Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 5

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m old fashioned about that whole “don’t lie under oath” thing. Small lies count too.

O’kavanaugh did take an oath to tell the truth before he testified, didn’t he? Did that oath not count? Did it include an unspoken exception for “little lies”? Does O’kavanaugh allow people to lie in his courtroom, so long as the lies are little ones?

You say that because you're just another hypocritical and childish liberal, angry that you didn't get your way. The giveaway was your calling him "O'Kavanaugh,"

Face it. Democrats could find nothing on this exemplary man, so now they're reduced to complaining that he didn't tell the truth about slang terms that silly 17-year old boys wrote in their yearbook. Do you people even hear how ridiculous you sound?

Using stolen documents.
Perjury.
Massive unexplained debt.
Perjury.
Lack of judicial temperment.

These are not “ridiculous” things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not the PP. Sorry, but I could not care less about stupid terms in one's high school yearbook. I don't expect even a SC nominee to get up in front of the world and explain any of those absurd terms 17 yr. olds used, 36 yrs. ago. I truly, honestly DON'T CARE. And I remain astounded at those of you who continue to clutch your pearls over this. I guess the man's impeccable reputation for the entirety of his adult life don't matter one iota to you. You people are beyond ridiculous.

So are you one of those republicans who shouted during the Clinton years that it’s stupid to criticize him - and even impeach - over a lie about a private and consensual sexual relationship?

If not, please explain what’s different for you (other than the party labels).

Really? You are comparing the Clinton impeachment fiasco to whether Kav lied about his HS yearbook posts from 36 years ago?
I really suggest you do some research. Clinton was not impeached because he had a consensual relationship with Lewinsky. He was impeached because he lied and tried to cover up the incident. In a sworn deposition he denied having relations with her. He coached his secretary to repeat the same lies only to come out 3 months later and admit that he lied. Had he admitted to the affair and not lied he would have never been impeached.

He was not found guilty on perjury and obstruction charges stemming from the Paula Jones allegations from his time as Governor of Arkansas.

If it was ever proven that Kavanaugh did assault Ford he should be impeached and removed. The Clinton Lies were black and white and were not about things that happened 36 years ago.

Yeah, he lied about a sexual affair and was impeached for it. Kavanaugh lies about his activities in Hs and college, and about his conduct in Starr’s investigation. I see three options:

1. Little lies are ok. Clinton should not have been impeached, and kavanaugh should be off the hook for his lies.

2. No lie is acceptable. Maybe the Clinton investigation was a witchhunt, but he lied under oath and that’s not allowed, so impeachment was the right move. Kavanaugh can be morally excused for lying about his unsavory past, but he nevertheless must suffer a penalty for lying under oath.

3. You’re a hypocrite.

Please provide "proof" that he lied under oath about his past. Not just conjecture. Also, show where he came out admitted lying. Clinton's was not a little lie. He lied in a sworn deposition about behavior that occurred during his current role. He tried to obstruct justice. He came out and admitted he lied.

There are certainly indications that Kavanaugh has been less than forthcoming about his time in the Bush administration but nothing that rises to the level of perjury.

https://www.vox.com/2018/9/7/17829320/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-hearing-perjury

I did not think they should have pushed Kavanaugh through because he is too political but I am also not moronic enough to think his testimony about HS rises to the level of perjury where he should be impeached.

Hindsight 20/20 it was a huge waste of time and resources impeaching Clinton. Just like it would be to try and impeach Kavanaugh. It is clear the American people do not care about politicians behavior unless they disagree with their views. It was proven during the Clinton situation. It was proven in Trump being elected. He had no redeeming personal qualities and was caught on tape admitting to sexual assault and was still elected. Kamala Harris slept her way to the top. Blumenthal lied about his service history. We as a Country just don't care about politicians lying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think liberals should let it go at this point. The Dems used Ford, despite knowing she had no proof of her allegation from high school, to try to force Kavanaugh to withdraw, and it didn't work. He is in the SCOTUS now, and there he will stay. Stop wasting your time dreaming about impeachment, since you will never get the 2/3 of the Senate you'd need to convict.

