Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Here Come The False Claims Kavanaugh Lied About Drinking

Here Come The False Claims Kavanaugh Lied About Drinking

Investigation week continues….

The drama surrounding Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh will continue for at least another week due to an investigation into the sexual assault claims against him.

But it also means that every aspect of his life will now fall under the microscope, even if it has nothing to do with the sexual misconduct claims. Now people have materialized out of the woodwork to claim that Kavanaugh lied about his heavy drinking, yet it’s nothing he denied in front of the committee.

Also, Paul Sperry, a Hoover Institution media fellow, tweeted on Sunday night that one of Kavanaugh’s classmates from Yale sent a tip to the Senate Judiciary Committee that a fraternity brother may have exposed himself to Deborah Ramirez, the second woman who accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct.

Judge Interviewed?

Looks like the FBI interviewed Kavanaugh’s friend Mike Judge.

Two Classmates Say They Never Saw Kavanaugh Black Out

McConnell Says Senate Will Vote on Kavanaugh This Week

Flake Wants Thorough Investigation

Trump said he didn’t mind a comprehensive investigation and it looks like he will get it. From The New York Times:

The White House has authorized the F.B.I. to expand its abbreviated investigation into sexual misconduct allegations against Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh by interviewing anyone it deems necessary as long the review is finished by the end of the week, two people briefed on the matter said on Monday.

The new directive came in the past 24 hours after a backlash from Democrats, who criticized the White House for limiting the scope of the bureau’s investigation into President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court. The F.B.I. has already completed interviews with the four witnesses its agents were originally asked to talk to, the people said.

Mr. Trump said on Monday that he favored a “comprehensive” F.B.I. investigation and had no problem if the bureau wanted to question Judge Kavanaugh or even a third accuser who was left off the initial witness list if she seemed credible. His only concerns he said, were that the investigation be wrapped up quickly and that it take direction from the Senate Republicans who will determine whether Judge Kavanaugh is confirmed.

“The F.B.I. should interview anybody that they want within reason, but you have to say within reason,” Mr. Trump told reporters in the Rose Garden after an event celebrating a new trade deal with Canada and Mexico. “But they should also be guided, and I’m being guided, by what the senators are looking for.”

Trump Talks About Kavanaugh at NAFTA Press Conference

The press asked questions about Kavanaugh at the press conference about the new NAFTA deal. He criticized the Democrats and said he knows “them too well” and that those people “are not angels.” He implied that he has seen an “aggressive” Democrat “in very, very bad situations, somewhat compromising.”

The FBI Must Investigate the Meaning of ‘Boofing’

Uh…so FAILED Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s former spokesman wrote an op-ed in Politico to demand that the FBI must investigate what “boofing” means. I kid you not.

Drinking Aspect Moves the Goalposts

Byron York at The Washington Examiner explained how the Democrats have moved the goalposts in their fight to disqualify Kavanaugh from the Supreme Court:

The new developments raised two questions. One, did Kavanaugh actually lie to the Senate about his drinking? And two, why are Democrats, now that they have finally won the FBI investigation they wanted into the sexual misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh, suddenly making a bigger deal of his drinking?

On the first, Kavanaugh clearly told the Senate he drank in high school and college. He told the Senate he sometimes drank to excess. But he said he did not black out, nor did he drink so much that he could not remember events that took place while he was drinking.

Some Democrats and their allies in the press suggested Kavanaugh lied in his exchanges with Mitchell and the Democratic senators. But how? Kavanaugh was quite open about the fact that he drank in high school and in college, and also about the fact that he sometimes drank too much. He denied having alcohol-related blackouts, but said he had “gone to sleep” after drinking. On another occasion, responding to Klobuchar, he said “I don’t know” when asked if he had ever drunk so much that he didn’t remember what happened the night before. It’s hard to see where the “federal crime,” as Sen. Sanders put it, is in that testimony.

The problem is, there is nothing in Ludington’s statement that actually contradicts Kavanaugh’s testimony. As noted, Kavanaugh testified that he drank plenty. And Ludington did not say that he, Ludington, ever witnessed Kavanaugh blacked out or passed out from alcohol. It is unclear what, if anything, the FBI would do with such a presentation from Ludington. But such stories are causing great excitement in Democratic Washington at the moment.

Why? The answer is the theory behind the Democratic attacks on Kavanaugh.

