Kavanaugh's Friend Needs To Be Forced To Testify At Hearing Or Be Held In Contempt Of Congress
Brett Kavanaugh's friend Mark Judge is a key witness to the alleged sexual assault. He is identified by name as being there when she says it happened.
Imagine an alleged eyewitness to a crime saying he doesn't want to participate in the fact finding.
If he doesnt remember what happened because he was dead drunk, then he can say that under oath.
The real reason he and the republicans don't want him to testify is because he has problematic (for Kavanaugh) statements and writings littered across his background. His high school yearbook includes a line from him joking that some women need to be hit like a gong.
He mentions in his writings that he had a drunken friend named Bart O'Kavanaugh. There are mentions and references to parties and sex. And drunkeness among the boys at the prep school they both attended.
Judge is also a right wing political advocate who appears to have been a birther.
He has to be put under the oath and made to answer pertinent questions before Kavanaugh is confirmed, or the Democrats should boycott the senate en masse.
Tags
Who is online
86 visitors
The details of Kavanaugh's drunken carousing as a 17 year old boy will come out, and we should find out if there is anything more to it before he becomes a Supreme Court justice. The FBI needs to investigate.
Oh, please give it up...
One more time....there is nothing to investigate because there is no evidence of a crime being actually committed. And now it appears that the accuser is reluctant to show up, so how can her claims be taken seriously. The FBI does not investigate things that might have occurred 35 years ago in high school. But keep trying JR. We both know this is simply a pathetic attempt to derail a SC nomination, which will be unsuccessful. A conservative SC Justice will be confirmed, and no last minute slander will change that FACT.
We forgot, all those that have been violated, always run forth screaming that they have been RAPED !
What were we thinking, it just can't possibly be true, because people NEVER repress traumatic experiences, and how could it come out via her therapists notes from 2012, this claim.
Nostradamus ? ESP N ?
Nope, just another glory seeker, looking for that giant Glory Whole
Life Insurance Policy, after all those life threats.
Kavanaugh just received a key endorsement from pedophile Roy Moore.
Of course, birds of a feather and all
What's that saying about it takes one to know one?
Ok...Stop me if you've heard this one before:
A pedophile and a sex abuser walk into the Capitol.....
Apparently [deleted] thought it was important to endorse a fellow rapist and pedophile with both Kavanaugh and Moore.
I can see why Trump likes Kavanaugh. "When you're a celebrity in high school you can do anything.....Grab 'em by the pussy."
But he has commands from Borg central to use that word as often as possible.
As long as it was a fellow liberal that made the allegation against a conservative, that is all the proof needed .
You didn't really expect an answer did you?
I don't HAVE a Fuhrer
yet, your txt screams you might be FURIOUS
.
Don''t worry, if you're a good little Texan
maybe Santa will bring you one
this year
[deleted]
No
and
Yes
He uses the term in a generalization that is directed at Trumps obvious Despotic wanna be leadership skills.
That more often than one might think, are in line with the Dicktatertotz that dot history.
For so many to just go with his constant barrage of bald face LIES, is what I find TRULY disturbing.
He HAS to be called out and held accountable for his words and deeds.
Attempting to use the DOJ for his own political ambitions ?
Attempting to silence so many journalists ?
Yea, nothing here huh ?
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
I enjoy chattin with my buddy from Texas
and most of the time, he stands by his messages, and refuses to back down.
I admire that sometimes
at least he is consistent
Renounce your politics so you conform with the Church of the Holy Progressives?
What IS the secret?
Tex, you do realize you are posing questions unto yourself, correct ?
This is not to Texan but about this thread.
You have all been way too personal with each other. In plain language, knock it off.
Stay on the topic and not on each other.
Thank You Texan
I wasn't quite shore how all those pesky little tickets were washing up on me, but your keen investigative labors, have born fruit for me to loom
I'm takin a shot in the dark ( N it burns) but I'm supposing that was found in that code of I can't crack thingy
.
I stated something to the effect, of you people...
should have stated , I didn't know I was statin a violation, cause you do know
in my world
igknorantz iz an excuse
To our dear Moderator
I may be partly entirely to blame,
so I do apologize to all of the fine posters posting hear today
as I will cease my opines and head to Mellon Collie Hour to get Flagged
N joy posters, and Tex, I was just attempting to be helpful on that one you were responding to yourself on
you know I care.
one last note Tex
I acquired a ticket defending you from your nemesis Tess,
so,
maybe,
that's probably worth nothing to anybody.
