Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Brett Kavanaugh in today's Wall Street Journal. Food for thought.

"I was very emotional last Thursday, crying and sniveling and making weird wrinkled-nose faces like a little bitch-man. I might have been too emotional at times, but that's me, a bitchy little pansy. I know that my tone was douchey, and unfortunately I said a few things that show the type of person I really am. I hope everyone can understand that I really, really want to be on the Supreme Court. It would be so awesome and I totally promise to do all of Trump's bidding and make sure he can operate outside the law. Seriously, whatever you want, I'll do it. Anyway, I testified with five people foremost in my mind: Squi, Judge, TK, Bernie, and Tobin. p.s. I never bagged Renate, cos I was virgin 'til I was 26, but I wanted all the guys to think I did."

You are a very angry man.

So, the left throws mud at him - calls him a sexual assaulter, a gang rapist, an alcoholic, a liar, a wife beater, a wife cheater, an attempted murderer, and one publication insinuated he was a pedophile.
And, you expect him to just sit there and take it? No way in hell. He fought back. He was angry. And, he had every damn right to be.

I remember many here saying, after the Martha McCallum interview, that he was robotic.

His reaction will never be appropriate in your eyes.

+1 The left wouldn't have liked any reaction he provided. They were going to go after him regardless. Regarding this process, Senator Graham spoke for me.

[Anonymous]

Rape in private, boys, and you'll be just fine.

Even though the number of false accusations by women is microscopic compared to the number of sexual assaults committed by men, Kavanaugh enthusiasts are exclusively focused on the very small problem and give no indication of giving a shit about the very big problem.

Look at the number of posts we've seen that claim there is "no corroboration." And, let's be clear, they don't say "Ford's claim has not been corroborated to my satisfaction." They are emphatic that it's *no* corroboration.

"The testimony of a witness is said to be corroborated when it is shown to correspond with the representation of some other witnesses, or to comport with some facts otherwise known or established."

Corroborating evidence includes:
- Ford’s description of Kavanaugh’s drinking buddies,

- Kavanaugh’s July 1 calendar entry that describes his plans to go to “Timmy’s for skis with Judge, Tom, P.J. Bernie and … Squi,”

-Mark Judge’s memoir outlining his and “Bart O’Kavanaugh’s” drinking habits,

-Kavanaugh’s Beach Week letter discussing “prolific pukers.” There is a slew of other evidence corroborating Ford’s claims. (Seth Abramson wrote a detailed Twitter thread about all the corroborating evidence; it is worth reading.)

-The fact that Brett’s claims that he was a virgin who never drank to excess are belied by his own statements about how much he likes beer, and the statements of his high school and college pals that he was frequently drunk and bragged about his sexual prowess. Evidence that lessens Kavanaugh’s credibility and enhances Ford’s credibility is corroborating evidence.

There is corroboration. Repeatedly and falsely claiming that there is none (rather than arguing that the corroboration is insufficiently convincing) will serve to discourage any woman who doesn't get raped or sexually harassed in front of witnesses who are friendly to her.

[Anonymous]

That column reads like an Alexandra Petri piece.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Statement from Kavanaugh via an editorial in the Wall Street Journal:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/i-am-an-independent-impartial-judge-1538695822?mod=hp_opin_pos1

He appears on Fox and gets published in WSJ - both Murdoch owned outlets. Why not be interviewed by John Dickerson or Rachel Maddow?

I am sure he would agree if Ford agreed to be interviewed by Fox.

[Anonymous]

Tweet from Ari Fleischer:

Anyone notice what the FBI Director did not do?

He did NOT hold a news conf 2release the bureau’s findings.

He did NOT decide what conclusion a superior agency (Justice/Senate) must reach.

He did NOT make himself the center of attention.

I hope James Comey was watching.

[Anonymous]

I never saw Obama lose his temper like that. And we all know the kind of trash that was thrown at him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tweet from Ari Fleischer:

Anyone notice what the FBI Director did not do?

