Patterico's Pontifications

10/5/2018

Blasey Ford Buddy: I Felt Pressure to Change My Statement

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 6:53 am



Via Ed Morrissey comes news that Blasey Ford’s buddy felt pressure to change her statement to make it more favorable to Ford — and you’ll never guess from whom (not Ford):

A friend of Christine Blasey Ford told FBI investigators that she felt pressured by Dr. Ford’s allies to revisit her initial statement that she knew nothing about an alleged sexual assault by a teenage Brett Kavanaugh, which she later updated to say that she believed but couldn’t corroborate Dr. Ford’s account, according to people familiar with the matter.

Leland Keyser, who Dr. Ford has said was present at the gathering where she was allegedly assaulted in the 1980s, told investigators that Monica McLean, a retired Federal Bureau of Investigation agent and a friend of Dr. Ford’s, had urged her to clarify her statement, the people said. …

On Thursday, a day after sending to the White House the report on its investigation into the allegations against Judge Kavanaugh, the FBI sent the White House and Senate an additional package of information that included text messages from Ms. McLean to Ms. Keyser, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Monica McLean is the person who, according to Ford’s ex, received advice from Ford about how to take a polygraph (advice Ford denied under oath ever having given to anyone). McLean denied this and the story died.

Understand: as best as I can tell, the “clarification” requested was likely: if you still believe her, say so. That’s not pressuring someone to lie. But it’s inserting yourself into the process, and in my mind it revives the issue about polygraph training. It certainly makes McLean seem less like a disinterested professional.

Anyway. Kavanaugh will be confirmed this weekend and this will soon all be moot. Because nobody will ever speak of it again. Right?

169 Responses to “Blasey Ford Buddy: I Felt Pressure to Change My Statement”

  1. you have to wonder if Chris Wray was personally involved in this fbi witness tampering effort

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  2. Polygraphs are such a joke. A pox on them. So many people are so eager to sacrifice their logic and discretion on the altars of machines they don’t understand.

    Leviticus (52e1fd)

  3. polygraphs given by sleazy ex-fbi agents are even more risible than the normal ones i would think

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  4. I saw an interesting reaction on campus. Most of my female students have told me the following: why couldn’t the Democrats just oppose Kavanaugh on policies? Why do they have to use the fears of many women as a political tool?

    I wanted to give them all gift certificates to a nice restaurant.

    Since I despise it when professors talk about politics on campus, I said this:

    1. All women should take self defense; don’t wait for others to defend you.
    2. No one should be afraid as they go through life; that needs fixing.
    3. Always ask what the motives of ANY politician are; they are generally not as the press claims (on either side).
    4. Stand up for what you believe.
    5. Don’t give any comedian’s opinion any more credence than your own.

    I can defend all of these.

    But I was surprised by the number of women on campus who have told me they are unhappy with how men are treated, and that they themselves feel they can’t speak out about it.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  5. I agree with you, Leviticus. Remember that the Scientologists use them! They just give them a different name. Measuring skin electrical resistance is not a science.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  6. This tangled web of arm-twisting, deceit, disingenuous behavior and bold-faced lies must somehow be fashioned into a tool that will dissuade these vermin and offspring of these vermin from the use of shameful tactics like these.

    Colonel Haiku (3ad005)

  7. This tangled web of arm-twisting, deceit, disingenuous behavior and bold-faced lies must somehow be fashioned into a tool that will dissuade these vermin and offspring of these vermin from the use of shameful tactics like these.

    dirty rape hoax aficionados Jeff Flake, Lisa Murkowski, and Susan Collins are still contemplating using their Kavanaugh vote to validate these Mitt Romney-style character assassination techniques

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  8. but at least the baby elephants aren’t going hungry today (thank you Melania)

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  9. I am gladdened by Simon’s comment at 4. That young people are aware of the real America they live in, and the real Americans they live with, and that it’s not the cesspool of the entertainment industry full of Harvey Weisteins, Matt Lauers and Les Moonveses.

    nk (dbc370)

  10. Except for who her attorney former main justice Intel chief laufman.

    Narciso (d1f714)

  11. yes yes and it’s important to note just how rabidly insistent the rape hoaxing senators and Jeff Flake were to bring in the fbi on this

    it may very well be that McLean’s heavy-handed bungling of the witness tampering effort tied the fbi’s hands when it came to deciding what to include in their “investigation” report

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  12. One concern, looking ahead and somewhat OT, is not so much whether Kavanaugh will revert to squishdom (probably not until very old age), but if fellow Georgetown Prep and beltway teen Gorsuch will feel compulsion to prove he’s not the same thing.

    urbanleftbehind (61ee40)

  13. Mitt Romney’s America’s a very very dark place

    but how can i explain

    when there are few words

    I can choose

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  14. Kavanaugh will be confirmed this weekend and this will soon all be moot.

