New SCOTUS Judge

[Dr. Keith]

But would you keep going to these parties?

No. I also didn't keep going to parties where people were snorting coke, but I didn't call the police on them. I also didn't keep going to parties where people were drunkenly trying to round up cattle from the back of pickup trucks, but I didn't call the police on them.

I was a kid, not a cop. I was probably breaking at least three laws at the time myself. I didn't need that to be exposed along the way.

 

[The_Animus]

Remember, we are taking the 80's here.
Rape cases were rarely brought to court.

It is perfectly understandable that a women or others wouldn't put their word against an entire group of boys who would all give each other an alibi.

So this argument is plain BS.

It's well known in sexual assault research that most incidents don't get reported for various legitimate reasons. Like anyone remotely knowledgeable about the topic knows this and yet the dumb "why didn't she report it" argument keeps getting brought up by people who seem immune to learning.

The whole "it was 30+ years ago and boys will be boys and shouldn't have their current life ruined because of a mistake so long ago" is also an awful argument. This is a lifetime appointment to one of the most important and powerful positions in government, not an application to McDonalds. And we like to believe in giving a second chance to someone who regrets their past actions and changes their behavior but in this case he's not even admitting he did it, let alone regrets it. Instead he calls his accusers liars.

I heard a theory that the reason republicans are going all in for Kavanaugh is because there is a case on the docket for SCOTUS that could potentially affect the ability to bring state criminal charges when charges can also apply federally because of double jeopardy issues. So the idea is ram him through, they rule against being able to bring state charges, and then Trump can use his pardon power and they become untouchable.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

"During the years 1981-82, I became aware of efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to spike the punch at house parties I attended with drugs and/or alcohol so as to cause girls to lose their inhibitions and their ability to say 'No'.

"I also witnessed efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to cause girls to become inebriated and disoriented so they could then be 'gang raped' in a side room or bedroom by a 'train' of numerous boys. I have a firm recollection of seeing boys lined up outside rooms at many of these parties waiting for their turn with the girl inside the room. These boys included Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh.

"In approximately 1982, I became the victim of one of these gang rapes where Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh were present."

-- The creepy porn lawyers new client, Julie Swetnick (Sept 25, 2018)

 

[LTC8K6]

No, he didn't.
The FBI investigated and told the Senate what they found. This is nothing like a security clearance investigation. As long as he is not suspected of a crime, there is no reason for the FBI to recommend him not becoming a Judge.
The fact that he is so dramatically in debt, had a drinking and gambling problem would most certainly disqualify high from a job with significant security concerns.

Kavanaugh is currently dramatically in debt?

I read that he paid off his debt to below the reporting level in 2017.

 

[LTC8K6]

"During the years 1981-82, I became aware of efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to spike the punch at house parties I attended with drugs and/or alcohol so as to cause girls to lose their inhibitions and their ability to say 'No'.

"I also witnessed efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to cause girls to become inebriated and disoriented so they could then be 'gang raped' in a side room or bedroom by a 'train' of numerous boys. I have a firm recollection of seeing boys lined up outside rooms at many of these parties waiting for their turn with the girl inside the room. These boys included Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh.

"In approximately 1982, I became the victim of one of these gang rapes where Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh were present."

-- The creepy porn lawyers new client, Julie Swetnick (Sept 25, 2018)

That's heavy for a 16-17 year old boy.

He must have been a holy terror by college.

 

[Dr. Keith]

No, he didn't.
The FBI investigated and told the Senate what they found. This is nothing like a security clearance investigation. As long as he is not suspected of a crime, there is no reason for the FBI to recommend him not becoming a Judge.
The fact that he is so dramatically in debt, had a drinking and gambling problem would most certainly disqualify him from a job with significant security concerns.

There is no pass/fail for this FBI investigation.

They don't grant clearance, they just inform the committee of their findings. I don't think they even make a recommendation.

Even if they found out that he was involved in the formation of a pizza based child rape ring, the senate could confirm him. And if they found out he was spotless the senate could decide not to confirm him.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Kavanaugh is currently dramatically in debt?