So the Ford case is quite hard to make. And that is where, for Democrats, Kavanaugh’s supposed blackouts come in. With no contemporaneous evidence that the Ford attack happened, Democrats are trying to make the case that it could have happened. What if Kavanaugh got drunk, attacked Ford, and later didn’t remember that he did it?

That is the theory behind some Democratic senators’ questioning of Kavanaugh last week. The idea was to get Kavanaugh to admit alcohol-induced memory loss and thus undermine his firm contention that he did not do what Ford alleged. How could he really know? He himself admitted that he sometimes drank so much he couldn’t remember what happened the night before. He could have attacked Christine Ford in an alcoholic blackout and never remember that he did it.

The problem, of course, is that is all anti-Kavanaugh theorizing. There’s no evidence to support it, just as there is no evidence beyond Christine Ford’s word to support the original attack allegation. But it’s what Democrats have to work with right now, and it’s why they are trying to change the subject from alleged sexual misconduct to Kavanaugh’s teenage drinking.

Yale Classmate Claims Kavanaugh Lied About His Drinking

Oh for crying out loud. The New York Times reported that classmate Chad Ludington said that Kavanaugh lied to the committee about his drinking:

Mr. Ludington said that Judge Kavanaugh had played down “the degree and frequency” of his drinking, and that the judge had often become “belligerent and aggressive” while intoxicated. Other former classmates have made similar claims.

“It is truth that is at stake, and I believe that the ability to speak the truth, even when it does not reflect well upon oneself, is a paramount quality we seek in our nation’s most powerful judges,” Mr. Ludington said, adding that he planned to “take my information to the F.B.I.”

Mr. Ludington, a professor at North Carolina State University who appears to have made small political contributions to Democratic candidates, said to The New York Times on Sunday that he had been told by the F.B.I.’s Washington, D.C., field office that he should go to the bureau’s Raleigh, N.C., office on Monday morning. He said he intended to do that, so he could “tell the full details of my story.”

The Washington Post has more:

In it, Ludington says in one instance, Kavanaugh initiated a fight that led to the arrest of a mutual friend: “When Brett got drunk, he was often belligerent and aggressive. On one of the last occasions I purposely socialized with Brett, I witnessed him respond to a semi-hostile remark, not by defusing the situation, but by throwing his beer in the man’s face and starting a fight that ended with one of our mutual friends in jail.”

Ludington says he was deeply troubled by Kavanaugh appearing to blatantly mischaracterize his drinking in Senate testimony.

“I do not believe that the heavy drinking or even loutish behavior of an 18 or even 21 year old should condemn a person for the rest of his life,” Ludington wrote. “However … if he lied about his past actions on national television, and more especially while speaking under oath in front of the United States Senate, I believe those lies should have consequences.”

Mistaken Identity?

Legal Insurrection has confirmed that such a tip was received. Whether the tip is correct remains to be seen.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

If we are going to investigate Kavanaugh for perjury, how about Ford, Feinstein, Ford’s lawyers, Booker, and company?

    clerk in reply to sequester. | October 1, 2018 at 12:09 pm

    Watching Blumenthal utter “Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus ” was one of the great comedic moments in Senate History.

    Jimbino in reply to sequester. | October 1, 2018 at 2:20 pm

    With all this talk of FBI searching for evidence, why not order the FBI to put an end to all the god-talk and prayer-talk by gummint and its representatives?

    Rather than trying to establish the truth of 35-year-old sex allegations, the FBI could better spend its time establishing the total lack of evidence with regard to existence of god and the fact that nothing fails like prayer.

    I’d like to put the FBI investigators to the task of showing that angels, devils, ghosts, talking snakes and donkeys, as well as unicorns and prayers, parthenogenesis, transubstantiation, immaculate conception and other nonsense that the Bible and Roman Catholic believers are so fond of.

    The could easily run an experiment to show that prayer has no efficacy, that no unicorn, talking snake or talking donkey has ever been found.

    Why the hell should we assume there is any truth value to anything assertion made by a Roman Catholic who adheres to a church that believes all those crazy things and that the earth can stand still and also serve as the center of the universe?

      Valerie in reply to Jimbino. | October 1, 2018 at 2:26 pm

      Are you unaware that there is an entire New Age cottage industry that relies upon the effectiveness of prayer? It’s fun to watch one of these alleged non-believers twist themselves in knots to find “new” terminology to avoid using the word “prayer,” and then loudly insist that it really, really works.

      So, don’t go too far out on that prayer limb: You’ll hit Ms. Ford coming at you from the other direction.

      Immolate in reply to Jimbino. | October 1, 2018 at 4:14 pm

      Show me on the doll where the Catholic Priest touched you.

Ford was trapped in myriad inconsistencies and multiple lies (e.g., cited witnesses refute her account; a totally discredited “fear of flying;” a callous and flippant dismissal of her “best friend’s” direct refutation of Ford’s account), and, yet, she is still lauded by the media and Dumb-o-crat pols as an allegedly “credible,” and “courageous” “victim,” presenting “her truth.” Man, if I had a dime for every time the water-carrying Leftist media parrots called partisan-kook Ford “credible,” I’d be richer than Jeff Bezos.

There can be no doubt that conservative Americans are now living in a totalitarian landscape painted by Orwell and Kafka, with assistance from Salvador Dali and Hieronymus Bosch.

Leftists are totalitarian sadists. They will stop at nothing to destroy Judge K., in their mad lust for absolute and unrestrained power. The true face of lemming-lockstep, zombie-like fealty to Party orthodoxies and jackbooted totalitarianism is the face of the contemporary Dumb-o-crat. I can arrive at no other conclusion, given events of the past decade, and more specifically, events of the past two months concerning Judge K’s Stalinist show trial and Salem Witch-Hunt.

Maybe the Dumb-o-crats can dig up an acquaintance from Kavanaugh’s pre-potty-training days, who will offer the astounding revelation that young Kavanaugh liked to urinate and defecate into a diaper, and, that he took an above-average amount of time to finally become toilet-trained?

    Edward in reply to guyjones. | October 1, 2018 at 3:38 pm

    They aren’t Dumb-o-crats any longer. The party now has two wings, the Socialist-Democrats and the Democrat-Socialists. do try to keep up with the changes.

So this turd of a professor doesn’t believe behavior of a 18-21 year old should ruin a person’s life, but he believes he should work to ruin his life because of his opinion, which is unsubstantiated, Kavanaugh might have downplayed how much beer he consumed.

It is my understanding that the leftist professor was also junior to him by 3 years, which makes it highly unlikely there would have been all that much interaction between them.

These leftists truly are willing to go scorched earth for their politics. We live in dangerous times when opinions are now worth more than law.

Here is what I posted on the other thread: Probably a better place for this now:

Not sure but it looks like Ludington is married to Sarah Ludington (Sarah Hutt Ludington) but I can not confirm that.

She is an attorney that worked for Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & Lewin, Washington D.C. The same firm that Seth P Waxman worked for.

https://directory.campbell.edu/people/sarah-ludington/

Waxman was the Solicitor General of the United States. He was nominated by President Clinton on September 19, 1997.

Starting to look like another hit job by the Clintons.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/08/28/solicitor_general_for_clinton_admin_what_manafort__cohen_mean_for_trump_.html

I think Seth Waxman is a Clinton hit man and is pushing the Russian crap.

The Ludington statements are just another Clinton smear campaign. With Ford’s brother connection to Baker-Hostler, which is connected to GPS Fusion, it is the same smear team working the second and third layers.

It even gets better:

The recent claims by Charles Chad Ludington about Kavanuagh had me wondering. Here is something interesting that I found but I can not verify:

Ludington is married to Sara Hutt Ludington. She use to work for Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & Lewin.

https://directory.campbell.edu/people/sarah-ludington/

Seth P Waxman use to work for Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & Lewin. He now works for Wilmer Hale (Wilma Cutler Pickering)

https://www.wilmerhale.com/en/people/seth-waxman

Robert Mueller was partner at WilmerHale’s Washington office before being hired as Special Counsel to the investigation into Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election. Other attorneys at WilmerHale include Seth Waxman, former Solicitor General of the United States; Ken Salazar, former United States Senator from Colorado and United States Secretary of the Interior; and Jamie Gorelick, former United States Deputy Attorney General.

It this a Mueller hit job?

Also, it looks like Sarah Ludington’s facebook page has been scrubbed and the “samll” donation is over $ 1000 but I have not confirmed that.

Just think about this. Fords brother is connected with Balker-Hoslter, the GPS Fusison related law firm. Ludington’s wife previous law firm connected with Seth Waxman, the Clinton Solicitor General and Mueller’s law firm of Wilmer Hale.

IT IS A CLINTON/MUELLER HIT JOB!

    nomadic100 in reply to MarkSmith. | October 1, 2018 at 12:35 pm

    Very interesting! Do you have a source for the Ludington link?

      MarkSmith in reply to nomadic100. | October 1, 2018 at 1:42 pm

      I have two links in there. Only thing I can’t confirm is Hutt Ludington and Charles. I found Hutt Ludington through ancestry.com but just can’t connect that. They both live in NC so it is likely.

        MarkSmith in reply to MarkSmith. | October 1, 2018 at 1:48 pm

        Link here Name: Charles C Ludington
        Gender: Male
        Race: White
        Age: 32
        Birth Year: abt 1965
        Residence Place: Beacon Falls, North Carolina, USA
        Marriage Date: 11 Oct 1997
        Marriage Place: Old Lyme, New London, Connecticut, USA
        Spouse: Sarah H Hutt

I do not give a damn.

I knew a guy who was fond of exposing himself in college. I hope he doesn’t run for office.

he had been told by the F.B.I.’s Washington, D.C., field office that he should go to the bureau’s Raleigh, N.C., office on Monday morning. He said he intended to do that

So one office blew him off and told him to go annoy someone else. I guess his hot tip is too seismic for the Washington office to handle on its own.

    Edward in reply to tom_swift. | October 1, 2018 at 3:43 pm

    Well, no. They sent him to the proper, local to him, Field Office for a Special Agent to interview him/take his statement after giving him the spiel about the felony of false statements under 18 USC 1001.

Bucky Barkingham | October 1, 2018 at 12:40 pm

Clearly the Leftists want to find a perjury trap. Also they want an excuse to have the FBI “investigation” continued, preferably until their Blue Wave majority in the Senate is seated in January.

Flake, Collins and Murkowski will aid and abet them.

We have met the enemy and they are us.

    fishstick in reply to Bucky Barkingham. | October 1, 2018 at 1:26 pm

    the problem is you need hard evidence at some point

    there is only one thing in common of every accusation made against Judge Kavanaugh

    there is a severe lack of any proof

    this newest accusation of him being an “aggressive” drunk was made by a Yale graduate around the time Kavanaugh attended said college but 2-3 years his junior

    but the real kicker is he made a mistake in saying something specific in that Kavanaugh somehow got a mutual friend of theirs arrested

    if that is true – then there would be a record of said arrest somewhere that the FBI could check out

    this causes Ludington three problems

    1) if the FBI places him under oath to give veritable testimony to his claim, then any lie can be used against him so if his accusation is without merit, he cannot directly name said mutual friend

    2) if the FBI places him under oath to give veritable testimony to his claim and names said mutual friend, then he/she could come back and contest Ludington’s accusation

    3) if the FBI places him under oath to give veritable testimony to his claim and names said mutual friend, then the FBI checks out said person’s record but finds no arrest on Ludington’s given date

    we have no reason to suspect this isn’t more of the same BS accusations we have seen the past 3 weeks

      Jackie in reply to fishstick. | October 3, 2018 at 12:56 am

      How did Kavanaugh get the guy arrested? He made him throw a punch? Young males especially drunk get into arguments. If someone gets violent and gets arrested it’s not the fault of everyone that argued. Also, this has nothing to do with the allegations. Neither is his throwing ice at someone 30 years ago. If Kavanaugh threw a snowball at someone is it disqualifying? I

What ever happened to the report that 2 men were admitting that it might have been them that ‘assaulted’ Ford? I haven’t seen anything about it after the initial report. Discredited or media blackout?

    guyjones in reply to Mojo56. | October 1, 2018 at 12:51 pm

    It was a “tip” from a transparent kook in Rhode Island, possibly mentally ill. Grassley referred the man to the FBI for investigation and possible prosecution for lying to Congress, in the course of an investigation.

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/09/29/sheldons-folly-chairman-chuck-grassley-requests-criminal-investigation-of-kavanaugh-accuser-jeffrey-catalan/comment-page-1/

    guyjones in reply to Mojo56. | October 1, 2018 at 12:52 pm

    Sorry; I mis-read your post.

    I think you were referring to Ed Whelan’s speculation — he apologized for proffering an unsupported theory.

    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/23/ed-whelan-kavanaugh-theory-837445

      civil truth in reply to guyjones. | October 1, 2018 at 1:11 pm

      Whelan’s ill-considered entry into the case was something else; this has to do with two individuals who were reported (rumored?) to have suggested to senate investigators that one of them may have been the person who is the object of Ford’s accusation. In other words, they were claiming that the accusation was a case of mistaken identity (and by implication that they knew her and remembered interacting with Ford in a way that may have traumatized her).

      The biggest problem here is even if such interactions happened so long ago, the lack of specifics of these events and in Ford’s allegation means that there is no way to determine that one of these events was the same interaction as what Ford described in her accusation, even if you were to assume that all of these occurred in the first place as these folks are describing.

    civil truth in reply to Mojo56. | October 1, 2018 at 1:00 pm

    Well, when you can’t establish a date, location, or any other corroborating detail about this alleged attack, then it’s equally hard to corroborate whether one of these men really was the perp.

    That is, before you can try to determine “who done it” you first have to specify what the “it” consists of, if anything.

    So it’s probably not so much that their statements have been “discredited” but rather a situation of their statements being objectively unverifiable, given the lack of other evidence to date.

Colonel Travis | October 1, 2018 at 12:42 pm

Let this drag on for at least one more week.
Gee, what could go wrong?

“Kavanaugh initiated a fight that led to the arrest of a mutual friend”

If true, there’d be a record of that arrest/detention. Find the record, learn the identity of the arrested, question him.

    fishstick in reply to fscarn. | October 1, 2018 at 1:09 pm

    Ludington should go to the FBI office, placed under oath, and asked to verify said claims

    guarantee you he has the same amount of actual evidence as every other Kavanaugh accuser – I can’t recall which mutual friend was arrested and I can’t recall time, date, or year of said occurrence

      snapper451 in reply to fishstick. | October 1, 2018 at 1:22 pm

      Simply speaking with the FBI is considered under oath, so if he lies they should prosecute him. See Martha Stewart and Gen Flynn about that. Thus, I doubt he will talk to the FBI unless Soros paying his fine but he still could go to jail. Maybe Ludington will take on for the team?

      Close The Fed in reply to fishstick. | October 1, 2018 at 1:22 pm

      Fishstick, I upvoted you, but now, think I was wrong.

      I don’t give a damn about all this B.S.

      It’s all ethereal crap, the thinnest of reeds, to keep this guy off. If they could exaggerate jaywalking to get him, they would.

      The one thing that typically disappoints me with the media, aside from everything else, is all this attention being given to trivialities, and nothing to his judicial record. I know the committee has it, but I don’t know it and I don’t want another John Roberts and his approval of Obamacare and homosexual marriage.

      Have nothing against homosexuals per se, I feel badly for them since many were abused or something as kids, but I’m disinterested in changing our society to fit their problems. Those are THEIR problems, not mine.

      Roberts has been a real disappointment and frankly, Gorsuch and that ridiculous ruling that the statute calling violent felonies was too vague to deport people, that was just ridiculous. Gorsuch is too academic. Don’t need any damn academics without any street smarts or practical experience in the law; we need people with real world experience, thank you very much.

    RodFC in reply to fscarn. | October 1, 2018 at 3:01 pm

    Exactly Where is the arrest record? This should be the theme anytime this clown comes out. It’s what I keep asking on twitter.

Like I care about somebody’s juvenile and college behavior.

I do care about ADULT behavior like HRC, Waters, Flake, Warren, and all of the other Dems and swamp creatures. The Dems can stop now. There is NOTHING they can do to lower my opinion of them further.

Close The Fed | October 1, 2018 at 1:09 pm

Benedict Arnold Flake will be gone soon. I hope McSally has spine, grit and principles that support the American way of life.

Arizona, please don’t make us suffer under another Flake or McCain. Please. . .

    Observer in reply to Close The Fed. | October 1, 2018 at 6:14 pm

    McSally is my congresswoman (unfortunately). If you’re expecting her to be a solid conservative vote in the senate, you’re going to be sorely disappointed. She’s another RINO establishment type. (And right now McSally is trailing pussy-hat-wearing Dim nutjob Kyrsten Sinema in the polls, so AZ’s “representation” in the senate could get even worse than it is now).

Granting the delay was idiotic. The further removed we are from Kavanaugh’s powerful testimony, the easier it is to lie about him.

