Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comments here are so damned predictable. “He made her do the interview.” His wife “doesn’t trust him.” Face it - Nothing he or she does would change your minds. They didn’t hold hands so they aren’t close. Had they held hands, they would have been “trying too hard.” “It was so sad to see that Brett Kavanaugh showed no emotion.” Had he shown emotion, he would be too “volatile” in your little minds.

One thing that has become abundantly clear - He could provide undisputed proof that he is totally innocent of these allegations and you people would still convict him. Because of “yearbooks” or some other stupid reason. “Well, Georgetown prep was the school you didn’t date boys from so he is not qualified.”

I find it so telling that people here are all about “believing her” with absolutely no proof, no details, no evidence. These women are actually setting back the efforts of abused women.

You dismiss crime victims so easily because of politics. Sad.

You believe uncorroborated accusations so easily because of politics. Sad.

There is corroboration. Why do you ignore that. And the FBI could easily find more by getting sworn statements. That’s what Kavanaugh should be demanding. It’s what an innocent person would demand.

not re Dr. Ford's accusation

There is. Threre are polygraphs, statements to therapists, statements to others, all done years ago. Let’s get all the facts out instead of trying to plow this nomination through. There are many other conservative judges who are reading and willing to take this seat who do not have such a sordid past of documented heavy drinking, slut shaming, and alleged sexual assault.

That's all from one person, the accuser. Doesn't mean her memory was accurate.

So let’s hear from Kavanaugh’s wingman, Mark Judge, under oath. Surely, the Committee will do that to clear Kavanaugh’s name right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry if this has been discussed before, but does anyone else think kavanaugh has some psychopathic tendencies? Not the stereotypical psychopathic killer, but the lying, lack of empathy, ability to use a social situation, seems charming to get what he wants or get ahead?

Why the hell lie about that being a virgin until his mid-20s? I was relatively late. There's no shame, but nobody believes that for a moment. WaPo said he refused to answer sexual proclivity and drinking questions during his practice debate. So being virginal is the only way to push those questions off?

Yes, it is a sociopathic bordering on narcissistic, just like the President.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comments here are so damned predictable. “He made her do the interview.” His wife “doesn’t trust him.” Face it - Nothing he or she does would change your minds. They didn’t hold hands so they aren’t close. Had they held hands, they would have been “trying too hard.” “It was so sad to see that Brett Kavanaugh showed no emotion.” Had he shown emotion, he would be too “volatile” in your little minds.

One thing that has become abundantly clear - He could provide undisputed proof that he is totally innocent of these allegations and you people would still convict him. Because of “yearbooks” or some other stupid reason. “Well, Georgetown prep was the school you didn’t date boys from so he is not qualified.”

I find it so telling that people here are all about “believing her” with absolutely no proof, no details, no evidence. These women are actually setting back the efforts of abused women.

You dismiss crime victims so easily because of politics. Sad.

You believe uncorroborated accusations so easily because of politics. Sad.

There is corroboration. Why do you ignore that. And the FBI could easily find more by getting sworn statements. That’s what Kavanaugh should be demanding. It’s what an innocent person would demand.

not re Dr. Ford's accusation

There is. Threre are polygraphs, statements to therapists, statements to others, all done years ago. Let’s get all the facts out instead of trying to plow this nomination through. There are many other conservative judges who are reading and willing to take this seat who do not have such a sordid past of documented heavy drinking, slut shaming, and alleged sexual assault.

A polygraph and Ford’s statements to others are not corroboration. The most they do is show 1) she believes her story and 2) she told others about her version of events at least decades afterwards.

It is corroborating evidence. You must not be familiar with the nature of sexual assault cases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comments here are so damned predictable. “He made her do the interview.” His wife “doesn’t trust him.” Face it - Nothing he or she does would change your minds. They didn’t hold hands so they aren’t close. Had they held hands, they would have been “trying too hard.” “It was so sad to see that Brett Kavanaugh showed no emotion.” Had he shown emotion, he would be too “volatile” in your little minds.

One thing that has become abundantly clear - He could provide undisputed proof that he is totally innocent of these allegations and you people would still convict him. Because of “yearbooks” or some other stupid reason. “Well, Georgetown prep was the school you didn’t date boys from so he is not qualified.”

I find it so telling that people here are all about “believing her” with absolutely no proof, no details, no evidence. These women are actually setting back the efforts of abused women.

You dismiss crime victims so easily because of politics. Sad.

DP. Not dismissing crime victims. But also not immediately believing their unproven accusations because of politics, which is what many posters here are doing. Sad.

The fact that Mark Judge isn't supporting his friend is meaningful.