I read that he paid off his debt to below the reporting level in 2017.

Kavanaugh had a $60K-$200K credit card debit in 2017, which disappeared again.
But he still has a 900K mortgage on a $1.2million home ... which isn't great given how long he has been working.

 

[LTC8K6]

Well, hopefully some facts will come in soon instead of endless parades of unverifiable claims.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Jackie was the name of the woman whose false story about being gang raped at the University of Virginia was published in Rolling Stone.

Thanks, I recall that event now, and the thread.

Yes, this woman may have similar issues. A few hours in, it seems too early to tell.

 

[LTC8K6]

Kavanaugh had a $60K-$200K credit card debit in 2017, which disappeared again.
But he still has a 900K mortgage on a $1.2million home ... which isn't great given how long he has been working.

Good, I'm glad he's not dramatically in debt.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Good, I'm glad he's not dramatically in debt.

compared to the rest of the Supreme Court, he is a pauper.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Turn about is always fair play.

https://wrko.iheart.com/content/2018-09-26-family-friend-of-julie-swetnick-details-her-issues/

Swetnick is some sort of low level person who needs access to buildings to do a job, I think. Not really the "security clearance" you think of when you hear the term. IIRC, she's a temp or something like that. I think I read that somewhere.

Of course Kavanaugh has passed many FBI background checks, but that gets dismissed.

https://news.clearancejobs.com/2013/04/29/what-is-a-public-trust-position/

What is a “Public Trust Position”?
While many government jobs do not require a security clearance, certain sensitive positions are designated as “Public Trust Positions.”
Government employment requires hiring responsible people for judicious roles such as managing finances, overseeing processes, inspecting compliance, and protecting people and assets, among others. While many government jobs do not require a security clearance, certain sensitive positions—often ones for protection of national security—demand especially knowledgeable and responsible employees. Such positions are designated as “Public Trust Positions.”
...
Public Trust positions require persons with not only the right job skills, but a high degree of trustworthiness

Well, hopefully some facts will come in soon instead of endless parades of unverifiable claims.

I'm surprised, your recent posting show you to be big user of the " endless parades of unverifiable claims"

 

[LTC8K6]

compared to the rest of the Supreme Court, he is a pauper.

I guess that's true, but I don't see any glaring problems with debt.

His wife has a nice job and she's had some interesting jobs in the past. Her current salary is $66K a year.

 

[LTC8K6]

https://news.clearancejobs.com/2013/04/29/what-is-a-public-trust-position/

What is a “Public Trust Position”?
While many government jobs do not require a security clearance, certain sensitive positions are designated as “Public Trust Positions.”
Government employment requires hiring responsible people for judicious roles such as managing finances, overseeing processes, inspecting compliance, and protecting people and assets, among others. While many government jobs do not require a security clearance, certain sensitive positions—often ones for protection of national security—demand especially knowledgeable and responsible employees. Such positions are designated as “Public Trust Positions.”
...
Public Trust positions require persons with not only the right job skills, but a high degree of trustworthiness



I'm surprised, your recent posting show you to be big user of the " endless parades of unverifiable claims"

I don't think it matters. Her story is impossible, imo.

It will turn out to be made up, I believe.

But I have no problem with investigations of any sort, because I believe they will favor Kavanaugh.

How you investigate these claims, I really don't know, though.
I can't see how you'd ever tell what the truth was at this point in time.

 

[Belz...]

Her story is impossible, imo.

How so?

 

[Stacyhs]

Clearly you have no idea how outraged you should be. Get with the program!

I'll see if I can work up some retroactive outrage.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

That's heavy for a 16-17 year old boy.

He must have been a holy terror by college.

I don't think it matters. Her story is impossible, imo.

