Supreme Court Nominee #2

[fannneee]

From same link.



Funding

Media Matters has a policy of not comprehensively listing donors. In 2010, six years after the Democracy Alliance initially endorsed MMfA, financier George Soros — a founding and continuing member of the Alliance — announced that he was donating $1 million to MMfA.

Red Herring. This has nothing to do witht the fact that Brock and Kavanaugh ran in the same extreme right wing circles that were part of the Arkansas Project and other smears funded by Sciafe.

 

[Mica]

Lots of info in this article. Sorry can’t post snippets. Going out and running late.


White House limits scope of the FBI’s Kavanaugh investigation

 

[Jax49]

Lots of info in this article. Sorry can’t post snippets. Going out and running late.


White House limits scope of the FBI’s Kavanaugh investigation

Anyone surprised???

 

[fannneee]

Plus he has been open and honest about drinking beer in high school and beyond. He certainly hasn't tried to hide anything.

Jmo

"Updated: Sep 25 2018 12:38PM PDT

SAN MATEO, Calif. - Brett Kavanaugh's ex-freshman roommate at Yale issued a written statement on Tuesday, after a woman in a New Yorker article accused the Supreme Court nominee of pulling down his pants 35 years ago and thrusting himself in her face."

"But Roche did say that Kavanaugh was a "heavy drinker" at the time, and he became "aggressive and belligerent."

Former roommate says Kavanaugh was 'belligerent when he was very drunk'

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Anyone surprised???

No, I am not surprised. I understood that the WH authorized FBI investigation would be limited in scope and duration.

 

[Hope4More]

Anyone surprised???

No. But the WH, not the FBi, deciding who CAN be interviewed, and putting K's drinking at Yale offlimits (drinking 100% relevant to Ramirez's allegations), and deciding ahead of time to make off limits questions directly related to what Flake & the Senate agreed should be investigated = AN ILLEGITIMATE INVESTIGATION.

The fact that the WH has put those precise limitations on the investigation, counter to what Senate REPUBLICANS agreed to, makes it clear they believe unfavorable info is likely to be found.

The fig leaf of the initial one week, limited investigation barely concealed the rot underneath this process, but this? If Senate Republicans don't object (hahahahahahaha), that fig leaf has been shredded, and the chance to protect the Court's legitimacy destroyed.

 

[Hope4More]

No, I am not surprised. I understood that the WH authorized FBI investigation would be limited in scope and duration.

Senators understood that the FBI, not the WH would decide who & what & how to investigate, with just 2 limitations: could last no more than a week, and only credible allegations already on the table could be investigated. That's it.

 

[Spellbound]

NR has been linked many time.
Because it’s right leaning makes it not allowed?

I don't know, left or right shouldn't matter..

I questioned it because the Media Bias Fact Checker page does not give either a very good reliability rating if you read the whole reports. The descriptions for the sites make me question whether WS allows them. Do you know if they are allowable WS links? It's hard to keep track of what is OK and what is not, so I just asked as I thought you would know better than me. If you don't know then I can ask mods

 

[Elley Mae]

Senators understood that the FBI, not the WH would decide who & what & how to investigate, with just 2 limitations: could last no more than a week, and only credible allegations already on the table could be investigated. That's it.

Makes sense to me.

 

[Elley Mae]

I don't know, left or right shouldn't matter..

I questioned it because the Media Bias Fact Checker page does not give either a very good reliability rating if you read the whole reports. The descriptions for the sites make me question whether WS allows them. Do you know if they are allowable WS links? It's hard to keep track of what is OK and what is not, so I just asked as I thought you would know better than me. If you don't know then I can ask mods

I’ve used it many times.

 

[mickey2942]

Trump was just on tv. I think he has jumped ship. He is still backing Kavanaugh, barely. He supports the FBI investigation now.

He is one step from throwing his buddy under the bus. Gotta love a guy who is that flexible

 

[Hope4More]

Makes sense to me.

That's not what will be happening, though. The WH just decided to dictate how the investigation will be conducted, not the FBI.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Senators understood that the FBI, not the WH would decide who & what & how to investigate, with just 2 limitations: could last no more than a week, and only credible allegations already on the table could be investigated. That's it.

I am concerned about the investigation not including BK's drinking habits at Yale. There must be something there that needs to be concealed. Those who have nothing to hide, hide nothing...

 

[Elley Mae]

Also Saturday, White House spokesman Raj Shah said: “The scope and duration has been set by the Senate. The White House is letting the FBI agents do what they are trained to do.”

FBI reaches out to second woman who has accused Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct

 

[neesaki]

Most notably, if the July 1 party were the event at which Ford claims she was assaulted, what about Timmy, Tom, Bernie, and Squi? They are, respectively, Kavanaugh high school friends Tim Gaudette, Tom Kane, Bernie McCarthy, and Chris Garrett. What might they know about what took place?

Is July 1, 1982 party key to Christine Ford's allegation against Brett Kavanaugh?

If the July 1 party were the event in question, the presence of Garrett would be especially noteworthy. In her testimony, Ford said she was going out with Garrett at that time in the summer of 1982. Today, she remembers him well. When Kavanaugh supporter Ed Whalen came up with a theory of mistaken identity, suggesting without evidence that Garrett, and not Kavanaugh, attacked Ford, Ford quickly said that there was no way she would mistake the two, and that she knew without doubt that Kavanaugh, not Garrett, was her attacker.

Snip

Rachel Mitchell, the prosecutor Republicans hired to question Ford, asked Ford about Garrett. Ford was willing to talk, but she refused even to say Garrett's name.

Snip

"Was this person the only common link between you and Judge Kavanaugh?" Mitchell asked.

"He's the only one that I would be able to name right now — that I would like to not name, but you know who I mean."

Since they were dating could it make sense that he’s the one who drove her to the party?

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

I just rewatched his questioning re the yearbook by Sen. Whitehouse. Amazing...

Sen. Whitehouse questions Kavanaugh about his yearbook page

Thanks for the link.

Just watched it again, too, several times. I think Kavanaugh is snide throughout this interaction. However, if you listen carefully his words and how he uses them, he's actually making excuses for the behavior he's attempting to deny, imo.

Whiteside: Let's look at "Beach Week Ralph Club biggest contributor." What does the word "ralph" mean in that image?
Kavanaugh: Uh, that probably refers purely to throwing up. I'm known to have a weak stomach and I always have. In fact, last time I was here you asked me about having catsup on spaghetti — I always have had a weak stomach. ..."

Whiteside: I don't know that I asked about catsup on spaghetti.
Kavanaugh: You didn't. Someone did. And —

Whiteside: OK
Kavanaugh: And — this is well known, anyone who knows me — like these people behind me — and who have known me my whole life — no (shakes head no, then nods yes) you know, I've got a weak stomach, whether it's with beer or spicy food or anything.​

What's odd is that, leading up to this interaction, Whiteside didn't even ask him about drinking beer, or whether Kavanaugh earned the nickname from drinking. But at the end, he admits beer contributed to his nickname.

In my opinion, his snide demeanor strongly implies:

1. He's aware that he's talking sideways and around the questions
2. He's (at times) pleased when he does it
3. He's done what he's denying
4. He doesn't see anything wrong the behavior
5. He's concealing something, because he's "leaking" unsolicited facts
6. He is quite accustomed to the "aw, guys will be guys, I'm a good guy" line of wriggling out of personal accountability​

 

[human]

School yearbooks from her HS years that have been removed from the web.

The yearbook title is SCRIBE. The relevant issues are SCRIBE 82, SCRIBE 83 and SCRIBE 84, corresponding to Blasey’s sophomore, junior and senior years, when she and her classmates (and Kavanaugh) were 15-17 year old juveniles.

And what is relevant? That the girls were wild? Does that fit in with asking what a victim was wearing or if she was promiscuous? Does that entitle someone to be sexually assaulted?

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Bumping link and debunked rumors:

Debunking 5 (More) Viral Rumors About Kavanaugh’s Accusers

Claim: Ms. Ramirez has ties to the liberal megadonor George Soros.
Verdict: False.
This week, two distinct — but equally false — rumors spread about links between Judge Kavanaugh’s accusers and George Soros, the liberal billionaire and Democratic megadonor. (Mr. Soros makes frequent appearances in internet conspiracy theories.)

The first claim was that Ms. Ramirez, who lives in Colorado, had received a fellowship in 2013 from the Open Society Foundations, a philanthropic organization started by Mr. Soros. In fact, a different Deborah Ramirez — a law professor at Northeastern University in Boston — received a grant from the organization.

Claim: Dr. Blasey was photographed with Mr. Soros at a public event.

Verdict: False.
The woman in the photograph with Mr. Soros is Lyudmyla Kozlovska, a Ukranian human rights activist, according to Snopes, the fact-checking website.


Claim: Dr. Blasey’s lawyer was photographed with Hillary Clinton at a 2016 fund-raiser.

Verdict: False.
The woman pictured with Ms. Clinton is Barbara Kinney, a photographer who traveled with Ms. Clinton during the campaign.


Claim: The lawyer Michael Avenatti was duped by a 4chan hoax into falsely bringing sexual assault accusations against Judge Kavanaugh.

Verdict: Unfounded.
No evidence corroborating the 4chan prank rumors has emerged.


Claim: Dr. Blasey works for a pharmaceutical company that makes “abortion pills,” and she is bringing accusations against Judge Kavanaugh to preserve abortion rights and protect her firm’s profits.

Verdict: Mostly false.
One of the more elaborate misinformation campaigns against Dr. Blasey involves claims that she worked for a pharmaceutical company that made abortifacient drugs. Because of these ties, the claims say, she was financially motivated to keep Judge Kavanaugh — who abortion-rights advocates worry would reverse Roe v. Wade and end legalized abortion in the United States — off the Supreme Court.

Dr. Blasey did, in fact, work as the director of biostatistics for Corcept Therapeutics. And mifepristone can, in fact, be prescribed in combination with another drug, misoprostol, to terminate pregnancies.
...

But Korlym, the drug made by Corcept Therapeutics, was developed to treat Cushing’s syndrome, a rare, potentially deadly condition that causes the body to produce excess cortisol.
...

In addition, there is no evidence that Dr. Blasey ever researched the drug’s use in terminating pregnancies, or has anything to gain financially from court rulings on abortions.
​

 

[human]

Teenage drinking may lead to bad choices as an adult

https://www.webmd.com/mental-health...21/teen-drinking-tied-to-bad-choices-as-adult

 

[human]

Teen drinking and the brain

Neurology Now: Buzz Kill: How does alcohol affect the teenage brain? | American Academy of Neurology®