Brett Kavanaugh now under FBI investigation

**LGBTQIAPK & G-D** · 09-30-2018

Originally Posted by Reck

How the do you "look into" the alleged attempted rape and not talk to either RapeK and Ford about it if you're the FBI?

It's ing insanity!

**ShotThroughTheHeart** · 09-30-2018

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

Fox News judge goes off on ‘adolescent’ Dr. Ford with ’emotional and psychological problems’

Former US Attorney Joseph diGenova went after Ford personally, attacking her as immature, damaged and either dumb or a liar.

“Quite frankly, her testimony the other day was far from credible,” he began. She’s a very, very disturbed woman with clear emotional and psychological problems. This is a 55-year-old adult who testified like an adolescent. Not a single corroborating detail.”

“That means she’s either dumb as a post or she lied to the committee under oath,” he continued. “I think Christine Ford is a very sad woman and not a thing that she said should be believed and none of it has corroborated.”

“She may very well believe that something happened to her, but none of it relates to Brett Kavanaugh, and she presented no evidence other than her stark raving testimony that it was he,”

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/09/fox...e+Raw+Story%29

**Chris** · 09-30-2018

He misrepresented his drinking habits

**MultiTroll** · 09-30-2018

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

Fox News judge goes off on ‘adolescent’ Dr. Ford with ’emotional and psychological problems’

Former US Attorney Joseph diGenova went after Ford personally, attacking her as immature, damaged and either dumb or a liar.

“Quite frankly, her testimony the other day was far from credible,” he began. She’s a very, very disturbed woman with clear emotional and psychological problems. This is a 55-year-old adult who testified like an adolescent. Not a single corroborating detail.”

“That means she’s either dumb as a post or she lied to the committee under oath,” he continued. “I think Christine Ford is a very sad woman and not a thing that she said should be believed and none of it has corroborated.”

“She may very well believe that something happened to her, but none of it relates to Brett Kavanaugh, and she presented no evidence other than her stark raving testimony that it was he,”

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/09/fox...e+Raw+Story%29

Joe working hard to earn his Fox appearance money

Was anything inaccurate from his quotes?

**Reck** · 09-30-2018

Originally Posted by Chris

He misrepresented his drinking habits

He didn't "misreprensented" anything. He outright lied about being a drunk under oath.

Chris

**ducks** · 09-30-2018

https://twitter.com/JacobAWohl/statu...799371776?s=20

**Spurs Homer** · 09-30-2018

Originally Posted by Mul roll

Was anything inaccurate from his quotes?

The entire content.

**boutons_deux** · 09-30-2018

Ford gonna be a hero

y'all's lying, abusive, privileged prick K is goin down, beer and all, not gonna be on SCOTUS.

Dems take the House, and impeach K from his Federal judgeship for lying to Congress multiple times.

**MultiTroll** · 10-01-2018

Kuntstein, Fords attorneys to be investigated?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartandhp

**Chris** · 10-01-2018

uh oh Pochahantas

**Chris** · 10-01-2018

**Chris** · 10-01-2018

**Chris** · 10-01-2018

**Pavlov** · 10-01-2018

Originally Posted by Chris

uh oh Pochahantas

"secret"

**Chris** · 10-01-2018

**ElNono** · 10-01-2018

Originally Posted by ElNono

Just feel for Chris, tbh... her decision to testify means the spin machine is going to be working overtime next week... those tweets nobody reads ain't going to get copy pasted all by themselves

time to pull a hater in here, tbh, called it!

**boutons_deux** · 10-01-2018

Yet Another Former Classmate Of Brett Kavanaugh Says He Drank More Than He Lets On

Chad Ludington, who went to Yale with Kavanaugh, told the New York Times he

often saw Kavanaugh “staggering from alcohol consumption.”

North Carolina State University professor Chad Ludington has joined a handful of other former classmates of Brett Kavanaugh in contradicting the Supreme Court nominee’s claims about his past drinking habits.

