Mixing
What does Brett Kavanaugh mean with “revenge on behalf of the Clintons�
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
During his personal statement in confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Brett Kavanaugh said:
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.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/09/27/kavanaugh-hearing-transcript/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.0a7f36e037a0
What in the world could he be talking about that would make people want revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons?
united-states
edited 13 mins ago
Martin Tournoij
5,91223864
asked 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
During his personal statement in confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Brett Kavanaugh said:
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.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/09/27/kavanaugh-hearing-transcript/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.0a7f36e037a0
What in the world could he be talking about that would make people want revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons?
united-states
edited 13 mins ago
Martin Tournoij
5,91223864
asked 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
3
Reread that, it says on behalf of the Clintons, not that it was orchestrated by them.
– IllusiveBrian
2 hours ago
Thank you! Edited!
– elliot svensson
2 hours ago
3
I'm going to try to find the specific references/links before I offer the answer, but I read that he rejected the help of two advisors in offering a "softer" opening statement, and that his language and tone were both crafted specifically for pleasing Trump, to insure his continued support. So, the degree of paranoid silliness might be more a measure of him offering that for Trump's approval, and pushing those buttons, intentionally.
– PoloHoleSet
1 hour ago
This question seems to ask two different things: in the title it asks if the claim have any merit, but in the body it asks "what is he talking about that would make people want revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons?" Those are two different questions. Which one did you intend to ask? Your own answer seems to indicate it's the second one? I would consider the "merit" question to be primarily opinion based btw. I think a better title would be something like "What does Brett Kavanaugh mean with 'revenge on behalf of the Clintons'?", or something to that effect.
– Martin Tournoij
47 mins ago
@MartinTournoij, I reworked the title a bit to make it match the question. It's an ongoing process, but I think the core is on-topic.
– elliot svensson
43 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
During his personal statement in confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Brett Kavanaugh said:
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.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/09/27/kavanaugh-hearing-transcript/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.0a7f36e037a0
What in the world could he be talking about that would make people want revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons?
united-states
edited 13 mins ago
Martin Tournoij
5,91223864
asked 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
During his personal statement in confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Brett Kavanaugh said:
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.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/09/27/kavanaugh-hearing-transcript/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.0a7f36e037a0
What in the world could he be talking about that would make people want revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons?
united-states
united-states
edited 13 mins ago
Martin Tournoij
5,91223864
asked 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
edited 13 mins ago
Martin Tournoij
5,91223864
asked 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
edited 13 mins ago
Martin Tournoij
5,91223864
edited 13 mins ago
Martin Tournoij
5,91223864
edited 13 mins ago
Martin Tournoij
5,91223864
5,91223864
asked 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
asked 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
asked 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
639113
3
Reread that, it says on behalf of the Clintons, not that it was orchestrated by them.
– IllusiveBrian
2 hours ago
Thank you! Edited!
– elliot svensson
2 hours ago
3
I'm going to try to find the specific references/links before I offer the answer, but I read that he rejected the help of two advisors in offering a "softer" opening statement, and that his language and tone were both crafted specifically for pleasing Trump, to insure his continued support. So, the degree of paranoid silliness might be more a measure of him offering that for Trump's approval, and pushing those buttons, intentionally.
– PoloHoleSet
1 hour ago
This question seems to ask two different things: in the title it asks if the claim have any merit, but in the body it asks "what is he talking about that would make people want revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons?" Those are two different questions. Which one did you intend to ask? Your own answer seems to indicate it's the second one? I would consider the "merit" question to be primarily opinion based btw. I think a better title would be something like "What does Brett Kavanaugh mean with 'revenge on behalf of the Clintons'?", or something to that effect.
– Martin Tournoij
47 mins ago
@MartinTournoij, I reworked the title a bit to make it match the question. It's an ongoing process, but I think the core is on-topic.
– elliot svensson
43 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
3
Reread that, it says on behalf of the Clintons, not that it was orchestrated by them.
– IllusiveBrian
2 hours ago
Thank you! Edited!
– elliot svensson
2 hours ago
3
I'm going to try to find the specific references/links before I offer the answer, but I read that he rejected the help of two advisors in offering a "softer" opening statement, and that his language and tone were both crafted specifically for pleasing Trump, to insure his continued support. So, the degree of paranoid silliness might be more a measure of him offering that for Trump's approval, and pushing those buttons, intentionally.
