Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Thread

[MixtyMotions 102]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Well, yeah. She never named him. But it is evidence that she told her therapist that a traumatic event occurred when she was 15.

I buy that.  Hook, line and sinker.  I think her "memory" that Kavanaugh was there is recent.  She remembers nothing else.  Something happened; she's angry; she doesn't want Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court.  That's all we know.

[David Dennison 18856]

4 minutes ago, MixtyMotions said:

I buy that.  Hook, line and sinker.  I think her "memory" that Kavanaugh was there is recent.  She remembers nothing else.  Something happened; she's angry; she doesn't want Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court.  That's all we know.

Until she gets in that committee room and testifies under oath unequivocally that it was Brett Kavanaugh who assaulted her.

 

[Celery Man 20946]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

"Not irrelevant" is an understatement. 

 

Minimal corroboration of any of the allegations that have been levied would sink Kavanaugh. So far that has been a hurdle too high. 

 

yeah cause we have about 3 tweets worth of information about a thing that allegedly happened in the 1980s.  The two alleged witnesses apart from the accuser were party to the alleged crime.  So far minimal corroboration has been a hurdle too high - could be because it's bullshit.  Could be because the people who want to push Kavanaugh through refuse to allow an investigation to take place as it did when the Anita Hill allegations came to light.

[Buzzrock 14920]

As far as strategy goes, I’m not sure why Grassley and co would want to ask any questions at all. Invite Ford in, let her tell her story, have Kavanaugh respond with wtte “I am very sorry for your traumatic experience but it wasn’t me, I wasn’t there, no one thinks I was there,” go vote.

[NowThis 931]

even if BK was perfectly clean, which means different things to people, he doesn't come across as an elite intellectual. I have the opinion that SCOTUS judges are more fair than people want to given them credit for, that they are not so beholden to their ideologies over the years as their confirmation opponents would have you believe. So, I really wouldn't mind a conservative judge if he/she was truly elite and not a political hack.  I just don't see BK as a grandmaster of the game, aka Judge Souter. 

Edited September 26, 2018 by NowThis

[Anastasis 23469]

Just now, Celery Man said:

The two alleged witnesses apart from the accuser were party to the alleged crime.  

This is not accurate. PJ and the lady whose lawyer had identified her as a lifelong acquaintance of Ford's were not involved in the alleged crime, and neither of them have corroborated even minimally the allegations. In fact, the friend of Ford has indicated that she was never at any time, the referenced party or others, at a party where Kavanaugh was present. This really isn't that hard to track. 

[Anastasis 23469]

2 minutes ago, NowThis said:

even if BK was perferctly clean, which means different things to people, he doesn't come across as an elite intellectual. I have the opinion that SCOTUS judges are more fair than people want to given them credit for, that they are not so beholden to their ideologies over the years as their confirmation opponents would have you believe. So, I really wouldn't mind a conservative judge if he/she was truly elite and not a political hack.  I just don't see BK as a grandmaster of the game, aka Judge Souter. 

Amazing that east coast prep school douchebag ivy league lawyers turn out to be douchebags. Maybe we should have less of them on the supreme court. 

[Party_Taco 3726]

I’m confused, are you not of the opinion that Kavanaugh is a political hack?

[Celery Man 20946]

Just now, Anastasis said:

 This is not accurate. PJ and the lady whose lawyer had identified her as a lifelong acquaintance of Ford's were not involved in the alleged crime, and neither of them have corroborated even minimally the allegations. In fact, the friend of Ford has indicated that she was never at any time, the referenced party or others, at a party where Kavanaugh was present. This really isn't that hard to track. 

the witnessing I'm referring to is the alleged assault.  I mean, really - correct me if I'm wrong.  The allegation is that Ford was at a party, there were four other people at the party, at some point she's in a room with Judge and Kavanaugh, and the alleged assault occurs.  She runs out and hides in a bathroom.  Do I have the story that Ford is currently alleging wrong?  By witnesses I mean people who allegedly would have witnessed the attack occurring.

[NowThis 931]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

nm 

Edited September 26, 2018 by NowThis

[hayden_horn 11362]

6 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Amazing that east coast prep school douchebag ivy league lawyers turn out to be douchebags. Maybe we should have less of them on the supreme court. 

[Horn Dog 9851]

12 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

This is not accurate. PJ and the lady whose lawyer had identified her as a lifelong acquaintance of Ford's were not involved in the alleged crime, and neither of them have corroborated even minimally the allegations. In fact, the friend of Ford has indicated that she was never at any time, the referenced party or others, at a party where Kavanaugh was present. This really isn't that hard to track. 

