Patterico's Pontifications

9/30/2018

Railroad Job!!!!1!: FBI (Maybe) Not Allowed to Investigate Avenatti Client’s Insane “Rape Train” Claims

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:52 am



MSNBC says Trump won’t let the FBI probe the laughable allegations of Julie Swetnick, client of creepy lawyer Michael Avenatti:

While the FBI will examine the allegations of Christine Blasey Ford and Deborah Ramirez, the bureau had not been permitted to investigate the claims of Julie Swetnick, who has accused Kavanaugh of engaging in sexual misconduct at parties while he was a student at Georgetown Preparatory School in the 1980s, those people familiar with the investigation told NBC News.

Trump denies it …

… thus making it a question of two unreliable narrators.

Gee, I sure hope the FBI is allowed to waste its time on this patently insane claim. Maybe while they’re at it they can get to the bottom of this:

Julie Swetnick, one of the women accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, faced allegations of her own misconduct during a short stint at a Portland tech company 18 years ago.

. . . .

In the suit, Webtrends alleged Swetnick claimed to have graduated from Johns Hopkins University but the company said it subsequently learned the school had no record of her attendance. Webtrends said she also “falsely described her work experience” at a prior employer.

The suit also alleges Swetnick “engaged in unwelcome, sexually offensive conduct” while at Webtrends and “made false and retaliatory allegations that other co-workers had engaged in inappropriate conduct toward her.”

The suit alleges Swetnick “engaged in unwelcome sexual innuendo and inappropriate conduct” directed at two male employees during a business lunch, with Webtrends customers present. Swetnick claimed two other employees had sexually harassed her, according to the suit.

Allegations in a lawsuit are not evidence and can be completely untrue — take it from me, as someone who has been the target of vindictive lawsuits packed with false claims. Creepy Avenatti points out that the lawsuit was dismissed, and the article does not explain why.

It’s a conundrum. This is why we need the FBI involved! (Rolls eyes.)

[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]

212 Responses to “Railroad Job!!!!1!: FBI (Maybe) Not Allowed to Investigate Avenatti Client’s Insane “Rape Train” Claims”

  1. Seriously, though, if you think someone is truly non-credible, the extra week does give time for dirt like this to emerge. In my constitutionally protected opinion, this woman seems like a piece of work.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  2. Yellow Submarine Grey Hippocampus

    In the land where I was born
    Lived a man, a judge was he
    And they told us of his life
    In the land of brave and free
    So we listened to Ford’s tales
    The crazies rode the Soros bus
    And we put the EPIC FAIL
    In our grey hippocampus

    We all possess a grey hippocampus
    grey hippocampus, grey hippocampus
    We all possess a grey hippocampus
    grey hippocampus, grey hippocampus

    And our friends were all aboard
    Lindsay Graham won teh day!
    Then teh crows got to Flake

    We all possess a grey hippocampus
    grey hippocampus, grey hippocampus
    We all possess a grey hippocampus
    grey hippocampus, grey hippocampus

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  3. Q for the lawyers, since I have such a poor understanding of these things:

    Since Ford used select portions of her therapy as a supporting factor in her allegations against Kavanaugh, has she waived privacy with respect to all of that therapist’s records for her? Are they now completely open to investigators? It was described as couple’s therapy: does the husband have a right to object to that?

    Also, to anyone: is it technically possible to retrieve and examine her “disappeared” social media?

    Is not the character and the background of Ford subject to investigation in equal depth to that of Kavanaugh?

    TIA

    ColoComment (58aadb)

  4. You know what they say. If it can be indelible in the hippocampus for one lady, it can be indelible in the hippocampus for three ladies.

    DejectedHead (29c885)

  5. … thus making it a question of two unreliable narrators.

    Yeah, for it to be reliable in the eyes of the FBI it would need corroboration from Christopher Steele.

    purple haze (8b1c51)

  6. Why would Trump get involved? Its the Senate’s show. They wanted the FBI investigation, he’ll let the FBI do whatever Flake, Collins, and Murkoswki want.

    They run the show. We’re only do this because of those 3.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  7. People forget Trump nominated Kavanaugh because he was the establishemnt’s choice. The guy who would breeze through the Senate. He’s a former Bush aide (and Bush was working the phones) and Justice Kennedy clerk.

    I never detected any great enthusiasm on trump’s part for the guy.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  8. @ 6 Why would Trump get involved?

    Too too funny. Thanks!

    Q! (86710c)

  9. Concerning that lawsuit between WebTrends and Swetnick, it was dismissed with prejudice, so does that say anything about the credibility of WebTrends’ suit? IANAL.

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  10. Ms. Swetnick is not afraid to go to court.

    Court records reviewed by The Associated Press show Swetnick has been involved in at least six legal cases over the past 25 years. Along with the lawsuit filed by a former employer in November 2000, the cases include a personal injury suit she filed in 1994 against the Washington, D.C., regional transit authority.

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  11. Despite that, she subsequently worked for state, justice and homeland, did that booz Hamilton vet her too.

    Narciso (7c1c80)

  12. Meanwhile re the weekly standard piece, the details don’t check out.

    Narciso (7c1c80)

  13. Patterico,

    This is SO beyond eye-rolling. The last time I felt this sick, I had just consumed rather more than a fifth of tequila.

    Kevin M (d6cbf1)

  14. A clear distraction from examining Ford’s claims.

    It does look more compelling that Ford’s alleged gathering had to be in 1982 because late summer Mark Judge said he worked at Safeway a few weeks in order to pay for a football camp that started August 22. If we back that up 4 to 6 weeks, we get middle June to early July. This also rules out Blasey Ford having driven herself to the gathering as she couldn’t have had a license at 15. This makes it more poignant that somehow must have given her a ride to and from the gathering (as Ford has made no suggestion that she cabbed, bussed, biked, or walked long distances to these parties).

    It also appears that Blasey Ford was “going out” with Kavanaugh’s friend Chris Garrett….and that is how she got introduced to the broader Kavanaugh clique. It does call into question why Kavanaugh would attack Garrett’s friend….even in an unserious manner…..and why Ford would be at a gathering without Garrett….or fail to mention that he was there.

    The DEMs have zeroed in on a Thursday July 1st 1982 Kavanaugh calendar entry that talks about getting together with a number of people for Brewskis at Tobin’s house without mention of any females attending. Still, it provides an opportunity to investigate Tobin’s house to match it with Ford’s claims and to see if other attendees had any information to share.

    This at least has a shot of providing some verification or repudiation of Frord’s claims. Swetnick on the other hand….well…

    AJ_Liberty (165d19)

  15. BTW: I am now “at home” in New Mexico.

    Bought a 6-month-old home in the heart of Rio Rancho (original owner was transferred to NC shortly after he bought it). 2600sf of new, high-end construction on a middling lot for less than $350K.

    Gas is $2.65 a gallon, cheaper if the station is on Indian land. I’s been down to $2.40 during the summer.

    There are Wal-Marts, produce is better and cheaper than LA, the roads are mostly empty, and the Republicans have a chance to retain the governorship. One thinks NOTHING of taking a 20 mile drive during business hours.

    Gun control is: you need a carry permit for concealed carry, otherwise there isn’t any. Not even registration. Federal nonsense applies, of course.

    Kevin M (d6cbf1)

  16. I think the Dems have something planned for this extra week. But they continue to make themselves look like loons so maybe that’s good. I just hope Kavanaugh and his family can recover from all this.

    BTW I heard some guy on Face the Nation say we have to send the investigation to the FBI because it’s the only institution that’s trustworthy! They live in a different world.

    Patricia (3363ec)

  17. I think the problem is that with no details or corroboration, if we grasp for any verification it can be over interpreted by our imaginations. The entry on the calendar, or Judge working at a grocery store… of course those details don’t actually mean the assault occurred. And if Ford were mistaken or lying, her memory or story would naturally include some aspects that were accurate.

    But this method of piecing things together cannot repudiate Ford. It’s been so long since then, with no other witnesses, with a whole summer and town where it could have happened, that if Kavanaugh is innocent, I think there’s no possible way to prove it. That’s why the arguments that he has to prove his innocence, because he was “credibly accused” are unfair, if not malicious.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  18. 16… sounds very enticing.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  19. Kavanaugh has no chance to recover, nor does the senate, but the media will charge forward for the democrat party. You better believe the media and democrats have something planned for this week. And team rino is at ACME with Wylie Coyote looking for rope.

    mg (9e54f8)

  20. Some swetnick mama with a head fulla curls
    Sez the judge was a part of gang-rapin’ teh girls
    Well I got good news she’s a real bad liar
    Subpoena teh nut so teh court can try ‘er

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  21. I love New Mexico. Congratulations on your new home, Kevin. Visit SF, the Pecos area, Chama, Ruidoso and Cloudcroft when you have time.

    DRJ (15874d)

  22. Taos is one great place to ski. Enjoy the Land of Enchantment, Kevin M.

    mg (9e54f8)

  23. Too bad they can’t get Avenatti under oath

    steveg (a9dcab)

  24. Clarice nails it again, narciso.

    mg (9e54f8)

  25. Welcome to New Mexico, Kevin M. I’m across the river from you – one of those wonderfully short 20 miles drives you’re talking about. I’d be happy to buy you a beer some time and sing the state’s praises. Patterico has my email, if you’re interested.

