Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone notice how Kavanaugh lives in a renovated house in Chevy Chase in a neighborhood that people with his HHI can’t afford? But it’s a neighborhood where other Supreme Court justices, Yalies, journalists and other power players live. He knows what he wants and is clawing to get it. That’s not really what Supreme Court justices do - there’s not supposed to be a career path to the highest court.

FYI - we have a similar HHI and we can’t afford our $650,000 house , never mind a 1.3 million dollar house. And we have no law school debts even.

Same. We have a similar income, a $650k house, no other debt and do alright, but could certainly not afford a country club (or two) and two private school tuitions.

I've read many, many times on this forum that there are a lot of people in DC who have help from wealthy parents for home purchases. Are the Kavanaughs somehow an exception?

Well - was that parental ‘help’ reported as income and taxes paid on it? Because that’s the law.

I have no idea what happened. But if, say, a parent pays an adult child’s credit card bill, the law requires reporting that?

If it’s over 14k in a year, yes.

Think it’s 15 k actually and perhaps double that, if given as a married couple.

Thanks - I’ll tell my parents!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone notice how Kavanaugh lives in a renovated house in Chevy Chase in a neighborhood that people with his HHI can’t afford? But it’s a neighborhood where other Supreme Court justices, Yalies, journalists and other power players live. He knows what he wants and is clawing to get it. That’s not really what Supreme Court justices do - there’s not supposed to be a career path to the highest court.

FYI - we have a similar HHI and we can’t afford our $650,000 house , never mind a 1.3 million dollar house. And we have no law school debts even.

Same. We have a similar income, a $650k house, no other debt and do alright, but could certainly not afford a country club (or two) and two private school tuitions.

I've read many, many times on this forum that there are a lot of people in DC who have help from wealthy parents for home purchases. Are the Kavanaughs somehow an exception?

Well - was that parental ‘help’ reported as income and taxes paid on it? Because that’s the law.

I have no idea what happened. But if, say, a parent pays an adult child’s credit card bill, the law requires reporting that?

No.

And parents can gift large sums of money to their adult children without triggering tax implications. I can't recall the threshold, but my in-laws gifted us money in the two years leading up to us purchasing our home. MIL is a realtor, FIL is an accountant, so they knew the pertinent laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've posted this before? Have you ever known anyone who was delusional? I have. They believe what they say--but, the story can change if you listen to them carefully.

Especially when you fried your brain with binge drinking during that time. Ford needs a whole lot more of therapy. How can she ever recover from this debacle?

No one has come close to your level of vickousness in talking about Kav. Do you live a normal life offline?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Watch Matt Damon as Kavanaugh on the SNL cold open last night. Epic!

https://www.npr.org/2018/09/30/653062763/matt-damon-is-a-sniffing-shouting-brett-kavanaugh-on-snl-season-premiere

"I'm an optimist. I'm a keg is half full kind of guy."

OMG that was hysterical.

[Anonymous]

She’ was a compelling witness overall. But as a factual matter, has it been determined who recommended the lawyers who are, it seems, working pro bono?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ford's story has changed. She has changed the # of people involved since she told the therapist. She told the therapist that she was in her "late teens." She changed the statement from her polygraph from early '80s to '80's and other small changes which go back to what she told the therapist.

In a case like this, where a public takedown of a man's reputation and whole career is being put in jeopardy, it seems to me that we need to know more about the accuser. Even the part of the Safeway and Mark Judge is odd --did she read Judge's book, maybe--apparently, it may tell us when he worked there and the lawyers and Ford know this. She seemed quite insistent that they look that part up. And, when did we first hear about Judge and the Safeway? Was it before or after she hired the lawyers?

Here is a twitter site that has a thread in it that lays it all out pretty well. There are more holes in Ford's story than I had caught. It seems to me that if Kavanaugh is going to be derailed over this, that the therapist notes should be available to the FBI.

https://twitter.com/profmjcleveland?lang=en

There aren’t holes. Yes, I read this, thanks for linking.

