Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America 2018 where you are guilty based on words and not evidence.

If a women up for confirmation have her career derailed because at Mardi Gras she flashed her boobs in my face?

Let me know if you think her career would be derailed if multiple witnesses came forward to testify that she:
1)Flashed her boobs in your face
2)Wrestled you to the bed and kept you from screaming aloud while grinding you and trying to strip off your clothes
3)Targeted you as a sexual victim by spiking your drink so that you would pass out and a train of people could molest your unconscious body. And did this to others, too.
4)Publicly lied about it and claimed her high school years and those following were pure as the driven snow.

As said, words have convicted him not evidence.

Testimony IS evidence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_(law)#Direct_vs._Circumstantial_evidence

"The most well-known type of direct evidence is a testimony from an eye witness. In eye-witness testimonies the witness states exactly what they experienced, saw, or heard. "

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America 2018 where you are guilty based on words and not evidence.

If a women up for confirmation have her career derailed because at Mardi Gras she flashed her boobs in my face?

Let me know if you think her career would be derailed if multiple witnesses came forward to testify that she:
1)Flashed her boobs in your face
2)Wrestled you to the bed and kept you from screaming aloud while grinding you and trying to strip off your clothes
3)Targeted you as a sexual victim by spiking your drink so that you would pass out and a train of people could molest your unconscious body. And did this to others, too.
4)Publicly lied about it and claimed her high school years and those following were pure as the driven snow.

As said, words have convicted him not evidence.

And the Rs are doing everything they can to preclude the development of any independent evidence to be considered. They have already made up their minds and are praying that no evidence can be identified and produced before they force through their vote. Not exactly acting like folks with faith in their candidate’s innocence.

And the reason they do not want a conservative nerd is they could not be as sure of his partisan bonifides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost too outrageous to even be believable. It’s like someone said “let’s come up with a shady sexual allegation to make him go away.” And that didn’t work so then they said “let’s try again just to bolster the first one.” Then when that didn’t work they said “screw it, let’s go for broke. Let’s say he’s actually a serial gang rapist.” I mean, this is like every liberal dystopian fantasy come to life

And yet, for someone who grew up in the area, in the prep school bubble, it's entirely believable. Because it has happened many times. Because I've seen it happen. Because I know so many smarmy lawyers just like Kav who have done the same.

OP here- on the other hand, if this is true then the GOP made the most tragically comical pick for SC. Of all the choices, they pick a gang rapist?!? I’m a conservative and this is dang frustrating! And no I’m not saying the allegations are “comical” so crazies relax

I'm relieved that you, as a conservative, can separate your political preferences from your disappointment at the nomination a Republican Supreme Court Judge who is palpably unfit.
I, as someone who leans left, who be equally disgusted if the nominee was a Democrat and was accused of similar acts. I do not want any abusive person, male or female, Democrat or Republican, on the Supreme Court.
It seems a no-brainer to me to attach credence to the accusers, who are so brave to come forward despite humiliations and threats.

Humans before politics!

Thank you. I am a conservative but I believe in the ideas, not necessarily the people who are supposed to carry them out. As we’ve all seen, they can be very incompetent unfortunately. I mean how hard is it to get a constitutional originalist with a squeaky clean record?

Probably not that hard. They picked Kavanaugh for his views on executive power, which are definitely outside the mainstream.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost too outrageous to even be believable. It’s like someone said “let’s come up with a shady sexual allegation to make him go away.” And that didn’t work so then they said “let’s try again just to bolster the first one.” Then when that didn’t work they said “screw it, let’s go for broke. Let’s say he’s actually a serial gang rapist.” I mean, this is like every liberal dystopian fantasy come to life

She graduated in a public high school in Gaithersburg in 1980, three years before the judge did. No way she was even in the social circle of the prep boys.

Wow, you have personal knowledge of these people?