    Leviticus (3c5a5d)

  26. We all get along pretty good when we aren’t talking Trump

    steveg (a9dcab)

  27. New Mexico is beautiful. And I’m sure someone on a California budget can live like a king there.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  28. @1. That’s great, Kevin. Congrats! The vistas and scenery weaved into the storyline of ‘Breaking Bad’ and ‘Better Call Saul’ are a wonderful postcard for New Mexico. Really looks beautiful there; certainly a liberation from Los Angeles. Just be wary of any high speed RVs cookin’ along or any guys selling burner phones out of their trunk.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  29. ^@15. Typo.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  30. rise up so early in the morn

    and do rape hoax all up in it!

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  31. Congrats, KevinG. Friends of mine just moved to San Antonio and bought a similar property. In a year, we may be heading East too!

    Patricia (3363ec)

  32. jeffy flake has singlehandedly guaranteed we won’t see a mormie president in our lifetimes

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  33. @ Colonel Haiku @2/

    What Professor Christine Blasey Ford said about the hippocamous was not just an attempt to sound authoritative by using academic language that didn’t add a single thing to the claim she was making, it was technically inaccurate and had almost as little meaning as anything Professor Irwin Corey said.

    RE: Professor Corey: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irwin_Corey

    Maybe she went above her pay grade. She’s not a medical doctor. But still someone who reads a lot about this should have a little bit better comprehension. I think she was taking direction here and didn’t even know enough to know this was nonsense, or didn’t care.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/09/27/kavanaugh-hea
    ring-transcript

    LEAHY: Well, then, let’s go back to the incident.

    What is the strongest memory you have, the strongest memory of the
    incident, something that you cannot forget? Take whatever time you need.

    FORD: Indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter, the laugh – the
    uproarious laughter between the two, and their having fun at my expense.

    Indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter.

    This is worthy of Professor Irwin Corey.

    Memory is not STORED in the hippocampus. The hippocamopusis necessary to encdode memory, but it doesn’t keep it there.

    She sounds like she never heard of H.M. – Henry Molaison.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Molaison

    His hippocampus was removed in 1953 to stop epileptic fits, and after that he ckould never remember anything that happened in his life – but his memory for things that hapepned before wss perfectly good. It’s one of the most famous things in the study of the brain.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  34. Professor Ford said this thing about memory being stored IN the hippocamous earlier in her testimony and also threw around a couple of other technical words taht didn’t add one thing to what she was saying:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/09/27/kavanaugh-hearing-transcript

    FEINSTEIN: I’m sorry.

    I want to ask you one question about the attack itself.

    You were very clear about the attack. Being pushed into the room, you
    say you don’t know quite by whom, but that it was Brett Kavanaugh that
    covered your mouth to prevent you from screaming, and then you escaped.
    How are you so sure that it was he?

    FORD: The same way that I’m sure that I’m talking to you right now. It’s
    – just basic memory functions. And also just the level of norepinephrine
    and epinephrine in the brain that, sort of, as you know, encodes – that
    neurotransmitter encodes memories into the hippocampus. And so, the
    trauma-related experience, then, is kind of locked there, whereas other
    details kind of drift.

    Memory is not stored in the hippocamous. It’s stored nowehre. It’s like a hologram.

    It’s been said that system of lines in 3 doimensions is mathematically equivalent to asystem of points in four dimensions. And that is, in all probability,what goes on the brain. Acrucial area is some place that the lines for similar must cross (I don’t suppose they realise that yet)

    But I mean – she’s talking nonsense. Plus what she describes – laughter – doesn’t fior a serious sexual assault, but with something intended to scare her – to freak her out.

    Professor Christine Blasey Ford used this talk of neurotranmitters in answer to asoftball question by Senator Coons:

    COONS: You know, experts have written about how it’s common for sexual assault survivors to remember some facts about the experience very
    sharply and very clearly, but not others, and that has to do with the
    survival mode that we go into in experiencing trauma. Is that your
    experience, and is that something you can help the layperson understand?

    FORD: Yes. I was definitely experiencing the fight-or-flight mode; is
    that what you’re referring to? Yes.

    So I was definitely experiencing the surge of adrenaline and cortisol
    and norepinephrine
    and – credit that a little bit for my ability to get
    out of the situation.

    But also some other lucky events that occurred. That…

    COONS: Well…

    FORD: …allowed me to get out of the event.

    Nobody even knows if these neurotransmitters do what they theorize they do. And she’s a textbook case, see??

    We all know maybe the way memory works, but giving names to chemicals taht seem to be associated with it, tell you nothing.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  35. new mexico’s one of my favorite places in the whole whirl you just have to learn how to avoid the indian reservations/farmington (ugh so depressing) but even farmington has some neat hiking

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  36. @30. Meh. The comedy team of Coons & Flake will be appearing 60 Minutes this evening; one night only, unlimited seating, no cover, two-drink minimum.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  37. plus it’s colorado-adjacent, and kinda to my thinking the best part of colorado

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  38. Indelible in the hippocampus

    This is just a $3 version of seared in the brain. Saying it in the little girl voice creates a dissonance but this is definitely meant to attempt to signal intelligence and expertise.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  39. “hippo campus”

    There’s a Smith College joke in there, but I won’t make it. Fat people have enough on their plates.

    nk (dbc370)

  40. Julie Swetnick, one of the women accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, faced allegations of her own misconduct during a short stint at a Portland tech company 18 years ago.

    . . . .

    In the suit, Webtrends alleged Swetnick claimed to have graduated from Johns Hopkins University but the company said it subsequently learned the school had no record of her attendance. Webtrends said she also “falsely described her work experience” at a prior employer.

    Uh.
    Mah.
    Gawd.

    You are now attacking the victim who so bravely came forward with her credible story? That won’t fly in our new gynocracy (stole that word from this American Thinker piece). Recall that we now have to believe all accusers.

    JVW (42615e)

  41. Congratulations on the move Kevin M. Like a number of other commenters, I too love New Mexico. You can spend a day just driving around (on your $2.65/gallon gas) and staring at the natural beauty surrounding you. One of my favorite towns is Las Vegas, where Teddy Roosevelt once held a Rough Riders reunion.

    JVW (42615e)

  42. There’s an epilogue to the story that Christine Blasey Ford told.

    Dustin (ba94b2) — 9/30/2018 @ 10:23 am

    Judge working at a grocery store… of course those details don’t actually mean the assault occurred.

    But what if he didn’t work at that grocery store, and that’s one of the details Mark Judge altered in his 1997 book??

    The name of the store is redacted in the version of the letter CNN published, so I don’t know, but she apparently made a correction (to the letter, not her statement)

    I think she probably changed the name of the store from what she oriuginally said to match something Mark Judge wrote in his book.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/09/27/kavanaugh-hea
    ring-transcript

    MITCHELL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    When we were stopped, you were going to tell us a third correction that
    you wanted to make on that statement – or, I’m sorry, the letter to
    Senator Feinstein.

    FORD: It’s – it wasn’t a correction, but I wanted to comment on it,
    since we were looking at this letter, that I did see Mark Judge once at
    the Potomac Village Safeway after the time of the attack. And it would
    be helpful with anyone’s resources if – to figure out when he worked
    there, if people are wanting more details from me about when the attack
    occurred. If we could find out when he worked there, then I could
    provide a more detailed timeline as to when the attack occurred.

    MITCHELL: OK.

    The Democrats are hanging a lot on that the name of teh store now matching with government records (they also prtended you needed an FBI inquiry for that.

    Here’s more on the epilogue:

    DURBIN: One hundred percent.

    In the letter which you sent to Dr. – or, Senator Feinstein you wrote,
    “I have not knowingly seen Kavanaugh since the assault. I did see Mark
    Judge once at the Potomac Village Safeway where he was extremely
    uncomfortable in seeing me.”

    Would you please describe that encounter at the Safeway with Mark Judge
    and what led you to believe he was uncomfortable?

    FORD: Yes.

    I was going to the Potomac Village Safeway – this is the one on the corner of Falls and River Road – and I was with my mother. And I was a teenager, so I wanted her to go in one door and me go in the other.

    So I chose the wrong door, because the door I chose was the one where Mark Judge was – looked like he was working there and arranging the shopping carts. And I said “Hello” to him. And his face was white and very uncomfortable saying “Hello” back.

    And we had previously been friendly at the times that we saw each other over the previous two years. Albeit not very many times, we had always been friendly with one another.

    I wouldn’t characterize him as not friendly. He was just nervous and not really wanting to speak with me.

    DURBIN: How long…

    FORD: And he – he looked a little bit ill.

    DURBIN: How long did this occur after the incident?

    FORD: I would estimate six to eight weeks.

    DURBIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Now she’s locked in. BTW, the “proof” may be why she switched to 1982.

    KLOBUCHAR: OK. And you’ve talked about your recollections, and seeing Mark Judge at that Safeway. If there had been an appropriate reopening of this background check and FBI interviews, would that help you find the time period, if you knew when he worked at that Safeway?

