nomination process (precedent set by the Thomas debacle). As the sitting President, he is mocking the party who made one of the primary accusations against his and his party's nominee. The President is essentially saying Ford is not credible. Trump has undermined the rule of law and the nominaton process.

How can any citizen of this country believe there is a fair justice system?