OFFICIAL: Kavanaugh Hearings Thread

[Defiant1]

Dr. Ford was credible, responsive, fair and believable.

Judge Kavanaugh was not responsive, not credible and angry. Notice how he and Grassley responded to the Female Senators, cutting them off and not answering their questions; of course Kavanaugh treated the Democratic Senators no better. Time and again Kavanaugh let us know he played Football and Basketball, studied hard, drank beer and never engaged in any sexually inappropriate behavior.

Any judge would have instructed Kavanaugh, the witness, to answer the questions put to him; in fact he did not. He responded with stock responses he had practiced with lawyers at the White House for the days prior to the hearing.

Believable? Really?

I've heard there may have been another such incident and she said you did it.

 

[forkup]

I will not shed a tear for the few people who get wrongly accused of sexual crimes

Shit like this is where nut bags lose the script. Intellectually it's lazy and sloppy, and it's entirely un-American.

Well, possibly. On the other hand since I have first hand experience in the consequences of dealing with sexual assault. And actively going after someone who did this to someone I cared about, I find it hypocritical to state otherwise.

 

[Hellokitty]

Does anyone know why the friend of Ford who she said introduced her to BK, why she never was pressed to give his name? Why did this one person get a special protection of anonymity that was not awarded to anyone else?

 

[LittleNipper]

Kavanaugh ruined his own name and is ruining it. He is a liar. One can tell. He is also an angry man.

You don’t think a man has a right to be angry when he’s accused of attacking someone, when the press publish all sorts of unverified filth and his family get death threats?

it was his extreme denial that I know he was lying, also the friend of Dr. Ford was in agreement, but then he didn't watch her testify, he was on the phone with the Potus and he said to give them hell. How much do you want to bet. Yes his life is ruined, due to the things he did in HS and now for being a liar, oh and he has a drinking problem.

I believe that ALL drinkers should be banned from belonging in the Democratic Party.

 

[forkup]

The FBI could investigate for 100 years and find nothing

There is nothing there. She lied

No, she did not lie. She just hasn't yet proven her charges beyond any reasonable doubt. Repubtards & Kavanaugh are refusing an FBI investigation because it could prove her charges beyond any reasonable doubt.

Attempting rape & murder is far beyond any sexual harassment accusations against Donald Trump, Clarence Thomas or Bill Clinton!!!

Actually in honesty, proving something like this beyond reasonable doubt 35 years after is unlikely. It should't matter since this isn't a trail.

If it were a trial Brett Kavanaugh would have been jailed for being combative to questions from Sen. Amy Klobuchar. Kavanaugh acted guilty as hell choking down water, screaming, disrespecting authority & refusing investigation.

Sorry Kiss acting guilty does NOT constitute proof of guilt.

Such conduct is 100% appropriate to consider when evaluating a witness' credibility.

Sure, but Kiss is not talking about credibility, he's talking about jailing somebody over acting guilty. Pretty funny how you just lectured me about un-American.

 

[LittleNipper]

It's amazing how for 30 years Repubtards were beyond obsessed that Clinton may have harassed a couple women, yet now support a rapist who spews Clinton conspiracy theories. Republicans had FBI investigating Clinton while allowing 9/11 attacks, but refuse the FBI investigate repubtard political operative judges rape.

Clinton’s DNA was all over the place! Please produce Kavanaugh’s DNA.

LOL - DNA on dress of a willing Clinton groopie who threw herself at him. LOL
Give the FBI 30+ years to investigate Kavanaugh's forced rape + attempted murder!!!

The FBI could investigate for 100 years and find nothing

There is nothing there. She lied

No, she did not lie. She just hasn't yet proven her charges beyond any reasonable doubt. Repubtards & Kavanaugh are refusing an FBI investigation because it could prove her charges beyond any reasonable doubt.

Attempting rape & murder is far beyond any sexual harassment accusations against Donald Trump, Clarence Thomas or Bill Clinton!!!

I really don't see how the FBI has anything but "She now remembers" to go on... Where is her calendar, diary, journal from 36 years ago? What did she tell her parents, her minister, her teachers, the police back then ----- or even now for that matter?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Nope. I really had not decided how I would decide on this until I heard them both. So I watched them both yesterday, and what I said earlier about my impression of his character and also the strident partisan tone of his statement--and attitude toward the Democratic questioners--stands. Your insults don't change my mind in the least.

