Kavanaugh Has Got to Go

[barn32]

I withheld judgment about this whole fiasco until I heard his testimony. I thought his opening statement was great. Moving. Convincing.

However, once they started to question him he lost me.

He could not answer direct questions. He kept throwing questions back at the Senators. He over explained. He equivocated.

"I drink beer. I like beer. I still drink beer. Do you drink beer, Senator?"

Gimme a ****ing break.

He sounded guilty to me. He acted guilty. Compare his "interrogation" to Clarence Thomas. Not even close.

I've got news for everyone here. I drank beer in high school, as did most of my classmates. I got drunk. I passed out. I was aggressive towards women. Very aggressive. And I did it more than once. I was a teenager, and I couldn't handle my liquor.

I wasn't a cool guy either. I was on the fringes. I never got invited to the good parties. I'd listen to the "cool guys" talk at lunch about how so and so "pulled the train" at Lambert's party. Wow, that must have been fun. It wasn't until later (years later) that I learned what "pulled the train" really meant. They got her passed out drunk and then took turns on her. You'd hear this kind of talk all the time. Every time there was a party somebody pulled the train. Who were these women I thought. Damn, I didn't know there were girls like that in school. Turns out there weren't.

A lot of bad shit happened in high school. Teenagers, especially drunken teenagers are not angelic innocents.

But the fact is that Kavanaugh did not come off well. He skirted the issues and was very defensive and evasive. I mean come on. Just answer the questions in a straight-forward manner and be done with it.

Tell them, of course I want an FBI investigation. The sooner the better. I'm 100% innocent, and I want to prove it. He didn't say that.

Of course Lindsay Graham and some others got in their righteous indignation. What else would you expect?

Then came the clincher. He missed a great opportunity to win me back. He was asked if he had ever taken a lie detector test, and then he was asked if he would take one. My answer? Yes, of course, tomorrow. Bring it on. You bet! I would welcome it.

His answer: "Well, whatever the committee wants, but you know they are not admissible in Federal Court, they are not
admissable in Federal Court, because they are unreliable.

So.

Wrong answer as far as I'm concerned.

Just get rid of this guy and appoint someone else. I don't care who you nominate to the court. Put whatever right wing nut job
you want in there. Who cares. Gorsuch sailed through. But this guy is damaged goods.

Can you imagine having someone on the highest court of the land who is so partisan that in his statements he attacked the left and the Clinton's and made backhanded attacks on the democrats on the committee. Is this a joke? Supreme court? You are going to be an impartial jurist? Yea, right.

It doesn't matter to me now if he is 100% innocent. it's one thing to be righteously indignant, but to throw out right-wing conspiracies, and partisan attacks does not make you a viable candidate for the highest court in the land.

There are better people out there.

He has ruined his own chances.

Get someone else.

This guy has got to go.

[sammy the sage]

Originally Posted by barn32

I withheld judgment about this whole fiasco until I heard his testimony. I thought his opening statement was great. Moving. Convincing.

However, once they started to question him he lost me.

He could not answer direct questions. He kept throwing questions back at the Senators. He over explained. He equivocated.

"I drink beer. I like beer. I still drink beer. Do you drink beer, Senator?"

Gimme a ****ing break.

He sounded guilty to me. He acted guilty. Compare his "interrogation" to Clarence Thomas. Not even close.

I've got news for everyone here. I drank beer in high school, as did most of my classmates. I got drunk. I passed out. I was aggressive towards women. Very aggressive. And I did it more than once. I was a teenager, and I couldn't handle my liquor.

I wasn't a cool guy either. I was on the fringes. I never got invited to the good parties. I'd listen to the "cool guys" talk at lunch about how so and so "pulled the train" at Lambert's party. Wow, that must have been fun. It wasn't until later (years later) that I learned what "pulled the train" really meant. They got her passed out drunk and then took turns on her. You'd hear this kind of talk all the time. Every time there was a party somebody pulled the train. Who were these women I thought. Damn, I didn't know there were girls like that in school. Turns out there weren't.

A lot of bad shit happened in high school. Teenagers, especially drunken teenagers are not angelic innocents.

But the fact is that Kavanaugh did not come off well. He skirted the issues and was very defensive and evasive. I mean come on. Just answer the questions in a straight-forward manner and be done with it.

Tell them, of course I want an FBI investigation. The sooner the better. I'm 100% innocent, and I want to prove it. He didn't say that.

Of course Lindsay Graham and some others got in their righteous indignation. What else would you expect?

Then came the clincher. He missed a great opportunity to win me back. He was asked if he had ever taken a lie detector test, and then he was asked if he would take one. My answer? Yes, of course, tomorrow. Bring it on. You bet! I would welcome it.

His answer: "Well, whatever the committee wants, but you know they are not admissible in Federal Court, they are not
admissable in Federal Court, because they are unreliable.

So.

Wrong answer as far as I'm concerned.

Just get rid of this guy and appoint someone else. I don't care who you nominate to the court. Put whatever right wing nut job
you want in there. Who cares. Gorsuch sailed through. But this guy is damaged goods.

