Kavanaugh SCOTUS hearings

[Nebuchadnezzar]

(09-27-2018, 11:20 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: He's applying for a job. A lifetime position on the highest court in the land. And, apparently, his initial background check wasn't thorough enough. But he and Trump could fix that and forever clear his 'good name' by having the FBI find facts.

Hmmm. I wonder why they don't do that?

How did the four people Ford said was there get their stories out that they don't know Kavanaugh and don't remember this party or get together?

Did the FBI get these sworn statements when this allegation hit Or did they go to their lawyers or what?

Serious question, I don't know how these statements came about.

[Bengalzona]

(09-27-2018, 11:31 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I don’t know what that has to do with your post that I responded to.

You said:
"This is a confirmation hearing not the legal system. He’s basically being asked to prove his innocence."

I said:
"He's applying for a job. A lifetime position on the highest court in the land. And, apparently, his initial background check wasn't thorough enough. But he and Trump could fix that and forever clear his 'good name' by having the FBI find facts.


Hmmm. I wonder why they don't do that?"

[*bfine32*]

(09-27-2018, 11:26 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: I didn't see it as "I'm an innocent victim" anger. Sounded more to me like Trump yelling into one of his infamous tweets.

And today has everything to do with the legal system. He is applying for a job at SCOTUS. He's being questioned by a lot of people who (believe it or not) have law degrees.

An FBI check could make all of this go away for him....right?

As I said your expert analysis of emotion aside, he has received outstanding ratings throughout his judicial career. I'm amazed that you and others know how a man should act when confronted by folks that have called him evil, suggested he will be the reason people die, try to ruin him as person, and are the imputes for his wife and family receiving hateful/threatening correspondence. You can assert what you want, but there would be a population that says he was guilty because all he did was be aloof toward the accusations.

Everything today had to do with the legislative system. And to the questioning: no of the law degree holders on the left questioned him at all about the merits of the case. 

Of course it won't make it go away. He has been investigated 6 times previous. There will always be those like you that consider him guilty until proven innocent and think that gives you justification to slur him. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-27-2018, 11:23 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Oh so these women were involved in his previous background investigations? 

No idea.  Also, that wasn't your point.

[GMDino]

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/brett-kavanaughs-calendar-for-july-1-1982-go-to-timmys-for-skis-with-judge.html

Quote:There’s an Entry on Kavanaugh’s 1982 Calendar That Supports Ford’s Story Better Than His Own



Brett Kavanaugh’s calendar for July 1982.

Provided by Brett Kavanaugh to the Senate Judiciary Committee


Much of Brett Kavanaugh’s testimony Tuesday focused on calendars he kept in the summer of 1982, where he detailed a few months that consisted mostly of hanging out with friends and sports camps and, Kavanaugh pointed out, few weekends spent in the Washington area as he traveled to the beach and other summer destinations. He insisted that his calendars proved he could not have been present at a gathering like the one described by accuser Christine Blasey Ford—a small group of friends drinking at a house when no parents were home.* Kavanaugh maintained that he recorded all his social engagements and that no entry on his calendar matches the vague outlines of the get-together Ford detailed. But one entry shows that he went “to Timmy’s for skis w/Judge, Tom, PJ, Bernie, Squi.”

View image on Twitter

Quote:
[/url]Matt Fuller

@MEPFuller





I missed this before, but I was just looking at Kavanaugh’s calendar, and I noticed that he’s hanging out on July 1, among a few other people, with “PJ” and “Judge.”

Pretty amazing coincidence that Ford, before she saw the calendars, said PJ and Mark Judge were there.
3:52 PM - Sep 27, 2018

• 
  11K
• 
  5,737 people are talking about this
  

Twitter Ads info and privacy




Ford had identified Mark Judge as in the room while Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her and said that “P.J.”—a man named Patrick Smyth—was elsewhere at the gathering. (Smyth denied to the Judiciary Committee being present at any such gathering.) Ford also noted that it appeared that Judge and Kavanaugh had been drinking beforehand and were far more intoxicated than the other people there.

