Brett Kavanaugh: a rapist, liar, and disgusting human is now a justice.- Page 2

[South Florida]

Posted: 10/9/18 at 2:34pm

Henri the keg guy delivers as usual.  I look at what the GOP has done to suppress voting and I feel so sad. Kavanaugh has not been accused of rape and it makes the title of this thread a problem.

 

[yankeefan7]

Posted: 10/9/18 at 3:30pm

"Nevertheless, IMHO Judge K flunked one of the key tests before him that day, that is whether or not he possessed the right temperament to be a judge in the highest court of the land. "

So I guess if you are accused of being a rapist in front of your entire family and the country you are supposed to not get angry while people try to destroy you. The day before the hearing he was interviewed on FOX and asked tough questions and when he calmly answered the questions he was slammed for being too robotic. Clarence Thomas was pretty darn angry during his hearing and somehow he has had a good temperament on the court. You don't want Kavanaugh on the court because of his beliefs/rulings that is fine but I think to question his temperament when he is basically being called a criminal is not fair IMO.

Posted: 10/11/18 at 4:32am

I read somewhere once that they won't let anyone in the cia or the fbi if they've done even cursory drug use. Meanwhile, the highest court in the land is open to an angry, black-out drunk that lies to the senate about his formative consumption habits. 

Sweet. 

 

This is my john hancock

Joe Jenkins

www.joejenkinsphoto.com

[mikey2573]

Posted: 11/3/18 at 3:07pm

Just curious what evidence there is that Kavanaugh is a rapist?  That's a pretty serious allegation and I would think you'd have to support it with some pretty serious evidence.  Please provide.

Oh, and this....

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/414693-senate-panel-asks-doj-to-investigate-fabricated-allegation-against-kavanaugh

Grassley, in a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and FBI Director Christopher Wray, wrote that Munro-Leighton admitted to the committee on Nov. 1 that she previously lied about an allegation that Kavanaugh and a friend raped her in the backseat of a car. 

Grassley requested that Munro-Leighton be investigated for making "materially false statements" and for obstruction of the committee's investigation into misconduct claims against Kavanaugh.

 

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 11/4/18 at 10:05am

mikey2573 said: "Just curious what evidence there is that Kavanaugh is a rapist? That's a pretty serious allegation and I would think you'd have to support it with some pretty serious evidence. Please provide.

Oh, and this....

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/414693-senate-panel-asks-doj-to-investigate-fabricated-allegation-against-kavanaugh

Grassley,in a letterto Attorney GeneralJeff Sessionsand FBI Director Christopher Wray,wrote that Munro-Leightonadmitted to the committee on Nov. 1 that she previously lied about an allegation that Kavanaugh and a friend raped her in the backseat of a car.

Grassley requested that Munro-Leighton be investigated for making "materially false statements" and for obstruction of thecommittee's investigation into misconduct claims against Kavanaugh."

Are you seriously asking what evidence there is that Kavanaugh is an ATTEMPTED rapist?

Did you not hear Dr. Ford's testimony?

Testimony is evidence.

People are convicted of rape and attempted rape frequently in this contrary on testimony alone.

Now, if you don't find Dr. Ford's testimony compelling or his testmony dubious - I do on both - then fine, we disagree.

If you are saying there's no evidence that he raped anyone, as opposed to attempted to rape Dr. Ford, then you would be correct.  

But if you are suggesting that there is no evidence that he attempted to rape anyone, you are objectively wrong.  There is evidence.  Dr. Ford's testimony under oath that he tried to rape her.
 

 

[mikey2573]

Posted: 11/5/18 at 8:17pm

Dr. Ford's testimony could be considered "evidence" in the weakest sense of the word.  The witnesses she named to corroborate her flimsy account of the night in question have no memory of ever attending such a gathering. Ford had no idea who invited her to the party, how she got there, where the party took place, or how she got home. Considering the fact that there did not appear to be any adults at the party, and there were only 5 or 6 people in attendance (all of whom she was eventually able to name) wouldn't the party have had to take place at the house of one of the attendees?  Do people generally go to strangers' houses when they are not home and have a drinking party? Since all the people who were at the gathering were known, wouldn't it have made sense to go back to their former homes to find where the alleged attack took place? Why did that never happen?