    FORD: I feel like I could be much more helpful if I could be providedwith that date through employment records or the IRS or something, any – anything that would help.

    KLOBUCHAR: Thank you. I would assume that’s true.

    More:

    BLUMENTHAL: Now, there’s been some talk about your requesting an FBI investigation, and you mentioned a point just a few minutes ago that you couldbetter-estimate the time that you ran into Mark Judge if you knew the time that he was working at that supermarket. That’s a fact that could be uncovered by an FBI investigation that would help further elucidate your account. Would you like Mark Judge to be interviewed in connection with the background investigation and the serious credible allegations that you’ve made?

    FORD: That would be my preference. I’m not sure it’s really up to me,but I certainly would feel like I could be more helpful to everyone if I knew the date that he worked at the Safeway so that I could give a better – a more specific date of the assault.

    BLUMENTHAL: Well, it’s not up to you. It’s up to the president of the United States, and his failure to ask for an FBI investigation, in my view, is tantamount to a cover-up.

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Mark Judge has now agreed to talk. I think maybe it is because he could totally destroy her credibility because he could bring proof, from a Social Security statement as to where he really worked and when.

    More:

    DURBIN: This morning – this morning, I asked Dr. Ford, I asked her about
    this incident where she ran into Mark Judge in Safeway, and she said, “Sure, I remember it.” Six or eight weeks after this occurrence.

    Well, someone at The Washington Post went in and took a look at Mr. Judge’s book and has been able to – the one that he wrote about his addiction and his alcoholism – and they have narrowed it down, what they think was a period of time six or eight weeks after the event. And he
    would have been working at the Safeway at that point.

    So the point I’m getting to is we at least can connect some dots here and get some information. Why would you resist that kind…

    I think they have the sequence reversed. I think maybe Ford’s lazwyers first saw the book, THEN she said she saw him at that Safeway. they want uis to connect thedots but the dits may be wrong.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  43. What if he didn’t

    But he did.

    Colonel Klink (efee99)

  44. But what if he didn’t work at that grocery store, and that’s one of the details Mark Judge altered in his 1997 book??

    If it turns out that one of Ford’s details cannot be verified you mean? Well I think in that case we actually have gotten nowhere, anyway. It’s a 36 year old memory so maybe she got that part mixed up, they will say. In that case, the same people saying they believe her, will keep saying it.

    At any rate, if he had never worked in a grocery store, the GOP would have brought that up by now.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  45. the question is did that Safeway carry mexican papaya, and at a fair price

    here in Chicago you usually have to go to an ethnic market like Rico Fresh for to find your tasty mexican papaya at a fair price

    my favorite use for the mexican papaya these days is in a smoovie with non-fat greek yogurts and what have you

    but I’ve never done a rape hoax all up in it

    so i’d have to defer to loopy Christine and her trusty engorged hippocampus on this issue

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  46. Actually none of them can be confirmed, not the layout of the house, this is why whelan was foolish in his speculations.

    narciso (d1f714)

  47. Mr. Judge was working part time in a five and dime – his boss was Mr. McGee

    and that’s when he saw her ooh he saw her

    she walked in through the out door out door

    and built like she was she had the nerve to ask Mark if he planned to do her any harm

    she wasn’t too bright but she had an engorged hippocampus

    in through the out door out door

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  48. Why are we avoiding the important questions? I am hereby demanding an FBI investigation into the questions of who put the bomp in the bomp bah bomp bah bomp? Who put the ram in the rama lama ding dong? Who put the bop in the bop shoo bop shoo bop? And – perhaps most importantly – who put the dip in the dip da dip da dip? Unless and until we get to the bottom of this, it is most unseemly that Brett Kavanaugh be seated.

    Jerryskids (702a61)

  49. Rich Lowry
    @RichLowry
    Consider where we are: It is now considered an outrage that there isn’t an FBI investigation into a Supreme Court nominee’s college drinking

    harkin (a4b010)

  50. That was inspired pikachu, it also punctuates another point, I don’t think nsith judge nor kavanaugh would have given her a second look.

    narciso (d1f714)

  51. It’s a 36 year old memory so maybe she got that part mixed up, they will say. In that case, the same people saying they believe her, will keep saying it.

    Kind of awesome for Prof. Ford how they’ve set it up so that if her details are accurate then it proves she’s telling the truth but if her details turn out to be wrong it’s just because 36-year-old memories are hard to pin down.

    JVW (42615e)

  52. Who put the bop in the bop shoo bop shoo bop? And – perhaps most importantly – who put the dip in the dip da dip da dip?

    Who was that man? I’d like to shake his hand.

    JVW (42615e)

  53. That is right up there with enduring mystery that was shanana. I mean this doesn’t even work as a grease recasting.

    narciso (d1f714)

  54. JVW,

    Much of Longmire was filmed in New Mexico, with many scenes shot in Las Vegas. It’s a great show and you should watch it if you like the Las Vegas (NM) look.

    DRJ (15874d)

  55. I don’t understand how Avenetti can expose his client to potential perjury charges–her allegations are beyond ridiculous.

    Rochf (877dba)

  56. Much of Longmire was filmed in New Mexico, with many scenes shot in Las Vegas. It’s a great show and you should watch it if you like the Las Vegas (NM) look.

    Huh. I wonder if my TV plays anything other than sports and old movies. I guess I ought to find out. Thanks for the tip, DRJ.

    JVW (42615e)

  57. We watch sports, a lot of TCM movies, and an odd assortment of shows. But we were addicted to Longmire. It had 6 seasons and we watched several episodes every night for a month. The only bad thing is it’s over, unless they do the rumored movie.

    DRJ (15874d)

  58. It looks like the initial impression of Blasey-Ford’s testimony-that men were wired to believe it and women immediately had LIAR LIAR LIAR alarm bells ring-extended to one of America’s finest voice actors:

    https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/star-wars-resistance-voice-actress-rachel-butera-mocks-kavanaugh-accuser-christine-blasey

    Imagine getting fired from your voice-acting job because your voice acting was too spot-on.

    “With an exaggerated glottal creakiness, Butera spends the now-deleted one-minute video mocking Ford’s vocal fry, something studies indicate is a criticism aimed solely at women, another method of perceiving women as “ditzy” or less capable than their male counterparts.”

    The absolute STATE of liberal attack journalism, particularly the ‘studies indicate’ and ‘aimed solely at.’

    Al-Khutr Davenport (5d32e7)

  59. Good fat joke, nk. Funny stuff!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  60. The Failing @NBCNews quotes “people familiar with the investigation,” who don’t exist, as saying “the bureau had not been permitted to investigate the claims of Julie Swetnick” WRONG AGAIN! Use real people, not phony sources.

    http://patterico.com/2018/05/27/this-open-thread-does-not-exist/

    Buduh (fc15db)

  61. Did you cover that lesson in conlaw:

    https://mobile.twitter.com/jonathanvswan/status/1045741651669524480

    narciso (d1f714)

  62. this julie swetnick
    drawn to teh gang rape parties
    like cow to salt lick

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  63. I don’t understand how Avenetti can expose his client to potential perjury charges–her allegations are beyond ridiculous.

    Rochf (877dba) — 9/30/2018 @ 1:27 pm

    They are truly out there. They are so bad, that if you really believed them, absolutely you would go to the police even years later. If they are true, a lot of people belong in prison.

    And if you don’t believe them, you get your client some help.

    What you don’t do is make your client a household name, subject these claims to public scrutiny, to insert yourself into the drama. Unless you’re Avanetti. Then that’s exactly what you do. As far as I’m concerned he shouldn’t get to practice law if this is how he does it.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  64. michael gang rape avanetti, just like loopy rape fantasist Christine Ford and sleazy rape hoax opportunist Jeff Flake, cheapens the allegation of rape to the level of “forgetting to floss” ot “taking too long to order at Starbucks (racist coffee shop)”

    but these people also further cheapen the already-debased currency of the joke FBI at the same time

    so it’s a two-fer

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  65. me i floss

    i floss like the dickens i really do

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  66. oopers that should be *or* “taking too long to order at Starbucks (racist coffee shop)”

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  67. Can one of you lawyer types explain what it takes to get disbarred? In relation to this type of false accusation type stuff? Also, are Ford’s attorneys in any potential trouble if they didn’t act in her interest for political reasons?

    Susanita (8bc977)

  68. Kelly Ann Conway says to Jake Tapper on CNN SOTU she was a victim of sexual assault. She did not elaborate. Did she report it at the time? If not, why not, as her boss, the president, tweeted Dr. Ford should have done? And Comey has weighed in w/an op-ed signalling Kavanaugh ‘lying’ under questioning about his yearbook is a red flag for FBI investigator. Sheesh.

    Six more days of this trench warfare. The World Series can’t come soon enough.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  69. there should be a website where women can post about all the misadventures of their sugar cookies and people could search it like a database to discern themes and trends

    this would be very empowering for women and you could also run ads for stuff like Sarah Michelle Gellar’s foodstirs products where you can make a cake just by pouring stuff into a coffee mug and throwing it in the microwave

    female empowerment

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  70. Papaya is “practice fruit”,IYKWIMAITYD, hence its Urban Dictionary meaning for the Caribbean part of the Latino spectrum.

    urbanleftbehind (61ee40)

  71. it’s a deeply meaningful fruit, fleshy and sweet with buttery notes

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  72. Yes but banana is heavy artillery.

