Jump to content

Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Thread


Hugo Stiglitz

Recommended Posts

Just now, hobbes2702 said:

Ok so why don’t we get an investigation so she can give her statement?

They don’t want to do one. Because her allegations have as much corroboration as me alleging you fucked 300 goats last night.  If she has something credible, she should tell them.  Then maybe they will do a 7th check.  Nothing and no one is stopping her from giving a statement. 

She is not credible. Thus the reason Feinstein sat on the letter for 6 weeks before leaking it at the last minute as a Hail Mary. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Here you go:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.weeklystandard.com/john-mccormack/blasey-fords-female-classmate-her-last-alleged-witness-denies-ever-attending-party-with-kavanaugh%3f_amp=true

 

 

Christine Blasey Ford has claimed that four other people attended a small gathering at which she was allegedly assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh. Three of those people, PJ Smyth, Mark Judge, and Kavanaugh, have already denied any recollection of attending such a party. 

On Saturday night, Leland Ingham Keyser, a classmate of Ford's at the all-girls school Holton-Arms and her final named witness, denied any recollection of attending a party with Brett Kavanaugh. 

"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," lawyer Howard J. Walsh said in a statement sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee. 

CNN reports that " Keyser is a lifelong friend of Ford's."

You're citing a publication that's owned by newscorp and contributed to by Tucker Carlson, neither of which are exactly known for their fact based reporting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Captainant said:

You're citing a publication that's owned by newscorp and contributed to by Tucker Carlson, neither of which are exactly known for their fact based reporting

Does this slate.com article saying the same shit help?

 

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/christine-ford-friend-leland-ingham-keyser-says-she-doesnt-recall-party-where-alleged-kavanaugh-assault-took-place.html

 

A longtime friend of Christine Blasey Ford named Leland Ingham Keyser says she doesn’t know Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and doesn’t recall attending a party with him. Ford said Keyser was at the party where Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her when they were both in high school, but she says she has no memory of it. “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,” Keyser’s lawyer, Howard Walsh, said in a statement.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

They don’t want to do one. Because her allegations have as much corroboration as me alleging you fucked 300 goats last night.  If she has something credible, she should tell them.  Then maybe they will do a 7th check.  Nothing and no one is stopping her from giving a statement. 

She is not credible. Thus the reason Feinstein sat on the letter for 6 weeks before leaking it at the last minute as a Hail Mary. 

Who doesn’t? She has asked for an investigation that the White House has failed to provide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

Does this slate.com article saying the same shit help?

 

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/christine-ford-friend-leland-ingham-keyser-says-she-doesnt-recall-party-where-alleged-kavanaugh-assault-took-place.html

 

A longtime friend of Christine Blasey Ford named Leland Ingham Keyser says she doesn’t know Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and doesn’t recall attending a party with him. Ford said Keyser was at the party where Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her when they were both in high school, but she says she has no memory of it. “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,” Keyser’s lawyer, Howard Walsh, said in a statement.

 

It doesn't matter.

He's political kryptonite now.

He's not going even going to make it to a vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

We will see. I disagree with your prediction. 

If you don't have the votes now, why do you think you're going to get them the longer this goes on and more information comes out? Every day gets worse for him and the GOP.

Even if you believe him with regard to Dr. Ford's accusations, he's obviously lying about his past. All of the things young Brett and his friends thought were super funny when they were teenagers are going to end up sinking his nomination. He's going to have to explain, in detail, all of the things he included in his yearbook. The Devil's Triangle, the keg club, the FFFFFFourth of July, Renate Alumni, etc.

That is not going to be a good look for someone interviewing for a spot on the Supreme Court. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this slate.com article saying the same shit help?
 
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/christine-ford-friend-leland-ingham-keyser-says-she-doesnt-recall-party-where-alleged-kavanaugh-assault-took-place.html
 

A longtime friend of Christine Blasey Ford named Leland Ingham Keyser says she doesn’t know Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and doesn’t recall attending a party with him. Ford said Keyser was at the party where Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her when they were both in high school, but she says she has no memory of it. “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,” Keyser’s lawyer, Howard Walsh, said in a statement.

 


Lacking corroboration and not being credible are completely different things. Assuming what she says happened did happen, for anyone not in that room, it was just one of countless parties that there was zero reason to remember weeks later, let alone decades later.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

reading as many as 4 accusers now.

anyone that has gone on record saying the R's should just vote and get it over with want to recant? I'm can't for sure anything is credible at this moment (including my opening statement above), but it isn't looking good. if you dug your heels in earlier, now is your chance to say you were probably wrong. because it's looking like you were.

