Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The FBI has not yet contacted Dr. Ford.

To date, there is absolutely no confirmation that ANY investigation is taking place at all.

Are they just running out the clock?

Once again, nobody knows what they have or haven’t done. It is an FBI investigation. Done in confidence. It is not for public consumption at this point.... as this SHOULD have been the way it was done all along. Thanks, Feinstein.

Two of the women confirm that they have not yet been contacted as of 10 minutes ago.

1) It's been 2 days. 2) Seems like it might make sense for them to start with testimony from those who might be able to corroborate or contradict the accusers' claims before they speak to them.

So, now you are not only demanding an FBI investigation, but you are telling them how to do it? Nice.

Read what I was replying to and read what I wrote again.

Sorry. I was replying to the person above you. Apologies for not being clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can everyone supporting Kavanaugh tell us why you are overlooking his obvious lies under oath? Putting all the allegations aside and just looking at the yearbook definitions he gave and is clearly lying about - how do you rationalize that? I really want to hear from someone.

This has been done over and over again. Go back and look through the thread.

Where? Where has this been adequately explained? It's been glossed over. But no, haven't seen anyone rationalize it.

Short answer... because what YOU are calling lies, are not lies. At all. It’s wishful thinking on your part because we know that you see your efforts falling apart and so you are diverting your efforts to come up with something you think will derail this nominee.

https://www.newsweek.com/kavanaugh-said-he-had-no-connections-yale-he-was-legacy-student-1145286
Kavanaugh lied about the Yale legacy, he liked about the drinking age. Those two are provable, so far.

The Yale legacy thing has been totally debunked. Question: Did he say anything in his testimony or in answering questions that he was not a legacy student?
The drinking age.... go back and read his testimony. He did not lie.

??. He clearly said he had “no connections.” Yet he had a connection— perhaps not a strong one, but significantly more than people who truly have no connection.

[Anonymous]

And for those saying, she was drinking, she may not remember accurately so pooooooooooor brett, he says he is innocent, we should believe him.

No. She knew him. She had been dating his friend. She knew him, she knew it was him.

The insinuation that she put herself at risk therefore she shouldn't expect to be believed, or it was just attempted rape, therefore not that bad - that EXACTLY is why judges who rule that way are getting thrown off the bench.

That time in our history is over and those judges who rule that way are out.

Too bad for BK that he wasn't born decades before so he could have made it on the court.

[Anonymous]

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...

It’s called the “I know my school friend is a loon but what can I do?” defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And for those saying, she was drinking, she may not remember accurately so pooooooooooor brett, he says he is innocent, we should believe him.

No. She knew him. She had been dating his friend. She knew him, she knew it was him.

The insinuation that she put herself at risk therefore she shouldn't expect to be believed, or it was just attempted rape, therefore not that bad - that EXACTLY is why judges who rule that way are getting thrown off the bench.

That time in our history is over and those judges who rule that way are out.

Too bad for BK that he wasn't born decades before so he could have made it on the court.

So, what you are saying is... we cannot question the motives or behavior of the accuser when there is no proof or even credible evidence?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Other changes to her story:

First: short stairwell (to me that indicates split level or split foyer home)
Next: Small stairwell (no clue what that is)
Last: Narrow stairwell (to me this indicates townhouse)

Is she trying to change the location of the party and the description of the house? Sounds like it. Why?

I guess we just go with stairwell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I have no idea whether someone from Feiny’s office leaked it but no way, no how is anyone ever going to admit if they did.

Exactly. Some activist Democrat did it.

Could an activist attorney have done it?

Sure. Debra Katz has an activist mission.

So Debra Katz is responsible for Kavanaugh lying multiple times under oath? Please explain.

The question was who leaked the "secret" letter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can everyone supporting Kavanaugh tell us why you are overlooking his obvious lies under oath? Putting all the allegations aside and just looking at the yearbook definitions he gave and is clearly lying about - how do you rationalize that? I really want to hear from someone.

This has been done over and over again. Go back and look through the thread.

Where? Where has this been adequately explained? It's been glossed over. But no, haven't seen anyone rationalize it.

Short answer... because what YOU are calling lies, are not lies. At all. It’s wishful thinking on your part because we know that you see your efforts falling apart and so you are diverting your efforts to come up with something you think will derail this nominee.

https://www.newsweek.com/kavanaugh-said-he-had-no-connections-yale-he-was-legacy-student-1145286
Kavanaugh lied about the Yale legacy, he liked about the drinking age. Those two are provable, so far.

The Yale legacy thing has been totally debunked. Question: Did he say anything in his testimony or in answering questions that he was not a legacy student?
The drinking age.... go back and read his testimony. He did not lie.

??. He clearly said he had “no connections.” Yet he had a connection— perhaps not a strong one, but significantly more than people who truly have no connection.

Again, a grandfather undergrad connection would not have been a connection for YLS. Unless GF was a big donor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I noticed Brett Kavanaugh yesterday with fake tears. I'm going to ask him who is his acting coach.

His tears were fake, but hers were genuine. Correct?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can everyone supporting Kavanaugh tell us why you are overlooking his obvious lies under oath? Putting all the allegations aside and just looking at the yearbook definitions he gave and is clearly lying about - how do you rationalize that? I really want to hear from someone.

