Senate Judiciary Committee hearing - Ford & Kavanaugh testimony - 9/27 at 10am ET

FunkyMonkey · Sep 30, 2018

Power of Sparda said:
Sounds like that optimism of yours has a bit of a fragility issue if you're going to have that level of hostility.

Maybe you should direct that to FunkyMonkey instead of me because it's actually a reference to his post from the other day. See below. However, I'm not the one telling someone to shut the fuck up or calling them pathetic, insecure, a coward, etc. and yet you want to tone police me? Really?

you decided to quote me when I called out peoples pessimism, taking it as an attack on yourself. that's not my problem and not relevant unless a.) you're shit-posting 1 sentence pessimistic hot takes and/or b.) kavanaugh is confirmed. once again you're missing the point: the people posting that crap muddy these threads for people looking for news and do nothing but call attention to themselves for replies.

im still wondering why you think I should be dragged when I haven't posted the equivalent of 1 sentence optimism hot takes in any of these threads? and for that you don't have an answer. other than I hurt your poor feelings by calling out people shitting up threads. that's not by problem if you took that as an attack on yourself, improve your political discussion contributions on this forum if that's the case.

"hey you shit posters need to quit with the hot takes"
"shit posters? hey that's me!"

shit posting and then complaining about policing threads when people call it out is rich though. reminds me of the "but but my freedom of speech!" people

edit: And if the point here for you to get the last word, I'll let you have it. I'm stopping the derail/side conversation

ZackieChan · Sep 30, 2018

Power of Sparda said:
Maybe you should direct that to FunkyMonkey instead of me because it's actually a reference to his post from the other day. See below. However, I'm not the one telling someone to shut the fuck up or calling them pathetic, insecure, a coward, etc. and yet you want to tone police me? Really?

So, you're both assholes? Wonderful.

Creamium · Sep 30, 2018

Jyester · Sep 30, 2018

RiPPn said:
It is just another false statement in the laundry list of lies he told in the Thursday hearing and his confirmation hearing. Bernie Sanders outlines all the lies told that are far more substantial than this one.

Aselith said:
I don't know what this means. His grandfather is a connection to the University whether he used it or not, it's a connection. There's a reason that legacies have a leg up, he lied because he was worried that if he mentioned the connection it would make him look bad. He had the hook up, if it was used or not is irrelevant to his truthfulness.

It's like saying, "I didn't know Brett, we never talked about murdering Tammy"

You may have not talked about murdering Tammy but lying about knowing Brett is still perjury.

Watchtower said:
A legacy is a legacy, regardless of how far away it is. And being a legacy admission did and still does give you an advantage over non-legacy admissions.

https://www.businessinsider.com/legacy-kids-have-an-admissions-advantage-2013-6

Nappuccino said:
Legacy just means that someone else in your family had attended the school. Generally parents are the most important connections, but I'd assume grandparents could be some kind of connection. If his grandfather was a large enough name, no question.

It should be noted that legacies aren't guranteed a place in the school.

Waffles said:
Legacy students, at the very worst, receive an extra look through their applications if they aren't accepted initially. That alone is enough to say he lied. He may have busted his tail, but he still had a connection.

I appreciate the responses, and point taken. I didn't know there was such a thing as a 'legacy student' in the US. It's disconcerting to hear that this is a thing.

Morrigan · Sep 30, 2018

Stop being hostile and antagonizing each others, y'all.

JeTmAn · Sep 30, 2018

Jyester said:
I appreciate the responses, and point taken. I didn't know there was such a thing as a 'legacy student' in the US. It's disconcerting to hear that this is a thing.

You're surprised that we have nepotism? We very nearly had a series of presidents whose names went Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton.

BossAttack · Sep 30, 2018

Jyester said:
I appreciate the responses, and point taken. I didn't know there was such a thing as a 'legacy student' in the US. It's disconcerting to hear that this is a thing.

