Kavanaugh Speaks

Author: Swagnarok ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 48
  • Swagnarok
    Swagnarok avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 687
    2
    2
    5
    Swagnarok avatar
    Swagnarok
    Judge Brett Kavanaugh is, at the time of posting, testifying before the Senate. At the opening of such he issued a lengthy statement defending his reputation and repudiating the allegations levied by Mrs. Ford.
    This statement can be read here:

    Having watched the statement as it was being given, Kavanaugh's voice was faultering as he recounted his high school days, his record of service, the many women who he's been friends with and mentored, 80+ of whom came together and penned a letter defending the integrity of the man they knew.
    Kavanaugh is extremely lucky in that he was able to provide extensive documentation of his day-to-day whereabouts in his high school years in the form of calendars, which served also as diaries. The calendars should be enough to prove that Kavanaugh was never at the party that is at the core of Mrs. Ford's accusation. He has been investigated by the FBI already on 6 different occasions, all of which were standard background checks. None turned up any dirt on the man Brett Kavanaugh.

    I don't know how this is ultimately going to turn out. But I have a feeling that most Americans are skeptical of the allegations. In the comments section of a recent Yahoo article about Kavanaugh (this was yesterday), the comments were pro-Kavanaugh at least 10 to 1, even though normally the majority of commentators for this media outlet are rabidly anti-Trump.
    So at this time I am *very cautiously* optimistic that justice will prevail and Mr. Kavanaugh will get his seat on the highest Court of this land that he so rightly deserves. Then again, only time will tell.
    The vote on his confirmation is scheduled for tomorrow at 9:30 AM.
  • mustardness
    mustardness avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,029
    2
    1
    3
    mustardness avatar
    mustardness
    --> @Swagnarok
    He should be asking for FBI investigation for sexual claims alledged against him.

    He could also be asking for poloygraph test.

    He does not do that. Why? Because he and his good drinking buddy Mark Judge would be put under oath.

    We can only pray 2 republicans senators have the moral courage and integrity to deny kavenaugh to sit on supreme court, because they believe Mrs Ford as most people who have watched her believe here.

    Kavenaugh and Graham follow in Trumpanzees footsteps so were getting alot of pissy men pissing off in public. Sad :--(

    I wouldnt believe tKavenaugh any further than I can throw that cry-baby pissy idio-ump.



  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,387
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @mustardness
    Ebuc has the whacko left talking points down accurately.


    The left will ask for an admissible polygraph test even though it's not a criminal proceeding.

    The left will also want him to involve the FBI when it's not his call to involve the FBI, nor can the FBI do anything more than the Senators can, namely, ask questions and hear answers.

    The good thing is that Kavanaugh is making these partisan whacko hacks squirm as he grills them back about the trivial questions from a high school yearbook. 

    Sad.

    Anyways, he will be confirmed and popularity for the GOP will rise in the wake of this retro-McCarthyism.

  • mustardness
    mustardness avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,029
    2
    1
    3
    mustardness avatar
    mustardness
    --> @Greyparrot
    The left will also want him to involve the FBI when it's not his call to involve the FBI, nor can the FBI do anything more than the Senators can, namely, ask questions and hear answers.
    He certainly can call for FBI investigation.  Why you would suggest otherwise makes no sense.

    He just cant cant with certainty make it happen. He refuses to ask because he is not interested in him or Mark Judge testifiying under oath.

    These two both need to be charged with sex crimes.  Somebody please charge these Trumpanzees and then lock them away!

    Lock Them Away Today!

    Lock Them Away Today!

    Lock Them Away Today!

  • Vortex86
    Vortex86 avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 32
    0
    0
    3
    Vortex86 avatar
    Vortex86
    --> @mustardness
    I'm sorry that you are that deluded that you think there is anything to "lock them up" for. 

    An unknown crime based on what she believed might happen. In an unknown location at an unknown time with unknown number of witnesses present. All of which who refute her claims. This with 36 years that have elapsed in between.. you really are reaching hard if that is your expectation. It also shows how far removed from reality you are.
  • Outplayz
    Outplayz avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,108
    2
    3
    4
    Outplayz avatar
    Outplayz
    --> @mustardness
    He says everything i would have and saves me time in typing... Learn. 


  • Swagnarok
    Swagnarok avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 687
    2
    2
    5
    Swagnarok avatar
    Swagnarok
    --> @mustardness
    As I said in the OP, Kavanaugh was vetted by the FBI on six separate occasions. And every single time he was cleared by them.
  • ethang5
    ethang5 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 4,457
    3
    3
    6
    ethang5 avatar
    ethang5
    Here are the questions I would have asked Mrs Ford.

    1. Do you believe people are innocent until proven guilty?

    2. Do you believe a person should be convicted on an accusation alone?

    3. The FBI investigates credible accusations. How is your accusation credible? You do not remember the time, the place, or the witnesses. You have no corroboration. Your witnesses do not verify your story. Unless you think the FBI should investigate every accusation no matter how absurd, your accusation is not credible.

    4. Given that your accusation has no objectively verified facts, do you think a person should be convicted based on accusation alone?

    5. Kavanaugh's name was not mentioned by you till 2012. Not even to your husband or your therapist. Does that help or hurt your credibility?

    6. Who do you believe carries the burden of proof? The accuser or the accused?

    7. Who do you think leaked your letter to the press?

    8. Do you think it was fair to Judge Kavanaugh to publish your accusation without any evidence or corroboration?

    9. If an FBI investigation was done and found your accusation false, would you have accepted that?

    10. Do you think it's fair to ruin a persons life for something they did once 35 years ago when they were 17 years old?
  • DrChristineFord
    DrChristineFord avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 80
    0
    0
    2
    DrChristineFord avatar
    DrChristineFord
    --> @ethang5
    1. People are assumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.  That doesn't mean that people are actually innocent until proven guilty, though.

    2.  No.

    3.  It's not for me to judge the credibility of my own account.  I can only state the facts as I know them to the best of my ability. 

    4.  The hearing so far was in relation to Brett's job interview.  So far there has been no question of conviction and I agree there should not be without substantial investigation, which I would support.

    5.  Please refer to my response for q3.

    6. Brett has the burden of proof to show that he is qualified and suitable for the supreme court position.

    7. I don't know.

    8. My account is evidence, and I don't personally need corroboration for something I know to be true.

    9. I didn't begin this process with expectations for any particular outcome.  In fact, I expected a poor outcome.  It just felt to be my duty to put this before the committee for them to consider.  That was the extent of my duty, and where people take it from there is out of my hands.  

    10.  The worst consequence Brett is facing is not getting accepted for a desirable job.  I can understand that that would be disappointing for him.  Nevertheless, we also need to think of the consequences to the country of having a supreme court justice who is unsuitable for the role.  Whether or not Brett us unsuitable is not my decision to make, but I don't believe that providing information about his character is unfair.  











  • Fallaneze
    Fallaneze avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,228
    2
    2
    5
    Fallaneze avatar
    Fallaneze
    Kavanaughs name was never mentioned in the 2012 therapy session. I believe she was harassed at somewhere at some point but not by Kavanaugh.

  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,387
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @ethang5
    LOL...in a world run by the whacky left...innocent people will demand that the FBI investigate them.

    Cause like...the FBI NEVER hurts innocent people....
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,387
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @DrChristineFord
    That doesn't mean that people are actually innocent until proven guilty, though.
    No that means we consider people ACTUALLY INNOCENT until evidence and a court proves otherwise. You don't get to slander people by calling them a rapist with no evidence. There are laws to protect people from libel when there is no evidence. Shut your mouth if you don't want a libel lawsuit.
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,387
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @DrChristineFord
    The worst consequence Brett is facing is not getting accepted for a desirable job.  I can understand that that would be disappointing for him.  Nevertheless, we also need to think of the consequences to the country of having a supreme court justice who is unsuitable for the role.  Whether or not Brett us unsuitable is not my decision to make, but I don't believe that providing information about his character is unfair.  
    Then this isn't about an offense committed against you. You admit yourself that your main worry is about the country, and not some repressed, recovered memory gaslighted by your psychiatrist. At least be honest that this is a political move you are willfully engaging in to protect the country from Brett. 
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,387
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @Swagnarok
    The Ford circus will be the turning point of the me-too movement where unsubstantiated claims will not be regarded as automatic truth, and men will be allowed to defend themselves from the current war-on-men by the me-too movement.
  • TheDredPriateRoberts
    TheDredPriateRoberts avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 3,340
    3
    3
    6
    TheDredPriateRoberts avatar
    TheDredPriateRoberts
    --> @Greyparrot
    did the republicans ever get the un-redacted letter she wrote and Fienstein or her lackeys leaked?

    How many times had she meet Kavanaugh, how did she know his name?

    I saw some of those year book pictures, a lot of look a likes imo
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,387
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @TheDredPriateRoberts
    This is what actually happened which you will never hear in the news. Avenatti and other operatives from the Demoncrat party interviewed all leftist females in every area of Kavanaugh's life...they were not able to find any women in any of the workplaces, so they could not find another Anita Hill.

    They found Ford who was more than willing to trade her soul by lying to the public to enhance her status among the whacko left community, and become a goddess alongside Anita Hill, who has ridden the gravy train all her life. Every wacko leftist enclave has welcomed Anita Hill with open arms, and Ford was looking to cash in on this. 

    Avenatti has another woman, but the Senate won't hear from her, because Ford was first, so his client is out of luck on cashing in the Anita Hill card.
  • 1Percenter
    1Percenter avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1
    0
    0
    0
    1Percenter avatar
    1Percenter
    First, they insisted Dr. Ford be allowed to testify before the committee so they can best make an "informed decision with all the facts". That was the whole point: let the accuser and the accused speak their side of the story and then the Senate can vote.

    Now, even after several months of Feinstein doing nothing with Ford's accusations, we suddenly need the FBI to get involved in order to make an informed decision? What nonsense. If there was even the slightest chance an FBI probe would have made a difference it would have been done long ago.

    Democrats are just moving the goalposts because it's obvious they now have no further reason to delay the Senate vote.

    Whether they doing this in order to buy time until November 6 in hopes the Senate flips, or if they actually believe this sort of grandstanding will make Dems more popular in the midterms, I cannot say. 

    Next week they will demand the FBI probe be extended, or they will demand Mark Judge testify before the committee. Probably both.

  • ethang5
    ethang5 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 4,457
    3
    3
    6
    ethang5 avatar
    ethang5
    --> @DrChristineFord
    1. People are assumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. That doesn't mean that people are actually innocent until proven guilty, though.
    Oh sorry. I ment in America, not Iran.

    2.  Do you believe a person should be convicted on an accusation alone?
    No.
    Contradiction. If people are not innocent until proven guilty, then they can be convicted on accusations alone.

    3.  It's not for me to judge the credibility of my own account.  I can only state the facts as I know them to the best of my ability. 
    Well, the Senate evaluated your account and found it not credible enough to stop his nomination. You aren't alone in not thinking your account credible.

    4.  The hearing so far was in relation to Brett's job interview.  So far there has been no question of conviction and I agree there should not be without substantial investigation, which I would support.
    The Judge is not applying to you. And claims that aren't credible do not warrant investigation. That way, not any whacko can hamper your life with a bogus accusation and demand an FBI investigation.

    5. Kavanaugh's name was not mentioned by you till 2012. Not even to your husband or your therapist. Does that help or hurt your credibility?

    Please refer to my response for q3.
    No need to. I can tell you. It hurt your credibility.

    6. Brett has the burden of proof to show that he is qualified and suitable for the supreme court position.
    Not to you though. You have nothing to do with his evaluation. The burden of proof for your accusation is on you. And if you cannot present proof, your accusation will be dismissed as trash.

    7. Who do you think leaked your letter to the press?

    I don't know.
    And you have not asked for an FBI investigation. How unusual.

    8. My account is evidence, and I don't personally need corroboration for something I know to be true.
    No one else knows it to be true snowflake. Not even your own witnesses. This is why it was dismissed.

    9. I didn't begin this process with expectations for any particular outcome.  In fact, I expected a poor outcome.  It just felt to be my duty to put this before the committee for them to consider.  That was the extent of my duty, and where people take it from there is out of my hands.  
    OK then. Go home. They considered it and found it wanting.

    10.  The worst consequence Brett is facing is not getting accepted for a desirable job.  I can understand that that would be disappointing for him.  Nevertheless, we also need to think of the consequences to the country of having a supreme court justice who is unsuitable for the role.  Whether or not Brett us unsuitable is not my decision to make, but I don't believe that providing information about his character is unfair.  