Can you imagine having someone on the highest court of the land who is so partisan that in his statements he attacked the left and the Clinton's and made backhanded attacks on the democrats on the committee. Is this a joke? Supreme court? You are going to be an impartial jurist? Yea, right.

It doesn't matter to me now if he is 100% innocent. it's one thing to be righteously indignant, but to throw out right-wing conspiracies, and partisan attacks does not make you a viable candidate for the highest court in the land.

There are better people out there.

He has ruined his own chances.

Get someone else.

This guy has got to go.

agree with this...by the way....prepare for incoming....they won't attack your message...they'll attack you...hhhhmmmm sounds familiar doesn't it...

I will say this....the diimwits blew two reputations by holding onto the info for as long as they did...which is really sad for this whole mess...but they didn't care...

[chadk66]

and he'll probably be confirmed anyway.

[Fred Mertz]

Originally Posted by barn32

He could not answer direct questions. He kept throwing questions back at the Senators. He over explained. He equivocated.

"I drink beer. I like beer. I still drink beer. Do you drink beer, Senator?"

Gimme a ****ing [beer?] break.

I expected him to comment for 10 minutes and shut up about an event he claims didn't happen.


Then he kept yapping. I predict he dies on the vine.


I don't think he deserves it; just how I read the tea leaves.

[VigorsTheGrey]

The problem with what you are saying is what if he is innocent (and there is no evidence that will hold up in court that he is guilty, which IS the standard of our legal system (innocent until PROVEN guilty)...there may be doubts from this person or that person BUT is there, or can there ever be in this case, “beyond a reasonable doubt”...? If not, this mans life and character has just been assasinated...

They went in knowing that they could never prove ANYTHING and that was never the point...the point was to RAISE SOME DOUBT or to imbroil him further in an investigation of the improbable...to delay his confirmation until after the Nov elections when Dem might have more veto power...clearly a political move by political partisans, and THAT is what is so shameful...Brett has every right to be angry...clearly, another color revolution against ‘whitey the privileged’...never mind that HE WORKED FOR EVERY BIT OF IT...
The Democrats responsible for this vile show are disgusting...

[zico20]

Originally Posted by barn32

I withheld judgment about this whole fiasco until I heard his testimony. I thought his opening statement was great. Moving. Convincing.

However, once they started to question him he lost me.

He could not answer direct questions. He kept throwing questions back at the Senators. He over explained. He equivocated.

"I drink beer. I like beer. I still drink beer. Do you drink beer, Senator?"

Gimme a ****ing break.

He sounded guilty to me. He acted guilty. Compare his "interrogation" to Clarence Thomas. Not even close.

I've got news for everyone here. I drank beer in high school, as did most of my classmates. I got drunk. I passed out. I was aggressive towards women. Very aggressive. And I did it more than once. I was a teenager, and I couldn't handle my liquor.

I wasn't a cool guy either. I was on the fringes. I never got invited to the good parties. I'd listen to the "cool guys" talk at lunch about how so and so "pulled the train" at Lambert's party. Wow, that must have been fun. It wasn't until later (years later) that I learned what "pulled the train" really meant. They got her passed out drunk and then took turns on her. You'd hear this kind of talk all the time. Every time there was a party somebody pulled the train. Who were these women I thought. Damn, I didn't know there were girls like that in school. Turns out there weren't.

A lot of bad shit happened in high school. Teenagers, especially drunken teenagers are not angelic innocents.

But the fact is that Kavanaugh did not come off well. He skirted the issues and was very defensive and evasive. I mean come on. Just answer the questions in a straight-forward manner and be done with it.

Tell them, of course I want an FBI investigation. The sooner the better. I'm 100% innocent, and I want to prove it. He didn't say that.

Of course Lindsay Graham and some others got in their righteous indignation. What else would you expect?

Then came the clincher. He missed a great opportunity to win me back. He was asked if he had ever taken a lie detector test, and then he was asked if he would take one. My answer? Yes, of course, tomorrow. Bring it on. You bet! I would welcome it.

His answer: "Well, whatever the committee wants, but you know they are not admissible in Federal Court, they are not
admissable in Federal Court, because they are unreliable.

So.

Wrong answer as far as I'm concerned.

Just get rid of this guy and appoint someone else. I don't care who you nominate to the court. Put whatever right wing nut job
you want in there. Who cares. Gorsuch sailed through. But this guy is damaged goods.

Can you imagine having someone on the highest court of the land who is so partisan that in his statements he attacked the left and the Clinton's and made backhanded attacks on the democrats on the committee. Is this a joke? Supreme court? You are going to be an impartial jurist? Yea, right.

It doesn't matter to me now if he is 100% innocent. it's one thing to be righteously indignant, but to throw out right-wing conspiracies, and partisan attacks does not make you a viable candidate for the highest court in the land.

There are better people out there.

He has ruined his own chances.

Get someone else.

This guy has got to go.

If the Democrats get their way here, every time a Republican gets nominated, the Democrats will parade out more women with false accusations and bring down every one of them.