Not really. It sucks, but it's also understandable. These are private universities who typically take very good care of their Alumni who in turn donate large amounts of money back to those institutions. Thus, if they have a child applying for admission you best believe they expect some extra lookover and leg up. Again it sucks, but it's also completely understandable. Alumni would be less generous if they were suddenly told their kids would receive absolutely no preferential treatment.

Deleted member 18951 · Sep 30, 2018

PersonAndStuff · Sep 30, 2018

RiPPn · Sep 30, 2018

This is pretty good:

https://www.brettkavanaugh.beer/

Bobson Dugnutt · Sep 30, 2018

Cilidra said:
'An image is worth a thousands words.'

It's a pretty powerful cartoon alright, really outlines how less is more.

If Ben Garrison had done it instead

(credit: someone else on another forum I go on, intials M.D)

RiPPn · Sep 30, 2018

firehawk12 · Sep 30, 2018

Is this a test to see if Avenatti is talking shit? Since they are going to ignore him, he better release whatever he has if he actually wants to do something.

Sky Chief · Sep 30, 2018

BlueTsunami said:
After reading this tweet thread look again at this Kavanaugh photo of him refusing to shake the hand of the father of a Parkland victim. Really look at it and realize its a man believing this person is acting above his station.

Eat the rich.

Why isn't this an ad that's running on the TV in every commercial break!?

RiPPn · Sep 30, 2018

And the gaslightining continues.

Sky Chief · Sep 30, 2018

In the last 24 hours I've had intense conversations with three different female friends who are all just apoplectic about this entire situation. I've never even discussed politics with any of these women before but they all brought this topic up and they are all REALLY fired up. I'm seeing more upset and anger than I saw after Trump was elected. This is so meaningful to so many people, I still think that there is a chance that public disapproval swings votes away from Kavanaugh.

Bernd Lauert · Sep 30, 2018

RiPPn said:
And the gaslightining continues.

The "Hello!" cracks me up for some reason.

Professor Quixote · Oct 1, 2018

Has anyone posted this Current Affairs article yet? Best article I've seen yet on why BK should be disqualified from the SCOTUS and why it's not even a close call. It's long, but definitely worth the read.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/09/how-we-know-kavanaugh-is-lying

EloquentM · Oct 1, 2018

Why did he capitalize obstruct and delay?

thediamondage · Oct 1, 2018

someone mixed pulp fiction and senate testimony

Rran · Oct 1, 2018

Professor Quixote said:
Has anyone posted this Current Affairs article yet? Best article I've seen yet on why BK should be disqualified from the SCOTUS and why it's not even a close call. It's long, but definitely worth the read.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/09/how-we-know-kavanaugh-is-lying

Thanks for bringing this to my attention! Very nuanced, in-depth discussion on Kavanaugh's testimony, and really serves to highlight his lack of credibility.

Absent · Oct 1, 2018

TheFireman · Oct 1, 2018

god dammit i am dreading to hear more news on this thing this fucking week

i hate this fucking lizard people mirror universe shit

HotHamBoy · Oct 1, 2018

ap_9a00a92eff9e4171bcee7e40b15b7c5e-620x370-1024x646.jpg

Kavanaugh's bitch-face. He looks like such a dweeby little bitch.

More evidence of perjury:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/30/us/politics/chad-ludington-statement-brett-kavanaugh.html

Chad Ludington, a Yale classmate of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh's who said he often drank with him, issued a statement on Sunday saying the Supreme Court nominee was not truthful about his drinking in his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week.

Here is the full text of the statement:

I have been contacted by numerous reporters about Brett Kavanaugh and have not wanted to say anything because I had nothing to contribute about what kind of justice he would be. I knew Brett at Yale because I was a classmate and a varsity basketball player and Brett enjoyed socializing with athletes. Indeed, athletes formed the core of Brett's social circle.

