Jump to content

Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Thread


Hugo Stiglitz

Recommended Posts

Also, I'm a man, I'm forty, and even I know what a church key is. Used to use them for shotgunning beers from our second storey apartment before throwing the empties into the courtyard. College. 

This would be before heading down to Logan's for some huge beers, maybe some ill-advised shots of jager, maybe some puking (Ralph champ, holla!) Of said ill-advised shots of jager in the filthy bathroom in the stall next to a guy who seems to be getting a blowjob from either a girl or a boy it doesn't matter because I'm over here puking enhancing whatever mood they are in, and maybe some blackout drunk. 

See, Judge K? It's not so hard. Just admit you were a stupid college kid. It's okay. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Yes. The government apparatus that just demonstrated a total and complete inability to make a first down on 3rd and 1 has been effectively executing a grand scheme to manipulate the next SCOTUS appointment, coordinating the resignation of Kennedy (Russia!) and the appointment of Kavanaugh, and the FBI is already hot on this case and will roll this into the investigation of the Ford allegation. Blunts like tree limbs. 

That their grand scheme would fly said no one ever.  It's the gaping stupidity.  Brett is a partisan hack with a dry drunk temperament and a history of large debt from gambles in life and on the table.

a finger over church key hole in the bottom of the can holds the beer inside when inverted, then drops it like a chute when the finger lifts.  My glottis never learned to hold open.  spillage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Triplehorn Quote:

That their grand scheme would fly said no one ever.  It's the gaping stupidity.  Brett is a partisan hack with a dry drunk temperament and a history of large debt from gambles in life and on the table.

a finger over church key hole in the bottom of the can holds the beer inside when inverted, then drops it like a chute when the finger lifts.  My glottis never learned to hold open.  spillage.

==============

Your glottis can't take the length!

Edited by burntorangebongos
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

Also, I'm a man, I'm forty, and even I know what a church key is. Used to use them for shotgunning beers from our second storey apartment before throwing the empties into the courtyard. College. 

This would be before heading down to Logan's for some huge beers, maybe some ill-advised shots of jager, maybe some puking (Ralph champ, holla!) Of said ill-advised shots of jager in the filthy bathroom in the stall next to a guy who seems to be getting a blowjob from either a girl or a boy it doesn't matter because I'm over here puking enhancing whatever mood they are in, and maybe some blackout drunk. 

See, Judge K? It's not so hard. Just admit you were a stupid college kid. It's okay. 

Church keys are still a thing. But why the hell are they called church keys?  Wiki only has a guess, but it seems suspect. I guess some things just are what they are. Also, apparently any bottle opener can be called a church key, but I had always reserved the term for devices that have a bottle opener on one end and a can piercer on the other. 

And youd be the 3rd best justice on the supreme court right now, and probably the fairest, even with no legal schooling. 

Edited by FondrenRoad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

One week is sufficient. We should be prepared to live with the results of the investigation. 

It should be sufficient. In reality, it takes over a week for it to be assigned to someone, and over a week for that person to even begin working on it. Maybe you can get a rush order if you guarantee overtime up front or if a black guy is the suspect. 

Maybe they will have agents working in shifts.

leads-yeah-sure-ill-just-check-with-the-

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry if already posted but the following is only an excerpt:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/09/28/american-bar-association-had-kavanaugh-concerns-years-ago-republicans-dismissed-those-too/?utm_term=.6a6701de0be5

 

History repeated itself. At least it had a spell of deja vu when the American Bar Association released an extraordinary statement at a crucial moment that raised concerns about Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh’s nomination to a powerful judicial position — just as it had done 12 years earlier.

Late Thursday evening, the ABA called for an FBI investigation into sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh before the Senate Judiciary Committee voted on his Supreme Court nomination. The warning was all the more remarkable, because just hours earlier, Kavanaugh and his Republican defenders had cited the ABA’s previously glowing endorsement of the nominee — “the gold standard,” as one leading Republican put it.

Republicans kept pushing to make Kavanaugh a judge on the powerful appeals court, year after year. In his defense, they cited multiple reviews by the ABA’s judicial review committee that found him “well qualified” — the big attorney association’s highest possible endorsement, meaning Kavanaugh had outstanding legal abilities and outstanding judicial temperament.

