• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Criminal Complaint Against Brett Kavanaugh File With The Department of Justice

I read the complaint on the link and it is 100% worthless crap, pure garbage.

1. It assured documents were "stolen" for the Democratic Party. There is exactly NOTHING even hinting any proof that theft occurred.

2. It does not provide ANY proof of who stole documents.

3. It does not even allege that Kavenaugh stole the documents.

4. It asserts the documents mentioned in an email to Kavenaugh refers to the "stolen" documents, providing NO proof of that assertion.

5. It then asserts without any proof that Kavenaugh knew the documents were stolen because the person sending the email asked the lawyer (Kavenaugh) for confidentiality - which comes automatically to a lawyer.

All in all, this added up to literally nothing. Just concocted drivel.
 
Fletch said:
They just had four days of hearings with Kavenaugh, why didnt they drill down on this then?
Click to expand...

Because this is 14 year old dead news, that's why.
 
TheRepublican said:
I don’t understand what the reason is for the criminal complaint against Mr. Kavanaugh? If we did this against Garland. The Democrats would come to his defense! In my opinion I think that the democrats are saying that the republicans got a seat but the other seven is ours. I’m sorry but since when the Supreme Court became a political issue?
Click to expand...

Exhibit A: the decision to stop the recount and give the presidency to W.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Very much the wrong thread for your nonsense.... start your own thread please. :doh
Click to expand...



You stated or alluded to why hillary lost. I corrected you.

Study the links, it's reality, and lawsuits are occurring because of it, there was a bill before congress on it, etc.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Really?
Click to expand...

Yes, my point is that sadly, the Supreme Court has become a political thing since the unacceptance of Brown v Board of Education and the Impeach Earl Warren movement. One could go back to FDR’s court packing attempts.
 
Nickyjo said:
Exhibit A: the decision to stop the recount and give the presidency to W.
Click to expand...

That election was over before SCOTUS got involved. I believe SCOTUS even said as much. I could be wrong.
 
Nickyjo said:
Yes, my point is that sadly, the Supreme Court has become a political thing since the unacceptance of Brown v Board of Education and the Impeach Earl Warren movement. One could go back to FDR’s court packing attempts.
Click to expand...

I’d have to agree. Although I think if we dig and are honest, they became political almost from the beginning in their own.

I’d heard a suggestion of randomly pulling every year from the circuit courts for SCOTUS. Not bad. Maybe an advantage to that over term limits.
 
I wrote some of the stolen memos Brett Kavanaugh lied to the Senate about

No, Kavanaugh should be removed because he was repeatedly asked under oath as part of his 2004 and 2006 confirmation hearings for his position on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit about whether he had received such information from Miranda, and each time he falsely denied it.

For example, in 2004, Sen. Orrin Hatch asked him directly if he received “any documents that appeared to you to have been drafted or prepared by Democratic staff members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.” Kavanaugh responded, unequivocally, “No.”

In 2006, Sen. Ted Kennedy asked him if he had any regrets about how he treated documents he had received from Miranda that he later learned were stolen. Kavanaugh rejected the premise of the question, restating that he never even saw one of those documents.
Click to expand...
 
joko104 said:
Because this is 14 year old dead news, that's why.
Click to expand...

And they waited until after the hearings were over so that Kavenaugh would not have the opportunity to defend himself publicly against the charges. Democrats will stop at nothing to destroy the man.
 
Fletch said:
And they waited until after the hearings were over so that Kavenaugh would not have the opportunity to defend himself publicly against the charges. Democrats will stop at nothing to destroy the man.
Click to expand...

Such as the 42,000 repub docs dumped at 3:00 AM just before they were to be used!
 
From the following:


Leahy says Kavanaugh was ‘not truthful’ about Democratic documents


the committee released a number of previously undisclosed emails that Leahy said raised new questions about Kavanaugh’s knowledge that the documents were improperly taken.

In a July 28, 2002, email, Miranda wrote Kavanaugh that Leahy’s staff has distributed a confidential letter to Democratic staffers, and then described the contents of the letter.



An email written by Miranda on March 18, 2003, and copied to Kavanaugh, had the subject line was “for use and not distribution.” Miranda wrote that “Dem staffers say that they have confidential information,” and he then listed “points they make.” Leahy said the points came from a draft of a letter written by his office. “We have every reason to believe that was taken,” Leahy said.

Separately, an email written to Kavanaugh by a then-staffer to the Republican leadership, Barbara Ledeen, had the subject line “spying.” Ledeen wrote that “I have a friend who is a mole for us on the left,” and described information she had learned about spending plans by liberal groups on judicial nominations. “It is important to note that IF we have a nominee, we need to ZIP THAT PERSON RIGHT THROUGH THE PROCESS....WE CANNOT BEAT 20 MILLION DOLLARS,” Ledeen wrote on June 5, 2003.

Kavanaugh forwarded the message to his boss, Counsel Alberto Gonzales, and others, writing, “interesting Ledeen email …”

Ledeen, who now serves as a Republican staffer on the committee, did not respond to a request for comment.

Leahy cited the “spying” email during the hearing, asking Kavanaugh, “None of this raised a red flag with you?”

“It did not, Senator,” Kavanaugh said. “People have friends across the aisle who they talk to — at least this was my experience back then; maybe it’s changed.”
Click to expand...

