Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 3

[Anonymous]

I honestly don’t know who is telling the truth. I don’t believe her blindly, but I also don’t think she’s involved in some big conspiracy (even if one is happening around her.) And certainly some people screwed the pooch procedurally here.

All that said, his behavior on Thursday was absolutely horrific and completely unbecoming of a Supreme Court Justice. He is hot tempered and blatantly partisan. Yes, lots of people in the room were being partisan, but he was the only one trying to become a Supreme Court Justice.

As I’ve said before, if he had been polite and answered the questions cordially and directly, this would all be over. He has humiliated himself and shown he can’t remain calm and impartial in tense situations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people are fine with his rising to the Supreme Court even if her story is true?

Only one element of her entire story, if true, would take it beyond the pale - hand over mouth. Otherwise, a drunk high school boy jumping on top of a girl and grinding into her is quite common. Happened to me. I was relieved he let me go and nothing more happened.

Well the hand over the mouth is totally not ok and very damning. It was that act that forced her to come forward at all.

Yes, as I said, that's the one element not excusable. But we don't know that it happened, or that it was Kavanaugh. I suspect the incident she is putting on K actually occurred years later, with someone else. That's why the polygraph had "early" 80s crossed out.

I also suspect the actual incident was worse.

[Anonymous]

Does the FBI get ot see the therapy notes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people are fine with his rising to the Supreme Court even if her story is true?

Only one element of her entire story, if true, would take it beyond the pale - hand over mouth. Otherwise, a drunk high school boy jumping on top of a girl and grinding into her is quite common. Happened to me. I was relieved he let me go and nothing more happened.

Well the hand over the mouth is totally not ok and very damning. It was that act that forced her to come forward at all.

Yes, as I said, that's the one element not excusable. But we don't know that it happened, or that it was Kavanaugh. I suspect the incident she is putting on K actually occurred years later, with someone else. That's why the polygraph had "early" 80s crossed out.

I also suspect the actual incident was worse.

But for every one of you, there is one of me that believes her clear memory of BK doing that is correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again. This would never go to trial. We don't want the guy on scotus if we believe her.

If you believe him this is an outrage

So are you telling me that if a Dem wins the presidential election and nominates a liberal justice, all it will take is for someone to say he assaulted her and he's done? There's no proof of this at all. Just a lot of inconsistencies in her story.

The Dems will very likely nominate a female justice. While it is possible she will have sexually assaulted someone and have no memory of it, that would be very difficult to convince many folks of were it to be false.

So someone could come out and say she sold them some pot at a party in high school.

Ok. Find 4 other people at the party, a polygraph, med notes from separate therapists and a convincing witness and not some political oeprative and you convince some people it is true.

What are you talking about? The four other people at the party don't recall a party ever taking place. In the therapist notes she claims she was in her LATE teens, not 15 when she was assaulted, and who is the convincing witness? Someone who has no evidence and a story full of loopholes? This woman claims she doesn't remember how she got back to her house seven miles away from the party! She remembers running out of the house but doesn't recall how she got home?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s pretty amazing to me how and why GOP is going on the mat for this heavily tainted nominee. There are so many other conservative justices who could take his place without the baggage. To me, it seems like the GOP has gone full Trump, which means it’s always about “winning” not necessarily what’s best for the country.

Also, having Don McGhan, Kavanaugh’s primary promoter, be directing the FBI investigation seems like a bad idea.

I'm one of the upset posters. It's not that I'm trying to go for the mat for him. I simply think it's outrageous how he's being treated and how this accusation has been handled. It should have been investigated and THEN presented. I would feel this way for any human being, regardless of sex, race, party, etc.

That is exactly what Ford wanted. Blame the GOP for this sh1tshow.

Wrong. We have established that had Feinstein passed the letter to the Chair and the FBI when she first received it, the investigation would have happened. Privately.
Nah - the Dems wanted this circus. Plays well to the base.

+1 my thoughts as well

[Anonymous]

She very clearly remember the assault by BK and millions believe her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people are fine with his rising to the Supreme Court even if her story is true?

Only one element of her entire story, if true, would take it beyond the pale - hand over mouth. Otherwise, a drunk high school boy jumping on top of a girl and grinding into her is quite common. Happened to me. I was relieved he let me go and nothing more happened.

Well the hand over the mouth is totally not ok and very damning. It was that act that forced her to come forward at all.

Yes, as I said, that's the one element not excusable. But we don't know that it happened, or that it was Kavanaugh. I suspect the incident she is putting on K actually occurred years later, with someone else. That's why the polygraph had "early" 80s crossed out.

I also suspect the actual incident was worse.

But for every one of you, there is one of me that believes her clear memory of BK doing that is correct.

That's because those who agree with me don't blindly believe accusations that have no evidence supporting them. What if I accuse YOU of assaulting me, and I am a very convinced liar? Should that be sufficient?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people are fine with his rising to the Supreme Court even if her story is true?

Only one element of her entire story, if true, would take it beyond the pale - hand over mouth. Otherwise, a drunk high school boy jumping on top of a girl and grinding into her is quite common. Happened to me. I was relieved he let me go and nothing more happened.

Well the hand over the mouth is totally not ok and very damning. It was that act that forced her to come forward at all.

Yes, as I said, that's the one element not excusable. But we don't know that it happened, or that it was Kavanaugh. I suspect the incident she is putting on K actually occurred years later, with someone else. That's why the polygraph had "early" 80s crossed out.

I also suspect the actual incident was worse.

But for every one of you, there is one of me that believes her clear memory of BK doing that is correct.

But she doesn't remember how she got home?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She very clearly remember the assault by BK and millions believe her.

Millions of liberals who would believe anything, as long as it helped their case of defeating Kavanaugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She very clearly remember the assault by BK and millions believe her.

Millions of liberals who would believe anything, as long as it helped their case of defeating Kavanaugh.

I am not a liberal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How many people are fine with his rising to the Supreme Court even if her story is true?

About 50% of Evangelicals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s pretty amazing to me how and why GOP is going on the mat for this heavily tainted nominee. There are so many other conservative justices who could take his place without the baggage. To me, it seems like the GOP has gone full Trump, which means it’s always about “winning” not necessarily what’s best for the country.

Also, having Don McGhan, Kavanaugh’s primary promoter, be directing the FBI investigation seems like a bad idea.

I'm one of the upset posters. It's not that I'm trying to go for the mat for him. I simply think it's outrageous how he's being treated and how this accusation has been handled. It should have been investigated and THEN presented. I would feel this way for any human being, regardless of sex, race, party, etc.

I don’t think you can blame the Democrats for how this was investigated. Even if you want to blame Sen. Fienstein for holding the letter and not sharing it with the committee. I think the Republican senators did no favors for Judge Kavanaugh by trying to rush the vote. The. They made it worst by holding a hearing without letting the FBI investigate first and limiting the witness’s to just two people (it would have been better if they had called Mark Judge). And now asking for an FBI investigation AFTER the matter has been voted out of committee, so that there can be no additional hearings based on what the FBI might find. And the White House placing any limitations on the scope of the investigation. I also think whoever told Judge Kavanaugh to paint himself as an extreme Boy Scouts during high school gave home bad advice.

If the FBI has investigated before the hearing, they probably would have determined (at worst) it is possible the two were at a party together in the Summer of 1982. But that they have no proof other than her testimony that what happened in the bedroom happened. I’m guessing Mark Judge would still say that he didn’t recall being st any such gathering, and that he has no memory of Judge Kavanaugh acting that way. Both Judge Kavanaugh and Mark Judge could have testified that the statement in their yearbook were simply boarish, brovado statements made by immature teenagers trying to sound cool.

He could have simply said, I don’t know how I can prove something didn’t happen 36 year ago. I can only provide my testimony that I deny it happened. In the end, I leave it to the Senators to determine whether they will recommend my appointment based on the record before them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people are fine with his rising to the Supreme Court even if her story is true?

Only one element of her entire story, if true, would take it beyond the pale - hand over mouth. Otherwise, a drunk high school boy jumping on top of a girl and grinding into her is quite common. Happened to me. I was relieved he let me go and nothing more happened.

Well the hand over the mouth is totally not ok and very damning. It was that act that forced her to come forward at all.

Yes, as I said, that's the one element not excusable. But we don't know that it happened, or that it was Kavanaugh. I suspect the incident she is putting on K actually occurred years later, with someone else. That's why the polygraph had "early" 80s crossed out.

I also suspect the actual incident was worse.

But for every one of you, there is one of me that believes her clear memory of BK doing that is correct.

But she doesn't remember how she got home?

Repeat for the willfully blind: because that’s how trauma works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She very clearly remember the assault by BK and millions believe her.

Millions of liberals who would believe anything, as long as it helped their case of defeating Kavanaugh.

I am not a liberal.

What are you?