In Thursday’s hearing, Kavanaugh was asked about the July 1 entry by Rachel Mitchell, the lawyer representing Republican senators, and replied, “It looks like we went over to Timmy’s” and identified the other boys who’d joined him. That was as far as that line of questioning went.

https://youtu.be/Z-E2GKARnSE

July 1 was a Thursday. Kavanaugh’s defense also relied on his insistence that the gathering could not have happened on a weeknight. “The event described by Dr. Ford presumably happened on a weekend because I believe everyone worked and had jobs in the summers,” he said. Kavanaugh later said his summer job in 1982 was mowing lawns. (“I had my own business of sorts.”)

Speaking of summer jobs, a book written by Judge says that the summer before his senior year of high school, “to raise money for football camp, I spent a few weeks working as a bag boy at the local supermarket.” This supports another statement of Ford’s when she described seeing Judge after the alleged incident at his job at a local Safeway supermarket. Judge writes in his book that, by then, he was “completely hooked” on alcohol and was frequently drunk. “Invariably I would be hungover” while working there, he wrote, which would mean drinking on weeknights.

Is it possible that teenagers might gather to drink on a Thursday night in the summer at a house with no parents home? Is it possible Kavanaugh went over to Timmy’s for “skis” (brewskis, apparently) and he and Judge journeyed on to another gathering? Could the night of July 1 be the night Ford was assaulted? Sounds worthy of further interrogation.

Quote:
Philip Bump

@pbump





That key July 1 calendar entry recorded by Kavanaugh came up by the Republican prosecutor. Despite how it overlapped with Ford's allegations, the prosecutor let him walk away from it. https://wapo.st/2DCojkR 
5:34 PM - Sep 27, 2018 · Brooklyn, NY

Analysis | Kavanaugh is pressed on the key July 1 entry in his calendar. But only to a point.
A July 1 party including people mentioned by Christine Ford is raised -- and then dropped.
washingtonpost.com

• 
  528
• 
  [url=https://twitter.com/pbump/status/1045426482267357184]442 people are talking about this
  

I wonder if that's why they stopped her from asking questions?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-27-2018, 11:28 PM)Dill Wrote: Possibly you are wondering why I am not a black and white thinker.

No, I'm actually wondering exactly what I typed.   

Quote:I wonder why you find it so difficult to find shades of grey.

I'll just bet you do. 

[*michaelsean*]

(09-27-2018, 11:36 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: You said:
"This is a confirmation hearing not the legal system. He’s basically being asked to prove his innocence."

I said:
"He's applying for a job. A lifetime position on the highest court in the land. And, apparently, his initial background check wasn't thorough enough. But he and Trump could fix that and forever clear his 'good name' by having the FBI find facts.


Hmmm. I wonder why they don't do that?"

Your original statement:

. Innocent people who believe and trust in our legal system don't have to worry.

In the legal system he would believe and trust in, this would be a slam dunk acquittal. This isn’t that.

[Bengalzona]

(09-27-2018, 11:35 PM)As Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: How did the four people Ford said was there get their stories out that they don't know Kavanaugh and don't remember this party or get together?

Did the FBI get these sworn statements when this allegation hit Or did they go to their lawyers or what?

Serious question, I don't know how these statements came about.

They made statements to their lawyers and sent them to the GOP-members of the committee, I believe.

None of them were deposed or questioned.

[*bfine32*]

(09-27-2018, 11:41 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Your original statement:

. Innocent people who believe and trust in our legal system don't have to worry.

In the legal system he would believe and trust in, this would be a slam dunk acquittal. This isn’t that.

Are you trying to say that a woman accusing a man of sexual assault at an event that she doesn't know where it was, when it was, how she, got there, how she got home while drinking at the age of 15. And all 4 of the people she asserts were also there have no idea what she's talking about and that her friend has no idea who Kavs is would not be compelling evidence in a court of law?

[NATI BENGALS]

(09-27-2018, 11:36 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No idea.  Also, that wasn't your point.

My original point was an attempt at satire. And you jumped in with an unrelated question.

If you cant answer that then the real question should be what is your point?

