Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Swetnik’s ex-boyfriend will be on Laura Ingraham tonight at 10:00.

Apparently she collected unemployment while on paid sick leave. She and creepy porn lawyer are made for each other. How lovely.

You rail on the porn lawyer, but not the President, who had an affair with the porn star while his wife was home with their infant. Why?

The background checks on Swetnick are not good - lying to multiple employers, false filings for unemployment, documented false accusations against co-workers, falsely claiming degree from Hopkins, court approve restraining order against -ex boyfriend and family. No problem with Avanetti, talk is he is a leading Dem Presidential candidate in '20.

Regardless of the various bad things, she made references to this three years ago. Additionally, one would think that being gang raped would cause many mental health issues, right?!

I hope she is prosecuted. I don’t believe anything she said.

She can get in line after Brett’s perjury trial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Therapist notes? Are they privileged?

Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Swetnik’s ex-boyfriend will be on Laura Ingraham tonight at 10:00.

Apparently she collected unemployment while on paid sick leave. She and creepy porn lawyer are made for each other. How lovely.

You rail on the porn lawyer, but not the President, who had an affair with the porn star while his wife was home with their infant. Why?

The background checks on Swetnick are not good - lying to multiple employers, false filings for unemployment, documented false accusations against co-workers, falsely claiming degree from Hopkins, court approve restraining order against -ex boyfriend and family. No problem with Avanetti, talk is he is a leading Dem Presidential candidate in '20.

Regardless of the various bad things, she made references to this three years ago. Additionally, one would think that being gang raped would cause many mental health issues, right?!

Unless you attended 9 parties and witnessed gang rapes happening and you just kept rolling the dice until your number was up. Drank the drugged punch that you KNEW was drugged and the drugs were enough to knock girls out week after week, ending in their gang rape. Parties that "the whole town" knew what was going on there. I'm going to have to assume she had mental health issues already. Or she's just a lying POS.

Maybe. But it seems like you've missed the various posts on all of these Kavanaugh threads posting knowledge of similar things happening at house parties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Swetnik’s ex-boyfriend will be on Laura Ingraham tonight at 10:00.

Apparently she collected unemployment while on paid sick leave. She and creepy porn lawyer are made for each other. How lovely.

You rail on the porn lawyer, but not the President, who had an affair with the porn star while his wife was home with their infant. Why?

The background checks on Swetnick are not good - lying to multiple employers, false filings for unemployment, documented false accusations against co-workers, falsely claiming degree from Hopkins, court approve restraining order against -ex boyfriend and family. No problem with Avanetti, talk is he is a leading Dem Presidential candidate in '20.

Regardless of the various bad things, she made references to this three years ago. Additionally, one would think that being gang raped would cause many mental health issues, right?!

This is what happens when Katz and Dems are literally doing mass emails to solicit women to come forward with ANYTHING however absurd. This is trashing the #MeToo movement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Quinnipac University polling, started the evening of Dr. Blasey and Judge Kavanaugh's testimonies:

Support for Kavanaugh decreases among all groups, separated by gender and political affiliation, EXCEPT for Republican women! The Republican men's support goes down (a little), as does the Democrat and Independent men and women's support (a lot), but the Republican women's support goes up, just a little!

Fascinating.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/10/01/big-gulf-kavanaugh-is-partisan-big-change-last-month-was-among-women/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6e56f6875902

Isn't it a hallmark of Republican women that they actually *like* the patriarchy? Kavanaugh was defending his family's honor!! His manly indignation was just so righteous!

Saw lots of indignation, must've missed the manly part. #weepy

He looked like he had a particularly bad case of PMS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/far-left-cartoonist-accused-of-targeting-kavanaughs-10-year-old-daughter-in-vicious-cartoon

Cartonnist targeting Kavanaugh's 10-year old.

This needs to stop. Take a vote and move on.

She' not being targeted, there is NOTHING negative about the child in that cartoon

You’ve been brainwashed. Children should be off limits.

Children should be off limits, which includes being misleading about how children are depicted in cartoons. The child was not targeted and you are attempting to exploit the child to generate outrage. You should be ashamed of yourself.

I think about this.... when his girls get a little older and google information about themselves, this will certainly be returned in the search results.
It is horrible.

The SNL opening will be far more horrible for her than the cartoon. Future embarrassment is a horse that is well out of the barn.

The SNL opening was tasteless. And hypocritical to have Matt Damon as the actor portraying Kavanaugh. Given that he, just a few years ago, stated that he would go “scorched earth” to protect his name if anyone ever leveled false allegations at him.
Interesting choice SNL made. Perhaps they should have done their research first.

Meh. It was hilarious. So spot on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Therapist notes? Are they privileged?

Yes.

Even at a criminal trial? Defense couldn’t ask about the method of memory recovery? Dr Ford’s testimony is so old alraedy, it seems. On to ice. Throwing, that is. Feiler faster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/far-left-cartoonist-accused-of-targeting-kavanaughs-10-year-old-daughter-in-vicious-cartoon

Cartonnist targeting Kavanaugh's 10-year old.

This needs to stop. Take a vote and move on.

She' not being targeted, there is NOTHING negative about the child in that cartoon

You’ve been brainwashed. Children should be off limits.

Children should be off limits, which includes being misleading about how children are depicted in cartoons. The child was not targeted and you are attempting to exploit the child to generate outrage. You should be ashamed of yourself.

