Brett Kavanaugh saga unfolding

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

The motive for Kavanaugh to lie is more obvious. All the motives so far ascribed to Dr. Ford for lying are bizarre, far fetched and people who believe in them also believe in UFO's.  She has been investigated to death by "rethuglican opposition research brigades" and believe me, if they had anything credible on her it would be out. The rethuglicans are ten times as ruthless in their opposition research as the baddest opposition research liberal. They are mean and they take no prisoners-just look back at what the "birthers" and how they were able to convice so many of their folks that Obama was not born in the USA.

In any case, Kavanaugh lies because liars lie.  Declassified documents from the Bush era show that he has in fact lied, under oath, to the Senate Judiciary committee for his previous judicial appointments.

[vooke]

The motive for Kavanaugh to lie is more obvious.  All the motives so far ascribed to Dr. Ford for lying are bizarre, far fetched and people who believe in them also believe in UFO's.  She has been investigated to death by "rethuglican opposition research brigades" and believe me, if they had anything credible on her it would be out. The rethuglicans are ten times as ruthless in their opposition research as the baddest opposition research liberal. They are mean and they take no prisoners-just look back at what the "birthers" and how they were able to convice so many of their folks that Obama was not born in the USA.

Even if one were to  find both of them credible (oxymoronic) then it should boil down to which one of two has more incentives to lie. The winner here is clearly Kavanaugh by a mile. Not only does he has more incentives to lie his, belligerent, combative-take no prisoners attitude is very consistent with a bad actor caught lying through his teeth. The contrast between Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford is so stark, its like truth and lie. His refusal to ask for the FBI investigation to clear his name was dispositive for me. There is a luo saying that loosely translates that "s/he who farted is ready to fight". Kavanough came ready to fight to the bitter end even if it meant splitting the baby into half,  while  Dr. Ford was literally ready to give up the baby from the time she entered the fray so long as the truth emerges by asking for more FBI investigations right away clearly not worried that the outcome.  I am not therefore going to sit on the fence on this one. I give this baby to Dr. Ford.

I think people believe both of them because of their heartbreaking testimonies. It's hard to imagine Dr. Ford is a stone cold liar even if you think her case hasn't been proven. There's nothing in her demeanor to suggest it. If she was lying she'd have to be a sociopath without much of a conscience. A good portion of sexual assaults to minors are never reported because something about this crime, unlike others, induces shame in the victim. They don't all react with outrage and report it. Some turn it inwards and it becomes shame and never spoken about. I'm sure most victims go to their graves with it. Some outright block it out of their memory, especially if it happened near infancy, like 3 to 4 years old. While it is a job interview, for Kavanaugh its more than that. Guy is ruined. If its a case of mistaken identity and he's not confirmed, ole wake.

Who has more incentive to lie depends on what you believe about them

If you believe Ford is just another victim traumatized who suddenly gathered courage to confront her attacker,then she has every reason to be honest several times over Kavanaugh whom you believe to be a monster.

Somebody who remembers the exact number of beers she took in a party 36 years ago ,but has no idea how they got to the party nor how they left is lying regardless of your convictions about their motives

[Dear Mami]

I have read a story that Dr. Ford's boyfriend from 1992 to 1998 is claiming he witnessed her preparing her friend McLean for a polygraph exam she was to take with the FBI or AG's office or something like that. He sent the letter to the Judicial Committee. Rachel Mitchell specifically asked her about that in her examination. What I find strange is the boyfriend's letter is dated 2nd October but Dr. Ford was questioned last week. Did the Republicans know about the boyfriend? That question by Mitchel seems very specific and targeted. Did the FBI therefore question both Ford and McLean in the Supplemental investigation going on right now? In other words, is this new information or a fresh arrival?  He also says he found her a truthful person when they dated. Ex-sexual partners might have an axe to grind though, so their info must be taken with a grain of salt. I'm interested in when this information was found out. That'd be more interesting.

BREAKING:  Fox’s @johnrobertsFox obtains letter from Ford ex-boyfriend alleging:  dated for 6 yrs, never told of sex assault, Ford coached friend on taking polygraph, flew frequently w/o expressing any fear of flying/tight spaces/limited exits.  Doesn’t want to b/c “involved”. pic.twitter.com/jVeW0qaJD0

— Shannon Bream (@ShannonBream) October 3, 2018

/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1047293294567456770&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailywire.com%2Fnews%2F36620%2Fbombshell-ford-lied-under-oath-about-never-ryan-saavedra

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

I have read a story that Dr. Ford's boyfriend from 1992 to 1998 is claiming he witnessed her preparing her friend McLean for a polygraph exam she was to take with the FBI or AG's office or something like that. He sent the letter to the Judicial Committee. Rachel Mitchell specifically asked her about that in her examination. What I find strange is the boyfriend's letter is dated 2nd October but Dr. Ford was questioned last week. Did the Republicans know about the boyfriend? That question by Mitchel seems very specific and targeted. Did the FBI therefore question both Ford and McLean in the Supplemental investigation going on right now? In other words, is this new information or a fresh arrival?  He also says he found her a truthful person when they dated. Ex-sexual partners might have an axe to grind though, so their info must be taken with a grain of salt. I'm interested in when this information was found out. That'd be more interesting.