– PoloHoleSet
1 hour ago
This question seems to ask two different things: in the title it asks if the claim have any merit, but in the body it asks "what is he talking about that would make people want revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons?" Those are two different questions. Which one did you intend to ask? Your own answer seems to indicate it's the second one? I would consider the "merit" question to be primarily opinion based btw. I think a better title would be something like "What does Brett Kavanaugh mean with 'revenge on behalf of the Clintons'?", or something to that effect.
– Martin Tournoij
47 mins ago
@MartinTournoij, I reworked the title a bit to make it match the question. It's an ongoing process, but I think the core is on-topic.
– elliot svensson
43 mins ago
3
3
Reread that, it says on behalf of the Clintons, not that it was orchestrated by them.
– IllusiveBrian
2 hours ago
Reread that, it says on behalf of the Clintons, not that it was orchestrated by them.
– IllusiveBrian
2 hours ago
Thank you! Edited!
– elliot svensson
2 hours ago
Thank you! Edited!
– elliot svensson
2 hours ago
3
3
I'm going to try to find the specific references/links before I offer the answer, but I read that he rejected the help of two advisors in offering a "softer" opening statement, and that his language and tone were both crafted specifically for pleasing Trump, to insure his continued support. So, the degree of paranoid silliness might be more a measure of him offering that for Trump's approval, and pushing those buttons, intentionally.
– PoloHoleSet
1 hour ago
I'm going to try to find the specific references/links before I offer the answer, but I read that he rejected the help of two advisors in offering a "softer" opening statement, and that his language and tone were both crafted specifically for pleasing Trump, to insure his continued support. So, the degree of paranoid silliness might be more a measure of him offering that for Trump's approval, and pushing those buttons, intentionally.
– PoloHoleSet
1 hour ago
This question seems to ask two different things: in the title it asks if the claim have any merit, but in the body it asks "what is he talking about that would make people want revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons?" Those are two different questions. Which one did you intend to ask? Your own answer seems to indicate it's the second one? I would consider the "merit" question to be primarily opinion based btw. I think a better title would be something like "What does Brett Kavanaugh mean with 'revenge on behalf of the Clintons'?", or something to that effect.
– Martin Tournoij
47 mins ago
This question seems to ask two different things: in the title it asks if the claim have any merit, but in the body it asks "what is he talking about that would make people want revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons?" Those are two different questions. Which one did you intend to ask? Your own answer seems to indicate it's the second one? I would consider the "merit" question to be primarily opinion based btw. I think a better title would be something like "What does Brett Kavanaugh mean with 'revenge on behalf of the Clintons'?", or something to that effect.
– Martin Tournoij
47 mins ago
@MartinTournoij, I reworked the title a bit to make it match the question. It's an ongoing process, but I think the core is on-topic.
– elliot svensson
43 mins ago
@MartinTournoij, I reworked the title a bit to make it match the question. It's an ongoing process, but I think the core is on-topic.
– elliot svensson
43 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
11
down vote
In 2012 when Mitt Romney was campaigning for president, CNN reported on the possibilities for US Supreme Court Justices that may come along with Romney. The Second of nine names was Kavanaugh. (The sixth in their little list was Neil Gorsuch). This is what CNN reported at the time:
Judge Brett Kavanaugh, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit
Born 1965. Began his job May 2006 in a court that has seen several of its former members make the jump to the Supreme Court. A former top official in the George W. Bush White House. His nomination to a federal appeals court for the D.C. circuit was held up for three years by Democrats. Senators Patrick Leahy and Richard Durbin later accused Kavanaugh of misleading the Judiciary Committee during his confirmation over whether he helped formulate policy on the detention and questioning of accused terrorists held overseas by the U.S. military. He is relatively young and considered one of the brightest conservative legal minds. He co-authored the Starr Report investigation of President Bill Clinton and clerked for Justice Anthony Kennedy and conservative appeals court Judge Alex Kozinski.
https://www.cnn.com/2012/09/30/politics/court-romney-list/index.html, bolding by Elliot
answered 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
2
I'm not sure if I follow how this proves the "revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons" claim? Just because there has been a conflict in the past doesn't mean that current actions are related.
– Martin Tournoij
55 mins ago
@MartinTournoij, I don't believe that we will arrive at proof. I just wanted to rule out crazy, silly, paranoid, etc.
– elliot svensson
34 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Two reasons.
One, Kavanaugh and Bill Clinton have a somewhat...tumultuous past.
Two, he believes that Democrats are still upset over Clinton's loss to Trump and are getting revenge.
answered 1 hour ago
Carduus
2,625415
3
Any sources to suggest that Kavanaugh believes your second claim? I can find a conspiracy for anything, its different to suggest that he actually believes it
– Ben Mohorc
1 hour ago
1
This is a somewhat subjective answer with one of your points being factually incorrect. I don't believe he stated belief for this anywhere.
– Danielson
1 hour ago
You're right, the claims of the second are uncorroborated. I will remove it.
– Carduus
17 mins ago
@Carduus, "still upset over Clinton's loss" was not the removed claim, was it?
– elliot svensson
6 mins ago
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
11
down vote
In 2012 when Mitt Romney was campaigning for president, CNN reported on the possibilities for US Supreme Court Justices that may come along with Romney. The Second of nine names was Kavanaugh. (The sixth in their little list was Neil Gorsuch). This is what CNN reported at the time:
Judge Brett Kavanaugh, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit
Born 1965. Began his job May 2006 in a court that has seen several of its former members make the jump to the Supreme Court. A former top official in the George W. Bush White House. His nomination to a federal appeals court for the D.C. circuit was held up for three years by Democrats. Senators Patrick Leahy and Richard Durbin later accused Kavanaugh of misleading the Judiciary Committee during his confirmation over whether he helped formulate policy on the detention and questioning of accused terrorists held overseas by the U.S. military. He is relatively young and considered one of the brightest conservative legal minds. He co-authored the Starr Report investigation of President Bill Clinton and clerked for Justice Anthony Kennedy and conservative appeals court Judge Alex Kozinski.
https://www.cnn.com/2012/09/30/politics/court-romney-list/index.html, bolding by Elliot
answered 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
2
I'm not sure if I follow how this proves the "revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons" claim? Just because there has been a conflict in the past doesn't mean that current actions are related.
– Martin Tournoij
55 mins ago
@MartinTournoij, I don't believe that we will arrive at proof. I just wanted to rule out crazy, silly, paranoid, etc.
– elliot svensson
34 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
11
down vote
In 2012 when Mitt Romney was campaigning for president, CNN reported on the possibilities for US Supreme Court Justices that may come along with Romney. The Second of nine names was Kavanaugh. (The sixth in their little list was Neil Gorsuch). This is what CNN reported at the time:
Judge Brett Kavanaugh, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit
Born 1965. Began his job May 2006 in a court that has seen several of its former members make the jump to the Supreme Court. A former top official in the George W. Bush White House. His nomination to a federal appeals court for the D.C. circuit was held up for three years by Democrats. Senators Patrick Leahy and Richard Durbin later accused Kavanaugh of misleading the Judiciary Committee during his confirmation over whether he helped formulate policy on the detention and questioning of accused terrorists held overseas by the U.S. military. He is relatively young and considered one of the brightest conservative legal minds. He co-authored the Starr Report investigation of President Bill Clinton and clerked for Justice Anthony Kennedy and conservative appeals court Judge Alex Kozinski.
https://www.cnn.com/2012/09/30/politics/court-romney-list/index.html, bolding by Elliot
answered 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
2
I'm not sure if I follow how this proves the "revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons" claim? Just because there has been a conflict in the past doesn't mean that current actions are related.
– Martin Tournoij
55 mins ago
@MartinTournoij, I don't believe that we will arrive at proof. I just wanted to rule out crazy, silly, paranoid, etc.
– elliot svensson
34 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
11
down vote
up vote
11
down vote
In 2012 when Mitt Romney was campaigning for president, CNN reported on the possibilities for US Supreme Court Justices that may come along with Romney. The Second of nine names was Kavanaugh. (The sixth in their little list was Neil Gorsuch). This is what CNN reported at the time:
Judge Brett Kavanaugh, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit
Born 1965. Began his job May 2006 in a court that has seen several of its former members make the jump to the Supreme Court. A former top official in the George W. Bush White House. His nomination to a federal appeals court for the D.C. circuit was held up for three years by Democrats. Senators Patrick Leahy and Richard Durbin later accused Kavanaugh of misleading the Judiciary Committee during his confirmation over whether he helped formulate policy on the detention and questioning of accused terrorists held overseas by the U.S. military. He is relatively young and considered one of the brightest conservative legal minds. He co-authored the Starr Report investigation of President Bill Clinton and clerked for Justice Anthony Kennedy and conservative appeals court Judge Alex Kozinski.
https://www.cnn.com/2012/09/30/politics/court-romney-list/index.html, bolding by Elliot
answered 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
In 2012 when Mitt Romney was campaigning for president, CNN reported on the possibilities for US Supreme Court Justices that may come along with Romney. The Second of nine names was Kavanaugh. (The sixth in their little list was Neil Gorsuch). This is what CNN reported at the time:
Judge Brett Kavanaugh, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit
Born 1965. Began his job May 2006 in a court that has seen several of its former members make the jump to the Supreme Court. A former top official in the George W. Bush White House. His nomination to a federal appeals court for the D.C. circuit was held up for three years by Democrats. Senators Patrick Leahy and Richard Durbin later accused Kavanaugh of misleading the Judiciary Committee during his confirmation over whether he helped formulate policy on the detention and questioning of accused terrorists held overseas by the U.S. military. He is relatively young and considered one of the brightest conservative legal minds. He co-authored the Starr Report investigation of President Bill Clinton and clerked for Justice Anthony Kennedy and conservative appeals court Judge Alex Kozinski.
https://www.cnn.com/2012/09/30/politics/court-romney-list/index.html, bolding by Elliot
answered 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
answered 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
answered 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
answered 2 hours ago
elliot svensson
639113
639113
2
I'm not sure if I follow how this proves the "revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons" claim? Just because there has been a conflict in the past doesn't mean that current actions are related.
– Martin Tournoij
55 mins ago
@MartinTournoij, I don't believe that we will arrive at proof. I just wanted to rule out crazy, silly, paranoid, etc.
– elliot svensson
34 mins ago
add a comment |Â
2
I'm not sure if I follow how this proves the "revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons" claim? Just because there has been a conflict in the past doesn't mean that current actions are related.
– Martin Tournoij
55 mins ago
@MartinTournoij, I don't believe that we will arrive at proof. I just wanted to rule out crazy, silly, paranoid, etc.
– elliot svensson
34 mins ago
2
2
I'm not sure if I follow how this proves the "revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons" claim? Just because there has been a conflict in the past doesn't mean that current actions are related.
– Martin Tournoij
55 mins ago
I'm not sure if I follow how this proves the "revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons" claim? Just because there has been a conflict in the past doesn't mean that current actions are related.
– Martin Tournoij
55 mins ago
@MartinTournoij, I don't believe that we will arrive at proof. I just wanted to rule out crazy, silly, paranoid, etc.
– elliot svensson
34 mins ago
@MartinTournoij, I don't believe that we will arrive at proof. I just wanted to rule out crazy, silly, paranoid, etc.
– elliot svensson
34 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Two reasons.
One, Kavanaugh and Bill Clinton have a somewhat...tumultuous past.
Two, he believes that Democrats are still upset over Clinton's loss to Trump and are getting revenge.
answered 1 hour ago
Carduus
2,625415
3
Any sources to suggest that Kavanaugh believes your second claim? I can find a conspiracy for anything, its different to suggest that he actually believes it
– Ben Mohorc
1 hour ago
1
This is a somewhat subjective answer with one of your points being factually incorrect. I don't believe he stated belief for this anywhere.
– Danielson
1 hour ago
You're right, the claims of the second are uncorroborated. I will remove it.
– Carduus
17 mins ago
@Carduus, "still upset over Clinton's loss" was not the removed claim, was it?
– elliot svensson
6 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Two reasons.
One, Kavanaugh and Bill Clinton have a somewhat...tumultuous past.
Two, he believes that Democrats are still upset over Clinton's loss to Trump and are getting revenge.
answered 1 hour ago
Carduus
2,625415
3
Any sources to suggest that Kavanaugh believes your second claim? I can find a conspiracy for anything, its different to suggest that he actually believes it
– Ben Mohorc
1 hour ago
1
This is a somewhat subjective answer with one of your points being factually incorrect. I don't believe he stated belief for this anywhere.
– Danielson
1 hour ago
You're right, the claims of the second are uncorroborated. I will remove it.
– Carduus
17 mins ago
@Carduus, "still upset over Clinton's loss" was not the removed claim, was it?
– elliot svensson
6 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
Two reasons.
One, Kavanaugh and Bill Clinton have a somewhat...tumultuous past.
Two, he believes that Democrats are still upset over Clinton's loss to Trump and are getting revenge.
answered 1 hour ago
Carduus
2,625415
Two reasons.
One, Kavanaugh and Bill Clinton have a somewhat...tumultuous past.
Two, he believes that Democrats are still upset over Clinton's loss to Trump and are getting revenge.
answered 1 hour ago
Carduus
2,625415
edited 17 mins ago
answered 1 hour ago
Carduus
2,625415
answered 1 hour ago
Carduus
2,625415
answered 1 hour ago
Carduus
2,625415
2,625415
3
Any sources to suggest that Kavanaugh believes your second claim? I can find a conspiracy for anything, its different to suggest that he actually believes it
– Ben Mohorc
1 hour ago
1
This is a somewhat subjective answer with one of your points being factually incorrect. I don't believe he stated belief for this anywhere.
– Danielson
1 hour ago
You're right, the claims of the second are uncorroborated. I will remove it.
– Carduus
17 mins ago
@Carduus, "still upset over Clinton's loss" was not the removed claim, was it?
– elliot svensson
6 mins ago
add a comment |Â
3
Any sources to suggest that Kavanaugh believes your second claim? I can find a conspiracy for anything, its different to suggest that he actually believes it
– Ben Mohorc
1 hour ago
1
This is a somewhat subjective answer with one of your points being factually incorrect. I don't believe he stated belief for this anywhere.
– Danielson
1 hour ago
You're right, the claims of the second are uncorroborated. I will remove it.
– Carduus
17 mins ago
@Carduus, "still upset over Clinton's loss" was not the removed claim, was it?
– elliot svensson
6 mins ago
3
3
Any sources to suggest that Kavanaugh believes your second claim? I can find a conspiracy for anything, its different to suggest that he actually believes it
– Ben Mohorc
1 hour ago
Any sources to suggest that Kavanaugh believes your second claim? I can find a conspiracy for anything, its different to suggest that he actually believes it
– Ben Mohorc
1 hour ago
1
1
This is a somewhat subjective answer with one of your points being factually incorrect. I don't believe he stated belief for this anywhere.
– Danielson
1 hour ago
This is a somewhat subjective answer with one of your points being factually incorrect. I don't believe he stated belief for this anywhere.
– Danielson
1 hour ago
You're right, the claims of the second are uncorroborated. I will remove it.
– Carduus
17 mins ago
You're right, the claims of the second are uncorroborated. I will remove it.
– Carduus
17 mins ago
@Carduus, "still upset over Clinton's loss" was not the removed claim, was it?
– elliot svensson
6 mins ago
@Carduus, "still upset over Clinton's loss" was not the removed claim, was it?
– elliot svensson
6 mins ago
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f34053%2fwhat-does-brett-kavanaugh-mean-with-revenge-on-behalf-of-the-clintons%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
3
Reread that, it says on behalf of the Clintons, not that it was orchestrated by them.
– IllusiveBrian
2 hours ago
Thank you! Edited!
– elliot svensson
2 hours ago
3
I'm going to try to find the specific references/links before I offer the answer, but I read that he rejected the help of two advisors in offering a "softer" opening statement, and that his language and tone were both crafted specifically for pleasing Trump, to insure his continued support. So, the degree of paranoid silliness might be more a measure of him offering that for Trump's approval, and pushing those buttons, intentionally.
– PoloHoleSet
1 hour ago
This question seems to ask two different things: in the title it asks if the claim have any merit, but in the body it asks "what is he talking about that would make people want revenge on him on behalf of the Clintons?" Those are two different questions. Which one did you intend to ask? Your own answer seems to indicate it's the second one? I would consider the "merit" question to be primarily opinion based btw. I think a better title would be something like "What does Brett Kavanaugh mean with 'revenge on behalf of the Clintons'?", or something to that effect.
– Martin Tournoij
47 mins ago
@MartinTournoij, I reworked the title a bit to make it match the question. It's an ongoing process, but I think the core is on-topic.
– elliot svensson
43 mins ago