    Narciso (c622c9)

  73. green banana’s an excellent source of #resistant starch

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  74. Twitter is banning conservatives and right of center folks all over the place
    but #KILLKAVANAUGH is currently the first autofill on #KILL.

    Twitter really is teh Devil’s Dandruff.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  75. @70 if Kavanaugh lied under oath or was “less than truthful,” even about matters he deemed trivial or under questioning he found invasive, it should be disqualifying for the position he is seeking. (1998 Brett Kavanaugh would have thought so).

    JRH (9c44ba)

  76. this sleazy rape fantasist is the one who’s lying though

    dirt doctor ford lol

    “i was afwaid he was gonna rape me cuz in my hippocampus there was these chemicals”

    and then i tried to get on the airplane and i just started slapping myself and slapping myself and i couldn’t stop

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  77. oops afwaid he was gonna *wape* me is what that should say

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  78. I’m told by the tribal elders that there once was a time when The Truth mattered.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  79. The authorities should check to see if Dr. Blasey Ford was ever treated for elephantiasis of the hippocampus.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  80. What sense does it make to say: Oh, I bumped into Mark Judge at Safeway X 6-8 weeks after the assault and he wasn’t friendly.

    First, why was FORD friendly to Judge? He helped Kavanaugh sexually assault her!

    Second, how is it she can remember it was 6-8 weeks after and NOT remember the month of the assault?

    Third, why is it she knew Judge was “Friendly to her” for two prior years, but they never socialized or knew each other AFTER the Safeway incident?

    rcocean (1a839e)

  81. Why didn’t Grassley insist on a full staff interview of Ford BEFORE having her testify?

    Why let Mitchell conduct her hurried, half-assed public deposition? We learned almost no details from her 1 hours of questioning!

    rcocean (1a839e)

  82. “This is what happens when you tie your identity to politics, isn’t it? I don’t march or get overly involved in political activities. I’m not going to have my identity so closely tied to power or ideology that when it runs amok – as it always does – it causes me to suffer. She chose to use her pain for a political purpose, a very SPECIFIC political purpose. If the results aren’t what you want or expect, there will be pain involved. More than you had before, and it may be deeper and more extensive. Politicians won’t prepare you for that part as they use you.

    Why someone would want to endure the pain she went through simply to destroy another person’s reputation is beyond me. Some people call it brave. If I felt she was advancing womens’ causes, or the cause of women who’d been assaulted, I’d call her brave. I don’t think she did. I believe she did damage to those causes, and she also damaged the process of approval for the Supreme Court. True believers will march and protest in her name for some time to come. All that is based on is emotion. No facts. No evidence, no care for the inability to tie truth of any kind to her vague remembrances. Identity Politics don’t require facts. Just emotion and alignment. Are you with our identity or against our identity? There can be no in-between with Identity Politics. If you’re a woman you must support women unquestionably, otherwise you’re manipulated or abused. If you’re manipulated or abused, then you’re worthy of additional abuse which the Identity Politics require be disbursed.

    This may be a watershed moment in Identity Politics. This was a great example of how identity has been weaponized for political gain. Don’t think this is the end of Identity Politics, though. The Democrats need identity to survive. Mao’s Cultural Revolution relied on hearsay and Identity, and was implemented shortly after the Great Leap Forward had failed to propel the nation forward economically. The Democrats are failing massively. They are launching their own Cultural Revolution. I’ve warned friends of mine who are sympathetic to the ’cause’ to be careful. Movements like this eat their young.”

    http://maggiesfarm.anotherdotcom.com/archives/32304-Kavanaughs-Hearings-are-Identity-Politics-Run-Amok.html#extended

    harkin (a4b010)

  83. Movements like this eat their young.

    It wouldn’t be so bad if their young were all they ate.

    frosty48 (9d3cda)

  84. When are FBI agents planning to interview ‘Gang-bang Greg’?!?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRJecfRxbr8

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  85. Can one of you lawyer types explain what it takes to get disbarred?
    1. Having sex with your client.
    2. Stealing your client’s money.
    3. Committing or suborning perjury or other fraud on the court.
    4. Conviction of a felony or other crime involving fraud, deceit or moral turpitude.
    5. Getting the disbarring panel at your disciplinary hearing.

    nk (dbc370)

  86. Could the Allentown PA car bomb be “ranch” or is it goombas?

    urbanleftbehind (61ee40)

  87. Interesting question, it had a large Lebanese community (Helen Thomas cane from there)

    Narciso (a6eae2)

  88. Mas Puto and I’m sure Dildos will start flying around soon:
    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/409108-flake-booed-at-festival-after-joking-feel-free-to-join-me-in-an

    urbanleftbehind (61ee40)

  89. If you need a pay phone The Big Island still has phone booths.

    mg (e60689)

  90. Thank you, nk.

    Susanita (8bc977)

  91. You’re welcome, Susanita.

    nk (dbc370)

  92. Jose Baez checks off a big one from that list…at least.

    urbanleftbehind (61ee40)

  93. Don’t get me started on that guy, he’s the Latino of avenatti.

    Narciso (1aa1ed)

  94. “Attention black America: The last time a mob of white liberals demanded that we believe women without due process, our ancestors were hung from trees. Under no circumstances should we allow this radical feminism to persist,”

    —- Candace Owens

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  95. Oh, look, life-long Republican® James Comey has sides, once again, with the Democrats’ newest Big Lie*.

    ———-
    * “Big Lie” is ® Goebbels Broadcasting Company.

    Kevin M (d6cbf1)

  96. #88: but not always.

    Kevin M (d6cbf1)

  97. James Comey is a sad case. He should take religious orders and assume the monastic life.

    nk (dbc370)

  98. Sammy… just saw what you’d posted in response to me… more examples of why she comes across as so unbelievable in my estimation. I do not buy any of it.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  99. But Comey was a “Republican”

    Lol, more lies

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  100. Real q.

    Do any NeverTrumpers here accept this is the pandora’s Box you opened up with your constant drivel about his morals whilst ignoring their homicidal tendencies?

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  101. But we were addicted to Longmire.

    Me, too. One of my very favorite shows, from beginning to end. They said they were in Wyoming but it was filmed in NM, and the scenery was gorgeous, especially right outside Longmire’s house.

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  102. Trump opened the Pandora’s Box by being an irredeemable sleazebag with absolutely no moral authority whatsoever, making it easy for people to believe that everybody associated with him is as dirty as he is. Which he is. Dirty. Very dirty. And isn’t that the main reason he appeals to Trumpkins?

    nk (dbc370)

  103. It was Mr. President Donald J. Trump’s “smaller than average” wee-wee which catapulted a creepy pron pmip into national prominence, Mr. Bob the Builder, not #NeverTrump’s.

    This thread being about Avenatti, as in says in the post’s title, and all.

    Or is there some dispute about that?

    nk (dbc370)

  104. He’s a bottom sucking carrion eater, Jonathan turley seems so proud of his star pupil. With cutter, now sucked in the swamp like venom, lobbying for deripasha, it was the evidence of the madams boom that did him in.

    Narciso (1aa1ed)

  105. All the actual evidence is on Cavanaugh’s side but it doesn’t matter, the times dregs up an Eli legacy warming a faculty chair in chapel hill, making up carp.

    Narciso (1aa1ed)

  106. Goliath, Sneaky Pete, Ozark

    mg (9e54f8)

  107. But Comey was a “Republican”

    Comey was a Republican (no scare quotes) longer than Trump was. Same with Mueller. And Comey’s right, the FBI can do this.

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  108. Comey doesn’t give a crap whether they can do it, so long as it allows new and different “credible” charges to be invented.

    Kevin M (d6cbf1)

  109. When did they investigate a crime, without a time or a place Montague, preventing an act of violence that’s something else.

    Narciso (1aa1ed)

  110. Even when there is a crime scene and actual evidence Mueller and Coney have a way of missing the target.

    Narciso (1aa1ed)

  111. Canada and the cheese mafia from qbeck signed on.
    Wish they would take back the seals that enter illegally.

    mg (9e54f8)

  112. So let me get this….

    Trump is to blame for the SCOTUS going crazy including introducing presumption of guilt into the world of juris prudence because he is scum.

    Yet we know this approach to SCOTUS is time honored D tactic going back to Bork. Worse yet presumption of guilt was also pioneered and advanced by D and NeverTrump with Russia!!!!!!!!!

    …..no matter how scummy Orangeman May be me thinks NeverTrump is big part of the problem. U kind of did this to Kavanaugh by pioneering this guilt by mob accusation mindset. By feeding metoo BS with those fake accusations after the unfortunate access Hollywood thing.

    Just saying.

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  113. Hey where can I find those lectures on free trade by u fine legal minds to tell me renegotiating nafta at the barrel of a gun is bad.

    Want to see how well that held up …..

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  114. If Kavanaugh lied during his testimony, it could be a game-changer. I drank like a sailor when I was in college, and so did a lot of people. So what. If he was less than forthcoming about that, he shouldn’t have played his cards that way.

    One potentially sad implication of all this is that it could well further politicize the FBI. We really don’t need that right now.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  115. Comey wife coming forward with credible allegations that Brett drinks lots of beer and looked at her kind of “queer” at a DOJ meeting in 2004 before he pocketed tens of millions by helping sell Raytheon crap to the fbi.

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  116. So I drank too much in college is a lie because he did not admit to drinking even more than toooooo much?

    Mental……

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  117. Now blotto ford, probably couldn’t remember the day of the week back in 1982, if pressed

    Narciso (1aa1ed)

  118. New BK alleged lie: “Senate, I made her cum 3 times”

    Soros She Gimp from Yale heard thru a friend “Not true, his lady friends never came more than once!”

    ….. only in D world kids is this insanity normal.

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  119. Mitchell was excellent and her Washington Post linked Memo clearly shows why:

    so many inconsistencies with Ford’s testimony. While watching & listening to Mitchell ask the questions you could hear one problem after the other with Ford’s answers. Ford couldn’t remember what she did a month ago let alone in early 80’s.

    Ford also revised her answers on the polygraph such as “Her August 7 statement to the polygrapher said that it happened one “high school summer in early 80’s,” but she crossed out the word “early” for reasons she did not explain.”

    also:

    • In a July 6 text to the Washington Post, she said it happened in the “mid 1980s.”
    • In her July 30 letter to Senator Feinstein, she said it happened in the “early 80s.”

    http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/politics/rachel-mitchells-analysis/3221/

    Where Eagles Dare (8f562c)

  120. And still another buddy from his teenage years offers testimony concerning loutish young Brett’s serious serial booziness, and his consequent conviction that “mature K” intentionally misled the SJC and the nation in K’s recent (unprecedented) tv interview and in his recent testimony.

    Q! (86710c)

  121. Judge K. Should demand the kid glove treatment illegal crimaleins receive for the sexual abuse they frequently commit.

    mg (9e54f8)

  122. Anyone can say anything and it can end up in a fisa application, actual proof is something else again, but the former employers of Jayson Blair should know this

    Narciso (1aa1ed)

  123. @ ColoComment, who asked (#3):

    Q for the lawyers, since I have such a poor understanding of these things:

    Since Ford used select portions of her therapy as a supporting factor in her allegations against Kavanaugh, has she waived privacy with respect to all of that therapist’s records for her? Are they now completely open to investigators? It was described as couple’s therapy: does the husband have a right to object to that?

    Also, to anyone: is it technically possible to retrieve and examine her “disappeared” social media?

    Is not the character and the background of Ford subject to investigation in equal depth to that of Kavanaugh?

    TIA

    ColoComment (58aadb) — 9/30/2018 @ 9:08 am

    Since this is not a criminal investigation with its attendant powers of subpoena, as DRJ pointed out here (and others have pointed out elsewhere) the FBI investigators won’t be able to force, for example, Facebook or other social media platforms to scour her social media for deletions, and without her consent, they would not likely cooperate voluntarily (and probably would be violating their on terms & conditions regarding privacy assurances to users if they did). Likewise, under both state & federal law, records in the possession of her therapists — and I’m guessing, from her age, social status, and career path, she’s had more therapy than just the couples’ therapy from which she’s kinda-sorta produced selected record excerpts to bolster her credibility (basically, an attempt to rebut a “recent fabrication” attack thereupon) — can’t be examined and copied by the FBI unless she consents.

    Your waiver question is an excellent one, to which the first-level answer is: In a civil or criminal court, conduct on her or her counsel’s part (like producing cherry-picked excerpts from one therapist about one session) might indeed be deemed now to have been a waiver of her broader confidentiality rights on the rest of those records. For example, Texas Rule of Evidence 510(b)(1) provides:

    In a civil case, a patient has a privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent any other person from disclosing:

    (A) a confidential communication between the patient and a professional; and

    (B) a record of the patient’s identity, diagnosis, evaluation, or treatment that is
    created or maintained by a professional.

    But there’s an express exception to the privilege laid out in Rule 510(d)(5) for those situations in which “any party relies on the patient’s physical, mental, or emotional condition as a part of the party’s claim or defense and the communication or record is relevant to that condition.”

    So if I were defending Judge Kavanaugh, for instance, in a civil assault tort claim in Texas, in which Dr. Ford was seeking money damages, and we alleged “recent fabrication” based on her three decades of silence, that by itself probably would be enough to burst the privilege; and certainly when she herself then relies on a subset of the privileged communications to dispute our recent fabrication argument, all of her treatment records would become more clearly relevant, and thus more likely to be ordered produced even over her motion to quash my subpoena of her therapists’ medical records custodians. (I’d also be gathering all her medical records from and after 1982, in addition to her therapy records, on grounds that an alleged assault victim’s physical condition is likewise relevant, and that even medical professionals who aren’t therapists frequently assess their patients’ mental status and report on it in the records they create.)

    But again, there being no pending civil or criminal case in connection with which a subpoena can be issued, there’s no judge to rule on the extent to which her past therapy or other medical records are genuinely relevant, nor to order their production.

    So I suspect that the FBI will only get such further therapy or medical records, if any, as she and her lawyers voluntarily choose to give up.

    However: We do know that she (and her lawyers) have access to all her treatment records, but nevertheless have produced only a tiny sliver of evidence from them in their efforts to rebut the recent fabrication assertion. It’s certainly fair for the public and the Senate to infer from that tiny production that the rest of her records, at a minimum, wouldn’t help her credibility.

    @ Dave, who asked (#9):

    Concerning that lawsuit between WebTrends and Swetnick, it was dismissed with prejudice, so does that say anything about the credibility of WebTrends’ suit?

    The significance of the judgment of dismissal being “with prejudice” is to quickly alert any future court, in which the same party again tries to reassert the same claim, that this prior court, which entered the “with prejudice” judgment, has already literally pre-judged, and found inappropriate, any such future attempt. The contrasting sort of dismissal order or judgment may be called something like a “nonsuit” or a “dismissal without prejudice” — both terms which are intended to convey to future courts that no, this dismissal doesn’t necessarily tie their hands from reconsidering these same claims. You typically see dismissals without prejudice when courts have determined that a case isn’t ripe yet, or that there’s some procedural hoop that must be jumped through first before the court can proceed.

    None of which answers your question. The additional fact needed to answer your question is: How did the judgment of dismissal with prejudice get entered? I haven’t looked at the underlying documents, but my bet is that Webtrends extracted something — money, a retraction, a promise to go separate ways far apart — from Swetnick as part of a settlement of that lawsuit, the details of which probably appear only in a confidential settlement agreement that’s not part of the court record. But such settlement agreements typically include, at the request of one or both sides, not only releases of pending claims (the belt), but an agreement to jointly ask the court to enter a judgment of dismissal with prejudice (the suspenders). That judgment confirms to the public that their dispute is permanently over, and along with whatever release Webtrends signed in favor of Swetnick as part of their compromise, this judgment with prejudice could be used by Swetnick in the future were Webtrends to attempt to re-assert the settled claims: She wouldn’t have to produce and make public the settlement agreement and releases, but could simply rely on the “with prejudice” language from the prior judgment.

    When there’s been no settlement, though, and you see a judgment of dismissal after a trial or a dispositive motion (like a motion for summary judgment in favor of the defendant) — either of which is a ruling “on the merits” by the court — that’s likewise going to be styled a “with prejudice” dismissal. Again, it’s a signal to the future courts: Don’t trod here, this ground’s already been thoroughly trod before.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  124. This round high school, next time middle school and subsequently working down thru Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, Brownies and Cub Scouts.

    What a load of crap>>>> http://patterico.com/2018/09/30/railroad-job1-fbi-maybe-not-allowed-to-investigate-avenatti-clients-insane-rape-train-claims/#comment-2156167

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  125. “One potentially sad implication of all this is that it could well further politicize the FBI. We really don’t need that right now.”

    I had to LOL at that one… thanks for the chuckle!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  126. Despite BS like this article, a voluntarily dismissal by the plaintiff with prejudice signals that it was done as part of a settlement.

    If a plaintiff voluntarily dismisses because he’s just decided to drop the case, without getting anything in a private settlement, then he’d dismiss “without prejudice” to keep his future options open.

    This makes Swetnick look worse, then, not better (as these lying douchebags are trying to make out).

    Beldar (fa637a)

  127. That judgment confirms to the public that their dispute is permanently over, and along with whatever release Webtrends signed in favor of Swetnick as part of their compromise, this judgment with prejudice could be used by Swetnick in the future were Webtrends to attempt to re-assert the settled claims…

    BTW, it was me who asked, Beldar, not Dave. Given the blockquote above, does this explain why WebTrends is saying diddly to the press about the lawsuit?

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  128. Oh! Sorry, Mr. Montagu, I apologize for that mistake!

    My guess is that WebTrends is horrified having its name again associated with Jule “I Didn’t Keep Going Back to the Gangbangs for Two Years for the Punch!” Swetnick.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  129. Well she was subsequently hired for information technology positions in federal agency, exsqueeze me?

    narciso (d1f714)

  130. In other words: All defamation plaintiffs suffer, to one degree or another, because of the Streisand Effect.

    WebTrends keeping mum is an attempt to minimize, rather than exacerbate, its Streisand Effect problems.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  131. Thank you Beldar for these detailed explanations. Very informative.

