Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's his letter to the JC:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/24/politics/read-brett-kavanaugh-letter-senate-judiciary-committee/index.html?utm_term=image&utm_source=twCNNp&utm_content=2018-09-24T18%3A47%3A08&utm_medium=social

His defense is that no one but Ford remembers the party from 36 years ago.

I don't remember parties from 36 years ago where nothing happened to me, so I hardly think that's a strong defense.

He also says that the alleged witnesses to the Ramirez incident deny it happened, yet he doesn't mention that others were told about it at the time. Ya, that's heresay, but it's still significant:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/24/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-what-we-know/1408056002/

One student, who chose to remain anonymous, told The New Yorker that he recalled being told about the alleged incident that night or the next day. He said he was "100 percent sure" that the person who told him about it identified Kavanaugh as the student who exposed himself.

Another classmate at Yale, now-emergency room doctor Richard Oh, remembered a tearful female student describing the incident but he could not recall who the student was.


/quote]

He's going to win!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interesting article because it is much like what is happening with Kavanaugh.

A blogger was sued by an Army soldier whom she accused of rape 3 decades earlier. He won and was awarded $8.4 million.

This was a soldier from Alexandria, VA. I can’t help but think that many of the same people here who have already said “I believe her” would have, or perhaps DID, say the same thing about this woman.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4793030/Woman-pay-Army-colonel-accused-rape-8-4million.html?ito=amp_twitter_share-top


The WaPo story on this indicates that the woman claimed to not know that he was being considered for promotion to General, but a witness contradicted that testimony.



Somebody said last week that Kavanaugh should sue. I said that he is not the type to sue. He is a forgiving person.
But, today I hope he does.

Sure, sure, sue away! I hope he does too. He'll be caught in his own net.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who here saves their calendars?

I do. And I look at them.

- Someone older than Kavanaugh

So does my spouse - also older than Kavanaugh.
I suspect one day, some of the people on this site will regret not maintaining calendars and records.

Heh?

No one’s saying they don’t keep records, we’re saying it’s weird AF to think that a 17 year old binge drinker was carefully tracking his days and writing all of his skeevy social engagements down. It’s not outside the realm of possibility, but it kinda seems.... like a coordinated effort.

Yup. They've done the math and realized they probably can't get a new nominee confirmed before midterms and are digging their heels in. They may get Kavanaugh confirmed, but it will cost them in midterms.

Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh denied new sexual misconduct allegations and said he would “not be intimidated into withdrawing” as the Supreme Court nominee.
Senior Republicans are closing ranks around the nominee, and they echoed Judge Kavanaugh’s claims, accusing Democrats of running “a smear campaign” to derail his confirmation.

Dem here and really? They don't have to do it by election day, just by Jan 20. How is that not enough time? Surely they have a short list.

You sure about that? New Congress takes office Jan. 3.

DP. It's only September now. If they put forward a new name in early October (presuming there's no shutdown or only a short one), then there's still time to confirm the next guy.

It won't look great to do that, but it can't look worse than what they're doing right now.

Just no. Why should they put forward a new nominee just because the Democrats have their panties in a bunch over this one and are trotting out extremely questionable allegations only to derail this nominee?

Look, no one has investigated these claims. A thorough investigation by an impartial law enforcement body (the FBI, for instance) would set aside all speculation. If these women are found after this investigation to be making these claims up, then prosecute and, if found guilty, jail them.

But if the claims are verified, well, then Kavanaugh must withdraw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who here saves their calendars?

I do. And I look at them.

- Someone older than Kavanaugh

So does my spouse - also older than Kavanaugh.
I suspect one day, some of the people on this site will regret not maintaining calendars and records.

Heh?

No one’s saying they don’t keep records, we’re saying it’s weird AF to think that a 17 year old binge drinker was carefully tracking his days and writing all of his skeevy social engagements down. It’s not outside the realm of possibility, but it kinda seems.... like a coordinated effort.

Yup. They've done the math and realized they probably can't get a new nominee confirmed before midterms and are digging their heels in. They may get Kavanaugh confirmed, but it will cost them in midterms.

Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh denied new sexual misconduct allegations and said he would “not be intimidated into withdrawing” as the Supreme Court nominee.
Senior Republicans are closing ranks around the nominee, and they echoed Judge Kavanaugh’s claims, accusing Democrats of running “a smear campaign” to derail his confirmation.

Dem here and really? They don't have to do it by election day, just by Jan 20. How is that not enough time? Surely they have a short list.

You sure about that? New Congress takes office Jan. 3.

DP. It's only September now. If they put forward a new name in early October (presuming there's no shutdown or only a short one), then there's still time to confirm the next guy.

It won't look great to do that, but it can't look worse than what they're doing right now.

Just no. Why should they put forward a new nominee just because the Democrats have their panties in a bunch over this one and are trotting out extremely questionable allegations only to derail this nominee?

Look, no one has investigated these claims. A thorough investigation by an impartial law enforcement body (the FBI, for instance) would set aside all speculation. If these women are found after this investigation to be making these claims up, then prosecute and, if found guilty, jail them.

But if the claims are verified, well, then Kavanaugh must withdraw.

And yet neither Grassley, Trump, nor Kavanaugh are asking the FBI to investigate and clear his name.

I wonder why?

I still have not heard a plausible excuse from conservatives on this point. This is no longer a local county matter; it's for the Supreme Court of the United States.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who here saves their calendars?

I do. And I look at them.

- Someone older than Kavanaugh

So does my spouse - also older than Kavanaugh.
I suspect one day, some of the people on this site will regret not maintaining calendars and records.

