Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rachel Mitchell is being called out by other prosecutors, saying a reasonable prosecutor would have to interview the other witnesses (therapist, judge) before making a decision about prosecution. Also ridiculous to not interview the accused when he was there and available. https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/gop-prosecutor-leaps-to-conclusion-despite-incomplete-testimony-1334424643831?v=railb&

Is not there any standard legal practice oath she violated by creating this biased report with incomplete interviews? Shouldn't she be disbarred for being partisan in the guise of her profession?

She was hired by and paid by her client, the Republicans. Of course her report is in the best interests of her client.

Sadly, she was hired by the Committee which means our tax dollars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

That is the cost of losing the election. Trump made a list of potential nominees public before the election to drive conservative turn out for him. Republicans have been nominating Federalist approved judges since 1985. BKs views on sitting Presidents is not a federalist view but a Kavanaugh view from his days in the Bush administration. BK is not a get out of jail free card for DT. He is a whip up the conservative vote pick. I get that Libs don't want federalist judges because of their opinions but the protection of sitting presidents is not a federalist view. Gorsuch was a federalist society approved judge and there was not one issue with his view presidential power.

I don't think BK belongs on the court and I prefer conservative judges. But I also don't agree that he is a get out of jail free card. IF he gets on the court he will have zero impact on whether Trump is charged with a crime or not.

Except the Federalist (who pays for that anyhow???) didn't have Kavanaugh on their list. He was added right after Manafort was indicted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Gorsuch made a mild comment against Trump's attacks on Judge Curiel. He showed some integrity. Kavanaugh has declined to show any integrity through this process.

That is such utter BS.
He and his family have been put through the wringer with false allegations and attacks from the left. His name has been smeared and his reputation damaged. He is defending himself and his family from the mud being slung at him.

If he hadn't lied with a blanket denial when the Ford allegation first surfaced, he would have been sworn in already. He made a grave tactical error and he dug his hole deeper with further lies and obfuscation. It really is his own fault for his own behavior, both in 1982 and 2018.

Exactly. There were a few different ways he could have handled it. “Belligerent BS” was not the best approach.

Was that an act for DT not to withdraw his nomination?

Trump doesn’t care what BK does or says. He just wants him in that seat. For protection. As a notch in his belt. He will do it at any cost.

Hope the price is too high for some of those key senators.

Trump wants him in there because BK is a member of the ultra conservative Federalist Society. Trump is but a mere puppet for the ultra conservatives. Honestly, he doesn’t seem to think for himself at all, he just appoints people who satisfy his followers’ desires.


Betsy Devos was only appointed not because of her fitness for the job but to satisfy his evangelical fan club. Trump obviously doesn’t believe anything that the evangelicals believe but he obviously wants to remain in power (he holds election rally’s every other week, doesn’t he?).
The Devos Foundation made most of its money selling things to evangelicals through their ‘multilevel marketing’ company. They then financially support things like - evangelical churches and schools :

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_and_Helen_DeVos_Foundation

Betsy’s money was made selling snake oil to special needs families (Neurocore) which I find infuriating :

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betsy_DeVos

Everything that Trump does should be very predictable now. Apparently he has no qualms about 100% being a puppet for others.

Agree. Trump isn't fixated on Kavanaugh's beliefs about presidential power. He just picked him because others told him to. Now he's supporting him because he never backs down from a fight. Ever.

Even though he is fighting hard for a drunk, which he hates!

Stop calling him a drunk! If that were the case, it would have come out in his previous FBI investigations.

You mean the ones that never even talked to his college roommate? THOSE investigations? Apparently they don't really do in depth research about college or high school. They will now!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

That is a perfect translation for the post above.
Forget that there is no corroborating evidence on Ford’s part. Forget that her story has huge holes and that her testimony was inconsistent. Forget that Kavanaugh has an impeccable record of not only hiring women, but treating them with respect and encouraging them to take positions of authority. Forget that nothing has been produced that verify Ford’s claim.

Kavanaugh absolutely must be ruined and his name damaged because of everybody’s MeToo moments. That is the message here.

You are lying! AGAIN!