I don't know about that. But we do need to do something to stop the acceptability of lying in our leaders. The moral fiber of our nation cannot hold if our very leaders are bold faced liars. What to do, I'm not sure. (and, yes, I'm against democratic liars as well. I thought if there was anything that defined what it means to be American, it is the sacredness of truth)

I think we need to distinguish between lies. Lying about a slang term for flatulence in one's high school yearbook is not the same as lying about being able to keep one's doctor and having premiums go down.

For average people in social situations, yes. When a candidate for supreme court justice is talking to Congress, no.

Not the PP. Sorry, but I could not care less about stupid terms in one's high school yearbook. I don't expect even a SC nominee to get up in front of the world and explain any of those absurd terms 17 yr. olds used, 36 yrs. ago. I truly, honestly DON'T CARE. And I remain astounded at those of you who continue to clutch your pearls over this. I guess the man's impeccable reputation for the entirety of his adult life don't matter one iota to you. You people are beyond ridiculous.

He doesn’t have an impeccable reputation. He was a scummy political hack from the time he haunted Foster’s family, from the time he came up with the filthiest, most prurient questions to try and embarrass Clinton, from the time he used STOLEN PROPERTY and perjured about it years ago and perjured about it this summer. He is unfit. Your sad little attempts to change the subject are just pathetic. He’s a perjurer and a political hack.

And yet unfortunately the liberals decided not to focus on these things but instead of an allegation of sexual assault that had zero evidence to back it up.

[Anonymous]

If you want to understand why people are upset, understand that under all the presidents before Obama, 86 judicial nominations had been blocked by filibuster. In just the Obama presidency alone, McConnell used the filibuster to block 82 nominations.

And now, the extreme right judges are being pushed through to fill those held seats. They are all stolen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can everyone back up a little. Regardless of your feelings about Kavanaugh etc., does anyone have any insight into the referral by Chief Justice Roberts of the complaints against Kavanaugh? A lot of reporters were quick to anticipate that the complaints would be dismissed as moot. Is that correct?

I am not a Kavanaugh, but I think those reports are correct. The judicial misconduct complaints in question are all tied to his confirmation hearing testimony. I think the judiciary is handling them carefully to avoid the appearance of impropriety, so they're not just dismissing them all out of hand, they're going through the formal channels, and transferring them to a different court to avoid any allegation of conflict of interest. But I don't see how anything would come out of them, because 1) they are not about things he did in his official role as a judge, 2) I believe the commentators are correct that the standards of misconduct Kavanaugh would have been subject to while he was a Court of Appeals judge no longer apply now that he's a Supreme Court Justice, and 3) the proper channel for removing a Supreme Court justice is through impeachment and conviction by the Senate, not through a Court of Appeals judicial panel.

My recollection is that when a judge retires these get dismissed as moot, which makes sense because the judge whose conduct is at issue is no longer on the bench so there’s no action to take to make sure he conducts himself appropriately in the future. This just has a weird wrinkle of a promotion rather than a retirement. I suspect those who are familiar with the treatment of this type of complaint have a definitive sense of how it will be resolved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you want to understand why people are upset, understand that under all the presidents before Obama, 86 judicial nominations had been blocked by filibuster. In just the Obama presidency alone, McConnell used the filibuster to block 82 nominations.

And now, the extreme right judges are being pushed through to fill those held seats. They are all stolen.

Stolen by democrats that threw away the last election by promoting immigration

I'm a lifelong Democrat and the child of two (legal) immigrants. I don't understand why we can't have a Democratic Party that simply says, "We are a nation of laws, and we will enforce immigration law as we do all others. Period."

Dems just don't get it. This year alone, they shut down the government over 800,000 dreamers and Nancy Pelosi brought the House to a halt with an 8 hour speech about...again, the dreamers. There are 330 million people in this country! I'd like to know why NP doesn't seem as excited about sky-high drug prices, the opioid epidemic, or stranglehold that Wall Street corporations have on this country? The Dems' fixation on the plight of illegal immigrants is killing us. It gives the impression that the party cares more about people who break the law than about issues that matter to ordinary Americans. As long as this is the case, we can look forward to more years of Trump and GOP rule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to understand why people are upset, understand that under all the presidents before Obama, 86 judicial nominations had been blocked by filibuster. In just the Obama presidency alone, McConnell used the filibuster to block 82 nominations.