This has been done over and over again. Go back and look through the thread.

Where? Where has this been adequately explained? It's been glossed over. But no, haven't seen anyone rationalize it.

Short answer... because what YOU are calling lies, are not lies. At all. It’s wishful thinking on your part because we know that you see your efforts falling apart and so you are diverting your efforts to come up with something you think will derail this nominee.

https://www.newsweek.com/kavanaugh-said-he-had-no-connections-yale-he-was-legacy-student-1145286
Kavanaugh lied about the Yale legacy, he liked about the drinking age. Those two are provable, so far.

The Yale legacy thing has been totally debunked. Question: Did he say anything in his testimony or in answering questions that he was not a legacy student?
The drinking age.... go back and read his testimony. He did not lie.

??. He clearly said he had “no connections.” Yet he had a connection— perhaps not a strong one, but significantly more than people who truly have no connection.

Again, a grandfather undergrad connection would not have been a connection for YLS. Unless GF was a big donor.

Yes, it is a connection. You can keep saying that it is not, Mr. Interviewer, but that doesn’t make it so.

I went to an HYP as an undein the 80s. I had a parent who went to a graduate school there. I would reserve the term “legacy” for people whose parents were also undergrads. But I would never insistently shout that I had “no connection.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How dare you make women be responsible for their behavior!!!

This thread is about men being responsible for their actions. Brett Kavanaugh is a coward and a liar who feels entitled to a Supreme Court seat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can everyone supporting Kavanaugh tell us why you are overlooking his obvious lies under oath? Putting all the allegations aside and just looking at the yearbook definitions he gave and is clearly lying about - how do you rationalize that? I really want to hear from someone.

This has been done over and over again. Go back and look through the thread.

Where? Where has this been adequately explained? It's been glossed over. But no, haven't seen anyone rationalize it.

Short answer... because what YOU are calling lies, are not lies. At all. It’s wishful thinking on your part because we know that you see your efforts falling apart and so you are diverting your efforts to come up with something you think will derail this nominee.

https://www.newsweek.com/kavanaugh-said-he-had-no-connections-yale-he-was-legacy-student-1145286
Kavanaugh lied about the Yale legacy, he liked about the drinking age. Those two are provable, so far.

The Yale legacy thing has been totally debunked. Question: Did he say anything in his testimony or in answering questions that he was not a legacy student?
The drinking age.... go back and read his testimony. He did not lie.

Kavanaugh said he had no connections.

The drinking age thing: definite lie.
http://time.com/5409564/brett-kavanaugh-drinking-age-maryland/

But I'm all for him being confirmed, just like you want. Then we'll see what happens. I've known guys like him, they'll find a way to implode one way or another, once they achieve their objective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And for those saying, she was drinking, she may not remember accurately so pooooooooooor brett, he says he is innocent, we should believe him.

No. She knew him. She had been dating his friend. She knew him, she knew it was him.

The insinuation that she put herself at risk therefore she shouldn't expect to be believed, or it was just attempted rape, therefore not that bad - that EXACTLY is why judges who rule that way are getting thrown off the bench.

That time in our history is over and those judges who rule that way are out.

Too bad for BK that he wasn't born decades before so he could have made it on the court.

It seems that in your world view only women are to be believed, and only men need to be accountable for their drinking and resulting behaviors. I sincerely hope that's not what you're thinking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The he said/she said of the Kavanaugh-Ford testimonies Thursday aside, Kavanaugh’s demeanor, his clear partisanship despite his assurances in earlier testimony that he was not partisan, his conspiracy theory allegations, and the rudeness with which he responded to Democratic Judiciary Committee members demonstrate, at the very least, that he is ill suited for the SCOTUS.

This is a man who ranted about his disdain for Democrats and threatened them - he’ll have to recuse himself from any case where a Democratic Party member or known liberal individual or group brings a case before the court. He is also dangerous - our Democratic institutions require as apolitical judiciary as is feasible. No reasonable person could expect Kavanaugh to be unbiased in cases where liberals or Democrats are involved.

And then there’s his very deliberate obfuscation and lies. The Devils Triangle is a drinking game? Boofing is farting? Renate was just a really good friend you admired? C’mon, Brett.

+1. He is unfit
Please nominate a Conservative jurist President Trump. We don’t want a partisan operative on the highest court

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And for those saying, she was drinking, she may not remember accurately so pooooooooooor brett, he says he is innocent, we should believe him.

No. She knew him. She had been dating his friend. She knew him, she knew it was him.

The insinuation that she put herself at risk therefore she shouldn't expect to be believed, or it was just attempted rape, therefore not that bad - that EXACTLY is why judges who rule that way are getting thrown off the bench.

That time in our history is over and those judges who rule that way are out.

Too bad for BK that he wasn't born decades before so he could have made it on the court.

It seems that in your world view only women are to be believed, and only men need to be accountable for their drinking and resulting behaviors. I sincerely hope that's not what you're thinking.

This was a job interview. She is a credible witness. There were doubts about his character and he confirmed those and raised new doubts in his tantrum. Bad strategy.
He is done.