Please. top of the top education. Rock star legal career. Beautiful healthy children. People would for kill for what he has. His life is not ruined just because he got hard push back on going to the Supreme court. No one is entitled to that job and he of all people knew that the nomination process would be unforgiving. If he wanted all those skeletons to stay buried, he should have declined.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Except the Federalist (who pays for that anyhow???) didn't have Kavanaugh on their list. He was added right after Manafort was indicted.

Whoa, can someone show me that this is true? So BK is definitely there just to protect the president with his views on presidential power as well as how he's likely to rule in Gamble vs US

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/09/trump-pardon-orrin-hatch-supreme-court/571285/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except the Federalist (who pays for that anyhow???) didn't have Kavanaugh on their list. He was added right after Manafort was indicted.

Whoa, can someone show me that this is true? So BK is definitely there just to protect the president with his views on presidential power as well as how he's likely to rule in Gamble vs US

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/09/trump-pardon-orrin-hatch-supreme-court/571285/

Yes, it is true. And Trump pushed him forward even though McConnell said he would be hard. Why would he be so hard if he were so squeaky clean? Why would they deny fbi investigation that was so obviously what should happen, and did happen with other nominees when questions came up? Because 1.) they would find his stinky dirt and 2.) they wanted him on the court for that ruling

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rachel Mitchell is being called out by other prosecutors, saying a reasonable prosecutor would have to interview the other witnesses (therapist, judge) before making a decision about prosecution. Also ridiculous to not interview the accused when he was there and available. https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/gop-prosecutor-leaps-to-conclusion-despite-incomplete-testimony-1334424643831?v=railb&

Is not there any standard legal practice oath she violated by creating this biased report with incomplete interviews? Shouldn't she be disbarred for being partisan in the guise of her profession?

No, sadly this is EXACTLY the kind of report that would come out if Dr. Ford had reported the attack at the time. His mom was a prosecutor in their county at the time! I am not sure the police would have even investigated though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

That is a perfect translation for the post above.
Forget that there is no corroborating evidence on Ford’s part. Forget that her story has huge holes and that her testimony was inconsistent. Forget that Kavanaugh has an impeccable record of not only hiring women, but treating them with respect and encouraging them to take positions of authority. Forget that nothing has been produced that verify Ford’s claim.

Kavanaugh absolutely must be ruined and his name damaged because of everybody’s MeToo moments. That is the message here.

I’m not sure whomtold you life was always fair.

It wasn’t fair to Ford. She is still suffering years later. It especially is ‘t Fair to have POTUS doing his little comedy routine last night over her pain
It wasn’t fair to me as a tween when I was molested
It wasn’t fair to Merrick Garlandwjo was amazingly qualified and did not even get a hearing
It may not be fair to Bart O’Kavanaugh— in his eyes and yours.

I’m okay with that for two reasons:

First, no one is promised a life where everything is fair. The fact is, we all have to learn to deal with disappointments. I know this is new to Bart. But he will learn too.

Second, point #1 is irrelevant because not confirming him is fair. His judicial temperament is a part of the job. A very important part. His behavior at the hearing, standing alone is disqualifying, both in terms of temperament and the vest left wing conspiracy crap. After that, he will never have even the veneer of impartiality as he deals with Trump pardons, voting rights, abortion, gerrymandering, and a whole host of other issues. Polllijg shows the majority of the country does not consider him to be legitimate. Seating him would be a significant step towards destroying the credibility of SCOTUS. His 5-4 decisions will never be considered legit. Him being seated is bad for the Court and bad for the country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except the Federalist (who pays for that anyhow???) didn't have Kavanaugh on their list. He was added right after Manafort was indicted.

Whoa, can someone show me that this is true? So BK is definitely there just to protect the president with his views on presidential power as well as how he's likely to rule in Gamble vs US

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/09/trump-pardon-orrin-hatch-supreme-court/571285/

OK but if even we plebians know about this, surely Collins, Murkowski, etc. know about it. Why would even a Republican (with a conscience) vote yes on this guy if this is true? Real Republicans don't like Trump. They've just been making a deal with the Devil as best they can to advance their agenda. They got their tax cuts, they got their Muslim ban, it's not like Trump's legislative actions are automatically reversed if he is impeached or convicted of a crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except the Federalist (who pays for that anyhow???) didn't have Kavanaugh on their list. He was added right after Manafort was indicted.

