Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 5

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was hoping avenatti had the goods but he didn't...

He didn't help

Only because the GOP didn't and doesn't care to get to the bottom of what Avenatti's client had to say.

+1

This is true, but her four witnesses she provided turned up nothing and she backtracked her claim on TV

I say this as someone who was rooting for avenatti to take kavanaugh down. He promised to humiliate Republicans on the SJC but wasn't able to deliver the evidence

Exactly like the other accusers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always knew he would be confirmed and I never said otherwise even though it makes me sick.

He's going to be impeached though. Some how, some way. The guy is shady AF and you all know it.

You believe 67 Senators are going to vote to impeach him? Wishful thinking on your part.
Z
It sure better be a giant, provable, offense to get that kind of vote. Remember that perjury didn't get a sitting president impeached.

Clinton lied about consensual sex—a BJ. He was impeached by the House. The Senate did not have the 2/3 necessary to remove him from office. But he was successfully impeached.

When you get your facts straight come back because you obviously have no clue about Clinton's impeachment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We should be thankful that must of us aren't alcoholics and didn't do permanent damage to our vital organs.

How do you all know that he’s an alcoholic? Do you know him? Your basing it on his complexion and the fact that he got drunk in high school and college 35 years ago? That is about as much supporting evidence as Swetnick had for her claim. Unless you know the man personally, you really don’t know anything. Just more wishful thinking.

DP here. This is the age of Trump. Just consider it truthful hyperbole and it will all make sense to you.

Another liberal making conclusions based on no evidence. Nice deflection.

He said he still likes beer. No one can drink that much and just stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

she explained that the parties she went to had a mix of college and high school students. Still weird, but it helps explain things some. Like maybe the host had a sibling in college and some of his friends were invited and it spread to a mix.

Sure a one time event could be explained by the host having an older sibling who invited their friends over that night. But according to Swetnick this was an ongoing thing where Kavanaugh and judge were spiking the punch bowl. She was at 10 different parties where this was happening. According to her everyone in Montgomery County remembers this.

By the way how many high school parties has anybody here attended where there was a communal punch bowl? I can't think of 1 off the top of my head and I was at plenty of Prep, St. Johns, Gonzaga, Stone Ridge, Holy Cross, Holy Child, Visi etc parties back in the mid-late 90's. People would show up with beer. No communal punch bowl. No girls from Gaithersburg High that were 3 years old older than us. Certainly not on 10 different occasions.

Swetnick and Avanatti did nothing to help the Democrats cause on this one.

Attended many Gonzaga and Vistation parties in early 80s, never punch bowls, always kegs. Now days, you do not often see kegs but back in the early 80s in Montgomery County parties it was the norm. No way a Gaithersburg High 3 year older MC woman hangs out at multiple Prep HS parties. No way. She did a huge disservice to actual victims by concocting this story.....

I attended one of the private schools in the area and went to a lot of house parties in ‘84-‘85. No punch bowls just beer and wine coolers, no college kids, no rape parties, etc. Her account is like feminist porn much like the UVA story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We should be thankful that must of us aren't alcoholics and didn't do permanent damage to our vital organs.

How do you all know that he’s an alcoholic? Do you know him? Your basing it on his complexion and the fact that he got drunk in high school and college 35 years ago? That is about as much supporting evidence as Swetnick had for her claim. Unless you know the man personally, you really don’t know anything. Just more wishful thinking.

DP here. This is the age of Trump. Just consider it truthful hyperbole and it will all make sense to you.

Another liberal making conclusions based on no evidence. Nice deflection.

He said he still likes beer. No one can drink that much and just stop.

You're FOS if you believe that every bigtime college drinker went on to become alcoholics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

she explained that the parties she went to had a mix of college and high school students. Still weird, but it helps explain things some. Like maybe the host had a sibling in college and some of his friends were invited and it spread to a mix.

Sure a one time event could be explained by the host having an older sibling who invited their friends over that night. But according to Swetnick this was an ongoing thing where Kavanaugh and judge were spiking the punch bowl. She was at 10 different parties where this was happening. According to her everyone in Montgomery County remembers this.

By the way how many high school parties has anybody here attended where there was a communal punch bowl? I can't think of 1 off the top of my head and I was at plenty of Prep, St. Johns, Gonzaga, Stone Ridge, Holy Cross, Holy Child, Visi etc parties back in the mid-late 90's. People would show up with beer. No communal punch bowl. No girls from Gaithersburg High that were 3 years old older than us. Certainly not on 10 different occasions.

Swetnick and Avanatti did nothing to help the Democrats cause on this one.

Ok, I understand. But I think the punch bowl is more of an 80's thing.

I agree they did a lot of damage. So many others did as well, though.

No. What makes you think that? You think a bunch of highschool kids are going to mix a punch bowl at their parents house? I think she was thinking of movie Animal House. I think I saw a punch bowl one time in college and everyone knew it was full of liquor.

[Anonymous]

Anybody who believes that Swetnick’s allegations were even remotely credible is crazy and tells me that all you are is desperate to find ANYTHING on Kavanaugh.
The story she gave on her sworn statement changed quite considerably during her interview.
None of her “witnesses” could corroborate her claims and you know damn well NBC tried to find any corroboration.

I hope that the SJC seeks an investigation for false testimony and includes Avenatti in their complaint.

It is ludicrous to think her claims are true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anybody who believes that Swetnick’s allegations were even remotely credible is crazy and tells me that all you are is desperate to find ANYTHING on Kavanaugh.
The story she gave on her sworn statement changed quite considerably during her interview.
None of her “witnesses” could corroborate her claims and you know damn well NBC tried to find any corroboration.

