Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 5

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think liberals should let it go at this point. The Dems used Ford, despite knowing she had no proof of her allegation from high school, to try to force Kavanaugh to withdraw, and it didn't work. He is in the SCOTUS now, and there he will stay. Stop wasting your time dreaming about impeachment, since you will never get the 2/3 of the Senate you'd need to convict.

I don't know about that. But we do need to do something to stop the acceptability of lying in our leaders. The moral fiber of our nation cannot hold if our very leaders are bold faced liars. What to do, I'm not sure. (and, yes, I'm against democratic liars as well. I thought if there was anything that defined what it means to be American, it is the sacredness of truth)

I think we need to distinguish between lies. Lying about a slang term for flatulence in one's high school yearbook is not the same as lying about being able to keep one's doctor and having premiums go down.

And as a reminder, things people have called out as lies, haven't been.
Kavanaugh said he drank.
Kavanaugh's answer for what Devils Triangle meant was backed up by men who were Prep students at the time.
The FFFF thing was shown to be a regular, non-sexual, thing the boys did.

I think the assumption that the term wasn't one they used for farting, and thus is proof he perjured himself, is ridiculous at this point.

That leaves the comment about their friend from the girls school. I've known teenage boys, and I can easily imagine them saying and doing something crude and thinking it was affectionate toward her, particularly if they didn't ever have to consider she would actually see it. The things teenagers consider jokes or incrowd endearments sometimes miss the mark completely. It doesn't mean they're intended to be cruel. So that too, I think is a challenging one to prove perjury.

Point, it should have been investigated properly. As PP said, there is a pattern of potential lies about things great and small, both recent and in the distant past. It is not necessary for the FBI to prove perjury. Just provide information so that a fair minded Senator (seem to be a handful left) can make a decision based facts not conjecture.

The pattern I see is he's accused of lying, only to then have other people or evidence backing him up as being accurate. The "pattern" shows multiple cases where the people accusing him were wrong, and maybe a couple cases where there might be some question left.

You see it in this thread, people talking about "all the lies" he told about his HS yearbook. They're including the drinking (not a lie), the devils triangle (not a lie), FFFF (not a lie). Of course when you include things that aren't lies, the list appears to be a pattern. When you consider the list and start throwing things out that have been demonstrated not a lie, suddenly it's not a pattern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The pattern I see is he's accused of lying, only to then have other people or evidence backing him up as being accurate. The "pattern" shows multiple cases where the people accusing him were wrong, and maybe a couple cases where there might be some question left.

You see it in this thread, people talking about "all the lies" he told about his HS yearbook. They're including the drinking (not a lie), the devils triangle (not a lie), FFFF (not a lie). Of course when you include things that aren't lies, the list appears to be a pattern. When you consider the list and start throwing things out that have been demonstrated not a lie, suddenly it's not a pattern.

The pattern I see is Brett lying and a very select group of his friends backing him up when everyone else says those were lies.

And those aren’t the lies of substance. Brett lied about receiving and using stolen emails while working in the Bush White House. Perjury. He did it. And it’s a big damn deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:notice how all the accusers/lawyers/dem bad actors suddenly got reallllly quiet as soon as Kavaungh was confirmed and sworn in.... all of this was a total farce and now they are being investigated. Just wait...

Only in your bubble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can everyone back up a little. Regardless of your feelings about Kavanaugh etc., does anyone have any insight into the referral by Chief Justice Roberts of the complaints against Kavanaugh? A lot of reporters were quick to anticipate that the complaints would be dismissed as moot. Is that correct?

They can't kick him off the court for the complaints alone, but what they can do is, if substantiated, lend weight to potentially impeaching and removing, although I think that's an impossible bar to meet at this point. And if they are substantiated, they lend help to the "* by his name" concept.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:notice how all the accusers/lawyers/dem bad actors suddenly got reallllly quiet as soon as Kavaungh was confirmed and sworn in.... all of this was a total farce and now they are being investigated. Just wait...

He's confirmed, there's nothing else they can do right now.

Sure there is. If they wanted a criminal investigation, they could make a police report.

They are choosing not to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The pattern I see is he's accused of lying, only to then have other people or evidence backing him up as being accurate. The "pattern" shows multiple cases where the people accusing him were wrong, and maybe a couple cases where there might be some question left.

You see it in this thread, people talking about "all the lies" he told about his HS yearbook. They're including the drinking (not a lie), the devils triangle (not a lie), FFFF (not a lie). Of course when you include things that aren't lies, the list appears to be a pattern. When you consider the list and start throwing things out that have been demonstrated not a lie, suddenly it's not a pattern.

The pattern I see is Brett lying and a very select group of his friends backing him up when everyone else says those were lies.

And those aren’t the lies of substance. Brett lied about receiving and using stolen emails while working in the Bush White House. Perjury. He did it. And it’s a big damn deal.

Kavanaugh's an ass, right? Arrogant, drunk? Slimy?

Why is it that you think people will lie for him (assuming he's lying and needs backup), and people won't lie for Ford (assuming she's lying and needs backup)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:notice how all the accusers/lawyers/dem bad actors suddenly got reallllly quiet as soon as Kavaungh was confirmed and sworn in.... all of this was a total farce and now they are being investigated. Just wait...

From where I sit, I still see people protesting and having lengthy discussions at work, in car pool lines and online, like here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:notice how all the accusers/lawyers/dem bad actors suddenly got reallllly quiet as soon as Kavaungh was confirmed and sworn in.... all of this was a total farce and now they are being investigated. Just wait...

From where I sit, I still see people protesting and having lengthy discussions at work, in car pool lines and online, like here.

And lawyers, lots of lawyers talking about the integrity of the court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It wasn't Kavanaugh who lied about the events over 30 years ago, it was Ford and Martinez. In Martinez's case, no one from a liberal institution such as Yale would come forward to corroborate the story of a girl who admits she was going foggy due to college dorm drinking and may or may not have remembered correctly if Kavanaugh was zipping up his pants. Sure, a bunch of people said he drank and maybe the puritans out there consider that a sin but many don't. That she internalized it for so long and then politicized it is so sad for her.

In Ford's case, it's an outright lie. Not a single friend would step forward to perjure themselves by saying they remembered picking her up and taking her home. That's all it would have taken, one person to step forward and say they gave her a ride home. She sent in a ridiculous statement hoping to do a spot of damage and remain out of it, the dems betrayed her and then they hung her out to dry. No direct family members signed her "believe" statement and no family members showed for the hearing and none spoke up for her because they didn't want to get caught lying. Do you know why she didn't take the offer to be interviewed in CA? It's because she was never there. She never left the Delaware beaches as the Dems were prepping her so she had to perjure herself by saying she was claustrophobic and couldn't make the trip. That's why she had so much trouble remembering details of the run up to the hearing. She couldn't keep her lies straight. Once she got through her well rehearsed description, she came across as a lying witness.

If you are looking for the Dalai Lama or a population of them to spring forward and become the heads of companies and elected officials, you'll be looking for a long time. Kavanaugh's had over 30 years to grow up, mature and become a good father and professional. I hope he succeeds and fulfills the promises of the repubs.

YOU are a liar.

Good comeback Potsie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It wasn't Kavanaugh who lied about the events over 30 years ago, it was Ford and Martinez. In Martinez's case, no one from a liberal institution such as Yale would come forward to corroborate the story of a girl who admits she was going foggy due to college dorm drinking and may or may not have remembered correctly if Kavanaugh was zipping up his pants. Sure, a bunch of people said he drank and maybe the puritans out there consider that a sin but many don't. That she internalized it for so long and then politicized it is so sad for her.