[Analysis: Kavanaugh’s evasive testimony probably wouldn’t have been allowed in his own courtroom]

But in May 2006, as Republicans hoped to finally push Kavanaugh’s nomination across the finish line, the ABA downgraded its endorsement.

The group’s judicial investigator had recently interviewed dozens of lawyers, judges and others who had worked with Kavanaugh, the ABA announced at the time, and some of them raised red flags about “his professional experience and the question of his freedom from bias and open-mindedness.”

“One interviewee remained concerned about the nominee’s ability to be balanced and fair should he assume a federal judgeship,” the ABA committee chairman wrote to senators in 2006. “Another interviewee echoed essentially the same thoughts: ‘(He is) immovable and very stubborn and frustrating to deal with on some issues.’”

A particular judge had told the ABA that Kavanaugh had been “sanctimonious” during an oral argument in court. Several lawyers considered him inexperienced, and one said he “dissembled” in the courtroom.

In the end, the ABA committee weighed Kavanaugh’s “solid reputation for integrity, intellectual capacity, and writing and analytical ability” against “concern over whether this nominee is so insulated that he will be unable to judge fairly in the future.” In a split vote, it downgraded the rating of the nominee to simply “qualified” — meaning he met the ABA’s standards to become a judge but was not necessarily an outstanding candidate.

A day after the ABA lowered its rating, the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee called Kavanaugh to return and sit before them and argued about how seriously the ABA’s concerns should be taken.

“They cannot be dismissed, as some of my colleagues suggest, as merely intemperate rants by Democrats on the committee,” Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) argued. “Predictably, of course, some are already launching a campaign to denigrate the ABA.”

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, FondrenRoad said:

It should be sufficient. In reality, it takes over a week for it to be assigned to someone, and over a week for that person to even begin working on it. Maybe you can get a rush order if you guarantee overtime up front or if a black guy is the suspect. 

 Maybe they will have agents working in shifts.

 leads-yeah-sure-ill-just-check-with-the-

 

I was told that the Anita Hill investigation was executed in 3 days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone tried to interview Garrett (Squi)?  If he corrobates that he and Ford were close that summer, then it becomes much harder to believe that Brett didn’t know Ford given how often Brett and Garrett hung out during that time. 

During questioning by Mitchell on Thursday, Ford said that she had been introduced to Kavanaugh and Judge by the boy known as Squi. Although she refused to identify him by name, to respect his privacy, Ford said that she and had socialized with the boy for a few months that year before the attack.

“He was somebody that, I will use the phrase ‘I went out with,'” Ford said. “I wouldn’t say ‘date.’ I would say ‘went out with’ for a few months. That was how we termed it at the time.”

“He also was a member of the same country club, and I knew his younger brother as well.”

https://theintercept.com/2018/09/27/live-christine-blasey-ford-brett-kavanaugh-testify/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Care to hazard a guess as to how many Supreme Court justices may have attended St. Paul's School, or Phillips Exeter Academy, or Phillips Andover Academy, or Choate Rosemary Hall?

I don't know either, but I bet it's more than two apiece.

I have a buddy Mark whose grandfather was CEO or some such of A.B. DIck paper company.  His family lived a standard middle class life, but in high school it was decreed that Mark should attend Phillips Andover, much to his chagrin.  He was such a bad fit.  Super smart but nerdy, definitely a lone wolf, loved to build computers from scratch (late 1970s), and more than a few bombs, etc.  A societal misfit, although no socio/psychopath tendencies. Once he got to Andover he grew to hate it in short order, and decided to get himself kicked out.  His method of choice was to steal some elemental metal -- maybe lithium?  sodium? -- that was exothermic in water, wrap it in candle wax, and flush it down the dorm toilet.  By the time the wax wore through, it was deep in the bowels of the dorm plumbing, and blew it wide open.  It didn't take long before he was back home in Missouri.  </csb>

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you every have any doubt about the long confirmed demographic difference in education and Trump support - just read this thread.  It's brought out the uninformed, the gullible, the dim conned angry men.   Ya know, MAGA peeps.  