Ludington told the New York Times in a statement Sunday that

Kavanaugh played down “the degree and frequency” of his drinking

to the Senate Judiciary Committee last week. He said he often saw Kavanaugh “staggering from alcohol consumption.”

Ludington called

Kavanaugh’s answers about drinking a “blatant mischaracterization”

based on his experiences around the judge when they attended Yale University together. Ludington claimed he often saw Kavanaugh “belligerent and aggressive” while drunk.

“It is truth that is at stake, and

I believe that the ability to speak the truth,

even when it does not reflect well upon oneself,

is a paramount quality we seek in our nation’s most powerful judges,”

Ludington said in a statement to the Times.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...gEmail__100118

“It is truth that is at stake" ... in theory, yes, but in practice, the oligarchy/Repugs' only "stake" is 100% reliable, extreme hard right 5 (or more) SCOTUS s to deliver the oligarchy's bidding.

K's lying coverup of his excessive drinking 30+ years ago is worse than the drinking (if he has really stopped heavy drinking)

K's lying must block him from SCOTUS and impeached/convict him from his current judgeship

(but of course the Repugs have no values except oligarchy's $$$)

**101A** · 10-01-2018

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

Yet Another Former Classmate Of Brett Kavanaugh Says He Drank More Than He Lets On

Chad Ludington, who went to Yale with Kavanaugh, told the New York Times he

often saw Kavanaugh “staggering from alcohol consumption.”

North Carolina State University professor Chad Ludington has joined a handful of other former classmates of Brett Kavanaugh in contradicting the Supreme Court nominee’s claims about his past drinking habits.

Ludington told the New York Times in a statement Sunday that

Kavanaugh played down “the degree and frequency” of his drinking

to the Senate Judiciary Committee last week. He said he often saw Kavanaugh “staggering from alcohol consumption.”

Ludington called

Kavanaugh’s answers about drinking a “blatant mischaracterization”

based on his experiences around the judge when they attended Yale University together. Ludington claimed he often saw Kavanaugh “belligerent and aggressive” while drunk.

“It is truth that is at stake, and

I believe that the ability to speak the truth,

even when it does not reflect well upon oneself,

is a paramount quality we seek in our nation’s most powerful judges,”

Ludington said in a statement to the Times.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...gEmail__100118

“It is truth that is at stake" ... in theory, yes, but in practice, the oligarchy/Repugs' only "stake" is 100% reliable, extreme hard right 5 (or more) SCOTUS s to deliver the oligarchy's bidding.

K's lying coverup of his excessive drinking 30+ years ago is worse than the drinking (if he has really stopped heavy drinking)

K's lying must block him from SCOTUS and impeached/convict him from his current judgeship

(but of course the Repugs have no values except oligarchy's $$$)

The Dems were focused on getting him to confess to "blacking out". They never asked "how much" or "how often". He said that he sometimes drank "too much". The only thing he denied was blacking out, that I remember.

**boutons_deux** · 10-01-2018

John Oliver destroys the self-destructive K, and K's attempted rape of Ford is way down Oliver's list of reasons why K should NEVER be judge.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opi8X9hQ7q8

K is the epitome of oligarchy/Repug kakistocracy.

**DMC** · 10-01-2018

Originally Posted by Winehole23

it wasn't an analogy. Senate confirmation is a job interview.

Due process and standards of proof don't apply, Senators vote their conscience.

As designed.

So you're at a job interview with a dozen people in the room interviewing you at the same time. A few of them told you the minute you walked in that they were going to destroy you. A few of them told you that you were in. The "destroy you" people want you to submit to background investigations by the FBI. The "you're in" people tell you it's not necessary, you're good.

Job interviews typically aren't loaded with people who hope you fail and have no intention of being honest about you as a worthy candidate, even before speaking to you or knowing anything about you.

It's interesting though how you try to equate the two, when they aren't even remotely similar.