    NJRob (1d7532)

  132. It does explain things did booz Hamilton get her too like they did snowden and the navy yard shooter?

    Narciso (1aa1ed)

  133. No reason to apologize, Beldar. Good stuff. It only further confirms my suspicions about Swetnick.

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  134. Beldar–

    I had asked a similar question about waiving confidentiality maybe a week ago, with the idea that a failure to have discussed this event prior to 2012 would have told volumes. Further, couple’s counseling suggests that there are problems in the marriage and there was the possibility that the assault was invented to cover for something she didn’t want hubby to know (e.g. their sex was off because she was banging the tennis pro).

    Kevin M (d6cbf1)

  135. The bottom line from Ms. Mitchell:

    A “he said, she said” case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that. Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard. Dr. Ford has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened.

    The number of inconsistencies to Ms. Ford’s testimony is pretty lengthy. We’ll see what the FBI turns up but, as it stands, it shouldn’t stop Kavanaugh from getting confirmed.

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  136. @131 Beldar .. Despite BS like this article, a voluntarily dismissal by the plaintiff with prejudice signals that it was done as part of a settlement.[¶]If a plaintiff voluntarily dismisses because he’s just decided to drop the case, without getting anything in a private settlement, then he’d dismiss “without prejudice” to keep his future options open.[¶]This makes Swetnick look worse, then, not better (as these lying douchebags are trying to make out). [Emph. added; h-links removed]

    Yo, yo, yo Beldar! Little harsh, doncha think? “BS”? “lying douchebags”? Seemed like a pretty neutral-ish article to me. (But, hey – maybe I’m particularly dense tonight.) You might want to consider toning down the outrage, Counsel. Sheesh!

    Q! (86710c)

  137. @135. Meh. An aside. That whole house picture thingy is right in character with Streisand BTW. She has a rep in the biz of being a notorious ‘control freak.’ We did some work w/Babs in the mid 80’s surrounding the marketing of some archived video work culled from various television specials and appearances. It was great stuff; show tunes, ballads and such. But Babs was really spooked about it; she was concerned at how people would think she looked. [We believed she meant aged.] The team sat in the office gobsmacked as the product manager was on the phone w/her literally begging her not to worry about how she’d look, that the material was from masters, both color and b/w video; crisp images, clear audio -her voice fine- and recent photo proofs for cover art were superb as was the marketing collateral. He rang off and let out a big sigh; said she was literally curled up on her bed worried about it all and to placate her anxieties we had to package up every photo, piece of art, advertising and assorted marketing materials and ship it FedEx to her for personal approval. Real PITA; added about three weeks to the production schedule by the time it all turned around and she ok’d it all anyway. Just a ‘control freak.’ We always contrasted her w/t great Mel Brooks, who didn’t give a hoot and would just say, ‘Sell my movie!!’

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  138. establishment corporate democrats are desperate to be seen trying to stop kavenaugh so the democrat base doesn’t primary them with real leftists in place of these corporate stooges kavenaugh wins diane fienstein loses to lefty opponent. this would be intolerable to corporate state.

    lany (b0fd36)

  139. So the new thing is “never mind Ford, Kavanaugh committed perjury”!!!
    Is it actually possible that, short of Judge saying Kavanaugh is lying about the yearbook, he can be convicted of perjury? How can they decide this about inside jokes? And if he says “I drank too much sometimes” does someone saying he underplayed it mean he lied? I am curious how all this is proven?

    Susanita (8bc977)

  140. A friend who was at yale, at the time earliers the latest breathless account doesn’t add up.

    Narciso (54490f)

  141. the sleazy over-stimulated men and women of the corrupt Chris Wray fbi are vastly more likely to lie lie lie than Mr. Kavanaugh

    this has been meticulously documented

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  142. it’s time for The Truth
    unvarnished plain-spoken harsh
    Dems have it in them?!?!

    Colonel Haiku (f4c5a5)

  143. Senator Jeff Flake
    Enema of teh People
    scolded little boy

    Colonel Haiku (f4c5a5)

  144. yes yes jeff flake’s a creepy rape hoax opportunist

    this rape hoax is all about me me me

    his mom and dad must be so proud

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  145. Kavanaugh laughs last
    then focus on replacement for
    Ruth Bader-Meinhoff

    Colonel Haiku (f4c5a5)

  146. It’s only a week. Five days now. Give Flake that much of a reprieve. It may be that he really is a [gentleman of dubious masculinity with unsanitary sexual habits] and that this is all a shuck and he never intended to vote for Kavanaugh, but let’s wait until we know for sure.

    nk (dbc370)

  147. obscene coward Jeff Flake is eager to do two things with this delay

    1. to validate diane moo goo gai pan feinstein’s evidence free rape hoax – an approach which has been endorsed by dirty rape hoax aficionado Mitt Romney

    2. to make this process as painful as possible for Brett Kavanaugh and his family so as to dissuade people from joining the Trump administration

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  148. I think Flake (and Coons) may have wanted to give the country a chance to breathe a little and climb down from their high horses. I had the (lamentable) opportunity to watch a lot of Fox News, and they aren’t climbing down from the RAGE talking points, and the left, by moving on to drinking, keg party, animal house, and PERJURY, aren’t lowering the temperature either.

    We are becoming a country that does not want or deserve its institutions. That’s pretty serious, and a little reflection on that might be useful. But I don’t think we, as a people, are big on reflections, either.

    Appalled (96665e)

  149. As soon as the hearing concluded Coons was in front of a microphone talking about other things the FBI might uncover.

    He didn’t want a breather.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  150. No, no, they don’t want a breather. What they want is for Trump not to appoint Kennedy’s replacement. It dat simpo.

    nk (dbc370)

  151. “a breather”… that’s rich…

    Colonel Haiku (f4c5a5)

  152. So the rest of the media gets a pass as it continues its disingenuous game of ignoring the lack of corroboration? They seem to believe common sense is not so common, appalled.

    Colonel Haiku (f4c5a5)

  153. @ Susanita (#144): I assess Judge Kavanaugh’s perjury risk (and his risk for perjury’s cousin, false statement to Congress or the FBI) so far, at least on the subject of his drinking, at almost zero, and I’m very confident that the lefties who are hyperventilating on this subject don’t know the law.

    Kavanaugh’s testimony before the Committee has never denied that Kavanaugh is at least a “social drinker.” He’s been quite unabashed in saying, “I liked beer” and “I still like beer.” He’s likewise admitted underaged drinking (in Maryland, not DC, based on their different drinking ages at the time). He’s admitted to “passing out” in the sense of falling asleep after drinking, and although I don’t recall him being pressed on that during his trial testimony, I suspect he’d concede that he fell asleep on at least some occasions at friends’ houses or in their cars. He’s denied ever being “black-out drunk,” or waking to find himself in a different place or with different clothes than he recalled before going to sleep.

    If he denied ever drinking at all, or claimed to have indulged in alcohol only once or twice, then that might be deemed a specific representation of objective fact, the truth or falsity of which is subject to objective verification.

    But as framed, the issue is whether he drank to excess, as a matter of habit and routine, such that it’s fair to impute not just being under the influence at parties and social gatherings to him, but to also impute to him, as a matter of habit and routine, black-out drinking in which his recall of his conduct before going to sleep was impaired.

    It’s very, very difficult for even a trained medical professional to assess the difference between these two levels of drinking. DWI defense lawyers make a living showing how badly cops do in making these assessments even when they’re trained for it and have administered a field sobriety test, which is why why those convictions generally require medical evidence (breathalyzer or blood tests, typically, adjusted for time of consumption and quantities imbibed). Teenage boys at parties often appear to be drunker than they really are because they’re being silly with friends (who may be much drunker than them, and/or whose own perceptions are impaired) or showing off stupidly for girls.

    Moreover, while his testimony about his drinking probably meets the materiality requirement for both perjury and false statement, a prosecutor would also have to prove that when he gave that testimony, Judge Kavanaugh knew and intended that his assessment of his own place on the spectrum between teetotaler and regular black-out/memory loss drinker was indeed false. That can only ever be proved inferentially. And with no history of traffic accidents or people finding him wandering dazed and disoriented, or a medical record showing that he’d checked himself in (or been checked in against his will) to some sort of rehab clinic, that’s practically impossible.

    Dems might just as well say, “He testified that he is a ‘good man,’ and he clearly is not, therefore he’s committed perjury.” Well, no: That’s a judgment call, a subjective assessment, not an objective fact capable of independent proof or disproof.

    nk or our host or others with more experience in criminal perjury prosecutions than I have may view this differently, but as a civil lawyer — who is nevertheless constantly obliged to assess whether his own or other clients have committed perjury — that’s my take on this.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  154. “Most of the media is too busy researching drinking parties at Yale in the mid to late 80s to care but the U.S. reaches trade deal with Canada and Mexico, providing Trump a crucial win.” Liz Sheld

    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/30/nafta-trade-canada-819081

    harkin (a4b010)

  155. Dangit. Okay, here it is again, third try (with “g00d man” hopefully masked this time):

    —–

    Oh, crap, I know why.