BREAKING:  Fox’s @johnrobertsFox obtains letter from Ford ex-boyfriend alleging:  dated for 6 yrs, never told of sex assault, Ford coached friend on taking polygraph, flew frequently w/o expressing any fear of flying/tight spaces/limited exits.  Doesn’t want to b/c “involved”. pic.twitter.com/jVeW0qaJD0

— Shannon Bream (@ShannonBream) October 3, 2018

/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1047293294567456770&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailywire.com%2Fnews%2F36620%2Fbombshell-ford-lied-under-oath-about-never-ryan-saavedra

He doesn�t want to be involved in this process anymore.  In other words, �don�t cross examine me, even though I am casting aspersions on her by claiming she was honest and stealing my money in the same vein�.  That�s rather convenient.

Also listening to the question and answer, I can tell Dr. Ford understood Mitchell to be asking if she herself had been the recipient of the tips. 

MY BAD.  She is asked at the very end if she herself has given tips.  I can see a way or two for an innocent explanation assuming Mr. Redacted-and-don�t-cross-examine-me is saying the truth.

[Dear Mami]

Ex sex partners are not good witnesses against their exes, especially if their relationship had a sour ending, which it sounds like this one did (In addition to the 'she stole' he also accuses her of cheating, that points to some tension) but it's significant that in 6 years he testifies he found her an honest person (ie not a conniving sociopath). In any case, this is not a big lie or even necessarily a lie, most likely she didn't remember this incident on her feet. It's from 20 years ago, if the boyfriend is not lying, and would not have been on her mind at the Kavanaugh trial, and Dr. Ford seems to struggle with memory in general IMO. Still leaves the question: Did the Republicans know about this last week? It seems fairly specific, that question by Mitchell. Why would she want to know if Dr. Ford had given advice/tips to others? The first questions (Were you coached when you took the test?) are clearly relevant, but 'Did you advice others ever?'....that does not seem like a question one would ask a person around a polygraph test they themselves had taken.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Ex sex partners are not good witnesses against their exes, especially if their relationship had a sour ending, which it sounds like this one did (In addition to the 'she stole' he also accuses her of cheating, that points to some tension) but it's significant that in 6 years he testifies he found her an honest person (ie not a conniving sociopath). In any case, this is not a big lie or even necessarily a lie, most likely she didn't remember this incident on her feet. It's from 20 years ago, if the boyfriend is not lying, and would not have been on her mind at the Kavanaugh trial, and Dr. Ford seems to struggle with memory in general IMO. Still leaves the question: Did the Republicans know about this last week? It seems fairly specific, that question by Mitchell. Why would she want to know if Dr. Ford had given advice/tips to others? The first questions (Were you coached when you took the test?) are clearly relevant, but 'Did you advice others ever?'....that does not seem like a question one would ask a person around a polygraph test they themselves had taken.

[GeeMail]

[vooke]

Ex sex partners are not good witnesses against their exes, especially if their relationship had a sour ending, which it sounds like this one did (In addition to the 'she stole' he also accuses her of cheating, that points to some tension) but it's significant that in 6 years he testifies he found her an honest person (ie not a conniving sociopath). In any case, this is not a big lie or even necessarily a lie, most likely she didn't remember this incident on her feet. It's from 20 years ago, if the boyfriend is not lying, and would not have been on her mind at the Kavanaugh trial, and Dr. Ford seems to struggle with memory in general IMO. Still leaves the question: Did the Republicans know about this last week? It seems fairly specific, that question by Mitchell. Why would she want to know if Dr. Ford had given advice/tips to others? The first questions (Were you coached when you took the test?) are clearly relevant, but 'Did you advice others ever?'....that does not seem like a question one would ask a person around a polygraph test they themselves had taken.

[gout]

Yes the cases are quite far apart. Kavanaugh and Ford were white so the power distance which prohibits pursuit of such matters was not there just like it ain't there today even though one can say Kavanaugh is obviously quite powerful guy today (equivalent of the cardinal if not the pope!!). No age differences to worry about. No class differences.

The power, age, status, racial distance among abuser mafioso clerics and their victims is hell to heaven thus why these cases won't go far even now.