Whoa, can someone show me that this is true? So BK is definitely there just to protect the president with his views on presidential power as well as how he's likely to rule in Gamble vs US

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/09/trump-pardon-orrin-hatch-supreme-court/571285/

Yes, it is true. And Trump pushed him forward even though McConnell said he would be hard. Why would he be so hard if he were so squeaky clean? Why would they deny fbi investigation that was so obviously what should happen, and did happen with other nominees when questions came up? Because 1.) they would find his stinky dirt and 2.) they wanted him on the court for that ruling

He has already established he is a politically partisan by his opening rant against the Democratic Party and the Clintons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yes. Merrick fu*king Garland would like to sympathize with him about the SCOTUS nomination process being unfair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That is the cost of losing the election. Trump made a list of potential nominees public before the election to drive conservative turn out for him. Republicans have been nominating Federalist approved judges since 1985. BKs views on sitting Presidents is not a federalist view but a Kavanaugh view from his days in the Bush administration. BK is not a get out of jail free card for DT. He is a whip up the conservative vote pick. I get that Libs don't want federalist judges because of their opinions but the protection of sitting presidents is not a federalist view. Gorsuch was a federalist society approved judge and there was not one issue with his view presidential power.

I don't think BK belongs on the court and I prefer conservative judges. But I also don't agree that he is a get out of jail free card. IF he gets on the court he will have zero impact on whether Trump is charged with a crime or not.

Except the Federalist (who pays for that anyhow???) didn't have Kavanaugh on their list. He was added right after Manafort was indicted.

Kavanaugh and Barrett were added to the list last November. I believe others were added at that time but not mentioned because they did not become a finalist. Manafort and Gates were indicted in October.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except the Federalist (who pays for that anyhow???) didn't have Kavanaugh on their list. He was added right after Manafort was indicted.

Whoa, can someone show me that this is true? So BK is definitely there just to protect the president with his views on presidential power as well as how he's likely to rule in Gamble vs US

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/09/trump-pardon-orrin-hatch-supreme-court/571285/

OK but if even we plebians know about this, surely Collins, Murkowski, etc. know about it. Why would even a Republican (with a conscience) vote yes on this guy if this is true? Real Republicans don't like Trump. They've just been making a deal with the Devil as best they can to advance their agenda. They got their tax cuts, they got their Muslim ban, it's not like Trump's legislative actions are automatically reversed if he is impeached or convicted of a crime.

They don't want to be primaried.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except the Federalist (who pays for that anyhow???) didn't have Kavanaugh on their list. He was added right after Manafort was indicted.

Whoa, can someone show me that this is true? So BK is definitely there just to protect the president with his views on presidential power as well as how he's likely to rule in Gamble vs US

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/09/trump-pardon-orrin-hatch-supreme-court/571285/

OK but if even we plebians know about this, surely Collins, Murkowski, etc. know about it. Why would even a Republican (with a conscience) vote yes on this guy if this is true? Real Republicans don't like Trump. They've just been making a deal with the Devil as best they can to advance their agenda. They got their tax cuts, they got their Muslim ban, it's not like Trump's legislative actions are automatically reversed if he is impeached or convicted of a crime.

They don't want to be primaried.

does that mean that, they are afraid that if they vote NO that their constituents will vote against them in the primaries?

We need term limits for Senators.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except the Federalist (who pays for that anyhow???) didn't have Kavanaugh on their list. He was added right after Manafort was indicted.

Whoa, can someone show me that this is true? So BK is definitely there just to protect the president with his views on presidential power as well as how he's likely to rule in Gamble vs US

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/09/trump-pardon-orrin-hatch-supreme-court/571285/

OK but if even we plebians know about this, surely Collins, Murkowski, etc. know about it. Why would even a Republican (with a conscience) vote yes on this guy if this is true? Real Republicans don't like Trump. They've just been making a deal with the Devil as best they can to advance their agenda. They got their tax cuts, they got their Muslim ban, it's not like Trump's legislative actions are automatically reversed if he is impeached or convicted of a crime.

They don't want to be primaried.

True for Murkowski and Flake (if he were running.) Collins could lose to a Democrat and Manchin could lose to a republican.