Kavanaugh SCOTUS Senate Judicial Hearing

[HomerJS]

"A Yale classmate of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh’s accused him on Sunday of a “blatant mischaracterization” of his drinking while in college, saying that he often saw Judge Kavanaugh “staggering from alcohol consumption.”

The classmate, Chad Ludington, who said he frequently socialized with Judge Kavanaugh as a student, said in a statement that the judge had been untruthful in testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee when he had denied any possibility that he had ever blacked out from drinking.

Mr. Ludington said that Judge Kavanaugh had played down “the degree and frequency” of his drinking, and that the judge had often become “belligerent and aggressive” while intoxicated. Other former classmates have made similar claims."

Maybe Mr. Ludington is just . . . you know . . . confused about what he remembers?

I remember him doing a nose scrunch during that question. Seems to be his lying tell.

 

[Guru]

When she told the claims to who is indisputably evidence. For instance the fact she told her therapist in 2012 about the assault with the therapist notes specifying "that she was attacked by students “from an elitist boys’ school” who went on to become “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.'"
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation...on-against-kavanaugh-unfolded-in-one-timeline

This at a minimum means she did not suddenly make up the claim such an event occurred suddenly when Kavanaugh got nominated, although its true the notes lack Kavanaugh's name at that time.

She also definitely contacted the Washington Post tip-line and specifically named Kavanaugh as her assaulter prior to his actual nomination, although she did not want to go public with her name at that time. (There is some evidence she was trying come up with a way to persuade the White House to pick another one of their candidates to actually nominate, which would be consistent with the assault occurring rather than her simply trying to prevent a Conservative Supreme Court Justice from being nominated. You would really need an alternate not obvious reason she would hold a grudge against Kavanaugh for her to act with this as her specific goal.)

Now you can argue these other details would not be definitive evidence in a court case, but they absolutely would be legally admissible supporting evidence in such a hypothetical case. Its worth noting for example that Bill Cosby got convicted of rape and sentenced to 3 to 10 years in jail mostly on the testimony of one individual. (Most of Cosby's accusers were not actually admissible evidence in the criminal case.)

Look if she told someone, anyone about this at the time or at least 4-5 years after the event occured and those people or at least single person corroborated her claims, then it would be evidence. Right? She told someone about an sexual abuse or attack or rape or whatever, something. From that we can confirm that there was indeed a case at the very least, that something had occurred.

But she said she didn't told ANYONE about it and only found out in a therapy session, that is inconsistent with her latest testimony that she told her husband years before that. Now she also changed her statement that she indeed told a friend of hers about it in 2016.

But all of this ASIDE, there is no credible evidence, there is no actual witness to what happened back then! And NO, him drinking as a teenager and getting into trouble sometimes doesn't mean shit. Who hasn't drank when teenagers and gotten in trouble at least few times? It has no barring on her accusation!

If we based job requirements on what people did when they were young teenagers, NO ONE will be qualified for a job EVER, ANYWHERE!

That is the issue with this whole case, it can't be proven either way and its just been a stall tactic for the democrats.

The only issue he was grilled about was Roe vs Wade, that's it. When that didn't work as people are actually divided on this, its about 50-50% loosely on average, maybe 55-50% pro abortion if you ask the question in a more favorable way to abortion, but essentially this went no where and instead of grilling him about his terrible abuse of the 4th and 5th amendment, they decided to call him a rapist. I guess calling someone sexist or racist these days doesn't do anything, because they've way overused it on nothing!

 

[Guru]

Examples of what you disagree with and why?

He doesn't value privacy, he's ruled and written that if its "national security'TM" the government can take your data without a warrant or that accused terrorists don't have constitutional protections and right to fair trials. So to me this is sort of a poetic justice, because Kavanagh did think some people are guilty until proven innocent, rather than the other way, so this is great that he gets to experience this!

What goes around comes around, I think everyone should remember that! Don't cry wolf, don't push fake agendas, don't oppose freedom and rights, because sooner or later it will come down on you and come down on you hard!

 

[HomerJS]

Look if she told someone, anyone about this at the time or at least 4-5 years after the event occured and those people or at least single person corroborated her claims, then it would be evidence. Right? She told someone about an sexual abuse or attack or rape or whatever, something. From that we can confirm that there was indeed a case at the very least, that something had occurred.

But she said she didn't told ANYONE about it and only found out in a therapy session, that is inconsistent with her latest testimony that she told her husband years before that. Now she also changed her statement that she indeed told a friend of hers about it in 2016.

