Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ABA letter? Fake news. Sent by one dude and not approved or endorsed by the ABA, who officially say Kavanaugh's rating remains unchanged:

https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2018/09/28/wow-it-turns-out-the-american-bar-association-story-on-brett-kavanaugh-was-fake-news/

That's not what fake news means.

It was repeated by the Dems several times yesterday in the committee room. So, yes, it is fake.

It wasn't sent by "some dude". It wasn't sent by the Judicial Committee. That's what you were endeavoring to say, but failed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You people need to put down the Kool aid. Are you willfully stupid or outright crazy? Or just a garden variety troll? As soon as you start talking about "liberals" as though they are a monolith, you lose all credibility. There are crazy posts on these Kavanaugh threads, to be sure, but so is yours. You "know" he's innocent. There are a limited set of people who "know" that, and you ain't one of em.

LOL! Kool aid? Go watch the opening of the first hearing on Kavanaugh. Almost choreographed and staged. Ridiculous, unprofessional performance by Dems.

Then, go listen to Feinstein the afternoon of K's last hearing--all the attacks. All the stupid questions about high school yearbooks. Personal attacks. Kavanaugh has had years on the bench and yet high school is the best they have? And, the assault accusations. Look at how Ford was handled by her lawyers--either she is lying or they deceived her.

No. It's not Kool Aid. The spiked punch came from Feinstein, et.al--not Kavanaugh.

And then watch this and try to convince me that this guy is owed a Supreme Court seat.

Not sure if I’m missing something, but that seems pretty uneventful.

Well, I guess you missed all the LIES the guy who wants to be on the SCOTUS said. Boofing means using drugs/alcohol anally, Devil’s Triangle is a threesome, Kav refused to admit that ralphing referred to puking when drunk, etc.
Review the tape and you’ll find more. Oh, and he claimed the ralphing had to do with his “weak stomach.”

All these stupid small lies were completely unnecessary. He could have said the things in his yearbook were sensational exaggerations typical of a teenager, and that he’sd put them in for the benefit of his friends because he wanted to look cool. Instead, he lied, which is far more suspicious. If he’s lying about small things, he’s surely lying about big things.

Seems like a SCOTUS nominee should know this:

"Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus" is a Latin phrase meaning "false in one thing, false in everything." At common law, it is the legal principle that a witness who testifies falsely about one matter is not credible to testify about any matter."

Delivered by BLUMENTHAL. I just can't

I didn't hear it from Blumenthal, and the phrase is part of jury instructions about the reliability of testimony under oath. Kavanaugh was under oath, Blumenthal wasn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ABA letter? Fake news. Sent by one dude and not approved or endorsed by the ABA, who officially say Kavanaugh's rating remains unchanged:

https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2018/09/28/wow-it-turns-out-the-american-bar-association-story-on-brett-kavanaugh-was-fake-news/

That's not what fake news means.

It was repeated by the Dems several times yesterday in the committee room. So, yes, it is fake.

It wasn't sent by "some dude". It wasn't sent by the Judicial Committee. That's what you were endeavoring to say, but failed.

It was sent by the President of the ABA, who was supposed to run it through the committee, but it appears he went rogue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perjury.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/lawandcrime.com/high-profile/legal-experts-and-yale-friends-believe-kavanaugh-committed-perjury/amp/

This is not convincing with respect to drinking. He said at times he probably drank too much, but he never drank to black out. The people they quote simply confirm that sometimes he (and they) drank too much. No quotes about him drinking to blackout, so hard to see how he perjured himself.

Respectfully, that is a dishonest gloss. “Heavy drinker who was frequently very drunk.”

Wouldn't that be covered by his statement that sometimes he drank too much?

No. He was fairly squirrelly and not once suggested a “frequently” kind of occurrence. Tee it up if you can show otherwise. No offense, but it can’t be done.

Perjury is a serious charge. If he said sometimes he drank too much it would seem difficult to pin a perjury charge on him because his "sometimes" is another's "frequently." The meaning of these words is subjective, so it would seem hard to say he lied.

