Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Elizabeth Warren
?
Verified account

@SenWarren
Following Following @SenWarren
More
I've seen the FBI "report" on Brett Kavanaugh. 4 things are clear:
?This wasn't a full or fair investigation.
? It doesn't exonerate him.
? The available documents contradict what he said under oath.
? We must #CancelKavanaugh.



So there's that. Apparently there are contradictions to what he said under oath and he is not exonerated.

quelle surprise

Well sure. The Republicans are adamant that the report doesn't corroborate Ford. They haven't said anything about what the report shows about Kavanaugh...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His WSJ op-ed is tepid and pathetic.

So tries-too-hard.

He's acting as if he's never been told No. If he just keeps asking, maybe they'll say Yes.

You are both idiotic. The op-ed was well-written and contrite for his argumentative tone during the hearing. Which was perfectly understandable to normal people who can put themselves in his shoes and realize that's how anyone would act when faced with these horrible and wrongful allegations - and in front of his family, no less.

The trolls seem to think they kNow something the rest of us don’t. They know Ford and Ramirez and the other woman who accused Kavanaugh are lying. How do they know this? I believe Ford because I do not see any reason for her to lie. I disbelieve Kavanaugh because he has every reason to lie about Ford’s allegation. But I freely admit that I do not know the truth. Does anyone? Surely not the trolls, yet they keep posting the lie that they know the allegations against Kavanaugh are false. They cannot know that, so they are posting lies. That doesn’t help your guy, folks, just adding to the lies we know he told under oath. If you posted the truth —that you do not know the truth any more than I do — and said you believe Kavanaugh for some other reason, we’ll that would be fine since it’s your opinion.

But you keep posting lies. Why must you lie? Clearly the truth does not support Kavanaugh.

Are you always this pedantic? Wow. I'm the PP and I used the term "wrongful allegations" because he denied the allegations. I don't know who is telling the truth here, and I have no problem admitting that. But obviously, since he DENIED the allegations, they are, from his perspective - WRONGFUL. I was trying to explain to those of you with zero empathy why he acted the way he did during the hearing - emotional, furious, crying. Because he's trying to defend himself against allegations he claims are FALSE. Can you even comprehend that?

And if you're just going to call people you disagree with "trolls," you should know how moronic you look. Do you spend your days telling everyone around you they're trolls if they don't agree with you? So incredibly juvenile.

I'm sick of this refrain. I've been wrongfully accused. Twice. It sucks. It hurts. It's awful. They cause major inconveniences in my life. But I stayed calm. The facts were on my side. I didn't cry to the police or the judge. I didn't spout conspiracy theories. I didn't talk about what a great person I was, or how personally insulted I was eager to talk to investigators to explain my side, and I said so. You know who cried, who spouted conspiracy theories, who talked about how great they were and got personally insulted? The people who lied about me.

So yes, I can comprehend exactly where he is coming from. I've been there. And since I've been there, I can say with full empathy with what he's going through -- he handled it very badly.

[Anonymous]

Goodness gracious, the WSJ self-defense was so weak. We all have feelings, the question is how we treat other people when we're feeling hurt and angry. Lashing out and attacking people is not acceptable. My five year old knows how to apologize better than this. . .

Justice Stevens says he does not belong on the court. This, after previously applauding his skills. He says Kavanaugh lacks the temperament.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/04/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-oped-wall-street-journal.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kavanaugh is terrible plain and simple.

How.Many.Times.Does.It.Have.To.Be.Said.

HE IS NOT FIT TO BE A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE.

The gambling. The debt. The lying. The perjury. The anger. The only child syndrome.

If anyone knows anything they can certainly SEE he is a LIAR. He does NOT deserve a LIFETIME appointment to the highest court in the land. He's a drunk and a liar.

All of you Republicans are so determined to win that you do not care that our executive and legislative branches of government are already in a shambles and the judicial branch is next if this CLOWN is appointed.

Oh and I have no doubt he WILL be appointed. DISGUSTING.

AND Pathetic.

The sycophants from Chevy Chase and Blessed Sacrament. Wow.

Who would know it was 2018 with the way women are standing up for this DB? SMH.

Came across so loud and clear in the WSJ piece. I couldn't believe the man is 50+. How in the world did he get to where he is with so much entitlement?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Op-Ed actually hurts him. I don't know who has been advising him, between this and the Fox interview and his demeanor when he testified, but all three have put him in a worse position than he would have been had he followed his likely instincts.

Agree. Trotting out the women in his life like a shield. He didn’t apologize and proved that he has learned nothing.

And, Fox News and WSJ seems pretty partisan in the era of the GOP’s fake news.

You are ridiculous. He did indeed apologize: “I was very emotional last Thursday, more so than I have ever been. I might have been too emotional at times,” Kavanaugh wrote. “I know that my tone was sharp, and I said a few things I should not have said.”

And he hasn't "trotted out the women in his life" at all - they came together to support him on their own. Imagine that! These women can actually think for themselves and make up their own minds! They won't be told what to do and whom to support by anyone. How disappointing!

And as for partisan, why on earth should he have submitted his op-ed to the Post or the NYT - two clearly liberal biased publications? You can't possibly claim they are somehow neutral? The WSJ was a good choice for him. Why would he take his statement to media that clearly is fanning the flames of his "guilt"? How idiotic can you get?

That's not an apology, that's an excuse. You're mixing them up. An apology starts with "I'm sorry" and it ends with an acknowledgment of what you've done to another person. There's a lot of "I" in that statement -- my feelings, what I know. There's no "sorry" and there's no "for . . . " (showing disrespect to the senator, for accusing half the country of harboring a bizarre revenge vendetta against me, for threatening revenge once I am a position in power on liberals, etc.). How can this person be a judge on the Supreme Court? I don't get it. You have thousands of law professors saying he shouldn't be. It is really unfathomable, I've never seen this before. What is our country coming to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His WSJ op-ed is tepid and pathetic.

So tries-too-hard.

He's acting as if he's never been told No. If he just keeps asking, maybe they'll say Yes.

You are both idiotic. The op-ed was well-written and contrite for his argumentative tone during the hearing. Which was perfectly understandable to normal people who can put themselves in his shoes and realize that's how anyone would act when faced with these horrible and wrongful allegations - and in front of his family, no less.

The trolls seem to think they kNow something the rest of us don’t. They know Ford and Ramirez and the other woman who accused Kavanaugh are lying. How do they know this? I believe Ford because I do not see any reason for her to lie. I disbelieve Kavanaugh because he has every reason to lie about Ford’s allegation. But I freely admit that I do not know the truth. Does anyone? Surely not the trolls, yet they keep posting the lie that they know the allegations against Kavanaugh are false. They cannot know that, so they are posting lies. That doesn’t help your guy, folks, just adding to the lies we know he told under oath. If you posted the truth —that you do not know the truth any more than I do — and said you believe Kavanaugh for some other reason, we’ll that would be fine since it’s your opinion.

But you keep posting lies. Why must you lie? Clearly the truth does not support Kavanaugh.

Are you always this pedantic? Wow. I'm the PP and I used the term "wrongful allegations" because he denied the allegations. I don't know who is telling the truth here, and I have no problem admitting that. But obviously, since he DENIED the allegations, they are, from his perspective - WRONGFUL. I was trying to explain to those of you with zero empathy why he acted the way he did during the hearing - emotional, furious, crying. Because he's trying to defend himself against allegations he claims are FALSE. Can you even comprehend that?

And if you're just going to call people you disagree with "trolls," you should know how moronic you look. Do you spend your days telling everyone around you they're trolls if they don't agree with you? So incredibly juvenile.

I'm sick of this refrain. I've been wrongfully accused. Twice. It sucks. It hurts. It's awful. They cause major inconveniences in my life. But I stayed calm. The facts were on my side. I didn't cry to the police or the judge. I didn't spout conspiracy theories. I didn't talk about what a great person I was, or how personally insulted I was eager to talk to investigators to explain my side, and I said so. You know who cried, who spouted conspiracy theories, who talked about how great they were and got personally insulted? The people who lied about me.

So yes, I can comprehend exactly where he is coming from. I've been there. And since I've been there, I can say with full empathy with what he's going through -- he handled it very badly.

Did you have members of the media camping out in front of your house, and half of the country calling you a rapist?

[Anonymous]

Senator Grassley sends his third request for evidence from Ford.
Last paragraph is interesting.


I urge you once again, now for the third time in writing, to turn over the therapy notes, polygraph materials, and communications with The Washington Post that Dr. Ford has relied upon as evidence. In addition to the evidence I requested in my October 2 letter, in light of recently uncovered information, please turn over records and descriptions of direct or indirect communications between Dr. Ford or her representatives and any of the following: (1) U.S. Senators or their staffs, particularly the offices of Senators Feinstein and Hirono, other than your communications with me and my staff in preparation for the September 27 hearing; (2) the alleged witnesses identified by Dr. Ford (Leland Keyser, Mark Judge, and Patrick “P.J.” Smyth); and (3) Debbie Ramirez, Julie Swetnick, or their representatives.


https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/grassley-repeats-request-of-katz-bromwich-banks-to-provide-evidence-cited-reported-but-never-provided-to-committee

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given the WSJ piece, clearly he did not learn from Thursday. He can't go on that Court and behave like this. His team advised him incorrectly when they instructed him to do the WSJ article.

I bet admissions to Yale from Georgetown Prep will be zilch for some time to come.

Tonight, I am praying for Gardner and Sasse along with the others.

Good grief. Obviously, he wouldn't be on the SC, acting emotional, as he did in a hearing specifically called to address alleged sexual assault on his part, numbskull. Do any of you have ANY common sense?