But all of this ASIDE, there is no credible evidence, there is no actual witness to what happened back then! And NO, him drinking as a teenager and getting into trouble sometimes doesn't mean shit. Who hasn't drank when teenagers and gotten in trouble at least few times? It has no barring on her accusation!

If we based job requirements on what people did when they were young teenagers, NO ONE will be qualified for a job EVER, ANYWHERE!

That is the issue with this whole case, it can't be proven either way and its just been a stall tactic for the democrats.

The only issue he was grilled about was Roe vs Wade, that's it. When that didn't work as people are actually divided on this, its about 50-50% loosely on average, maybe 55-50% pro abortion if you ask the question in a more favorable way to abortion, but essentially this went no where and instead of grilling him about his terrible abuse of the 4th and 5th amendment, they decided to call him a rapist. I guess calling someone sexist or racist these days doesn't do anything, because they've way overused it on nothing!

She didn't "find out" in her therapy session, as if the therapist put the suggestion in her head. She told the therapist. This was all back in 2013.

She says Mark Judge was in the room. Judge says he can't recall that. Judge and Kavanaugh need to submit to a polygraph. That would clear up a lot.

My theory is Kavanaugh was so blackout drunk he could have attacked her and didn't remember. We already know he has lied in the hearing about drinking to the point of not remembering.

You need to go back and listen to the accounts of the flood of women callers into CSPAN during the hearing. You may have a change of heart.

 

[jackstar7]

Thread for those determined to cry foul when it comes to these kind of accusations, lest men actually face consequences:

https://twitter.com/jeremycyoung/status/1046056287929356289

 

[UberNeuman]

Look if she told someone, anyone about this at the time or at least 4-5 years after the event occured and those people or at least single person corroborated her claims, then it would be evidence. Right? She told someone about an sexual abuse or attack or rape or whatever, something. From that we can confirm that there was indeed a case at the very least, that something had occurred.

But she said she didn't told ANYONE about it and only found out in a therapy session, that is inconsistent with her latest testimony that she told her husband years before that. Now she also changed her statement that she indeed told a friend of hers about it in 2016.

But all of this ASIDE, there is no credible evidence, there is no actual witness to what happened back then! And NO, him drinking as a teenager and getting into trouble sometimes doesn't mean shit. Who hasn't drank when teenagers and gotten in trouble at least few times? It has no barring on her accusation!

If we based job requirements on what people did when they were young teenagers, NO ONE will be qualified for a job EVER, ANYWHERE!

That is the issue with this whole case, it can't be proven either way and its just been a stall tactic for the democrats.

The only issue he was grilled about was Roe vs Wade, that's it. When that didn't work as people are actually divided on this, its about 50-50% loosely on average, maybe 55-50% pro abortion if you ask the question in a more favorable way to abortion, but essentially this went no where and instead of grilling him about his terrible abuse of the 4th and 5th amendment, they decided to call him a rapist. I guess calling someone sexist or racist these days doesn't do anything, because they've way overused it on nothing!

lol.

 

[Moonbeam]

lol.

Yup, and then there's the part about the helicopter with the cross eyed dragon painted on its side that took her to heaven she only remembers on Monday evenings. I mean, how gullible can people be?

 

[sportage]

Assault and rape isn't something you go around telling people about.
Even ones own family.
And it depends on the time and the era this took place.
This happened in an entirely different mindset than society of today.
Remember, almost every movie of rape and assault made back in those days, the woman or victim was always assumed had ASKED FOR IT, or ENJOYED IT.
And in the courtroom, it went far beyond that.
Remember, most of those rape movies were from actual events. And the outcome was still pretty bad for the victim. All you need is a ruthless lawyer for the accused, and digging into any past intercessions of the victim.
Make him out a saint, and her out a whore.
In this current case, the republican congress is the ruthless lawyer playing their part.

This is more a case of extreme humiliation and embarrassment for the victim rather than simply running to the cops sort of thing. Women knew running to the cops or even telling their family might lead to guilt placed on them and disbelief from those surrounding the assaulting party.
It becomes complicated.

What brings the horrors back to mind is the victim witnessing this creep up for some important job or position. Then it becomes a WTF, oh no you don't issue.
Do I tell? Should I say something? Should I stay quiet?
I think the anger becomes to unbearable where the victim MUST finally say something.
Especially when the creep is about to get a position of great power where they can pretend to be pure as the driven snow.