You can tell the Fox watchers by the total lack of understanding the other side's position.    They are hearing most of what we are saying for the first on Surly, their Fox News and talk radio stations passing on Dear Leader's messaging.  Why of course if there is a he-said, she-said about assault in a room with three people, you definitely do not want to subpoena the third person.  That is crazy Librul talk!!!  

They are completely unaware of the facts that have come out, and have circled the herd like some musk ox convention.   Truly sad.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

 Once he got to Andover he grew to hate it in short order, and decided to get himself kicked out.  His method of choice was to steal some elemental metal -- maybe lithium?  sodium? -- that was exothermic in water, wrap it in candle wax, and flush it down the dorm toilet.

Mg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10:25p EST, tonight, Fri 9/28

"The FBI moved immediately given the short time frame. By Friday night, agents had sought to schedule an interview with one of two other women who, after Blasey Ford went public, made accusations of their own about alleged assaults dating to Kavanaugh’s days in high school and at Yale University, according to two sources with knowledge of the investigation who asked to remain unidentified given the sensitivity of the matter.

FBI investigators contacted the attorneys for the woman and asked to interview her “as early as tonight,” according to one of the sources. Her attorneys countered with a later time, but the interview could occur this weekend, the sources said."

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Incredulity said:

We set bad precedents by the minute.  What has occurred here will come back around. 

Instead of hoping Brett withdraws, I think the Senate should be forced to do their job.  Take the vote and then answer to your constituents.

 

Fair I think...agree we the people need to hold our representatives accountable.  But I still think his hysterics yesterday should disqualify him 

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet another twist and turn in this saga. I thought we were going to be done.  I think there is a presumption that the FBI investigation will not turn up anything useful. I'm not so sure that is true.  Ford did not run in the same social circles as Kavanaugh. She told Congress that she was linked by a friend (who she declined to name publicly) who also was friends with members of Kavanaugh's social circle. I think the FBI should be able to verify whether or not this story is true.  Even after all this time, this investigation should be able to provide the link between Ford and Kavanaugh, if one exists.  I'd like to know if Ford's story of how she knew Kavanaugh is true.  If it is, it is powerful circumstantial evidence that she is telling the truth. If it is not, she should be prosecuted for perjury.  

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Ragnarok said:

Yet another twist and turn in this saga. I thought we were going to be done.  I think there is a presumption that the FBI investigation will not turn up anything useful. I'm not so sure that is true.  Ford did not run in the same social circles as Kavanaugh. She told Congress that she was linked by a friend (who she declined to name publicly) who also was friends with members of Kavanaugh's social circle. I think the FBI should be able to verify whether or not this story is true.  Even after all this time, this investigation should be able to provide the link between Ford and Kavanaugh, if one exists.  I'd like to know if Ford's story of how she knew Kavanaugh is true.  If it is, it is powerful circumstantial evidence that she is telling the truth. If it is not, she should be prosecuted for perjury.  

You're slow. Everyone already knows it is Garrett who was her friend. The one that Republicans stupidly claimed was the look-a-like she didn't know. And per Kavanaugh he was there.

Edited by RayDog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, RayDog said:

You're slow. Everyone already knows it is Garrett who was her friend. The one that Republicans stupidly claimed was the look-a-like she didn't know. And per Kavanaugh he was there.

How could someone forget “Squi”? 

Edited by hobbes2702
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/i-knew-brett-kavanaugh-during-his-years-republican-operative-don-ncna907391

I used to know Brett Kavanaugh pretty well. And, when I think of Brett now, in the midst of his hearings for a lifetime appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court, all I can think of is the old "Aesop's Fables" adage: "A man is known by the company he keeps."

And that's why I want to tell any senator who cares about our democracy: Vote no.

Twenty years ago, when I was a conservative movement stalwart, I got to know Brett Kavanaugh both professionally and personally.

Brett actually makes a cameo appearance in my memoir of my time in the GOP, "Blinded By The Right." I describe him at a party full of zealous young conservatives gathered to watch President Bill Clinton's 1998 State of the Union address — just weeks after the story of his affair with a White House intern had broken. When the TV camera panned to Hillary Clinton, I saw Brett — at the time a key lieutenant of Ken Starr, the independent counsel investigating various Clinton scandals — mouth the word "bitch."