And now, the extreme right judges are being pushed through to fill those held seats. They are all stolen.

Stolen by democrats that threw away the last election by promoting immigration

I'm a lifelong Democrat and the child of two (legal) immigrants. I don't understand why we can't have a Democratic Party that simply says, "We are a nation of laws, and we will enforce immigration law as we do all others. Period."

Dems just don't get it. This year alone, they shut down the government over 800,000 dreamers and Nancy Pelosi brought the House to a halt with an 8 hour speech about...again, the dreamers. There are 330 million people in this country! I'd like to know why NP doesn't seem as excited about sky-high drug prices, the opioid epidemic, or stranglehold that Wall Street corporations have on this country? The Dems' fixation on the plight of illegal immigrants is killing us. It gives the impression that the party cares more about people who break the law than about issues that matter to ordinary Americans. As long as this is the case, we can look forward to more years of Trump and GOP rule.

If you are a lover of the rule of law, then you must love our President and the law-breaking cabinet he has assembled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you want to understand why people are upset, understand that under all the presidents before Obama, 86 judicial nominations had been blocked by filibuster. In just the Obama presidency alone, McConnell used the filibuster to block 82 nominations.

And now, the extreme right judges are being pushed through to fill those held seats. They are all stolen.

There are some partial truths here. You are correct that McConnell and Republicans were wrongly blocking judge appointments. Dems had the majority in the Senate at that time. They changed the rule to simple majority and pushed through their judges. Republicans are not using the simple majority to push through their judges. If the Dems win the Senate they will block judge appointments as well.

[Anonymous]

Perjury for sure about not knowing about Ramirez allegations. That can be easily proven by having them testify plus they have the texts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to understand why people are upset, understand that under all the presidents before Obama, 86 judicial nominations had been blocked by filibuster. In just the Obama presidency alone, McConnell used the filibuster to block 82 nominations.

And now, the extreme right judges are being pushed through to fill those held seats. They are all stolen.

There are some partial truths here. You are correct that McConnell and Republicans were wrongly blocking judge appointments. Dems had the majority in the Senate at that time. They changed the rule to simple majority and pushed through their judges. Republicans are not using the simple majority to push through their judges. If the Dems win the Senate they will block judge appointments as well.

They changed the rules because McConnell was refusing to allow ANY through on the filibuster rule. These were mostly moderate nominees who would have normally received 97, 98 votes on the Senate floor. So please don't sugar coat WHY the rule was changed. McConnell was destroying the judiciary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Perjury for sure about not knowing about Ramirez allegations. That can be easily proven by having them testify plus they have the texts.

Nope. Big difference between potential rumors and allegations.

[Anonymous]

It wasn't Kavanaugh who lied about the events over 30 years ago, it was Ford and Martinez. In Martinez's case, no one from a liberal institution such as Yale would come forward to corroborate the story of a girl who admits she was going foggy due to college dorm drinking and may or may not have remembered correctly if Kavanaugh was zipping up his pants. Sure, a bunch of people said he drank and maybe the puritans out there consider that a sin but many don't. That she internalized it for so long and then politicized it is so sad for her.

In Ford's case, it's an outright lie. Not a single friend would step forward to perjure themselves by saying they remembered picking her up and taking her home. That's all it would have taken, one person to step forward and say they gave her a ride home. She sent in a ridiculous statement hoping to do a spot of damage and remain out of it, the dems betrayed her and then they hung her out to dry. No direct family members signed her "believe" statement and no family members showed for the hearing and none spoke up for her because they didn't want to get caught lying. Do you know why she didn't take the offer to be interviewed in CA? It's because she was never there. She never left the Delaware beaches as the Dems were prepping her so she had to perjure herself by saying she was claustrophobic and couldn't make the trip. That's why she had so much trouble remembering details of the run up to the hearing. She couldn't keep her lies straight. Once she got through her well rehearsed description, she came across as a lying witness.

