Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

IF it were just one rumor, maybe.

But it’s a bunch of rumors, some with some substantiation, and, most importantly, a whole big bunch of clear lies.

The lies disqualify him. The partisan vitriol does not help.

Totally agree with this. Whether or not you believe the various assault charges against him, he’s clearly lying about lots of things, most obviously his drinking. You can’t lie in a court, you can’t lie in a Congressional hearing, and you definitely can’t lie when you’re trying to get on the Supreme Court.

We can do better.

What lies?

1. Claiming he was not much of a drinker.

2. Boof = flatulence

3. “Renate alumnus” means we were buddies.

4. Devils Triangle is a drinking game.

5. “Ralph” refers to his dislike of spicy food.

Many more.

[Anonymous]

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.

Boo hoo. Bitter.

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

"And I worked my butt off and was not a legacy."

Oh, wait, another LIE.

https://www.newsweek.com/kavanaugh-said-he-had-no-connections-yale-he-was-legacy-student-1145286

Remarkable. Can the guy tell the truth about anything?!

Here is Kavanaugh's quote:

“I have no connections there. I got there by busting my tail,” Kavanaugh, a who currently serves as a federal judge, said while testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week.

I don't see the word legacy in his statement. That is how fake news starts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Feinstein recommended them. Hmmmmm......

Who recommended Kavanaugh's lawyers? Hmmmmm.......

The real question is why didn't Feinstein turn the allegation over to the FBI to investigate?

This has been answered ad nauseum. Ford asked her to keep it confidential. She only came forward once her identity was blown.

So how was her identity blown, and at the last minute after the initial hearings in which the D's couldn't land a knock-out punch?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Feinstein recommended them. Hmmmmm......

They are all good pals fighting for their agenda.

No wonder they are billing to work pro bono. They probably would have been willing to pay HER to come forward.

Should read WILLING, not billing.

They are probably billing someone - LOL. You might not be that far off!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

IF it were just one rumor, maybe.

But it’s a bunch of rumors, some with some substantiation, and, most importantly, a whole big bunch of clear lies.

The lies disqualify him. The partisan vitriol does not help.

Totally agree with this. Whether or not you believe the various assault charges against him, he’s clearly lying about lots of things, most obviously his drinking. You can’t lie in a court, you can’t lie in a Congressional hearing, and you definitely can’t lie when you’re trying to get on the Supreme Court.

We can do better.

What lies?

1. Claiming he was not much of a drinker.

2. Boof = flatulence

3. “Renate alumnus” means we were buddies.

4. Devils Triangle is a drinking game.

5. “Ralph” refers to his dislike of spicy food.

Many more.

Please--he said more than once he sometimes drank too much. There is no way for you to know that the others are lies. You are going on your feelings about him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

IF it were just one rumor, maybe.

But it’s a bunch of rumors, some with some substantiation, and, most importantly, a whole big bunch of clear lies.

The lies disqualify him. The partisan vitriol does not help.

Totally agree with this. Whether or not you believe the various assault charges against him, he’s clearly lying about lots of things, most obviously his drinking. You can’t lie in a court, you can’t lie in a Congressional hearing, and you definitely can’t lie when you’re trying to get on the Supreme Court.

We can do better.

What lies?

1. Claiming he was not much of a drinker.

2. Boof = flatulence

3. “Renate alumnus” means we were buddies.

4. Devils Triangle is a drinking game.

5. “Ralph” refers to his dislike of spicy food.

Many more.

Wow. Liberals are sinking low.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
IF it were just one rumor, maybe.

But it’s a bunch of rumors, some with some substantiation, and, most importantly, a whole big bunch of clear lies.

The lies disqualify him. The partisan vitriol does not help.

So it's the number of rumors that count? What should count is if there is any corroboration of the claims, and there isn't.

It's a crying shame what Democrats have done to defeat this nominee. Feinstein, especially. I think SHE should be investigated for collaborating with the witness' attorney and convincing her to act against the best interests of her client.

No, you’re moving the goalposts again. The rumors are really troubling and require full investigation. The lies are inexcusable and disqualifying. Every Senator, Republican or Democrat, knows this. The question is whether the Republicans will close their eyes to ignore the lies, just to please Trump.

I suspect many Republican Senators are secretly wishing now that the investigation turns up more dirt, so they can vote NO without fear of criticism.

The bolded statement is ridiculous. You are suggesting that anything, anytime can be derailed by rumors. Welcome to liberalism

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Feinstein recommended them. Hmmmmm......

They are all good pals fighting for their agenda.

No wonder they are billing to work pro bono. They probably would have been willing to pay HER to come forward.

Should read WILLING, not billing.

They are probably billing someone - LOL. You might not be that far off!

You know what? I think Feinstein, who is worth $77 million, is paying them, and I think she should be forced to resign. I don't have any proof of it, of course, but the mere accusation should be enough to bring her down, don't you think?

[Anonymous]

Re him claiming he wasn't a legacy -- according to the transcript of the hearing prepared by Bloomberg Government, this is what he actually said:

"I got into Yale Law School. That’s the number one law school in the country. I had no connections there. I got there by busting my tail in college."

He used the word "connections" not "legacy." I mention his b/c above, he was quoted above as saying he was not a legacy. Based on the transcript, that's inaccurate.

Having said all that, in my book, claiming that one don't have "connections" to a school when one's actually a legacy is just way too cute, and not the type of straight and honest talk I'd expect from a future SC justice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Feinstein recommended them. Hmmmmm......

They are all good pals fighting for their agenda.

No wonder they are billing to work pro bono. They probably would have been willing to pay HER to come forward.

Should read WILLING, not billing.

They are probably billing someone - LOL. You might not be that far off!

You know what? I think Feinstein, who is worth $77 million, is paying them, and I think she should be forced to resign. I don't have any proof of it, of course, but the mere accusation should be enough to bring her down, don't you think?

LOL! I doubt she pays for anything herself when she can use other people's money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Feinstein recommended them. Hmmmmm......

They are all good pals fighting for their agenda.

No wonder they are billing to work pro bono. They probably would have been willing to pay HER to come forward.

Should read WILLING, not billing.

They are probably billing someone - LOL. You might not be that far off!

You know what? I think Feinstein, who is worth $77 million, is paying them, and I think she should be forced to resign. I don't have any proof of it, of course, but the mere accusation should be enough to bring her down, don't you think?

If you asked her under oath and she then lied about it, I’d agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Feinstein recommended them. Hmmmmm......

They are all good pals fighting for their agenda.

No wonder they are billing to work pro bono. They probably would have been willing to pay HER to come forward.

Should read WILLING, not billing.

They are probably billing someone - LOL. You might not be that far off!

You know what? I think Feinstein, who is worth $77 million, is paying them, and I think she should be forced to resign. I don't have any proof of it, of course, but the mere accusation should be enough to bring her down, don't you think?

I want to know what was in that envelope that Sheila Jackson Lee passed to one of Ford's lawyers:

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-27/what-was-envelope-rep-sheila-jackson-lee-slipped-kavanaugh-accusers-lawyer

We are told it's notes. In a sealed envelope, that resembles a card.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Feinstein recommended them. Hmmmmm......

They are all good pals fighting for their agenda.

No wonder they are billing to work pro bono. They probably would have been willing to pay HER to come forward.

Should read WILLING, not billing.

They are probably billing someone - LOL. You might not be that far off!

You know what? I think Feinstein, who is worth $77 million, is paying them, and I think she should be forced to resign. I don't have any proof of it, of course, but the mere accusation should be enough to bring her down, don't you think?

If you asked her under oath and she then lied about it, I’d agree.

I think Feinstein should be investigated. Seriously. Especially in connection with the conduct of the lawyer she recommended Ford hire.

If I were Ford, I'd be furious. I didn't want to go public in the first place, and I had an option to testify privately? And my attorney didn't tell me?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Re him claiming he wasn't a legacy -- according to the transcript of the hearing prepared by Bloomberg Government, this is what he actually said:

"I got into Yale Law School. That’s the number one law school in the country. I had no connections there. I got there by busting my tail in college."

He used the word "connections" not "legacy." I mention his b/c above, he was quoted above as saying he was not a legacy. Based on the transcript, that's inaccurate.

Having said all that, in my book, claiming that one don't have "connections" to a school when one's actually a legacy is just way too cute, and not the type of straight and honest talk I'd expect from a future SC justice.

Whoa! Now reading this more carefully. Kavanaugh said he had no connection to Yale Law School. That would be correct. He would not be considered a legacy at YLS because his grandfather had been an undergraduate at Yale. As explained earlier, the grandfather connection would have been weak even for undergraduate.

Newsweek is playing it fast and loose in its article but not clarifying that Kavanuagh was talking about YLS not Yale undergrad, and then bringing in the grandfather undergrad connection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Feinstein recommended them. Hmmmmm......

They are all good pals fighting for their agenda.

No wonder they are billing to work pro bono. They probably would have been willing to pay HER to come forward.

Should read WILLING, not billing.

They are probably billing someone - LOL. You might not be that far off!

You know what? I think Feinstein, who is worth $77 million, is paying them, and I think she should be forced to resign. I don't have any proof of it, of course, but the mere accusation should be enough to bring her down, don't you think?

I want to know what was in that envelope that Sheila Jackson Lee passed to one of Ford's lawyers:

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-27/what-was-envelope-rep-sheila-jackson-lee-slipped-kavanaugh-accusers-lawyer

We are told it's notes. In a sealed envelope, that resembles a card.

What envelope? Did I miss something?