So you have a problem with a partisan answer to a partisan question?

Did you see his smart ass response to Senator Klobuchar? She was doing her job of trying to get to bottom of the allegations. He asked if SHE had ever been blackout drunk.
C'mon, that wasn't USMB. Smart ass responses to something like that are unprofessional. If you missed it, the exchange is below. Trying to determine if he drank to excess and might have forgotten an incident is at the heart of the allegations and wasn't "partisan" on Senator Klobuchar's part. After a potty break, Kavanaugh came back and apologized to her--apparently someone took him aside and told him it was out of line. His excuse was "this is a tough process." Poor him.

Kavanaugh Apologizes to Klobuchar For Drinking Question

Klobuchar is an annoying bitch like the rest of them. Kavanaugh apologized because he is gentlemanly, something that is wasted on Democrat women these days.

 

[LittleNipper]

So the fracture in US politics grows ever deeper?

Only if we allow it.

 

[Obama2020]

3 letters would avoid threads like these (and a shitload of speculation):

F B I

The accounting of energy expended on coverage and committees VS a 3 day FBI investigation (Anita Hill) ? Probably 1,000,000 to 1

 

[edward37]

Unfortunately these hearing has left lots of doubt about this guy.

1. He did not answer many of the questions asked of him, instead going out in left field in many cases. Why did he avoid answering those questions?

2. What judicial demeanor? His demeanor was angry, unbalanced, almost deranged at times. Judicial ethical standards require that a judge be courteous, dignified, and patient.
who would want to have their case held in his court with that demeanor?

3. And a big one there remain accusations that he committed felony sexual abuse, without any evidence to the contrary. An FBI investigation could have discovered that evidence, but unfortunately it was not looked for.

4. Finally, if he did in fact commit even a single one of the accused crimes, he also committed perjury.

There exist many possible candidates for the Supreme Court without all these doubts. Trump said there should be no doubts. Let's pick a candidate with no doubts!

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Dr. Ford was credible, responsive, fair and believable.

Judge Kavanaugh was not responsive, not credible and angry. Notice how he and Grassley responded to the Female Senators, cutting them off and not answering their questions; of course Kavanaugh treated the Democratic Senators no better. Time and again Kavanaugh let us know he played Football and Basketball, studied hard, drank beer and never engaged in any sexually inappropriate behavior.

Any judge would have instructed Kavanaugh, the witness, to answer the questions put to him; in fact he did not. He responded with stock responses he had practiced with lawyers at the White House for the days prior to the hearing.

Believable? Really?

I've heard there may have been another such incident and she said you did it.

So she's not believable because a lie she hasn't made would have been a lie if she had made it?

 

[WillowTree]

Unfortunately these hearing has left lots of doubt about this guy.

1. He did not answer many of the questions asked of him, instead going out in left field in many cases. Why did he avoid answering those questions?

2. What judicial demeanor? His demeanor was angry, unbalanced, almost deranged at times. Judicial ethical standards require that a judge be courteous, dignified, and patient.
who would want to have their case held in his court with that demeanor?

3. And a big one there remain accusations that he committed felony sexual abuse, without any evidence to the contrary. An FBI investigation could have discovered that evidence, but unfortunately it was not looked for.

4. Finally, if he did in fact commit even a single one of the accused crimes, he also committed perjury.

There exist many possible candidates for the Supreme Court without all these doubts. Trump said there should be no doubts. Let's pick a candidate with no doubts!

So why didn’t she go to the police again?

 

[The Purge]

3 letters would avoid threads like these (and a shitload of speculation):

F B I

The accounting of energy expended on coverage and committees VS a 3 day FBI investigation (Anita Hill) ? Probably 1,000,000 to 1

Should have been called 7 weeks ago check would have been completed but NOOOO.Feinstein used it to DELAY...You know what ABNORMALS FUCKED UP, THEY LOSE! Actions have consequences!

 

[martybegan]

Just a comment. When having a hearing, if I were asking a yes or no question, I would want an answer. They weren't "trick" questions, from what I recall.

Usually it's an Attorney on either side that wants the yes or no response only, not the judge. The judge only decides if the attorney's request is valid or not.

