Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump has no idea what is going on.

I really did want to mention that, but it really seemed like he didn't.

Did he tweet something?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Okay, here's my problem. I don't know what happened in any of these allegations against Kavanaugh. Dr. Ford came across very intelligent, passionate and truthful. Based on her testimony and friendly testimonials for her, he sounds guilty as h**l. But Judge Kavanaugh also sounds very sincere in his denials. He is also intelligent and passionate and likewise has a lot of testimonials. Based on his testimony, it sounds like she was very mistaken perhaps by trauma about enough details to question whether it was Kavanaugh. Both sound credible. Fortunately, from my perspective, I don't have to decide his guilt or innocence based on very intelligent and passionate people talking about a he-said, she-said situation.

In my mind, judges need to appear to be impartial. They need to appear knowledgeable enough to listen to the arguments, do their due diligence research into the law and precedence and come up with a fair judgment. Now, "fair" is obviously a subjective word, but everyone should feel going in that they have a chance to present their case, be heard, have their analysis of the law (or their lawyer's analysis of the law) and have the law applied to them in a reasonable way. The problem here is that even without deciding whether the man is guilty or not of the alleged crimes, how are any women going to feel having their cases adjudicated by this man? Whether he is guilty or not, he is now condemned by this vetting process to be overshadowed by this accusation for the rest of his life and career. Unless someone could present a video of what happened that night he will never fully come out from under this shadow. While many believe that Dr. Ford has been grossly victimized by her traumatic past, Judge Kavanaugh has certainly been victimized by this media circus and will forever be questioned or even assumed guilty by many because there is no way for him to ever prove his innocence and there is no way for Dr. Ford to ever prove his guilt. He is stuck in a limbo of ignorance. Many will believe him or believe her, but that is not proof. Because of this, it is unfortunately true that he cannot reasonablyt sit on the highest federal court, where litigants have no recourse and no appeal. This shadow will color every decision he makes, every ruling he gives, every statement he writes and that is not appropriate for a SC Justice.

It is unfortunate, especially if he is innocent, but he should not be seated on the SCOTUS.

+10000. Thank you DP for FINALLY commenting with through fulness and intelligence on this forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's suppose they do an all out complete investigation, witnesses, perjury on the line etc and it turns out he didn't do it.

Then what?

I think the real question is suppose the FBI does an investigation and no one can remember enough to corroborate anything. Then what?

Then they vote.

There will more allegations and a further delay

I'm not sure who will be helped or hurt by a delay. McConnell was trying to manyfacture some momentum to get BK confirmed, and he also created lots of urgency to oppose him. Now, that momentum is gone (although they could still vote early next week). Will that help BK or hurt him?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are three other women waiting in the wings to come forward during the week. All will testify that Kavanaugh took turns with them after they were drugged. I heard it from a Yale graduate

was on the Yale alum distribution list. anyone please come forward if they had any situations with said individual. civic duty solicitation.

"Or even if you haven't and are just interested in lying to help ruin a Republican's life and family"

We can all read between the lines. This has seriously gone to far.

It’s not about his republicanness although he did cross the line with partisans comments. Gorsuch is a Republican and sailed right through. Surely there is another Republican more suited to a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land.

[Anonymous]

*thoughtfulness

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not against an FBI invest. But I’m confused on a few points
-I thought they, the FBI, had considered and decided no. I brought this up yesterday but it got lost in the massive Part 2 thread.
-as I’ve heard legal experts suggest (liberal ones too!), the FBI doesn’t judge on the matter. You will still have 98% probability that no conclusion will be made. The 2% chance is worth it I suppose but as I heard someone on LRC put it, the FBI isn’t “magical.”
-what is their exact jurisdiction on this? In the way they investigate cases, they don’t usually take on 35yo cases in which no charges were filed. (Educate me here)

The FBI wasn't asked after these allegations were made and (like in the Anita Hill case asked by Pres Bush) they would conduct an investigation if the president asked
They don't reach conclusions but would corroborate or refute what the allegations are... adding proof to her case or not, which would help Senators decide which way to vote.

Here’s the deal: there is no proof. They would interview BK CBF, Judge, Leland keyser. That’s been done. What proof? What proof exists after 36 years?