The speculation that Ford read Judge’s book to make up the Safeway detail is just a fever dream of conservatives.

There are definitely holes. She goes from attack in her late teens, mid 1980s, and four boys as attackers in her therapist notes to 2 boy attackers, early 1980s then to 1982 specifically, somehow remembering she wasn't driving at the time though she can't remember how she got to and from the party. She can claim the therapist's notes are wrong all she wants, but they aren't corroborating evidence of a summer 1982 attack by 2 boys.

It’s always pleasant to deal with a liar.

You were not present for this therapy session. Your undignified need to paint Ford as a liar has you lying, and staring as fact that Ford misstated something as opposed to her therapist making an error in the notes. Ford’s story has remained remarkably consistent. And here you sit on a Sunday morning, telling lies.

For me, Kavanaugh’s behavior regarding the Miranda memos and his testimony about it weeks ago is fully disqualifying. But I don’t hate him, and I’m not spreading lies about him.

Her therapist's notes don't corroborate her claim of a 1982 attack by 2 boys. Period.

Myra, they do. You have no idea what you are talking about - but keep talking anyway, it suits you.

Have the notes been released? Not saying they have to be—just asking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone notice how Kavanaugh lives in a renovated house in Chevy Chase in a neighborhood that people with his HHI can’t afford? But it’s a neighborhood where other Supreme Court justices, Yalies, journalists and other power players live. He knows what he wants and is clawing to get it. That’s not really what Supreme Court justices do - there’s not supposed to be a career path to the highest court.

FYI - we have a similar HHI and we can’t afford our $650,000 house , never mind a 1.3 million dollar house. And we have no law school debts even.

Same. We have a similar income, a $650k house, no other debt and do alright, but could certainly not afford a country club (or two) and two private school tuitions.

I've read many, many times on this forum that there are a lot of people in DC who have help from wealthy parents for home purchases. Are the Kavanaughs somehow an exception?

Well - was that parental ‘help’ reported as income and taxes paid on it? Because that’s the law.

Look, this is just not true. The giver pays the gift tax, not the recipient, and only if it exceeds a certain amount. And there are a ton of tax loopholes/strategies that anyone with a significant fortune can use to shield a good amount of it from estate taxes. They can give the couple a set amount tax free annually, plus each of the grandkids. Not to mention there could be educational trusts from Kav's grandparents that pay for the private schools for children. I don't know that any of this is relevant except to prove that he is no way self-made. He didn't get to where he is alone or exclusively on his own merits. He does not seem capable of recognizing that fact, however.

[Anonymous]

This all comes down to what Squi will say. Focus, people. We don’t have to turn this into a privileged measuring contest. We get it. He’s a striver.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She’ was a compelling witness overall. But as a factual matter, has it been determined who recommended the lawyers who are, it seems, working pro bono?

I don’t understand the relevance of this. Honestly. She went to her representatives, who are Democrats, for help. It would not be surprising that they have lawyer friends or contacts who are also democrats? Even if Feinstein did recommend the lawyers, how does that make her a liar?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ford's story has changed. She has changed the # of people involved since she told the therapist. She told the therapist that she was in her "late teens." She changed the statement from her polygraph from early '80s to '80's and other small changes which go back to what she told the therapist.

In a case like this, where a public takedown of a man's reputation and whole career is being put in jeopardy, it seems to me that we need to know more about the accuser. Even the part of the Safeway and Mark Judge is odd --did she read Judge's book, maybe--apparently, it may tell us when he worked there and the lawyers and Ford know this. She seemed quite insistent that they look that part up. And, when did we first hear about Judge and the Safeway? Was it before or after she hired the lawyers?

Here is a twitter site that has a thread in it that lays it all out pretty well. There are more holes in Ford's story than I had caught. It seems to me that if Kavanaugh is going to be derailed over this, that the therapist notes should be available to the FBI.

https://twitter.com/profmjcleveland?lang=en

There aren’t holes. Yes, I read this, thanks for linking.