In Ford's case, it's an outright lie. Not a single friend would step forward to perjure themselves by saying they remembered picking her up and taking her home. That's all it would have taken, one person to step forward and say they gave her a ride home. She sent in a ridiculous statement hoping to do a spot of damage and remain out of it, the dems betrayed her and then they hung her out to dry. No direct family members signed her "believe" statement and no family members showed for the hearing and none spoke up for her because they didn't want to get caught lying. Do you know why she didn't take the offer to be interviewed in CA? It's because she was never there. She never left the Delaware beaches as the Dems were prepping her so she had to perjure herself by saying she was claustrophobic and couldn't make the trip. That's why she had so much trouble remembering details of the run up to the hearing. She couldn't keep her lies straight. Once she got through her well rehearsed description, she came across as a lying witness.

If you are looking for the Dalai Lama or a population of them to spring forward and become the heads of companies and elected officials, you'll be looking for a long time. Kavanaugh's had over 30 years to grow up, mature and become a good father and professional. I hope he succeeds and fulfills the promises of the repubs.

I think you meant Ramierez, not Martinez, though I get it that from your perspective, "they are all the same" - that said, she had scores of coroborrating witnesses. However the White House refused to let the FBI investigate them. That's ok though, they are investigating them now.

Ha Ha. Yes, the mistake in the name indicates the disdain for the allegation. She had a bunch of people saying he drank but none coming forward to raise an allegation of sexual assault based on dorm room drinking where the "victim" is half in the bag. Yale may be very liberal but not stupid liberal where they would perjure themselves on a baseless charge. Good luck with the scores of witnesses and let us know when they can verify when Kavanaugh kicked their dog too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And yet unfortunately the liberals decided not to focus on these things but instead of an allegation of sexual assault that had zero evidence to back it up.

Zero evidence? Julie Swetnick is a woman with an impeccable reputation. She was at 10 parties where Kavanaugh was spiking the punch bowl and gang raping women. She had 4 witnesses that could back up her story but Trump made sure the FBI would not investigate her claim.

Is this supposed to be a joke. This allegation blew the whole case for the Democrats. Not believable at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone please clearly show what he actually, provably LIED about under oath?
Honest question.

Maybe an investigation would come in handy...oh wait...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1) BK *lied* under oath about his drinking. Doesn't matter why, or what pressures were on him, or that the drinking took place when he was younger. A SCOTUS should *never* lie under oath. The truly sad part about this is that if he had not lied about his drinking (which we all would have chalked up to as typical highschool/college behavior), we would be more likely to believe him about the Ford assault claims.

2) BK was clearly partisan when it mattered. Before the SJC, televised before the nation, he made clearly biased claims about the Democratic Party and the Clintons.

This reminds me of when the democrats were saying that the republicans were so concerned about a consensual BJ. When the Republicans stated that they did not care about the BJ, but because he had lied under oath about and had then been disbarred. The democrats scoffed. But now the democrats are doing the same thing. They are saying it’s not the drinking, it’s because Kavanaugh lied about it. Such hypocrites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And yet unfortunately the liberals decided not to focus on these things but instead of an allegation of sexual assault that had zero evidence to back it up.

Zero evidence? Julie Swetnick is a woman with an impeccable reputation. She was at 10 parties where Kavanaugh was spiking the punch bowl and gang raping women. She had 4 witnesses that could back up her story but Trump made sure the FBI would not investigate her claim.

Is this supposed to be a joke. This allegation blew the whole case for the Democrats. Not believable at all.

I know that when I head out to a gang rape, I always pack a punch bowl. It adds a touch of class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And yet unfortunately the liberals decided not to focus on these things but instead of an allegation of sexual assault that had zero evidence to back it up.

Zero evidence? Julie Swetnick is a woman with an impeccable reputation. She was at 10 parties where Kavanaugh was spiking the punch bowl and gang raping women. She had 4 witnesses that could back up her story but Trump made sure the FBI would not investigate her claim.

Is this supposed to be a joke. This allegation blew the whole case for the Democrats. Not believable at all.

I know that when I head out to a gang rape, I always pack a punch bowl. It adds a touch of class.

Anybody who thinks that a 20 year old woman who went to Gaithersburg High is going to be hanging out with a bunch of 16-17 year old Georgetown Prep students on 10 different occasions clearly never went to private school in this area.

And punch bowls? What high school party have you ever seen a punch bowl at?