Probably never, given that the majority isnt interested in investigating that issue, since it is obviously not going to have their preferred outcome. Doesn't mean that he didnt do it. He very obviously did it. Multiple times. Anybody with knowledge of basic slang terms and a bit of logical ability knows it.
Yes, because the Flakes, Sasses, Collins and Murkowski's are all good with being lied to under oath when it comes down to party over country, amirite? More reaching, more excuses. The Democrat playbook for 2018. Sad.
He lied dozens of times under oath. Every time that he claimed there were witnesses that denied the party ever occurred, he lied. And that happened a lot during that hearing. When he claimed Ford's girl friend refuted her story, he lied. In fact she specifically said she believed Ford's story. Some people may be able to lay claim to ignorance of the English language as an excuse to lie as he did, but as a lawyer and judge he cannot lay claim to that kind of ignorance. He knew he was lying, and he did it intentionally to create a false public perception. He probably did it at Trump's urging, because that's exactly what Trump would do... lie to create a false public perception. Kavanaugh also lied about every single sexual/drinking related term brought up from his yearbook. His opening statement was compelling (the portion I heard), but as soon as he got past that, he lied early and he lied often. Finally, paranoid partisan rants are only appealing to paranoid partisans. And people who engage in them certainly have no place on the USSC.
Yes, they are as long as it isn't explicitly pointed out to them by an investigation. Easiest way to avoid that? Limit the investigation to make sure that they don't find it. A decision that they haven't objected to, so they seem fine with it. There is a reason you didn't want to address the substance and went to a process excuse: you can't answer how they weren't lies without sounding ridiculous. Because even you don't believe that he misused a bunch of sexual slang terms all at once rather than the much more obvious explanation and has never blacked out despite claiming in private multiple times to have blacked out.
And ……. a hearing that's now been recharacterized by the left and never-trumpsters as a "job interview" ….. thereby eliminating the need for evidence of wrong-doing …. and replacing that requirement with just an "unsubstantiated, unwarranted character assassination" as a basis for disqualifying someone from serving in the capacity for which they've been nominated. It's really amazing how these people roll. Simply amazing. What's both funny and sad is they demean the Donald for his name calling and lies ….. while they do the very same thing.
His partisan rants also violated the Judicial Code of Conduct. Seeing as he's currently a sitting judge, that's a big deal.
Yep. The bottom line is if this is the burden of proof we're going to begin using in these confirmation hearings, then it will be relatively easy for partisans to derail any nominee in the future. I mean, he was actually asked a question about "boofing" because of an entry in his high school yearbook, lol. As if his remembrance of what that means or even his participation in it is in any way relevant to whether or not he tried to rape a girl.
Given that part of his defense was that he wasn't sexually active, his familiarity and comfort with sexual slang terms (and using them to reference sexual activity in high school), seems relevant. As does the fact that he was willing to lie about it in furtherance of his defense.
Yes, I am well aware that the whole game is to make a bunch of ridiculous accusations, attempt to destroy a man's career and reputation and impugn his character at any costs, so that when he attempts to clear his name, you can simply catch him in process crimes like lying under Oath about his understanding off the meaning of a word that refers to anally consuming alcohol, lol. Thus pivoting off of the original ridiculous allegation (as if it was meaningless and never occurred), after it's clearly proven to be a sham and saying "Gotcha!" because you didn't like his explanation for the term "boofing" from his high school year book. Again, a game of Gotcha! from the start. Even Feinstein said she was skeptical of Dr. Ford's claims when she received the letter.
And now we move to the next stage of the defense. Now it doesn't matter if somebody trying to be on the Supreme Court lies under oath, because Democrats tried to make him lie. Nobody forced him to lie. He chose to do so. "Process crime" is the current, official right-wing defense of criminal activity for the right type of people. It is especially hilarious in that a President was impeached for lying under oath about sex. BTW, he lied about a number of terms. I would have given him the benefit of the doubt on one term. He lied about many terms.
I wasn’t sure how much to care about these, possibly minute, untruths, as evidenced by my exchange with lawyer 2,000 ish pages back where he asked me if I’m ok with a SC nominee lying and I replied ‘maybe’. However, the more people that contradict his statements and the more I think about it, the more i see these untruths as absolutely disqualifying. Someone pointed out that we’ve only had around 100 SC justices in our nation’s history, so this should be a very high bar to cross. Kavanaugh should not clear it (and he obviously wouldn’t without the bizarre nuclear option).
And to get back to THE salient points of this exercise, 1) He was appointed to a Federal judgeship years ago. He was not accused then? 2) The dems SAT on this. Why? because it was their attempt to subvert a viable candidate and did not want to use it too early to be ineffective. This is ALL about getting the pols re-elected and re-entrenched. It is ALL a ruse. Repeat, it is ALL about the mid-term elections and what will be the playbook in 2020.
Well, first of all, you would actually have to PROVE he lied, which is something you have not done. It's amazing how Dr. Ford gets away with not remembering what year, what house, who was there, how many people were there and how she got home from her supposed sexual assault, but if Kavanaugh doesn't recall exactly what the term "boofing" means, he's gotta be lying!! Kavanaugh doesn't strike me as someone who spends a lot of time on urban dictionary and the entry itself tells you he'd probably never actually "boofed" before he graduated HS, because they wouldn't be asking him if he had done it yet if he had. So, unlike Clinton, who clearly lied under Oath without any doubt, you would have to prove Kavanaugh did.
Never forget that Kavanaugh was arguably the most zealous member of the Starr team in going after Bill Clinton. He wrote a memo detailing how he wanted to drag out all the sordid details in order to embarrass Clinton. They say what goes around comes around. (Kavanaugh also reportedly leaked confidential documents.)
Is there a requirement that she had to accuse him when he was appointed to his first judgeship or lose the right? She wasn't even ready to discuss it in a safe space until 2012. It's pretty obvious that she wasn't ready to go public back then. You can have your doubts about her, but that's a bad argument.
He didn't claim that he did not recall. That would possibly not be a lie. He claimed that each of the terms had a different meaning than they do. His high school classmates have stated that he lied about that. A number of his college classmates have stated that he lied about the drinking. But yeah, I'm sure he was just a good innocent person that showed up at Yale and immediately joined a secret society commonly known as a reference to female anatomy that would get me banned from this board for saying it, but he had no idea about those terms in high school, even though his classmates all knew what those things meant and he chose to put them in his own yearbook entry (suggesting that he found those references important).
I don’t know what you mean by Dr Ford “getting away” with not remembering all these things. She’s not the one being considered for the Supreme Court. What do you want done to her?
According to this article from a few weeks ago, lying under oath is not new for Kavanaugh. I Wrote Some of the Memos That Brett Kavanaugh Lied to the Senate About. He Should Be Impeached, Not Elevated.
According to the NYTimes, the FBI extended background check could be finished by today or early tomorrow. Democrats Denounce Limits on F.B.I.’s Kavanaugh Inquiry as a ‘Farce’
