Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what I think.

I think the 8 justices currently on SCOTUS are horrified at what is going on. I think that each one of them are thinking... “Geez. I’m glad nobody searched deep into my high school years because there are things there that they would certainly consider disqualifying.” I think they are disgusted that the argument is coming down to what was written in his HS yearbook and the fact that he likes beer.

It’s a travesty. Nobody is a saint. Nobody has made Kavanaugh out to be a saint. He’s human - just like the other 8 justices who have been confirmed. And, simply because people have leveled false allegations at him, we have come to this. It’s pathetic.

I agree that they are likely horrified. I disagree about why. I doubt any of them had this kind of background (even Thomas) that warranted such scrutiny. The issue is the nominee.

He never should have lied about the drinking. He was trying to avoid any possibility that he could have attacked Ford and not remembered, but he just looks ridiculous now. I mean, FFS, he pledged a fraternity and was involved in bar fights. Did he really think nobody would speak up?

Yep, this.

#LeftyLies
He was not “involved in bar fights.” He happened to be present.
He never lied about his drinking.
He did not attack Ford.

The only truth you have stated is that he pledged a fraternity.

You sound desperate. You are just making stuff up. And adding hashtags.

I'm still waiting for your summary of CBFs lies, by the way.

I wasn’t the one who said she lied. But, since you asked. I do believe she made up the whole story. I didn’t believe that at first, but as more is revealed, I do now.
And, given her former boyfriend’s letter to officials, it seems she did lie regarding her fear of flying and her coaching of a friend on a polygraph. She lied to her former boyfriend about credit card charges. Why not now?

Can you explain how she knew that 1) Brett Kavanaugh was a heavy drinker/hard partier in high school/college and 2) that Mike Judge was a heavy drinker/hard partier and 3) that BK and MJ were best friends -- how did she figure this all out years ago so that she could start telling her story about the two in case BK ever got nominated for SCOTUS and she got called to testify against him?

Not one single pro-BK poster has come here to eplain how Ford figured all this out. Because otherwise it's a great coincidence, is it not, that the person she picked to lie about just happened to be a hard-drinking lout in high school and college and had a best buddy who was also a hard-drinking lout. She had to have done serious research to find this out so that she could make her lies ring true. Please explain. The notion that she saw his name in the paper in 2012 when he was nominated for a judgeship, saw he was about her age and went to GT Prep, and then started researching and somehow discovered he was a huge drinker and had a best friend named Mike Judge who was also a drinker, so then she started telling her tale in the event she could use it, is too incredible to believe. She would have had to talk to others whom BK acknowledges he knows to find all this out. Where are those people saying she called or wrote them asking for dirt on him? So far haven't heard anyone come forward and say, hey CBF contacted me in 2012 asking if I knew BK and what was he like.

To me the simple solution to this question is the one that makes the most sense: she did know BK, she did know MJ, this did happen to her, she is telling the truth.

To follow up on this post: Gorsuch is ALSO a GP alumnus her age. She could have picked him to lie about, right? She could have named him way back when she told her husband about this, in the event Gorsuch got nominated. He was also in the news, someone who worked for a Republican president in the DOJ. But then her story wouldn't have rung true, because there is no evidence he was a hard drinker with a pattern of loutish behavior.

So how did she zero in on BK to lie about, if you believe she lied?

I want to hear Kavanaugh supporters come here and explain this.

I think this is the strongest argument for Ford.

Still, even the "strongest" argument is uncorroborated testimony, including from the witnesses who were present at the house.

I view it as unproven, and unprovable. Thus, I give benefit of doubt/presumption to Kavanaugh.

You are using corroboration like you know what it means. Her testimony is NOT uncorroborated.

You can see you still aren't sure but her testimony WAS corroborated. Not just with HER corroboration, but also with his (his calendar).

I do know what the word means.

You are free to believe what you want, but that calendar does not prove her allegations even remotely. It doesn't corroborate them either insofar as they witnesses deny she was at that event.

You need to acknowledge the arguments on both sides. Otherwise, you are just a hack.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what I think.

I think the 8 justices currently on SCOTUS are horrified at what is going on. I think that each one of them are thinking... “Geez. I’m glad nobody searched deep into my high school years because there are things there that they would certainly consider disqualifying.” I think they are disgusted that the argument is coming down to what was written in his HS yearbook and the fact that he likes beer.

It’s a travesty. Nobody is a saint. Nobody has made Kavanaugh out to be a saint. He’s human - just like the other 8 justices who have been confirmed. And, simply because people have leveled false allegations at him, we have come to this. It’s pathetic.

I agree that they are likely horrified. I disagree about why. I doubt any of them had this kind of background (even Thomas) that warranted such scrutiny. The issue is the nominee.