It will turn out to be made up, I believe.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news...rett-kavanaughs-college-years-deborah-ramirez

After seeing Judge’s denial, Elizabeth Rasor, who met Judge at Catholic University and was in a relationship with him for about three years, said that she felt morally obligated to challenge his account that “ ‘no horseplay’ took place at Georgetown Prep with women.” Rasor stressed that “under normal circumstances, I wouldn’t reveal information that was told in confidence,” but, she said, “I can’t stand by and watch him lie.” In an interview with The New Yorker, she said, “Mark told me a very different story.” Rasor recalled that Judge had told her ashamedly of an incident that involved him and other boys taking turns having sex with a drunk woman. Rasor said that Judge seemed to regard it as fully consensual. She said that Judge did not name others involved in the incident, and she has no knowledge that Kavanaugh participated. But Rasor was disturbed by the story and noted that it undercut Judge’s protestations about the sexual innocence of Georgetown Prep.

But yeah, it's all a made up smear campaign.

But I have no problem with investigations of any sort, because I believe they will favor Kavanaugh.

How you investigate these claims, I really don't know, though.
I can't see how you'd ever tell what the truth was at this point in time.

I wonder why Kavanaugh and his attorney don't support an investigation ?

I wonder why the senate doesn't support a short delay for an investigation ?

 

[Belz...]

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news...rett-kavanaughs-college-years-deborah-ramirez

After seeing Judge’s denial, Elizabeth Rasor, who met Judge at Catholic University and was in a relationship with him for about three years, said that she felt morally obligated to challenge his account that “ ‘no horseplay’ took place at Georgetown Prep with women.” Rasor stressed that “under normal circumstances, I wouldn’t reveal information that was told in confidence,” but, she said, “I can’t stand by and watch him lie.” In an interview with The New Yorker, she said, “Mark told me a very different story.” Rasor recalled that Judge had told her ashamedly of an incident that involved him and other boys taking turns having sex with a drunk woman. Rasor said that Judge seemed to regard it as fully consensual. She said that Judge did not name others involved in the incident, and she has no knowledge that Kavanaugh participated. But Rasor was disturbed by the story and noted that it undercut Judge’s protestations about the sexual innocence of Georgetown Prep.

But yeah, it's all a made up smear campaign.

Yeah but, she remembers it in 2018 so it doesn't count.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Christine Blasey Ford has faced similar levels of rumor mongering. Snopes has covered five of them so far...

All provably false.

Now it is Julie Swetnick's turn. All the nutheads and CT loons will go into overdrive to make up stories about her.

Not nutty, Deplorable. The rumormongers know full well that they are spreading lies, and their reasons for doing so are perfectly rational.

 

[Segnosaur]

But I have no problem with investigations of any sort...

But the Republicans (as well as some of the Kavanaugh and Trump apologists on this forum) do seem to have a problem with it.

because I believe they will favor Kavanaugh.

Then you have the question... why isn't Kavanaugh asking for an investigation. If he is truly innocent, if an investigation would favor him, he should be front and center demanding the FBI get in there and clear his name.

The fact that he isn't asking for the FBI to do so (yet at least one victim, Ford, has asked for an investigation) gives a little more credibility to her than him.

How you investigate these claims, I really don't know, though.

Well, for one you get the FBI to interview people. Those in the same social circles as Kavanaugh back in high school/college. Parents. Maybe even police or campus security who may have heard about "wild parties" even if nothing resulted in charges being laid.

Right now, we have a lot of people coming forward to support both sides... "I knew Kavanaugh and he would never do such a thing"/"I saw Kavanaugh kick a puppy dog". But for the most part, the people making the statements are self-selecting (i.e. people who may feel strongly about Kavanaugh for some reason), and/or may be compromised (e.g. people lying because they too were involved.) Get the FBI to interview not only the people who have already stated a position about Kavanaugh (those people may change their statement if they are talking to the FBI, as opposed to someone in the media), but also people who may have been in the same social circles but who HAVEN'T spoken out yet.

I can't see how you'd ever tell what the truth was at this point in time.

Again, its not a court of law. Its not some sort of scientific hypothesis to test. Its a job interview. It would be great if we had some sort of hard-core video proof, but in this situation, the preponderance of evidence should suffice.