NOTHING GOOD comes after a week. The FBI submits a report that draws no conclusions and no new information is found. Democrats manufacture more bullshit and throw another tantrum about how it wasn’t ‘thorough’ enough.

Flake is a joke. He has no intention of voting for Kavanaugh and never did. He’s trying to string this along purely to increase the salary of the job he takes with a ‘news’ network after getting thrown out.

Collins and Murkowski are absolutely DESPERATE to not have to actually vote. They’re praying Kavanaugh withdraws or is forced out without a vote so they can lie about what they were actually planning to do.

A week is already too long. McConnell needs to call the freaking vote. If they’re going to vote against him a week is only good for the Democrats.

Put them on the record and FORCE them to vote. They’ll cave. They know damn well if they vote against him they’re finished next election, which is why they’re desperate to NOT vote.

Force them to vote, enough of this negotiating.

In Flakes mind, he has to destroy the institution of the Senate to save the institution of the Senate.

Us AZ voters can’t prevent Flakes or McCains. Flake ran as a tea partier. McCain ran as a Republican!

    Close The Fed in reply to Dejectedhead. | October 1, 2018 at 1:58 pm

    DejectedHead, with ALL due respect, it’s not like McCain was a 1st-termer. Y’all KNEW he voted for the fence in 2006 and then pushed amnesty in 2013 etc.

    No excuses for Arizonans.

      Old Patzer in reply to Close The Fed. | October 1, 2018 at 2:44 pm

      I chanced to see him on CSPAN in the mid 90’s. At that point, I didn’t know much about him and assumed that he was a conservative. In about two minutes, I was completely disillusioned as he hit wrong note after wrong note, e.g., praising bilingual education and of course calling for restrictions on free speech. Arizonans seem to have a strange taste for RINO.

      Exactly so. The old “fool me once…” routine applies. Once he proudly wore the “Maverick” nom de guerre, he should have been gone with the next Primary.

If Kavanaugh had been such a loutish alcoholic in college, how did he get into Yale Law School? How did he manage to graduate and pass the Bar?
And, hasn’t anybody who writes editorials noticed that every one of his accusers is a liberal Democrat? There is also evidence that every one of them is a political activist—evidence that has either been scrubbed from the Internet or simply not followed by an amazingly incurious press. Not a single one has been an independent or a Republican. I suppose leftists would blame conservative tribalism. But they claim that the accusations against him transcend tribalism, and that every woman feels personally involved in Dr. Ford’s story. Curious.

    Edward in reply to HarvardPhD. | October 1, 2018 at 3:55 pm

    I’ve read he was top of his class in HS, Yale and Yale Law. There is no way that can be done and drink to the excess being alleged. To be at, or near, the top of your class (even in the land grant college I attended) eliminates spending that much time mind numbed and suffering from “Beer flu”.

      MAB in reply to Edward. | October 1, 2018 at 4:08 pm

      … or going to parties. I still remember sitting in the library working on my Masters at 10, 11 at night while friends were out partying! There was no time except for studying, going to class, writing papers and occasionally sleeping!

        Edward in reply to MAB. | October 1, 2018 at 10:51 pm

        I was married, ended my three years of undergraduate work with two wonderful kids and had to work full time on the evening shift because the GI Bill only paid (IIRC) $130 month married and $250 with the two kids. The wife worked full time too. The next semester after I finished the single guys were getting more than that as Congress decided the Korean War benefits needed some adjustment for we RVN guys. Carried 18 SH, 9 in summer and worked 40 hours, kept the kids between end of class and start of work to keep the babysitting bill down. Finished in 3 years flat with all but one semester either on the Dean’s List or President’s List. As Kavanaugh said “I busted my butt”, but I think he had more fun than I, certainly more beer.

Unfortunately a plague of “Schistocerca gregaria California” has descended upon Arizona. Consider this a reverse of Exodus… where the plagues drive the Egyptians out to infest the Holy Lands rather than freeing the Israelites.

The best thing about Trump I don’t care what the uptight set says is he can take their attempt at going after a Kavanaugh soundbite and turn into running down the list of things the media gives the Democrats a pass on. Bush or Romney or McCain or name your GOPe would cave and give them a defensive soundbite for making Republicans look bad.
Ordinary Republican voters love him for that.

I just love their assumption that anybody who has ever gotten drunk has been blackout drunk. What kind of personal lives do these people have?