He never should have lied about the drinking. He was trying to avoid any possibility that he could have attacked Ford and not remembered, but he just looks ridiculous now. I mean, FFS, he pledged a fraternity and was involved in bar fights. Did he really think nobody would speak up?

Yep, this.

#LeftyLies
He was not “involved in bar fights.” He happened to be present.
He never lied about his drinking.
He did not attack Ford.

The only truth you have stated is that he pledged a fraternity.

You sound desperate. You are just making stuff up. And adding hashtags.

I'm still waiting for your summary of CBFs lies, by the way.

I wasn’t the one who said she lied. But, since you asked. I do believe she made up the whole story. I didn’t believe that at first, but as more is revealed, I do now.
And, given her former boyfriend’s letter to officials, it seems she did lie regarding her fear of flying and her coaching of a friend on a polygraph. She lied to her former boyfriend about credit card charges. Why not now?

Can you explain how she knew that 1) Brett Kavanaugh was a heavy drinker/hard partier in high school/college and 2) that Mike Judge was a heavy drinker/hard partier and 3) that BK and MJ were best friends -- how did she figure this all out years ago so that she could start telling her story about the two in case BK ever got nominated for SCOTUS and she got called to testify against him?

Not one single pro-BK poster has come here to eplain how Ford figured all this out. Because otherwise it's a great coincidence, is it not, that the person she picked to lie about just happened to be a hard-drinking lout in high school and college and had a best buddy who was also a hard-drinking lout. She had to have done serious research to find this out so that she could make her lies ring true. Please explain. The notion that she saw his name in the paper in 2012 when he was nominated for a judgeship, saw he was about her age and went to GT Prep, and then started researching and somehow discovered he was a huge drinker and had a best friend named Mike Judge who was also a drinker, so then she started telling her tale in the event she could use it, is too incredible to believe. She would have had to talk to others whom BK acknowledges he knows to find all this out. Where are those people saying she called or wrote them asking for dirt on him? So far haven't heard anyone come forward and say, hey CBF contacted me in 2012 asking if I knew BK and what was he like.

To me the simple solution to this question is the one that makes the most sense: she did know BK, she did know MJ, this did happen to her, she is telling the truth.

To follow up on this post: Gorsuch is ALSO a GP alumnus her age. She could have picked him to lie about, right? She could have named him way back when she told her husband about this, in the event Gorsuch got nominated. He was also in the news, someone who worked for a Republican president in the DOJ. But then her story wouldn't have rung true, because there is no evidence he was a hard drinker with a pattern of loutish behavior.

So how did she zero in on BK to lie about, if you believe she lied?

I want to hear Kavanaugh supporters come here and explain this.

I think this is the strongest argument for Ford.

Still, even the "strongest" argument is uncorroborated testimony, including from the witnesses who were present at the house.

I view it as unproven, and unprovable. Thus, I give benefit of doubt/presumption to Kavanaugh.

You are using corroboration like you know what it means. Her testimony is NOT uncorroborated.

You can see you still aren't sure but her testimony WAS corroborated. Not just with HER corroboration, but also with his (his calendar).

Also his corroborating evidence (his calendar) also shows that his statements were not truthful.
He said he wasn't even in Maryland on the weekends, and that he only drank on the weekends.

Right there on his calendar, it shows him at a party on a week day in Maryland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what I think.

I think the 8 justices currently on SCOTUS are horrified at what is going on. I think that each one of them are thinking... “Geez. I’m glad nobody searched deep into my high school years because there are things there that they would certainly consider disqualifying.” I think they are disgusted that the argument is coming down to what was written in his HS yearbook and the fact that he likes beer.

It’s a travesty. Nobody is a saint. Nobody has made Kavanaugh out to be a saint. He’s human - just like the other 8 justices who have been confirmed. And, simply because people have leveled false allegations at him, we have come to this. It’s pathetic.

I agree that they are likely horrified. I disagree about why. I doubt any of them had this kind of background (even Thomas) that warranted such scrutiny. The issue is the nominee.

He never should have lied about the drinking. He was trying to avoid any possibility that he could have attacked Ford and not remembered, but he just looks ridiculous now. I mean, FFS, he pledged a fraternity and was involved in bar fights. Did he really think nobody would speak up?

Yep, this.

#LeftyLies
He was not “involved in bar fights.” He happened to be present.
He never lied about his drinking.
He did not attack Ford.

The only truth you have stated is that he pledged a fraternity.

You sound desperate. You are just making stuff up. And adding hashtags.

I'm still waiting for your summary of CBFs lies, by the way.

I wasn’t the one who said she lied. But, since you asked. I do believe she made up the whole story. I didn’t believe that at first, but as more is revealed, I do now.
And, given her former boyfriend’s letter to officials, it seems she did lie regarding her fear of flying and her coaching of a friend on a polygraph. She lied to her former boyfriend about credit card charges. Why not now?