I can tell you I met her years ago and she said she knew a ton of people I knew in Chevy Chase. This is long before this incident.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So, looking ahead here to the future of Republican Senators who have expressed their opinion today that the latest accusation is another Democrat scam.

Do you think they will face political backlash?

They fear their own base more than anything else. He may still be confirmed.

I think the base has shrunk considerably in the past 24 hours!

Remember that Roy Moore was not elected...

[Anonymous]

If testimony were NOT evidence, than I think most of the convicts currently in prison in the US would have to be freed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost too outrageous to even be believable. It’s like someone said “let’s come up with a shady sexual allegation to make him go away.” And that didn’t work so then they said “let’s try again just to bolster the first one.” Then when that didn’t work they said “screw it, let’s go for broke. Let’s say he’s actually a serial gang rapist.” I mean, this is like every liberal dystopian fantasy come to life

She graduated in a public high school in Gaithersburg in 1980, three years before the judge did. No way she was even in the social circle of the prep boys.

I doubt the prep boys asked for ID or credentials before allowing an attractive young woman to attend/crash a party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America 2018 where you are guilty based on words and not evidence.

If a women up for confirmation have her career derailed because at Mardi Gras she flashed her boobs in my face?

Let me know if you think her career would be derailed if multiple witnesses came forward to testify that she:
1)Flashed her boobs in your face
2)Wrestled you to the bed and kept you from screaming aloud while grinding you and trying to strip off your clothes
3)Targeted you as a sexual victim by spiking your drink so that you would pass out and a train of people could molest your unconscious body. And did this to others, too.
4)Publicly lied about it and claimed her high school years and those following were pure as the driven snow.

As said, words have convicted him not evidence.

Testimony is evidence.

[Anonymous]

I think Breitbart has it right - they are calling it the Resistance Freak Show.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost too outrageous to even be believable. It’s like someone said “let’s come up with a shady sexual allegation to make him go away.” And that didn’t work so then they said “let’s try again just to bolster the first one.” Then when that didn’t work they said “screw it, let’s go for broke. Let’s say he’s actually a serial gang rapist.” I mean, this is like every liberal dystopian fantasy come to life

She graduated in a public high school in Gaithersburg in 1980, three years before the judge did. No way she was even in the social circle of the prep boys.

I went to a public high school in MoCo in the late 1980s and there were tons of public school kids who lived in the MD suburbs who were fiends with prep school kids. It was not at all unheard of for kids to go to public school until 8th grade and then peel off for Immaculata, Visi, Good Counsel or St. John's. So, it would be very conceivable that she knew Catholic school kids and partied in their circles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Lol. You have no idea how much he did or didn’t drink. This whole thing is bullshit. He’s qualified and will be confirmed.

can't believe you're a real person

I am and a woman and a Democrat who voted for Hillary. Also a lawyer. This campaign is transparently political and the allegations are drafted to be vague guilt-by-association nonsense with timing that is ridiculously and transparently politically-motivated. It’s a campaign to discredit him based on him being at parties where bad things may have happened. You are a sheep and a part of the brainless mob for believing this stuff.

sorry, don't believe you

LMAO. Go ask Jeff to check my IP. I posted tons in favor of Hillary. Is it really so unbelievable that I can think for my damn self and see that this campaign is vague and baseless. I’m a woman who can think for herself, thank you very much. I read and think critically and can see this latest #metoo campaign for what it is.

This poster asked other posters to ask me to check the poster's IP address. Two posters asked. So I checked and this poster has claimed to be a Hillary supporter in the past. However, the poster also claims to have been impressed by the Jordan Peterson videos and to have "seen the light" as a result. The poster also support the "Walk Away" movement which doesn't really exist.

Jeff, has she only claimed to be a Hillary supporter in the past or her behaviors (original posting supporting Hillary, defending Hillary/praising Hillary on other post) in the past proves she is a Hillary supporter. I can say I am Trump supporter multiple time on posts while questioning all kind of crap policies by his administration here. That would not make me a Trump supporter, rather would make me a fake to buy in Trump supporters trust. Please respond. And thanks for what you do!