Mr. Judge has not denied the event.  He has simply said he doesn’t remember anything like that.  He is also BK’s bestie.  He needs to be made to testify under oath and under penalty of felony charges.  

Ford’s friend also has not denied being at the party, she simply says she doesn’t remember a party like that.  I also can not remember a party I was at in high school or at UT where a girl was made to feel unsafe by a sexually predator, but I am certain I have been in the presence of such an event at some point in my life.  Doesn’t mean it didn’t happen, simply means that since I was not emotionally traumatized, I don’t remember it.

Edited September 26, 2018 by Horn Dog

[Johnny Sack 8397]

I’d like more people asking common sense questions.  Such as “Hey Diane, if this was so important and credible, why didn’t you give it to Grassley under the condition of anonymity?  Were you worried that he might leak this information?  If so, how do reconcile that with the fact that while the letter was in your staff’s custody, someone DID leak that information?”

[Johnny Sack 8397]

1 minute ago, Horn Dog said:

Mr. Judge has not denied the event.  He has simply said he doesn’t remember anything like that.  He is also BK’s bestie.  He needs to be made to testify under oath and under penalty of felony charges.  

Ford’s friend also has not denied being at the party, she simply says she doesn’t remember a party like that.  I also can not remember a party I was at in high school or at UT where a girl was made to feel unsafe by a sexually predator, but I am certain I have been in the presence of such an event at some point in my life.  Doesn’t mean it didn’t happen, simply means that since I was bot emotionally traumatized, I don’t remember it.

Judge can be criminally prosecuted if he lied in the statement he submitted to the committee

Edited September 26, 2018 by Johnny Sack

[Anastasis 23469]

4 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:



god damnit i hate that one. 

[Horn Dog 9851]

2 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Judge can be criminally prosecuted if he lied in the statement he submitted to the committee

Is the penalty of submitting a false statement the same as the penalty of committing perjury under sworn oath to Congress the same?  I have no idea.  Nevertheless  I’d like to see Mr. Judge’s body language when he says it and also like for him to testify that BK never drank and was never drunk like BK is now is implying.   The bigger issue with BK is he seems to have no problems lying, and that is a big problem for a SCOTUS justice.

[Anastasis 23469]

 

12 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

the witnessing I'm referring to is the alleged assault.  I mean, really - correct me if I'm wrong.  The allegation is that Ford was at a party, there were four other people at the party, at some point she's in a room with Judge and Kavanaugh, and the alleged assault occurs.  She runs out and hides in a bathroom.  Do I have the story that Ford is currently alleging wrong?  By witnesses I mean people who allegedly would have witnessed the attack occurring.

My position has been that any witness to the fact that Kavanaugh was at a party where Ford was present would likely be sufficient to scuttle his nomination. So far every person that Ford has named that could corroborate that they were at a party at the same time has categorically denied such. 

[Anastasis 23469]

10 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

Mr. Judge has not denied the event.  He has simply said he doesn’t remember anything like that.  He is also BK’s bestie.  He needs to be made to testify under oath and under penalty of felony charges.  

 Ford’s friend also has not denied being at the party, she simply says she doesn’t remember a party like that.  I also can not remember a party I was at in high school or at UT where a girl was made to feel unsafe by a sexually predator, but I am certain I have been in the presence of such an event at some point in my life.  Doesn’t mean it didn’t happen, simply means that since I was not emotionally traumatized, I don’t remember it.

She says that she has "no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford".  It's a little broader denial than just a specific party. I can't remember a lot of details of many parties from HS and college.  But if you named off some names of individuals, I could probably tell you if we were ever at the same party, especially if the parties in question involved 4 or 5 people. 

Edited September 26, 2018 by Anastasis

[bad_teammate 13195]

25 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

In fact, the friend of Ford has indicated that she was never at any time, the referenced party or others, at a party where Kavanaugh was present.

She did? As far as I know she said she doesn't recall being at a party with Kavanaugh. Which is not the same thing at all as what you just said.

[Celery Man 20946]

Just now, Anastasis said:

 

My position has been that any witness to the fact that Kavanaugh was at a party where Ford was present would likely be sufficient to scuttle his nomination. So far every person that Ford has named that could corroborate that they were at a party at the same time has categorically denied such. 

right.  and my position is that what has happened is that the initial allegations were made, and then everything following that has been posturing and maneuvering from all parties on how to continue with getting to the bottom of them (and not actually getting to the bottom of them).  Ford doesn't want to just go be grilled by a group of people whose primary interest is disproving her in a thing that will be orchestrated into he said/she said in front of the entire nation.  Trump and the republicans absolutely do not want the FBI investigating the matter.  Maybe she named every single person that could corroborate her story and that's it - she's got nothing.  Maybe not.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just how mad is Avenatti making the Trumpkins?

