Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maine's largest newspaper

https://www.pressherald.com/2018/09/28/our-view-brett-kavanaugh-has-shown-he-doesnt-belong-on-the-supreme-court/

I am shocked, shocked, I tell you, that the media would print such an opinion piece. It’s not like the media hasn’t been doing attack articles throughout the entire confirmation process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"However, as my client has already made clear, she does not know Judge Kavanaugh and has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford," the letter from Howard Walsh, Keyser's attorney, said. It continued that Keyser "does not refute Dr. Ford's account, and she has already told the press that she believes Dr. Ford's account."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/christine-blasey-ford-friend-leland-keyser-clarifies-statement-about-alleged-assault-by-brett-kavanaugh/


Cliffs of insanity party of millions...

Not a single Ford supporter will explain this.

The attorney's statement carries more weight than anything said in the press.

His statement is that she does not refute Ford's account. How can she--she says she has not recollection. The next part of the statement simply says what she said to the press and is not part of her legal statement. Rather it simply retelling what WaPo reported: she said she believes Dr. Ford's account.

That press statement could have meant I believe that sometime, somewhere something happened to Ford. It is also interesting that the WaPo story that reported this did not use a direct quote from Keyser, so it is difficult to know what words Keyser actually used when she spoke to WaPo.

The don't refute statement through her lawyer means more than any conversation she had with the press.

[Anonymous]

https://mobile.twitter.com/mjhawley/status/1045847173408194561

This interesting graphics depicts every time either Ford or Kavanaugh did or not answer a question (it’s probably already been posted thrice, but I don’t want to read from 50 to 190 to catch up). It does a good job showing how much Kavanaugh lied and obfuscated and drifted off topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maine's largest newspaper

https://www.pressherald.com/2018/09/28/our-view-brett-kavanaugh-has-shown-he-doesnt-belong-on-the-supreme-court/

I am shocked, shocked, I tell you, that the media would print such an opinion piece. It’s not like the media hasn’t been doing attack articles throughout the entire confirmation process.

Murkowski and Collins now have 100% cover to vote no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is NOTHING except an allegation, from a seemingly troubled young woman (by her own admission) that any of this occurred. NOTHING.
An allegation from 36 years ago. An allegation from a woman whose details have conflicted and who won’t release any of her therapy notes.
It simply does not fit with his behavior over the past 36 years. Not when you have dozens of people - mostly women - speaking up about his impeccable character and his respectful treatment of women.

Almost being raped causes some people trouble.

She seemed credible to most, including most Republicans. How many victims does Brett need to have come forward for you to find any of them credible? You’d give him a pass to ten? Is it 20 victims and you’d believe?

Oh, FFS. And, most Republicans, like myself, believe she has had some type of sexual assault in the past. But, not by Kavanaugh. In fact, I think whatever happened was much more serious and happened in her late teens, as her therapists notes have indicated.
How many “victims?” How about just ONE credible victim with some kind of corroborating evidence. We have seen nothing like that. You can trot out 20 people with allegations. That means nothing except that Democrats will indeed do whatever it takes to derail this nominee.

She knew Brett. She knew her attacker. This wasn’t that she witnessed someone get mugged and she had to guess which two brown haired teens did it; he pulled her into the bedroom, locked the door, got her on the bed, tried to take her clothes off, covered her mouth when she screamed, fondled her, and ground his pelvis against hers while his friend laughed and jumped on top of both of them.

We’ve seen three credible victims. So far. Just because the GOP lives and dies by the rat*uck does not mean the the Democrats do,

[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......

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.

She wanted it kept confidential so she sent it to a senator (and tipped off the Washington Post)? You disclose it to your therapist or best friend if you want it kept completely private, not to a senator on the judiciary committee who has an obligation to report it to the rest of the committee and to the FBI for the nominee's background check at which time it could have been handled in a non-public manner.

Thank you. Feinstein really screwed up. Big time.

