Brett Kavanaugh

D

deleted142346

Guest
Okay, there's this book and NYTimes article which has brought to life impeachment convos about the sitting Supreme Court judge. Judging from the Fresh Air interview of the authors, to me they sound like the usual antics of a young, hung guy, insecure around girls, and his dumb friends, who are all admiring and get to literally wave around how hung he is.
 

gr8gatsby

Mythical Member
Joined
May 2, 2017
Posts
6,608
Media
5
Likes
30,444
Points
233
Location
Sarasota (Florida, United States)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Okay, there's this book and NYTimes article which has brought to life impeachment convos about the sitting Supreme Court judge. Judging from the Fresh Air interview of the authors, to me they sound like the usual antics of a young, hung guy, insecure around girls, and his dumb friends, who are all admiring and get to literally wave around how hung he is.
I'd like to see him impeached for lying to congress, not just penis shaking.
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,253
Media
213
Likes
32,166
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
His answers were not:
I was young and and in college and engaged in excessive drinking and inappropriate and demeaning conduct toward women, and for that I am truly sorry.

His answers were:
It's LIES, ALL LIES!
 
D

deleted142346

Guest
His answers were not:
I was young and and in college and engaged in excessive drinking and inappropriate and demeaning conduct toward women, and for that I am truly sorry.

His answers were:
It's LIES, ALL LIES!
The rationale for that which Terri Gross made sure to bring up, was that if he had tried the sensitive approach, given who his boss was for the nomination (i.e., Trump) he would have been withdrawn. No weakness, never give an ounce of thought or credibility to your "victims," is the Trump way. As you say: lies, all lies
 

gr8gatsby

Mythical Member
Joined
May 2, 2017
Posts
6,608
Media
5
Likes
30,444
Points
233
Location
Sarasota (Florida, United States)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
The rationale for that which Terri Gross made sure to bring up, was that if he had tried the sensitive approach, given who his boss was for the nomination (i.e., Trump) he would have been withdrawn. No weakness, never give an ounce of thought or credibility to your "victims," is the Trump way. As you say: lies, all lies
Sadly that mantra has become the norm and the new American way...
 

TexanStar

Worshipped Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2014
Posts
10,496
Media
0
Likes
14,978
Points
183
Location
Fort Worth (Texas, United States)
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
The rationale for that which Terri Gross made sure to bring up, was that if he had tried the sensitive approach, given who his boss was for the nomination (i.e., Trump) he would have been withdrawn. No weakness, never give an ounce of thought or credibility to your "victims," is the Trump way. As you say: lies, all lies

Possible loss of a job opportunity does not create grounds for committing perjury.
 

phonehome

Superior Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2006
Posts
3,896
Media
0
Likes
4,277
Points
343
Gender
Male
Possible loss of a job opportunity does not create grounds for committing perjury.

That and NO ONE is or has ever been entitled to "due process" in the course of a JOB INTERVIEW

That HR/hiring manager hears or otherwise learns of something that MAY be "problematic" does not know if it is true or not but ends the interview or maybe never schedules one, gives the classic non committal, "don't call us we will call you" puts you application aside or just "round files "it and picks up the next one in the stack

And that is for a job where the employee can BE FIRED and if in an "at will/RTW" states no reason even needs to be given.
 

keenobserver

Worshipped Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Posts
8,550
Media
0
Likes
13,952
Points
433
Location
east coast usa
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Okay, there's this book and NYTimes article which has brought to life impeachment convos about the sitting Supreme Court judge. Judging from the Fresh Air interview of the authors, to me they sound like the usual antics of a young, hung guy, insecure around girls, and his dumb friends, who are all admiring and get to literally wave around how hung he is.

I read him differently - I see an entitled jock raised and acting like a prince and seeing women as conveyances designed to serve him, as one of the boys. I don't really care about 'hi-jinks' but he has lied to Congress and that is a serious issue. I believe his first accuser, but there is really nothing else that backs her up. Sadly of the two picks Trump has put on the court, he is probably the one less harmful of the two and the one who might evolve, but he still lied to Congress. That has to matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MisterB

fireman1294

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jul 27, 2008
Posts
2,927
Media
9
Likes
8,314
Points
468
Location
Lake Villa (Illinois, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
And yet when the 30 year old victim says I don’t even remember who he is or that ever happening. And everyone at the party doesn’t remember that happening, then what? Every piece of 30 year old eyewitness everything all says nothing. So all you really have is this 30 years ago something happened at a party. Not enough to remove him.
 