Perjury simply means he lied under oath. Whitehouse’s entire line of questions re Brett’s drinking and social activities as documented in his own contemporaneous yearbook entries gave him every chance to be straight. It appears likely he wasn’t. I’m sure you’ll demur but the contemporaneous boofing stuff someone else dug up and the cross-references of same by him and Judge strain credulity.

Your point is “it’s too petty for perjury.” It’s a poor point. He non-stop lied after oath to a Senator questioning him about references he made to his social life in a contemporaneous doc to when the assault is alleged. It’s perjury.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone's in trouble:

Grassley: "When individuals provide fabricated allegations to the Committee, diverting Committee resources during time-sensitive investigations, it materially impedes our work. Such acts are not only unfair; they are potentially illegal.



Chad Pergram @ChadPergram
57m
Grassley makes a criminal referral to the FBI. Cmte says someone made "apparent false statements to committee investigators alleging misconduct by Judge Brett Kavanaugh." Cmte says it's "not been able to substantiate any allegations of wrongdoing by Judge Kavanaugh."

Surely not those two guys who said it was them that Ford had mistaken Kavanaugh for?

It’s not Ford and it’s not Ramirez, and desperados here aside, their claims aren’t going away.

I hear it's referring to Avenetti at minimum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone's in trouble:

Grassley: "When individuals provide fabricated allegations to the Committee, diverting Committee resources during time-sensitive investigations, it materially impedes our work. Such acts are not only unfair; they are potentially illegal.



Chad Pergram @ChadPergram
57m
Grassley makes a criminal referral to the FBI. Cmte says someone made "apparent false statements to committee investigators alleging misconduct by Judge Brett Kavanaugh." Cmte says it's "not been able to substantiate any allegations of wrongdoing by Judge Kavanaugh."

Surely not those two guys who said it was them that Ford had mistaken Kavanaugh for?

It’s not Ford and it’s not Ramirez, and desperados here aside, their claims aren’t going away.

I hear it's referring to Avenetti at minimum.

It's referring to the guy in Rhode island.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ABA letter? Fake news. Sent by one dude and not approved or endorsed by the ABA, who officially say Kavanaugh's rating remains unchanged:

https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2018/09/28/wow-it-turns-out-the-american-bar-association-story-on-brett-kavanaugh-was-fake-news/

That's not what fake news means.

It was repeated by the Dems several times yesterday in the committee room. So, yes, it is fake.

Wow! This is the single most shocking thing that has happened during this whole episode.

I expect politicians to lie, I expect journalists to take short cuts with the truth, and I expect DCUM to post comments slanted by their partisan views.

But never, never would I expect the president of the ABA to misrepresent his views as those of Bar Association.

What happens to him for this misstep?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone's in trouble:

Grassley: "When individuals provide fabricated allegations to the Committee, diverting Committee resources during time-sensitive investigations, it materially impedes our work. Such acts are not only unfair; they are potentially illegal.



Chad Pergram @ChadPergram
57m
Grassley makes a criminal referral to the FBI. Cmte says someone made "apparent false statements to committee investigators alleging misconduct by Judge Brett Kavanaugh." Cmte says it's "not been able to substantiate any allegations of wrongdoing by Judge Kavanaugh."

Surely not those two guys who said it was them that Ford had mistaken Kavanaugh for?

It’s not Ford and it’s not Ramirez, and desperados here aside, their claims aren’t going away.

I hear it's referring to Avenetti at minimum.

After seeing how they went after Christopher Steele, we've seen how the SJC regards people who provide incriminating information about members of the GOP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ABA letter? Fake news. Sent by one dude and not approved or endorsed by the ABA, who officially say Kavanaugh's rating remains unchanged:

https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2018/09/28/wow-it-turns-out-the-american-bar-association-story-on-brett-kavanaugh-was-fake-news/

This is maddening.
On Thursday, as part of his testimony, Judge Kavanaugh spoke about the money behind the effort to smear his name. And, the coordination on the part of liberals, Democrats, and outside groups.

This is a perfect example of that. He was so right.

Democrats are a dirty bunch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perjury.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/lawandcrime.com/high-profile/legal-experts-and-yale-friends-believe-kavanaugh-committed-perjury/amp/

This is not convincing with respect to drinking. He said at times he probably drank too much, but he never drank to black out. The people they quote simply confirm that sometimes he (and they) drank too much. No quotes about him drinking to blackout, so hard to see how he perjured himself.