    “G00d man” ought to be reconsidered as a trigger for moderation. When your filters let hatefulfeet prattle on about “lick-lick” whatevers and his other routine filth, but block “g00d man,” something needs readjustment.

    Here’s the comment again, with that masked; just leave the original in moderation, please, to avoid duplication and disruption of the numbering everyone else sees:

    —–

    @ Susanita (#144): I assess Judge Kavanaugh’s perjury risk (and his risk for perjury’s cousin, false statement to Congress or the FBI) so far, at least on the subject of his drinking, at almost zero, and I’m very confident that the lefties who are hyperventilating on this subject don’t know the law.

    Kavanaugh’s testimony before the Committee has never denied that Kavanaugh is at least a “social drinker.” He’s been quite unabashed in saying, “I liked beer” and “I still like beer.” He’s likewise admitted underaged drinking (in Maryland, not DC, based on their different drinking ages at the time). He’s admitted to “passing out” in the sense of falling asleep after drinking, and although I don’t recall him being pressed on that during his trial testimony, I suspect he’d concede that he fell asleep on at least some occasions at friends’ houses or in their cars. He’s denied ever being “black-out drunk,” or waking to find himself in a different place or with different clothes than he recalled before going to sleep.

    If he denied ever drinking at all, or claimed to have indulged in alcohol only once or twice, then that might be deemed a specific representation of objective fact, the truth or falsity of which is subject to objective verification.

    But as framed, the issue is whether he drank to excess, as a matter of habit and routine, such that it’s fair to impute not just being under the influence at parties and social gatherings to him, but to also impute to him, as a matter of habit and routine, black-out drinking in which his recall of his conduct before going to sleep was impaired.

    It’s very, very difficult for even a trained medical professional to assess the difference between these two levels of drinking. DWI defense lawyers make a living showing how badly cops do in making these assessments even when they’re trained for it and have administered a field sobriety test, which is why why those convictions generally require medical evidence (breathalyzer or blood tests, typically, adjusted for time of consumption and quantities imbibed). Teenage boys at parties often appear to be drunker than they really are because they’re being silly with friends (who may be much drunker than them, and/or whose own perceptions are impaired) or showing off stupidly for girls.

    Moreover, while his testimony about his drinking probably meets the materiality requirement for both perjury and false statement, a prosecutor would also have to prove that when he gave that testimony, Judge Kavanaugh knew and intended that his assessment of his own place on the spectrum between teetotaler and regular black-out/memory loss drinker was indeed false. That can only ever be proved inferentially. And with no history of traffic accidents or people finding him wandering dazed and disoriented, or a medical record showing that he’d checked himself in (or been checked in against his will) to some sort of rehab clinic, that’s practically impossible.

    Dems might just as well say, “He testified that he is a ‘g00d man,’ and he clearly is not, therefore he’s committed perjury.” Well, no: That’s a judgment call, a subjective assessment, not an objective fact capable of independent proof or disproof.

    nk or our host or others with more experience in criminal perjury prosecutions than I have may view this differently, but as a civil lawyer — who is nevertheless constantly obliged to assess whether his own or other clients have committed perjury — that’s my take on this.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  156. Haiku:

    This whole situation gives me a swirl of mixed feelings. I don’t think Kavenaugh was treated remotely fairly, AND I think Kavenaugh’s enraged response crossed enough lines to be concerned about. Which, maybe, puts me in the same space as Flake. Wanting something, other than a stirring appeal to the tribe, to hang my yes vote on.

    Also, you got to think that Kavenaugh will be under constant political assault from the moment he hits the court. The resolutions of impeachment will be an annual event from the Democratic side of the aisle. The FBI review will calm some of that down. Now, I notice that the media is trying to turn that investigation into a whitewash, and the Trump administration really helped with that project when they overdid the restrictions on the review on Saturday. But, really, we are reaching a spot where, no matter what, the country does not have the consent of 50% of the governed. That’s dangerous.

    Appalled (96665e)

  157. Who would have thought that Brett Kavanaugh’s Yearbook ramblings would be decisive in determining the man’s character and whether he was being forthright about the abuse accusations? Kavanaugh is placed in the impossible position of having to unravel what exactly was in his teen mind when he penned those stupid comments…..with the knowledge that insincere critics will crucify him no matter what he says. He is in the impossible position of further painting himself in an unflattering light that makes his abuse charge more plausible….or as a liar, which makes his abuse charge more plausible.

    The fact that many don’t see this gotcha-game….and seem to revel in it….and see no problem with the Senate and media indulging in it, just shows how low we’ve fallen. Did Kavanaugh and his peers engage stupid double entendre and exaggerated boasts of their exploits from their self-absorbed teen years. Yeah, but it provides no further insight into whether during the summer of 1982 he assaulted Christine Blasey Ford. She either has corroboration…or doesn’t. So far she doesn’t.

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74)

  158. Alot of folks here in the “(semi-/full-on) outraged camp” oughta count their blessings that Sen. Flake made the move he did. Whatever his motivations, it would seem to me that by far the likeliest outcome is that the FBI investigation will be rather severely limited, and will not end up providing anything close to a more robust understanding of either Dr. Ford’s testimony or that of Judge Kavanaugh. Indeed, so far as one is aware, no interviews will be taken even of “the principals” in the Ford/Kavanaugh controversy. In a “he-said-s/he-said” situation such as this, credibility assessments are of course, crucial, and the investigation of facts asserted and/or sworn to by the witnesses are of course key. As is other (3d party) information bearing on those accounts and on other potentially relevant aspects of the principals’ conduct.

    While Trump has declaimed that the FBI has been given “free rein” to investigate here, reports place that considerably in question. On an issue which is obviously of great and enduring public interest and import (such as this) on so many levels, one would imagine that dozens or scores of special agents would be following up this, that or the other lead, so as to run down so much of the story as can be effected in the (somewhat arbitrary) time-frame imposed by the White House. Yet there is no indication (that I am aware of), that any such concerted and even moderately man-powered (see, above) effort is being undertaken.

    Alot of folks here in the “(semi-/full-on) outraged camp” oughta count their blessings that Sen. Flake made the move he did. Dollars to donuts, the FBI investigation will prove to be rather anemic and unenlightening (although it need not have been either) and it will provide “cover” for a confirmation of His Honor to the lifetime position in the highest court of the land. And you will have “won” and perhaps even improved prospects for some or more than some GOP candidates in the mid-terms.

    Q! (86710c)

  159. I agree with you, Beldar. I know how debilitating habitual alcohol abuse is. Kavanaugh’s stellar resume is proof that he was entirely forthcoming about his drinking.

    nk (dbc370)

  160. stel·lar
    ˈstelər/
    adjective
    relating to a star or stars.
    “stellar structure and evolution”
    synonyms: astral, sidereal
    “an estimate of stellar ages”
    INFORMAL
    featuring or having the quality of a star performer or performers.
    “a stellar cast had been assembled”
    synonyms: all-star, star-studded
    “a stellar cast”
    INFORMAL
    exceptionally good; outstanding.
    “his restaurant has received stellar ratings in the guides”
    synonyms: marvelous, outstanding, superb, first-rate, out of this world, heavenly, dazzling
    “a stellar performance”

    nk (dbc370)

  161. 165… but being forthcoming isn’t good enough. They will continue in their quest to destroy him… and his family.

    Colonel Haiku (f4c5a5)

  162. Former “fired for cause” FBI Director James Comey says that the FBI’s investigation into Kavanaugh won’t be “as hard as Republicans hope it will be”.

    I can’t say if he was gazing up at the Statue of Liberty at the time.

    Colonel Haiku (f4c5a5)

  163. Q:

    Indeed, so far as one is aware, no interviews will be taken even of “the principals” in the Ford/Kavanaugh controversy.

    I disagree. The principals shouod be interviewed, probably more than once. After this new delay, Kavanaugh issued a statement that he has previously answered Senate and FBI questions and will continue to cooperate, so I think he will agree to be and will be interviewed. Hopefully Ford will cooperate, too.

    DRJ (15874d)

  164. Thanks for the great explanations. It’s very helpful for a layperson. Do you have an opinion on the yearbook stuff? I am really curious if they can try to impeach him later on the meaning of “devils triangle”

    Susanita (0f4ae6)

  165. I just noticed I said “try to impeach him” which of course they can…I meant to say convict him.
    I just saw it pointed out that Ford scratched out “early” from “early 80s” in her polygraph statement.this seems important.

    Susanita (0f4ae6)

  166. And the plot thickens…

    Colonel Haiku (f4c5a5)

  167. Flake is a paid hack.

    mg (9e54f8)

  168. Note to Beldar: it wasn’t good man.

    DRJ (15874d)

  169. assess

    nk (dbc370)

  170. I guess not.

    nk (dbc370)

  171. The fact that in a different time and place, a different set of people entirely have used the term “Devil’s Triangle” to refer to sexual three-way proves nothing at all — isn’t even probative, doesn’t move the needle — about whether Kavanaugh intended that meaning in something he wrote in a high school yearbook.

