Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 4

[Anonymous]

Denny Hastert was Speaker of the House and had security clearances and they didn’t uncover multiple sexual assaults against kids.

So enough w the ‘Kavanaugh has multiple clearances’ talking point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He lied about Devil's Triangle. It's not a drinking game. So, I assume he's lying about everything else as well.

It's not possible that a term used by some for one thing can be different from a term used by others for another thing? Or that people could use a phrase to describe different things?

When my son was 12, he and his friends were joking about "4:20". I asked him what "4:20" meant, and he told me it was when his group of friends did their homework. He wasn't going to tell me they were making a pot reference. Amusingly, they do use it as both, even years later. Is he lying, if he testifies under oath that 4:20 means you're supposed to be doing your homework?

For us, Devil's Triangle was a term for a woman with an STD

I grew up in this area during the 80's and had never even heard of "Devil's Triangle."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The FBI should have questioned the GP football player who lived 4 blocks from Columbia Country Club.

There are over 40 people who *should* have been interviewed, but weren't. And somehow there are people here who think that is acceptable.

Yep they questioned less than 10 people. That isn't an "investigation", it's a joke. Of course they didn't find what they needed, they didn't talk to the people who were involved.

Didn't Ford say there were a total of 4 people, other than her, at the party? Isn't the investigation regarding Ford's allegation? Why 40 people, if the investigation is regarding Ford's allegation and the number of possible witnesses is significantly fewer than 10, much less 40?

The 40+ people include the members of the public who have come forward to offer sworn statements as it relates to all three allegations.

Was there an agreement that the investigation was to cover multiple allegations? My understanding was that the investigation was to investigate Ford's allegation, which is the one the Senate deemed credible enough to have testimony regarding?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The FBI should have questioned the GP football player who lived 4 blocks from Columbia Country Club.

There are over 40 people who *should* have been interviewed, but weren't. And somehow there are people here who think that is acceptable.

You clearly don't understand what the FBI is tasked to do in these "investigations" (not just Kavanaugh's).

You realize the FBI wanted to interview all of these people and were barred from doing so, right?

Citation please.

Wray has let it be known that he is keeping contemperaneous memos as it relates to this investigation.

That's nice. Wray keeping memos is not evidence that the FBI wanted to interview all these people and were barred from doing so. Do you have evidence?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He lied about Devil's Triangle. It's not a drinking game. So, I assume he's lying about everything else as well.

Agree. That and the elaborate lie he concocted about FFFF - kind of disturbingly pathological if you think about it. If you don't think that type of behavior casts serious doubt on his character and fitness to sit on our SUPREME court...I don't know what to tell you

The FFFFFF thing is the one term I think he did not lie about because there are multiple references and captions in the yearbook to it that don't seem to align with what some people think it means. But boofing, devils triangle, and Renate Alumnus he lied about. The whole conversation about ralphing was totally laughable as well (re: spicy food and sensitive stomach).

He didn't lie about it. It's been corroborated by several of his friends/classmates that the boy who started "FFFFF" said it with a stutter. Liberals are (surprise, surprise!) trying to make it into something it's not.

So he signed the beach week letter by ridiculing a friend with a speech impediment? “FFFFF, Bart.”

No, idiot. The friend didn't have a speech impediment. He simply said the F-word in a funny way. Which has already been corroborated by others. Catch up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The FBI should have questioned the GP football player who lived 4 blocks from Columbia Country Club.

There are over 40 people who *should* have been interviewed, but weren't. And somehow there are people here who think that is acceptable.

Yep they questioned less than 10 people. That isn't an "investigation", it's a joke. Of course they didn't find what they needed, they didn't talk to the people who were involved.

Didn't Ford say there were a total of 4 people, other than her, at the party? Isn't the investigation regarding Ford's allegation? Why 40 people, if the investigation is regarding Ford's allegation and the number of possible witnesses is significantly fewer than 10, much less 40?

The 40+ people include the members of the public who have come forward to offer sworn statements as it relates to all three allegations.

Was there an agreement that the investigation was to cover multiple allegations? My understanding was that the investigation was to investigate Ford's allegation, which is the one the Senate deemed credible enough to have testimony regarding?

Well they interviewed Ramirez and yet refused to speak with people who socialized with Kavanaugh and Ford at YLS. People that desperately wanted to speak to the FBI.

