Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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....

YEp and then they would not send it for a vote. Nice guys those GOP senators on the JC are!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The whole Flake thing was about giving political cover to Collins and Murkowski for voting YES on Kavanaugh. Collins & Murkowski can claim that a "thorough FBI investigation" showed no evidence that Kavanaugh committed sexual assault, and they can vote the man in with no fear of a political backlash from their moderate, mainly female, voters.

This entire carnival could have been avoided if the POTUS put up a conservative with a clean background. Or if POTUS had pulled this nomination at the first stench of mischief in Kav's history.

But POTUS was trained by Roy Cohn, whose MO was never back down, never admit anything, fight to the death, and that's what POTUS is doing with this completely and terminally flawed candidate.

[Anonymous]

Kav is a crappy candidate. We can do better. Toss his resume in the trash and find someone without all these skeletons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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....

You have to watch how they vote and not what they say.
They wouldn't let there even BE a vote on Garland.

They are politicians, pay attention to what I am saying, not what I am doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Democrats will fight ANY conservative.

Neil Gorsuch says, "what about me?"

[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.

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.

If Yale’s application had a line asking about relatives who attended the school, I have zero doubt that he listed his grandfather.

(All the applications I filled out in the 80s asked this question. I have no idea if it is a question on today’s common app.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

If Yale’s application had a line asking about relatives who attended the school, I have zero doubt that he listed his grandfather.

(All the applications I filled out in the 80s asked this question. I have no idea if it is a question on today’s common app.)

Likely is--but a grandfather undergrad wouldn't merit a second look for YLS.

[Anonymous]

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

Yup. She was a Holton-Arms, Columbia Country Club girl. Now she (and her husband) own a $3 million house Palo Alto and a $1 million beach house in Santa Cruz.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

If Yale’s application had a line asking about relatives who attended the school, I have zero doubt that he listed his grandfather.

(All the applications I filled out in the 80s asked this question. I have no idea if it is a question on today’s common app.)

I am the same age as Ashley and the state schools she and I went to in the early 90s had the same question. No way was YALE not asking it. He was full of crap. But I love the grasshopper KA Conway wannabees who want to spin it like his grandfather's legacy was no connection. LOL! You have to work harder if you want to get to her level, folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents knew she had a drinking problem. Ask them. Or her lawyer brothers in DC.

Ask her husband why they were in couples counseling.
It wasn’t about an extra front door during a renovation.

She did not say they were in counseling because of the door. She said the door came up during couples counseling

I thought the second door was for a separate entrance for Google interns they host?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

Yup. She was a Holton-Arms, Columbia Country Club girl. Now she (and her husband) own a $3 million house Palo Alto and a $1 million beach house in Santa Cruz.

Do you know what a $3m house in Palo Alto is? When did they buy this house?

[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.

People make ‘phone calls’ all the time. Especially those that have given money or that are willing to give a substantial amount of money. I’m not against that as who else is going to pay for the nice things at the school? It’s not going to be me.
My issue would be when these privileged folk who get in think that they only get in on their own merits when in actuality there were maybe 29,000 equally qualified candidates who were rejected (subtract out about 15% of the applicants as being unqualified and that’s what you get). Some of the rejected applicants, many of them really, were actually more qualified than the rich applicants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

If Yale’s application had a line asking about relatives who attended the school, I have zero doubt that he listed his grandfather.

(All the applications I filled out in the 80s asked this question. I have no idea if it is a question on today’s common app.)

Likely is--but a grandfather undergrad wouldn't merit a second look for YLS.

please. disagree with that at that time but the fact he had a grandfather who went to yale helped him get in to yale. That definitely helped him get in to YLS even if his grandfather's connection didn't affect YLS.

He was full of it.

[Anonymous]

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?

Different PP, but the article links to The Oregonian article: https://www.oregonlive.com/silicon-forest/index.ssf/2018/09/julie_swetnick_one_of_kavanaug.html

Swetnick worked at Portland-based Webtrends for a few months in 2000, according to a civil suit the Portland company filed against her late that year. The company said she was hired as a professional services engineer to work off-site. It's not clear whether she ever worked in Webtrends' Portland office.

In the suit, Webtrends alleged Swetnick claimed to have graduated from Johns Hopkins University but the company said it subsequently learned the school had no record of her attendance. Webtrends said she also "falsely described her work experience" at a prior employer.

The suit alleges Swetnick "engaged in unwelcome sexual innuendo and inappropriate conduct" directed at two male employees during a business lunch, with Webtrends customers present. Swetnick claimed two other employees had sexually harassed her, according to the suit.

Webtrends' suit said it determined Swetnick had engaged in misconduct but could not find evidence to support her allegations against her colleagues. Later, the company alleged, Swetnick took medical leave and simultaneously claimed unemployment benefits in the District of Columbia.

In the suit, Webtrends alleged Swetnick threatened legal action against the company over her own harassment claims. The lawsuit claimed that act defamed the business and sought at least $150,000 on behalf of an employee that Swetnick had allegedly made false statements about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

Yup. She was a Holton-Arms, Columbia Country Club girl. Now she (and her husband) own a $3 million house Palo Alto and a $1 million beach house in Santa Cruz.

Only poor women can be victims of sexual assault? I’m not sure I follow your argument.