But there's a lot more to know about Kavanaugh than just his Pavlovian response to Hillary's image. Brett and I were part of a close circle of cold, cynical and ambitious hard-right operatives being groomed by GOP elders for much bigger roles in politics, government and media. And it’s those controversial associations that should give members of the Senate and the American public serious pause.

Call it Kavanaugh's cabal: There was his colleague on the Starr investigation, Alex Azar, now the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Mark Paoletta is now chief counsel to Vice President Mike Pence; House anti-Clinton gumshoe Barbara Comstock is now a Republican member of Congress. Future Fox News personalities Laura Ingraham and Tucker Carlson were there with Ann Coulter, now a best-selling author, and internet provocateur Matt Drudge.

At one time or another, each of them partied at my Georgetown townhouse amid much booze and a thick air of cigar smoke.

In a rough division of labor, Kavanaugh played the role of lawyer — one of the sharp young minds recruited by the Federalist Society to infiltrate the federal judiciary with true believers. Through that network, Kavanaugh was mentored by D.C. Appeals Court Judge Laurence Silberman, known among his colleagues for planting leaks in the press for partisan advantage.

When, as I came to know, Kavanaugh took on the role of designated leaker to the press of sensitive information from Starr's operation, we all laughed that Larry had taught him well. (Of course, that sort of political opportunism by a prosecutor is at best unethical, if not illegal.)

Another compatriot was George Conway (now Kellyanne's husband), who led a secretive group of right-wing lawyers — we called them "the elves" — who worked behind the scenes directing the litigation team of Paula Jones, who had sued Clinton for sexual harassment. I knew then that information was flowing quietly from the Jones team via Conway to Starr's office — and also that Conway's go-to man was none other than Brett Kavanaugh.

That critical flow of inside information allowed Starr, in effect, to set a perjury trap for Clinton, laying the foundation for a crazed national political crisis and an unjust impeachment over a consensual affair.

But the cabal's godfather was Ted Olson, the then-future solicitor general for George W. Bush and now a sainted figure of the GOP establishment (and of some liberals for his role in legalizing same-sex marriage). Olson had a largely hidden role as a consigliere to the "Arkansas Project" — a multi-million dollar dirt-digging operation on the Clintons, funded by the eccentric right-wing billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife and run through The American Spectator magazine, where I worked at the time.

Both Ted and Brett had what one could only be called an unhealthy obsession with the Clintons — especially Hillary. While Ted was pushing through the Arkansas Project conspiracy theories claiming that Clinton White House lawyer and Hillary friend Vincent Foster was murdered (he committed suicide), Brett was costing taxpayers millions by pedaling the same garbage at Starr's office.

A detailed analysis of Kavanaugh's own notes from the Starr Investigation reveals he was cherry-picking random bits of information from the Starr investigation — as well as the multiple previous investigations — attempting vainly to legitimize wild right-wing conspiracies. For years he chased down each one of them without regard to the emotional cost to Foster’s family and friends, or even common decency.

Kavanaugh was not a dispassionate finder of fact but rather an engineer of a political smear campaign. And after decades of that, he expects people to believe he's changed his stripes.

Like millions of Americans this week, I tuned into Kavanaugh's hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee with great interest. In his opening statement and subsequent testimony, Kavanaugh presented himself as a "neutral and impartial arbiter" of the law. Judges, he said, were not players but akin to umpires — objectively calling balls and strikes. Again and again, he stressed his "independence" from partisan political influences.

But I don't need to see any documents to tell you who Kavanaugh is — because I've known him for years. And I'll leave it to all the lawyers to parse Kavanaugh's views on everything from privacy rights to gun rights. But I can promise you that any pretense of simply being a fair arbiter of the constitutionality of any policy regardless of politics is simply a pretense. He made up his mind nearly a generation ago — and, if he's confirmed, he'll have nearly two generations to impose it upon the rest of us.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

