Official Brett Kavanaugh confirmation thread

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

First you shouldn’t assume I am any color, so don’t go around posting like you arethe aggrieved party SJW.

Lots of people here know who you are. Surely you realize that...

Kavanaugh, Schmavanaugh wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

First you shouldn’t assume I am any color, so don’t go around posting like you arethe aggrieved party SJW.

Lots of people here know who you are. Surely you realize that...

Surely you realize that the poster made a racist comment. Surely you realize I have confidence in my convictions and I don’t need to hide behind a handle registered or otherwise.

Hardloper wrote:

If I'm understanding you correctly you're saying misidentificaton would be impossible in almost all cases, but we know it happens.

Maybe you could help me out with the mis-identification theory.

The allegation is that there were four boys and one other girl at this gathering. The two boys identified as involved in the alleged attack have denied it. So are the other two boys the suspects in this theory or did two completely different guys somehow wander into the house, follow the alleged victim up the stairs, attack her, and then left unnoticed by anyone else in attendance?

Still no corroboration of Ford's testimony. The clock is ticking, dems. The FBI has until Friday to be finished.

Monkeys typing wrote:

Hardloper wrote:

If I'm understanding you correctly you're saying misidentificaton would be impossible in almost all cases, but we know it happens.

Maybe you could help me out with the mis-identification theory.

The allegation is that there were four boys and one other girl at this gathering. The two boys identified as involved in the alleged attack have denied it. So are the other two boys the suspects in this theory or did two completely different guys somehow wander into the house, follow the alleged victim up the stairs, attack her, and then left unnoticed by anyone else in attendance?

In terms of the number of individuals Dr. Ford has given three different versions. The girl denies a recollection as well.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

In terms of the number of individuals Dr. Ford has given three different versions. The girl denies a recollection as well.

Your numbers are made up from the Russian website, zerohenge. Even then, three variant stories are far less than the 30+ variant stories (lies) Kavanaugh told; and that was just during senate testimony.

Some comments from Jeff Flake today:

https://uk.reuters.com/video/2018/10/02/verbatim-flake-slams-kavanaughs-partisan?videoId=469680363&videoChannel=118262&channelName=Reuters+Now

I'm really not sure that his comments mean much. Although I think that he is sincere in his criticisms of Republican Party leaders these days, he has a tendency to fall in line with his party when the votes are cast.

Kavanaugh was careful not to tell any direct lies. He might have deflected certain items, but he never lied. Re-watch the testimony. He typically will deflect a question that he feels is not relevant to the Ford or Ramirez issue usually with a swirl of his tongue and a pause, which is what they are supposed to be addressing anyhow. The Democrats are asking him a bunch of questions with no relevance to the proceedings ultimately hoping to catch him in a lie, because they know the accusers they are rolling in are not credible and have claims that are not only not corroborated, but are refuted. When you have been grilled for 80 hours, then you can talk about someone giving short answers to a witch hunt.

Democrats are crazy blasey lovers. That’s nasty!!!!!

What an ugly democrat piece of trash.

B. "Ralph King" O'Kavanaugh wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

In terms of the number of individuals Dr. Ford has given three different versions. The girl denies a recollection as well.

Your numbers are made up from the Russian website, zerohenge. Even then, three variant stories are far less than the 30+ variant stories (lies) Kavanaugh told; and that was just during senate testimony.

1. Therapist notes, 2. Feinstein letter, 3. Newspaper story and 4. Testimony; so actually four versions.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Monkeys typing wrote:

Maybe you could help me out with the mis-identification theory.

The allegation is that there were four boys and one other girl at this gathering. The two boys identified as involved in the alleged attack have denied it. So are the other two boys the suspects in this theory or did two completely different guys somehow wander into the house, follow the alleged victim up the stairs, attack her, and then left unnoticed by anyone else in attendance?

In terms of the number of individuals Dr. Ford has given three different versions. The girl denies a recollection as well.

This, she's stated different numbers of individuals at the party and also couldn't even narrow down the year it took place let alone location, who drove her home, etc, so there's no reason to think she identified exactly which four boys were at the party.

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

Still no corroboration of Ford's testimony. The clock is ticking, dems. The FBI has until Friday to be finished.

Uh oh, dems. The FBI may be way ahead of their Friday deadline.

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

Still no corroboration of Ford's testimony. The clock is ticking, dems. The FBI has until Friday to be finished.

Devil’s Triangle Kavanaugh has two problems, and you aren’t even correctly articulating one of them. The sexual assault allegation is one problem - but this isn’t a criminal trial and he doesn’t need to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The other, and now probably bigger problem, is if he lied during the hearing. And, not just about the sexual assault, it’s if he lied at all.

Two issues wrote:

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

Still no corroboration of Ford's testimony. The clock is ticking, dems. The FBI has until Friday to be finished.

Devil’s Triangle Kavanaugh has two problems, and you aren’t even correctly articulating one of them. The sexual assault allegation is one problem - but this isn’t a criminal trial and he doesn’t need to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The other, and now probably bigger problem, is if he lied during the hearing. And, not just about the sexual assault, it’s if he lied at all.

joedirt wrote:

Kavanaugh was careful not to tell any direct lies. He might have deflected certain items, but he never lied. Re-watch the testimony. He typically will deflect a question that he feels is not relevant to the Ford or Ramirez issue usually with a swirl of his tongue and a pause, which is what they are supposed to be addressing anyhow. The Democrats are asking him a bunch of questions with no relevance to the proceedings ultimately hoping to catch him in a lie, because they know the accusers they are rolling in are not credible and have claims that are not only not corroborated, but are refuted. When you have been grilled for 80 hours, then you can talk about someone giving short answers to a witch hunt.

No many how many times you say this, it is still wrong.

Devil's triangle. Giant lie, directly on topic.

Two issues wrote:

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

Still no corroboration of Ford's testimony. The clock is ticking, dems. The FBI has until Friday to be finished.

Devil’s Triangle Kavanaugh has two problems, and you aren’t even correctly articulating one of them. The sexual assault allegation is one problem - but this isn’t a criminal trial and he doesn’t need to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The other, and now probably bigger problem, is if he lied during the hearing. And, not just about the sexual assault, it’s if he lied at all.

You and other posters really have this fascination with the Devil’s Triangle. After awhile you begin to wonder if you are the parties with a problem.

well, another witness claiming to know Kav, Judge, Swet, Blas and having attended the house parties is corroborating the sexual misconduct and spiking the punch.

https://twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Two issues wrote:

Devil’s Triangle Kavanaugh has two problems, and you aren’t even correctly articulating one of them. The sexual assault allegation is one problem - but this isn’t a criminal trial and he doesn’t need to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The other, and now probably bigger problem, is if he lied during the hearing. And, not just about the sexual assault, it’s if he lied at all.

You and other posters really have this fascination with the Devil’s Triangle. After awhile you begin to wonder if you are the parties with a problem.

You will too when he doesn't get appointed because he lied about.