Read more:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.8928c012d463
 
Kavanaugh's position under Bush was similar to an information liaison between the President's office, and all the information that headed to the president. He wrote none of those documents, but rather was more like a secretary, who opens the mail, and organizes it, so the boss can review it efficiently. This entire scam is misleading and is like blaming a secretary for handling the cable bill, the boss forgot to pay.

The Democrats cannot help but lie and run scams, since it is part of their crooked nature, This is why Trump was elected in the first place; drain the swamp of the liars and crooks. Harry Reid opened the door for a simple majority to nominate Cavanaugh, which is about to happen. Nobody buys Democrat scams any more.
 
Fletch said:
And they waited until after the hearings were over so that Kavenaugh would not have the opportunity to defend himself publicly against the charges. Democrats will stop at nothing to destroy the man.
Click to expand...

Fletch, see how you have to reassure yourself with silly narratives. Why isn't it possible that Kavanaugh did commit perjury? he is a conservative. When you go through life trying to make reality fit your ideology, you're just going to lie at some point.

Newly released emails show that while he was working to move through President George W. Bush’s judicial nominees in the early 2000s, Kavanaugh received confidential memos, letters, and talking points of Democratic staffers stolen by GOP Senate aide Manuel Miranda. That includes research and talking points Miranda stole from the Senate server after I had written them for the Senate Judiciary Committee as the chief counsel for nominations for the minority.

Receiving those memos and letters alone is not an impeachable offense.

No, Kavanaugh should be removed because he was repeatedly asked under oath as part of his 2004 and 2006 confirmation hearings for his position on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit about whether he had received such information from Miranda, and each time he falsely denied it.

For example, in 2004, Sen. Orrin Hatch asked him directly if he received “any documents that appeared to you to have been drafted or prepared by Democratic staff members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.” Kavanaugh responded, unequivocally, “No.”
In 2006, Sen. Ted Kennedy asked him if he had any regrets about how he treated documents he had received from Miranda that he later learned were stolen. Kavanaugh rejected the premise of the question, restating that he never even saw one of those documents.


Back then the senators did not have the emails that they have now, showing that Miranda sent Kavanaugh numerous documents containing what was plainly research by Democrats. Some of those emails went so far as to warn Kavanaugh not to distribute the Democratic talking points he was being given. If these were documents shared from the Democratic side of the aisle as part of normal business, as Kavanaugh claimed to have believed in his most recent testimony, why would they be labeled “not [for] distribution”? And why would we share our precise strategy to fight controversial Republican nominations with the Republicans we were fighting?

https://slate.com/news-and-politics...r-lying-during-his-confirmation-hearings.html
 
Linc said:
Such as the 42,000 repub docs dumped at 3:00 AM just before they were to be used!
Click to expand...

Waaaa. Cry me a river, dude. The dems made up their minds to oppose whoever Trump nominated. This demand for documents is just more liberal bull*** and you know it. If there was anything to this story Senator Spartacus or one of the other morons would have raised it.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Just another democratic game of trying to delay...... Won't work! If it was anything other than BS it would have been front and center at the hearings!
Thick headed people don't understand Kavenaugh is the next Justice of the Supreme court. ;)
Click to expand...

Theuy understand it. They are just throwing a temper tantrum because the cant get their way.
 
joko104 said:
I read the complaint on the link and it is 100% worthless crap, pure garbage.

1. It assured documents were "stolen" for the Democratic Party. There is exactly NOTHING even hinting any proof that theft occurred.
Click to expand...

Er uh joko, there was a investigation by the senate Sargent at Arms. He determined the files were indeed stolen.

Two former Republican staffers on the Senate Judiciary Committee may have broken the law when they downloaded thousands of computer files with information about Democratic strategies in the partisan tug-of-war over judicial nominations, according to the results of an investigation by the Senate sergeant-at-arms released Thursday.

Some committee Democrats are calling for a special counsel to investigate the breach, and its Republican chairman, Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, who employed the staffers, said "odds are" that the matter may be referred to prosecutors.
"I am mortified that this improper, unethical and simply unacceptable breach of confidential files occurred," Hatch said. "There is no excuse to justify these improper actions."

CNN.com - Former Senate staffers faulted in memo leaks - Mar. 5, 2004

Miranda resigned and that ended the matter but they were stolen. I guess ultra conservative Hatch is part of the "deep state".
 
Fletch said:
Waaaa. Cry me a river, dude. The dems made up their minds to oppose whoever Trump nominated. This demand for documents is just more liberal bull*** and you know it. If there was anything to this story Senator Spartacus or one of the other morons would have raised it.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Mind boggling how this wasn't brought during the Senate hearings. Something doesn't pass the smell test...
 
Jack Fabulous said:
Exactly. Mind boggling how this wasn't brought during the Senate hearings. Something doesn't pass the smell test...
Click to expand...

Funny how on the day AFTER the hearings end, a lawsuit is filed with all these accusations.
 
OscarLevant said:
You guys steal the seat that rightfully belonged to Merrick Garland and you expect Democrats to lay down and play dead?

What goes around comes around baby.

You want war you got it
Click to expand...

Elections have concequences. Garland wasn't entitled to be appointed to the court. The Republicans were in power, they said no. Live with it. Figure out how to win some elections.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom