Brett KavanNOT Must Be Removed ASAP From The US Court Of Appeals

1. 68

   JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years ago

   
   
   What the hell is going on in this crumbling Trump era ???? And forget the new FBI investigation into this angry weirdo’s past, why haven‘t the first steps been taken to remove this crazy conspiracy theorist from his current position as a GOD forbid judge ???? How much more evidence do you need to realize he’s unfit period just like the whack job perched in our oval office ???? We’re already seeing the alarmingly irreparable negative impact on our society, legal system, national security, morality and economy since Vladimir Putin helped to embed this dangerous, psychologically impaired orange nut case in our oval office, NOW republicans are trying desperately to RAM another obvious basket case named Brett onto OUR SUPREME Court ???? That’s  Beyond INSANE: All the serious criminal allegations aside and there have been 3 named so far, did everyone witness his dramatically disturbing mental meltdown on national television during the republican sham hearing ???? Righteous Blue Progressive Democratic Wave In November, Come Wash This Mega-Corrupt Republican Conservative EVIL Away:

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Ed Fisherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      
      
      No one has to say anything more Jake but you will of course .

      replyreport
      1. 68

         JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         I don't even know what you're talking about most of the time ahorseback, but we've all known the 'fix' was in from the very beginning for this psychologically fragile, Alex Jones style conspiracy theorist, just go watch 'Granny' McConnell who announced to the world when he said beattie eyes Brett would be confirmed, he actually said this days before Dr. Ford was even scheduled to appear before the republican sham committee:
         
         However, just because the 'fix' is in by republicans, that doesn't discount divine intervention from our good lord to stop this dark minded man who has pending criminal allegations, from infiltrating the highest court of our land: GOD it seems touched Jeff Flake, now he needs to simply touch a few other republicans and convert them over from confused, complicit evil doers, to righteous children of good by halting this KavaNOT madness:

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Ed Fisherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            I'm not surprised that " .....I don't even know what you're talking about ......."Jake  but hey that's your problem . I suggest you now sit and wait patiently for the "..........good lord............ " to guide you .   I believe Kavanaugh  will be confirmed and  that may just END the mid term ploys by your party .  Your party is however going to pay dearly  , do you know why ?  Because Republicans have not only picked up on the patterns of dirty tricks of democrats but are using them  to stop your nonsense strategies.
            
            One thing conservatives  are easily pointing out at present  is the constancy of hypocrisy your people uses in these confirmations , congratulations though , it will end up costing liberals ,by timing , the next fifty years of SCOTUS controls .   Don't be surprised if  the liberal ideology cannot pass one constitutional  change for decades to come !
            
            And all for dirty tricks .

            replyreport
2. 68

   JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years ago

   Where there's smoke there's usually fire, and now on top off all the other disqualifying detrimental evidence against Brett, serious allegations of criminal activity, we're receiving press reports and eye witness accounts which call his integrity into serious question: Can't be surprised with that right?
   
   Also, the ultra-corrupt oval office appears to be influencing this latest FBI investigation: UNREAL and Alarming:
   
   "he American Bar Association had concerns about Kavanaugh 12 years ago. Republicans dismissed those, too."
   
   
   
   "Late Thursday evening, the ABA called for an FBI investigation into sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh before the Senate Judiciary Committee voted on his Supreme Court nomination. The warning was all the more remarkable, because just hours earlier, Kavanaugh and his Republican defenders had cited the ABA’s previously glowing endorsement of the nominee — “the gold standard,” as one leading Republican put it."
   
   https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics … d340233f7d

   replyreport
   1. 68

      JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Breaking BIG *******: Developing NOW *******: Will Brett be prosecuted for perjury ?? Emerging evidence seems to be corroborating the logical assumption that it's becoming clearer and clearer Brett may have committed perjury under oath about many different aspects of his angry, unhinged, mentally disturbed testimony at the sham republican hearing the other day:
      
      Witnesses are coming forward to tell the world that he was a belligerent drinker and after watching his incredibly dark and violent attitude and verbal outbursts at the hearing, it would lead one to believe that violent temper and perhaps heavy consumption of alcohol might have followed him throughout the years: Either way, he's absolutely unfit and needs to be removed ASAP from the US Court of Appeals:
      
      "Brett Kavanaugh was 'belligerent and aggressive' drinker, Yale classmate says"
      
      https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol … 484822002/

      replyreport
      1. 77

         hard sunposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         And boofing is flatulence, devil's triangle, I LOVED beer but went to sleep, never passed out. JOKE

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Common sense. Judgement. Educated opinion. Intuition.
            
            Call it what you want, it is reasonable to believe that Brett the Punk is lying.

            replyreport
            1. 77

               hard sunposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               Right. I really didn't think I would have to say much to back up my lying punk assertion. We all saw the same hearing right?

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  One person's petulant punk tirade is another person's righteous indignation tirade.
                  
                  He lied several times under oath. He should already be disqualified.

                  replyreport
                  1. 77

                     hard sunposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     Good point about the tirade. I'm thinking life experiences, and of course political affiliation play a role in this difference. I was taught to be composed when confronted with challenges...be the bigger person so to speak and not to lie.
                     
                     His lying may actually get him disqualified. I didn't think so, but I'm not sure Flake, Collins, and Murkowski will vote to affirm at this point.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        Ed Fisherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                        People in America are not convicted on numerable ,
                        "I can't remembers" .
                        
                        I'll keep saying that until you on the left stop lying .

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                           This is not a trial, so if course there will be no conviction, nor will there be a formal declaration of innocence.
                           
                           Do you comprehend this very simple fact?

                           replyreport
                           1. 77

                              hard sunposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                              I don't think he does..it's almost sad.

                              replyreport
                              1. 0

                                 Ed Fisherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                                 You too!

                                 replyreport
                           2. 0

                              Ed Fisherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                              And you guys do right ?

                              replyreport
                              1. 0

                                 PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                                 Lol, since we've repeated it multiple times, I don't know how you can doubt that we understand the hearing is not a trial.
                                 
                                 Since you claim to understand this simple fact, why do you keep talking about criminal donviction?
                                 
                                 You:  People in America are not convicted on numerable , "I can't remembers" .

                                 replyreport
                           3. 94

                              wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                              Of course there won't - the FBI does not make conclusions and does not advise.  It only gathers information.
                              
                              Except in the case of Hillary, when it advised the AG that their conclusion was that she should not be tried for her crime...makes one wonder just how unbiased they are, doesn't it?

                              replyreport
3. 0

   Ed Fisherposted 5 years ago

   So say's the "Trial by Yearbook "class .

   replyreport
   1. 0

      PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Says the guy who pulls speculative assertions like "jilted ex-lover" out of his partisan arse.

      replyreport
      1. 77

         hard sunposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         ding ding..and his gossip wasn't even based on something said at the hearing.
         
         "Common sense. Judgement. Educated opinion. Intuition."

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Ed Fisherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Gossip ? How many times DID Ford say , "I don't remember"at the hearings ?

            replyreport
      2. 0

         Ed Fisherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         What isn't speculative in this .
         
         Fords numerable "I don't remembers "?

         replyreport
4. 0

   Ed Fisherposted 5 years ago

   I've been trying to teach liberals the obvious hypocrisy of their ways ,   Yet you have all judged Kavanaugh ,  ".......judge not lest ye be judged........ "

   replyreport
   1. 0

      PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Just like you judge us in practically every post on these forums. What's new?

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Ed Fisherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         New Jersey , New York , New Ipswich , New Bedford ......................same ole' same ole '.

         replyreport
5. 68

   JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years ago

   Breaking BIG *******: Another ENTITLED rich creep ?? As the days go on, more and more alleged victims and eye witnesses to what they say are distortions, misinformation and out right lies uttered by Brett before the senate: WHY is Brett apparently frightened to death of FBI investigations, lie detector tests and questions pertaining to his past which could conceivably be disturbing indications of his present behavior ?:
   
   Does Brett still drink in dramatically heavy proportions as some of his former friends and eye witnesses claim he did in high school and college ??
   
   "Yale friend, now NC State professor says Kavanaugh 'has not told the truth' about drinking"
   
   "RALEIGH, N.C. -- A former Yale University classmate of Brett Kavanaugh's said he is "deeply troubled" by what he claims has been a blatant mischaracterization by Kavanaugh of his drinking at Yale."
   
   "Charles "Chad" Ludington now teaches at North Carolina State University. After first releasing a statement Sunday, describing Kavanaugh as "a frequent drinker, and a heavy drinker," Ludington spoke to reporters outside his home in Carrboro on Monday evening."
   
   https://abc11.com/politics/video-friend … -/4378893/

   replyreport
   1. 68

      JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Breaking BIG *******: Developing NOW: Looks like Harvard cut ties with KavaNOT, nobody can possibly be surprised about that at this point right? : He will no longer be teaching at the institution: Who wants an unhinged, mentally unsound individual who appears according to press reports, to be less than forthcoming and appears to have serious skeletons in his closet teaching martians, let alone young impressionable adults:
      
      "Kavanaugh no longer teaching at Harvard after outcry"
      
      "Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, who’s been battling allegations of sexual misconduct, won’t be teaching a class at Harvard Law School this winter after an outcry from hundreds of alumni, according to a report.
      
      “Today, Judge Kavanaugh indicated that he can no longer commit to teaching his course in January Term 2019, so the course will not be offered,” Catherine Claypoole, associate dean and dean for academic and faculty affairs, wrote in an email, the Harvard Crimson reported late Monday."
      
      https://nypost.com/2018/10/02/kavanaugh … er-outcry/

      replyreport
      1. 94

         wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         "Today, Judge Kavanaugh indicated that he can no longer commit to teaching his course in January Term 2019, so the course will not be offered"
         
         That's what you offer in support of "Looks like Harvard cut ties with KavaNOT"  That Kavanaugh could not commit to teaching a class because he may be on the courtroom bench instead?
         
         Can't you do better than obvious, and false, spin?  This is just more "Jake nonsense" without any truth at all!

         replyreport
         1. 68

            JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            I'm sure some Trump sheep believe you wilderness but unless the 'fix' is in and beattie eyes Brett has already been guaranteed a seat on the supreme court by "Granny" McConnell which is very likely considering he announced to a crazy right wing audience weeks ago that KavaNOT would be on the court before a vote was even taken, Your assertion is less than plausible:
            
            WHY would beattie eyes Brett cancel his teaching commitment at Harvard BEFORE a vote was even taken ?? Makes absolutely zero sense and that's why there is every indication that his teaching tenure at Harvard was terminated due to the massive student protests of his nomination: THEY WANT HIM OUT Period:
            
            How else do you expect rational thinking students to react to Bozo Trump, a confessed sexual abuser himself via the Access Hollywood film, nominating an alleged attempted rapist to the supreme court ??? Do you honestly think this abomination of a nomination is acceptable to normal Americans ??
            
            "Brett Kavanaugh Won't Be Returning To Teach At Harvard After 'Outcry'
            
            "Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh was slated to teach a course on the Supreme Court at Harvard next spring, but he's declined after a concerted effort on the part of alumni and current students to have his invitation rescinded.
            
            The New York Post reports that "hundreds of alumni" penned a letter, joining a chorus of student detractors, begging Harvard's administration to cancel what appears to be an annual lecture conducted by the current DC Circuit judge."
            
            https://www.dailywire.com/news/36593/br … ly-zanotti

            replyreport
            1. 94

               wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               Fair enough, and I'm also sure that some people will take your word for it that the school canceled even though your own link says the opposite.  There are gullible people everywhere.
               
               Kavanaugh didn't "cancel", according to your own link: he said he could not commit.  Reasonable as he has already committed to SCOTUS should he be confirmed.  You may think he should maintain both commitments, but I doubt that even you could actually advise or believe that such a thing was the right thing to do.  Could be wrong though - would you suggest committing to two things even though you could only do one of them?

               replyreport
               1. 68

                  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  the evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the students forced KavaNOT out because of the serious allegations of attempted rape against him:
                  
                  If that wasn't the case, he could have very easily committed to teaching the class and then if the unthinkable, evil, abominable thing happened where he was actually confirmed, he could have cancelled the class at that point in infamous time:

                  replyreport
                  1. 94

                     wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     "beyond a reasonable doubt".  That a few students don't like him and others do proves that the school canceled his class for reasons other than Kavanaugh did being able to  commit to them?  You have a very (very!) strange idea of what "beyond a reasonable doubt" means.
                     
                     Of course he could have committed.  And then canceled, leaving the students and school in the air.  I assume your statement means you would have done just that, without concern about the effect on those students or school.  Am I correct in then concluding that your pocketbook is more important than the time of students or cost to the school?

                     replyreport
                     1. 68

                        JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                        More than a few students wanted him out wilderness and they expressed their anger toward this alleged attempted rapist and yes, I would have done the normal rational thing and committed to teaching the class pending a decision from the senate but according to the evidence, that's not the real reason why his teaching tenure was terminated:
                        
                        It's a no brainer: The students are furious as is the country with this alleged attempted rapist not to mention what appears to be his less than forthcoming testimony and apparent past and perhaps present drinking problem which has been extended to hard liquer by at least one eye witness that I've seen on television and or in press reports::
                        
                        I keep hearing Sarah Hucklberry Sanders and Kellyanne CLOWNway saying Brett's reputation has been destroyed which makes perfect sense considering the evidence against him just like Bill Cosby's reputation has been destroyed and if that's the case, Brett can NEVER be confirmed:

                        replyreport
                        1. 94

                           wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                           Ok.  Count them.  Count those that did not.  THEN, and only then, can you say with any degree of certainty that the school took action.  Of course, you haven't checked how many would want him, have you?
                           
                           Second, college students, particularly liberal ones, are well known for denying anything to conservatives, whether it be teaching, a seminar or just a talk.  Better take that into account as well.  Their rage at the very thought that people they don't like enjoy the same free speech as they do is intolerable.
                           
                           Same thing; your evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt" is solely the testimony of a tiny handful of people (that may or may not have been enemies - you don't know and don't care)...while ignoring that dozens upon dozens of people that have testified to the opposite.  Hard to make a case that way.  If you care about truth, anyway - if your goal is to demonize then it's perfect.

                           replyreport
6. 68

   JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years ago

   Breaking BIG: Developing NOW ******: Hundreds and counting of law professors reject the nomination of unhinged, crazy right wing conspiracy theorist Brett KavaNOT: How can republicans possibly confirm an unstable man like this who has already confessed to his bias against more than half the country, will trample women's rights, confessed to drinking too many beers, sobs and acts like an unhinged, angry mental patient under pressure and has attempted rape and other serious criminal allegations hanging over his head like a 7 ton albatross ?? UNREAL:
   
   America will not stand for this attempted egregious perversion of our justice system:   
   
   "The Senate Should Not Confirm Kavanaugh
   Signed, 1,000+ Law Professors (and Counting)"
   
   OCT. 3, 2018
   
   "The following letter will be presented to the United States Senate on Oct. 4. It will be updated as more signatures are received.
   
   Judicial temperament is one of the most important qualities of a judge. As the Congressional Research Service explains, a judge requires “a personality that is even-handed, unbiased, impartial, courteous yet firm, and dedicated to a process, not a result.” The concern for judicial temperament dates back to our founding; in Federalist 78, titled “Judges as Guardians of the Constitution,” Alexander Hamilton expressed the need for “the integrity and moderation of the judiciary.”
   
   https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 … etter.html

   replyreport
   1. 68

      JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      
      
      Breaking BIG *******: Developing NOW ****: Alarming: Former supreme court justice Stevens says essentially Brett's unacceptable demeanor, behavior and bad erratic temperament  which was on horrific display at the hearing, disqualifies Brett KavaNUT from this highly consequential nomination: Should he be impeached from his current position ??
      
      Essentially judge Stevens a republican who served on the supreme court, said Brett is NOT fit for the job: After Brett's hearing insanity where apparent mental breakdowns and uncomfortable tizzy fits of crying and what appeared to be uncontrollable outbursts of red faced anger laced with crazy right wing conspiracy delusions, I don't think anyone in their right mind needed a former respected supreme court judge to inform us of the obvious conclusion that Brett appears to be mentally and politically incapable of handling stress and judging cases in an impartial manner without injecting poisonous right wing conspiracy bias nonsense: But just for the record, judge Stevens has warned the senate against confirming him which should carry very heavy weight considering he has done the job:
      
      "Retired Justice John Paul Stevens Says Kavanaugh Is Not Fit for Supreme Court"
      
      https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/04/us/p … naugh.html

      replyreport
7. 68

   JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years ago

   Major BOMBSHELL *******: Breaking Big: MORE Troubling Developments: ABA re-evaluating Brett KavaNUT rating: "Brett Kavanaugh's fitness to serve on the Supreme Court is now in grave doubt.":
   
   " American Bar Association Reevaluating Kavanaugh's 'Well Qualified' Rating, Citing 'Temperament' Issues"
   
   "Brett Kavanaugh's fitness to serve on the Supreme Court is now in grave doubt."
   
   https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-polit … reexamined

   replyreport
8. 0

   Ed Fisherposted 5 years ago

   Hey Jake how about this guy ?
   

   replyreport