Respectfully, that is a dishonest gloss. “Heavy drinker who was frequently very drunk.”

Wouldn't that be covered by his statement that sometimes he drank too much?

No. He was fairly squirrelly and not once suggested a “frequently” kind of occurrence. Tee it up if you can show otherwise. No offense, but it can’t be done.

Perjury is a serious charge. If he said sometimes he drank too much it would seem difficult to pin a perjury charge on him because his "sometimes" is another's "frequently." The meaning of these words is subjective, so it would seem hard to say he lied.

Perjury simply means he lied under oath. Whitehouse’s entire line of questions re Brett’s drinking and social activities as documented in his own contemporaneous yearbook entries gave him every chance to be straight. It appears likely he wasn’t. I’m sure you’ll demur but the contemporaneous boofing stuff someone else dug up and the cross-references of same by him and Judge strain credulity.

Your point is “it’s too petty for perjury.” It’s a poor point. He non-stop lied after oath to a Senator questioning him about references he made to his social life in a contemporaneous doc to when the assault is alleged. It’s perjury.

Not that it's too petty. But it simply doesn't seem to be lie. If he said he never drank too much, it would be. But he admitted that sometimes he did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ABA letter? Fake news. Sent by one dude and not approved or endorsed by the ABA, who officially say Kavanaugh's rating remains unchanged:

https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2018/09/28/wow-it-turns-out-the-american-bar-association-story-on-brett-kavanaugh-was-fake-news/

That's not what fake news means.

It was repeated by the Dems several times yesterday in the committee room. So, yes, it is fake.

Wow! This is the single most shocking thing that has happened during this whole episode.

I expect politicians to lie, I expect journalists to take short cuts with the truth, and I expect DCUM to post comments slanted by their partisan views.

But never, never would I expect the president of the ABA to misrepresent his views as those of Bar Association.

What happens to him for this misstep?

Here is media coverage of the letter, as well as a link to the letter. It's pretty straightforward. Not fake.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/408894-american-bar-association-calls-on-senate-to-hold-off-on-kavanaugh-vote-until

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ABA letter? Fake news. Sent by one dude and not approved or endorsed by the ABA, who officially say Kavanaugh's rating remains unchanged:

https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2018/09/28/wow-it-turns-out-the-american-bar-association-story-on-brett-kavanaugh-was-fake-news/

That's not what fake news means.

It was repeated by the Dems several times yesterday in the committee room. So, yes, it is fake.

Wow! This is the single most shocking thing that has happened during this whole episode.

I expect politicians to lie, I expect journalists to take short cuts with the truth, and I expect DCUM to post comments slanted by their partisan views.

But never, never would I expect the president of the ABA to misrepresent his views as those of Bar Association.

What happens to him for this misstep?

Here is media coverage of the letter, as well as a link to the letter. It's pretty straightforward. Not fake.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/408894-american-bar-association-calls-on-senate-to-hold-off-on-kavanaugh-vote-until

So is the second letter a fake?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perjury.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/lawandcrime.com/high-profile/legal-experts-and-yale-friends-believe-kavanaugh-committed-perjury/amp/

This is not convincing with respect to drinking. He said at times he probably drank too much, but he never drank to black out. The people they quote simply confirm that sometimes he (and they) drank too much. No quotes about him drinking to blackout, so hard to see how he perjured himself.

Respectfully, that is a dishonest gloss. “Heavy drinker who was frequently very drunk.”

Wouldn't that be covered by his statement that sometimes he drank too much?

No. He was fairly squirrelly and not once suggested a “frequently” kind of occurrence. Tee it up if you can show otherwise. No offense, but it can’t be done.

Perjury is a serious charge. If he said sometimes he drank too much it would seem difficult to pin a perjury charge on him because his "sometimes" is another's "frequently." The meaning of these words is subjective, so it would seem hard to say he lied.

Perjury simply means he lied under oath. Whitehouse’s entire line of questions re Brett’s drinking and social activities as documented in his own contemporaneous yearbook entries gave him every chance to be straight. It appears likely he wasn’t. I’m sure you’ll demur but the contemporaneous boofing stuff someone else dug up and the cross-references of same by him and Judge strain credulity.