I think about this.... when his girls get a little older and google information about themselves, this will certainly be returned in the search results.
It is horrible.

The child IS being targeted. She is being used by the cartoonist putting words in her mouth that suggest she believes those awful things are true about her own father. I don't know how anyone could attempt to justify that hideous behavior. Imagine how she'll feel the day she sees that. It won't be as far off as when she's old enough to find it on her own. How long will it be before it is shown to her by a classmate taunting her with it? It will be used in a second way to target her.

So Brett should have never publicly talked about her prayers. He introduced the topic and the cartoonist ran worth it. Both of them were wrong.

Why's that? Because disgusting people will use anything they can to dig a knife in you and he should've known this about liberals? And disgusting people on DCUM will defend it and even blame him for it? I think a lot of people got really burned up that he mentioned religion. It was one more reason for them to disrespect and hate him more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Quinnipac University polling, started the evening of Dr. Blasey and Judge Kavanaugh's testimonies:

Support for Kavanaugh decreases among all groups, separated by gender and political affiliation, EXCEPT for Republican women! The Republican men's support goes down (a little), as does the Democrat and Independent men and women's support (a lot), but the Republican women's support goes up, just a little!

Fascinating.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/10/01/big-gulf-kavanaugh-is-partisan-big-change-last-month-was-among-women/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6e56f6875902

Isn't it a hallmark of Republican women that they actually *like* the patriarchy? Kavanaugh was defending his family's honor!! His manly indignation was just so righteous!

Saw lots of indignation, must've missed the manly part. #weepy

He looked like he had a particularly bad case of PMS.

So hysterical.

[Anonymous]

There are almost certainly more Kavanaugh victims out there who are too scared or intimidated to come forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree, the kids should all be off limits. To great extent, both Tiffany and Barron have been spared anything.

I terms of the Senate, at any point McConnell thinks he has the votes, he will call the vote. That he hasn't yet is telling.

Whether he has the votes or not, McConnell needs to call the vote to stop this national embarrassment of our institutions. Senators need to put their names on the record. If Kavanaugh loses, Trump will campaign hard in Indiana, West Virginia and North Dakota and salvage a majority out of it.

Except his candidates in those three states are trailing bigly.

Remember, everything Trump touches, dies.

Ffffalse. GOP challenger is up in ND. Donnelly stepped in it with his premature no declaration. Manchin is sui generis. R down in TN.

Actually no, the R is at a statistical tie in TN.
https://realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tn/tennessee_senate_blackburn_vs_bredesen-6308.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/far-left-cartoonist-accused-of-targeting-kavanaughs-10-year-old-daughter-in-vicious-cartoon

Cartonnist targeting Kavanaugh's 10-year old.

This needs to stop. Take a vote and move on.

She' not being targeted, there is NOTHING negative about the child in that cartoon

You’ve been brainwashed. Children should be off limits.

Children should be off limits, which includes being misleading about how children are depicted in cartoons. The child was not targeted and you are attempting to exploit the child to generate outrage. You should be ashamed of yourself.

I think about this.... when his girls get a little older and google information about themselves, this will certainly be returned in the search results.
It is horrible.

The child IS being targeted. She is being used by the cartoonist putting words in her mouth that suggest she believes those awful things are true about her own father. I don't know how anyone could attempt to justify that hideous behavior. Imagine how she'll feel the day she sees that. It won't be as far off as when she's old enough to find it on her own. How long will it be before it is shown to her by a classmate taunting her with it? It will be used in a second way to target her.

So Brett should have never publicly talked about her prayers. He introduced the topic and the cartoonist ran worth it. Both of them were wrong.

I cannot believe you said this. I cannot believe that you are rationalizing what this person did because of Kavanaugh’s testimony.
I just am astounded daily at the thought process of a liberal.

[Anonymous]

That cartoon was a misstep. No two ways to spin it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/far-left-cartoonist-accused-of-targeting-kavanaughs-10-year-old-daughter-in-vicious-cartoon

Cartonnist targeting Kavanaugh's 10-year old.

This needs to stop. Take a vote and move on.

She' not being targeted, there is NOTHING negative about the child in that cartoon

You’ve been brainwashed. Children should be off limits.

Children should be off limits, which includes being misleading about how children are depicted in cartoons. The child was not targeted and you are attempting to exploit the child to generate outrage. You should be ashamed of yourself.

I think about this.... when his girls get a little older and google information about themselves, this will certainly be returned in the search results.
It is horrible.

The child IS being targeted. She is being used by the cartoonist putting words in her mouth that suggest she believes those awful things are true about her own father. I don't know how anyone could attempt to justify that hideous behavior. Imagine how she'll feel the day she sees that. It won't be as far off as when she's old enough to find it on her own. How long will it be before it is shown to her by a classmate taunting her with it? It will be used in a second way to target her.

It is terrible. And it follows targeting of sons and daughters of folks who've found themselves in similar crosshairs. The GOP and their fellow travellers draw no boundaries between the parents and the children and will argue that the parents' alleged sins justify the attacks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So Brett should have never publicly talked about her prayers. He introduced the topic and the cartoonist ran worth it. Both of them were wrong.

I cannot believe you said this. I cannot believe that you are rationalizing what this person did because of Kavanaugh’s testimony.
I just am astounded daily at the thought process of a liberal.

DP. Curious interpretation of "wrong".