They are now pushing the perjury meme

Far left Democrat Representaive Jerrold Nadler, the ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee, told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos on SUnday that if the Senate did not investigate the claims against Judge Brett Kavanaugh, including accusations of perjury, then House Democrats will investigate these charges if they take power in November.

Humphrey's Executor | October 1, 2018 at 2:41 pm

I sure would not want to be an FBI agent involved in this investigation. No matter what, somebody with a lot of power — either now or in the future — will not be happy with the outcome.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to Humphrey's Executor. | October 1, 2018 at 9:41 pm

    True, but right now it is mostly libs unhappy with with Trump. I am willing to bet that even if the get the House back, that Trump will continue to find ways to keep them unhappy.

Gatewaypundit is now reporting they may be finished with the FBI report tomorrow. If so how soon can the vote be taken? What are the debate rules of the Senate?

    Edward in reply to RodFC. | October 1, 2018 at 10:41 pm

    IIRC it takes at least three full days with the vote on the fourth. The vote to proceed to vote (the cloture vote) is followed by 30 hours of Democrats yelling on the floor and then the vote.

    Well this sat here long enough you probably have the answer already, but just in case.

Comanche Voter | October 1, 2018 at 3:07 pm

I can recall the Dhimmis saying (in reference to Slick Willy Clinton’s sexual escapades) “Everybody lies about sex.”

Well then is it okay to lie about Schlitz? Or Strohs?

    alaskabob in reply to Comanche Voter. | October 1, 2018 at 3:17 pm

    Sorry ..down vote too close the reply on iPad . Remember that tossing a flier to someone else in your mail box is a felony. Every citizen can be found to have any “legal” problem during their life. Heck, a 33 year old rabbi physically drove money changers out of the Temple grounds. The Dems would also indict G_d if they could for all the suffering permitted in the world. Solomon couldn’t pass muster.

    Time to put this travesty down.

    They also said it was no big deal that he sexually assaulted (read raped or attempted to rape) several women, because it was only about sex and didn’t have anything to do with how he did his job.

Limbaugh just mentioned the Dems insisting on adding over 20 new people to interview by FBI. If so this can exponentially go nuts. It is time for an epic beat down of this nonsense and an end to bickering little brats playing Senators.

So now there are calls to have Trump removed…period and Kavanaugh never surviving a full career on the bench if confirmed. Imagine a world with these people running things..we have ….oh We have.

    Is there a nice, large, desert island were we can all move and start over?

    ugottabekiddinme in reply to alaskabob. | October 1, 2018 at 5:55 pm

    Dems issue a list, claiming no FBI investigation can be “complete” unless all listed are interviewed.

    Rumor has it the list includes both Jimmy Hoffa and Judge Crater. /sarc

i wonder how forthcoming all these “witnesses” will be after they are reminded about the penalties for lying to the FBI and/or Congress?

The Dems’ camel’s-nose has already inserted itself into the tent all the way to the beginning of its tail.

“Just one more week…or so…”

Shurrrr……they’ll guarantee at least 1-2 “bimbo eruptions” per week from now until the 2020 elections.

They have LOTS of $100 dollar bills to “drag through a trailer park” (where oh where have we heard THAT before?).

Can’t wait for someone to produce and anonymous letter from someone who tearfully claims that EVERY ONE of the Dems on the committee have committed absolutely horrendous acts sometime, somewhere, with plenty of unnamed witnesses from elementary school up to the present. Each should be forced to undergo massive FBI investigations to PROVE their innocence. Until then, they are presumed GUILTY of every single accusation.

Well, a fella can dream, can’t he?

All of the hand wringing around this revolves around the belief that the FBI still works for the Democrats.

The Dems may have enough strength left to get 51 no votes on Kavanaugh’s confirmation. No way to know that one.

Only a fool has himself for a lawyer and there must be an equivalent saying such as..only a fool asks to sit for an FBI investigation. Doh!!

I’ve never been one of those people who think Trump has magic powers. But I think Trump and his advisers have to be laughing their rear ends off as the stupid Dems swallow, no gobble, the perjury and conspiracy bait he is throwing them.

This is getting fun.

Colonel Travis | October 1, 2018 at 4:39 pm

From Ace, funny:

Christine M. Blasey Co-Wrote a Paper on How to Conduct Self-Hypnosis to Recover Memories and “Create Artificial Situations

http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=377362

It’s from Margot Cleveland’s Twitter account, doesn’t sound like she came up with this nugget, but Cleveland is a really good legal analyst who pops up on the Federalist. She’s like their Andrew McCarthy.

rejoice fellow Americans. At this point, the Dems have completely and totally jumped the shark. Trump is just handing them ANOTHER beer and saying Do it again! Go For it! And they are such suckers that they are doing it!!!!

Not sure how you could even prove perjury on a individuals statement about drinking. Too much, heavy, or even light or non-drinker is subjective and subject to time, place, and even profession. When I was on active duty a doctor asked me if I drank, and I replied I was a social drinker. After asking me how often and how much he coded me as a non-drinker. He explained that by Navy standards, I was a non-drinker. I suspect lawyers drink more than accountants due to required social events, but that neither has the capacity of a commercial painter.

Too much can only be defined in a legal sense if you do something stupid, like starting up a vehicle while in the drivers’s seat while over the legal limit. But open bar at a wedding? With the hotel a two minute walk down the sidewalk without crossing a street? Describes where I was last weekend. Very few there were capable of legal driving by midnight after 5.5 hours of partying following the vows. Did they have too much? Only the one who fell backwards and whopped his head… And possibly the bridesmaid who was standing in the restroom talking to everyone. The men’s restroom. I certainly didn’t have too much. Stayed upright, and slept soundly as soon as my head hit the pillow.

Frat parties- while underage. Obviously, legally, one is too many. Throw that aside, since underage drinking is the most violated law in the United States after speeding. Everyone on campus is within walking distance of their bed.

A bigger question is- Why do we have a legal drinking age at all? Legal drinking age in France is 16 years for wine and beer, 18 years for spirits and liquor. 21 places us in good stead with the following: Côte d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Iraq, Kiribati, Micronesia, Mongolia, Nauru, Oman, Palau, Samoa, Sri Lanka.

To maximize freedom, we really should be in company with the nations that have no minimum drinking age, which surprising enough includes China.

I’m old enough to remember the mantra “Old enough to fight, old enough to drink” which was sufficient to actually lower the drinking age to 18 way back when. And I find it extremely hypocritical that a lot of us oldsters who benefited from that turned around and restricted freedom once they got into power.

Apparently prior to 1881 or so- there was no minimum drinking age in the United States except for Wisconsin and Illinois. I would argue that under the 9th Amendment- The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. a minimum drinking age is unconstitutional. And further argue that the passage of the 18th amendment to outlaw alcohol, and the 21st that repealed the 18th in it’s entirety proves the point.

“a minimum drinking age is unconstitutional”

So, you’re OK with a mother putting booze in her baby’s bottle instead of formula?

    gospace in reply to txvet2. | October 1, 2018 at 5:53 pm

    According to stories, beer used to be commonly given to infants and youngsters. It was safer than water. As is, allowing your own underage children to have a glass or two at dinner in your own home is legal in 37 states. The way the law is written in NY- “A person under the age of twenty-one years may possess any alcoholic beverage with intent to consume if the alcoholic beverage is given … to the person under twenty-one years of age by that person’s parent or guardian.” doesn’t specifically state “inside the home”. But I have discovered that judges in NY don’t care what the law actually says. NY’s legal code is full of contradictory laws.

    Barry in reply to txvet2. | October 1, 2018 at 10:34 pm

    You really think that kind of mother is going to worry about the baby being under age?

    It was routine for kids to get a “drink” for medicinal purposes at one time. What makes you think it’s your decision, or the governments?

Thank you, Senator Flake. This has turned into the somber, serious reflection that we all knew it would become from the 1 week delay.

Ya’ll need a beer or two to cheer yourselves up. Things are looking good right now. The Democrats are so stupid they allowed Trump to trick them into DEMANDING the FBI investigate what we all know is perjury and whatever other crimes they have committed. HAHA How is that a bad thing?

And China was working with Canada thinking they could hold out and get a better deal after the Repubs lost their majority in the mid-terms. But seeing as how Canada signed and China lowered tariffs today, seems likely China’s thinking that’s not happening. Oh…and Mitch called for the vote.

Drink up! Cheers!

Hey LI just got a couple of mentions on Mark L radio show

He will be a great justice. Red Pilled.

Pathetic and desperate. From the leader of a rampabing gang of of 15 year old rapists to a high school driner of too much beer.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend