Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 5

[Anonymous]

If you don't think there is a "power dynamic" when a couple of popular football playing Prep boys hold down a younger underclassman girl of 15 from another school (in Ford's case), let alone a female from a public school in Gaithersburg (Swetnik), then you are just being purposefully dishonest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you don't think there is a "power dynamic" when a couple of popular football playing Prep boys hold down a younger underclassman girl of 15 from another school (in Ford's case), let alone a female from a public school in Gaithersburg (Swetnik), then you are just being purposefully dishonest.

I completely agree, and also are that the essay from The Nation was damning. I fully expect Judge to eventually confess.

[Anonymous]

"You are wrong. The ABA considered Kavanaugh well qualified on the basis of his record. They reconsidered after his testimony defending himself."

~wiping tears of laughter from my eyes~

The IRS went after Capone for tax evasion, but they otherwise thought he was a great guy.

Please. The ABA was caught sleeping on this and realized they had rubber stamped him. They had to walk it back and most pointedly, they have NOT re-endorsed him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash: both the congress, white house, and the judiciary are controlled by the GOP. Do you really think even Kavanaugh's obvious perjury would be prosecuted there?

Stop asking: Why aren't perjury charges being brought?

Answer:

The majority GOP branches of government will never bring charges.

Why didn't Ford or Swetnik bring their charges to the police?

The sexist police force and prosecutors offices of 1981, 1983 etc., would never have believed them! They can't bring the charges now because too much time has gone by. It doesn't mean it didn't happen the exact way she said it did.

When the Republicans had no hope in hell of passing bills, they still worked on them, used media, and otherwise energized their base to keep issues at the forefront.
If the perjury charge were serious, Democrats could be doing exactly the same. They are not, and yet their base would love it. That they are not pursuing this is telling.

I'm not asking why Ford and Swetnick didn't go to the police then. I'm asking why they don't go to the police now. The police who have explicitly said they will follow up on their complaints. That Ford and Swetnick don't go to the police now is telling.

Are you suggesting that Democrats behave in the same unconscionable way Republicans did and go on FOX and spread lies about the ACA to conspire to rip healthcare away from millions of Americans even though they didn't have the votes to overturn it? You may be on to something with that...

I am suggesting that when people believe strongly in something, they aren't going a little thing like "don't currently have the votes/power" get in their way.

If Democrats believe that Kavanaugh has perjured himself, they could be doing something about it. They aren't. Which gives credence to the theory that it was all a circus and nothing they believed seriously. If they believe that he was a disgusting man who sexually attacked and assaulted multiple women, they would be actively encouraging the women to report to police. They aren't. It was a show for them, and they used the women as pawns.

For all that "Benghazi" was a ridiculous frustration, it shows a level of belief that something happened and it should be followed up on. The loudest agitators may have been single-minded to the point of insanity, but I don't think you could doubt that they believed something bad happened and justice was needed.

This situation is exposing the Democrats as having run a circus with no real belief in their assertions. Being willing to attack and destroy a man over what seem to have been baseless assertions, since there has been no followup, is completely disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don't think there is a "power dynamic" when a couple of popular football playing Prep boys hold down a younger underclassman girl of 15 from another school (in Ford's case), let alone a female from a public school in Gaithersburg (Swetnik), then you are just being purposefully dishonest.

I completely agree, and also are that the essay from The Nation was damning. I fully expect Judge to eventually confess.

Kavanaugh has no conscience to unburden. There is no shame among the members of that Senate committee--they have shown us who they are and they are celebrating!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there ever any proof or witnesses when a boy is raped by a fellow player or a teacher, coach, priest, etc.?

Aren't those allegations usually decades old?

Why do you believe the boys and not Dr. Ford who was 15 at the time?

In many cases there was a pattern of abuse and reported by enough people to establish that. So, when someone comes forward, consider Cosby, and their recall significantly aligns, you believe. With Kavanaugh, when you read the whole of it and rationally and objectively consider it there is nothing here that aligns save the excessive drinking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:By the way it isn't up to Dr. Ford, et al, to bring charges, you ninnies. The prosecutor's office can bring charges on any case they like, whether or not the victim comes in to their offices

*sigh*

"Police in Montgomery County conduct “victim-based” sexual assault investigations, meaning they generally do not launch an investigation until someone speaks to investigators and says he or she wants a criminal case to be opened."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/amid-the-ford-kavanaugh-exchanges-have-the-local-police-been-asked-to-investigate/2018/09/27/7787d8c0-c297-11e8-a1f0-a4051b6ad114_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.eac9e9a8805f

The police are ready to hear Ford's complaint. They have explicitly said so. That she is choosing not to do so makes her story less believable. Unfortunately Feinstein put her in this position, but as soon as Ford decided she was willing to come out publicly, it makes no sense not to follow up with the police. If she believes Kavanaugh would have raped her, her willingness to leave him on the court by not making a police report is bizarre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you don't think there is a "power dynamic" when a couple of popular football playing Prep boys hold down a younger underclassman girl of 15 from another school (in Ford's case), let alone a female from a public school in Gaithersburg (Swetnik), then you are just being purposefully dishonest.

The PP offering 1-3 power dynamic situations was doing so regarding the Swetnick situation. Swetnick was an adult college student. Swetnick was the one who claimed to repeatedly attend gang rape parties. The PP was attempting to defend that behavior.

Swetnick was not 15. She was years older than the boys. She was a legal adult.

That you have to bring in Ford in an attempt to make Swetnick look like she had no agency is being purposefully dishonest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"You are wrong. The ABA considered Kavanaugh well qualified on the basis of his record. They reconsidered after his testimony defending himself."

~wiping tears of laughter from my eyes~

The IRS went after Capone for tax evasion, but they otherwise thought he was a great guy.

Please. The ABA was caught sleeping on this and realized they had rubber stamped him. They had to walk it back and most pointedly, they have NOT re-endorsed him.

That may be, but it doesn't change the facts. The ABA considered Kavanaugh well qualified on the basis of his record. They reconsidered after his testimony defending himself.

To claim the ABA found Kavanaugh not qualified based on his record is wrong.

What is the point to lying about the situation? Why lie about something so trivial? It just weakens your point. If you have to lie to make Kavanaugh seem incompetent, you don't have an argument for his incompetence.

[Anonymous]

Once these midterms are over and people are back from campaigning, I think you will hear quite a howl coming from the Democrats about the perjury. These chicks ain't hatched yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"You are wrong. The ABA considered Kavanaugh well qualified on the basis of his record. They reconsidered after his testimony defending himself."

~wiping tears of laughter from my eyes~

The IRS went after Capone for tax evasion, but they otherwise thought he was a great guy.

Please. The ABA was caught sleeping on this and realized they had rubber stamped him. They had to walk it back and most pointedly, they have NOT re-endorsed him.

That may be, but it doesn't change the facts. The ABA considered Kavanaugh well qualified on the basis of his record. They reconsidered after his testimony defending himself.

To claim the ABA found Kavanaugh not qualified based on his record is wrong.

What is the point to lying about the situation? Why lie about something so trivial? It just weakens your point. If you have to lie to make Kavanaugh seem incompetent, you don't have an argument for his incompetence.

Tell that to your boy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Once these midterms are over and people are back from campaigning, I think you will hear quite a howl coming from the Democrats about the perjury. These chicks ain't hatched yet.

I hope so. Although that doesn't explain why Leahy couldn't be laying ground work now. I'm not the only person who, given lack of follow up, is becoming more convinced that the Democratic Senators were just engaged in showmanship and had no qualms dragging Ford, Swetnick, and Ramirez through the mud in their attempts to slime Kavanaugh. Being able to demonstrate some follow up would help make it look as if they had honest concerns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"You are wrong. The ABA considered Kavanaugh well qualified on the basis of his record. They reconsidered after his testimony defending himself."

~wiping tears of laughter from my eyes~

The IRS went after Capone for tax evasion, but they otherwise thought he was a great guy.

Please. The ABA was caught sleeping on this and realized they had rubber stamped him. They had to walk it back and most pointedly, they have NOT re-endorsed him.

That may be, but it doesn't change the facts. The ABA considered Kavanaugh well qualified on the basis of his record. They reconsidered after his testimony defending himself.

To claim the ABA found Kavanaugh not qualified based on his record is wrong.

What is the point to lying about the situation? Why lie about something so trivial? It just weakens your point. If you have to lie to make Kavanaugh seem incompetent, you don't have an argument for his incompetence.

Tell that to your boy.

There is no evidence he lied. There is evidence PP lied about the ABA.

Try again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"You are wrong. The ABA considered Kavanaugh well qualified on the basis of his record. They reconsidered after his testimony defending himself."

~wiping tears of laughter from my eyes~

The IRS went after Capone for tax evasion, but they otherwise thought he was a great guy.

Please. The ABA was caught sleeping on this and realized they had rubber stamped him. They had to walk it back and most pointedly, they have NOT re-endorsed him.

The ABA did NOT walk it back. The president of the ABA wrote a personal letter to Charles Grassley. She has not authority to change the decision by the ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary. The ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary gave its highest rating of well-qualified to Kavanaugh. That rating by the ABA standing committee has never changed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"You are wrong. The ABA considered Kavanaugh well qualified on the basis of his record. They reconsidered after his testimony defending himself."

~wiping tears of laughter from my eyes~

The IRS went after Capone for tax evasion, but they otherwise thought he was a great guy.

Please. The ABA was caught sleeping on this and realized they had rubber stamped him. They had to walk it back and most pointedly, they have NOT re-endorsed him.

The ABA did NOT walk it back. The president of the ABA wrote a personal letter to Charles Grassley. She has not authority to change the decision by the ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary. The ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary gave its highest rating of well-qualified to Kavanaugh. That rating by the ABA standing committee has never changed.

She is a he. Bob Carlson is president of the ABA. And, yes, he overstepped his authority by sending out his letter on ABA letterhead and using the term "we" to imply he was speaking for the ABA and not himself.

The Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary the next day diplomatically pointed out they had not reviewed his letter before it went out and said it upheld Kavanaugh's well qualified rating.