09.27.2018 06:47 PM

I thought Judge Kavanaugh sounded like a guilty man

But don’t take my word for it. Check out the expressions on the faces of his mother and his wife.


  1. Matt says:

    Ford – I’m 100% sure Kavanaugh did it.

    Kavanaugh – I’m 100% sure I did not do it.

    Me – I’m 100% sure someone just lied under oath.

    I didn’t see Ford’s testimony so I can’t speak to whether she seemed credible or not, though the consensus seems to be she was.

    From the Kavanaugh testimony I did see the most telling part was the Democratic Senator kept pshing him about asking for an FBI investigation and Kavanaugh just sat there in silence for what seemed like 10 seconds.

    • whyshouldIsellyourwheat says:

      You are incorrect. Both can be telling the truth as they now believe it to be.

      Childhood trauma, PTSD, memory transference…look it up.

  2. Mike Jeffries says:

    What thinking brought on that thought Warren? Coming forward at that late date by Senator Feintein WITHOUT collaborating evidence is plain nuts. It SO smells of dirty, very dirty politics that undermines their credibility! They will pay at the polls is what I think! The judge is angry and he has a lot to be angry about.

  3. James Smith says:

    My wife & I are Boomers so we have metaphors that are, well, old. She wasn’t really following this goat rodeo & so she was convinced that the women coming forward were suspect.
    That is until she watched much of the hearing today. This evening she told me about it and said “He’s a drip. He’s Eddy Haskell when he’s been caught in a lie”.

  4. Jack says:

    That photo is America right now.

    Brett Kavanaugh was a petulant, entitled liar who clearly doesn’t possess the temperament or credibility to be on the SCOTUS.

    He’s toxic now and Republicans would be incredibly stupid (yet true to form) to confirm this guy.

  5. Gilbert says:

    Politics is so ugly.

  6. Angel Martin says:

    Looks like it’s a done deal. Final vote Tues.


    A fitting end for Dems on this travesty is that they are now fighting amongst themselves over who leaked the Ford letter. Appropriate that they finish how they start.

    • James Smith says:

      Curious. Do you think this person is fit to sit in judgement? Seems both the US bar association & the US Jesuits have withdrawn their support for this pipsqueek.

  7. Art says:

    What did people think he would say, “yes I did it, guilty as charged”. Of course he denied it. He had to. Dr. Ford had nothing to gain by lying. In fact, her life is a nightmare because of this. This guy is as guilty as sin.

  8. pierre lawayne says:

    Hell hath no fury like that of a scorned Kavanaugh.

  9. Sean says:

    I don’t have any patience for a lawyer who a) advised the Bush WH re. terror laws and b) accepted a nomination from the Trump WH. Even if the accuser is lying, he is getting his own medicine and exactly what he deserves. F%&k Kavanaugh.

    • The Doctor says:

      Plus the hypocrisy is screaming when one considers that he was arguably the most vicious and partisan member of the whole Ken Starr team.

    • Steve T says:

      Ah… now I get it. I suppose we should apply that same criteria to hearings on other serious allegations like murder?

      Your honor, we have no evidence and no witnesses. But we have a sympathetic accusor, and we know that murder is a bad thing we need to stop. So let’s make an example of this guy, OK? Plus, really, look at the him. His type just deserve to be found guilty. He is just someone you want to hate, right?

      Justice schmustish. I guess we didn’t learn anything from the hundreds of black men unjustly found guilty of crimes, simply because their accusors were sympathetic, and there was a need to feel good about cracking down on murder.

      • Sean says:


        Kavanaugh himself has demonstrated through his career that he doesn’t give a f&%k about due process or evidence. Anyone who was a central player of the GWB war on terror has no business at all complaining about a lack of due process. It is hypocrisy in its purest form.

        • Steve T says:

          So now we evaluate defendants using their own foibles as the benchmark, rather than the rule of law?

          By that measure, those guilty of murder have no regard for human life, so we should execute them. Those guilty of theft have no regard for personal property, so we should seize all their belongings.

          Reap what you sow sounds good in principle, but it isn’t the basis of a proper justice system.

          • Peter says:

            Don’t forget the look on his mother’s face and his peppier background. Who needs evidence when you have those?

    • Angel Martin says:

      “Even if the accuser is lying, he is getting his own medicine and exactly what he deserves.”

      We are now at the point, similar to the Dreyfus Affair, when the anti-Dreyfusards praised the “Patriotic Fake”.

  10. Al in Cranbrook says:

    Welcome to the 21 century version of a “lynch mob”, empowered by social media, and exploited by the left for every last iota that can be squeezed out of it. Most disgusting thing I have ever witnessed in politics in all my 60 plus years. The Democrats have made an absolute mockery of law, of rights, and of everything decent for which America has stood tall. Appalling and shameless hardly begins to describe this farce!

  11. Al in Cranbrook says:

    Damned straight I am! The Democrats used this woman for their own ends, pure and simple. This could have been looked into the moment Feinstein received the information, but instead that sat on it until the very last minute to make a public spectacle out of her in order to waylay the entire process until the midterms are over and they hopefully pick up enough to control the either the house or the senate and block this and any further nominations. Lindsey Graham nailed it all down in no uncertain terms, he was fantastic!
    In the meantime the usual suspects (meaning fanatics) of the left went to work to “lynch” Kavenaugh by the same means they have employed countless time already over the last decade. A allegation, you’re guilty, you’re finished! In the 1800s they strung people up and killed them. No trial, no self defense, game over. In the 21st century, via social media they destroy peoples’ very lives, and their family’s, no trial, no defense, you’re guilty, you might as well be dead!
    What an unholy disgrace!!!
    Looking at the cast of Democrat collection of activists, socialist Marxists, and elitist snots lining up in this election, I fear for America! They scare the hell out of me!!!
    If there’s an ounce of justice left in the democratic process, the Dems will slaughtered in the midterms, as they so richly deserve!