I have a buddy Mark whose grandfather was CEO or some such of A.B. DIck paper company.  His family lived a standard middle class life, but in high school it was decreed that Mark should attend Phillips Andover, much to his chagrin.  He was such a bad fit.  Super smart but nerdy, definitely a lone wolf, loved to build computers from scratch (late 1970s), and more than a few bombs, etc.  A societal misfit, although no socio/psychopath tendencies. Once he got to Andover he grew to hate it in short order, and decided to get himself kicked out.  His method of choice was to steal some elemental metal -- maybe lithium?  sodium? -- that was exothermic in water, wrap it in candle wax, and flush it down the dorm toilet.  By the time the wax wore through, it was deep in the bowels of the dorm plumbing, and blew it wide open.  It didn't take long before he was back home in Missouri.  </csb>

shenanigans

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I have turned a 180 on Kavanaugh. Not to say that I think he actually did the things he’s accused of, or that Dem’s handled this appropriately in any way. 

Partying and drinking too much, even to the point of blackout, doesn’t move the needle for me. To me that indicates he’s a normal human being. (Although I know their next question would have been is it possible you were too drunk to remember assaulting her) I do find it hard to believe that he can say he never got blackout drunk. 

The tenperment stuff doesn’t really sway me either because if he is innocent (and there is no tangible evidence or facts to support he was guilty) then I would be furious about all of this.

However, I think there is enough questionable history out there that makes me wonder if he’s the right guy to be put in a lifetime appointment. (And none of it related to Ford or these other last minute accusers) That NBC article above seems much more damaging.

I do hope that this leaves enough time to get a more qualified judge in place, potentially one that is a bit more apolitical, but even more conservative in ideology.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, burntorangebongos said:

Ashley K. went to UT so there is no way that is true for her. I've never seen the winged horses from the south mall fountain fly around the tower as was rumored to occur if a female virgin ever graduated. Just too many fine-assed charming dudes on campus for that to happen back in the day. Got damn, where is the fucking hot tub time machine to send me back?! 

How you doin'?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/i-knew-brett-kavanaugh-during-his-years-republican-operative-don-ncna907391

I used to know Brett Kavanaugh pretty well. And, when I think of Brett now, in the midst of his hearings for a lifetime appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court, all I can think of is the old "Aesop's Fables" adage: "A man is known by the company he keeps."

And that's why I want to tell any senator who cares about our democracy: Vote no.

Twenty years ago, when I was a conservative movement stalwart, I got to know Brett Kavanaugh both professionally and personally.

Brett actually makes a cameo appearance in my memoir of my time in the GOP, "Blinded By The Right." I describe him at a party full of zealous young conservatives gathered to watch President Bill Clinton's 1998 State of the Union address — just weeks after the story of his affair with a White House intern had broken. When the TV camera panned to Hillary Clinton, I saw Brett — at the time a key lieutenant of Ken Starr, the independent counsel investigating various Clinton scandals — mouth the word "bitch."

But there's a lot more to know about Kavanaugh than just his Pavlovian response to Hillary's image. Brett and I were part of a close circle of cold, cynical and ambitious hard-right operatives being groomed by GOP elders for much bigger roles in politics, government and media. And it’s those controversial associations that should give members of the Senate and the American public serious pause.

Call it Kavanaugh's cabal: There was his colleague on the Starr investigation, Alex Azar, now the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Mark Paoletta is now chief counsel to Vice President Mike Pence; House anti-Clinton gumshoe Barbara Comstock is now a Republican member of Congress. Future Fox News personalities Laura Ingraham and Tucker Carlson were there with Ann Coulter, now a best-selling author, and internet provocateur Matt Drudge.

At one time or another, each of them partied at my Georgetown townhouse amid much booze and a thick air of cigar smoke.

In a rough division of labor, Kavanaugh played the role of lawyer — one of the sharp young minds recruited by the Federalist Society to infiltrate the federal judiciary with true believers. Through that network, Kavanaugh was mentored by D.C. Appeals Court Judge Laurence Silberman, known among his colleagues for planting leaks in the press for partisan advantage.

When, as I came to know, Kavanaugh took on the role of designated leaker to the press of sensitive information from Starr's operation, we all laughed that Larry had taught him well. (Of course, that sort of political opportunism by a prosecutor is at best unethical, if not illegal.)