You win again Damn !
Bigot is one of her more favorite ones too.
No idea what it means.
agine an alleged eyewitness to a crime saying he doesn't want to participate in the fact finding.
He's already submitted a letter to Congress denying the allegations. If he's lying, he can go to jail for lying.
It's almost as crazy as someone willing to ruin the life of a person over an allegation refusing to testify about it.
The US Senate, the former "Greatest Deliberative Body in the World," reduced to investigating "drunkenness among the boys at the prep school" 40 years ago.
The accuser should make her accusation under oath before anyone is compelled to defend themselves or other under oath.
[deleted] You want a judge to determine if a victim's complaint hold merit???
I like how the defense witness put it in an article he wrote for the RWNJ "Daily Caller":
I hope this was a good life lesson for both young men......never try to rape someone when you're black-out drunk. Only do it when you're sober so you can amaze her with the awesome power and wonderful beauty of your "uncontrollable male passion", otherwise you might trip and spoil the entire rape for everyone.
That's assuming a guy can even get it up when he's black-out drunk.....
In a REAL investigation, the accuser actually reports the crime along with some form of proof before an investigation commences. Very similar to what happens in a car accident, you have to have witnesses or evidence that an accident occurred before it will be investigated. She has none, just her say so.
Sounds like you don't know much about sexual abuse. Here.
Read it and pass it on the the Judiciary Committee quickly before they screw it up again.
I'm not clueless and I didn't say anything about a judge. I'm talking about swearing out a complaint. She wants the Senate to deny a qualified person a seat on the Supreme Court. She shouldn't just be able to stop that by throwing out an accusation she isn't willing to stake her own reputation and freedom on. If we operated that way, it would be impossible to ever the fill the seat.
We also don't require anyone to defend themselves unless and until their accuser does their part.
You are indeed clueless, in that you have failed to recognize a hyper emotional leftist echo chamber when you saw one.
So far we've got Nazi accusations, libellous assumptions of attempted rape toward a man who hasn't even been accused, and absolute and unwavering presumption of guilt of Judge Kavanaugh despite the fact not a single one of these people were there.
I taught junior high school. This is a lot like that.
The professional term is, "whiskey dick".
Does she have any witnesses who can say her behavior changed after the incident? So far she has not provided anything other than therapists notes that actually call into question that Kavanaugh was involved as they say FOUR boys attacked her and made no mention of any names.
Last night on Lawrence O'Donnell, he showed video of BOTH Chuck Grassley and Orin Hatch saying in 1991, how appropriate it was and how right it was for the FBI to investigate Anita Hill's claims against Clarence Thomas. Today, both Grassley and Hatch, still on the same committee, say how unnecessary and pointless it would be for the FBI to do the exact same depth of investigation as they did for Hill and Thomas. The hypocrisy of these two is staggering.
The FBI can conduct the appropriate investigation in a few days. There is no reason whatsoever why this confirmation cannot be delayed for a few days. None. If Ford is not given the same consideration that Hill /Thomas was, it will be clear she is not being treated fairly.
The truth is that a lot of the GOP senators are getting worried there might be fire below Ford's smoke. They are afraid of what the FBI might turn up. If Kavanaugh is innocent, he should welcome an investigation of a few days. If Ford is lying, she should be afraid of an investigation. But the opposite is what is actually happening.
The FBI investigation of alleged wrongdoing involved two Federal Employees, took about 36 hours and consisted of getting statements on the record from the parties. The accusers, Kavanaugh and the two witnesses have already done that, although Feinstein is hiding the letter.
So once Feinstein stops hiding the letter, we will be at the same place we were in 1991 before the hearings.
Since the FBI has not conducted an investigation of the alleged incident, we don't know what is or is not relevant.
The senators are going to make a judgement call. If there is information to be gathered that will help make one or the other of the parties appear more believable than the other, it should be pursued.
Whether what is relevant? The goalposts keep moving so it's hard to keep up. First, it was "she has to be allowed to testify." Now it's unfair to ask her to do that. Then the witnesses had to face punishment if they lied. Now that's taken care of.
She needs to testify under oath. The "FBI investigation" is not relevant to her version of what happened and linking them is a sign of desperation. Or do you think her testimony will change depending on the FBI investigation?
First: Who's going to make them? They've already decided they don't want to. In the case of Anita Hill, the White House asked the FBI to investigate, but I don't think a day has gone by in the last 18 months where some Democrat hasn't expressed outrage at the notion of the president ordering the FBI to do anything .