Feinstein. did. not. leak. it. I just hate how comfortable right wingers are with flat out lying; you people are deranged and poisoning America.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maine's largest newspaper

https://www.pressherald.com/2018/09/28/our-view-brett-kavanaugh-has-shown-he-doesnt-belong-on-the-supreme-court/

I am shocked, shocked, I tell you, that the media would print such an opinion piece. It’s not like the media hasn’t been doing attack articles throughout the entire confirmation process.

Murkowski and Collins now have 100% cover to vote no.

They won’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is NOTHING except an allegation, from a seemingly troubled young woman (by her own admission) that any of this occurred. NOTHING.
An allegation from 36 years ago. An allegation from a woman whose details have conflicted and who won’t release any of her therapy notes.
It simply does not fit with his behavior over the past 36 years. Not when you have dozens of people - mostly women - speaking up about his impeccable character and his respectful treatment of women.

Almost being raped causes some people trouble.

She seemed credible to most, including most Republicans. How many victims does Brett need to have come forward for you to find any of them credible? You’d give him a pass to ten? Is it 20 victims and you’d believe?

Oh, FFS. And, most Republicans, like myself, believe she has had some type of sexual assault in the past. But, not by Kavanaugh. In fact, I think whatever happened was much more serious and happened in her late teens, as her therapists notes have indicated.
How many “victims?” How about just ONE credible victim with some kind of corroborating evidence. We have seen nothing like that. You can trot out 20 people with allegations. That means nothing except that Democrats will indeed do whatever it takes to derail this nominee.

She knew Brett. She knew her attacker. This wasn’t that she witnessed someone get mugged and she had to guess which two brown haired teens did it; he pulled her into the bedroom, locked the door, got her on the bed, tried to take her clothes off, covered her mouth when she screamed, fondled her, and ground his pelvis against hers while his friend laughed and jumped on top of both of them.

We’ve seen three credible victims. So far. Just because the GOP lives and dies by the rat*uck does not mean the the Democrats do,

Swetnick isn't credible. Ramirez is more so but the fact that it took her six days to be sure it was Kavanaugh somewhat undermines her story as does the fact that her only corroborator is an anonymous male who said it he heard it from someone. In addition, NYT said they could not corroborate and gave the story a ass.

[Anonymous]

^^a pass. Sorry!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is NOTHING except an allegation, from a seemingly troubled young woman (by her own admission) that any of this occurred. NOTHING.
An allegation from 36 years ago. An allegation from a woman whose details have conflicted and who won’t release any of her therapy notes.
It simply does not fit with his behavior over the past 36 years. Not when you have dozens of people - mostly women - speaking up about his impeccable character and his respectful treatment of women.

Almost being raped causes some people trouble.

She seemed credible to most, including most Republicans. How many victims does Brett need to have come forward for you to find any of them credible? You’d give him a pass to ten? Is it 20 victims and you’d believe?

Oh, FFS. And, most Republicans, like myself, believe she has had some type of sexual assault in the past. But, not by Kavanaugh. In fact, I think whatever happened was much more serious and happened in her late teens, as her therapists notes have indicated.
How many “victims?” How about just ONE credible victim with some kind of corroborating evidence. We have seen nothing like that. You can trot out 20 people with allegations. That means nothing except that Democrats will indeed do whatever it takes to derail this nominee.

She knew Brett. She knew her attacker. This wasn’t that she witnessed someone get mugged and she had to guess which two brown haired teens did it; he pulled her into the bedroom, locked the door, got her on the bed, tried to take her clothes off, covered her mouth when she screamed, fondled her, and ground his pelvis against hers while his friend laughed and jumped on top of both of them.