I hope that the SJC seeks an investigation for false testimony and includes Avenatti in their complaint.

It is ludicrous to think her claims are true.

That is never happening. She had witnesses who were willing to come forward to the FBI. Kavanaugh can't afford a real investigation.

[Anonymous]

And, in other news........
In one day on the bench, Justice Kavanaugh has now hired as many African-American Supreme Court clerks as Justice Ginsburg has in her entire SCOTUS tenure (and her 13-years on the DC Circuit, too).

New Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh has made good on his pledge to hire women to serve as his law clerks, becoming the first justice to have an all-female staff.

Kavanaugh said during his Senate confirmation hearings that he has made a special effort to hire women after reading a story years ago about the unequal balance between men and woman hired for prestigious clerkships at the Supreme Court and for other federal judges.

During his 12 years on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, a majority of the clerks he hired were women, which he said should be an indicator of his views about women in the workplace.

The group was working at the Supreme Court on Sunday to help prepare Kavanaugh for his debut on this Supreme Court bench this week.

Jackson is black and, like Kavanaugh, went to Yale Law School. Kavanaugh supporters noted that two of the three African Americans clerking at the Supreme Court this term previously worked for Kavanaugh.

Grammel is a former president of the Stanford Law Review, who had just started working at the Justice Department. Lacy was part of the White House team that worked on Kavanaugh’s nomination, and is a former counsel to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa). She went to law school at the University of Virginia.

Besides her clerkships, Nommensen worked at the Justice Department’s office of legal counsel. She was a student of Kavanaugh’s in the class he taught at Harvard Law School.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/kavanaugh-makes-good-on-his-pledge-at-hearing-to-hire-women-as-law-clerks/2018/10/07/06e4893a-ca92-11e8-a3e6-44daa3d35ede_story.html?utm_term=.2b30c40113c0

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anybody who believes that Swetnick’s allegations were even remotely credible is crazy and tells me that all you are is desperate to find ANYTHING on Kavanaugh.
The story she gave on her sworn statement changed quite considerably during her interview.
None of her “witnesses” could corroborate her claims and you know damn well NBC tried to find any corroboration.

I hope that the SJC seeks an investigation for false testimony and includes Avenatti in their complaint.

It is ludicrous to think her claims are true.

That is never happening. She had witnesses who were willing to come forward to the FBI. Kavanaugh can't afford a real investigation.

DP

PP, you are in La La Land. Swetnick had witnesses?

Even Ford didn't have witnesses to the alleged assault. Were there any corroborations that dated before 2010?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anybody who believes that Swetnick’s allegations were even remotely credible is crazy and tells me that all you are is desperate to find ANYTHING on Kavanaugh.
The story she gave on her sworn statement changed quite considerably during her interview.
None of her “witnesses” could corroborate her claims and you know damn well NBC tried to find any corroboration.

I hope that the SJC seeks an investigation for false testimony and includes Avenatti in their complaint.

It is ludicrous to think her claims are true.

That is never happening. She had witnesses who were willing to come forward to the FBI. Kavanaugh can't afford a real investigation.

Interesting that not a one of them was willing to speak to NBC, even anonymously. Not one.

[Anonymous]

I must say that I give the Bart followers props for their loyalty.

But you are all wrong. And it will all come out sooner rather than later.

He's a disgrace who was nominated by our disgrace of a president and confirmed by our disgrace of a senate.

The drunk won't be able to keep up with the pressure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anybody who believes that Swetnick’s allegations were even remotely credible is crazy and tells me that all you are is desperate to find ANYTHING on Kavanaugh.
The story she gave on her sworn statement changed quite considerably during her interview.
None of her “witnesses” could corroborate her claims and you know damn well NBC tried to find any corroboration.

I hope that the SJC seeks an investigation for false testimony and includes Avenatti in their complaint.

It is ludicrous to think her claims are true.

That is never happening. She had witnesses who were willing to come forward to the FBI. Kavanaugh can't afford a real investigation.

DP

PP, you are in La La Land. Swetnick had witnesses?

Even Ford didn't have witnesses to the alleged assault. Were there any corroborations that dated before 2010?

She alleges she has corroborating witnesses. For the hundredth goddamned time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anybody who believes that Swetnick’s allegations were even remotely credible is crazy and tells me that all you are is desperate to find ANYTHING on Kavanaugh.
The story she gave on her sworn statement changed quite considerably during her interview.
None of her “witnesses” could corroborate her claims and you know damn well NBC tried to find any corroboration.

I hope that the SJC seeks an investigation for false testimony and includes Avenatti in their complaint.

It is ludicrous to think her claims are true.

That is never happening. She had witnesses who were willing to come forward to the FBI. Kavanaugh can't afford a real investigation.

DP

PP, you are in La La Land. Swetnick had witnesses?

Even Ford didn't have witnesses to the alleged assault. Were there any corroborations that dated before 2010?

She alleges she has corroborating witnesses. For the hundredth goddamned time.

The truth doesn’t matter to Trump scum. Or ethics. Or democracy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I must say that I give the Bart followers props for their loyalty.

But you are all wrong. And it will all come out sooner rather than later.

He's a disgrace who was nominated by our disgrace of a president and confirmed by our disgrace of a senate.

The drunk won't be able to keep up with the pressure.

I didn't support his nom but people like you aren't rooted in reality. Toe the party line. Ready too many headlines without the content.

Fact is that the biggest majority of Justices in the past 50 years were sent over by Republican presidents. The issue is complex but there is a central theme that has continued over time...the court tends to seek balance even with those rooted in their conservative/liberal bias.