Apparently Kavanaugh knew about the Debra Ramirez dick-slapping allegations before they were made public.  Not just that but he also exchanged messages with potential witnesses on how to counter them.  Then he lied to Congress under oath that he only learned about them when they were reported in the New Yorker.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/mutual-friend-ramirez-kavanaugh-anxious-come-forward-evidence-n915566

Yeah this caught my attention. Would change the story for me. But I understand he already said on September 25th that he had heard from classmates that Ramirez was going round classmates asking them to remember the event and that he thought it was trying to implant false memories in an ochestrated hit. So, a discrepancy sure. But when I first heard it I thought of a more damning scenario than that. I thought it was Kavanaugh's own messages. But it's messages between two of his classmates who were friends with both him and Ramirez. One of them says to the other that Bret has asked her to publicly defend him. Another mentions that she's in contact with Bret's guys. That gives a slightly different picture than you first get when you hear of exchanged text messages and talking to witnesses. I've heard of one where he was looking for a photo from a decade before showing him and Ramirez and one of the ladies says to him she remember Ramirez being scared of him. I'm not sure if that part includes Kavanaugh's own text messages. The NBC has the texts, though, I hope they publish them. Would be very interesting. http://uk.businessinsider.com/did-brett-kavanaugh-commit-perjury-testimony-new-yorker-article-deborah-ramirez-2018-10?r=US&IR=T

[vooke]

Invalid Tweet ID?s=21

[KenyanPlato]

Republicans will be in a read pickle going forward. They have lost white suburban women. They have lost young people less than 50 years. What happens is that Donald trump is imploding gop from within

[GeeMail]

It's amazing how ricin (wastegate) shows up at such a time as this.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Republicans will be in a read pickle going forward. They have lost white suburban women. They have lost young people less than 50 years. What happens is that Donald trump is imploding gop from within

They have a higher tolerance for Trump's toxicity than you are willing to give them.  The only white demographic not in Trump's column are college educated women and maybe millenials.   Access Hollywood tape didn't faze them.  I don't think Dr. Ford's difficult to prove story matters to them.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

I have been seeing reports that the FBI has released a report.  It appears they did this before interviewing Brett Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford among others.  DCI did a better job investigating Yebei, Jacob Juma, Msando murders. 

Granted, this FBI background investigation is not the usual FBI investigation.  The White House(Trump) in this case is a client of the FBI, and therefore has a say in what they can or cannot look at.  They cannot really push back or ignore their client's constraints. 

So we are back to square A.  I don't believe a more thorough investigation would get us any information beyond the confirmation(for anyone still doubting) that Kavanaugh is a liar.  And that could be one reason they were not asked to question him, because he would have been forced to lie to the FBI, a very serious offence.

It seems the ball is back in Jeff Flake's(and the Republican women senators) hands.  Are they going to vote yes, because the FBI investigation, however flawed, now gives them cover?

[GeeMail]

That story by Ford's ex BF has done her a lot of damage. I don't think she's going to recover from it. In fact, the FBI report would be incomplete if it does not recommend prosecution. Monica MacLean has not helped matters.

[patel]

FBI does not offer conclusive report....he say they said ......form 302 just like we said...then let the senate make decision. amazing how this woman made up this whole story
to torpedo Kavanaugh nomination.....women can be evil. bye bye mrs Blasley and your irritating 3 yrs old voice

I have been seeing reports that the FBI has released a report.  It appears they did this before interviewing Brett Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford among others.  DCI did a better job investigating Yebei, Jacob Juma, Msando murders. 

Granted, this FBI background investigation is not the usual FBI investigation.  The White House(Trump) in this case is a client of the FBI, and therefore has a say in what they can or cannot look at.  They cannot really push back or ignore their client's constraints. 

So we are back to square A.  I don't believe a more thorough investigation would get us any information beyond the confirmation(for anyone still doubting) that Kavanaugh is a liar.  And that could be one reason they were not asked to question him, because he would have been forced to lie to the FBI, a very serious offence.

It seems the ball is back in Jeff Flake's(and the Republican women senators) hands.  Are they going to vote yes, because the FBI investigation, however flawed, now gives them cover?

[patel]

These 2 women should be prosecuted. Monica Maclean must have done some deep dive on kavanaugh and most likely heard a story similar to the one Mrs Blasley was selling.

That story by Ford's ex BF has done her a lot of damage. I don't think she's going to recover from it. In fact, the FBI report would be incomplete if it does not recommend prosecution. Monica MacLean has not helped matters.

[GeeMail]

Once Kava lands in the SCOTUS, Papa Sirandula will engage forward gear to execute the evil agenda of global domination. it will not be sweet.

[patel]

Trump has been more reserved you cannot even compare with Obama who destroyed several countries including Libya, Syria and Yemen.

Once Kava lands in the SCOTUS, Papa Sirandula will engage forward gear to execute the evil agenda of global domination. it will not be sweet.

[GeeMail]

The reservedness or lack of reservedness is not the question. In fact, the holder of the office of POTUS does not even matter. What is planned to happen will happen. Papa Sirandula will end up responding to very serious questions in the SCOTUS and Kava will be needed to join hands with his fellows.

https://www.dariennewsonline.com/news/crime/article/California-man-sues-Vatican-over-priest-sex-abuse-13281532.php

Other Papa Sirandula plans absolutely require majority in the SCOTUS.