Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Avenatti’s new client has a checkered past with questionable claims. I really hope they charge her (and Avenatti) with making false allegations.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/36503/kavanaugh-accuser-lied-about-background-has-ryan-saavedra

"Daily Wire" looks like a troll website set up by the Russians to discredit Blasey Ford and promote Kavanaugh.

Find a reliable source, would ya, trollie?

The link to WSJ is reliable.

post excerpts. I can't read wsj online without paying.

"Roughly a decade ago, Ms. Swetnick was involved in a dispute with her former employer, New York Life Insurance Co., over a sexual-harassment complaint she filed, according to people familiar with the matter. Representing her in the complaint was the firm run by Debra Katz, the lawyer currently representing Dr. Ford. The company ultimately reached a financial settlement with Ms. Swetnick, the people said."

Free part of online WSJ--comes near end of story.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/attorney-avenatti-releases-affidavit-from-woman-describing-kavanaugh-at-parties-in-1980s-1537974634

Might be a coincidence. She wasn't represented by Katz, just by her firm. There may not be that many firms that specialize in sexual harassment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I didn’t go to Yale, have no connections there and no nothing about the ability to get in.
But, the fact that you all are arguing over whether being a “legacy” means he has “no connections with” YLS tells me that HE didn’t consider it a “connection” worth discussing since this fact is so easily checked.
To argue this as a lie is just petty and will not go anywhere. In fact, it’s ridiculous.

And that isn't credible. A grandfather having gone to Yale is in fact a connection, no matter how much you want to deny it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The FBI is apparently going to interview 4 witnesses about the sexual assault allegations, but it won't be a full fledged criminal investigation. The WH will then decide based on these findings, as reported in NYT.

If that is true he will always be illegitimate and this will hang over him forever, SCOTUS or not. Stupid move but he and Trump only care about getting him on the court.

Sacrifice will not be worth it.

Only in the minds of liberals who had him guilty before anyone testified about any of this crap.

Anyone on the fence is no longer on the fence. He looked like an angry drunk, and he was presumably sober. He had a pathetic tantrum. The GOP is going to lose people who may have gone their way in the past.

I have to admit, I kept thinking, imagine that personality after quickly imbibing 5 or 6 beers in a row Yikes.

I don’t presume he was sober. He was acting like he had already had a few.

[Anonymous]

Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh’s names were not on the initial list of names given by Senate Republicans to the White House with suggested witnesses for the FBI.

https://twitter.com/ShimonPro/status/1046499678806847496

Hey, let's have the FBI do an investigation and NOT interview the two main people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

He lied about even watching Ford's testimony. I mean, as plain on the nose on your face, he lied.

Prove he did.

His aid tweeted it, it was screen captured and shared widely including here. And then she deleted it.

Show it. If it was screen captured, it is there somewhere.

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/2835/755157.page#top

9/27 at 19:12

Thanks, PP!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I didn’t go to Yale, have no connections there and no nothing about the ability to get in.
But, the fact that you all are arguing over whether being a “legacy” means he has “no connections with” YLS tells me that HE didn’t consider it a “connection” worth discussing since this fact is so easily checked.
To argue this as a lie is just petty and will not go anywhere. In fact, it’s ridiculous.

And that isn't credible. A grandfather having gone to Yale is in fact a connection, no matter how much you want to deny it.

Connection for undergrad where GF went. Unless GF was big Yale donor, the fact that GF went to Yale undergrad would not have been a connection for Yale Law School.

[Anonymous]

James Comey in a NYT article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/30/opinion/james-comey-fbi-kavanaugh-investigation.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

Last paragraphs:

"It is idiotic to put a shot clock on the F.B.I. But it is better to give professionals seven days to find facts than have no professional investigation at all. When the week is up, one team (and maybe both) will be angry at the F.B.I. The president will condemn the bureau for being a corrupt nest of Clinton-lovers if they turn up bad facts. Maybe Democrats will similarly condemn agents as Trumpists if they don’t. As strange as it sounds, there is freedom in being totally screwed. Agents can just do their work. Find facts. Speak truth to power.

Despite all the lies and all the attacks, there really are people who just want to figure out what’s true. The F.B.I. is full of them."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I didn’t go to Yale, have no connections there and no nothing about the ability to get in.
But, the fact that you all are arguing over whether being a “legacy” means he has “no connections with” YLS tells me that HE didn’t consider it a “connection” worth discussing since this fact is so easily checked.
To argue this as a lie is just petty and will not go anywhere. In fact, it’s ridiculous.

And that isn't credible. A grandfather having gone to Yale is in fact a connection, no matter how much you want to deny it.

To me that just smacks of the privilege that he is ensconced in. That he doesn't consider being a legacy to have facilitated his entry into Yale is part and parcel of his self-mythologizing. He's convinced himself he is a stand up guy who worked hard for everything he has, rather than realizing how much has been handed to him on a silver platter, starting with the fact that he went to one of the most prestigious prep schools around. Typical for the wealthy who have no clue what it means to really have achieved success with out a leg up. No humility there whatsoever.

[Anonymous]

They were both privileged. Do you know who her father is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I didn’t go to Yale, have no connections there and no nothing about the ability to get in.
But, the fact that you all are arguing over whether being a “legacy” means he has “no connections with” YLS tells me that HE didn’t consider it a “connection” worth discussing since this fact is so easily checked.
To argue this as a lie is just petty and will not go anywhere. In fact, it’s ridiculous.

And that isn't credible. A grandfather having gone to Yale is in fact a connection, no matter how much you want to deny it.

To me that just smacks of the privilege that he is ensconced in. That he doesn't consider being a legacy to have facilitated his entry into Yale is part and parcel of his self-mythologizing. He's convinced himself he is a stand up guy who worked hard for everything he has, rather than realizing how much has been handed to him on a silver platter, starting with the fact that he went to one of the most prestigious prep schools around. Typical for the wealthy who have no clue what it means to really have achieved success with out a leg up. No humility there whatsoever.

Again, Kavanaugh said he did not have connections to Yale Law School. His grandfather did not go there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's more from the NYT story. It completely backs up the NBC news story from last night. The "investigation" is complete BS orchestrated by Senate Republicans and Don McGahn, who's been working his butt off trying to get an ultra-conservative majority on the Supreme Court.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/29/us/politics/kavanaugh-fbi-inquiry.html

Led by Donald F. McGahn II, the White House counsel, Mr. Trump’s advisers are helping direct the scope of the background check, according to the senior administration official. Mr. McGahn shared the witness list with the F.B.I. but is working in concert with Senate Republicans, and senators considered key swing votes have had extensive input, the people said. Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Jeff Flake of Arizona have both said they want Mr. Judge questioned by the F.B.I.

The witness list did not extend to high school and college classmates who have said in interviews that Judge Kavanaugh drank heavily, including some who said he went beyond typical consumption.

So a sham investigation. Hope that Flake and co. don't fall for it.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

And, I will say it again.... 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?

Easy. I hung out with many people over the years briefly and I have no recollection of them today.

Let’s consider the situation. 4 boys. 2 girls. One girl claims she was sexually assaulted while 2 boys and another girls were downstairs. The two boys who allegedly assaulted her go downstairs and join the other 2 boys and 1 girl. That is 4 boys and 1 girl downstairs.
Ford claims she left at that point. Seemingly, leaving her friend with these other 4 boys. Several questions come to mind....
1. Evidently, Ford was not at all considered about the safety of her friend with the 4 boys, despite the fact that she was allegedly assaulted. You don’t find that strange? You don’t find it odd that she never asked her friend what happened after she left?
2. Leland was allegedly in the room with 4 boys, one of which was allegedly Kavanaugh, yet she claims not to know him. Seriously? A small gathering such as this and she still claims she doesn’t know him?
3. Ford leaves, not knowing how she got home. Does her friend not wonder why she left? Wouldn’t a friend follow up and ask her about it?

It makes no sense......

I agree. Also, she is sure she drank only one beer. What does she remember of this? Where did she drink it? Was she talking with the orhers? How can she remember the number of beers but nithing else about what was going on while she drank it?

If we look at her yearbook, you'll see how none of those party girls had only one beer.

They also are not alleged to have assaulted anyone.

See the difference?

No, but she is accusing him of assault. With all the drinking depicted in her yearbooks, how do we know SHE was not drunk? Because she said she wasn’t? Maybe that is why she doesn’t remember how she got home.

She clearly remembers only one beer. We are to take her word.

Why?

Crickets

I would imagine after she was assaulted one of the thoughts that ran through her mind over and over was, how did this happen to me? Part of that was probably I just had one beer. Was it my fault? I only had one beer. Should I tell my parents? I had a beer, my parents would kill me. So many reasons she would remember this detail.

Kavanaugh on the hand says he only drank on the weekends. His own freaking calendar shows him going to parties on weekdays too! But sure, let's believe him.

For goodness sake--it was summer. And July 1st was Thursday before a three day weekend.

Maybe in the Trumpian Calendar, Thursday is a weekend day, but in the calendar the rest of the US uses, Thursday is a weekday.

Lie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They were both privileged. Do you know who her father is?

Enlighten us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They were both privileged. Do you know who her father is?

Did she ever say she wasn't? She spoke about going to the country club. She is not hiding who she was at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrats will fight ANY conservative.

And conservatives would welcome any Democrat to the court with wine and roses.

Yeah, the GOP rolled out the red carpet for Garland as I remember .... Oh, wait.

And yet....