I've been questioned and cross examined enough times to know that if I didn't immediately give a yes or no response to a yes/no question, I was going to get told by the judge to answer the question. If I was lucky, and it was a question that required more than a yes/no, the judge would let me continue....

One thing that is very telling is that the attorney that the Republicans brought in was clearly in "cross examine" mode when questioning Ford, but not so when questioning Kavvy. It just goes to show that she came in to treat Ford as a hostile witness.

Um. that's what she was exactly brought in for, to deny Dems the optics of "a bunch of old men beating up on some poor woman"

Yeah, I know. But it also seemed to me that they wanted to create this veneer of having someone come in to independently investigate the facts. In reality, her questioning shows that she was playing defense attorney, looking for opportunities to impeach an accuser's testimony.

And?

She represented the Republicans on the Committee, not the Committee as a whole.

 

[Hiryuu]

Did you see his smart ass response to Senator Klobuchar? She was doing her job of trying to get to bottom of the allegations. He asked if SHE had ever been blackout drunk.
C'mon, that wasn't USMB. Smart ass responses to something like that are unprofessional. If you missed it, the exchange is below. Trying to determine if he drank to excess and might have forgotten an incident is at the heart of the allegations and wasn't "partisan" on Senator Klobuchar's part. After a potty break, Kavanaugh came back and apologized to her--apparently someone took him aside and told him it was out of line. His excuse was "this is a tough process." Poor him.

Kavanaugh Apologizes to Klobuchar For Drinking Question

Whether or not he ever drank to excess does not provide a date or time for a party no one but the accuser remembers Judge Kavanaugh being at. So, you ask a hostile question, you get a hostile answer. At least Judge Kavanaugh apologized, and I doubt Senator Klobuchar will.

See, your response is based on what you want to hear, and how you could try and make it apply to something it doesn't necessarily apply to.

 

[The Purge]

Unfortunately these hearing has left lots of doubt about this guy.

1. He did not answer many of the questions asked of him, instead going out in left field in many cases. Why did he avoid answering those questions?

2. What judicial demeanor? His demeanor was angry, unbalanced, almost deranged at times. Judicial ethical standards require that a judge be courteous, dignified, and patient.
who would want to have their case held in his court with that demeanor?

3. And a big one there remain accusations that he committed felony sexual abuse, without any evidence to the contrary. An FBI investigation could have discovered that evidence, but unfortunately it was not looked for.

4. Finally, if he did in fact commit even a single one of the accused crimes, he also committed perjury.

There exist many possible candidates for the Supreme Court without all these doubts. Trump said there should be no doubts. Let's pick a candidate with no doubts!

Even bigger doubt about Balsy, NO ONE she mentioned backed her up....ABNORMALS LOSE!

 

[edward37]

Unfortunately these hearing has left lots of doubt about this guy.

1. He did not answer many of the questions asked of him, instead going out in left field in many cases. Why did he avoid answering those questions?

2. What judicial demeanor? His demeanor was angry, unbalanced, almost deranged at times. Judicial ethical standards require that a judge be courteous, dignified, and patient.
who would want to have their case held in his court with that demeanor?

3. And a big one there remain accusations that he committed felony sexual abuse, without any evidence to the contrary. An FBI investigation could have discovered that evidence, but unfortunately it was not looked for.

4. Finally, if he did in fact commit even a single one of the accused crimes, he also committed perjury.

There exist many possible candidates for the Supreme Court without all these doubts. Trump said there should be no doubts. Let's pick a candidate with no doubts!

So why didn’t she go to the police again?

How many don't or didn't ? Embarrassment ?? Not wanting to piss in the wind knowing nothing would become of it?

 

[martybegan]

The bigger issue is if that he's not appointed because of the accusation his career is likely over and he is forever tainted over something:

1. He denies vehemently
2. That cannot be proven in any court of law, be it criminal or even civil.

The fact that the memories that could be checked out in any way is the most damning thing about this, be it a willful fabrication or just her mind remembering parts of what happened (to her) that didn't actually happen.

The background check would turn up nothing additional, because there is ZERO documentation of the incident in question.

As for the other 3, the committee (as a whole) had access to all the statements made, and even questioned some of them via paper.

Is your lust for power so great that ruining a possibly innocent man is worth it?

-Actually that is in the scheme of things pretty minor. Firstly, he STILL holds a position at the appellate court. He still has a career. Also the law is bigger then one man. The Supreme Court makes decisions for all Americans.
-AN FBI investigation could actually be helpful. They could interview Mark Judge for instance. Something that is better then simply accepting a statement. They could check when Judge worked at that supermarket establishing a time of the assault. Something that Ford suggested by the way. They could talk to the other 2 people who have made similar allegations and look for corroboration or exonerating evidence for Kavanaugh in the form of alibis or what not. There are a lot of facts the FBI could uncover that the Senate committee is simply not equipped for.

You really think that if he is not confirmed for this, and the Dems take the house, their base won't clamor for his Impeachment?

I find it comical you appeal to the law when if this was a court proceeding under the law he wouldn't be indicted.

All the investigation thing is moot because Dems waited 2 months to bring this up for political reasons, sorry, actions have consequences.

Floor vote time.

-They may clamor for it. Doesn't mean they will get it.By the way what makes you think if the Democrats win they wouldn't clamor for his impeachment if he gets on the bench?
-This is a political appointment not a court of law. There's a difference. If someone would suggest that Kavanaugh would be jailed for this I would have a problem with them because THAT does require judicial standards of proof.
- There goes your argument that Republicans are following due process..... So because you suspect political motivation the Republicans should not find out the truth of these matters? Glad you don't use political motivation. "Hey it's just a lifetime appointment to the supreme court for a suspected rapist, what's the big deal?"
-I've said it before. I'm not big on fortune telling I'm really not, but I will make this prediction. Confirm Kavanaugh and the GOP can say goodbye to any but the most ardent females in the Trump base. All other ones will go out and vote just to spite them.

They clamored for forcing the Republicans to use the Nuke option against Gorusch (and they got it).

How did that work out for Dems?

So you are Ok with their life being ruined and political gain from false accusations. Got it.

The hearing was the way to try to get to the bottom of things. The process is being followed to the letter in this case.

You are forgetting about mothers with sons, and wives with husbands who may worry their child or spouse can get railroaded by 30 year old accusations.

-If some random person would accuse another random person of sexual assault, chances are that person committed sexual assault. One doesn't typically levy that accusation unmerited. Being able to prove it beyond reasonable doubt is another matter.
-The US finds it perfectly appropriate to have public registers of sex crime offenders. These people are branded for life. If that is appropriate I will not shed a tear for the few people who get wrongly accused of sexual crimes in cases were embarrassment on the local level is the worst they suffer.
- As to the hearing being meant to get to the bottom of things. You can't both admit that Republicans refused to take steps in the investigation and in the next breath say to they wanted to get to the bottom of things.

All the investigation thing is moot because Dems waited 2 months to bring this up for political reasons, sorry, actions have consequences.

Wow, nice job ignoring hundreds of years of american legal precedent. Innocent until proven guilty.

Wow, guess you would be more concerned otherwise if it happened to you.

They could have just went with a vote, or had the hearing monday. They bent over backwards to a point to give this woman the floor, and give the Dems another chance to bolster their 2020 campaign ads.

 

[Care4all]

Unfortunately these hearing has left lots of doubt about this guy.

1. He did not answer many of the questions asked of him, instead going out in left field in many cases. Why did he avoid answering those questions?

2. What judicial demeanor? His demeanor was angry, unbalanced, almost deranged at times. Judicial ethical standards require that a judge be courteous, dignified, and patient.
who would want to have their case held in his court with that demeanor?

3. And a big one there remain accusations that he committed felony sexual abuse, without any evidence to the contrary. An FBI investigation could have discovered that evidence, but unfortunately it was not looked for.

4. Finally, if he did in fact commit even a single one of the accused crimes, he also committed perjury.

There exist many possible candidates for the Supreme Court without all these doubts. Trump said there should be no doubts. Let's pick a candidate with no doubts!

So why didn’t she go to the police again?

look it up, google it

why sexual assault victims do not report


or

you can ask one of the hundreds of teens those pedophile Priests sexually assaulted and did not report it for 20 to 40 years...

 

[edward37]

Even the lawyers association says to involve FBI DUE PROCESS ,,,RULE OF LAW of which repubs know nothing of unless it helps their cause