Can you explain how she knew that 1) Brett Kavanaugh was a heavy drinker/hard partier in high school/college and 2) that Mike Judge was a heavy drinker/hard partier and 3) that BK and MJ were best friends -- how did she figure this all out years ago so that she could start telling her story about the two in case BK ever got nominated for SCOTUS and she got called to testify against him?

Not one single pro-BK poster has come here to eplain how Ford figured all this out. Because otherwise it's a great coincidence, is it not, that the person she picked to lie about just happened to be a hard-drinking lout in high school and college and had a best buddy who was also a hard-drinking lout. She had to have done serious research to find this out so that she could make her lies ring true. Please explain. The notion that she saw his name in the paper in 2012 when he was nominated for a judgeship, saw he was about her age and went to GT Prep, and then started researching and somehow discovered he was a huge drinker and had a best friend named Mike Judge who was also a drinker, so then she started telling her tale in the event she could use it, is too incredible to believe. She would have had to talk to others whom BK acknowledges he knows to find all this out. Where are those people saying she called or wrote them asking for dirt on him? So far haven't heard anyone come forward and say, hey CBF contacted me in 2012 asking if I knew BK and what was he like.

To me the simple solution to this question is the one that makes the most sense: she did know BK, she did know MJ, this did happen to her, she is telling the truth.

To follow up on this post: Gorsuch is ALSO a GP alumnus her age. She could have picked him to lie about, right? She could have named him way back when she told her husband about this, in the event Gorsuch got nominated. He was also in the news, someone who worked for a Republican president in the DOJ. But then her story wouldn't have rung true, because there is no evidence he was a hard drinker with a pattern of loutish behavior.

So how did she zero in on BK to lie about, if you believe she lied?

I want to hear Kavanaugh supporters come here and explain this.

I think this is the strongest argument for Ford.

Still, even the "strongest" argument is uncorroborated testimony, including from the witnesses who were present at the house.

I view it as unproven, and unprovable. Thus, I give benefit of doubt/presumption to Kavanaugh.

You are using corroboration like you know what it means. Her testimony is NOT uncorroborated.

You can see you still aren't sure but her testimony WAS corroborated. Not just with HER corroboration, but also with his (his calendar).

I do know what the word means.

You are free to believe what you want, but that calendar does not prove her allegations even remotely. It doesn't corroborate them either insofar as they witnesses deny she was at that event.

You need to acknowledge the arguments on both sides. Otherwise, you are just a hack.

Okay now I know you are just nuts. No witnesses deny she was at the event. They say they do not recall - that is NOT the same thing.
She has extensive corroborating evidence - the therapy appts where she spoke of the attack, words to her husband years ago, her polygraph.

All of these things are corroborating evidence. These things would be considered if this were a criminal trial. They EXACTLY are corroborating evidence.

Which he knew, as a judge. He knew all of this and he still said it over and over again at the hearing for his soundbites. He was not remotely honest on there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what I think.

I think the 8 justices currently on SCOTUS are horrified at what is going on. I think that each one of them are thinking... “Geez. I’m glad nobody searched deep into my high school years because there are things there that they would certainly consider disqualifying.” I think they are disgusted that the argument is coming down to what was written in his HS yearbook and the fact that he likes beer.

It’s a travesty. Nobody is a saint. Nobody has made Kavanaugh out to be a saint. He’s human - just like the other 8 justices who have been confirmed. And, simply because people have leveled false allegations at him, we have come to this. It’s pathetic.

I agree that they are likely horrified. I disagree about why. I doubt any of them had this kind of background (even Thomas) that warranted such scrutiny. The issue is the nominee.

He never should have lied about the drinking. He was trying to avoid any possibility that he could have attacked Ford and not remembered, but he just looks ridiculous now. I mean, FFS, he pledged a fraternity and was involved in bar fights. Did he really think nobody would speak up?

Yep, this.

#LeftyLies
He was not “involved in bar fights.” He happened to be present.
He never lied about his drinking.
He did not attack Ford.

The only truth you have stated is that he pledged a fraternity.

You sound desperate. You are just making stuff up. And adding hashtags.

I'm still waiting for your summary of CBFs lies, by the way.

I wasn’t the one who said she lied. But, since you asked. I do believe she made up the whole story. I didn’t believe that at first, but as more is revealed, I do now.
And, given her former boyfriend’s letter to officials, it seems she did lie regarding her fear of flying and her coaching of a friend on a polygraph. She lied to her former boyfriend about credit card charges. Why not now?

Can you explain how she knew that 1) Brett Kavanaugh was a heavy drinker/hard partier in high school/college and 2) that Mike Judge was a heavy drinker/hard partier and 3) that BK and MJ were best friends -- how did she figure this all out years ago so that she could start telling her story about the two in case BK ever got nominated for SCOTUS and she got called to testify against him?

Not one single pro-BK poster has come here to eplain how Ford figured all this out. Because otherwise it's a great coincidence, is it not, that the person she picked to lie about just happened to be a hard-drinking lout in high school and college and had a best buddy who was also a hard-drinking lout. She had to have done serious research to find this out so that she could make her lies ring true. Please explain. The notion that she saw his name in the paper in 2012 when he was nominated for a judgeship, saw he was about her age and went to GT Prep, and then started researching and somehow discovered he was a huge drinker and had a best friend named Mike Judge who was also a drinker, so then she started telling her tale in the event she could use it, is too incredible to believe. She would have had to talk to others whom BK acknowledges he knows to find all this out. Where are those people saying she called or wrote them asking for dirt on him? So far haven't heard anyone come forward and say, hey CBF contacted me in 2012 asking if I knew BK and what was he like.

To me the simple solution to this question is the one that makes the most sense: she did know BK, she did know MJ, this did happen to her, she is telling the truth.

To follow up on this post: Gorsuch is ALSO a GP alumnus her age. She could have picked him to lie about, right? She could have named him way back when she told her husband about this, in the event Gorsuch got nominated. He was also in the news, someone who worked for a Republican president in the DOJ. But then her story wouldn't have rung true, because there is no evidence he was a hard drinker with a pattern of loutish behavior.

So how did she zero in on BK to lie about, if you believe she lied?

I want to hear Kavanaugh supporters come here and explain this.

I think this is the strongest argument for Ford.

Still, even the "strongest" argument is uncorroborated testimony, including from the witnesses who were present at the house.

I view it as unproven, and unprovable. Thus, I give benefit of doubt/presumption to Kavanaugh.

You are using corroboration like you know what it means. Her testimony is NOT uncorroborated.

You can see you still aren't sure but her testimony WAS corroborated. Not just with HER corroboration, but also with his (his calendar).

Also his corroborating evidence (his calendar) also shows that his statements were not truthful.
He said he wasn't even in Maryland on the weekends, and that he only drank on the weekends.

Right there on his calendar, it shows him at a party on a week day in Maryland.

If he's such a perjurer, and was caught by his calendar, he could have left the damn thing in his parent's basement, no?

[Anonymous]

The Akin Gump partner who has text messages that may show that Bart lied about his knowledge of Debbie Ramirez and a wedding they both attended, STILL has not heard from the FBI.
This is her letter of this morning that was shared with me on FB.

From: Kerry Berchem
Date: October 3, 2018 at 6:23:28 AM EDT
To: "--------. (DO) (FBI)"
Subject: FOLLOWING UP AGAIN Urgent: Ramirez Allegations
Agent ---------,
I appreciate your email below advising me to call the field office. Indeed, in addition to my sending you several emails below and logging into the PAL portal twice and having a representative speak with the New Haven CT field office (which advised that they had no jurisdiction), I called the Bridgeport CT FBI field office Monday at 9:45 am. I spoke with and left messages with three (3) different people.
I suppose you know this already but no one called me back. Really? The FBI is so busy that it cannot spare one agent to call me back? How can th]}e FBI - or anyone else for that matter - conclude that the information that I have and the questions they pose are without merit if they have not been answered? I do not know what the texts I have may mean or may not mean. But, then again, neither does the FBI. It hasn’t reviewed them.
In my professional capacity, I have been part of teams that have conducted internal and SEC investigations for public companies. Litigation hold notices go out. Emails and texts are reviewed. People questioned. No stone is unturned.
All I wanted when I reached out to the FBI on Sunday was to perform my civic duty, to have a private discussion with the FBI and to possibly assist in the investigation ordered by President Trump. I believed in “the process.” It is now Wednesday morning, almost three full days since I sent you my draft memorandum, which was subsequently leaked to the press without my permission. Can you offer any explanation - any explanation whatsoever - as to why the FBI has refused to follow up on a “tip” from me, a law abiding, tax paying private citizen?
Regards,
Kerry E. Berchem

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what I think.

I think the 8 justices currently on SCOTUS are horrified at what is going on. I think that each one of them are thinking... “Geez. I’m glad nobody searched deep into my high school years because there are things there that they would certainly consider disqualifying.” I think they are disgusted that the argument is coming down to what was written in his HS yearbook and the fact that he likes beer.

It’s a travesty. Nobody is a saint. Nobody has made Kavanaugh out to be a saint. He’s human - just like the other 8 justices who have been confirmed. And, simply because people have leveled false allegations at him, we have come to this. It’s pathetic.

I agree that they are likely horrified. I disagree about why. I doubt any of them had this kind of background (even Thomas) that warranted such scrutiny. The issue is the nominee.

He never should have lied about the drinking. He was trying to avoid any possibility that he could have attacked Ford and not remembered, but he just looks ridiculous now. I mean, FFS, he pledged a fraternity and was involved in bar fights. Did he really think nobody would speak up?

