Christian Louboutin Multicolor Discodeporte 100 Pumps Patent Resille Multi Heels Pumps 100 349dfc

Christian Louboutin Multicolor Discodeporte 100 Pumps Patent Resille Multi Heels Pumps 100 349dfc

Christian Louboutin Multicolor Discodeporte 100 Pumps Patent Resille Multi Heels Pumps 100 349dfc

Dark Blue Multi Colored Celebrity Pumps,

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh defended himself in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal. He says you can trust him to be impartial. Did he undo the damage he did during his hearing last week?

Just a reminder: the purpose of this blog is to reveal what’s really going on with written communications. I’m not here to argue Kavanaugh’s credentials or how senators decide how to vote. The question I’ll address is more specific: did his op-ed do what it was intended to do?

Fendi Gold Brown Metallic Leather Slingback Hidden Platform Pumps,Stuart Weitzman Black Fringelica Fringe Ankle Strap Sandals - Pumps,Christian Louboutin Multicolor Winter Trash PumpsRoberto Cavalli Multi Colors 12335 Pumps,Christian Louboutin Blue Pigalle Follies 100 Egyptian Suede Heel 37.5 PumpsChristian Louboutin Begonia (Pink) Pigalle Follies 100 Patent Leather Pumps,Christian Louboutin Etincelle Sharpeta 100 Suede Pumps,Stuart Weitzman Black Sheer Evening Pumps,Stuart Weitzman Nude Style Name: "Diplille" Adobe Aniline Pumps,Jimmy Choo Black Kid Leather Slingback PumpsChristian Louboutin Black Miss Ellen 100mm Suede A770 Pumps,Brian Atwood Purple Maniac Suede Platform Pumps,Manolo Blahnik Tortoise Bb 105mm PumpsLinea Paolo Pink Fuchsia Slingbacks PumpsChristian Louboutin Beige Suede Embellishment Bollywood Peep Toe Platform Pumps,Christian Louboutin Nude New Pyramidame Patent 38.5 Pumps,Miu Miu Black and Red Peep Toe Suede Pumps,Nicholas Kirkwood Sliver Prism Metallic Pumps,Just Cavalli Brown Calf Hear Burgundy Pumps,New Made In Italy Leather Snakeskin Trim PumpsChristian Louboutin Nude Lady Lynch 120 Pumps,Dior Beige Cannage Stitched Patent Leather Peep Pumps,Christian Louboutin Purple Classic Sharpeta 100mm Suede Leather Buckle Point-toe Pumps,Christian Louboutin Blue Bianca 140 Patent Calf Euro 36 / PumpsCalvin Klein Beige Caz Strappy Heeled Sandals Snadstorm / 38 Eu Pumps,Christian Louboutin Orange Dalida 100 Fluo Matte Neon Curve Heel 36.5 PumpsValentino Pink T-strap Rockstud Platform Pumps,Tahari Black & White Patent Pumps,Christian Louboutin Black Pigalle 120 Leather Pumps,Giuseppe Zanotti Natural/Black Alien 115 Patent Eur 40 Pumps,

Since my nomination in July, there’s been a frenzy on the left to come up with something, anything to block my confirmation. Shortly after I was nominated, the Democratic Senate leader said he would “oppose me with everything he’s got.” A Democratic senator on this committee publicly referred to me as evil. Evil. Think about that word. And said that those that supported me were “complicit and evil.” Another Democratic senator on this committee said, “Judge Kavanaugh is your worst nightmare.” A former head of the Democratic National Committee said, “Judge Kavanaugh will threaten the lives of millions of Americans for decades to come.”

This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election, fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record, revenge on behalf of the Clintons and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups.


Louboutin Discodeporte 100 Patent Resille Multi Pumps Heels

Very rare style. New, with box, dust bag, and spare taps. No receipt left.
Small X marks under the heels were made in store to prevent returns.

Heel is 4.1"
Insole is 9.65"

Terms of Sale

Please note, that European designer shoes typically run smaller then US designers.

You should know your size in the particular designer's shoes before making a purchase.

This is the hole Kavanaugh is attempting to dig himself out of.

