Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A man’s life is shattered.

-Donald J. Trump 10/2/2018

He should have thought about his past before he put himself forward as a SCJ. Even *I* would not put myself forward for a public office because I partied when I was younger. And I never assaulted anyone. But if they started looking at my high school days, I hung around with some low lifes (think Judge) and was at some crazy parties. I wouldn't want to have to claim "I didn't inhale".

I think the lesson is, just be honest about your youthful indiscretions. It's not the sex, it's the cover up. it's not the underage drinking, it's the prevarication and obfuscation he engaged in. It's not the vomiting, it's that he lied when he said that "ralphing" was because he ate too much Thai food.

You can't lie to the Senate Judiciary Committee. And he did. Some of the lies were lies of omission, of refusal to answer, of minimizing "WE drank... only BEER... only on WEEKENDS" but you can't try to bamboozle under oath and expect to be a SCJ. The guy is a lawyer and a judge. Do you think he'd accept that behavior from a witness in his own courtroom?

He'd have held such a witness in contempt of court. But can he do so in the future? Can a judge be hypocritical from the bench? I guess so. But when a judge believes he is above the law, we have a crisis in the courtroom.

But why did he act that way? He was probably going to skate through in spite of the allegations until that moment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A man’s life is shattered.

-Donald J. Trump 10/2/2018

He should have thought about his past before he put himself forward as a SCJ. Even *I* would not put myself forward for a public office because I partied when I was younger. And I never assaulted anyone. But if they started looking at my high school days, I hung around with some low lifes (think Judge) and was at some crazy parties. I wouldn't want to have to claim "I didn't inhale".

I think the lesson is, just be honest about your youthful indiscretions. It's not the sex, it's the cover up. it's not the underage drinking, it's the prevarication and obfuscation he engaged in. It's not the vomiting, it's that he lied when he said that "ralphing" was because he ate too much Thai food.

You can't lie to the Senate Judiciary Committee. And he did. Some of the lies were lies of omission, of refusal to answer, of minimizing "WE drank... only BEER... only on WEEKENDS" but you can't try to bamboozle under oath and expect to be a SCJ. The guy is a lawyer and a judge. Do you think he'd accept that behavior from a witness in his own courtroom?

This makes sense but there are many people in this thread who are ready to believe he didn't even lie at all. Maybe his plan was to just lie lie lie lie so Trump and co can just claim this perfectly innocent man was destroyed. A little harder maybe when he admits he was a drunken jerk. Instead he can lie about everything and all the news articles pointing out his lies can be written off as just part of the liberal media or some Democratic hitjob.

His audience for his lies was not smart people -- the audience was stupid people who don't know any better and dishonest politicians who want to take advantage of that fact to get their guy on the scotus

[Anonymous]

I think he is imminently qualified. And, this was not a job interview. It was a sham of a Constitutional process.
I cannot imagine going to a job interview with the knowledge that people sitting in front of me had called me “evil” and a “danger to the Constitution.” And, that they had stated prior to my interview that they “believe her.” Despite lack of evidence.
No, this was far from a job interview.

I think he is imminently qualified

He's imminently qualified? The problem is we can't wait.

#Republicans #TheyKillMe

[Anonymous]

He lied about knowing Deborah Ramirez:



listed above is the description of the people in the photo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He lied about knowing Deborah Ramirez:



listed above is the description of the people in the photo.

Go back and read his testimony. He didn’t lie.
#LeftyLies #Desperation

[Anonymous]

There are dozens and dozens of witnesses to his debauchery. DC is full of secrets on this man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prosecutor Rachel Mitchell has stated that she doesn't have enough evidence to bring a "criminal case" of rape against Kavanaugh. Criminal cases have to be proved beyond a REASONABLE DOUBT. A confirmation of a SJC is not a court. It is a job interview for arguably one of the most important and powerful jobs in America.

Kavanaugh fails MISERABLY on the most important aspect of being a judge: fairness and impartiality (FAIL) even temperedness (FAIL) and wisdom.

That’s your opinion.
I think he is imminently qualified. And, this was not a job interview. It was a sham of a Constitutional process.
I cannot imagine going to a job interview with the knowledge that people sitting in front of me had called me “evil” and a “danger to the Constitution.” And, that they had stated prior to my interview that they “believe her.” Despite lack of evidence.
No, this was far from a job interview.

Yes, a total sham. And a shame.
Shame on the Republicans for picking a partisan hack as a candidate.
Shame on them for keeping Kavanaugh’s documentation from the committee that they KNEW would reveal some troubling aspects of his partisanship and willingness to do the president’s bidding.
Shame on the GOP for this farce of a hearing where they didn’t even have the balls (and they were all men) to question Ford directly.
Shame on Kavanaugh for his disgraceful conduct and vitriol and dishonesty - conspiracy theories and threats to Democrats and distortions of his past (Devils Triangle is not a drinking game, Brett. You know this) - that showed his bias and lack of judicial temperament.
Shame on the GOP for this farce of an FBI investigation. They don’t want to dig too deeply because they know they will find imcriminating evidence.
And shame on the GOP for putting party over country yet again.

It’s a sham. And a damn shame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He lied about knowing Deborah Ramirez:



listed above is the description of the people in the photo.

Go back and read his testimony. He didn’t lie.
#LeftyLies #Desperation

Yes, he did. The desperation is all yours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Having conveniently developed amnesia that not too long ago, they supported a candidate who didn't pay his taxes, had multiple allegations of sexual assault against him and who insulted heads of state around the world in a way that embarassed our great nation.

I’m a republican, and DJT embarrasses me. I’m glad that a career politician is not in office, but I’m sad it’s he. And that is one of the differences between DJT and many other accused, both R and D, is that he was not an elected official at the time, but exactly as he lived his life as a wealthy playboy. I have not seen any sexual allegations or affairs which he has currently engaged since he has become president.

As it stands, one of the reasons I voted for him is exactly this issue: SCOTUS appointments. He has done an excellent job. Judge Kavanaugh has a 12 year record of being an outstanding judge and an exceptional, world class legal scholar - all his opinions are available for public inspection.

The last minute allegations come across exactly as Kavanaugh characterized them: a political hit job. On that principle alone he should be confirmed, and the confirmation process re-examined. Otherwise, get ready when any nominee of the majority is nominated to see more slimy tactics. I’m assuming that the D’s will be majority this next election cycle.

The R’s now look classy as to how they handled Merrick Garland. Even though it was manipulative to instigate procedural delays, they not destroy his character. This is beyond the pale.

So it doesn’t matter if the allegations are true. It doesn’t matter if he perjured and greatly misrepresented himself. It doesn’t matter that his judicial behavior has been questionable (and called out by multiple groups).

The ONLY thing that matters to you is getting back at the Ds for the TIMING of the allegations (not the content).

Got it. Spiteful to the end.

You are twisting my words.

First, I don’t believe the allegations, and I don’t believe in coincidences. I would have to believe accidentally the letter was leaked almost 6 weeks after Democrats had it and after having already extensively interviewed Kavanaugh, privately interviewed Kavanaugh, where Dr. Ford’s wishes for anonymity might have been honored. Do you believe in that coincidence?

Secondly, I never said I wanted to ‘get back at D’s.’ You said that. I said this process should be re-examined and defined, no matter who is in power, R or D. Do you think it should stand as it is? I am suggesting if it is not reformed, it could be another circus, when D’s may have a nominee. I am explaining that the process is flawed. What is wrong with you?

Your words are your words:
“On that principle alone he should be confirmed”

Did you mean what you wrote or not?

Based the principle he is well qualified reviewing his 12 year record as an appellate judge, his solid reputation as being fair, and his reputation as a top legal scholar. Based on that I don’t believe the allegations, and they remain allegations whether YOU believe them or not.

So you believe that accidentally, after hundreds of hours of interviews, where Dr. Ford might have been allowed to remain a private person, her wishes for confidentiality honored, where the allegations might have been shared with Republicans on the SJC in strict confidence 6 weeks ago, accidentally, coincidentally this was leaked and revealed?

You said that just based on the fact that there are last minute allegations he should be confirmed. Did you mean that or not?

You should also read up on his performance as a judge before you keep tooting his horn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are dozens and dozens of witnesses to his debauchery. DC is full of secrets on this man.

Her too

[Anonymous]

I think the fact that Trump taunted Ford at a rally last night should be an automatic disqualifier for his SCOTUS nominee. At the very least Kavanaugh should show that he has some integrity and withdraw his nomination, saying that it has come too far and the president has sunk too low.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not a big fan of decades-old allegations.

But Kavanaugh's belligerent tone and blaming the Clintons disqualify him as a competent justice. A total disgrace. Case closed.

Agree. We as a country can do better for a Supreme Court seat. Heck, even the partisan Republicans can do better.

Seriously. You have to have a deeper bench than this. Go pick another one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the fact that Trump taunted Ford at a rally last night should be an automatic disqualifier for his SCOTUS nominee. At the very least Kavanaugh should show that he has some integrity and withdraw his nomination, saying that it has come too far and the president has sunk too low.

But he doesn’t have integrity. You leave that at the door when you give your soul to the devil/gop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the fact that Trump taunted Ford at a rally last night should be an automatic disqualifier for his SCOTUS nominee. At the very least Kavanaugh should show that he has some integrity and withdraw his nomination, saying that it has come too far and the president has sunk too low.

I hate that Trump has no filter, and I hate that he stepped into this trap. So Kavanaugh should take the fall for Trump being an A$$, as well as take all the penalties for all women who were assaulted but never given justice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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....

All of these letters from high school are amusing, but they have little to do with someone being appointed to a position such as a scj.
Sure, if someone lies you won’t even pass a security clearance and that disqualifies you.
But being an irresponsible imbecile - within the bounds of our laws - doesn’t disqualify you and it’s not terribly shocking.
These letters are just dumb kid stuff.

I’m gonna go burn my teen letters that were filled with incredible stupidity, irresponsibility and really bad mean jokes.
Burn baby burn!!

+1
I remember looking through all my high school stuff years ago and being incredulous at the kinds of things we talked about, wrote notes about, drew pictures of (!). I threw all of that stuff away. I find it hard to take people seriously who place so much credence in someone's high school antics (beyond rape or murder, of course - neither of which we're talking about).

We wrote risqué notes back and forth to each other - all of it made up - just for the riskiness of possibly getting caught. And we were just frustrated jerks - still stuck at home and school with parents and teachers telling us what to do nonstop. None of it meant much except we were ready to put on our own.

LOL. That is the most pitiful and contrived excuse of Kavanaugh yet! And you're still a frustrated jerk. Get a new hobby.

We are girls!
Apparently you were never a teenager. You can’t remember? Nothing? Too many drinks in your lifetime? Bonks on the head?

“As A Woman, I support sexual assault and lying under oath! I was a girl! Take that!”