Yep, this.

#LeftyLies
He was not “involved in bar fights.” He happened to be present.
He never lied about his drinking.
He did not attack Ford.

The only truth you have stated is that he pledged a fraternity.

You sound desperate. You are just making stuff up. And adding hashtags.

I'm still waiting for your summary of CBFs lies, by the way.

I wasn’t the one who said she lied. But, since you asked. I do believe she made up the whole story. I didn’t believe that at first, but as more is revealed, I do now.
And, given her former boyfriend’s letter to officials, it seems she did lie regarding her fear of flying and her coaching of a friend on a polygraph. She lied to her former boyfriend about credit card charges. Why not now?

Can you explain how she knew that 1) Brett Kavanaugh was a heavy drinker/hard partier in high school/college and 2) that Mike Judge was a heavy drinker/hard partier and 3) that BK and MJ were best friends -- how did she figure this all out years ago so that she could start telling her story about the two in case BK ever got nominated for SCOTUS and she got called to testify against him?

Not one single pro-BK poster has come here to eplain how Ford figured all this out. Because otherwise it's a great coincidence, is it not, that the person she picked to lie about just happened to be a hard-drinking lout in high school and college and had a best buddy who was also a hard-drinking lout. She had to have done serious research to find this out so that she could make her lies ring true. Please explain. The notion that she saw his name in the paper in 2012 when he was nominated for a judgeship, saw he was about her age and went to GT Prep, and then started researching and somehow discovered he was a huge drinker and had a best friend named Mike Judge who was also a drinker, so then she started telling her tale in the event she could use it, is too incredible to believe. She would have had to talk to others whom BK acknowledges he knows to find all this out. Where are those people saying she called or wrote them asking for dirt on him? So far haven't heard anyone come forward and say, hey CBF contacted me in 2012 asking if I knew BK and what was he like.

To me the simple solution to this question is the one that makes the most sense: she did know BK, she did know MJ, this did happen to her, she is telling the truth.

To follow up on this post: Gorsuch is ALSO a GP alumnus her age. She could have picked him to lie about, right? She could have named him way back when she told her husband about this, in the event Gorsuch got nominated. He was also in the news, someone who worked for a Republican president in the DOJ. But then her story wouldn't have rung true, because there is no evidence he was a hard drinker with a pattern of loutish behavior.

So how did she zero in on BK to lie about, if you believe she lied?

I want to hear Kavanaugh supporters come here and explain this.

I think this is the strongest argument for Ford.

Still, even the "strongest" argument is uncorroborated testimony, including from the witnesses who were present at the house.

I view it as unproven, and unprovable. Thus, I give benefit of doubt/presumption to Kavanaugh.

You are using corroboration like you know what it means. Her testimony is NOT uncorroborated.

You can see you still aren't sure but her testimony WAS corroborated. Not just with HER corroboration, but also with his (his calendar).

Also his corroborating evidence (his calendar) also shows that his statements were not truthful.
He said he wasn't even in Maryland on the weekends, and that he only drank on the weekends.

Right there on his calendar, it shows him at a party on a week day in Maryland.

If he's such a perjurer, and was caught by his calendar, he could have left the damn thing in his parent's basement, no?

Yes, and he probably should have. He thought he was in and his calendar would show he was innocent. Imagine his surprise when the GOP prosecutor - acting as his defense atty - pointed out a date that shows a weekday party with the very people ford had said was there.

This is why the Republicans yanked her.

[Anonymous]

My laugh out loud moment of today: Megyn Kelly says that the letter from "Bart" shows.... that he is a very responsible young man!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqLP8uybUPA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Akin Gump partner who has text messages that may show that Bart lied about his knowledge of Debbie Ramirez and a wedding they both attended, STILL has not heard from the FBI.
This is her letter of this morning that was shared with me on FB.

From: Kerry Berchem
Date: October 3, 2018 at 6:23:28 AM EDT
To: "--------. (DO) (FBI)"
Subject: FOLLOWING UP AGAIN Urgent: Ramirez Allegations
Agent ---------,
I appreciate your email below advising me to call the field office. Indeed, in addition to my sending you several emails below and logging into the PAL portal twice and having a representative speak with the New Haven CT field office (which advised that they had no jurisdiction), I called the Bridgeport CT FBI field office Monday at 9:45 am. I spoke with and left messages with three (3) different people.
I suppose you know this already but no one called me back. Really? The FBI is so busy that it cannot spare one agent to call me back? How can th]}e FBI - or anyone else for that matter - conclude that the information that I have and the questions they pose are without merit if they have not been answered? I do not know what the texts I have may mean or may not mean. But, then again, neither does the FBI. It hasn’t reviewed them.
In my professional capacity, I have been part of teams that have conducted internal and SEC investigations for public companies. Litigation hold notices go out. Emails and texts are reviewed. People questioned. No stone is unturned.
All I wanted when I reached out to the FBI on Sunday was to perform my civic duty, to have a private discussion with the FBI and to possibly assist in the investigation ordered by President Trump. I believed in “the process.” It is now Wednesday morning, almost three full days since I sent you my draft memorandum, which was subsequently leaked to the press without my permission. Can you offer any explanation - any explanation whatsoever - as to why the FBI has refused to follow up on a “tip” from me, a law abiding, tax paying private citizen?
Regards,
Kerry E. Berchem