How is it that the one insignificant detail that she COULD remember was the she had only had one beer? That was a VERY important ( and CONVENIENT) detail for her to remember because had she not remembered that she only had ONE BEER that night, her memory could have been called into question if she had been intoxicated.  But THANK GOODNESS she was able to remember that ONE insignificant detail!! 

She was also caught in several lies during the testimony.  She clearly had no fear of flying, despite her claims.  She flew numerous times all over the world, some very long flights, and even went island hopping in a small bi-plane while visiting Hawaii.  So that was a lie. 

The second door being included in the remodel of her home as a "means of escape" due to her fear caused by the attack also proved to be highly dubious.  She claims that he anxiety began in 2012 and caused friction in her marriage resulting in the marriage counselor.  Yet, the permit for the remodel that included the door was issued in 2008, and she did not reside in the part of the house where the second "escape" door was installed. 

She stated in her testimony that she was unaware that the committee had offered to fly out to her if she so wished.  Yet, this was common knowledge to her legal team who either kept the information from her as a delaying tactic, or (more likely) Ford was once again lying. 

The special prosecutor who was brought in to question Ford said that ,based on Ford's testimony, no reasonable prosecutor would have brought charges against Kavanaugh, citing "inconsistencies" in Ford's testimony. 

The fact that Ford's legal team asked one of the "witnesses" named by Ford to "revisit" her testimony, causing the witness to feel pressured, brings Ford's legal team's ethics into serious doubt.  

The bottom line is that Justice Kavanaugh is NOT a rapist, as this thread's title declares, nor is he an "attempted rapist" as you claim, as there is no credible evidence that he has ever tried to sexually assault anyone. 

 

 

[John Adams]

Posted: 11/7/18 at 9:20am

I completely agree with mikey2573. 

Additionally, I'm angry with those people who thought it would be useful to trot out Dr. Ford in this way. I'm not primarily angry because of how Dr. Ford was (ab)used in this way, but because of how her presence created a smokescreen and a distraction from Kavanaugh's behaviors, and gave him and his proponents cause to gloat about how wronged HE was, and what a "victory" it was to overcome the false accusation.

Her poor testimony (which should have been discerned to be weak and discreditable before she ever appeared), and her presence changed the conversation from "is Kavanaugh qualified" to "Poor, poor Dr. Ford" and "Women should always be believed" - which did NOTHING towards serving the relevant topic. In fact, it did the opposite.

That change of focus was the reason he got his lifetime seat on SCOTUS. Congratulations, #metoo movement.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 11/7/18 at 11:19am

I share your contempt for whoever leaked Dr. Ford's name to the press, John Adams.  Though it is not clear who that person was.  Or whether it was anyone in government.

But "poor testimony?"

Why?

Even a great many Senate Republicans described Dr. Ford's testimony as compelling and credible.  

The poor testimony was Kavanaugh's!  Defensive, offering a calendar as exculpation because it showed he only partied on weekends - except that calendar showed he attended a gathering on a weeknight right around that time with - lo and behold - several people Dr. Ford said were in the house when he tried to rape her!

Then apologizing for the lasciviousness of his "alumni" of a female friend, but then an hour later complaining that any Senator implying the statement was lascivious was doing a disservice to his friend!  WTF!

Denying his inebriation levels contrary to his own drinking buddies and acquaintances reports.

Defensively turning the table on Senator Klobuchar - in a way that would be lethal for any criminal defendant if this were a criminal trial - Senator Klobuchar answering him with dignity and patience such that he had to apologize to her when he returned from recess.

Blaming the Clintons and George Soros!

John Adams, with due respect, what possible concern over Dr. Ford's testimony could possibly be in the same league as the myriad problems with Kavanaugh's?

[John Adams]

Posted: 11/7/18 at 11:32am

henrikegerman said: "But 'poor testimony?' Why?
[...]
John Adams, with due respect, what possible concern over Dr. Ford's testimony could possibly be in the same league as the myriad problems with Kavanaugh's?"

Scroll up. Both questions were answered in my post, and mikey2573's.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 11/7/18 at 10:04pm

mikey, do you remember every party you went to as a kid, where it was and when it was?