No it has not been done. If you think Mike "determined to confirm" Davis is running an investigation, I have a bridge to sell you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ford DATED the Kavanaugh look-alike. The FBI should investigate that.

80's prep boys all looked alike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not against an FBI invest. But I’m confused on a few points
-I thought they, the FBI, had considered and decided no. I brought this up yesterday but it got lost in the massive Part 2 thread.
-as I’ve heard legal experts suggest (liberal ones too!), the FBI doesn’t judge on the matter. You will still have 98% probability that no conclusion will be made. The 2% chance is worth it I suppose but as I heard someone on LRC put it, the FBI isn’t “magical.”
-what is their exact jurisdiction on this? In the way they investigate cases, they don’t usually take on 35yo cases in which no charges were filed. (Educate me here)

The FBI wasn't asked after these allegations were made and (like in the Anita Hill case asked by Pres Bush) they would conduct an investigation if the president asked
They don't reach conclusions but would corroborate or refute what the allegations are... adding proof to her case or not, which would help Senators decide which way to vote.

Here’s the deal: there is no proof. They would interview BK CBF, Judge, Leland keyser. That’s been done. What proof? What proof exists after 36 years?

They have not been interviewed. That’s the point!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not against an FBI invest. But I’m confused on a few points
-I thought they, the FBI, had considered and decided no. I brought this up yesterday but it got lost in the massive Part 2 thread.
-as I’ve heard legal experts suggest (liberal ones too!), the FBI doesn’t judge on the matter. You will still have 98% probability that no conclusion will be made. The 2% chance is worth it I suppose but as I heard someone on LRC put it, the FBI isn’t “magical.”
-what is their exact jurisdiction on this? In the way they investigate cases, they don’t usually take on 35yo cases in which no charges were filed. (Educate me here)

The FBI wasn't asked after these allegations were made and (like in the Anita Hill case asked by Pres Bush) they would conduct an investigation if the president asked
They don't reach conclusions but would corroborate or refute what the allegations are... adding proof to her case or not, which would help Senators decide which way to vote.

Here’s the deal: there is no proof. They would interview BK CBF, Judge, Leland keyser. That’s been done. What proof? What proof exists after 36 years?

They will actually questi9n Kavanaugh. Every time something actually relevant was being got to, Grassley or someone jumped in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are three other women waiting in the wings to come forward during the week. All will testify that Kavanaugh took turns with them after they were drugged. I heard it from a Yale graduate

Yep.

And we all know Yale graduates dont lie or spread rumors, except Kavanaugh of course. HAVE YOU LEARNED NOTHING????

[Anonymous]

I am now going to bet kavanaugh drops out before a floor vote -- there is more going on here with even the Dersh pushing for a delay. For one thing, Kavanaugh's performance yesterday did not poll well. Kavanaugh can claim partial redemption because he made it out of committee, and hope that he holds on to his DC Circuit seat.

[Anonymous]

Murkowski is on board, per NBC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a feeling this investigation will bring us no closer to the truth here. The witnesses who have already denied this happening will do so again. Ford will reiterate that though she doesn’t remember much else, shes 100% sure BK was the one who assaulted her. It will still be down to credibility

But won't they question Mark Judge at that point?

Mark Judge doesn’t have to say a damned thing. FBI can’t make you answer questions.

"Mr. Judge, have you ever seen Mr. Kavanaugh drink to the point of blacking out an/or not knowing what he was doing?"

"No comment."

That's still answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a feeling this investigation will bring us no closer to the truth here. The witnesses who have already denied this happening will do so again. Ford will reiterate that though she doesn’t remember much else, shes 100% sure BK was the one who assaulted her. It will still be down to credibility

But won't they question Mark Judge at that point?

I would think they need to question:

Mark Judge

All of the men and women listed on his calendar in 1982. (The Post reported that his GP classmates made a vow to not speak on the record about him.)

Whelan

Chris Garret - not only about that summer, but if he knew he was being framed

The people who wrote testimony about Ford

The friends who have made character statements on social media

And, on...

[Anonymous]

If Kavanagh gets confirmed after a week of investigation by the FBI, can we bring back Al Franken?? It's only fair, right?