He did NOT hold a news conf 2release the bureau’s findings.

He did NOT decide what conclusion a superior agency (Justice/Senate) must reach.

He did NOT make himself the center of attention.

I hope James Comey was watching.

Thanks, Fleischer, for the confirmation that you are clueless. Still.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Brett Kavanaugh in today's Wall Street Journal. Food for thought.

"I was very emotional last Thursday, crying and sniveling and making weird wrinkled-nose faces like a little bitch-man. I might have been too emotional at times, but that's me, a bitchy little pansy. I know that my tone was douchey, and unfortunately I said a few things that show the type of person I really am. I hope everyone can understand that I really, really want to be on the Supreme Court. It would be so awesome and I totally promise to do all of Trump's bidding and make sure he can operate outside the law. Seriously, whatever you want, I'll do it. Anyway, I testified with five people foremost in my mind: Squi, Judge, TK, Bernie, and Tobin. p.s. I never bagged Renate, cos I was virgin 'til I was 26, but I wanted all the guys to think I did."

You are a very angry man.

So, the left throws mud at him - calls him a sexual assaulter, a gang rapist, an alcoholic, a liar, a wife beater, a wife cheater, an attempted murderer, and one publication insinuated he was a pedophile.
And, you expect him to just sit there and take it? No way in hell. He fought back. He was angry. And, he had every damn right to be.

I remember many here saying, after the Martha McCallum interview, that he was robotic.

His reaction will never be appropriate in your eyes.

Well said. thank you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rape in private, boys, and you'll be just fine.

Even though the number of false accusations by women is microscopic compared to the number of sexual assaults committed by men, Kavanaugh enthusiasts are exclusively focused on the very small problem and give no indication of giving a shit about the very big problem.

Look at the number of posts we've seen that claim there is "no corroboration." And, let's be clear, they don't say "Ford's claim has not been corroborated to my satisfaction." They are emphatic that it's *no* corroboration.

"The testimony of a witness is said to be corroborated when it is shown to correspond with the representation of some other witnesses, or to comport with some facts otherwise known or established."

Corroborating evidence includes:
- Ford’s description of Kavanaugh’s drinking buddies,

- Kavanaugh’s July 1 calendar entry that describes his plans to go to “Timmy’s for skis with Judge, Tom, P.J. Bernie and … Squi,”

-Mark Judge’s memoir outlining his and “Bart O’Kavanaugh’s” drinking habits,

-Kavanaugh’s Beach Week letter discussing “prolific pukers.” There is a slew of other evidence corroborating Ford’s claims. (Seth Abramson wrote a detailed Twitter thread about all the corroborating evidence; it is worth reading.)

-The fact that Brett’s claims that he was a virgin who never drank to excess are belied by his own statements about how much he likes beer, and the statements of his high school and college pals that he was frequently drunk and bragged about his sexual prowess. Evidence that lessens Kavanaugh’s credibility and enhances Ford’s credibility is corroborating evidence.

There is corroboration. Repeatedly and falsely claiming that there is none (rather than arguing that the corroboration is insufficiently convincing) will serve to discourage any woman who doesn't get raped or sexually harassed in front of witnesses who are friendly to her.

NONE of this has anything to do with the alleged assault. Provide some corroboration for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tweet from Ari Fleischer:

Anyone notice what the FBI Director did not do?

He did NOT hold a news conf 2release the bureau’s findings.

He did NOT decide what conclusion a superior agency (Justice/Senate) must reach.

He did NOT make himself the center of attention.

I hope James Comey was watching.

I thought Republicans don't like or trust the FBI any more, and think its filled with partisan hacks aiming to take down the president? So confusing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rape in private, boys, and you'll be just fine.

Even though the number of false accusations by women is microscopic compared to the number of sexual assaults committed by men, Kavanaugh enthusiasts are exclusively focused on the very small problem and give no indication of giving a shit about the very big problem.

Look at the number of posts we've seen that claim there is "no corroboration." And, let's be clear, they don't say "Ford's claim has not been corroborated to my satisfaction." They are emphatic that it's *no* corroboration.

"The testimony of a witness is said to be corroborated when it is shown to correspond with the representation of some other witnesses, or to comport with some facts otherwise known or established."

Corroborating evidence includes:
- Ford’s description of Kavanaugh’s drinking buddies,

- Kavanaugh’s July 1 calendar entry that describes his plans to go to “Timmy’s for skis with Judge, Tom, P.J. Bernie and … Squi,”

-Mark Judge’s memoir outlining his and “Bart O’Kavanaugh’s” drinking habits,

-Kavanaugh’s Beach Week letter discussing “prolific pukers.” There is a slew of other evidence corroborating Ford’s claims. (Seth Abramson wrote a detailed Twitter thread about all the corroborating evidence; it is worth reading.)

-The fact that Brett’s claims that he was a virgin who never drank to excess are belied by his own statements about how much he likes beer, and the statements of his high school and college pals that he was frequently drunk and bragged about his sexual prowess. Evidence that lessens Kavanaugh’s credibility and enhances Ford’s credibility is corroborating evidence.

There is corroboration. Repeatedly and falsely claiming that there is none (rather than arguing that the corroboration is insufficiently convincing) will serve to discourage any woman who doesn't get raped or sexually harassed in front of witnesses who are friendly to her.

There is no corroboration of Ford's claims to have been sexually assaulted by Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh never said he did not drink to excess. He literally said the opposite. Let's see the exact quote from Kavanaugh that backs up your claim that he claims he did not drink to excess. I'll wait.

And Ford, who briefly went out with Squi, knew who Kavanaugh's buddies were so that means he sexually assaulted her? That is not corroboration of sexual assault. Nor is Kavanaugh drinking too many beers corroboration of sexual assault. Nor would his bragging about his sexual prowess (first I've ever heard of that...got a citation?) proof of sexual assault. Do you know what the words proof and corroboration actually mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tweet from Ari Fleischer:

Anyone notice what the FBI Director did not do?

He did NOT hold a news conf 2release the bureau’s findings.

He did NOT decide what conclusion a superior agency (Justice/Senate) must reach.

He did NOT make himself the center of attention.

I hope James Comey was watching.

How tight is Fleischer with Ashley Kavanaugh? She was Bush's personal secretary and worked for him in Texas as well. So I assume Ari's just helping out a friend. He was ok lying us into a war that killed thousands of innocent people, so he's not likely to lose any sleep over saying any old thing about Kavanaugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a nominee can’t get through confirmation without lapses in emotional regulation so severe they require damage control op-eds, they are unfit.

But it is nice he is expressing his lack of fitness.

Again, judges recuse themselves from cases in which there is a conflict of self interest because everyone knows it is impossible to be dispassionate in those situations. Why is this such a tough concept? Oh yeah. Grasping at anything.

What use is a Justice who has to recuse himself from every case with a remotely political question? He’s already declared Dems the enemy, he’d have to recuse himself from every case with a partisan divide.

Right. So why hasn't RBG left the court after saying she'd move to New Zealand after Trump won? And he didn't declare Dems the enemy, but nice try. He read what they actually said about him. Get your head out of the sand.

She shouldn't have made those remarks, but she is already on the bench. Had she made them when appointed, she never would have been confirmed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tweet from Ari Fleischer:

Anyone notice what the FBI Director did not do?

He did NOT hold a news conf 2release the bureau’s findings.

He did NOT decide what conclusion a superior agency (Justice/Senate) must reach.

He did NOT make himself the center of attention.

I hope James Comey was watching.

Thanks, Fleischer, for the confirmation that you are clueless. Still.

Wait. You liked the way Comey handled himself? You are a rock. You are an island

[Anonymous]

He absolutely misled the Senate during his testimony thursday - and earlier this month - and in 2006. It's indisputable. If it was a race to be disqualified, the race would be over right there...no need to run any further in that sense (eg assault, temperance, etc.).