Drinking and partying in high school and college does not disqualify anyone to be a SCOTUS Justice. But do you honestly think Kavanaugh was being truthful about boofing, the Renate Club, the Ralph Club? Do you think he was being honest about never passing out from drinking? And unless, "I don't remember" = "It definitely didn't happen," then Kavanaugh also lied about the 3 sworn statements Kavanaugh said exonerated him. This alone should be enough to disqualify Kavanaugh for the SCOTUS. Throw in the hyper-partisan rant from a man who is applying for a Judge seat on the highest court in the land, and there is no way Kavanaugh should be confirmed.
Yes, it is evidence. I think you need to google that term. There's also the police report (along with a firsthand account) showing that Kavanaugh started a bar fight while drunk. Guess what Kavanaugh said when asked if he had ever acted aggressively while drunk? "Basically no." There's the NBC article with the mutual friend of Kavanaugh and Ramirez saying she has texts proving Kavanaugh was reaching out to set up a defense to Ramirez's allegation in the days leading up to the New Yorker publishing the second accusation. Guess what Kavanaugh said when asked if he heard about or discussed the Ramirez allegation before the New Yorker story? He said, "No." There are a number of points in his testimony where Kavanaugh lied or misrepresented what he knew. If you want to know more, you can google it and find plenty of articles.
Understanding the sex and drinking terms? Not at all. Having engaged in them? Not at all. Being a belligerent drunk in HS and College? Not on its own, but I think it is a potential piece of the puzzle if something like this sexual assault case had more supporting information. When belligerent drunks are drunk, they are bad people who do bad things... including assaulting other people.
Again, luckily, it's not up to you... To answer your question... I don't know if he lied.... maybe he did... But there's no way of proving it... no blue dress... no smoking gun....
Which is exactly why I don't necessarily believe he was lying. Why would such a well accomplished jurist and legal mind flush his career down the drain over details that would really do nothing in terms of proving he tried to sexually assault a girl in HS?? So, he partied. So what? That doesn't make him a rapist and if anyone understands this, it's Kavanaugh. He would have to be incredibly dumb to perjure himself over such inconsequential information. I mean, my god, it was 36 years ago, long before he even met his wife. But as I've pointed out here numerous times, you'll never get perjury out of this, because perjury isn't born from a he said she said, even if in affidavit form. He has to directly contradict himself with two separate statements of his own under Oath and of course, that never happened.
I've already found and read plenty... Paired with the 6 FBI investigations and a 7th that likely won't have anything turn up.... I've seen enough to give Kavanaugh the benefit of the doubt... and if I were in the Senate, he'd have my vote... Call me whatever you want... I really don't care...
Thankfully, this isn't a court of law where proof has to be beyond a reasonable doubt. If it was, it would be difficult to prove Kavanaugh was lying. But does anyone here honestly think boofing meant flatulence and that Kavanaugh was telling the truth about devil's triangle and the Renate Club too? Anyone care to claim Kavanaugh was 100% honest with these items, or at least attempting to be honest? Again, drinking, partying, and juvenile yearbook claims that are more likely brags than truth, while not great behavior, aren't disqualifiers for SCOTUS Judge. Whom among us doesn't have a few things we've said and done we regret now as adults. I certainly do. But lying under oath in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee should automatically disqualify someone for SCOTUS. Again, unless you believe Kavanaugh's boof doesn't stink!
Oh yeah, I'm really jumping out there. Aside from police reports of him throwing ice at a guy as part of a bar fight, throwing a drink at a guy and starting another bar fight... how about we explore the meanings of the words here... bel·lig·er·ent bəˈlijərənt/ adjective 1. hostile and aggressive. "a bull-necked, belligerent old man" synonyms: hostile, aggressive, threatening, antagonistic, warlike, warmongering, hawkish, pugnacious, bellicose, truculent, confrontational, contentious, militant, combative; More drunk drəNGk/ verb 1. past participle of drink. adjective adjective: drunk; comparative adjective: drunker; superlative adjective: drunkest 1. affected by alcohol to the extent of losing control of one's faculties or behavior. "he was so drunk he lurched from wall to wall" synonyms: intoxicated, inebriated, inebriate, impaired, drunken, tipsy, under the influence;
So boof does mean flatulence? Again, I don't know... maybe he was, maybe he wasn't... But it's not up to you, and he'd have my vote...
Do you seriously agree that all belligerent drunks assault people? I agree they are at a far greater risk of assaulting people... but not all have necessarily assaulted someone, sexually, or physically....
And if I were in the Senate, he would not have mine. He disqualified himself from SCOTUS with me the second he went on his partisan rant.
He disqualified himself from SCOTUS, far before, then for you... whether you'll admit it now or not...
This is false. Someone being a drunk in high school and college does no more to prove an attempted rape than say a college kid jumping up on a table in the student center yelling "f her in the p***y". Sure, the optics could be better, but that doesn't make someone guilty of attempted rape and doesn't prove anything. It just means they behaved irresponsibly at one point in their lives, which tons of non-rapists do.
Don't need a smoking gun to determine whether one will vote to approve the nomination or not. It's not a court of law where there must be proof beyond a reasonable doubt. And indeed, it's quite reasonable to infer from all we have seen that not only was Kavanaugh's response to his drinking a problem in terms of temperament and partisanship (judges are held to different standards than elected officials, for good reason), but in terms of how he framed it, quite likely lying on multiple occasions. I was willing to give BK much benefit about it given my own experience with the excesses of the college party life. But this is a nomination process for a permanent SCOTUS appointment. Simply put, he should've been completely forthcoming and sincerely apologetic about it even if he thinks the questions were unfair. Shading the truth and/or lying, being indignant and angrily defensive about it are disqualifying behaviors for such an important job interview where his teen/twenty-something behaviors were not, at least not ispo facto.
Yeah, I mean to all the people yelling "perjury!", I guess I don't understand the relevance of the question. So let's say he admits to knowing what boofing means......what? he's now a rapist or somehow more likely to be a rapist? Is that what we're talking about here?
per·ju·ry ˈpərj(ə)rē/ noun LAW noun: perjury; plural noun: perjuries the offense of willfully telling an untruth in a court after having taken an oath or affirmation. synonyms: lying under oath, giving false evidence/testimony, making false statements, willful falsehood "she was found guilty of perjury" He was willfully lying under oath, to create a public misperception about who he was and what the strength of the accusations were. He intentionally lied about the affidavits because he didn't want to just say the other witnesses didn't remember, he wanted to say that they refuted the incident because that is a much stronger statement. He lied over and over again just on that point. He certainly did not need to lie about it, but he lied anyway. He intentionally lied about the sex and drinking terms because they might have given a less than wholesome public image, and made it look more likely like he could have assaulted Ford. Devil's Triangle - is a two guys on one girl... the exact scenario Ford had been placed in when they locked the door on her, according to her testimony. Even if Judge wasn't accused of trying to take part before she escaped. Boofing - anal sex... doesn't make him look guilty (unless someone reports he tried to force himself in that way), but it gives a bad impression among most people Ralphing - puking from excess drinking - again looks bad when he tries to claim he didn't drink too heavily Renate Alumnius - claiming he bedded Renate... not in keeping with his claim to virginity, and even if true that he bedded her (which she denies), it's just bad form to publicly humiliate someone like that
Well, for starters, boofing isn't anal sex. You should do your research before accusing a highly esteemed Federal judge of perjury. Secondly, if you really think Kavanaugh would purposely lie under Oath about the meaning of "ralphing", you're insane. Finally, as I've said here a 100 times, you're never going to get perjury charges or a conviction from Kavanaugh's testimony. Even if the Dems were in charge, it never happens. You really need to do some research on perjury. Goes a little deeper than a Webster's definition. It's incredibly hard to prove, for starters.
So you agree they are far more likely to assault people, which was my point when I referenced it wrt possibly sexual assault of Ford... or anyone else for that matter. As far as do "all belligerent drunks" assault people? I'd say that if they are frequent belligerent drunks, they've assaulted somebody. If they don't drink because they know they have a problem with it, that's altogether different.
Boofing at the time of this incident was DEFINITELY anal sex. That's what it meant. As far as ralphing goes, he just tried to change the subject more than anything. Claimed he had weak stomach. Spicy food or alcohol. But he went to Yale. We can pull that one as its more evasive than flat out lying. Perjury again is intentionally lying under oath. He did that. Was accused of doing it in 2004 and 2006 as well.