It is not that odd that she or anyone victim would keep what happened quiet for so many years.
And it is not that odd the victim would come to find the horror unbearable.
To reach the limit of what any victim could take.
In this case, that limit being the US Supreme Court.

Regardless, the deal breaker for me is and will always be his temperament.
His unhinged personality.
His evading the facts.
His way of not answering and evading.
Usually, you only see this in children. Not adults.
Not in normal, mentally stable adults.
This is a guy that felt privileged, entitled, was out of control, felt this sort of behavior would never catch up to him, and he certainly felt he was PROTECTED.
Protected by his frat brothers, and now protect by Donald Trump and Chuck Grassley.
Which by the way, are the two protecting him now.

 

[theeedude]

Anyways, I love that the Democrats have gone scorched earth and finally are moving to delegitimize the SCOTUS. I think from that point of view, it would be good if Kavanaugh is confirmed. Really, he would be the gift that keeps on giving for Democrats.

 

[umbrella39]

Anyways, I love that the Democrats have gone scorched earth and finally are moving to delegitimize the SCOTUS. I think from that point of view, it would be good if Kavanaugh is confirmed. Really, he would be the gift that keeps on giving for Democrats.

This 100%. Win - Win...

 

[Guru]

She didn't "find out" in her therapy session, as if the therapist put the suggestion in her head. She told the therapist. This was all back in 2013.

She says Mark Judge was in the room. Judge says he can't recall that. Judge and Kavanaugh need to submit to a polygraph. That would clear up a lot.

My theory is Kavanaugh was so blackout drunk he could have attacked her and didn't remember. We already know he has lied in the hearing about drinking to the point of not remembering.

You need to go back and listen to the accounts of the flood of women callers into CSPAN during the hearing. You may have a change of heart.

Why would they submit to a polygraph? Do you know why polygraph tests are inadmissible in court? Because innocent people kept doing them to exonerate them from accusations or investigations and it actually ended up having the opposite effect. When DNA testing became a thing and they found that a ton of people who failed the polygraph and actually incriminated themselves and were thus thrown in prison, but were actually innocent as DNA testing exonerated them, polygraph tests were made inadmissible in court due to its severe inconsistency and unreliability.

So why would he submit to a polygraph when they are notoriously erroneous and they are inadmissible in court? He could potentially end up hurting himself.

 

[UberNeuman]

lol. It says "might."

 

[HomerJS]

Why would they submit to a polygraph? Do you know why polygraph tests are inadmissible in court? Because innocent people kept doing them to exonerate them from accusations or investigations and it actually ended up having the opposite effect. When DNA testing became a thing and they found that a ton of people who failed the polygraph and actually incriminated themselves and were thus thrown in prison, but were actually innocent as DNA testing exonerated them, polygraph tests were made inadmissible in court due to its severe inconsistency and unreliability.

So why would he submit to a polygraph when they are notoriously erroneous and they are inadmissible in court? He could potentially end up hurting himself.

There are a lot of high level government jobs that require polygraphs. What makes Kavanaugh so special that he can't take one?

Besides this is not a court case and Kavanaugh is not facing the loss of his freedom, its a fucking job.

With what we know now its a credibility test and Kavanaugh is losing to Ford by a lot.

 

[soundforbjt]

There are a lot of high level government jobs that require polygraphs. What makes Kavanaugh so special that he can't take one?

Besides this is not a court case and Kavanaugh is not facing the loss of his freedom, its a fucking job.

With what we know now its a credibility test and Kavanaugh is losing to Ford by a lot.

Not only that but Kavanaugh himself says they are a valuable tool for top level jobs.

 

[Jaskalas]

Ludington says he was deeply troubled by Kavanaugh appearing to blatantly mischaracterize his drinking in Senate testimony.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amph....html?__twitter_impression=true&noredirect=on

Yes, if anything is easily unraveled it is Kavanaugh's categorical denial of his party bro life stye. Such a bald face lie.

 

[trenchfoot]

Damn, if Kavanaugh gets spike booted out of contention, he is going to cry a river and wail and moan and have an epic hissy fit worse than the one he had at his hearing and all of which will trigger Trump and his base of loonies into hitting the streets and go apeshit berserk.

Now that would be very entertaining and curiously satisfying to witness first hand.

I wonder if he still thinks it was a good idea to go for it. lol

 

[pcgeek11]

Wow, This comedy thread is still going.

 

[UberNeuman]

Wow, This comedy thread is still going.

It's Comedy Now with Mama's Litt'er Lier...

lol.