And all of them will demand that the FBI do investigations on everything and all of them will demand that a different one testify first, and then somebody else will make another demand and then someone else will make another demand and then someone else will make another demand and this thing becomes an endless list of demands that are never going to be met so this thing never ends until McConnell and Grassley say they have had enough which means it never ends.  The whole purpose of this is to keep Kavanaugh's head under water until he drowns from bad publicity.  Unless of course the next polls that come out show Republicans making huge advances in popularity.  If that happens this goes away faster than NASCAR tv ratings.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

She’s free to give the fbi a statement.  They aren’t interested yet.  They’ve done 6 background checks.  If she has something substantial she should tell them

 

 

2 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

They don’t want to do one. Because her allegations have as much corroboration as me alleging you fucked 300 goats last night.  If she has something credible, she should tell them.  Then maybe they will do a 7th check.  Nothing and no one is stopping her from giving a statement. 

She is not credible. Thus the reason Feinstein sat on the letter for 6 weeks before leaking it at the last minute as a Hail Mary. 

You create a pretty amusing vision of the FBI.

"Anybody want to do this investigation? Looks interesting." 

"I'm tired of investigating that. I don't want to."

"I'm out, too. I'm just not interested. Who has the funny pages?"

The FBI doesn't choose. They are ordered by the White House to do these background investigations. Trump could have ordered it days ago, but he hasn't. Why?

Why doesn't the committee want to hear from other witnesses? Why don't they insist that Judge testify?

Why did they choose this slimeball? Well, he's a conservative!

Buzz-buzz! Sorry, Hans, wrong answer. They could have picked from any number of conservative candidates who would have sailed through. Why are they so determined to have this guy? He oozes slime. Mysterious payoffs on large debts. Hiding his record in the Bush White House. Lying about what he remembers. Lying. Lying. Lying.

This is the conservative you want?

Why?

(Hint: He's the crook that the crooks need. Okay, that was more than a hint.)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You create a pretty amusing vision of the FBI.
"Anybody want to do this investigation? Looks interesting." 
"I'm tired of investigating that. I don't want to."
"I'm out, too. I'm just not interested. Who has the funny pages?"
The FBI doesn't choose. They are ordered by the White House to do these background investigations. Trump could have ordered it days ago, but he hasn't. Why?
Why doesn't the committee want to hear from other witnesses? Why don't they insist that Judge testify?
Why did they choose this slimeball? Well, he's a conservative!
Buzz-buzz! Sorry, Hans, wrong answer. They could have picked from any number of conservative candidates who would have sailed through. Why are they so determined to have this guy? He oozes slime. Mysterious payoffs on large debts. Hiding his record in the Bush White House. Lying about what he remembers. Lying. Lying. Lying.
This is the conservative you want?
Why?
(Hint: He's the crook that the crooks need. Okay, that was more than a hint.)



There is zero chance, IMO, that any other candidate was going to “sail through”. We would be in the same situation no matter who was nominated. The Democrats are backed into a corner on SCOTUS appointments so there is no way this last one wasn’t going to get bloody. They would have done anything in their power to try to delay this until after the midterms.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or maybe he's a shitbird. 


Maybe. Maybe not. No one on this thread knows.

If the Republicans had any sack they would go ahead with the vote and say “Impeach him if you can.” Hell why wasn’t he impeached during the last 12 years as a justice on the 2nd highest court?
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It’s remarkable how emotionally invested some are in Kavanaugh.  As if the world comes to an end if he gets pulled.  

I really just don't get with the long list of very accomplished conservative justices that they just don't go and pick one without this baggage.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It’s remarkable how emotionally invested some are in Kavanaugh.  As if the world comes to an end if he gets pulled.  

This is what I can't get over.  It's not like Hillary gets elected to the court if they pull Kavanaugh.  I genuinely think that 40% of the country simply cannot mentally handle losing to the Democrats in any way, even if the end result of a conservative majority Supreme Court stays exactly the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ragnarok said:

We're emotionally invested in seeing this tactic fail.  If bringing forth a string of liars after the confirmation hearings are over, none of whom have testified under oath, can bring down a candidate, it will always be used in the future.

Is there anything Dr. Blasey Ford could do that would convince you her claims are legitimate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ragnarok said:

We're emotionally invested in seeing this tactic fail.  If bringing forth a string of liars after the confirmation hearings are over, none of whom have testified under oath, can bring down a candidate, it will always be used in the future.

Fuck off.  If allegations like these and those against Roy Moore are concocted out of thin air, then why didn't they do that to Gorsuch or any other of the vast majority of nominees and candidates that face no such attacks?  Maybe Kavanaugh is a shitbird.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Ragnarok said:

We're emotionally invested in seeing this tactic fail.  If bringing forth a string of liars after the confirmation hearings are over, none of whom have testified under oath, can bring down a candidate, it will always be used in the future.

Look, I can buy that argument when there is one person who hasn't testified under oath yet.  But we are up to at least three now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

maybe they should use an independent and professional investigatory group to whom making false statements is a crime to determine the validity of claims like this

Nah, seems like too much work and impossible to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...