Second: Requests for an FBI investigation seem disingenuous given what happened as a result of the Anita Hill FBI investigation. The FBI investigated and the finding was that the accusations were unfounded. Nevertheless all but one of the Democrats on the committee voted against recommending him to the full Senate . All but a handful of Dems in the full senate voted against him and he was barely approved 52-48. So what is the point of an investigation if the Democrats will just ignore it?
The confirmation is being delayed so that the committee can hear from the accuser and any witnesses.
Feinstein held on to this information for 6 or 7 weeks. Somebody could have been investigating during all that time. And if the FBI didn't want to do it, there is no statute of limitations in Maryland for sex crimes against minors. It could have been referred to local authorities.
Sorry, but most of your points are completely irrelevant. How Democrats might or might not vote has nothing to do with it.
It has everything to do with how Democrats will vote. There are several who will probably vote for Kavanaugh and if this "good" doctor does not show up to testify, these democrats will have more reason to vote for him because the democratic party has become an embarrassment to them.
If this woman is subpoenaed to show, democrats will scream she is being forced to do something she does not want her to do.
On a side note...John, why don't you just try and refute the comment to you instead of making snarky personal attacks? By doing so, you may have some credibility.
How Democrats might vote has nothing to do with whether or not facts should be gathered about the incident.
I don't know how to say it any clearer than that.
What happens if we find out these allegations are nothing but BS and made up to try and destroy a SC nominee, simply because Trump nominated him? Do you think many, or any, democrat will change their votes if it does come out the allegations were made up? I don't, because most of them came out even before Kavanaugh, by name, was nominated, and said they would not vote for a Trump nominee.
All Americans lose if a wannabe rapist ends up on SCOTUS.
It does. Democrats say an investigation matters, but their past actions put the lie to that claim. Therefore, why should we take their demands seriously?
"the FBI completed its investigation, and a report was submitted to the White House and the Judiciary Committee, according to Smith's statement. "The White House reviewed the report and determined that the allegation was unfounded," the statement said."
So technically it was the Bush Sr. white house that claimed the allegation was "unfounded", not the FBI.
And then there was a big outcry from outraged FBI officials who knew better, right?
Yeah, that didn't happen.
just curious here...
can anyone produce a police report with a signed statement from the accuser?
is she willing to give the fbi a signed statement before they investigate?
if the answer to both questions is no
and she is unwilling to testify before congress under oath there can be no investigations.
she must put her foot in her mouth under oath first.
Have Trumps crack Birth Certificate Investigators give it a whirl,
there a proven lott
of BShit
I told you yesterday WallyWild,
I want ta PARTY WITH YOU COWBOY !
Oh. Brother.
For the sake of us all, please research your silly comments before you make them. You'll find that it reduces the ignats blowback factor significantly.
Trump finally admits it: 'President Barack Obama was born in the United States'
Not too difficult to tell who listens to wingnut AM radio.
[Removed]
I think there is a point that is being missed here...
If everyone remembers, Senator Feinstein was rejected by her own state Democratic party and her challenger for the November primaries was overwhelmingly endorsed by them.
Senator Feinstein may be feeling some heat that there is a chance she could be defeated in the election, and by releasing this letter and outing Dr Ford is her way of trying to be the one who could say..."Look, California, I was the one who took down President Trump's SC nominee. You should vote for me now."
Yes, RCP has her about 20 points up, but that lead has been eroding over time, and she is starting to get desperate.
Hell, all of this could have just been made up by democrats to gain relevancy before the election. Pretty much everything that has been said or made public is a letter that may or may not exist, a woman whose only identity is a name and a grainy photo and a defense lawyer who is well known for defending corrupt high ranking democrats, and who is continuously moving the goalposts to have her "client" testify.
Way to fishy for competent Americans to get behind.
if ya got it all figured out?
explain why she can only talk about all of this while NOT under oath?
currently, the times says she will testify... with conditions.
should be fun to watch
hint: personally? I want kavanaugh gone for other reasons...
one more reason will be fun enough for me
[Deleted]
"Imagine an alleged eyewitness to a crime saying he doesn't want to participate in the fact finding."
The "Accuser" doesn't want to "participate" either !
Hmmmmmmm.
I find it funny that most Republicans have been on record saying she should be given the opportunity to tell her story. What may have happened to her is terrible and should not have happened to any woman. Let her testify in the arena she chooses and let the Senate make the decision from there.
Democrats....HE'S GUILTY!!!
Grassley is bending over backwards to allow her to testify in the manner she's most comfortable, and Feinstein is hiding the letter from Republicans. Says a lot.
you should ask triple X,
it could be Grassley's WET DREAM,
Democrats just want a lengthy investigation, not a "quick, on the books" testimony from her.
I disagree. Dems simply want a talking point for the midterms.
The playbook is becoming crystal clear. Dems hoped the confirmation would have proceeded on schedule without giving any consideration to Mrs Fords claim. It would have been the perfect “me too” talking point to fire up the base.
Now or it will be all about how the big bad republicans are denying an FBI investigation that will never happen.
Meanwhile, this “guilty until proven innocent” approach the far left has been pushing for that past few years scares the hell out of most Americans. Most Americans don’t really care that there is an empty spot on the bench. But when unsubstantiated 30 year old accusations can ruin someone’s life? They care a lot.
A continued fight against Kavanaugh being seated, is a good mid-term talking point for Liberal/Progressive/socialist democrats also.
Again, I disagree. A continued fight, with the Ford accusation at the center, will backfire. We are witnessing the dems snatching defeat from the jaws of victory in the midterms.
That's okay.
The Dems.… and the MSM.... are going to do the same thing they did in 2016 ……. LIE …….. then fake being shocked when it doesn't go their way.
I'm seeing and hearing the same. Dems need to appeal to moderates in flyover states in order to have significant gains in the midterms. This issue will have the far left going nuts, moderate dems running for cover and will unify repubs. Exactly the opposite of what needs to happen.
Conservative voters are actually starting to wake up from their normal Primary hibernation cycle. And, this has Democrats looking like buffoons similar to what happened with the Duke Lacrosse team and it will bite everyone involved in attacking Kavanaugh in the butt unless they can provide some form of proof this actually happened.
What is the point here? A letter was delivered by his attorney stating he doesn't recall the alleged incident nor does he ever recall Kavanaugh acting in the manner described by Dr. Ford. The Republicans have nothing to do with his inability to recall an alleged event that Dr. Ford describes.
The 'line' was a quote from a playwright. Poor taste - absolutely. Show me 17 and 18 year olds that don't do something in poor taste...please.
This incident happened 30+ years ago. Tell me, do you recall every party you attended when you were 17? Do you recall all of the parties that you got wasted and exactly what you did at those parties?
Let's allow the accused to face his accuser...or should we simply believe her accusations because she is a democrat? /s
first? she has to make a sworn complaint.
no sworn complaint = no investigations - simple math
so the real questions are...
A) will she show up by 10am tomorrow in congress, under oath?
B) will she file charges with her state authorities?
C) is she just another, full of shit, leftwingnut?
stay tuned for the next episode...
A) Probably not
B) No .She would have to provide some evidence that it did happen (sorry seems, her mentioning something to her shrink 30 years after the alleged incident is not evidence).. In any case the statute of limitation has passed years ago .
C) Yes, yes she is.
I'll take left wing nut for 1,000 Alex.
Force Judge to testify? If anyone should be forced to testify, it should be the one making the claims.
It's a serious claim. I have questions about the veracity of the claim though. She claims this occurred sometime during a 3 year period. Really? She can't remember the year? In September of 1994, one of my high school classmates, an ex, called me at around midnight on a Saturday, crying, and told me that some dude had tried to force himself on her. I tried to get her to tell me where she was, and who the guy was, but she wouldn't. She also refused to call the police, to my knowledge.
I get that victims may not want to report these cases. I'm not clear on why my ex called me really, as opposed to her mom, dad, siblings. At the time, I thought she initially called to set me loose on someone, but changed her mind during the conversation. Now, I think she called me because she wanted comfort in a familiar voice, and also privacy. Regardless, although I can't remember the exact date 24 years later, I definitely remember the year, month, and day of the week, and I wasn't the victim, but the guy the victim called. I have a hard time believing Ford, the person making the charge, can't limit this to even a 12 month date range.
In fact she's asking the FBI to investigate her claims and interview all the parties involved, thus exposing any liars to a potential felony if they lie to the FBI. That makes far more sense than the sideshow in the judiciary committee.
Not a federal jurisdiction. Local only.
Out of curiosity, do you also think Dr. Ford should be subpoenaed and if she refuses to testify also be held in contempt of Congress?
I look forward to progressives arguing that the accuser's history of drinking and partying be explored.