It’s worth noting that Rachel Mitchell didn’t do that much except ask the “pink” questions. And yet she expressed an opinion about the viability of the case, based on her “expertise.”
That’s all very well, but of course the point of this was not to determine whether or not Kavanaugh could be prosecuted. (Not that the right will ever let go of pretending that it was.)
A couple of random thoughts that have been gelling in my mind:
In light of what we now know of Brett Kavanaugh’s character, I now realize in retrospect that we should have been more tipped off by the effusive praise that he gave to Trump. I remember being irked by it somewhat at the time, but now just listening to it again I realize has sickening it was. It really wasn’t necessary for him to say more than that he greatly appreciated the honor of being nominated. I mean, he was either lying through his teeth or he is just totally lacking in all judgment to throw this effusive praise onto Trump.
Another thing about the whole conspiracy theory crap he spouted on Thursday: Besides it being totally lacking in personal responsibility (something that conservatives seem to believe applies to poor Black folks who make mistakes in their adolescence and early adulthood but apparently not to entitled rich White folks), at least if you are going to identify the political influences of your opponents, you should (especially as a judge) be able to show some ability to actually understand their arguments and motivations. No, it is not just about anger over the election, it is about anger over the way Trump has behaved both during the campaign and in office…And, for heaven’s sake, you have to at least mention the elephant in the room, which is Merrick Garland. There is considerable anger over that, and I think, justifiable anger.
Basically, this guy has been showing us again and again how completely unfit he is for the position that he has been nominated for, even independent of whether or not he sexually assaulted women.
Now take the belligerent temperament we’ve seen on display, the drinking problem that is quite apparent, the gambling (nobody gets “aggressive” about a game of dice if there is no money on the line) that seems very likely and the debts that have mysteriously disappeared and and what should be tinfoil hat territory suddenly enters the realm of, at least, the plausible.
Even if, in fact, Christine Blasey Ford is mistaken in her recollection, Kavanaugh is totally unsuited to being a Supreme Court justice. He is an absolutely shameless liar, and his partisan ranting means he can never be trusted to fairly judge anything involving a Democrat. And I’m leaving out the things I suspect but can’t prove.
Do you believe RBG can be trusted to fairly judge anything involving President Trump?
4chan strikes again.
The real reason Christine Ford wanted a second front door to their home wasn’t for claustrophobia but because she had created an illegal rental unit.
Mic drop! You own all the libs.
Wow, lots of info there that looks like Ford lied under oath.
Really? Could you maybe dig out the most convincing nugget and share it with the rest of us?
I’ll work on a longer post trying to detail it later.
ShE IsN’t TrYiNg tO gEt CoNfIrMeD aS a JuDgE. Just saying.
I can’t wait.
A cursory glance, this seems to be the most curse-worthy.
(Is this the first time 4 chan has been offered as a citation? Oh, tempura! Oh, morays!…)
4chan=reliable. Hmmm?
The last time you quoted 4chan in this thread it turned out to be a load of utter horseshit.
If this is true, then holy fuck her lawyers should be shot. Not debarred. Shot.
This would be some unbelievable level of fuck up. This would violate the most basic preparation process.
If true. If! Which is why I can’t believe it to be accurate.