I super love that you are so thoroughly floored that I did indeed support Hillary. What is seriously wrong with you that you cannot fathom disagreement in your own party? I don’t know how far back Jeff can look at posts but I posted a LOT on here in favor of Hillary during the campaign.

On another note, I find it incredible that posters turn to Mr. Steele for background on people who post here and he happily obliges. I think it is HIS way of trying to discredit some of the people who post here.

You told them to ask him, and now you're incredulous that they actually did what you suggested? I think it's his way of maintaining the integrity of this forum, so it doesn't become awash in dishonest conspiracies that originated online. Like the walkaway movement.

I’m a DP. I didn’t ask him to do any revealing of anything. As for maintaining the “integrity” of this forum, he does have a “delete” feature available to him. Disclosing information about posters is a bit more manipulative.
And, I understand why you don’t want to believe anything about #WalkAway. Hard to admit that people who used to be Dems are fed up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So, looking ahead here to the future of Republican Senators who have expressed their opinion today that the latest accusation is another Democrat scam.

Do you think they will face political backlash?

No. I think Democrats will, though, esp. among men. This is mob justice identity politics laid bare. People have had enough.

Do you realize that men are also victims of sexual assault?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost too outrageous to even be believable. It’s like someone said “let’s come up with a shady sexual allegation to make him go away.” And that didn’t work so then they said “let’s try again just to bolster the first one.” Then when that didn’t work they said “screw it, let’s go for broke. Let’s say he’s actually a serial gang rapist.” I mean, this is like every liberal dystopian fantasy come to life

And yet, for someone who grew up in the area, in the prep school bubble, it's entirely believable. Because it has happened many times. Because I've seen it happen. Because I know so many smarmy lawyers just like Kav who have done the same.

OP here- on the other hand, if this is true then the GOP made the most tragically comical pick for SC. Of all the choices, they pick a gang rapist?!? I’m a conservative and this is dang frustrating! And no I’m not saying the allegations are “comical” so crazies relax

I'm relieved that you, as a conservative, can separate your political preferences from your disappointment at the nomination a Republican Supreme Court Judge who is palpably unfit.
I, as someone who leans left, who be equally disgusted if the nominee was a Democrat and was accused of similar acts. I do not want any abusive person, male or female, Democrat or Republican, on the Supreme Court.
It seems a no-brainer to me to attach credence to the accusers, who are so brave to come forward despite humiliations and threats.

Humans before politics!

Thank you. I am a conservative but I believe in the ideas, not necessarily the people who are supposed to carry them out. As we’ve all seen, they can be very incompetent unfortunately. I mean how hard is it to get a constitutional originalist with a squeaky clean record?

All of this could have been avoided if the Republicans hadn't done away with the filibuster. A candidate who can get 60 votes is going to be a good candidate.

Let’s remember the facts here.....

-Harry Reid was the one that started this train in motion by changing the rules.
-Feinstein received a letter. Instead of following regular procedure and forwarding that letter to the Chairperson, she chose to sit on it, then leak it at an opportune time.
-There is nothing “unfit” about this candidate. These allegations are just that - allegations. No evidence. Nothing. Unprovable - all of them. And, these women know it.

Testimony is evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think Breitbart has it right - they are calling it the Resistance Freak Show.

I can't imagine being so cynical as to think that these claims are entirely made up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of y'all's victim-blaming is starting to sound like the Taliban. Under Shari'a law, the testimony of the woman about her rape is not enough. What she needs is the corroborating eye-witness testimony of 4 males to accuse her rapist. Is that what you'd like to see in America?

Um, no. We have (1) rape kits, (2) ability to report rape contemporaneously, and (3) what’s more, even if reporting late, the ability to do that not on the time table of Democratics who are trying to gin up enthusiasm for midterms.

My spouse is an ER doc. Teen girls decline rape kits all the time; they don't want to go through that process.