Your point is “it’s too petty for perjury.” It’s a poor point. He non-stop lied after oath to a Senator questioning him about references he made to his social life in a contemporaneous doc to when the assault is alleged. It’s perjury.

Not that it's too petty. But it simply doesn't seem to be lie. If he said he never drank too much, it would be. But he admitted that sometimes he did.

It certainly seemed to be a lie to two at minimum Yale friends who immediately filed bullshit on his claim. Come on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You people need to put down the Kool aid. Are you willfully stupid or outright crazy? Or just a garden variety troll? As soon as you start talking about "liberals" as though they are a monolith, you lose all credibility. There are crazy posts on these Kavanaugh threads, to be sure, but so is yours. You "know" he's innocent. There are a limited set of people who "know" that, and you ain't one of em.

LOL! Kool aid? Go watch the opening of the first hearing on Kavanaugh. Almost choreographed and staged. Ridiculous, unprofessional performance by Dems.

Then, go listen to Feinstein the afternoon of K's last hearing--all the attacks. All the stupid questions about high school yearbooks. Personal attacks. Kavanaugh has had years on the bench and yet high school is the best they have? And, the assault accusations. Look at how Ford was handled by her lawyers--either she is lying or they deceived her.

No. It's not Kool Aid. The spiked punch came from Feinstein, et.al--not Kavanaugh.

And then watch this and try to convince me that this guy is owed a Supreme Court seat.

Not sure if I’m missing something, but that seems pretty uneventful.

Well, I guess you missed all the LIES the guy who wants to be on the SCOTUS said. Boofing means using drugs/alcohol anally, Devil’s Triangle is a threesome, Kav refused to admit that ralphing referred to puking when drunk, etc.
Review the tape and you’ll find more. Oh, and he claimed the ralphing had to do with his “weak stomach.”

All these stupid small lies were completely unnecessary. He could have said the things in his yearbook were sensational exaggerations typical of a teenager, and that he’sd put them in for the benefit of his friends because he wanted to look cool. Instead, he lied, which is far more suspicious. If he’s lying about small things, he’s surely lying about big things.

Seems like a SCOTUS nominee should know this:

"Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus" is a Latin phrase meaning "false in one thing, false in everything." At common law, it is the legal principle that a witness who testifies falsely about one matter is not credible to testify about any matter."

Delivered by BLUMENTHAL. I just can't

I didn't hear it from Blumenthal, and the phrase is part of jury instructions about the reliability of testimony under oath. Kavanaugh was under oath, Blumenthal wasn't.

I was at work and in meetings so this is my first time watching this whole clip. What. a. liar. He must think viewers are complete idiots. Why would he and his friends be ALUMS of Renate, unless they're implying that they've completed something with respect to the woman? And, he also comes off as an entitled asshole throughout.

Also, can someone do a freeze frame analysis of his micro-expressions? Every time he lied, he did that sort of sniff thing--not sure if that's discomfort or disgust at having to answer on his face, or something else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ABA letter? Fake news. Sent by one dude and not approved or endorsed by the ABA, who officially say Kavanaugh's rating remains unchanged:

https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2018/09/28/wow-it-turns-out-the-american-bar-association-story-on-brett-kavanaugh-was-fake-news/

That's not what fake news means.

It was repeated by the Dems several times yesterday in the committee room. So, yes, it is fake.

Wow! This is the single most shocking thing that has happened during this whole episode.

I expect politicians to lie, I expect journalists to take short cuts with the truth, and I expect DCUM to post comments slanted by their partisan views.

But never, never would I expect the president of the ABA to misrepresent his views as those of Bar Association.

What happens to him for this misstep?

Here is media coverage of the letter, as well as a link to the letter. It's pretty straightforward. Not fake.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/408894-american-bar-association-calls-on-senate-to-hold-off-on-kavanaugh-vote-until

The letter also comes after the ABA previously evaluated Kavanaugh’s professional accomplishments for the Supreme Court and found him “well qualified for the position.”

The problem here, is that the president of the ABA acted independently leading the public to believe that the ABA committee backed his statements. They do not.

Therefore, Fake news.