Heh?

No one’s saying they don’t keep records, we’re saying it’s weird AF to think that a 17 year old binge drinker was carefully tracking his days and writing all of his skeevy social engagements down. It’s not outside the realm of possibility, but it kinda seems.... like a coordinated effort.

Yup. They've done the math and realized they probably can't get a new nominee confirmed before midterms and are digging their heels in. They may get Kavanaugh confirmed, but it will cost them in midterms.

Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh denied new sexual misconduct allegations and said he would “not be intimidated into withdrawing” as the Supreme Court nominee.
Senior Republicans are closing ranks around the nominee, and they echoed Judge Kavanaugh’s claims, accusing Democrats of running “a smear campaign” to derail his confirmation.

Dem here and really? They don't have to do it by election day, just by Jan 20. How is that not enough time? Surely they have a short list.

You sure about that? New Congress takes office Jan. 3.

DP. It's only September now. If they put forward a new name in early October (presuming there's no shutdown or only a short one), then there's still time to confirm the next guy.

It won't look great to do that, but it can't look worse than what they're doing right now.

Just no. Why should they put forward a new nominee just because the Democrats have their panties in a bunch over this one and are trotting out extremely questionable allegations only to derail this nominee?

Look, no one has investigated these claims. A thorough investigation by an impartial law enforcement body (the FBI, for instance) would set aside all speculation. If these women are found after this investigation to be making these claims up, then prosecute and, if found guilty, jail them.

But if the claims are verified, well, then Kavanaugh must withdraw.

+1

Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot trying to play judge and jury on the Kavanaugh accusations. Let law enforcement investigate.

[Anonymous]

The reason why she will not file a formal complaint with the Montgomery County Police Dept is that she would get taken apart in a real investigation of the crime. She wants the FBI to investigate Kavanaugh, not the actual crime. Her reputation in HS and college was not so great. She does not want to have to answer to that during a formal criminal investigation.

[Anonymous]

Watching McConnell complain about the "smear campaign" is rich.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reason why she will not file a formal complaint with the Montgomery County Police Dept is that she would get taken apart in a real investigation of the crime. She wants the FBI to investigate Kavanaugh, not the actual crime. Her reputation in HS and college was not so great. She does not want to have to answer to that during a formal criminal investigation.

Are you a schoolmate? Or is this just a 'blame the victim' statement?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reason why she will not file a formal complaint with the Montgomery County Police Dept is that she would get taken apart in a real investigation of the crime. She wants the FBI to investigate Kavanaugh, not the actual crime. Her reputation in HS and college was not so great. She does not want to have to answer to that during a formal criminal investigation.

This speaks to her sensibility and to our awful system. I know you think this is a great gotcha but if you read your post dispassionately, it's just sad.

What a world we live in. If a girl parties hard, then she cannot ever complain about treatment she receives? Really?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Just no. Why should they put forward a new nominee just because the Democrats have their panties in a bunch over this one and are trotting out extremely questionable allegations only to derail this nominee?

You guys are such a dishonest people.

You were content to ignore the debts and perjury., and then word surfaced of a woman accusing Brett of sexual assault. You said it didn’t matter because she was anonymous. Then she came forward and you said it didn’t matter because she wouldn’t speak under oath. Then she said she would speak under oath and could the FBI please investigate and you said it wasn’t in their scope and her accusations didn’t matter because there was only one and it wasn’t rape. So more women come forward, one possibly a victim of a gang rape involving Brett and you guys still don’t care. There’s no sexual assault you believe because you don’t think women are human.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reason why she will not file a formal complaint with the Montgomery County Police Dept is that she would get taken apart in a real investigation of the crime. She wants the FBI to investigate Kavanaugh, not the actual crime. Her reputation in HS and college was not so great. She does not want to have to answer to that during a formal criminal investigation.

Uh, the FBI will make her testify to them. Providing false info to the FBI is punishable by 5 years in prison.

The point you're trying to make has zero basis in logic or facts.

[Anonymous]

Where are all of the DC-natives that speak out on so many threads about DCurbanmom topics? Where are the people that know what Kavanaugh did (or did not) do? Surely there are people out there that are on this website. I think the main issue here is the lying - if this happened, and Kavanaugh is lying, that is a much different issue than if it happened and he issued an acknowledgement and apology. DC-natives - where are you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where are all of the DC-natives that speak out on so many threads about DCurbanmom topics? Where are the people that know what Kavanaugh did (or did not) do? Surely there are people out there that are on this website. I think the main issue here is the lying - if this happened, and Kavanaugh is lying, that is a much different issue than if it happened and he issued an acknowledgement and apology. DC-natives - where are you?

Read the very long Kavanaugh thread. Look at some of the other threads. There are DC contemporaries who have posted. I haven't seen anyone who says that they used to be best buds with Judge and can say that anything did or did not happen, but there have been posts about the prep school culture in the early 80s.

[Anonymous]

Copy of Professor Ford's letter to Sen. Grassley:
https://twitter.com/ElizLanders/status/1044302759959449600

"While I am frightened, please know, my fear will not hold me back from testifying."

The subtext of this letter is her pleading with Grassley to behave decently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reason why she will not file a formal complaint with the Montgomery County Police Dept is that she would get taken apart in a real investigation of the crime. She wants the FBI to investigate Kavanaugh, not the actual crime. Her reputation in HS and college was not so great. She does not want to have to answer to that during a formal criminal investigation.

Kavanaugh's mother was the presiding judge in Montgomery County for juvinile affairs at the time. So she literally would have filed a complaint to her. That's a plausible scenario.