Another compatriot was George Conway (now Kellyanne's husband), who led a secretive group of right-wing lawyers — we called them "the elves" — who worked behind the scenes directing the litigation team of Paula Jones, who had sued Clinton for sexual harassment. I knew then that information was flowing quietly from the Jones team via Conway to Starr's office — and also that Conway's go-to man was none other than Brett Kavanaugh.

That critical flow of inside information allowed Starr, in effect, to set a perjury trap for Clinton, laying the foundation for a crazed national political crisis and an unjust impeachment over a consensual affair.

But the cabal's godfather was Ted Olson, the then-future solicitor general for George W. Bush and now a sainted figure of the GOP establishment (and of some liberals for his role in legalizing same-sex marriage). Olson had a largely hidden role as a consigliere to the "Arkansas Project" — a multi-million dollar dirt-digging operation on the Clintons, funded by the eccentric right-wing billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife and run through The American Spectator magazine, where I worked at the time.

Both Ted and Brett had what one could only be called an unhealthy obsession with the Clintons — especially Hillary. While Ted was pushing through the Arkansas Project conspiracy theories claiming that Clinton White House lawyer and Hillary friend Vincent Foster was murdered (he committed suicide), Brett was costing taxpayers millions by pedaling the same garbage at Starr's office.

A detailed analysis of Kavanaugh's own notes from the Starr Investigation reveals he was cherry-picking random bits of information from the Starr investigation — as well as the multiple previous investigations — attempting vainly to legitimize wild right-wing conspiracies. For years he chased down each one of them without regard to the emotional cost to Foster’s family and friends, or even common decency.

Kavanaugh was not a dispassionate finder of fact but rather an engineer of a political smear campaign. And after decades of that, he expects people to believe he's changed his stripes.

Like millions of Americans this week, I tuned into Kavanaugh's hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee with great interest. In his opening statement and subsequent testimony, Kavanaugh presented himself as a "neutral and impartial arbiter" of the law. Judges, he said, were not players but akin to umpires — objectively calling balls and strikes. Again and again, he stressed his "independence" from partisan political influences.

But I don't need to see any documents to tell you who Kavanaugh is — because I've known him for years. And I'll leave it to all the lawyers to parse Kavanaugh's views on everything from privacy rights to gun rights. But I can promise you that any pretense of simply being a fair arbiter of the constitutionality of any policy regardless of politics is simply a pretense. He made up his mind nearly a generation ago — and, if he's confirmed, he'll have nearly two generations to impose it upon the rest of us.

I had to go look up who David Brock was.   Looks pretty credible to me.

Quote

David Brock (born July 23, 1962[1]) is an American liberal political consultant, author, and commentator who founded the media watchdog group Media Matters for America.[2] He has been described by Time as "one of the most influential operatives in the Democratic Party" while others believe his tactics led to Hillary Clinton's defeat in the 2016 presidential election.[3]

Brock began his career as a right-wing investigative reporter during the 1990s.[4] He wrote the book The Real Anita Hill and the Troopergate story, which led to Paula Jones filing a lawsuit against Bill Clinton. In the late-1990s, he switched sides, aligning himself with the Democratic Party and in particular with Bill and Hillary Clinton.

In 2004, he founded Media Matters for America, a non-profit organization which describes itself as a "progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media".[5] He has since also founded super PACs called American Bridge 21st Century and Correct the Record, has become a board member of the super PAC Priorities USA Action and has been elected chairman of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).[6][7]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Brock

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

 

The tenperment stuff doesn’t really sway me either because if he is innocent (and there is no tangible evidence or facts to support he was guilty) then I would be furious about all of this.

 

Obviously you have the right to your opinion, but to me this is easily as bad as if he did assault anyone. I wouldn't hire a laborer for my construction company that was this emotionally underdeveloped. 

 

It's just symptomatic of the wider phenomenon that American has turned into a land of adult teenagers who think their feelings matter in the slightest. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/i-knew-brett-kavanaugh-during-his-years-republican-operative-don-ncna907391

I used to know Brett Kavanaugh pretty well. And, when I think of Brett now, in the midst of his hearings for a lifetime appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court, all I can think of is the old "Aesop's Fables" adage: "A man is known by the company he keeps."

And that's why I want to tell any senator who cares about our democracy: Vote no.

Twenty years ago, when I was a conservative movement stalwart, I got to know Brett Kavanaugh both professionally and personally.