fireman1294

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jul 27, 2008
Posts
2,927
Media
9
Likes
8,314
Points
468
Location
Lake Villa (Illinois, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
It’s easy for reporters and authors to say anything they want, but when someone is put under oath things change. They have no loyalties to any agenda at that time and they get honest real quick
 

phonehome

Superior Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2006
Posts
3,896
Media
0
Likes
4,277
Points
343
Gender
Male
And yet when the 30 year old victim says I don’t even remember who he is or that ever happening. And everyone at the party doesn’t remember that happening, then what? Every piece of 30 year old eyewitness everything all says nothing. So all you really have is this 30 years ago something happened at a party. Not enough to remove him.


Blah blah blah yadda yadda yadda

Here is the thing that people like you just do not want to wrap your head around.

With all the "questions" surrounding what did or did not happen WRT to DR. Ford and all the other "problematic' incidents and other "animal house" type behavior that was known of to some degree at that time any half way competent hiring manager would have moved on to another applicant who was way more of a "choir boy" than "frat boy" in order to not have to risk that more shit might come out in the future which it would seem to have now.

Rather than say "fuck it we don't want to know because in the end we don't fucking care"

It was nothing more than a "job interview" and he was by NO MEANs the ONLY applicant
 

fireman1294

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jul 27, 2008
Posts
2,927
Media
9
Likes
8,314
Points
468
Location
Lake Villa (Illinois, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
Blah blah blah yadda yadda yadda

Here is the thing that people like you just do not want to wrap your head around.

With all the "questions" surrounding what did or did not happen WRT to DR. Ford and all the other "problematic' incidents and other "animal house" type behavior that was known of to some degree at that time any half way competent hiring manager would have moved on to another applicant who was way more of a "choir boy" than "frat boy" in order to not have to risk that more shit might come out in the future which it would seem to have now.

Rather than say "fuck it we don't want to know because in the end we don't fucking care"

It was nothing more than a "job interview" and he was by NO MEANs the ONLY applicant
Do you have any idea what or how to become a judge at all? I know I didn’t know I had to look it up on google just to have an idea of it. You’re operating under the impression that he just showed up wanting to be a Supreme Court justice. He’s been a judge for 15 to 20 years. When you first want to become a judge a background check is done on you. Then again when appointed and every time you change positions or a higher position another background check is done again. So by the time he hits the SCOTUS nomination level he’s already had 10 to 15 background checks done spanning his whole career. And during this whole time span of background checks nothing was found. If he legit did something on the level of what he’s being accused of, then it would have surfaced with the first check many years ago. But we are supposed to believe that the years or checks are all wrong and some author and reporter is right. Also you’re not hiring for a cashier at Home Depot so even though I understand your analogy it just doesn’t apply here
 

keenobserver

Worshipped Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Posts
8,550
Media
0
Likes
13,952
Points
433
Location
east coast usa
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Do you have any idea what or how to become a judge at all? I know I didn’t know I had to look it up on google just to have an idea of it. You’re operating under the impression that he just showed up wanting to be a Supreme Court justice. He’s been a judge for 15 to 20 years. When you first want to become a judge a background check is done on you. Then again when appointed and every time you change positions or a higher position another background check is done again. So by the time he hits the SCOTUS nomination level he’s already had 10 to 15 background checks done spanning his whole career. And during this whole time span of background checks nothing was found. If he legit did something on the level of what he’s being accused of, then it would have surfaced with the first check many years ago. But we are supposed to believe that the years or checks are all wrong and some author and reporter is right. Also you’re not hiring for a cashier at Home Depot so even though I understand your analogy it just doesn’t apply here

First - what should be done and what is / was done are the issues here. Second after Anita Hill's experience with Clarence Thomas, women stopped speaking out of fear of being demonized. Many things can and do get missed in background checks. The larger issue is that Trump personally limited the background checks, did not investigate witness allegations and the Senate was fine with that because their goal was to pack the judiciary.
 

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,784
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
Blah blah blah yadda yadda yadda

Here is the thing that people like you just do not want to wrap your head around.

With all the "questions" surrounding what did or did not happen WRT to DR. Ford and all the other "problematic' incidents and other "animal house" type behavior that was known of to some degree at that time any half way competent hiring manager would have moved on to another applicant who was way more of a "choir boy" than "frat boy" in order to not have to risk that more shit might come out in the future which it would seem to have now.

Rather than say "fuck it we don't want to know because in the end we don't fucking care"

It was nothing more than a "job interview" and he was by NO MEANs the ONLY applicant

Like I said, the "good ol' boy" mentality:

If You Don't Get Why Campus Rape Is A National Problem, Read This | HuffPost

and the republican perspective:

The House GOP’s Plan to Redefine Rape – Mother Jones
 
  • Like
Reactions: keenobserver

fireman1294

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jul 27, 2008
Posts
2,927
Media
9
Likes
8,314
Points
468
Location
Lake Villa (Illinois, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
First - what should be done and what is / was done are the issues here. Second after Anita Hill's experience with Clarence Thomas, women stopped speaking out of fear of being demonized. Many things can and do get missed in background checks. The larger issue is that Trump personally limited the background checks, did not investigate witness allegations and the Senate was fine with that because their goal was to pack the judiciary.

So it was missed on every background check? And he didn’t deep investigate eleged allegations from people that said they don’t remember either the party because they had been to many parties. Trump didn’t get impeached so now your going after someone else because of 4th party hearsay not backed up by any credible sources
 

IntactMale

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Posts
2,757
Media
17
Likes
7,914
Points
493
Location
Asheville (North Carolina, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
Unsure
Gender
Male
So it was missed on every background check? And he didn’t deep investigate eleged allegations from people that said they don’t remember either the party because they had been to many parties. Trump didn’t get impeached so now your going after someone else because of 4th party hearsay not backed up by any credible sources

The word is alleged. Eleged is not a word, at least not in English. It also doesn't really make sense to say that allegations are alleged, its a different form of the same word. Allegations are inherently alleged.

I wouldn't normally comment on something like this but I can see you've spelled it "eleged" several times in different posts. How can you expect anyone to take what you have to say seriously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voltaire

keenobserver

Worshipped Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Posts
8,550
Media
0
Likes
13,952
Points
433
Location
east coast usa
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
So it was missed on every background check? And he didn’t deep investigate eleged allegations from people that said they don’t remember either the party because they had been to many parties. Trump didn’t get impeached so now your going after someone else because of 4th party hearsay not backed up by any credible sources

Kavanaugh will never be impeached - only one SC justice ever was and it failed in the Senate. That he lied during confirmation both times is well established, but the GOP is fine with lies. That is the reality. You own that. This was not '4th party' hearsay. It was an eye witness statement by a peer who knows Kavanaugh well, and has an impeccable reputation. Trump will be impeached, but he will not be removed from office, except by voters - which is more likely every day. Those are the facts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MisterB

StormfrontFL

Superior Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Posts
8,903
Media
4
Likes
6,854
Points
358
Location
United States
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Do you have any idea what or how to become a judge at all? I know I didn’t know I had to look it up on google just to have an idea of it. You’re operating under the impression that he just showed up wanting to be a Supreme Court justice. He’s been a judge for 15 to 20 years. When you first want to become a judge a background check is done on you. Then again when appointed and every time you change positions or a higher position another background check is done again. So by the time he hits the SCOTUS nomination level he’s already had 10 to 15 background checks done spanning his whole career. And during this whole time span of background checks nothing was found. If he legit did something on the level of what he’s being accused of, then it would have surfaced with the first check many years ago. But we are supposed to believe that the years or checks are all wrong and some author and reporter is right. Also you’re not hiring for a cashier at Home Depot so even though I understand your analogy it just doesn’t apply here
Does the name Harriet Miers ring any bells?
Harriet Miers Supreme Court nomination - Wikipedia
 
  • Like
Reactions: keenobserver

Thikn2velvet1

Admired Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2012
Posts
2,715
Media
0
Likes
750
Points
148
So a judge with an absolutely impeccable reputation and a highly regarded documented work history praised by virtually every female over 25 years is going to be tarred by a lying progressive female who cannot find one person to back her fossilized story? I already know she is a liar( as are posters here) and her ex bf contradicted every thing she testified ( lied) about, so there is that.

BTW she could have filed a complaint with the Maryland PD that would have been taken very seriously ( there is no statute of limitations on a sex crime)but instead slunk back to her liar’s den like the lying whipped dog she is and was. Why not file and get Kavanaugh on a felony charge? Because she didn’t want HER story investigated by police. Her story would not have held up.

And it isn’t even 4th party, it is total BS.