 

[pcgeek11]

I speak of comedy and look who responds. LOL

 

[UberNeuman]

I speak of comedy and look who responds. LOL

Two guys walk into a bar and the Bartender says "What will you have?" The one guy says "Beer and a shot." The other guy says "Beer and a Rape."

 

[Guru]

There are a lot of high level government jobs that require polygraphs. What makes Kavanaugh so special that he can't take one?

Besides this is not a court case and Kavanaugh is not facing the loss of his freedom, its a fucking job.

With what we know now its a credibility test and Kavanaugh is losing to Ford by a lot.

No they don't. Only jobs that require high level security clearance require polygraph checks and certain specific fields in certain departments. So out of more than 17 million federal government jobs, less than 0.1% take polygraph tests.

Again why would he do a polygraph test? I just wrote how unreliable they are and the history of those interpretations putting innocent people in jail.

Why would he choose to do it? He'd have to be the stupidest person alive, because there is a chance for him to fail the test even if he is telling the truth.

If you or anyone was in his shoes you wouldn't take the test either, unless you are a complete and utter brainless idiot!

And lets say he takes the test and passes 100%, the arguments that I just wrote about how unreliable polygraphs are will be used to discredit his polygraph results by democrats, so it won't help him one bit and it can just hurt him.

There has never been a requirement to take a polygraph test to be a supreme court judge, so him not taking a test is not controversial or anything, its a smart thing to do that any person with half a brain will do as well.

 

[Moonbeam]

No they don't. Only jobs that require high level security clearance require polygraph checks and certain specific fields in certain departments. So out of more than 17 million federal government jobs, less than 0.1% take polygraph tests.

Again why would he do a polygraph test? I just wrote how unreliable they are and the history of those interpretations putting innocent people in jail.

Why would he choose to do it? He'd have to be the stupidest person alive, because there is a chance for him to fail the test even if he is telling the truth.

If you or anyone was in his shoes you wouldn't take the test either, unless you are a complete and utter brainless idiot!

And lets say he takes the test and passes 100%, the arguments that I just wrote about how unreliable polygraphs are will be used to discredit his polygraph results by democrats, so it won't help him one bit and it can just hurt him.

There has never been a requirement to take a polygraph test to be a supreme court judge, so him not taking a test is not controversial or anything, its a smart thing to do that any person with half a brain will do as well.

The real reason he won't take the test is because he would fail. Ford took it because she knew she would pass and all the bull shit you just listed applies to her as well. Anybody who knows they aren't lying would jump at the chance to demonstrate they can pass such a test.

 

[lopri]

In testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday, Judge Kavanaugh also denied the possibility that he had ever been blackout drunk, a state that implies memory loss, despite consciousness. But Mr. Ludington, a former basketball player at Yale, said in a statement that he could “unequivocally say” that Judge Kavanaugh had “not told the truth.”

He said Judge Kavanaugh had often become “belligerent and aggressive” while intoxicated during his first two years at Yale. Mr. Ludington recalled one incident in which he said Judge Kavanaugh threw a beer in someone’s face, “starting a fight that ended with one of our mutual friends in jail.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/30/...icle&region=Footer&contentCollection=Politics

He seems to be a ruthless careerist. I base this on the first-hand knowledge of the judge's behavior during the hearing ("revenge on behalf of the Clintons" Is he for real?) as well as some of his court opinions that appear to be borne out of pure career calculations. I do not want him to be on the SCOTUS.

 

[cytg111]

Dude was a jock, his crew was jocks.. there is a good possibility that he was jucing too.. Someone should look into Kavanaugh and steroids..

 

[Guru]

The real reason he won't take the test is because he would fail. Ford took it because she knew she would pass and all the bull shit you just listed applies to her as well. Anybody who knows they aren't lying would jump at the chance to demonstrate they can pass such a test.

You are just dumb! What part of polygraphs are erroneous and unreliable don't you get? They are not 100% truth telling machines. They measure heart rate and sweating on the fingers and you need a trained professional to interpret those results. Every test is different with every person, this a baseline is established to see what would normal answers look like, but the issue is when people are in pressure situations they do tend to heat up and sweat and have their heart rate go up, they don't have to lie to do that. That is why polygraph tests are unreliable. Trained professionals can consistently pass them, while innocent people may fail them.

All over the world polygraph tests in majority of countries are inadmissible in court.

Her passing the polygraph test gives her a tiny bit credibility, but not much and is certainly no evidence against Kavanaugh.