Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dem Playbook:

Throw out unsubstantiated allegations of gang rape, attempted rape, and attempted murder

Make sure every media source repeats those allegations as fact

Make sure that any he said/she said is in front of the public

Attack the character of the accused when he dares himself

Make fun of the accused when he gets emotional when speaking of his wife and kids

Use the media to make fun of the accused

Continued.......

Ensure your witness has appropriate representation by referring her to an activist attorney

Call, repeatedly, and loudly, for an FBI investigation

Convince a Republican Senator that an FBI investigation is needed

Once the FBI investigation is ongoing, call it a “sham"

If they aren't going to talk to Judge, Squi, the Yale classmates, Safeway or any of Ford's coroburators, then yes it is a sham.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A couple of Kavanaugh friends (women) have been on TV. The come off as total snobs "We only associate with Catholic Schools"

Nobody is more snobbish than Blackout Brett. “I GOT INTO YALE LAW SCHOOL!”

It's so embarrassing that he behaved like an entitled angry jerk, no matter what the allegations are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an interesting Ted talk on memory by a memory researcher who found that some people were going into therapy with one problem (depression, eating disorders, etc) and coming out of therapy false memories of abuse or horrific events that never actually happened to them due to 'repressed memory' psychotherapy.

Go to 8:43 at https://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_loftus_the_fiction_of_memory#t-523210 and watch from there. It's really interesting.

Powerful quote from the end of the talk: "If I've learned anything from these decades of working on these problems it's this: just because somebody tells you something and they say it with confidence, just because they say it with lots of detail, just because they express emotion when they say it, it doesn't mean that it really happened."

+ 1,000

BINGO.
And, once again - the 4 people SHE gave as people who could corroborate her story were unable to do that.

We get it. You think he is a lovely sweet man. Got it.

One does not need to be pro-Kavanaugh to be appalled by the use of totally uncorroborated allegations against a nominee.

This is inaccurate. And you know it. Cosby, Sandusky, Nassar, they all went down from testimony and sworn statements. She had that. She also has medical records that are considered evidence in all 50 states.

There was a ton of corroborating evidence in each of those cases.

And, because it evidently needs to be stated again..... NO corroborating evidence in this case. NONE.

Remember, Cosby, Sandusky and Nassar were all being charged CRIMINALLY. They were not hoping for appointment to the Supreme Court.

The standard of evidence required to find someone guilty of sexual abuse or rape is and should be much higher than that which is required to fail to give a judge a promotion.

I get that many of you liberals think any woman should be able to accuse a man of egregious behavior---with no corroboration or witnesses who can support her or any accountability for her behaviors or mental health status--while stating it's not a criminal charge. As a woman, it is absolutely incredible and shocking to me that you could think that way. And then point to his reaction to a detailed, highly descriptive account of a near rape and suffocation as inappropriate. I don't care if the accused is a Democrat, Republican, or anywhere in between, I think that's wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an interesting Ted talk on memory by a memory researcher who found that some people were going into therapy with one problem (depression, eating disorders, etc) and coming out of therapy false memories of abuse or horrific events that never actually happened to them due to 'repressed memory' psychotherapy.

Go to 8:43 at https://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_loftus_the_fiction_of_memory#t-523210 and watch from there. It's really interesting.

Fod has not had "repressed memory" therapy. PLus, her memory of the event was not repressed -- she just didn't tell anyone for a long time.

How do you know?

How do you know she has? What I know is that she was in couples counseling with her husband, that she told some friends about the incident along the way, that the incident affected her studies in undergrad. There are no reports of any repressed memory therapy. It's simply speculation.

Plus, I know that repressed memory therapy has been debunked by the professional psychological community of which Ford is a part.

I DON’T know. But, I am not claiming I do know. Unlike you.
Since she will not submit her therapy records, the committee also does not know.
“The incident” could be anything. I believe something very traumatic happened to her - something much worse than what she is claiming - at the hands of someone that was NOT Brett Kavanaugh.

I suggest you demand a full FBI investigation into the matter -- Starting with her therapist to see if she' ever done any repressed memory therapy. Then check all the therapists who have done this type of therapy to determine if Ford has ever been their patient. Stop at nothing to prove your theory.