[Bengalzona]

(09-27-2018, 11:41 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Your original statement:

. Innocent people who believe and trust in our legal system don't have to worry.

In the legal system he would believe and trust in, this would be a slam dunk acquittal. This isn’t that.

It is an application for that legal system.

But you are right that a job application for the federal government is different than the legal system. In a federal judge position, you are assumed to not be qualified until you prove you are qualified.

[Vlad]

(09-27-2018, 11:36 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: You said:
"This is a confirmation hearing not the legal system. He’s basically being asked to prove his innocence."

I said:
"He's applying for a job. A lifetime position on the highest court in the land. And, apparently, his initial background check wasn't thorough enough. But he and Trump could fix that and forever clear his 'good name' by having the FBI find facts.


Hmmm. I wonder why they don't do that?"

Really? You wonder why?

Six times Kavanaugh has had FBI background checks...how many times does it take to be thorough?

You wonder why?
You can't see how another FBI background check would delay Kavanaughs confirmation until after election day..when this supposed "blue wave" takes back the Senate and blocks him from the SCOTUS?

[Bengalzona]

(09-27-2018, 11:36 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As I said your expert analysis of emotion aside, he has received outstanding ratings throughout his judicial career. I'm amazed that you and others know how a man should act when confronted by folks that have called him evil, suggested he will be the reason people die, try to ruin him as person, and are the imputes for his wife and family receiving hateful/threatening correspondence. You can assert what you want, but there would be a population that says he was guilty because all he did was be aloof toward the accusations.

Everything today had to do with the legislative system. And to the questioning: no of the law degree holders on the left questioned him at all about the merits of the case. 

Of course it won't make it go away. He has been investigated 6 times previous. There will always be those like you that consider him guilty until proven innocent and think that gives you justification to slur him. 

Yeah. Clearly there was a lot of sincerity in my slur when I put an emoji after the original post.

Just the same, the guy is clearly an emotional hothead. I've never seen any previous SCOTUS member act that way.

[Bengalzona]

(09-28-2018, 12:10 AM)Vlad Wrote: Really? You wonder why?

Six times Kavanaugh has had FBI background checks...how many times does it take to be thorough?

You wonder why?
You can't see how another FBI background check would delay Kavanaughs confirmation until after election day..when this supposed "blue wave" takes back the Senate and blocks him from the SCOTUS?

Do you actually believe there is going to be a "blue wave"?

[treee]

http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-Heads-up

Reminder

[*Nately120*]

(09-28-2018, 12:25 AM)treee Wrote: http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-Heads-up

Reminder

Quick question...is calling them DemoCRAPS and RePOOPlicans going too far, too?  Asking for a friend who is probably me and also functionally friendless. 

[treee]

(09-28-2018, 12:31 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Quick question...is calling them DemoCRAPS and RePOOPlicans going too far, too?  Asking for a friend who is probably me and also functionally friendless. 

While funny, unfortunately still name calling. The goal is to discuss Politics and Religion. 

[Benton]

(09-27-2018, 11:34 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Yeah this wouldn’t be his first judgeship. He’s been a judge for quite a while so I’m guessing there are some instances of him being an uncontrolled hothead?

Well, yeah, allgedly in high school...

:Mellow:

I'm shifting though. Originally I didn't like him because I thought he was too pro-busibess. Then it was because he was dishonest. Now, with the calendars which shoot a hole in his own alibi... Im leaning more towards kavanaugh just being not smart enough 

Not that he's not asmart guy. But you've got your buds all saying they don't know anything about anything ... And you throw out a calendar that says otherwise.

[Arturo Bandini]

(09-27-2018, 07:41 PM)Vlad Wrote: Why don't you take a listen to what one of your idols had to say about an FBI investigation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKZjR_n7R8w

Joe Biden is my idol ? Nice to know that. 

I'm not even voting in France lol  

[ballsofsteel]

Good old Lindsay Graham. At least he waited to his dear and best friend John McCain died before he showed his true colors as a Trump lover. McCain is turning over in his grave. Faking that outrage at the hearing was pretty good acting though.