[Anonymous]

Help - What happens during and after cloture? After cloture will we know whether there are enough votes to confirm, or do we wait until Saturday?

PS - I did check the interwebs first, but Wikipedia is only confusing me more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The truth is that Ford made an allegation without any support to corroborate what she said. Her version was full of holes.

The Democrats realized this and switched the attack to his year book, his drinking in college and his anger when he testified the second time.

The Democrats have nothing to rely on when it comes to the Ford allegation which is what started the whole thing after the hearings so they can only fall back on other accusations unrelated to the alleged sexual assault on Ford.

The yearbook corroborates her story, as does the calendar. It isn't that they changed tactics, the fact patterns warrant more scrutiny - scrutiny that the White house has shielded Kavanaugh from.

If her story was that Kavanaugh was a crude young man who drank, then yes, the yearbook and calendar corroborates her story. The most important part of her story is the sexual assault. The yearbook does not corroborate that, and we're waiting to see what the investigation turned up to see if the calendar could have helped corroborate that. Although, at best, it would help, not completely corroborate.

Just because someone was a crude young man who drank does not mean he engaged in sexual assault. Yes, many crude young men who drink engaged in sexual assault. Many did not.
If the calendar can place him where she places him, with the people she placed him with, and interviews with or statements from the potential witnesses also suggest at the least there was such a gathering, her claim will have some corroboration. The most helpful would of course be a witness who saw the assault.

But 1) there appears to have been a conscious decision to prevent the FBI from attempting to corroborate her claims, since they weren't even allowed to interview her, much less review any additional information she had

2) if Kavanaugh is lying about whether he was a crude hard drinking teen -- which most people agree he is-- then it is perfectly fair to wonder whether he is lying whether he can reliably remember not assaulting her.

1) Do you have the FBI report? I don't, so I can't say who the FBI interviewed or what details they followed up on.

2) I don't care about your claims about what "most people agree." I care about facts. Please show me the quotes where he lied. My recollection of his testimony was that he admitted to drinking when he was a teen. I can't recall off the top of my head if he was asked if he was crude. I'm sure you can provide the supporting quotes, if your claim is factual.

ng
I don't have the FBI report but I have seen the letter Dr Ford's lawyers wrote to the FBI saying they were having problems contactig the SAIC and saying no one had interviewed them.

There is plenty of evidence he lied about his behavior in HS but just to take one he claimed that the Renate alumni club was a way of paying tribute to a friend. I can't believe anyone over the age of 10 believes that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He lied about Devil's Triangle. It's not a drinking game. So, I assume he's lying about everything else as well.

It's not possible that a term used by some for one thing can be different from a term used by others for another thing? Or that people could use a phrase to describe different things?

When my son was 12, he and his friends were joking about "4:20". I asked him what "4:20" meant, and he told me it was when his group of friends did their homework. He wasn't going to tell me they were making a pot reference. Amusingly, they do use it as both, even years later. Is he lying, if he testifies under oath that 4:20 means you're supposed to be doing your homework?

Don't be stupid. Kavanaugh is lying about Devil's Triangle. Do you deny this?

I have no evidence that he is lying about Devil's Triangle. Do you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Help - What happens during and after cloture? After cloture will we know whether there are enough votes to confirm, or do we wait until Saturday?

PS - I did check the interwebs first, but Wikipedia is only confusing me more.

Cloture just means the senate is ready to vote. It doesn't mean Kavanaugh will pass. They had cloture for ACA repeal and that was voted down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He lied about Devil's Triangle. It's not a drinking game. So, I assume he's lying about everything else as well.

It's not possible that a term used by some for one thing can be different from a term used by others for another thing? Or that people could use a phrase to describe different things?

When my son was 12, he and his friends were joking about "4:20". I asked him what "4:20" meant, and he told me it was when his group of friends did their homework. He wasn't going to tell me they were making a pot reference. Amusingly, they do use it as both, even years later. Is he lying, if he testifies under oath that 4:20 means you're supposed to be doing your homework?

Would you like a pretzel to model your arguments after?

If I'm resorting to such a pretzel for my arguments, then surely someone can provide evidence that he's lying, rather than just claiming he's lying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, the lying has been going on for years now. See tweets from Leahy regarding how Kavanaugh lied in 2006 during his previous confirmation hearings about never having used stolen emails from Democrats during judicial confirmation hearings. You cannot say that Kavanaugh is a truthful judge. And what, if not truthful, are judges supposed to be? This is scandalous.