Brett actually makes a cameo appearance in my memoir of my time in the GOP, "Blinded By The Right." I describe him at a party full of zealous young conservatives gathered to watch President Bill Clinton's 1998 State of the Union address — just weeks after the story of his affair with a White House intern had broken. When the TV camera panned to Hillary Clinton, I saw Brett — at the time a key lieutenant of Ken Starr, the independent counsel investigating various Clinton scandals — mouth the word "bitch."

But there's a lot more to know about Kavanaugh than just his Pavlovian response to Hillary's image. Brett and I were part of a close circle of cold, cynical and ambitious hard-right operatives being groomed by GOP elders for much bigger roles in politics, government and media. And it’s those controversial associations that should give members of the Senate and the American public serious pause.

Call it Kavanaugh's cabal: There was his colleague on the Starr investigation, Alex Azar, now the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Mark Paoletta is now chief counsel to Vice President Mike Pence; House anti-Clinton gumshoe Barbara Comstock is now a Republican member of Congress. Future Fox News personalities Laura Ingraham and Tucker Carlson were there with Ann Coulter, now a best-selling author, and internet provocateur Matt Drudge.

At one time or another, each of them partied at my Georgetown townhouse amid much booze and a thick air of cigar smoke.

In a rough division of labor, Kavanaugh played the role of lawyer — one of the sharp young minds recruited by the Federalist Society to infiltrate the federal judiciary with true believers. Through that network, Kavanaugh was mentored by D.C. Appeals Court Judge Laurence Silberman, known among his colleagues for planting leaks in the press for partisan advantage.

When, as I came to know, Kavanaugh took on the role of designated leaker to the press of sensitive information from Starr's operation, we all laughed that Larry had taught him well. (Of course, that sort of political opportunism by a prosecutor is at best unethical, if not illegal.)

Another compatriot was George Conway (now Kellyanne's husband), who led a secretive group of right-wing lawyers — we called them "the elves" — who worked behind the scenes directing the litigation team of Paula Jones, who had sued Clinton for sexual harassment. I knew then that information was flowing quietly from the Jones team via Conway to Starr's office — and also that Conway's go-to man was none other than Brett Kavanaugh.

That critical flow of inside information allowed Starr, in effect, to set a perjury trap for Clinton, laying the foundation for a crazed national political crisis and an unjust impeachment over a consensual affair.

But the cabal's godfather was Ted Olson, the then-future solicitor general for George W. Bush and now a sainted figure of the GOP establishment (and of some liberals for his role in legalizing same-sex marriage). Olson had a largely hidden role as a consigliere to the "Arkansas Project" — a multi-million dollar dirt-digging operation on the Clintons, funded by the eccentric right-wing billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife and run through The American Spectator magazine, where I worked at the time.

Both Ted and Brett had what one could only be called an unhealthy obsession with the Clintons — especially Hillary. While Ted was pushing through the Arkansas Project conspiracy theories claiming that Clinton White House lawyer and Hillary friend Vincent Foster was murdered (he committed suicide), Brett was costing taxpayers millions by pedaling the same garbage at Starr's office.

A detailed analysis of Kavanaugh's own notes from the Starr Investigation reveals he was cherry-picking random bits of information from the Starr investigation — as well as the multiple previous investigations — attempting vainly to legitimize wild right-wing conspiracies. For years he chased down each one of them without regard to the emotional cost to Foster’s family and friends, or even common decency.

Kavanaugh was not a dispassionate finder of fact but rather an engineer of a political smear campaign. And after decades of that, he expects people to believe he's changed his stripes.

Like millions of Americans this week, I tuned into Kavanaugh's hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee with great interest. In his opening statement and subsequent testimony, Kavanaugh presented himself as a "neutral and impartial arbiter" of the law. Judges, he said, were not players but akin to umpires — objectively calling balls and strikes. Again and again, he stressed his "independence" from partisan political influences.

But I don't need to see any documents to tell you who Kavanaugh is — because I've known him for years. And I'll leave it to all the lawyers to parse Kavanaugh's views on everything from privacy rights to gun rights. But I can promise you that any pretense of simply being a fair arbiter of the constitutionality of any policy regardless of politics is simply a pretense. He made up his mind nearly a generation ago — and, if he's confirmed, he'll have nearly two generations to impose it upon the rest of us.