If you are looking for the Dalai Lama or a population of them to spring forward and become the heads of companies and elected officials, you'll be looking for a long time. Kavanaugh's had over 30 years to grow up, mature and become a good father and professional. I hope he succeeds and fulfills the promises of the repubs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to understand why people are upset, understand that under all the presidents before Obama, 86 judicial nominations had been blocked by filibuster. In just the Obama presidency alone, McConnell used the filibuster to block 82 nominations.

And now, the extreme right judges are being pushed through to fill those held seats. They are all stolen.

Stolen by democrats that threw away the last election by promoting immigration

I'm a lifelong Democrat and the child of two (legal) immigrants. I don't understand why we can't have a Democratic Party that simply says, "We are a nation of laws, and we will enforce immigration law as we do all others. Period."

Dems just don't get it. This year alone, they shut down the government over 800,000 dreamers and Nancy Pelosi brought the House to a halt with an 8 hour speech about...again, the dreamers. There are 330 million people in this country! I'd like to know why NP doesn't seem as excited about sky-high drug prices, the opioid epidemic, or stranglehold that Wall Street corporations have on this country? The Dems' fixation on the plight of illegal immigrants is killing us. It gives the impression that the party cares more about people who break the law than about issues that matter to ordinary Americans. As long as this is the case, we can look forward to more years of Trump and GOP rule.

DT is repulsive regardless of what party you belong too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It wasn't Kavanaugh who lied about the events over 30 years ago, it was Ford and Martinez. In Martinez's case, no one from a liberal institution such as Yale would come forward to corroborate the story of a girl who admits she was going foggy due to college dorm drinking and may or may not have remembered correctly if Kavanaugh was zipping up his pants. Sure, a bunch of people said he drank and maybe the puritans out there consider that a sin but many don't. That she internalized it for so long and then politicized it is so sad for her.

In Ford's case, it's an outright lie. Not a single friend would step forward to perjure themselves by saying they remembered picking her up and taking her home. That's all it would have taken, one person to step forward and say they gave her a ride home. She sent in a ridiculous statement hoping to do a spot of damage and remain out of it, the dems betrayed her and then they hung her out to dry. No direct family members signed her "believe" statement and no family members showed for the hearing and none spoke up for her because they didn't want to get caught lying. Do you know why she didn't take the offer to be interviewed in CA? It's because she was never there. She never left the Delaware beaches as the Dems were prepping her so she had to perjure herself by saying she was claustrophobic and couldn't make the trip. That's why she had so much trouble remembering details of the run up to the hearing. She couldn't keep her lies straight. Once she got through her well rehearsed description, she came across as a lying witness.

If you are looking for the Dalai Lama or a population of them to spring forward and become the heads of companies and elected officials, you'll be looking for a long time. Kavanaugh's had over 30 years to grow up, mature and become a good father and professional. I hope he succeeds and fulfills the promises of the repubs.

I think you meant Ramierez, not Martinez, though I get it that from your perspective, "they are all the same" - that said, she had scores of coroborrating witnesses. However the White House refused to let the FBI investigate them. That's ok though, they are investigating them now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Let's say that he did what she said

And there in lies the rub, after how many investigations were her accusations proven either false or inconsistent?
Whistling in the wind, nothing more.

what investigation? are you counting the sham one that didn't even interview Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford?

The FBI made their stance clear. They had already investigated Kavanaugh long before the hearings. There was nothing new to find. The director of the FBI said that the only point of further investigations would be to trip both of them up on claims of perjury. Given that it's pretty clear that both of them did technically like (Kavanaugh definitely was a heavy drinker, Ford definitely changed her story several times) those would be the only findings from the FBI. Of the two, Ford had a lot more to lose, with people refusing to corroborate her allegation, an ex boyfriend of six years releasing a letter saying Ford's claims of being afraid to fly or needing a place with two doors were bullshit because she flew all the time and lived in a studio apartment with only one door, for five years. Or the discrepancy between the therapist' notes and what Ford later told the Senate. Those are the things the FBI would be investigating Ford for. And she'd be prosecuted for having lied to the FBI and the Senate. It would have never been about what happened in the summer of 1982.

Ford did not change her story, and the She will never be prosecuted by the FBI, she did nothing wrong.
THE FBI did not investigate his high school or college years.