    What you provided was hearsay. Baseless accusation. Nothing about his character. If you think the worst consequence for the Judge is facing is not getting accepted for a desirable job you are a brainless fool. I have 3 daughters and would rather die than put them through what you jackals did to him.

    You did not provide proof of your accusation, as such, his character is fine. Go and tell the people paying your lawyers you've done all you can do. Wipe your eyes and blow your nose. You can stop crying now.
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,387
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @1Percenter
    The entire thing was orchestrated for a 2 month long FBI probe to delay the confirmation past the midterms. Republicans won't allow this to happen. The vote will happen even if the judge does not get confirmed.
  • Buddamoose
    Buddamoose avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 3,177
    2
    3
    6
    Buddamoose avatar
    Buddamoose
    --> @mustardness
    Because he and his good drinking buddy Mark Judge would be put under oath.

    Except Judge already has been put under oath and made a statement under penalty of perjury. He denies it categorically. Ford's best friend, denies even having met Kavanaugh period. Nobody else corroborates it either. 

    That diary/journal though. Every accusation just got blown out of the water by that. The obstruction failed and it only made the Dems look pathetic AF. Congrats, they just gave all the ammunition needed to get turn out the Republican voter base en masse. 

    "This senator doesn't believe in due process, presumption of innocence, and shits on our founding documents and principles." 

    Watch as Repubs gain seats now lol


  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,387
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @Buddamoose
    Also, Democrats refused to allow Judge to testify because they knew he would make Ford look bad.
  • ethang5
    ethang5 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 4,457
    3
    3
    6
    ethang5 avatar
    ethang5
    --> @Buddamoose
    The obstruction failed and it only made the Dems look pathetic AF.
    I mean. Can you imagine the absurdity of some dumb senator grilling the Judge on his yearbook from when he was 17, some 36 years ago?

    My god that was idiotic.
  • Buddamoose
    Buddamoose avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 3,177
    2
    3
    6
    Buddamoose avatar
    Buddamoose
    --> @Greyparrot
    Also, Democrats refused to allow Judge to testify because they knew he would make Ford look bad

    Mmhm, then in the hearing kept repeating that Judge nor the polygraph examiner were being brought to testify. Despite it being them that blocked it because Judge unequivocally denied it and the polygraph examiner even admitted the test was shit. 

    Notice how there were no calls to bring the therapist to testify. Also notice how Ford, being a psych professor, blatantly lied about it not being a therapists job to write down details of recounted events? 

    That's psych 101 shit where you learn that is a therapists job. And then also where you learn, "hey, you can get your license to practice revoked if you don't report probable crimes to police. That requires writing down patient accounts of past events.

    Absolutely horrid testimony from Ford. That diary/calendar kept from the age of 14 was a bombshell though. Did you see Ford's lawyers in the background shit their pants and start looking down alot? 

    Guarantee they knew nothing about that and we're scrambling to write down everything, like, "oh we are so fucked, this just fucked everything." 

    😂😂😂
     
  • Buddamoose
    Buddamoose avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 3,177
    2
    3
    6
    Buddamoose avatar
    Buddamoose
    --> @ethang5
    I mean. Can you imagine the absurdity of some dumb senator grilling the Judge on his yearbook from when he was 17, some 36 years ago?

    My god that was idiotic

    This was the same senator who during the Ford testimony was like, "the hardest thing to do as a prosecutor is tell someone there isnt enough evidence to bring something to trial."

    Then proceeds to list things that aren't evidence that's admissible in court/even constitutes as evidence at all. 

    "She came forward and was willing to testify in front of everyone"

    She immediately contradicted that minutes later btw 😂. And that isnt evidence of anything beyond that. What a pathetic hack 😂😂

    Hope he realizes that's gonna be plastered everywhere when he's up for re-election. "Look at this former prosecutor who either blatantly lied, or doesn't know the law at all. You really wanna vote for such an idiot?" 
  • Buddamoose
    Buddamoose avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 3,177
    2
    3
    6
    Buddamoose avatar
    Buddamoose
    Btw, it was brilliant how Grassley called breaks right after Ford contradicted or made herself look untruthful. People kept complaining about how they were stopping every 5-10 minutes without realizing they were stopping whenever she fucked up to let that she did sink in real good 😂😂