  12. Fred from BC says:


    So, to review:

    She doesn’t know where it happened.

    She doesn’t know when it happened.

    She didn’t tell anyone about it, either at the time or for the next 30-something years afterward.

    Everyone whom she claims was a witness to the event denies knowing anything about it.

    So what am I missing here? What specifically makes this person believable? I see nothing credible here at all, just more of the same tired old smear tactics that the Democrats have been using every since they lost the election.

    If anyone here knows any actual journalists, maybe they could be asked these four questions I came across:

    1) Do you have any actual verification or evidence that any of these sexual assault stories is true?

    2) Should networks and other media outlets endlessly report stories when there is no actual evidence that they are true?

    3) Should people be considered innocent until proven guilty or guilty until they prove their innocence (which is almost impossible after 35 years)?

    4) Is it good, fair, or factual reporting when the media seek to destroy a person, a family, and their livelihood because they don’t like their political views?

    • doconnor says:

      It is, of course, very common for victims of sexual assault not to tell anyone, but she did tell her therapist 7 years ago, which makes it believable.

      Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is required for criminal sanctions. It is not required for civil cases, job interviews or person opinion.

      • Fred from BC says:

        “but she did tell her therapist 7 years ago, which makes it believable. ”

        She lied (again) about the number of people involved, and never identified any of them as being Kavanaugh.

        “Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is required for criminal sanctions.

        Unsubstantiated allegations are not proof in any court.

  13. Art says:

    What the heck are these two BCers smoking? Fred and Al. Sorry Warren if I’m off limits here but these two are a piece of work. Both frothing at the mouth ala Lindsay Graham.

  14. Al in Cranbrook says:

    I’m “far out there”???
    The left posted the addresses of Lindsey Graham and others on Twitter, otherwise known as “doxing”…look it up! Ted Cruz, Sarah Sanders, their families, and others, harassed in public restaurants! Leftists yelling and screaming, even profanity, at public hearings! Threats against family members! Even death threats! “Virtue signalling” taken to the level of sport! Universities trashed by gangs of thugs in black masks over a “conservative” speaking event! Violence bordering on outright terrorism in the streets! Unabashed racism against “old white men”! Antifa behavior the very definition of fascism!
    And you think I’m “far out there”??????
    Yep, I’ll bet you do.

    • Robert White says:

      Al, when you reach the age of being like those old bastard Muppets in the balcony your perceptual reality becomes slightly blurry like you are wearing Coke bottle glasses and cannot see very well or think clearly due to central nervous system atrophy and possibly dementia from watching too much Right-wing commentary on mainstream TV.

      Watching FOX News and reading Breitbart drivel makes you very far out there to be sure.

      And Sarah Sanders has a genital grabbing misogynist creep for an employer so it seems reasonable to boo her out of the public commons whenever possible.

      Hopefully some day she will resign in disgust.


    • Art says:

      Doxing was made popular by right wing blogs. I don’t suppose you had a problem with it then. Probably figured the doxee deserved it.

  15. Robert White says:

    Kananaugh is 100% guilty as charged, but so was Clarence Thomas and he was ushered onto the bench faster than they could turn the channel away from Anita Hill’s testimony. The same thing will occur here if the Justice Clarence Thomas vetting is any indication with respect to behaviour of the administration that investigated Anita Hill’s testimony in the past. Behaviourism is such that past behaviour is the best predictor of future behaviour and as such we can expect the same behaviour once again.

    The FBI has had ample opportunity to initiate an investigation thus far yet they have done no investigative work to date. Frankly, Ford has now asked the FBI to investigate and as I see it the FBI has to oblige the request because crimes of a sexual nature are not statute barred and everyone knows it too.

    I hope Kavanaugh gets turfed but because of Clarence Thomas I kind of doubt he will be.


  16. Nicole says:

    This is tiresome. Stop talking about due process for a judicial hearing where the test is determining if the person has the proper judicial temperament to be on the Supreme Court. He’s not charged with a crime. He is just being held to account for his actions and it’s a job interview so they are looking for an exceptional person, not a grown up entitled frat boy. There are plenty of other candidates who are conservative and don’t have this problematic and most importantly unrepentant history. Mr Catholic has not demonstrated one iota of humility or repentance which sounds more like a Pharisee than a true follower of Christ. But I digress. Dr. Ford provided a credible account of what happened that would be believed by an reasonable jury, if this was a trial. Her testimony is evidence and under cross examination she held up quite well. In response he went on about how he likes beer but yet never drank so much that he blacked out. His own calendar provided evidence about the weekday parties he claims to have never attended. Inconsistencies were abundant in his evidence. His ranting about the left and the Clintons further confirmed that he will never be neutral and it’s disturbing that a member of the bench sounds like someone posting in a q anon comment section. He utterly failed this job interview and his behaviour toward the democratic senators, especially Klobuchar would have landed him a contempt charge in a real court.

    As for all the men posting here and their faux outrage about due process, just talk and listen to women. You have no idea what they have lived through. Many women have experienced assault and almost all women have faced harassment of some form. That is the epidemic going on here. Women often don’t talk about it because of the hostile environment and reading the posts here would certainly intimidate many to just keep quiet. Dr. Blasey Ford’s testimony resonated with many women around the world. And it felt true because it was similar to an experience many have lived, if not worse. This is bigger than just this hearing and many men need to shut up and listen. Talk to real life women and your eyes will be opened. Women need allies in stopping the powerful from abusing them. This goes beyond partisan lines and should appeal to the basic humanity of all.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *