What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

French Rage said:
She would need to ask about Bart O'Kavanaugh, or his oddly identical British cousin, Bertram Cavendish.
Click to expand...

You do know that in Kavanaugh's yearbook, on Judge's page he has, as a quote, "Bart, have you boofed yet"? While Kavanaugh, as we all know, has "Judge, have you boofed yet?"

Seems the evidence that the character in Judge's book is based on Kavanaugh just got a little more evident.
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

rufus said:
You do know that in Kavanaugh's yearbook, on Judge's page he has, as a quote, "Bart, have you boofed yet"? While Kavanaugh, as we all know, has "Judge, have you boofed yet?"

Seems the evidence that the character in Judge's book is based on Kavanaugh just got a little more evident.
Click to expand...

They must eat a lot of burritos if they are so concerned with boofing amirite?
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Handyman said:
Huh?

I cant believe I am about to say this...but I prefer Sessions stay as head of the DOJ than put Graham there. I like Graham better, but without McCain to back him up he is a jellyfish and Sessions, despite being a racist little troll, doesnt do whatever Donny tells him.
Click to expand...

I know you're thinking Sessions or Graham as the AG; however, if Sessions is no longer AG I suspect Trey Gowdy is waiting in the wings*.


*Gowdy is probably someone in Trump's "next 10" for the SC after Kavanaugh, ACB, et al.
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

The Sicatoka said:
I know you're thinking Sessions or Graham as the AG; however, if Sessions is no longer AG I suspect Trey Gowdy is waiting in the wings*.


*Gowdy is probably someone in Trump's "next 10" for the SC after Kavanaugh, ACB, et al.
Click to expand...

Knowing trump, I'd say Joe Arpaio is next in line.
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

The Sicatoka said:
Knowing Judge is on the record already with:



Judge can say almost nothing else. Why? He jammed himself up.

If he changes his story in his FBI interview he's committed a felony with the SJC, or just lied to the FBI, or both.
Click to expand...

Can't he weasel out of it by saying he doesn't recall the specific event, but he could potentially hang Kavanaugh if he happens to "recall" the party itself? Just not the whole incident in the bedroom? IMHO if Kavanaugh is proven to be there, he's sunk (rightly or wrongly depending on your view of the guy as I realize him being here isn't proof that he did the crime).
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Rover said:
Can't he weasel out of it by saying he doesn't recall the specific event, but he could potentially hang Kavanaugh if he happens to "recall" the party itself? Just not the whole incident in the bedroom? IMHO if Kavanaugh is proven to be there, he's sunk (rightly or wrongly depending on your view of the guy as I realize him being here isn't proof that he did the crime).
Click to expand...

I'm not sure he gave himself that wiggle room in his letter to the SJC.

"I do not recall the events described by Dr. Ford in her testimony before the US Senate Judiciary Committee today," he wrote. "I never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes. I am knowingly submitting this letter under penalty of felony."
Click to expand...

He backs away from "do not recall" and part of the SJC comes for him.
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Rover said:
Can't he weasel out of it by saying he doesn't recall the specific event, but he could potentially hang Kavanaugh if he happens to "recall" the party itself? Just not the whole incident in the bedroom? IMHO if Kavanaugh is proven to be there, he's sunk (rightly or wrongly depending on your view of the guy as I realize him being here isn't proof that he did the crime).
Click to expand...

It seems really unlikely that Judge would ever want to vary from "I don't recall", as he is actually an accused party, albeit probably not in any criminal jeopardy at this date. Unless he lies, of course. I believe I saw a friend of Judge's claim that Judge confided he barely recalls anything of 1982 and several other years due to his apparently severe alcohol abuse.

I saw some outrage over the weekend over the idea the FBI hadn't arranged to interview Ford yet. Ford is on the record under oath as to what she says happened and what detail she says she remembers. She also testified she had stated everything she could remember related to the incident. What else can she say she knows without being placed in jeopardy? I think the FBI questions the other people first, and then if they come up with something that is in conflict with Ford's statements, they go to Ford to figure it out. If they produce nothing, I don't think they necessarily ever even talk to Ford.

FWIW, after watching Ford's testimony, I, like most people, found her very credible for the most part. The other day though, I went back and read the testimony again and reviewed some of the other facts surrounding the case. After having done so I do feel quite a bit less certain about her testimony than I did initially

One additional thing I just read today in one of the SJC releases was the fact that the committee does not have, and has never seen a copy, (or even a redacted copy) of Ford's therapist notes. That seems pretty surprising, given how often they have been cited toward the credibility of Ford.
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Handyman said:
Huh?
Click to expand...
Flake (and I assume Collins, Murkowski, and maybe even red Dems) just want to have an FBI investigation so that when the sham investigation finds nothing they can just say, "oh well I guess it didn't find anything, clearly he's clean!". Or if it does find something then they can also just use that as cover as well.
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Wisko McBadgerton said:
It seems really unlikely that Judge would ever want to vary from "I don't recall", as he is actually an accused party, albeit probably not in any criminal jeopardy at this date. Unless he lies, of course. I believe I saw a friend of Judge's claim that Judge confided he barely recalls anything of 1982 and several other years due to his apparently severe alcohol abuse.

I saw some outrage over the weekend over the idea the FBI hadn't arranged to interview Ford yet. Ford is on the record under oath as to what she says happened and what detail she says she remembers. She also testified she had stated everything she could remember related to the incident. What else can she say she knows without being placed in jeopardy? I think the FBI questions the other people first, and then if they come up with something that is in conflict with Ford's statements, they go to Ford to figure it out. If they produce nothing, I don't think they necessarily ever even talk to Ford.

FWIW, after watching Ford's testimony, I, like most people, found her very credible for the most part. The other day though, I went back and read the testimony again and reviewed some of the other facts surrounding the case. After having done so I do feel quite a bit less certain about her testimony than I did initially

One additional thing I just read today in one of the SJC releases was the fact that the committee does not have, and has never seen a copy, (or even a redacted copy) of Ford's therapist notes. That seems pretty surprising, given how often they have been cited toward the credibility of Ford.
Click to expand...

Maybe cause they never asked for them? Just like they didn't want to have the affadavit about Kavanaugh contacting friends of Debbie Ramirez days before her accusation toward him was even made public.


You know what that's called? "Consciousness of guilt". For some reason, Kavanaugh seemed to know that there was some event between him and Ramirez that needed to be repudiated.
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

rufus said:
Maybe cause they never asked for them? Just like they didn't want to have the affadavit about Kavanaugh contacting friends of Debbie Ramirez days before her accusation toward him was even made public.


You know what that's called? "Consciousness of guilt". For some reason, Kavanaugh seemed to know that there was some event between him and Ramirez that needed to be repudiated.
Click to expand...

SJC records show they asked for the notes and the complete polygraph records, but they weren't provided. (They also asked in open session.) In Ford's testimony she cast doubt on whether anyone at all has ever seen them, including the person behind the WaPo article that reported their existence in the first place. Why not turn over a redacted copy as it was such a critical point in establishing she didn't just make up the story this summer. My guess would be that they don't corroborate her given testimony as to the event, the time, the place, or people or they would be in evidence.

At a loss, as I didn't read about the SJC refusing an affidavit like that, perhaps you have a link handy? If not, don't worry, I can look for it.


I do have an alternate theory on all this that you'll perhaps like as it includes the party at Timmy's. Turns out Timmy is a past Chairman of the Denver Lesbian and Gay Chamber of Commerce. So maybe Kav and Squi and PJ are all closeted homosexuals. Which today, who cares? But in the 80's it could have been a big scandal. It was the height of the Cold War, so probably the KGB was monitoring these classy Prep schools and Yale and Harvard types for scandals all the time. KGB hears about K's extracurriculars, gets the goods and has him in the bag. 35 years pass and K is now a KGB mole about to be named to the court by Red Don. All is good. Except Obama gets wind of it through his remaining loyal soldiers in the CIA. The CIA plants Ford, (which Alex Jones has apparently figured out) and Ford takes down K.
America is saved!
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

I believe Klobuchar inserted a copy of the polygraph results in the official record during Ford's testimony.

If they wanted more, maybe they could have called the polygrapher to testify?


Not sure of the doctor's notes, but if the SJC committee notes are anything like their staff responses to people wishing to testify, and like the committee's BS statements that they would have gone to California to hear from Ford, I'd take those with a grain of salt.

Still no comment on why Kavanaugh was soliciting friends from Yale to rebut Ramirez' charges, before anyone even knew that Ramirez was gonna accuse him of something?
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

rufus said:
Still no comment on why Kavanaugh was soliciting friends from Yale to rebut Ramirez' charges, before anyone even knew that Ramirez was gonna accuse him of something?
Click to expand...

It doesn't make any sense.

Bottom line is if you're a boy now you're guilty until proven innocent. Right? So, there it is. And, all of the Kavanaugh defense centers on that.
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Also, if the FBI is considering making this their final report, and they haven't interviewed any of the witnesses that Ramirez gave them, any of the people that Kavanaugh contacted about Ramirez, or any of the other people we've been reading about offering information, then we will know that this was the sham that it was intended to be from the start.


They were given a week. Why not use the whole week?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top