In recent days I have become deeply troubled by what has been a blatant mischaracterization by Brett himself of his drinking at Yale. When I watched Brett and his wife being interviewed on Fox News on Monday, and when I watched Brett deliver his testimony under oath to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday, I cringed. For the fact is, at Yale, and I can speak to no other times, Brett was a frequent drinker, and a heavy drinker. I know, because, especially in our first two years of college, I often drank with him. On many occasions I heard Brett slur his words and saw him staggering from alcohol consumption, not all of which was beer. When Brett got drunk, he was often belligerent and aggressive. On one of the last occasions I purposely socialized with Brett, I witnessed him respond to a semi-hostile remark, not by defusing the situation, but by throwing his beer in the man's face and starting a fight that ended with one of our mutual friends in jail.

I do not believe that the heavy drinking or even loutish behavior of an 18- or even 21-year-old should condemn a person for the rest of his life. I would be a hypocrite to think so. However, I have direct and repeated knowledge about his drinking and his disposition while drunk. And I do believe that Brett's actions as a 53-year-old federal judge matter. If he lied about his past actions on national television, and more especially while speaking under oath in front of the United States Senate, I believe those lies should have consequences. It is truth that is at stake, and I believe that the ability to speak the truth, even when it does not reflect well upon oneself, is a paramount quality we seek in our nation's most powerful judges.

Boy will be boys!

Etc.

alstrike · Oct 1, 2018

HotHamBoy said:
Kavanaugh's bitch-face. He looks like such a dweeby little bitch.

More evidence of perjury:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/30/us/politics/chad-ludington-statement-brett-kavanaugh.html

Boy will be boys!

Etc.

I just read it on my Twitter feed and I feel Brett's pretty much done.

Winstano · Oct 1, 2018

alstrike said:
I just read it on my Twitter feed and I feel Brett's pretty much done.

We thought he was done when *someone* put the down payment on his house.
We thought he was done when *somehow* he came up with $92k of country club fees despite owing (allegedly) nearly $200,000 on credit cards.
We thought he was done when one woman came forward.
We thought he was done when a second woman came forward.
We thought he was done when a third woman came forward.
We thought he was done when one of them testified.
We thought he was done when he came across like a belligerent dick hole.
We thought he was done when a Republican senator started to grow a spine last week.

The dude's getting confirmed. Regardless of the outcome of this investigation. The wagons are circled, the rich dudes are protecting their own. You done fucked it, America.

AncientReptileBrain · Oct 1, 2018

i still think there's a reasonably good chance we hit the fifth stage of grief this week and his nomination falls through.

RiPPn · Oct 1, 2018

Winstano said:
We thought he was done when *someone* put the down payment on his house.
We thought he was done when *somehow* he came up with $92k of country club fees despite owing (allegedly) nearly $200,000 on credit cards.
We thought he was done when one woman came forward.
We thought he was done when a second woman came forward.
We thought he was done when a third woman came forward.
We thought he was done when one of them testified.
We thought he was done when he came across like a belligerent dick hole.
We thought he was done when a Republican senator started to grow a spine last week.

The dude's getting confirmed. Regardless of the outcome of this investigation. The wagons are circled, the rich dudes are protecting their own. You done fucked it, America.

Sadly, I think you're right. And if the voting system wasn't rigged they would certainly pay for it in November.

I do think today's news cycle is really going to give an idea where this is going to end up. The good thing about Trump's win with NAFTA is it's going to get over shadowed by Kavanaugh, and he isn't going to like that very much.

Casa · Oct 1, 2018

I'm definitely resigned to him being confirmed. This sham FBI investigation will come and go without any substance (by design of course) and we'll see Flake, Lisa M, and Collins throw their hands up and say " well, that was good enough for me" and vote yes.

Just have to hope that the rage across the country intensifies further and insures the blue wave. That won't do anything to get rid of Kavanaugh, but we could at least make Trump and the GOP's lives a living hell.

I can tell this week is going to be a terrible one news wise. Kav getting confirmed, Rosenstein situation, Orange Bastard gloating non-stop about forcing Canada to back down. Uhh.

Creamium · Oct 1, 2018

Absent said:

That Mambo n°5 comparison is on point. His father being alive and sitting behind him was the biggest twist while watching. I couldn't believe it when someone in the thread pointed it out during the hearing.

Palette Swap · Oct 1, 2018

When Brett got drunk, he was often belligerent and aggressive.

Who could have imagined.

HotHamBoy · Oct 1, 2018

Creamium said:
That Mambo n°5 comparison is on point. His father being alive and sitting behind him was the biggest twist while watching. I couldn't believe it when someone in the thread pointed it out during the hearing.

That blew my mind. Certainly someone told him 99% of people watching wouldn't know that and would assume he was dead. I certainly did.

Because why else would anyone act like he did while talking about his dad's calendars unless they were a) unhinged b) putting on a (thick) performance?

RiPPn · Oct 1, 2018

Evidence doesn't support claims against Kavanaugh, Judiciary Committee questioner says

"I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the committee," Rachel Mitchell writes.

No reasonable prosecutor would bring sexual assault charges against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh based on the public evidence, the prosecutor whom Republicans hired to ask the questions during last week's Senate hearing said in a memo to senators.

Welp.

Chrome Hyena · Oct 1, 2018

Wow his dad is alive?! lol wtf!

Slime · Oct 1, 2018

RiPPn said:
Evidence doesn't support claims against Kavanaugh, Judiciary Committee questioner says

Welp.

Deleted member 198 · Oct 1, 2018

Note that she says public evidence

Grimm Fandango · Oct 1, 2018

Again good thing this isn't a trial. Like holy shit, it's amazing how Republicans are clinging to this. Or maybe not amazing and just sickening like the past few years have been.

Palette Swap · Oct 1, 2018

Chrome Hyena said:
Wow his dad is alive?! lol wtf!

Missed opportunity to end the audition on a miracle as his dad rose from the audience, because we all thought he was dead before someone pointed it out ITT.

This made the whole argument even more bizarre.

Deleted member 13364 · Oct 1, 2018

Whether or not there's sufficient public evidence to bring charges should be irrelevant - the issue is that faced with that public evidence, he lied through his teeth to defend himself, and in the context of a job interview that should be grounds for not being confirmed.

Random Painted Highway · Oct 1, 2018

RiPPn said:
Evidence doesn't support claims against Kavanaugh, Judiciary Committee questioner says

Welp.

No shit, this isn't the standard of evidence here. Give me a break.

Winstano · Oct 1, 2018

Now seems like as good a time as any to remind people that the Republicans shut down the government 5 years ago because they didn't want poor people to get healthcare, yet they're forcing this through like a marshmallow in a keyhole because they're terrified of what might happen in the mid-terms...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_government_shutdown_of_2013

BossAttack · Oct 1, 2018

RiPPn said:
Evidence doesn't support claims against Kavanaugh, Judiciary Committee questioner says

Welp.

LOL, this is hilarious.

"No reasonable prosecutor would bring this case to trial after refusing to open a criminal investigation, instead basing such a decision on a single Judiciary Committee questioning of five minute, partisan increments in which no other witnesses could be questioned, no other evidence investigated, and one party wasn't even fully questioned by a prosecutor but was instead bolstered by partisan allies. Yes, based on such facts I cannot possibly find that the evidence supports the claims against Brett "I Like Beer" Kavanaugh."

rjinaz · Oct 1, 2018

RiPPn said:
Evidence doesn't support claims against Kavanaugh, Judiciary Committee questioner says

Welp.

I mean that should hardly be surprising, just based on what we've seen and that it's been decades. This was never about sending his ass to jail though.

Kill3r7 · Oct 1, 2018

Winstano said:
Now seems like as good a time as any to remind people that the Republicans shut down the government 5 years ago because they didn't want poor people to get healthcare, yet they're forcing this through like a marshmallow in a keyhole because they're terrified of what might happen in the mid-terms...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_government_shutdown_of_2013

Partially true. The GOP will get someone through regardless of midterm results. However dropping Kavanaugh is problematic because they won't get a boost at the polls and another loss in the eyes of their supporters to the #metoo movement. Plus Trump loses his vote on Gamble.

rjinaz · Oct 1, 2018

BossAttack said:
LOL, this is hilarious.

"No reasonable prosecutor would bring this case to trial after refusing to open a criminal investigation, instead basing such a decision on a single Judiciary Committee questioning of five minute, partisan increments in which no other witnesses could be questioned, no other evidence investigated, and one party wasn't even fully questioned by a prosecutor but was instead bolstered by partisan allies. Yes, based on such facts I cannot possibly find that the evidence supports the claims against Brett "I Like Beer" Kavanaugh."

Seriously, she basically even admitted at the end of Ford's testimony the whole thing was a mess, and she didn't even really question Kavanaugh thanks to Reps pulling her.

It's like they wanted her to say this specifically, so would you prosecute him based on this yes or no, and she answered.

tlhm94 · Oct 1, 2018

RiPPn said:
Evidence doesn't support claims against Kavanaugh, Judiciary Committee questioner says

Welp.

She's right. There was never a strong criminal case here. That should NOT be the standard for putting ppl on the SCOTUS though.

Ac30 · Oct 1, 2018

Grimm Fandango said:
Again good thing this isn't a trial. Like holy shit, it's amazing how Republicans are clinging to this. Or maybe not amazing and just sickening like the past few years have been.

That's their whole argument though

RiPPn · Oct 1, 2018

That's why I said "Welp" because you know this is all they are going to need to vote for him. Although MSNBC just made an interesting point that if he isn't confirmed this could be the one thing to energize the republicans to get out and vote in midterms.

Arttemis · Oct 1, 2018

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/30/us/politics/chad-ludington-statement-brett-kavanaugh.html

"I knew Brett at Yale because I was a classmate and a varsity basketball player and Brett enjoyed socializing with athletes. Indeed, athletes formed the core of Brett's social circle.

In recent days I have become deeply troubled by what has been a blatant mischaracterization by Brett himself of his drinking at Yale. When I watched Brett and his wife being interviewed on Fox News on Monday, and when I watched Brett deliver his testimony under oath to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday, I cringed. For the fact is, at Yale, and I can speak to no other times, Brett was a frequent drinker, and a heavy drinker. I know, because, especially in our first two years of college, I often drank with him. On many occasions I heard Brett slur his words and saw him staggering from alcohol consumption, not all of which was beer. When Brett got drunk, he was often belligerent and aggressive. On one of the last occasions I purposely socialized with Brett, I witnessed him respond to a semi-hostile remark, not by defusing the situation, but by throwing his beer in the man's face and starting a fight that ended with one of our mutual friends in jail.

I do not believe that the heavy drinking or even loutish behavior of an 18- or even 21-year-old should condemn a person for the rest of his life. I would be a hypocrite to think so. However, I have direct and repeated knowledge about his drinking and his disposition while drunk. And I do believe that Brett's actions as a 53-year-old federal judge matter. If he lied about his past actions on national television, and more especially while speaking under oath in front of the United States Senate, I believe those lies should have consequences. It is truth that is at stake, and I believe that the ability to speak the truth, even when it does not reflect well upon oneself, is a paramount quality we seek in our nation's most powerful judges.

I can unequivocally say that in denying the possibility that he ever blacked out from drinking, and in downplaying the degree and frequency of his drinking, Brett has not told the truth.

I felt it was my civic duty to tell of my experience while drinking with Brett, and I offer this statement to the press. I have no desire to speak further publicly, and nothing more to say to the press at this time. I will, however, take my information to the F.B.I.

Charles (Chad) Ludington

Orb · Oct 1, 2018

It's likely this has been posted already, but in case you haven't seen it, here's a really detailed breakdown of just the demonstrable lies in Kavanaugh's testimony, of which there are plenty.

Senate Judiciary Committee hearing - Ford & Kavanaugh testimony - 9/27 at 10am ET

Spear of the Metal Church

User requested account closure

Self Requested Ban

One Winged Slayer

Editor-in-chief at nextgenbase.com

User requested account closure

Editor-in-chief at nextgenbase.com