    If they produce the other sexual partners, who will testify under oath that, “Yes, I had a three-way with Kavanaugh, and we all referred to what we were doing as making a ‘Devil’s Triangle,’ and I have a clear present recollection of him using that exact term,” then Kavanaugh might have a problem. Otherwise, not remotely.

    This is an argument made by people who think the crowd-sourced (anyone can edit anonymously) Urban Dictionary is a basis for putting other people into prison — in other words, an argument made by palpable idiots with transparently partisan motives and no shame.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  172. Thank you, DRJ, if you fished my original comment out of moderation so promptly (and thanks, too, for deleting the later versions)! And thanks for the head’s-up on what didn’t trigger it. But I’m still at a loss as to what I wrote that triggered the filter, and I feel like I’m a contestant on Groucho Marx’ “You Bet Your Life,” only I’m trying to prevent the toy duck from descending when I blunder into saying the secret word.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  173. i don’t understand how this forms a triangle

    full disclosure i’m lutheran

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  174. Dr. Ford testified that “the details [about] that — about that night that bring me here today are the ones I will never forget. They have been seared into my memory, and have haunted me episodically as an adult.”

    Was I the only one listening who immediately recalled John Kerry’s memories of Christmas in Cambodia, memories that were seared — seared, mind you! — into his memory?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  175. ConservaCon Inc seems to rallying to save a decent man from the gallows. Good news!

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  176. 179… no, it had me reaching up in my closet for a boonie hat…

    Colonel Haiku (f4c5a5)

  177. @175 Beldar [re: Devil’s Triangle] . . . then Kavanaugh might have a problem. Otherwise, not remotely. [Emphasis added]

    lol. Oh, I imagine that if Timmy or Mark (for example) were questioned on the locution “Devil’s Triangle” as back-in-the-day (Hail, Georgetown, All Hail Georgetown Prep . . .!) and said (e.g.) “Drinking game? – Like ‘Quarters’? Whaddayu nuts?” (etc.), there might be a “remote” problem. Eh? Likewise “boof”, likewise …. Lotsa kinda interesting questions out there … not to be much question-taking, apparently. Such is life, and politics.

    Q! (86710c)

  178. apologies for the faultily-closed italics .. that’ll teach me (probably not) to go in and try to italicize my “e.g.s” like a proper gent and all.

    Q! (86710c)

  179. Beldar,

    I fished your comment out of the trash. See #160.

    Dana (023079)

  180. Soros-paid operative screeching at a Senator as he stands in an elevator, equating all accused of sex assault as guilty:

    Progressive Hero
    __ _

    Judge with impeccable lifetime record angered over being called rapist, drunk and creepy sex perp and calling out the smear-merchants:

    Unfit for SCOTUS.

    harkin (a4b010)

  181. Teenage boys at parties often appear to be drunker than they really are because they’re being silly with friends (who may be much drunker than them, and/or whose own perceptions are impaired) or showing off stupidly for girls.

    you can also be tea drunk sometimes

    i read it at spruce this weekend

    that sight has some really strange tangents sometimes

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  182. oopers *site* i mean

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  183. Thanks Beldar! I have been lurking around here for years (I took a hiatus recently as politics made me too disgusted to care)
    But I have been jolted awake and wanted to check with well informed & thoughtful commenters.

    Susanita (0f4ae6)

  184. Devil’s Triangle in prep school in the DC area, and most likely everywhere else, in 1982 did, in fact, mean a three-way with two guys. Boofed did not mean flatulence. Ralphed was not referring to eating spaghetti with ketchup. How could I possibly know that, I mean, I wasn’t in a prep school in the DC area in 82, wait, yeah I was, and we all know what those words mean.

    I don’t get the lying about trivial things that are easily known and checked, why bother? It was a juvenile yearbook, that the adults who should have been in charge failed mightily in their responsibility to oversee. Kavanaugh’s lying about such things doesn’t help him in my view, especially when you add in his weird opening statement with all of the histrionics, fake crying, and strange conspiracy theories. He partied a lot, just own your life. He just doesn’t have the temperament, but I’m an Amy Coney-Barrett fan.

    Colonel Klink (9e4613)

  185. Was I the only one listening who immediately recalled John Kerry’s memories of Christmas in Cambodia, memories that were seared — seared, mind you! — into his memory?

    Beldar (fa637a) — 10/1/2018 @ 8:54 am

    You weren’t. I can’t believe she wrote it and said it in questioning.

    Patterico added versions of the word P*ERV*ERT to the filter in his New Commenting Rules. I think the word that triggered it was hyper*ventilated.

    DRJ (15874d)

  186. Seared, really?

    DRJ (15874d)

  187. Devil’s Triangle in prep school in the DC area, and most likely everywhere else, in 1982 did, in fact, mean a three-way with two guys.

    It must have skipped every place I was ever at because I never heard it until now and I know what antidisestablishmentarianism is.

    nk (dbc370)

  188. The one time I visited moderation was over the phrase d*ama qu**n. I was disappointed, because nothing else was going to get my particular point across.

    Appalled (96665e)

  189. @ 194 Appalled .. The one time I visited moderation was over the phrase d*ama qu**n. I was disappointed, because nothing else was going to get my particular point across. [Emph. added]

    Wow. That does seem like an odd/unexpected phrase to flag. So, what’s the rule – then? If something’s blocked, can you not (without violating some rule) use elipsis (as above), as a substitute in the original proposed post? (I’m assuming there’s no issue whatsoever, re: using such elipsis in a “meta-discussion”, like this.)

    Q! (86710c)

  190. Someone accused you of rape, tarnishes your whole reputation without a,shred of evidence, tell me how you would react.

    Narciso (54490f)

  191. dra·ma queen
    noun
    INFORMAL
    a person who habitually responds to situations in a melodramatic way.

    nk (dbc370)

  192. Q —

    I didn’t do that, mainly because I felt the host didn’t want a political character referred to that way, and his blog, his rules. I used another phrase that was 70% as effective.

    Fact is, though, I appreciate the strong moderation here.

    Appalled (96665e)

  193. You were probably misusing it. A lot of people do, when they say “… being a drama queen”. Drama queen is not an ephemeral state, it is an ingrained characteristic. One is not “being” in any particular discussion, he or she always “is”. The filter objected to your usage of the phrase, not the phrase itself.

    nk (dbc370)

  194. I thought it was Boffed derived from Boff (short o sound, double consonant) and not from Boof. Also notable, though very tangential from this case, is the prevalance of the preppy look in the early 80s high school scene, not just in actual Prep schools, but across socioeconomic and racial spectrums. At my uncle/aunts 50th wedding anniversary, the son/cousin who organized it had all these pics of his high school days (class of ’81) at TF North (Burnham/Calumet City IL) and for being populated with sons of steel and auto workers and tradesmen, those kids could outdo their North Shore, Hinsdale and Barrington “bro” competition with loafers, sweaters and oxfords and of course sweep hairdos’. Granted it was a town that would go white-black in 15 years time, but that was also a look within black “bougie” culture that was the near term replacement until the even more disruptive CHA tower displacements in the latter 90s.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  195. @199 nk You were probably misusing it. A lot of people do, when they say “… being a drama queen”. Drama queen is not an ephemeral state, it is an ingrained characteristic. One is not “being” in any particular discussion, he or she always “is”. The filter objected to your usage of the phrase, not the phrase itself. [Emph. added]

    Oh Pshaw!, Mr./Mrs./Ms. GrammarPants. Pshaw! I say!

    Q! (86710c)

  196. “hyper*ventilated”

    Hahaha! First world problems.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  197. Dems and their lackeys
    they just runnin’ around in
    the shoes of a clown 🤡

    Colonel Haiku (f4c5a5)

  198. The filter was imper*vious to hyper*ventilated

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  199. Go read a book Haiku: get some depth.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  200. that poor Blumenthal
    he fooled around caught case of
    dat damned DaNang Dick

    Colonel Haiku (f4c5a5)

  201. @182. Meh. ‘In Heaven there is no beer; that’s why we drink it here…’ At college a few years earlier in nearby Pennsylvania, in our frat universe, we knew the meaning of the terminology. Having a ticket punched catching a ‘train’ was the more common refrain outta Boastville.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  202. As this Devil’s Triangle thing keeps coming up, I recall an SNL skit, I think a Weekend Update story, in which a map of the Bermuda Triangle, AKA Devil’s Triangle, was on the screen and as, IIRC Dan Ackroyd was speaking about mysterious things disappearing in there the frame of reference pulled back to show the map being superimposed over a mini-skirt or something. I recall that being a joke reference amongst us guys to anyone picking up or hitting on a plus-sized and/or loose girl for a short while. Does anyone else recall that skit?

    Skorcher (5b282a)

  203. 200 urbanleftbehind, I distinctly remember having conversations in the 80s (I was in middle school) about boffing and what it meant. We were a bit confused and there was no urban dictionary to sort it out. We were pretty sure that the character in Teen Wolf was called Boof, so we ruled that out as the correct pronunciation.

    Susanita (1892b6)

  204. teen high school three-way action wasn’t a thing in the 80s

    not even for sleazy fbi teens

    it just wasn’t a thing

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  205. @190. Well said.

    DCSCA (797bc0)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5838 secs.