Email he received recently.

 

[David Dennison 18856]

15 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Judge can be criminally prosecuted if he lied in the statement he submitted to the committee

He might also have his memory refreshed when someone asks him questions. That's a little different than submitting a written statement.

[Mdhorn 5949]

2 hours ago, Buzzrock said:

 

Just my opinion.

Who are my “colleagues” btw?

The FBI basically said “we don’t do that sort of thing.”

https://www.npr.org/2018/09/18/649085712/democrats-want-fbi-to-investigate-kavanaugh-allegations-it-likely-won

"The FBI does not make any judgment about the credibility or significance of any allegation," the statement reads. "The purpose of a background investigation is to determine whether the nominee could pose a risk to the national security of the United States. The allegation does not involve any potential federal crime. The FBI's role in such matters is to provide information for the use of the decision makers."

I believe Congress is free to launch their own investigation. I could be wrong about that.
 

 

But there's also a possible money trail as to his debts that does pose a risk.  I'm pretty certain this was something they didn't want investigated.  

 

2 hours ago, Buzzrock said:

 

I honestly do not care, at all, if Kavanaugh gets confirmed. I think Roe v Wade (which is what this is really about) is safe, and even if it was overturned most states would allow abortion anyway (which I’m in favor of). I supported the SCOTUS on gay marriage. I support many progressive social issues because I’m a live and let live libertarian.

I’m just suggesting that if the Republicans want to “win” this, that’s what they should do. Could be the worst idea ever, just my opinion.

 

That's a pretty big gamble that Trump and the Republicans don't try and game the system or allow for further destruction or erosion to personal liberties.  It was a pretty big gamble that Trump would get elected and look at the damage he's doing.  He surrounds himself with criminals and wants to pack the courts with them.  Anybody he supports is not a good thing.  As far as smear campaigns go, remember that awesome one the mall did in Alabama against the Republican nominee because kids? Yeah, I'm not naming his sorry name but that was another good Republican candidate that the Left was trying to tarnish.    

[Anastasis 23469]

Just now, Celery Man said:

right.  and my position is that what has happened is that the initial allegations were made, and then everything following that has been posturing and maneuvering from all parties on how to continue with getting to the bottom of them (and not actually getting to the bottom of them).  Ford doesn't want to just go be grilled by a group of people whose primary interest is disproving her in a thing that will be orchestrated into he said/she said in front of the entire nation.  Trump and the republicans absolutely do not want the FBI investigating the matter.  Maybe she named every single person that could corroborate her story and that's it - she's got nothing.  Maybe not.

We aren't far apart here. The FBI should have been called in to investigate.  We would already have put this shit to rest, one way of the other, if that had been done. 

[Anastasis 23469]

Just now, Celery Man said:

right.  and my position is that what has happened is that the initial allegations were made, and then everything following that has been posturing and maneuvering from all parties on how to continue with getting to the bottom of them (and not actually getting to the bottom of them).  Ford doesn't want to just go be grilled by a group of people whose primary interest is disproving her in a thing that will be orchestrated into he said/she said in front of the entire nation.  Trump and the republicans absolutely do not want the FBI investigating the matter.  Maybe she named every single person that could corroborate her story and that's it - she's got nothing.  Maybe not.

We aren't far apart here. The FBI should have been called in to investigate.  We would already have put this shit to rest, one way of the other, if that had been done. 

[Anastasis 23469]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

She did? As far as I know she said she doesn't recall being at a party with Kavanaugh. Which is not the same thing at all as what you just said.

You're parsing around "I don't recall".  OK.

 

Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford

[EMAWesome 101]

2 hours ago, cactusflinthead said:

Then you made it up out of thin air. 

Thanks for playing 

Or it has only been reported in the media about 2,000 times in the past week so anyone that has actually been paying any attention at all to this would already know it.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Makes sense.

[DixonHur 11303]

7 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Just how mad is Avenatti making the Trumpkins?

Email he received recently.

 

Evidentally, all Trumpkins are "very stable" geniuses.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

[Ragnarok 103]

From Powerline:  Selected quotes from Grassley letter to Ford's attorney after they requested another delay: (Then answer is no)  Still don't think she shows.

You suggest that Dr. Ford’s testimony should be further delayed because of allegations made in the New Yorker by Deborah Ramirez. I am unclear why Ms. Ramirez’s claims should have any bearing on Dr. Ford’s testimony. In fact, the obvious connection between the two claims is that Senate Democrats hid both allegations of misconduct from the Committee and the public.

I think Grassley is losing patience. At last.

As of now, the only allegations of which the Committee is aware with respect to Ms. Ramirez are the allegations described in the New Yorker. As you know, false statements made to the press are not subject to criminal penalty, but false statements to Congress are. If Ms. Ramirez submits testimony and evidence to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which Committee investigators have requested, we can decide how to proceed. But, at this time, Democratic staff has not shared any such evidence it has with Republican staff.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

All women should be believed.  

Signed,

Emmett Till

[Celery Man 20946]

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Three former Yale Law School classmates who endorsed Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh called Tuesday for an investigation into allegations by two women that he engaged in sexual misconduct in the 1980s.

Kent Sinclair, Douglas Rutzen and Mark Osler were among roughly two dozen of Kavanaugh’s law school classmates who lauded Kavanaugh’s qualifications in an Aug. 27 letter to leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Their support for an investigation came as Yale Law professor Akhil Amar — who taught Kavanaugh and testified on his behalf before the committee this month — also called for a probe into what he described as “serious accusations” from the women.

Kavanaugh has vehemently denied the charges. On Thursday, he is scheduled to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee along with one accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, who said he assaulted her at a party in high school.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/three-yale-law-school-classmates-who-endorsed-kavanaugh-call-for-investigation-into-sexual-misconduct-claims/2018/09/25/fabfc002-c10e-11e8-9005-5104e9616c21_story.html

[Horn Dog 9851]

14 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

She says that she has "no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford".  It's a little broader denial than just a specific party. I can't remember a lot of details of many parties from HS and college.  But if you named off some names of individuals, I could probably tell you if we were ever at the same party, especially if the parties in question involved 4 or 5 people. 

Maybe.  I can’t name casual acquaintances  at parties i was at last year much less 30yrs ago, but your memory is likely better then mine.

It is obvious that BK was a hard drinker and liked to party.  This is corroborated by his own yearbook entries and his college roomate, who also states he was an aggressive drunk.  This means that it would be consistent with his character and adds credibility to the accusation.  Furthermore, BK denies a lot of shit which he really shouldn’t be denying.  He would be more credible if he just said yea I drank like a fish at times, yea I partied and did pranks.  But he can’t even admit to that.  Instead he says he just went to church and studied.  To me that makes him suspect.  Not enough to convict, but enough to pass over a lifetime appointment job interview.

[Pescado_Rojo 19416]

NM

Edited September 26, 2018 by Pescado_Rojo

[used2b 249]

A "female assistant" from Maricopa County. Really now.

[Stros 153]

Don’t zoom

[David Dennison 18856]

So accusations aside, none of you right wing apologists are bothered by the fact that he's lying through his teeth about what he was like in high school?

It's amazing the bullshit that he's peddling. None of you buy it, do you?

 

 

[conVINCEd 21469]

29 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Just how mad is Avenatti making the Trumpkins?

Email he received recently.

 

Strongly worded note 

[bad_teammate 13195]

28 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

You're parsing around "I don't recall".  OK.

"I don't recall that happening" != "That never happened"

It's not parsing. It's you overstating your case in an attempt to discredit a potential victim of sexual assault as a minor. Because both sides.

[Hank Scorpio 17729]

 

[Gil Bang 25954]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

So accusations aside, none of you right wing apologists are bothered by the fact that he's lying through his teeth about what he was like in high school?

It's amazing the bullshit that he's peddling. None of you buy it, do you?

 

 

They're phony motherfuckers.  "Character counts" is like the deficit.  It's only relevant when we're talking about a dem.  

Fucking hypocrite assholes...that's the GOP and the Trumpkins.  It's easy to spot right here on this thread. 

BK is a lying motherfucker.  There's no denying it. But that doesn't matter.  They don't give a shit.  Character DOES NOT count.  

[cactusflinthead 27598]

30 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

Or it has only been reported in the media about 2,000 times in the past week so anyone that has actually been paying any attention at all to this would already know it.

Fuck off. And I mean that with all due respect 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

It’s becoming clear now a wise man inside the GOP evaluated Kavanaugh up close months ago and said something like, “Yeah, this guy is such a lying douchebag stooge we’re going to have to spend millions of dollars in television advertisements if we want to get him confirmed without losing the Senate.”

[ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2671]

I so completely know BK's type. In fact, he's the rank intersection of 2 types.  First -- wealthy, entitled white kid in bubble-type enclave in the 80s....just like certain places in TX, materialism is king and sexual assault is rampant among the high school set. The thought of reporting any of it as a young female teen, is laughable. They knew it would only blow up their own lives. And it's as if the boys were raised by wolves and no one seems to quite grasp that the behavior is wrong, much less illegal.

Then you get your male law student who came from this environment. He was a bit too nerdy and/or not athletic enough to have been in the cool jock crowd, and has a chip on his shoulder because of it. "I'm gonna fuck everyone over with my intellect and skilz" says he, and so begins his obnoxious reign as class gunner.  These types are of the conservative, "anti-affirmative action," free enterprise persuasion, 99% of the time.  Lacking in emotional or social maturity, they continue to act in problematic ways towards women. Then they go on to become self-aggrandizing, sycophantic hacks, with personal advancement an end unto itself. Amazingly, women agree to marry and reproduce with these odious creatures. But don't mistake their having families for actually having empathy or human qualities.  Ted Cruz fits this profile as well (notwithstanding the Cuban-ness).   

I know a little bit about which I speak. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

5 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

Fuck off. And I mean that with all due respect 

You were wrong and made an ass out of yourself about it.  And now you’re offended.  And get pos rep for it.  You represent the batshit far left crazy fucks who dominate this politics board quite well.  

[Johnny Sack 8397]

4 minutes ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

I so completely know BK's type. In fact, he's the rank intersection of 2 types.  First -- wealthy, entitled white kid in bubble-type enclave in the 80s....just like certain places in TX, materialism is king and sexual assault is rampant among the high school set. The thought of reporting any of it as a young female teen, is laughable. They knew it would only blow up their own lives. And it's as if the boys were raised by wolves and no one seems to quite grasp that the behavior is wrong, much less illegal.

Then you get your male law student who came from this environment. He was a bit too nerdy and/or not athletic enough to have been in the cool jock crowd, and has a chip on his shoulder because of it. "I'm gonna fuck everyone over with my intellect and skilz" says he, and so begins his obnoxious reign as class gunner.  These types are of the conservative, "anti-affirmative action," free enterprise persuasion, 99% of the time.  Lacking in emotional or social maturity, they continue to act in problematic ways towards women. Then they go on to become self-aggrandizing, sycophantic hacks, with personal advancement an end unto itself. Amazingly, women agree to marry and reproduce with these odious creatures. But don't mistake their having families for actually having empathy or human qualities.  Ted Cruz fits this profile as well (notwithstanding the Cuban-ness).   

I know a little bit about which I speak. 

And you represent the white knight pussy liberal effeminate male eternally stuck in the friend zone. 

Edited September 26, 2018 by Johnny Sack

[Mack Tripper 696]

I so completely know BK's type. In fact, he's the rank intersection of 2 types.  First -- wealthy, entitled white kid in bubble-type enclave in the 80s....just like certain places in TX, materialism is king and sexual assault is rampant among the high school set. The thought of reporting any of it as a young female teen, is laughable. They knew it would only blow up their own lives. And it's as if the boys were raised by wolves and no one seems to quite grasp that the behavior is wrong, much less illegal.
Then you get your male law student who came from this environment. He was a bit too nerdy and/or not athletic enough to have been in the cool jock crowd, and has a chip on his shoulder because of it. "I'm gonna fuck everyone over with my intellect and skilz" says he, and so begins his obnoxious reign as class gunner.  These types are of the conservative, "anti-affirmative action," free enterprise persuasion, 99% of the time.  Lacking in emotional or social maturity, they continue to act in problematic ways towards women. Then they go on to become self-aggrandizing, sycophantic hacks, with personal advancement an end unto itself. Amazingly, women agree to marry and reproduce with these odious creatures. But don't mistake their having families for actually having empathy or human qualities.  Ted Cruz fits this profile as well (notwithstanding the Cuban-ness).   
I know a little bit about which I speak. 

Did you go to law school with Johnny Sack?

[Gil Bang 25954]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

And your  represent the white knight pussy liberal effeminate male eternally stuck in the friend zone. 

don''t you have somebody to rape, tough Alpha dude?  Or did you quit that after high school?  

 

What the fuck is wrong with you dude?  You've turned into a swam-level dickhead lately. And by "lately" I mean for several months.