The speculation that Ford read Judge’s book to make up the Safeway detail is just a fever dream of conservatives.

There are definitely holes. She goes from attack in her late teens, mid 1980s, and four boys as attackers in her therapist notes to 2 boy attackers, early 1980s then to 1982 specifically, somehow remembering she wasn't driving at the time though she can't remember how she got to and from the party. She can claim the therapist's notes are wrong all she wants, but they aren't corroborating evidence of a summer 1982 attack by 2 boys.

It’s always pleasant to deal with a liar.

You were not present for this therapy session. Your undignified need to paint Ford as a liar has you lying, and staring as fact that Ford misstated something as opposed to her therapist making an error in the notes. Ford’s story has remained remarkably consistent. And here you sit on a Sunday morning, telling lies.

For me, Kavanaugh’s behavior regarding the Miranda memos and his testimony about it weeks ago is fully disqualifying. But I don’t hate him, and I’m not spreading lies about him.

Her therapist's notes don't corroborate her claim of a 1982 attack by 2 boys. Period.

Myra, they do. You have no idea what you are talking about - but keep talking anyway, it suits you.

Have the notes been released? Not saying they have to be—just asking.

Good question. It think the FBI can determine exactly when these notes were written. Yikes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She’ was a compelling witness overall. But as a factual matter, has it been determined who recommended the lawyers who are, it seems, working pro bono?

Ford said during her testimony Feinstein's office recommended Katz. She did not say who recommended her other attorney(s).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This all comes down to what Squi will say. Focus, people. We don’t have to turn this into a privileged measuring contest. We get it. He’s a striver.

Squi is the one blamed by Whelen, right? Since he never objected to that bit of crazy, I’m (and I’ll admit it) paranoid he’d lie even to an agent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’ was a compelling witness overall. But as a factual matter, has it been determined who recommended the lawyers who are, it seems, working pro bono?

I don’t understand the relevance of this. Honestly. She went to her representatives, who are Democrats, for help. It would not be surprising that they have lawyer friends or contacts who are also democrats? Even if Feinstein did recommend the lawyers, how does that make her a liar?

To add, I understand that there was some back and forth about the lawyers during her testimony and that if Feinstein recommended them it might contradict what she said and make her a liar in that sense, but Im asking about the relevance of this line of questioning in the first place. What was time even wasted on this point?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone notice how Kavanaugh lives in a renovated house in Chevy Chase in a neighborhood that people with his HHI can’t afford? But it’s a neighborhood where other Supreme Court justices, Yalies, journalists and other power players live. He knows what he wants and is clawing to get it. That’s not really what Supreme Court justices do - there’s not supposed to be a career path to the highest court.

FYI - we have a similar HHI and we can’t afford our $650,000 house , never mind a 1.3 million dollar house. And we have no law school debts even.

Same. We have a similar income, a $650k house, no other debt and do alright, but could certainly not afford a country club (or two) and two private school tuitions.

Boo hoo. Bitter.

But I had perfect SAT scores and A’s - I DESERVE a better job and a rich mansion and vacations. Whaaaaaaaah!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’ was a compelling witness overall. But as a factual matter, has it been determined who recommended the lawyers who are, it seems, working pro bono?

I don’t understand the relevance of this. Honestly. She went to her representatives, who are Democrats, for help. It would not be surprising that they have lawyer friends or contacts who are also democrats? Even if Feinstein did recommend the lawyers, how does that make her a liar?

To add, I understand that there was some back and forth about the lawyers during her testimony and that if Feinstein recommended them it might contradict what she said and make her a liar in that sense, but Im asking about the relevance of this line of questioning in the first place. What was time even wasted on this point?

It’s like asking about who paid the polygrapher. The Republicans are chumming the Comet Ping-Pong waters, and if there is a Hell, they should be cast into it for eternity. Their lives cannot be harmed by even Putin being Associate Justice; 350,000,000 others don’t have that luxury.