I don’t actually need to prove my theory.
The FBI is doing an investigation. My bet is they turn up nothing new.

So the FBI is checking out repressed memory therapy? I thought they had a narrow purview.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dem Playbook:

Throw out unsubstantiated allegations of gang rape, attempted rape, and attempted murder

Make sure every media source repeats those allegations as fact

Make sure that any he said/she said is in front of the public

Attack the character of the accused when he dares himself

Make fun of the accused when he gets emotional when speaking of his wife and kids

Use the media to make fun of the accused

Continued.......

Ensure your witness has appropriate representation by referring her to an activist attorney

Call, repeatedly, and loudly, for an FBI investigation

Convince a Republican Senator that an FBI investigation is needed

Once the FBI investigation is ongoing, call it a “sham"

If they aren't going to talk to Judge, Squi, the Yale classmates, Safeway or any of Ford's coroburators, then yes it is a sham.

+1 They should pull every available record for each of them going back to 1980, and neither should be able to withhold mental health records.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A couple of Kavanaugh friends (women) have been on TV. The come off as total snobs "We only associate with Catholic Schools"

Nobody is more snobbish than Blackout Brett. “I GOT INTO YALE LAW SCHOOL!”

I wonder what people from HLS have to say about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A couple of Kavanaugh friends (women) have been on TV. The come off as total snobs "We only associate with Catholic Schools"

Nobody is more snobbish than Blackout Brett. “I GOT INTO YALE LAW SCHOOL!”

I wonder what people from HLS have to say about it.

Probabaly having a good snicker over that line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A couple of Kavanaugh friends (women) have been on TV. The come off as total snobs "We only associate with Catholic Schools"

Nobody is more snobbish than Blackout Brett. “I GOT INTO YALE LAW SCHOOL!”

It's so embarrassing that he behaved like an entitled angry jerk, no matter what the allegations are.

I bet those repeated lines of "I worked my butt off..." were talking points that were pounded into him during the WH practice sessions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Remember, Cosby, Sandusky and Nassar were all being charged CRIMINALLY. They were not hoping for appointment to the Supreme Court.

The standard of evidence required to find someone guilty of sexual abuse or rape is and should be much higher than that which is required to fail to give a judge a promotion.

This is a dumb take.

it’s a hugely important difference that you idiot Kavanugh supporters seem unable to grasp

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Remember, Cosby, Sandusky and Nassar were all being charged CRIMINALLY. They were not hoping for appointment to the Supreme Court.

The standard of evidence required to find someone guilty of sexual abuse or rape is and should be much higher than that which is required to fail to give a judge a promotion.

This is a dumb take.

it’s a hugely important difference that you idiot Kavanugh supporters seem unable to grasp

Right. Hilarious that their standard for supreme court justice is.. not convicted of a sex crime

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The judge went the typical lawyer/pol route: giving evasive answers, turning oppositional, and getting as close to lying if not lying on many issues. Standard practice. Except in certain situations. Certainly one of those situations is when you’re interviewing for a SUPREME COURT JUSTICE position. On national TV under oath. That is where you would not do this. Would never work.

Except it might.

Watched his testimony with my teen as a lesson in what lying looks like. Evade, evade, evade....

Watched it with my teens (one DS and One DD) as an example of the fact that even when they are minors (14 and 16), they have reached a point where parents can no longer protect them from bad decisions. And that they have reached the age where the concern is less about what consequences mom and dad impose for screwing up, and more about the consequences life imposes (not getting into the college you want, the naked picture that gets passed around school, the DUI charge, or still dealing with bad decision making 40 year later).

And yes. We talked about how he looked like a liar. And she looked like someone who had experienced a lot of pain because she snuck away to a party and drank underage. And this time last year, they both had pretty great lives. And now, neither of their lives will ever be the same. He will always have the Clarence Thomas asterisks. She will always have conservative trolls trying to ruin her life. No one ultimately wins here.

I was with you 'til your statement about Clarence Thomas and then your one about conservative trolls. You're showing your bias that no one can point out the flaws in her story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Remember, Cosby, Sandusky and Nassar were all being charged CRIMINALLY. They were not hoping for appointment to the Supreme Court.

The standard of evidence required to find someone guilty of sexual abuse or rape is and should be much higher than that which is required to fail to give a judge a promotion.

This is a dumb take.

NP. Ummm No. it’s an accurate take. The burden of proof is whatever the Senate says it is. But I have yet to see anyone with legal training suggest it is beyond a reasonable doubt. It’s more along the civil BoP. We do in fact deny judges promotions based on a lower standard of proof than a criminal conviction (which beyond a reasonable doubt). Go rewatch Judge Judy. Learn something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an interesting Ted talk on memory by a memory researcher who found that some people were going into therapy with one problem (depression, eating disorders, etc) and coming out of therapy false memories of abuse or horrific events that never actually happened to them due to 'repressed memory' psychotherapy.

Go to 8:43 at https://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_loftus_the_fiction_of_memory#t-523210 and watch from there. It's really interesting.

Powerful quote from the end of the talk: "If I've learned anything from these decades of working on these problems it's this: just because somebody tells you something and they say it with confidence, just because they say it with lots of detail, just because they express emotion when they say it, it doesn't mean that it really happened."

+ 1,000

BINGO.
And, once again - the 4 people SHE gave as people who could corroborate her story were unable to do that.

We get it. You think he is a lovely sweet man. Got it.

One does not need to be pro-Kavanaugh to be appalled by the use of totally uncorroborated allegations against a nominee.

This is inaccurate. And you know it. Cosby, Sandusky, Nassar, they all went down from testimony and sworn statements. She had that. She also has medical records that are considered evidence in all 50 states.

There was a ton of corroborating evidence in each of those cases.

And, because it evidently needs to be stated again..... NO corroborating evidence in this case. NONE.

Remember, Cosby, Sandusky and Nassar were all being charged CRIMINALLY. They were not hoping for appointment to the Supreme Court.

The standard of evidence required to find someone guilty of sexual abuse or rape is and should be much higher than that which is required to fail to give a judge a promotion.

I get that many of you liberals think any woman should be able to accuse a man of egregious behavior---with no corroboration or witnesses who can support her or any accountability for her behaviors or mental health status--while stating it's not a criminal charge. As a woman, it is absolutely incredible and shocking to me that you could think that way. And then point to his reaction to a detailed, highly descriptive account of a near rape and suffocation as inappropriate. I don't care if the accused is a Democrat, Republican, or anywhere in between, I think that's wrong.

He reacted like a lying, privileged alcoholic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dem Playbook:

Throw out unsubstantiated allegations of gang rape, attempted rape, and attempted murder

Make sure every media source repeats those allegations as fact

Make sure that any he said/she said is in front of the public

Attack the character of the accused when he dares himself

Make fun of the accused when he gets emotional when speaking of his wife and kids

Use the media to make fun of the accused

Continued.......

Ensure your witness has appropriate representation by referring her to an activist attorney

Call, repeatedly, and loudly, for an FBI investigation

Convince a Republican Senator that an FBI investigation is needed

Once the FBI investigation is ongoing, call it a “sham"

If they aren't going to talk to Judge, Squi, the Yale classmates, Safeway or any of Ford's coroburators, then yes it is a sham.

+1 They should pull every available record for each of them going back to 1980, and neither should be able to withhold mental health records.

To include substance abuse treatment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dem Playbook:

Throw out unsubstantiated allegations of gang rape, attempted rape, and attempted murder

Make sure every media source repeats those allegations as fact

Make sure that any he said/she said is in front of the public

Attack the character of the accused when he dares himself

Make fun of the accused when he gets emotional when speaking of his wife and kids

Use the media to make fun of the accused

Continued.......

Ensure your witness has appropriate representation by referring her to an activist attorney

Call, repeatedly, and loudly, for an FBI investigation

Convince a Republican Senator that an FBI investigation is needed

Once the FBI investigation is ongoing, call it a “sham"

If they aren't going to talk to Judge, Squi, the Yale classmates, Safeway or any of Ford's coroburators, then yes it is a sham.

+1 They should pull every available record for each of them going back to 1980, and neither should be able to withhold mental health records.

Agreed.