I always assumed the Federalist Society promoted lawyers were decent lawyers and judges, more or less, just bat sit crazy. Kavanaugh’s perjury and total lack of fitness for the job has me wondering just how many of those other Federalist yahoos would be better employed cleaning dog waste from city parks.

Those who clean dog waste from city parks were tricked by liberals into believing they could go to college at no cost, do no work, and emerge with a six figure salary.

Fact check; half true.

Those who clean dog waste from public parks were told by democrats that we want to make free or low cost voc-Tech training available for them to transition into careers where you can make a MC wage without a 4 year college degree. By doing actual work in areas like high tech manufacturing. Which pays better than dog poop scooping, and which cannot find enough qualified employees who can pass a drug screen. I have no idea why this is objectionable. Seems win-win to me.

I dunno, ask the GOP and their obstructionist caucus.

Where are these training programs established between 2009 and 2016?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Denny Hastert was Speaker of the House and had security clearances and they didn’t uncover multiple sexual assaults against kids.

So enough w the ‘Kavanaugh has multiple clearances’ talking point.

+ a billion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The truth is that Ford made an allegation without any support to corroborate what she said. Her version was full of holes.

The Democrats realized this and switched the attack to his year book, his drinking in college and his anger when he testified the second time.

The Democrats have nothing to rely on when it comes to the Ford allegation which is what started the whole thing after the hearings so they can only fall back on other accusations unrelated to the alleged sexual assault on Ford.

The yearbook corroborates her story, as does the calendar. It isn't that they changed tactics, the fact patterns warrant more scrutiny - scrutiny that the White house has shielded Kavanaugh from.

If her story was that Kavanaugh was a crude young man who drank, then yes, the yearbook and calendar corroborates her story. The most important part of her story is the sexual assault. The yearbook does not corroborate that, and we're waiting to see what the investigation turned up to see if the calendar could have helped corroborate that. Although, at best, it would help, not completely corroborate.

Just because someone was a crude young man who drank does not mean he engaged in sexual assault. Yes, many crude young men who drink engaged in sexual assault. Many did not.
If the calendar can place him where she places him, with the people she placed him with, and interviews with or statements from the potential witnesses also suggest at the least there was such a gathering, her claim will have some corroboration. The most helpful would of course be a witness who saw the assault.

But 1) there appears to have been a conscious decision to prevent the FBI from attempting to corroborate her claims, since they weren't even allowed to interview her, much less review any additional information she had

2) if Kavanaugh is lying about whether he was a crude hard drinking teen -- which most people agree he is-- then it is perfectly fair to wonder whether he is lying whether he can reliably remember not assaulting her.

1) Do you have the FBI report? I don't, so I can't say who the FBI interviewed or what details they followed up on.

2) I don't care about your claims about what "most people agree." I care about facts. Please show me the quotes where he lied. My recollection of his testimony was that he admitted to drinking when he was a teen. I can't recall off the top of my head if he was asked if he was crude. I'm sure you can provide the supporting quotes, if your claim is factual.

ng
I don't have the FBI report but I have seen the letter Dr Ford's lawyers wrote to the FBI saying they were having problems contactig the SAIC and saying no one had interviewed them.

There is plenty of evidence he lied about his behavior in HS but just to take one he claimed that the Renate alumni club was a way of paying tribute to a friend. I can't believe anyone over the age of 10 believes that.

That she immediately withdrew her support rather than accepting his explanation should be all anyone needs to know about that lie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He lied about Devil's Triangle. It's not a drinking game. So, I assume he's lying about everything else as well.

It's not possible that a term used by some for one thing can be different from a term used by others for another thing? Or that people could use a phrase to describe different things?

When my son was 12, he and his friends were joking about "4:20". I asked him what "4:20" meant, and he told me it was when his group of friends did their homework. He wasn't going to tell me they were making a pot reference. Amusingly, they do use it as both, even years later. Is he lying, if he testifies under oath that 4:20 means you're supposed to be doing your homework?

Don't be stupid. Kavanaugh is lying about Devil's Triangle. Do you deny this?

I have no evidence that he is lying about Devil's Triangle. Do you?

Yeah. Devil's Triangle isn't a drinking game. It's a sex act. He's lying.

Do you believe ralphing was referring to his weak stomach?