[fast4522]

Originally Posted by zico20

If the Democrats get their way here, every time a Republican gets nominated, the Democrats will parade out more women with false accusations and bring down every one of them.

Should they fail this time, would they try the same thing when its RBG who needs replacement?

[vegasone]

Wow! Must have been watching a different show in a parallel universe. No matter how they supposedly sounded, hope nobody here gets convicted of something because they “sound” guilty. Not that he did, to me at least. They both sounded credible, at least I am not that biased to admit that.
Typical, like my sister, he was already guilty before she even heard any testimony. Why bother, just listen to the media and make your decisions.
Lack of any corrobating evidence , and the people at the supposed party refuting her testimony had no bearing.

Typical of what is happening in this country. People listen to something and hear different things.

[davew]

When they talk about 2012 doctors notes, and yet do not produce these notes ... there is something to hide.

When the Senate democrats hired the lawyers for this accuser ... who must of wrote her responses, as they frequently grabbed a page and pointed to what she should read, most credibility is lost.

When Diane Feinstein says she didn't leak the letter and didn't ask her aides, and then an aide told her she already did ... she is getting too senile for her position and has to go.

When notes and inscriptions in a high school yearbook have relevance to a supreme court nomination, something is wrong with the process.

So I agree he has got to go ... to the Supreme Court

[Suff]

Originally Posted by vegasone

Wow! Must have been watching a different show in a parallel universe. No matter how they supposedly sounded, hope nobody here gets convicted of something because they “sound” guilty. Not that he did, to me at least. They both sounded credible, at least I am not that biased to admit that.
Typical, like my sister, he was already guilty before she even heard any testimony. Why bother, just listen to the media and make your decisions.
Lack of any corrobating evidence , and the people at the supposed party refuting her testimony had no bearing.

Typical of what is happening in this country. People listen to something and hear different things.

My take away is the same as yours. My heart ripped open for both of them. Her, Him, his Kids... awful thing.

[Burls]

Originally Posted by VigorsTheGrey

The problem with what you are saying is what if he is innocent (and there is no evidence that will hold up in court that he is guilty, which IS the standard of our legal system (innocent until PROVEN guilty)...there may be doubts from this person or that person BUT is there, or can there ever be in this case, “beyond a reasonable doubt”...? If not, this mans life and character has just been assasinated...

They went in knowing that they could never prove ANYTHING and that was never the point...the point was to RAISE SOME DOUBT or to imbroil him further in an investigation of the improbable...to delay his confirmation until after the Nov elections when Dem might have more veto power...clearly a political move by political partisans, and THAT is what is so shameful...Brett has every right to be angry...clearly, another color revolution against ‘whitey the privileged’...never mind that HE WORKED FOR EVERY BIT OF IT...
The Democrats responsible for this vile show are disgusting...

The problem: People who are falsely accused don't act like Brett Kavanaugh acted.
He was a caricature of a falsely accused person.
He acted in the way he was instructed to act after days of coaching in the White House.
He came across as contrived and artificial.
Unlike Blasey-Ford, Kavanaugh did not come across as genuine and believable.

He dodged and dodged and dodged the question of whether or not he would support a thorough FBI investigation regarding the relevant events.

He gave a ridiculously implausible story about the 'Renate Alumnius'.
"Oh No. A group of high school boys on a the football team weren't making a sexual joke about a female student at her expense. We were honoring her as a fellow member of our group. That's what the 'Renate Alumnius' was about."
Do you really think people are that stupid, Brett?
If you're going to lie, at least try to tell some minimally plausible lies.

[Burls]

Originally Posted by zico20

If the Democrats get their way here, every time a Republican gets nominated, the Democrats will parade out more women with false accusations and bring down every one of them.

Right.
I can still remember how they did that with Gorsuch.

[fast4522]

Originally Posted by Burls

The problem: People who are falsely accused don't act like Brett Kavanaugh acted.
He was a caricature of a falsely accused person.
He acted in the way he was instructed to act after days of coaching in the White House.
He came across as contrived and artificial.
Unlike Blasey-Ford, Kavanaugh did not come across as genuine and believable.

He dodged and dodged and dodged the question of whether or not he would support a thorough FBI investigation regarding the relevant events.

He gave a ridiculously implausible story about the 'Renate Alumnius'.
"Oh No. A group of high school boys on a the football team weren't making a sexual joke about a female student at her expense. We were honoring her as a fellow member of our group. That's what the 'Renate Alumnius' was about."
Do you really think people are that stupid, Brett?
If you're going to lie, at least try to tell some minimally plausible lies.

Like you have much experience about deeply religious people, your experence is obvious just by your posts.

[Burls]

Originally Posted by fast4522

Like you have much experience about deeply religious people, your experence is obvious just by your posts.

Focus on the substance of the comments, please.
If they are implausible, explain why.
Don't waste time bringing my character into question.
You are just making it obvious to all that you have nothing useful to add here.

[JustRalph]

What a load of crap.

I actually scored him on body language using my DVR.

Once upon a time I was certified to do interrogations and interviews.

He scored truthful 32-4 on my scale.

Take that for what it’s worth.

If you’re a Dem you should be ashamed........