And I disagree about the WSJ article. I'm glad he wrote it. Honestly, if he hadn't, you people would be complaining that he should write an op-ed and apologize!! You're not going to approve of anything he does because - shocker! - you want him destroyed.

Judges, like all of us, have all kind of difficult things going on in their lives. Some things are harder than others. But there can be no thing so hard for them that they cannot keep their cool. Nothing. He blew it. Under the same circumstances, Clarence Thomas stayed cool. I don't like politics or his judicial philosophy, but at least he acted like a judge should act.

I don't want Kavanaugh's life destroyed. And it won't be. He will go back to his current highly respected judicial position. And even if he loses that, he can go back to his former career as a political hack. His family will still love him. He will still have his drinking buddies to hang out with. So he really needs to get over himself. Life sucks sometimes. That's an important lesson for a judge to learn.

You are delusional. And, quite frankly, frightening.

Agree.

The liberals try to convince themselves that Kavanaugh can go back to his "former life" because it's the only way they can accept what the Democrsts have done. It's like someone bashing a brick into someone's head and then telling the officer, "he'll be just fine....it's no big deal."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This all feels like typical fake posturing on both sides. He'll be confirmed, he was always going to be confirmed. Distract the population with this crap theater while both sides of the same coin do nothing but help their 9, 10, 11, and 12 figure net worth puppetmasters loot the nation.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Senator Grassley sends his third request for evidence from Ford.
Last paragraph is interesting.


I urge you once again, now for the third time in writing, to turn over the therapy notes, polygraph materials, and communications with The Washington Post that Dr. Ford has relied upon as evidence. In addition to the evidence I requested in my October 2 letter, in light of recently uncovered information, please turn over records and descriptions of direct or indirect communications between Dr. Ford or her representatives and any of the following: (1) U.S. Senators or their staffs, particularly the offices of Senators Feinstein and Hirono, other than your communications with me and my staff in preparation for the September 27 hearing; (2) the alleged witnesses identified by Dr. Ford (Leland Keyser, Mark Judge, and Patrick “P.J.” Smyth); and (3) Debbie Ramirez, Julie Swetnick, or their representatives.


https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/grassley-repeats-request-of-katz-bromwich-banks-to-provide-evidence-cited-reported-but-never-provided-to-committee

The coverup here is clear. These weasels won’t turn it over, ever. Bank on it. I’d ask what they’re hiding but it’s already clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can see a narrow staircase in a picture on Zillow below:

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/3333-Tennyson-St-NW-Washington-DC-20015/452556_zpid/

Picture 5 is a narrow staircase. The description of the house says the Family Rom is on 1st Floor.

I lived in a carbon copy of this house in the early 1990's down the street. The layout is exactly as Ford had described it.

If this is for sure Timmy's house--wow. This is bad for Kavanaugh..

It is not timmy's house ffs it is the house that Mark Judge's grandparents lived in at the time and bizarrely Mike Pence rented it during the transition in 2016-17

so effing do your research before you comment on this sht ok????

Article by the current occupant of the house - https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/my-house-could-be-home-of-kavanaugh-party/news-story/691ee06c01cd15a7a0e0ec6304ba1c66

Subscriber only article.

ok, ok, pp--you're right! Calm down. We're just asking! I'm a Dem, and OP you shouldn't surmise BS like this. It demeans the process of getting to the truth. Lets only deal in reliable evidence please. Don't muddy the waters with this kind of crap!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Senator Grassley sends his third request for evidence from Ford.
Last paragraph is interesting.


I urge you once again, now for the third time in writing, to turn over the therapy notes, polygraph materials, and communications with The Washington Post that Dr. Ford has relied upon as evidence. In addition to the evidence I requested in my October 2 letter, in light of recently uncovered information, please turn over records and descriptions of direct or indirect communications between Dr. Ford or her representatives and any of the following: (1) U.S. Senators or their staffs, particularly the offices of Senators Feinstein and Hirono, other than your communications with me and my staff in preparation for the September 27 hearing; (2) the alleged witnesses identified by Dr. Ford (Leland Keyser, Mark Judge, and Patrick “P.J.” Smyth); and (3) Debbie Ramirez, Julie Swetnick, or their representatives.


https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/grassley-repeats-request-of-katz-bromwich-banks-to-provide-evidence-cited-reported-but-never-provided-to-committee

And for the third time, I am sure her attorneys will respond that she is happy to turn over those materials to the FBI as part of their investigation.

[Anonymous]

Brett Kavanaugh WSJ Op-ed Oct 4, 2018:
Trust me, how I behaved during that testimony is not who I am, and I would not be that way on the Supreme Court.

President Donald J. Trump, Sept 27, 2018:
"Judge Kavanaugh showed America exactly why I nominated him."

[Anonymous]

Republicans like Brett Kavanaugh because he just won't take "no" for an answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Republicans like Brett Kavanaugh because he just won't take "no" for an answer.

You mean he won't succumb to the Democrats' tactics of character assassination.