We’ve seen three credible victims. So far. Just because the GOP lives and dies by the rat*uck does not mean the the Democrats do,

This is what SHE says. After 36 years. Sorry, but memories are not always accurate. The 4 people who she said were there have absolutely no recollection of it. None. Her own friend has said she does not know Kavanaugh. How do you reconcile this..... Ford said after her alleged assault, she went downstairs, left the house where her friend was and the three boys were downstairs with her. How could this be if her friend says she doesn’t know Kavanaugh?
The other two claims are a bunch of BS. Not at all credible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is NOTHING except an allegation, from a seemingly troubled young woman (by her own admission) that any of this occurred. NOTHING.
An allegation from 36 years ago. An allegation from a woman whose details have conflicted and who won’t release any of her therapy notes.
It simply does not fit with his behavior over the past 36 years. Not when you have dozens of people - mostly women - speaking up about his impeccable character and his respectful treatment of women.

Almost being raped causes some people trouble.

She seemed credible to most, including most Republicans. How many victims does Brett need to have come forward for you to find any of them credible? You’d give him a pass to ten? Is it 20 victims and you’d believe?

Oh, FFS. And, most Republicans, like myself, believe she has had some type of sexual assault in the past. But, not by Kavanaugh. In fact, I think whatever happened was much more serious and happened in her late teens, as her therapists notes have indicated.
How many “victims?” How about just ONE credible victim with some kind of corroborating evidence. We have seen nothing like that. You can trot out 20 people with allegations. That means nothing except that Democrats will indeed do whatever it takes to derail this nominee.

She knew Brett. She knew her attacker. This wasn’t that she witnessed someone get mugged and she had to guess which two brown haired teens did it; he pulled her into the bedroom, locked the door, got her on the bed, tried to take her clothes off, covered her mouth when she screamed, fondled her, and ground his pelvis against hers while his friend laughed and jumped on top of both of them.

We’ve seen three credible victims. So far. Just because the GOP lives and dies by the rat*uck does not mean the the Democrats do,

Swetnick isn't credible. Ramirez is more so but the fact that it took her six days to be sure it was Kavanaugh somewhat undermines her story as does the fact that her only corroborator is an anonymous male who said it he heard it from someone. In addition, NYT said they could not corroborate and gave the story a ass.

Don’t forget that she didn’t come forward until Democrats encouraged her to do so. Talk about a lack of credibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^a pass. Sorry!

Good typo, though.

[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......

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.

She wanted it kept confidential so she sent it to a senator (and tipped off the Washington Post)? You disclose it to your therapist or best friend if you want it kept completely private, not to a senator on the judiciary committee who has an obligation to report it to the rest of the committee and to the FBI for the nominee's background check at which time it could have been handled in a non-public manner.

Thank you. Feinstein really screwed up. Big time.

Feinstein. did. not. leak. it. I just hate how comfortable right wingers are with flat out lying; you people are deranged and poisoning America.

How do you know I am lying? I am 100% sure, even though the Intercept will not verify my claim, nor will the staffers for Feinstein, but I say I was there and I am sure it was her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maine's largest newspaper

https://www.pressherald.com/2018/09/28/our-view-brett-kavanaugh-has-shown-he-doesnt-belong-on-the-supreme-court/

I am shocked, shocked, I tell you, that the media would print such an opinion piece. It’s not like the media hasn’t been doing attack articles throughout the entire confirmation process.

And the most prominent newspaper in Susan Collins home state at that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"However, as my client has already made clear, she does not know Judge Kavanaugh and has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford," the letter from Howard Walsh, Keyser's attorney, said. It continued that Keyser "does not refute Dr. Ford's account, and she has already told the press that she believes Dr. Ford's account."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/christine-blasey-ford-friend-leland-keyser-clarifies-statement-about-alleged-assault-by-brett-kavanaugh/


Cliffs of insanity party of millions...

Not a single Ford supporter will explain this.

It’s been explained so many times but I’ll do it again: that gathering was a non-event for Keyser so nobody expects her to remember. They went to the pool almost every day, it sounds like small gatherings after being at the pool were a regular occurrence, and Ford didn’t tell her about the assault. Can you recall every gathering big or small that you went to as a freshman in college and who was there? I certainly cannot, I pretty much just remember events, etc. with personal significance, even then I can’t remember much detail. Even though she doesn’t remember anything she trusts her friend and believes her.