Kavanaugh Hearing

@BradMossEs
I have no idea if Julie Swetnick is telling the truth. I can say this: submitting a sworn affidavit carries with it criminal liability if she perjured herself. Also, as a clearance holder, giving perjured statements would be a career-ender. Take that for what it's worth.
11:12 AM · Sep 26, 2018

 

There is literally no way they could ever nail her on a perjury charge from this. Risk zero. And I'm not saying she's lying, but the above doesn't prove she isn't. Gotta love all these armchair legal experts all over Twitter.

 

So a allocation with no proff should be enough to keep him off the court.

 

So in the future if you don’t like the person and you don’t have the votes to stop him just make up a bunch of false allegations. You don’t have to prove the allegations so just make up a pack of lies

 

That's not what she said. She said she doesn't know Kavanaugh and doesn't remember the party, but she does believe Dr. Blasey.

 

The trouble with false allegations is that it takes a lot of work to craft a plausible lie that can't be disproven. Continue to sell us the conspiracy theory that the Dastardly Democrats have found three women who are willing to lie under oath to stop one conservative from getting on SCOTUS, when the Republicans can easily just appoint somebody else in his place.

 

I'll say it, "she is LYING".

 

The fact she as a adult was attending party’s with underage kids and witnessed underage drinking, gang rape not once but at nine different party’s she never notified police or any parents should makes her a accessory to the delinquency of a minor. Is that not enough for a career-ender I do not really believe she should any type clearance and belongs in jail

 

In reality, you don’t know they’re false any more or less than I know if they are true.

Although I tend to think if it’s all truly “a pack of lies” we would have seen it for Gorsuch as payback for Garland not getting a hearing.

Pubs must be far more concerned about losing the Senate than they let on to not pull back at this point and come back with a more conservative nominee.

 

Minor nuance, but I believe she said she was at 10 parties with them, not that there was gang rape at every party.

And wasn’t the drinking age 18 in 1981/1982?

 

I suspect she has already found the “career-ender” as a clearance holder: unless they’re the wrong Julie Swetnick, she appears to have a little better than $100k in tax liens on her between the IRS and the State of Maryland.

 

"Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford," lawyer Howard J. Walsh said in a statement sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

I guess my point all of the named witnesses by Dr. Ford have no recollection of attending such a party.

 

Which isn't a denial.

 

They will properly just get paid after this is over

 

It does not support her story either.

 

18 through July 1982.

I'd say it is not a minor nuance. The way diehard framed it is a major distortion. Not to mention, calling recent hs graduates "adults" partying with "minors" who are a year or two behind but still in high school is a gratuitously ridiculous way to frame it.

 

The WaPo article says that the Maryland tax lien was satisfied in 2016 and the IRS one was satisfied in March this year.

 

It's a neutral response. It doesn't confirm or deny her story.

 

I guess we have different ideas on what truth is then... If all witnesses named by her do not remember such a party happening, and her ONLY story is this party with THESE exact named witnesses, how does that not hurt her story??

 

Kavanaugh will be expected to testify first about charges brought today by anonymous at the nutfest tomorrow.

I guess not all rape is legitimate.