Interesting story.  Very incestuous group.

his background with the Vince foster “murder” and his obvious continued hatred of the clintons are some of the strangest parts of him.   

My hope is that this weeks reprieve will give some of the more level headed gop senators more time to reflect.  I have to assume several were turned off by his performance but I can understand that they have their own agenda and fighting McConnell and trump doesn’t help them.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

I think I have turned a 180 on Kavanaugh. Not to say that I think he actually did the things he’s accused of, or that Dem’s handled this appropriately in any way. 

Partying and drinking too much, even to the point of blackout, doesn’t move the needle for me. To me that indicates he’s a normal human being. (Although I know their next question would have been is it possible you were too drunk to remember assaulting her) I do find it hard to believe that he can say he never got blackout drunk. 

The tenperment stuff doesn’t really sway me either because if he is innocent (and there is no tangible evidence or facts to support he was guilty) then I would be furious about all of this.

However, I think there is enough questionable history out there that makes me wonder if he’s the right guy to be put in a lifetime appointment. (And none of it related to Ford or these other last minute accusers) That NBC article above seems much more damaging.

I do hope that this leaves enough time to get a more qualified judge in place, potentially one that is a bit more apolitical, but even more conservative in ideology.

I agree for the most part, although his temperament is a big red flag IMO.   Assuming all the sexual allegations are false, we can not have rabid political operatives, from either side, on the SC.  They can be ideological, but if they are just going to play fuck the other side, then the country just needs to split in two.

Edited by Horn Dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

I agree for the most part, although his temperament is a big red flag IMO.   Assuming all the sexual allegations are false, we can not gave rabid political operatives, from either side, on the SC.  They can be ideological, but if they are just going to play fuck the other side, then the country just needs to split in two.

Yes but at least the judicial branch is the more passive of the 3 branches.  Kavanaugh won’t be able to decide to start an investigation to put _______ in prison because __________ is too liberal.    Sure he will be a solid conservative sc vote for the next 30 years.  But so would have X other nominees trump put on the  bench.  The result will be the same.  Kavanaughs confirmation will not change that.

the left should be satisfied that they have a strong issue with many women for the next generation.  Vote for dems or put another attacker in the Supreme Court.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

The scary part of kavanaugh is that he and his temperament are 7 days away from a 30 year job.  He answers to no one at that point.  Not even the Chief Justice.   He never has to speak to Congress, the WH or the general public unless he wants to.

 

Well, he's still subject to the impeachment process

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ragnarok said:

Ford did not run in the same social circles as Kavanaugh. She told Congress that she was linked by a friend (who she declined to name publicly) who also was friends with members of Kavanaugh's social circle. I think the FBI should be able to verify whether or not this story is true.  Even after all this time, this investigation should be able to provide the link between Ford and Kavanaugh, if one exists.  I'd like to know if Ford's story of how she knew Kavanaugh is true.  If it is, it is powerful circumstantial evidence that she is telling the truth. If it is not, she should be prosecuted for perjury.  

It's true.  Tom Kane, who was at that brewski party on Kavanaugh's calendars, remembers Dr. Ford from this time frame because she was dating Garrett, who was also at that party.  Now, he believes his buddy, of course, but those underlying facts of how she knew this group are confirmed.

 

Tom Kane, a 1983 graduate of Georgetown Prep who was close friends with Kavanaugh, said in an interview Tuesday that he knew Ford, who he said was dating Garrett at the time.

Kane said Ford was not close with their group and remembered her only as “very young-looking.”

He added that he did not know whether Kavanaugh knew Ford, and he rejected the idea that Kavanaugh assaulted her.

“The whole allegation is absurd, and Brett would never do anything like that,” Kane said. “If it had happened, I would know about it. We all would have known about it.”

Kavanaugh testified Thursday that a “Tom Kane” was among those in attendance July 1.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/details-in-kavanaughs-1982-calendar-entry-could-be-scrutinized-in-fbi-investigation/2018/09/28/d51fd764-c358-11e8-b338-a3289f6cb742_story.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...