COVER UP! SHe is not wrong at all. IT it is ridiculous that they think we will not notice, not care, or forget.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My laugh out loud moment of today: Megyn Kelly says that the letter from "Bart" shows.... that he is a very responsible young man!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqLP8uybUPA

Is she trying to get KellyAnne's job?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what I think.

I think the 8 justices currently on SCOTUS are horrified at what is going on. I think that each one of them are thinking... “Geez. I’m glad nobody searched deep into my high school years because there are things there that they would certainly consider disqualifying.” I think they are disgusted that the argument is coming down to what was written in his HS yearbook and the fact that he likes beer.

It’s a travesty. Nobody is a saint. Nobody has made Kavanaugh out to be a saint. He’s human - just like the other 8 justices who have been confirmed. And, simply because people have leveled false allegations at him, we have come to this. It’s pathetic.

I agree that they are likely horrified. I disagree about why. I doubt any of them had this kind of background (even Thomas) that warranted such scrutiny. The issue is the nominee.

He never should have lied about the drinking. He was trying to avoid any possibility that he could have attacked Ford and not remembered, but he just looks ridiculous now. I mean, FFS, he pledged a fraternity and was involved in bar fights. Did he really think nobody would speak up?

Yep, this.

#LeftyLies
He was not “involved in bar fights.” He happened to be present.
He never lied about his drinking.
He did not attack Ford.

The only truth you have stated is that he pledged a fraternity.

You sound desperate. You are just making stuff up. And adding hashtags.

I'm still waiting for your summary of CBFs lies, by the way.

I wasn’t the one who said she lied. But, since you asked. I do believe she made up the whole story. I didn’t believe that at first, but as more is revealed, I do now.
And, given her former boyfriend’s letter to officials, it seems she did lie regarding her fear of flying and her coaching of a friend on a polygraph. She lied to her former boyfriend about credit card charges. Why not now?

Can you explain how she knew that 1) Brett Kavanaugh was a heavy drinker/hard partier in high school/college and 2) that Mike Judge was a heavy drinker/hard partier and 3) that BK and MJ were best friends -- how did she figure this all out years ago so that she could start telling her story about the two in case BK ever got nominated for SCOTUS and she got called to testify against him?

Not one single pro-BK poster has come here to eplain how Ford figured all this out. Because otherwise it's a great coincidence, is it not, that the person she picked to lie about just happened to be a hard-drinking lout in high school and college and had a best buddy who was also a hard-drinking lout. She had to have done serious research to find this out so that she could make her lies ring true. Please explain. The notion that she saw his name in the paper in 2012 when he was nominated for a judgeship, saw he was about her age and went to GT Prep, and then started researching and somehow discovered he was a huge drinker and had a best friend named Mike Judge who was also a drinker, so then she started telling her tale in the event she could use it, is too incredible to believe. She would have had to talk to others whom BK acknowledges he knows to find all this out. Where are those people saying she called or wrote them asking for dirt on him? So far haven't heard anyone come forward and say, hey CBF contacted me in 2012 asking if I knew BK and what was he like.

To me the simple solution to this question is the one that makes the most sense: she did know BK, she did know MJ, this did happen to her, she is telling the truth.

To follow up on this post: Gorsuch is ALSO a GP alumnus her age. She could have picked him to lie about, right? She could have named him way back when she told her husband about this, in the event Gorsuch got nominated. He was also in the news, someone who worked for a Republican president in the DOJ. But then her story wouldn't have rung true, because there is no evidence he was a hard drinker with a pattern of loutish behavior.

So how did she zero in on BK to lie about, if you believe she lied?

I want to hear Kavanaugh supporters come here and explain this.

I think this is the strongest argument for Ford.

Still, even the "strongest" argument is uncorroborated testimony, including from the witnesses who were present at the house.

I view it as unproven, and unprovable. Thus, I give benefit of doubt/presumption to Kavanaugh.

You are using corroboration like you know what it means. Her testimony is NOT uncorroborated.

You can see you still aren't sure but her testimony WAS corroborated. Not just with HER corroboration, but also with his (his calendar).

I do know what the word means.

You are free to believe what you want, but that calendar does not prove her allegations even remotely. It doesn't corroborate them either insofar as they witnesses deny she was at that event.

You need to acknowledge the arguments on both sides. Otherwise, you are just a hack.

Okay now I know you are just nuts. No witnesses deny she was at the event. They say they do not recall - that is NOT the same thing.
She has extensive corroborating evidence - the therapy appts where she spoke of the attack, words to her husband years ago, her polygraph.

All of these things are corroborating evidence. These things would be considered if this were a criminal trial. They EXACTLY are corroborating evidence.

Which he knew, as a judge. He knew all of this and he still said it over and over again at the hearing for his soundbites. He was not remotely honest on there.

That’s not evidence. Seriously she does not have any proof. This is why people doubt her. She really needs the people she listed as witnesses to affirm her story. She needs to release the therapy notes. Right now her witnesses do not back her story and who known what’s in the therapy notes.

[Anonymous]

Interesting to go back and read the big profiles of Kavanaugh when he was nominated a few months back. Like this NYT one. Details one might normally gloss over - issues when he was nominated to the DC Circuit, partying in law school - now stand out. Some of the people listed on this multi-bylined story are pretty serious investigative reporters. I bet some of what's coming out now was edited out / not pursued then. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/14/us/politics/judge-brett-kavanaugh.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what I think.

I think the 8 justices currently on SCOTUS are horrified at what is going on. I think that each one of them are thinking... “Geez. I’m glad nobody searched deep into my high school years because there are things there that they would certainly consider disqualifying.” I think they are disgusted that the argument is coming down to what was written in his HS yearbook and the fact that he likes beer.

It’s a travesty. Nobody is a saint. Nobody has made Kavanaugh out to be a saint. He’s human - just like the other 8 justices who have been confirmed. And, simply because people have leveled false allegations at him, we have come to this. It’s pathetic.

I agree that they are likely horrified. I disagree about why. I doubt any of them had this kind of background (even Thomas) that warranted such scrutiny. The issue is the nominee.

He never should have lied about the drinking. He was trying to avoid any possibility that he could have attacked Ford and not remembered, but he just looks ridiculous now. I mean, FFS, he pledged a fraternity and was involved in bar fights. Did he really think nobody would speak up?

Yep, this.

#LeftyLies
He was not “involved in bar fights.” He happened to be present.
He never lied about his drinking.
He did not attack Ford.

The only truth you have stated is that he pledged a fraternity.

You sound desperate. You are just making stuff up. And adding hashtags.

I'm still waiting for your summary of CBFs lies, by the way.

I wasn’t the one who said she lied. But, since you asked. I do believe she made up the whole story. I didn’t believe that at first, but as more is revealed, I do now.
And, given her former boyfriend’s letter to officials, it seems she did lie regarding her fear of flying and her coaching of a friend on a polygraph. She lied to her former boyfriend about credit card charges. Why not now?

Can you explain how she knew that 1) Brett Kavanaugh was a heavy drinker/hard partier in high school/college and 2) that Mike Judge was a heavy drinker/hard partier and 3) that BK and MJ were best friends -- how did she figure this all out years ago so that she could start telling her story about the two in case BK ever got nominated for SCOTUS and she got called to testify against him?

Not one single pro-BK poster has come here to eplain how Ford figured all this out. Because otherwise it's a great coincidence, is it not, that the person she picked to lie about just happened to be a hard-drinking lout in high school and college and had a best buddy who was also a hard-drinking lout. She had to have done serious research to find this out so that she could make her lies ring true. Please explain. The notion that she saw his name in the paper in 2012 when he was nominated for a judgeship, saw he was about her age and went to GT Prep, and then started researching and somehow discovered he was a huge drinker and had a best friend named Mike Judge who was also a drinker, so then she started telling her tale in the event she could use it, is too incredible to believe. She would have had to talk to others whom BK acknowledges he knows to find all this out. Where are those people saying she called or wrote them asking for dirt on him? So far haven't heard anyone come forward and say, hey CBF contacted me in 2012 asking if I knew BK and what was he like.

To me the simple solution to this question is the one that makes the most sense: she did know BK, she did know MJ, this did happen to her, she is telling the truth.

To follow up on this post: Gorsuch is ALSO a GP alumnus her age. She could have picked him to lie about, right? She could have named him way back when she told her husband about this, in the event Gorsuch got nominated. He was also in the news, someone who worked for a Republican president in the DOJ. But then her story wouldn't have rung true, because there is no evidence he was a hard drinker with a pattern of loutish behavior.

So how did she zero in on BK to lie about, if you believe she lied?

I want to hear Kavanaugh supporters come here and explain this.

I think this is the strongest argument for Ford.

Still, even the "strongest" argument is uncorroborated testimony, including from the witnesses who were present at the house.

I view it as unproven, and unprovable. Thus, I give benefit of doubt/presumption to Kavanaugh.

You are using corroboration like you know what it means. Her testimony is NOT uncorroborated.

You can see you still aren't sure but her testimony WAS corroborated. Not just with HER corroboration, but also with his (his calendar).

I do know what the word means.

You are free to believe what you want, but that calendar does not prove her allegations even remotely. It doesn't corroborate them either insofar as they witnesses deny she was at that event.

You need to acknowledge the arguments on both sides. Otherwise, you are just a hack.

Okay now I know you are just nuts. No witnesses deny she was at the event. They say they do not recall - that is NOT the same thing.
She has extensive corroborating evidence - the therapy appts where she spoke of the attack, words to her husband years ago, her polygraph.

All of these things are corroborating evidence. These things would be considered if this were a criminal trial. They EXACTLY are corroborating evidence.

Which he knew, as a judge. He knew all of this and he still said it over and over again at the hearing for his soundbites. He was not remotely honest on there.

That’s not evidence. Seriously she does not have any proof. This is why people doubt her. She really needs the people she listed as witnesses to affirm her story. She needs to release the therapy notes. Right now her witnesses do not back her story and who known what’s in the therapy notes.

They exactly are evidence. Enough for a conviction? No. Enough to pass on him for SC? Hell yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My laugh out loud moment of today: Megyn Kelly says that the letter from "Bart" shows.... that he is a very responsible young man!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqLP8uybUPA

Is she trying to get KellyAnne's job?

Megyn Kelly knows her days at NBC are numbered and is probably auditioning for the 7pm or 9am chair at Fox News.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interesting to go back and read the big profiles of Kavanaugh when he was nominated a few months back. Like this NYT one. Details one might normally gloss over - issues when he was nominated to the DC Circuit, partying in law school - now stand out. Some of the people listed on this multi-bylined story are pretty serious investigative reporters. I bet some of what's coming out now was edited out / not pursued then. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/14/us/politics/judge-brett-kavanaugh.html

thank you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what I think.

I think the 8 justices currently on SCOTUS are horrified at what is going on. I think that each one of them are thinking... “Geez. I’m glad nobody searched deep into my high school years because there are things there that they would certainly consider disqualifying.” I think they are disgusted that the argument is coming down to what was written in his HS yearbook and the fact that he likes beer.

It’s a travesty. Nobody is a saint. Nobody has made Kavanaugh out to be a saint. He’s human - just like the other 8 justices who have been confirmed. And, simply because people have leveled false allegations at him, we have come to this. It’s pathetic.

I agree that they are likely horrified. I disagree about why. I doubt any of them had this kind of background (even Thomas) that warranted such scrutiny. The issue is the nominee.

He never should have lied about the drinking. He was trying to avoid any possibility that he could have attacked Ford and not remembered, but he just looks ridiculous now. I mean, FFS, he pledged a fraternity and was involved in bar fights. Did he really think nobody would speak up?

Yep, this.

#LeftyLies
He was not “involved in bar fights.” He happened to be present.
He never lied about his drinking.
He did not attack Ford.

The only truth you have stated is that he pledged a fraternity.

You sound desperate. You are just making stuff up. And adding hashtags.

I'm still waiting for your summary of CBFs lies, by the way.

I wasn’t the one who said she lied. But, since you asked. I do believe she made up the whole story. I didn’t believe that at first, but as more is revealed, I do now.
And, given her former boyfriend’s letter to officials, it seems she did lie regarding her fear of flying and her coaching of a friend on a polygraph. She lied to her former boyfriend about credit card charges. Why not now?

Can you explain how she knew that 1) Brett Kavanaugh was a heavy drinker/hard partier in high school/college and 2) that Mike Judge was a heavy drinker/hard partier and 3) that BK and MJ were best friends -- how did she figure this all out years ago so that she could start telling her story about the two in case BK ever got nominated for SCOTUS and she got called to testify against him?

Not one single pro-BK poster has come here to eplain how Ford figured all this out. Because otherwise it's a great coincidence, is it not, that the person she picked to lie about just happened to be a hard-drinking lout in high school and college and had a best buddy who was also a hard-drinking lout. She had to have done serious research to find this out so that she could make her lies ring true. Please explain. The notion that she saw his name in the paper in 2012 when he was nominated for a judgeship, saw he was about her age and went to GT Prep, and then started researching and somehow discovered he was a huge drinker and had a best friend named Mike Judge who was also a drinker, so then she started telling her tale in the event she could use it, is too incredible to believe. She would have had to talk to others whom BK acknowledges he knows to find all this out. Where are those people saying she called or wrote them asking for dirt on him? So far haven't heard anyone come forward and say, hey CBF contacted me in 2012 asking if I knew BK and what was he like.

To me the simple solution to this question is the one that makes the most sense: she did know BK, she did know MJ, this did happen to her, she is telling the truth.

She read Mark Judge's novel. It's all in there, the Safeway job ...

We don't have her 2012 therapists notes. We don't know what's in there. One thing is certain Kavanaugh's name was not mentioned in the notes.