He's not saying it happened, either. And the fact that the people she said were at the gathering don't recall any such thing is meaningful too. Also is the fact that she can't specify when or where, making it impossible for Kavanaugh to provide an alibi.

And yet, he unequivicollay denied being at any social gathering at any time where anything like this could have happened. It isn't believable unless his whole yearbook is a lie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to Catholic school in the 1980s. Absolutely if they put there were "x girl alum" ion their yearbook it's a sexual inference. And I don't buy the explanation that it was "they went to a dance together" or "kissed" or whatever. That is 1980 fake Latin Catholic speak for I HIT THAT.

What was 1980 fake Latin Catholic girls' speak if they were sexually promiscuous?

Wouldn't know. I was a virgin and could produce a witness (my husband) to that effect if people wrongly accused me of sexual assault in HS. Kav claims he was a virgin "for many years" after HS. Can't wait to see if the ladies he knew in HS and early college agree.

The problem here is not sex, the problem is lies. He could have said he partied as a teen and did things he wasn't proud of, even as he denied assault. Instead his pretense of having been a relatively innocent angel is being seriously undermined by the weight of the overall evidence.

You didn’t see his interview yesterday, did you? Because, he pretty much said exactly that.

No he didn’t. He went full teetotaling virgin. He’s so full of shit.

Going out on a limb like that and saying you were a virgin until your mid-20s is not only embarrassing to have to disclose to the entire country, but it would be a lie easily exposed. All it would take is one liberal Yale classmate (or GP) to come forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems that Ms. Debra Katz didn't think Paula Jones had a case and dismissed her accusations in 1998, based on one incident; but she thinks Dr. Ford does? Guess it depends on the political views of the accuser.

https://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/15/us/testing-president-overview-experts-say-suit-against-president-faces-big-hurdles.html

It's as if you missed the entire MeToo movement.

DP. Does the MeeToo movement mean we should take at face value every accusation, regardless of evidence or lack thereof, as the gospel truth?

No. It means times have changed. What was acceptable (those yearbooks!) in '82-'83 aren't acceptable anymore.

Do you really believe that Thomas would have been confirmed today? Or that he should have been?

Excuses. Ms Katz's political leanings are on display and in print.

So Katz gets excused for dismissing Jones because times have changed, but Kavanaugh gets no break for immature scribblings as a teenager even though it was over a generation ago and, as you point out, times have changed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems that Ms. Debra Katz didn't think Paula Jones had a case and dismissed her accusations in 1998, based on one incident; but she thinks Dr. Ford does? Guess it depends on the political views of the accuser.

https://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/15/us/testing-president-overview-experts-say-suit-against-president-faces-big-hurdles.html

It's as if you missed the entire MeToo movement.

DP. Does the MeeToo movement mean we should take at face value every accusation, regardless of evidence or lack thereof, as the gospel truth?

No. It means times have changed. What was acceptable (those yearbooks!) in '82-'83 aren't acceptable anymore.

Do you really believe that Thomas would have been confirmed today? Or that he should have been?

Excuses. Ms Katz's political leanings are on display and in print.

So Katz gets excused for dismissing Jones because times have changed, but Kavanaugh gets no break for immature scribblings as a teenager even though it was over a generation ago and, as you point out, times have changed?

Uh, no. It's his current response that is important. If you think he is honest now, great. I don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry if this has been discussed before, but does anyone else think kavanaugh has some psychopathic tendencies? Not the stereotypical psychopathic killer, but the lying, lack of empathy, ability to use a social situation, seems charming to get what he wants or get ahead?

Why the hell lie about that being a virgin until his mid-20s? I was relatively late. There's no shame, but nobody believes that for a moment. WaPo said he refused to answer sexual proclivity and drinking questions during his practice debate. So being virginal is the only way to push those questions off?

You are disgusting. Truly.
Psychopath? Are you f’ing kidding me?
You are also accusing him of lying about a very personal choice he made. How in the hell do you know what he is lying about?

And, had you read the WaPo thoroughly,.... you would have seen that he refused to answer questions THAT WENT OVER THE LINE. As the questioners expected him to do.

You are insufferable.

He refused to answer if he boofed a girl as a freshman in college or if he aided in drunk-training an underclassman in high school. He may have refused to answer those in moot at the white house, but he will have to answer those questions on Thursday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comments here are so damned predictable. “He made her do the interview.” His wife “doesn’t trust him.” Face it - Nothing he or she does would change your minds. They didn’t hold hands so they aren’t close. Had they held hands, they would have been “trying too hard.” “It was so sad to see that Brett Kavanaugh showed no emotion.” Had he shown emotion, he would be too “volatile” in your little minds.

One thing that has become abundantly clear - He could provide undisputed proof that he is totally innocent of these allegations and you people would still convict him. Because of “yearbooks” or some other stupid reason. “Well, Georgetown prep was the school you didn’t date boys from so he is not qualified.”

I find it so telling that people here are all about “believing her” with absolutely no proof, no details, no evidence. These women are actually setting back the efforts of abused women.

You dismiss crime victims so easily because of politics. Sad.

You believe uncorroborated accusations so easily because of politics. Sad.

He's hiding at
There is corroboration. Why do you ignore that. And the FBI could easily find more by getting sworn statements. That’s what Kavanaugh should be demanding. It’s what an innocent person would demand.

He's in hiding at Bethany Beach (the Catholic beach)

not re Dr. Ford's accusation

There is. Threre are polygraphs, statements to therapists, statements to others, all done years ago. Let’s get all the facts out instead of trying to plow this nomination through. There are many other conservative judges who are reading and willing to take this seat who do not have such a sordid past of documented heavy drinking, slut shaming, and alleged sexual assault.

That's all from one person, the accuser. Doesn't mean her memory was accurate.

So let’s hear from Kavanaugh’s wingman, Mark Judge, under oath. Surely, the Committee will do that to clear Kavanaugh’s name right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just went back and read some of the posts on the Rolling Stone thread BEFORE the story was discovered to be a hoax.

Very similar to what we see here. A lot of people who “believe it” and are slamming UVA, all fraternities, and men in general.

I would encourage you to read it, then reflect on the crap you are writing here. http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/425975.page

Doesn't change the words in black and white in the yearbook, on his own yearbook page and that of his friends, or the contents of Mark Judge's book.

How do you explain away the Renate alum reference? Do you buy what his lawyers are saying? Renate denies she ever kissed him.

"Judge Kavanaugh and Ms. Dolphin attended one high school event together and shared a brief kiss good night following that event," the statement reads.

"They had no other such encounter. The language from Judge Kavanaugh's high school yearbook refers to the fact that he and Ms. Dolphin attended that one high school event together and nothing else."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/24/politics/new-york-times-kavanaugh-renate-high-school-yearbook/index.html

Yeah. I actually believe what his lawyers are saying.

she says they didn't kiss, his lawyers say they did. So you believe the lawyers?
And you believe that an entire group of boys referred to her in their yearbooks in this manner in reference to innocent dates and maybe kisses? Just want to be sure I'm understanding you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teenage boys in America are watching and learning how far they can push the envelope and claim “normal high school/college boy behavior”. The public discourse matters just as much as what Kavanaugh did or didn’t do.

They already know better than this.

What we do in real situations matters more than what we say in hypothetical ones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comments here are so damned predictable. “He made her do the interview.” His wife “doesn’t trust him.” Face it - Nothing he or she does would change your minds. They didn’t hold hands so they aren’t close. Had they held hands, they would have been “trying too hard.” “It was so sad to see that Brett Kavanaugh showed no emotion.” Had he shown emotion, he would be too “volatile” in your little minds.

One thing that has become abundantly clear - He could provide undisputed proof that he is totally innocent of these allegations and you people would still convict him. Because of “yearbooks” or some other stupid reason. “Well, Georgetown prep was the school you didn’t date boys from so he is not qualified.”

I find it so telling that people here are all about “believing her” with absolutely no proof, no details, no evidence. These women are actually setting back the efforts of abused women.

You dismiss crime victims so easily because of politics. Sad.

You believe uncorroborated accusations so easily because of politics. Sad.

He's hiding at
There is corroboration. Why do you ignore that. And the FBI could easily find more by getting sworn statements. That’s what Kavanaugh should be demanding. It’s what an innocent person would demand.

He's in hiding at Bethany Beach (the Catholic beach)

not re Dr. Ford's accusation

There is. Threre are polygraphs, statements to therapists, statements to others, all done years ago. Let’s get all the facts out instead of trying to plow this nomination through. There are many other conservative judges who are reading and willing to take this seat who do not have such a sordid past of documented heavy drinking, slut shaming, and alleged sexual assault.

That's all from one person, the accuser. Doesn't mean her memory was accurate.

So let’s hear from Kavanaugh’s wingman, Mark Judge, under oath. Surely, the Committee will do that to clear Kavanaugh’s name right?

Judge is in hiding at Bethany Beach. Some alum must be putting him up to keep his mouth zipped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just went back and read some of the posts on the Rolling Stone thread BEFORE the story was discovered to be a hoax.

Very similar to what we see here. A lot of people who “believe it” and are slamming UVA, all fraternities, and men in general.

I would encourage you to read it, then reflect on the crap you are writing here. http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/425975.page

Doesn't change the words in black and white in the yearbook, on his own yearbook page and that of his friends, or the contents of Mark Judge's book.

How do you explain away the Renate alum reference? Do you buy what his lawyers are saying? Renate denies she ever kissed him.

"Judge Kavanaugh and Ms. Dolphin attended one high school event together and shared a brief kiss good night following that event," the statement reads.

"They had no other such encounter. The language from Judge Kavanaugh's high school yearbook refers to the fact that he and Ms. Dolphin attended that one high school event together and nothing else."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/24/politics/new-york-times-kavanaugh-renate-high-school-yearbook/index.html

Yeah. I actually believe what his lawyers are saying.

she says they didn't kiss, his lawyers say they did. So you believe the lawyers?
And you believe that an entire group of boys referred to her in their yearbooks in this manner in reference to innocent dates and maybe kisses? Just want to be sure I'm understanding you.

DP. I don't believe either of them. I don't think this matters much. But added to all the rest? It's just one more thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Granted I didn't watch the interview, but it's kinda shitty that he made her appear on national television, judging from people's observations here. It doesn't sound like she is a Kellyanne Conway type, who relishes media appearances.

This reminds me of the Good Wife. But, much, much worse.

I don't feel bad for her-- she had to know what she was marrying. But I do feel terrible for their daughters.

Meh. Not necessarily. Guys like Kavanaugh and his crew know how to be charming, articulate, and put on a good show - it's no doubt part of what was stressed at Georgetown Prep. They know how to keep their hijinks private and in their circle and they crush anyone who dares violate that code.

It's entirely possible, that Mrs. Kavanaugh really didn't know who she was marrying. No doubt Brett was a charming and dashing beau who seemed to be going places. He kept his past behavior private - as did everyone him. I do feel sorry for her and for their daughters.

+1. She met him long after high school and college. She probably had no idea about this side of him.

Let’s drop the misogyny that lies in blaming the wife and saying she should have known. She shouldn’t be a part of it. He shouldn’t be dragging her in front of cameras. It’s a way of invoking the “how dare you hurt my lovely family” defense. Nor should people be saying she knew and deserves any pain. Kids and wives should be left out of attacks.

You should know that there are many women who would want to be beside their husband to support him, given these terrible unsubstantiated accusations. You don't know that she was forced to be there.

+ 1 Also, the posters here who have already decided he's guilty would have had a field day if his wife did not show up.

She shows up: He forced her to show up.
She doesn't: See....she doesn't believe her own husband.

The guy has been tried, found guilty, and sentenced by you people - and we haven't even heard his accuser speak.

No, I want to hear his explanation under oath for the Renata alum. Even Renata, who signed the letter supporting him, now says the obvious insinuation is hurtful.
You can't reconcile the Renata alum entry in the yearbook with his teetotalling virgin to borrow a phrase from another poster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comments here are so damned predictable. “He made her do the interview.” His wife “doesn’t trust him.” Face it - Nothing he or she does would change your minds. They didn’t hold hands so they aren’t close. Had they held hands, they would have been “trying too hard.” “It was so sad to see that Brett Kavanaugh showed no emotion.” Had he shown emotion, he would be too “volatile” in your little minds.

One thing that has become abundantly clear - He could provide undisputed proof that he is totally innocent of these allegations and you people would still convict him. Because of “yearbooks” or some other stupid reason. “Well, Georgetown prep was the school you didn’t date boys from so he is not qualified.”

I find it so telling that people here are all about “believing her” with absolutely no proof, no details, no evidence. These women are actually setting back the efforts of abused women.

You dismiss crime victims so easily because of politics. Sad.

You believe uncorroborated accusations so easily because of politics. Sad.

There is corroboration. Why do you ignore that. And the FBI could easily find more by getting sworn statements. That’s what Kavanaugh should be demanding. It’s what an innocent person would demand.

not re Dr. Ford's accusation

There is. Threre are polygraphs, statements to therapists, statements to others, all done years ago. Let’s get all the facts out instead of trying to plow this nomination through. There are many other conservative judges who are reading and willing to take this seat who do not have such a sordid past of documented heavy drinking, slut shaming, and alleged sexual assault.

That's all from one person, the accuser. Doesn't mean her memory was accurate.

Absolutely. I could say I remember Reagan attacking me, and I could have told my therapist that as well as all my friends. All that means is that I think it was him. Proves nothing, especially when I add in that a few people were there when it happened can attest to it, and they all say they don't remember anything like that happening.