The ROAM analysis of Judge Kavanaugh’s op-ed

Prada Beige Fabric & Rhinestone Heels (42827) PumpsChristian Louboutin Yellow Satin Jeweled - PumpsStuart Weitzman Red Ombré Peep Pumps,Aquazzura Black Suede Forever Marilyn Fringe Bow Pointed Siz PumpsManolo Blahnik Multicolor 'bb' Black Suede Red Leather - PumpsCole Haan Black Helen Grand Pumps,Manolo Blahnik Black Hangisi Jewel Pumps,Salvatore Ferragamo Pinkish Beige 100mm Emy Bow Pumps,Christian Louboutin Beige / Gold Lola Linen Canvas with Leather Flowers Pumps,Christian Louboutin Silver Metallic Leather Slingbacks Pumps,Prada Cream with Black Trim Open Toe & Pumps,Christian Louboutin Nude Pijonina 100 Scallop Peep Heels A429 Pumps,Ted Baker Black Patent Leather Pumps,Salvatore Ferragamo Multi Color Lot Of 4 Pairs Extra 8aaaa. Pumps,Christian Louboutin Black Simple Round 70 PumpsLucky Brand Beige Kabott Heeled Sandals Sandshell / 38.5 Eu Pumps,Christian Louboutin Black/Gold Sexystrapi 70 Jazz Leather Zip Studded PumpsPrada Red Patent Leather Hidden Platform Pumps,Jimmy Choo Navy Luna Blue Crackly Glitter Pumps,Céline White Throat Soft Leather Pumps,Dune London Black Aubree Classic Dress 481 / 39 Eu Pumps,Jimmy Choo Black Leather Sling Pumps,Christian Louboutin Leopard Pony with Red Toe Patent Cap Geo 85 PumpsValentino Pink Rockstud Patent Leather T Strap Heel Sz. 39 Euro PumpsJimmy Choo Gold 'abel' Mirrored Patent - Pumps,Emporio Armani Gold Glitter Eu 37.5 Pumps,Saint Laurent Black W Chain Strap Pumps,Grey Louboutin No Prive Charcoal Glitter Pumps,Seychelles Green Aqua Blue Teal Turquoise Mint Everybody Dance Pumps,Alice + Olivia Neon Orange * Patent Pointed Pumps,

  • Readers. Who is the op-ed aimed at? Two groups. First, the broader judicial and legal community, who will be arguing cases in front of Kavanaugh and discussing his opinions. And second, the four senators who remain undecided and may decide the fate of his nomination.
  • Objective. What change is the op-ed trying to create? The title of the op-ed is “I Am an Independent, Impartial Judge.” So there’s no mystery here: Kavanaugh seeks to dispel the impression he created that he is a biased hothead, and replace it with the idea that he is an appropriate choice for the Supreme Court.
  • Action. Kavanaugh wants the senators to vote for him and the legal community to respect him.
  • iMpression. Much more than most pieces of writing, this one must leave a good impression. If the oral testimony was wild, the op-ed must be rational, well-argued, and free from bias.

Did the op-ed do its job?

Let’s take a look at some excerpts from the op-ed:

I Am an Independent, Impartial Judge

Yes, I was emotional last Thursday. I hope everyone can understand I was there as a son, husband and dad.

. . . [A] good judge must be an umpire—a neutral and impartial arbiter who favors no political party, litigant or policy. As Justice Kennedy has stated, judges do not make decisions to reach a preferred result. Judges make decisions because the law and the Constitution compel the result. Over the past 12 years, I have ruled sometimes for the prosecution and sometimes for criminal defendants, sometimes for workers and sometimes for businesses, sometimes for environmentalists and sometimes for coal miners. In each case, I have followed the law. I do not decide cases based on personal or policy preferences. I am not a pro-plaintiff or pro-defendant judge. I am not a pro-prosecution or pro-defense judge. I am a pro-law judge. . . .

The Supreme Court must never be viewed as a partisan institution. The justices do not sit on opposite sides of an aisle. They do not caucus in separate rooms. As I have said repeatedly, if confirmed to the court, I would be part of a team of nine, committed to deciding cases according to the Constitution and laws of the United States. I would always strive to be a team player. . . .

I testified before the Judiciary Committee last Thursday to defend my family, my good name and my lifetime of public service. My hearing testimony was forceful and passionate. That is because I forcefully and passionately denied the allegation against me. At times, my testimony—both in my opening statement and in response to questions—reflected my overwhelming frustration at being wrongly accused, without corroboration, of horrible conduct completely contrary to my record and character. My statement and answers also reflected my deep distress at the unfairness of how this allegation has been handled.

I was very emotional last Thursday, more so than I have ever been. I might have been too emotional at times. I know that my tone was sharp, and I said a few things I should not have said. I hope everyone can understand that I was there as a son, husband and dad. I testified with five people foremost in my mind: my mom, my dad, my wife, and most of all my daughters.

Going forward, you can count on me to be the same kind of judge and person I have been for my entire 28-year legal career: hardworking, even-keeled, open-minded, independent and dedicated to the Constitution and the public good. As a judge, I have always treated colleagues and litigants with the utmost respect. I have been known for my courtesy on and off the bench. I have not changed. I will continue to be the same kind of judge I have been for the last 12 years. . . .

I revere the Constitution. I believe that an independent and impartial judiciary is essential to our constitutional republic. If confirmed by the Senate to serve on the Supreme Court, I will keep an open mind in every case and always strive to preserve the Constitution of the United States and the American rule of law.

So, did the op-ed do its job?

Judge Kavanaugh does not in this description apologize for anything he said. He did not apologize in the op-ed for his response to Senator Klobuchar, or for his citation of the Clintons and left-wing opposition groups.

As close as he gets is “I might have been too emotional at times. I know that my tone was sharp, and I said a few things I should not have said.” There are no specifics. His reasoning behind this statement is that he was there as a son, a husband, and a dad. (Wasn’t he there as a Supreme Court nominee?)

The rest of the op-ed is clear, reasoned, and sober. It basically says, “judge me by my record.” This is fair. But it does not undo the impression left by Kavanaugh’s testimony in the Senate.

Basically, if you feel you did something wrong and were criticized, you have two possible options. You can say “I did this specific thing, and I’m sorry.” Or you can say “I was right. I don’t need to apologize.”

Kavanaugh attempted a third option: “I made mistakes, but I won’t be specific about them, and I had an excuse because I felt threatened and was acting as a father.” This never works. It is not an effective strategy for a corporate executive or, for that matter, for any adult, let alone a nominee for Supreme Court Justice.

You may or may not believe it is fair to condemn Kavanaugh for a woman’s accusations about what he did in high school 36 years ago.

But it is certainly fair to judge him for what he said, and how he said it, in the Senate last week.

Judge Kavanaugh’s op-ed says, basically “I am fair and impartial when I am a judge, but I am combative and emotional when I am criticized, and I react as an angry father, not as a judge.”

If you believe that a judge should be evaluated only on what does on the bench, and not on his other behavior, then you’ll be fine with this.

But if you believe a judge should be evaluated on what he says and how he acts during confirmation hearings, the op-ed fails. It does not undo any of the impressions that Kavanaugh left. It’s a waste of time, and will change nothing.

Christian Louboutin Multicolor Discodeporte 100 Pumps Patent Resille Multi Heels Pumps 100 349dfc

Tory Burch Black New Mary Jane Wedge Leather Pumps,

I publish a blog post this interesting every single weekday. Sign up. It's worth it, really.

5 responses to “Does the Brett Kavanaugh op-ed make its case?

  1. You hit it on the head.

    He wins on the logic battle, which is often thought of as the most important part of being a lawyer/judge. (For most professions, we think of an actual skill as the most important aspect. Both are important, but neither is the most important.)

    His conduct at the circus the other day betray a lack of Emotional Intelligence, which is the most important. Emotional: good, actually natural and necessary (he should have led with the anger in both the oral testimony and the commentary, period). Combative: bad and dumb.

    While the commentary is measured, it misses the emotion and does not address the onlyquestion that was out there: “What, Senator, will it take from me to change your vote?” Maybe, he is gambling that he needs none of them to change or realizes none are likely to. Maybe that explains why he did not apologize.

    Interestingly, I am not readily recalling another case where we have someone whose actions we admire and words we do not. (Maybe, “communication” is a better word than “words.”)

  2. Readers. Who he aiming the op-ed at? I would expand your analysis. This goes beyond his nomination. You mentioned the 2,000 law professors who are saying he shouldn’t even remain a judge, let alone a member of the Supreme Court — his entire career is at stake. His reputation is at stake. Many people of all stripes will no longer believe the story he tells about himself, so his relationships in society (and possibly his understanding of his own identity) are at stake.

    “I hope everyone can understand I was there as a son, husband and dad.” That is such a curious statement. Do you know anyone who goes into a job interview as a son, husband, and dad? That’s why I say this op ed is also for them.

    Has this accusation made him feel like a teen again? If he was, indeed, going there as a role model, and defending himself as a good son, he didn’t act like it. He acted like a teen. He owes his own family much more of an apology.

    His entire opening paragraph was a list of people who are credible and upstanding — the company he now keeps. He desperately needs to appear credible. But as you stated, it would have been much more compelling if the article had begun with a heartfelt apology addressing specifics.

    I know that by “team player” he means he’s a fit for the culture of the Supreme Court, but I don’t think of the Supreme Court as a team. That would defeat its purpose. The use of the word “team” makes me shudder when I think of its potential meaning.

    The entire process has been very upsetting. This op ed does absolutely nothing to change that. I don’t think it convinces anyone of anything — it’s just more whining.

  3. Sorry, I yelled at you during my job interview. It’s because I am Dad.

    Sorry, I couldn’t have commited that crime because I went to Yale and studied during high school.

    For a lawyer, he has weak logic.

  4. If you didn’t hear Senator Collins talk yesterday, you should. You probably wouldn’t have written this blog post other than for click bait.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.