    Let’s hope us. We’ve still got a few hours to go.

    Because nobody will ever speak of it again. Right?

    I don’t think D’s in congress will really want to open this box very far.

    Have you seen RBG lately? I don’t think she knows which day it is most of the time. I suspect her replacement will be up soon and that will make this look civil. Especially if he puts up someone like Pryor.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  15. The FBI needs to remind all its employees that it is a nonpartisan organization, which means its employees need to refrain from getting involved in partisan matters. And if the FBI is going to use polygraphs, it should investigate when someone claims employees are trying to game them.

    DRJ (15874d)

  16. 51 aye, 49 no

    Colonel Haiku (3ad005)

  17. Agree w/ Patterico that there’s no indication of witness tampering. Likewise, no doubt that Kavanaugh will be confirmed shortly. imo

    Reposting here (fwiw) a very slightly modified version of my post on this topic, from the last initiated thread before this (Response To FBI…) [w/ thanks to Col.H for the heads-up]:

    Can’t get behind the firewall at WSJ, but if FoxNews’ account accurately reflects the WSJ reporting, what’s the beef?

    (1) She (Keyser) said (initially) she had “no recollection” of the party (but believed Ford);
    (2) as I recall it, there was pretty universal and wide-spread reaction on the right, that Ford’s account “had been refuted” by all identified participants (save Ford) – i.e., including Keyser;
    (3) this sort of reaction – stating that Keyser’d “refuted” Ford’s account – is a wholly inaccurate as to the meaning of “refute” (at least how that word is employed by a great swath of educated English speakers);
    (4) in reaction to that mis-characterization, Ford’s friends/acquaintances/allies reportedly “urged” Keyser to say the same thing again (I do not recollect that party and by the bye (obviously), this not a “refutation” of Ford’s account, but simply reflects that I cannot corroborate her account), if in fact that statement of non-recollection was accurate;
    (5) apparently Keyser wrote just such a supplemental “clarification”, calculated to attempt to squash the block-headed mis-reporting -slash- mischaracterization of what she’d written earlier.
    (6) Indeed, as I recall it (and the transcript bears it out) Kavanaugh himself had falsely asserted in his testimony before the SJC that Ford’s account had been thus “refuted”:
    Dr. Ford’s allegation is not merely uncorroborated, it is refuted by the very
    people she says were there, including by a long-time friend of hers. Refuted.

    No Beef.

    Q! (86710c)

  18. Murkowski vows against cloture, just because, just like she screwed us on repeal, so in what way is she useful for any e but herself.

    narciso (d1f714)

  19. not only does Lisa Murkowski trivialize rape and glorify joke rape allegations, she does so as the mother of two sons

    that’s kinda special

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  20. Just remember we should have Joe Miller in the Senate if not for the games people play.

    NJRob (1d7532)

  21. She has a lot of home-state push back because of the Obamacare and rulings Kavanaugh has made against native American tribal concerns.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  22. How much have premiums gone up since robertscare went into effect.

    narciso (d1f714)

  23. This is a huge triumph for our president though, President Donald Trump.

    A huge defeat for the CNN Jake Tapper rape hoax media.

    And aside from a few hundred thousand dollars of gofundme bribes, Christine Ford made a lying rape-hoaxing spectacle of herself for nothing.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  24. Ah, good old blocking script! The clicQ! that refreshes.

    nk (dbc370)

  25. Making someone falsely attest to a criminal charge, that is a bfd

    narciso (d1f714)

  26. i hadn’t realized Christine’s FBI minder Monica McLean had actually attended the rape hoax hearings with her

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  27. Happyfeet … I am gonna be singing Chains of Love all day now. But it’s so sinister now.

    Susanita (1ec019)

  28. Erasure? WTH! But at least they show up at their scheduled concerts.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  29. ack it’s in my head too

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  30. 20… Joe Miller meet Joe South… https://youtu.be/5znh58WITU8

    Colonel Haiku (3ad005)

  31. 27… more honestly, a different chain… https://youtu.be/hrcUNChhOP0

    Colonel Haiku (3ad005)

  32. So I feel like I have fully evolved from giving CBF the benefit of the doubt about believing what she was saying to fully believing she is a willing pawn of the Democrats. She put on an act about being naive, but given these new stories it seems like pure calculation. Its sickening, and even Erasure can’t cheer me up now.

    Susanita (1ec019)

  33. Although chains of Love was a great song… Alison moyet?

    Colonel Haiku (3ad005)

  34. 17… drop teh Clara Peller act, Q! Patterico nailed the concern with the ex-FBI agent

    Colonel Haiku (3ad005)

  35. So this is as fake as the wwf

    Narciso (1ebf89)

  36. looking from the window above it’s like a story of love

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  37. oopers

    still looks like the rape hoaxers could win this

    too bad abortion-lover Mitt Romney just had to have his boy Doug Jones huh

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  38. Jessica Taylor
    @JessicaTaylor
    In close #TNSen race, Democrat Phil Bredesen puts out statement just as cloture vote closing that he would be a YES on Kavanaugh

    https://mobile.twitter.com/JessicaTaylor/status/1048224828392726531

    harkin (f2bc98)

  39. Q:

    The “refutation” language is an overstatement (though of the type not unusual among lawyers describing their client’s case in summary). It’s an appeal to faith rather than reason.

    Of course, when our Democratic Gubernatorial candidate begs for money, invoking the phrase “I believe Christine Blasey Ford”, she is also appealing to faith, right before the offertory.

    This has been an ugly mess. And, really, the Democrats are the ones who created it. I wonder if, at some level, they are ashamed. Probably not, given their puzzlement that usually fairly bipartisan guys like Graham have gone totally ballistic over this.

    Appalled (c9622b)

  40. Susanita, if you have mind control abilities, please use them on your tocaya this afternoon.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  41. Some people are too old to have a pony,

    Narciso (bb65c7)

  42. “Because nobody will ever speak of it again. Right?“

    Speak of what again? Partisan FBI agents? No, we’ll be back to complaining about how Trump is ruining our cherished institutions by calling out partisan FBI agents.

    Munroe (f357f9)

  43. @34 col. h .. 17… drop teh Clara Peller act, Q! Patterico nailed the concern with the ex-FBI agent

    You mean “the polygraph” concern? Whatever you say. But the word polygraph doesn’t appear in the FoxNews account (proffered by hf as a “better link” [last thread]), though. Strange, huh? (And I don’t have access to the WSJ’s [paywall, ‘n all.], so I can’t comment on that.) But. Whatever you say. Fer sure.

    Q! (86710c)

  44. “This has been an ugly mess. And, really, the Democrats are the ones who created it. I wonder if, at some level, they are ashamed.”

    They have no shame, the prize of government power is valued way above honor. Look at the Senator looking to vote NO now that her poll numbers for upcoming re-election look dismal.

    Plus they’ve learned from the Russian Collusion hoax that it’s not the original accusation that needs corroboration, you only need it to set the FBI loose and start gathering statements under oath.

    From there you look for any inconsistency to threaten-jail-or-join-our-team recruitment.

    harkin (f2bc98)

  45. The weasel weather vane from AZ says he’s yes for the final vote. Which is meaningless until he actually does it–his word is almost literally worthless.

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  46. ulb, I have never tried before but I will send out a Susan to Susan message with the power of my mind. Let’s see if it works!

    Susanita (1ec019)

  47. #45

    He has Presidential aspirations that require at least some Republican support. He won’t get that with a no vote. So, I take his yes vote seriously.

    Appalled (c9622b)

  48. He has Presidential aspirations that require at least some Republican support. He won’t get that with a no vote. So, I take his yes vote seriously.

    The only way that spineless idiot will ever be President is if he’s cast in a reboot of Designated Survivor.

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  49. No the witness tampering against heyser,

    Narciso (bb65c7)

  50. People in congress who have committed crimes during this lynching need to be charged and prosecuted like the criminals they are. Inciting violence?

    mg (0a8fd4)

  51. Murkowski is now a no vote tomorrow as well. She loves stabbing the Republic in the back.

    NJRob (fd79f1)

  52. she’s also very keen on making sure the native american womens in her state are periodically able to get their uteruses scraped clean of all that baby gunk and residue

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  53. Her and Heitkamp must have watched Wind River on continuous loop.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  54. I can see Murkowski being the one who agrees to withhold her vote to match the guy at the wedding. That would make the vote 49-49 (with the tie broken by Pence) unless Manchin decides to vote yes because Pence’s vote will break the tie anyway.

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  55. Girls can be mean when they think they are right, whether they are teenagers or Senators.

    DRJ (d18ca6)

  56. There’s also this:

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

    MITCHELL: I’m sorry, go ahead.

    FORD: You know, oh wait, I’m sorry.

    I just realized that I said something that was inaccurate. I said I hadn’t spoken with anyone from the party since that. [*] I have spoken with Leland.

    MITCHELL: OK. Thank you for correcting that. I appreciate that.

    * Maybe that’s why, in the epilogue, there were no words exchanged between Christine Blasey and Mark Judge. She had already said she spoke to none of them again.

    Also:

    MITCHELL: OK. And when you – when you did leave that night, did Leland Keyser – now Keyser ever follow up with you and say hey, what happened to you?

    FORD: I have had communications with her recently. [*]

    MITCHELL: I’m talking about like the next day.

    FORD: Oh no, she didn’t know about the event. She was downstairs during the event and I did not share it with her.

    * That didn’t sound so ominous but did sound as though she was lobbying her.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  57. Murkowski’s statement was utterly disgraceful. She states that she thinks Kavanaugh is a “good man”, but since his name has been tarnished he shouldn’t be on the court because “victims” or something. She is admitting that this was a complete hatchet job in one breath and then simply going along with it in the next breath.

    radar (d55449)

  58. 50+1 then start the process of destroying Murkowski and her family.

    Bob the Builder (d2fbba)

  59. She deserves it

    Bob the Builder (d2fbba)

  60. TN Democrat a liar like Jones in BAMA.

    Never trust a Democrat to be bipartisan

    Bob the Builder (d2fbba)

  61. The Weak-kneed R senators – we know who they are – should keep their yappers shut and stay away from the crazies and the media, but I repeat myself. Just cast your votes

    Colonel Haiku (3ad005)

  62. 51:

    Wouldn’t bet on it yet, I expect Murkowski and all sorts of senators on both sides of the aisle are getting their protest procedural votes in before voting for Kavanaugh in the end, they’ll milk the slow process for every triangulating donation and concession they can get before the final tally, wherein they offer their final set of excuses for or against. It was ever thus!

    “Understand: as best as I can tell, the “clarification” requested was likely: if you still believe her, say so.”

    Democrats have ran the table on widespread forced shallow support that gets reinterpreted later as I BELIEVE DEEPLY IN MY HEART, seeing them forced to beg and plead others to take positions with actual personal consequences is a beautiful thing which we must repeat and publicize long after the Kavanaugh Kerfluffle is past. Winning isn’t as tiring as expected!

    Pencil-Necked Pundit (f36b36)

  63. Here’s McLean’s denial:

    “I have never had anyone assist me with the preparation of any polygraph. Ever. Not my entry polygraph, not my 5-year reinvestigation polygraphs. Never. I am extremely angry he would make this up,” said McLean.

    I would characterize this as a “non-denial denial.” I denial would have been, “I have never discussed the subject of polygraph testing with Dr. Ford.”

    What she’s denied is only that she was “assisted with the preparation [for any] polygraph [examination],” which would have been an admission of her part of a conspiracy to deceive the FBI, which of course she’s not going to admit.

    I’d say the “story died” because the hearing isn’t going to permit further calling of live witnesses, including either her or the ex-boyfriend. I’d say a contributing cause of death to the story was CNN and McLean’s smothering the story with a pillow and a half-lie.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  64. *A denial would have been.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  65. I would bet a large sum that if questioned directly under oath, McLean would concede that she and Ford discussed polygraphs, but that she’d continue to deny “being assisted,” or being trained to pass despite telling untruths.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  66. Keyser’s testimony “refutes” Ford’s, but only circumstantially. Mark Judge’s testimony refutes Ford’s testimony directly. The distinction is obvious, but if you’ve missed it: Judge denies that the event described by Ford. Keyser’s doesn’t, but it strongly undercuts the premises of Ford’s testimony, in two different ways: First, because Ford says Keyser was at the party, and Ford denies any recollection of such a party (which isn’t the same as claiming a clear present recollection that no such party ever happened, as Judge has done). Second, Keyser didn’t say “I have no recollection of ever meeting or being introduced to Kavanaugh,” which would have paralleled her assertion about her lack of memory of any such party. Instead, she said, in the present tense and without qualification, that she doesn’t know Kavanaugh; and since, by both Ford’s and Keyser’s account, they were very close, lifelong friends who frequently attended parties together, Keyser’s assertion that she doesn’t know Kavanaugh casts circumstantial doubt on Ford’s claim that she’d previously met Kavanaugh at past parties.

    Dems are parsing words. Well, I can do that too; I do it for a living. I regularly, frequently have to pin down witnesses: “Are you saying you have a clear, present recollection of past events, so that you can affirmatively state that Event X did not happen? Or are you saying you have no recollection of Event X happening, such that you can’t say one way or the other whether it did?” Cases can be won and lost on exactly this kind of distinction.

    Unfortunately, none of the relevant witnesses has been thoroughly examined in public by a comptetent questioner. (Which makes me crazy as I watch this charade.)

    Beldar (fa637a)

  67. I assure you, friends and neighbors — and I’m reasonably sure that our host and other commenters with trial court experience will confirm — that the ability to ask the right questions, clearly in a way that creates an unambiguous record in transcripts and/or on video (for effective impeachment opportunities later if the witness strays from that testimony), is a very rare skill-set. It’s barely taught at all in law school, and then only in elective courses. It requires constant use and study of transcripts to polish and hone. And the ability to do it in real time, under pressure and a spotlight, likewise takes years of experience to develop fully.

    Not all Japanese fighters are ninjas, either.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  68. #66 This is the beauty to our new post-truth world. We have senators who can say with a straight face that they can’t vote for a qualified candidate because they’ve thrown too much mud at him and no it doesn’t matter whether any of it stuck or not.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  69. And look at this: (this could be perjury)

    MITCHELL: OK. Do you have any particular motives to ascribe to Leland?

    FORD: I guess we could take those one at a time. Leland has significant health challenges, and I’m happy that she’s focusing on herself and getting the health treatment that she needs, and she let me know that she needed her lawyer to take care of this for her, and she texted me right afterward with an apology and good wishes, and et cetera, So I’m glad that she’s taking care of herself.

    Health challenges? This makes it sound like she has chemo brain. It seems like that’s not the case. It’s pain from sports injuries.

    This blames the initial statement on her lawyer.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  70. “Ford says Keyser was at the party, and Ford Keyser denies any recollection…” was what was meant?

    Colonel Haiku (3ad005)

  71. Understand: as best as I can tell, the “clarification” requested was likely: if you still believe her, say so

    Not IF, but SAY say you believe her. These conversations were not being recorded, or they were gambling on them not – there was no need to be coy about things.

    Why so little? Simple. They didn’t ask her to backtrack, because that would put her in the position of having signed a false statement. It was carefully crafted to creata hole but leave her safe. And didn’t make any sense actually. What does it mean to believe her if you have no memory of EVER being at a party or gathering where Brett Kavanaugh was present? Never mind, they could just ignore that litle bit.

    They got a Washington Post reporter to call her and have her say – or maybe just not deny – that she believed her. Then they said Kavanaugh and the others were lying. What they had was enough.

    So we got this:

    https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2018/09/28/us/politics/ap-us-supreme-court-kavanaugh-fact-check.html

    The Daily Mail has a story:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6235463/Christine-Fords-high-school-friend-blindsided-named-corroborating-witness.html

    Evidently, in the FBI interview, Leland Keyser (nee Ingham – also once the wife of Bob Beckel) say something quite different, but it is all confidential.

    The contents of FBI reports cannot be released by the White House bacause of the 1974 Privacy Act (without the consent of the party affected) and they can’t by Senate rules be discussed either, although the speech and debate clause of the constitution otherwise permits members of Congress to disclose anything. The committee, or a member of Congress, would have to get teh wtness to repeat what they said for the public record.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  72. If you’re trying to send a message quickly to a Congress-critter of whom you’re not a direct constituent, it’s hard to do that by email: The senators’ and reps’ websites insist that you input a zip code showing you’re a constituent before you can send them a message via those websites, and they don’t publish their direct email addresses.

    FAXES, however, are another story.

    Here’s Lisa Murkowski’s fax numbers, for instance:

    AK: (877) 857-0322
    DC: (202)-224-5301

    There are multiple online services that will allow you to send a fax to any given phone number, for free, using only your web browser. This link, for example, will let you send a fax to Murkowski’s DC office, and even fills in her name and fax number for you!

    Beldar (fa637a)

  73. (Best case, of course, a staffer will add a tick-mark to their running pro/con list, maybe in a separate column for non-constituents. If you’re profane or abusive, they’ll just ignore your fax; and avoid threats of violence or other non-political threats, which can get you in serious trouble.)

    Beldar (fa637a)

  74. @71 haiku (referencing 67) “Ford says Keyser was at the party, and F̶o̶r̶d̶ Keyser denies any recollection…” was what was meant?

    Yeah, clearly. A (class II) typo, is all.

    Q! (86710c)

  75. While the FBI was doing its interviews, and even after, until even yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee was also doing its own followup investigations. For instance into the meaning of teh words: Devil’s Triangle:

    https://twitter.com/guypbenson/status/1047930830012796928/photo/1

    https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1047924963611750400

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  76. “MITCHELL: I’m talking about like the next day.

    FORD: Oh no, she didn’t know about the event. She was downstairs during the event and I did not share it with her.”

    It kind of begs the question as to why….Ford explained not talking to her parents because of the “1 beer” with boys drinking….but why would she not explain to Keyser why she left so suddenly? Why wouldn’t Keyser of asked the next time she saw Ford? Teenagers may not always be especially perceptive or thoughtful….but this is someone that she considers a life-long friend. Is it likely that nothing would ever be mentioned about two guys who were extremely inebriated? Isn’t this exactly what teenagers talk about? Why, at 15, was Ford at a gathering where she was not especially close with anyone there (as the guy Garrett she dated was not there)?

    If Judge worked at the Safeway early August of 1982…and we work back to 4-6 weeks to late June early July….and they have Kavanaugh’s calendar (which still amazes me that he would have kept this)….then are there any other candidate dates for the alleged party…other than the July 1st Brewski’s at Tim Gaudette’s house (a house which does not match Ford’s description)? Is there any evidence that Kavanaugh’s calendar was manipulated?

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74)

  77. @2. So many people are so eager to sacrifice their logic and discretion on the altars of machines they don’t understand.

    Meh. Keeps the lights on in Vegas. Stick to the nickel slots. 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  78. @77 AJ_Liberty Many good questions, there, AJ. Boggles the mind why the fbi didn’t interview either of the principals. Just flat-out incredible. Except on the explanation that they were instructed not to, expressly & specifically (or pretty wink-winky-nod-noddy specifically at least).

    Question: Many people have said, and written that Keyser and Ford were close “life-long” friends, and I imagine that that came from something Ford wrote or said. (Haven’t looked it up, but seems like it would “have to be”.) Question: So far as I know, that was true when it was said, but is there any evidence at all as to how long they’d been close friends in, say, 1982 or 1984? I cannot recall any, and am curious if anyone (e.g., any 3d party who’s been paying attention to the brouhaha) actually has any data on that point. Just out of curiosity. As I suggested (above), I don’t think there’s information out there, on that point. (Not that it’s particularly important, necessarily; of course. But any competent fbi interview would have (tried to have) pinned that down, of course, as well. Absolutely gobsmacking not to have interviewed the principals (as well as several others, for that matter))

    Is there any evidence that Kavanaugh’s calendar was manipulated? Not so far that I am aware. Boy, that would have been a damn stupid thing to do, not to mention the chutzpah. I’ve assumed the calendars (while majorly quirky) were legit in all respects. But of course, that’s simply an assumption.

    Q! (86710c)

  79. Here are the accusaitons about the yearbook:

    https://www.vox.com/2018/9/26/17901368/kavanaugh-yearbook-boof-devil-triangle-renate-beach-week

    The word “boofed” is supposed to prove Brett Kavanaugh a liar. Brett Kavanaugh’s yearbook entry says “Judge – Have You Boofed Yet?” and for Mark Judge says: “Bart – Have You Boofed yet” (Bart was nickname for Brett Kavanaugh – he signed a 1983 letter, Bart – but he was not named after Bart Simpson because Bart Simpson did not exist yet * – it was that long ago. Maybe Black Bart)

    * Bart Simpson first appeared on television in The Tracey Ullman Show short “Good Night” on April 19, 1987 (Wikipedia). On the other hand, I once was told, on a BBS, circa 1994, that a writer knew somebody who was the real Bart Simpson. Almost certainly not Brett Kavanaugh, though.

    Boofed is said to mean anal sex. Another explanation is, it means taking alcohol via the rectum – like an enema or a suppository. When asked about it by Senator Whitehouse, Brett Kavanaugh, after a pause, said it means “flatulence.”

    It seems to me, from the context, it probably meant an alcohol enema there. A reference to flatulence might be an alternate meaning, (making what Brett Kavanaugh said technically true) and there is some evidence for that:

    https://twitter.com/DelWilber/status/1045421183926247430

    But that’s a noun and this is a verb.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  80. @13. And Mr. Trump’s America is a shining, brass-plated hotel on a hill, eh, Mr. Feet.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  81. it’s very shiny because that’s the brand

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  82. @35. But narciso, it’s “high drama”… just like BoSoxers in a do-or-die with Pinstripers, the Canadian moonman in a tailspin and what’s behind curtain number 2.

    Are you not entertained?!

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  83. Q @79. Kavanaugh would need to erase something to falsely clear himself.
    Adding
    something is for people, like maybe in the FBI, who want to falsely prove guilt.

    There’s actuallly a contradiction between two claims as to how Kavanaugh could be guilty.

    A) He left out any planned evil deeds from the calendar.

    B) He did evil deeds only when he was drunk and wouldn’t remember them.

    If he didn’t plan it, he wouldn’t leave out a note about the gathering; and if he left out the gathering because he was planning to do something evil, he would not need to be drunk to do something like that, and he might have done that even when not drunk.

    Incidentally this blackout thing is nonsense. It takes a long history foi alcoholism till someone has retrograde amnesia.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  84. @82. Mucho Brasso polishes that brand, Mr. Feet.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  85. @80. Seems the origin of barfin’ “Bart” refers to a mispronouncing of his name ‘Brett’ by a teacher early on in a class and it stuck, Sammy.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  86. Boggles the mind why the fbi didn’t interview either of the principals. Just flat-out incredible. Except on the explanation that they were instructed not to, expressly & specifically (or pretty wink-winky-nod-noddy specifically at least).

    The most likely outcome of interviewing Ford would have been to further damage her story, possibly to the point of her making inconsistent statements. Pinning down the friendship status of Keyser and Ford from ’82-’84 isn’t necessary for a competent FBI background check.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  87. @84 sammy .. Q @79. Kavanaugh would need to erase something to falsely clear himself.

    Disagree strongly, Sammy, but don’t care to debate why. Like I say, I assume the calendar pages are wholly legit.

    Q! (86710c)

  88. nk!!!!!! because happy floats above the maelstrom no matter what.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  89. AJ_Liberty (ec7f74) — 10/5/2018 @ 11:21 am

    ….and they have Kavanaugh’s calendar (which still amazes me that he would have kept this)….then are there any other candidate dates for the alleged party…other than the July 1st Brewski’s at Tim Gaudette’s house (a house which does not match Ford’s description)?

    I think that, with July 1, the Democrats took their best shot for a party in the summer of 1982.

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

    MITCHELL: The entry says — and I quote — “Go to Timmy’s (ph) for skis (ph) with Judge (ph), Tom (ph), P.J. (ph), Bernie (ph) and Squee (ph)”?

    KAVANAUGH: Squee. That’s a nick…

    MITCHELL: What does…

    KAVANAUGH: … that’s a nickname.

    MITCHELL: OK. To what does this refer, and to whom?

    KAVANAUGH: So first, says “Tobin’s (ph) house workout”. So that’s one of the football workouts that we would have — that Dr. (inaudible) would run for guys on the football team during the summer.

    So we would be there — that’s usually 6:00 to 8:00 or so, kind of — until near dark. And then it looks like we went over to Timmy’s — you want to know their last names too? I’m happy to do it.

    MITCHELL: If you could just identify, is — is “Judge,” Mark Judge?

    KAVANAUGH: It is.

    MITCHELL: And is “P.J.,” P.J. Smith?

    KAVANAUGH: It is.

    So — all right. It’s Tim Gaudette (ph), Mark Judge, Tom Caine (ph), P.J. Smith, Bernie McCarthy (ph), Chris Garrett (ph).

    MITCHELL: Chris Garrett is Squee?

    KAVANAUGH: He is.

    So there are 6 boys and no girls. Well, you could say, he left out the girls because they would have been unscheduled.

    One problem with July 1, besides the fact that I think they went there many times, is that Brett mentions too many people there. CBF has 4 boys. Another is that one of the boys is Squi (or Squee) whom Christine Blasey says is the person who introduced her to both Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh and whom she dated more or elss and even visited in the hospital one time (her side says anyway)

    If he was one of the boys, how could CBF not remember that he was one of the boys at the party??

    Q. One of the ten witnesses the FBI wanted to interview declined to be interviewed. as

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  90. Who was the tenth witness? then we could come up with many differing theories as to why.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  91. 88. If there was date that he knew, and it really happened, and the date was blank on teh calendar, or had more space, Kavanaugh could add something so as to exclude the party but that scenario is highly unlikely.

    This is actually quite detectable by thw FBI lab, if someone knows to test it, because ingredients are added to ink so as to date things.. They were first added unintentionally, as changes were made, and then later deliberately.)

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  92. @87 frosty Pinning down the friendship status of Keyser and Ford from ’82-’84 isn’t necessary for a competent FBI background check.

    Well, I certainly would hope that if an fbi agent was going to go to the bother of interviewing Ford (like should have been done), that he would have had the smarts enough to try to establish if Ford and this supposed friend of hers were in fact friends back in the relevant day, and if they were close friends — like they were best buds from 9 y.o. onwards, or they really got tight only sometime in the summer of 1982? or 1984?. Maybe that’s just me, and I’m smarter (or dumber) than your average fbi dude.

    Q! (86710c)

  93. @77. Re: calendars. Can cut Bart a little slack on that- my mother kept calendars for many years w/t daily weather written in and a few parties as well. Thought it was odd, too- but her mother did it as well. ‘Course, Mom omitted the weekly wine and beer consumption.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  94. OK,I guess 80s teen movie douchebro Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh is part of this bargain.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  95. This mroning I heard most of what Senator Charles Schumer and Senator Mitch McConnell had to say 90% of what Schumer said was alie of one sort ofr another. The only thing maybe true was the claim that Brett Kavanaugh was sketical of unenumerated rights. Except that I think they all are, and the new ones waanted are coming from the right (e.g. the right to try, the right to self defense) Abortion wasn’t based on the 9th amendment.

    McConnell didn’t really give a good speech but he contradicted one claim – about the meaning of a phrase in the yearbook. He said his classmates had written a letter supporting his testimony.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  96. jesus god

    lobsterpot bim really likes the sound of her own voice huh

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  97. Is there no punch bowl you can’t walk past without sh!tting in it, hatefulfeet?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  98. all i know is if you’re a straw man or have loved ones what are straw men you need to keep them far away from this chick

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  99. @99 hf all i know is if . . .

    Finally! An honest expression of the severe, severe, limits of your knowledge. Kudos.

    Q! (86710c)

  100. Rush raises a great point, by continuing to allow a 4-4 SCOTUS by not confirming Kavanaugh, Alaskans are subject to the progressive tyranny of the 9th circuit and their capricious rulings…

    i think the point’s more how she’s corrupt and got bought off by them eskimos, but here’s this angle for you anyways

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  101. An honest expression of the severe, severe, limits of your knowledge.\

    i have many good knowledge

    so how sleazy is the ABA?

    American Bar Association reopening Kavanaugh evaluation due to ‘temperament’

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  102. Sen. Collins is giving the political speech of her career, hatefulfeet, by far the best speech I’ve ever heard her give on any subject. She’s doing a huge service to her party — including to your cult leader — that she could have skipped entirely, and probably thereby have avoided the traitor to womankind she’ll be labeled within the hour.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  103. *thereby have avoided becoming the traitor to womankind, I meant to write in #103.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  104. she doesn’t condone sexual assault

    at least that’s what she claims today

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  105. @97. She’s delivering a reasoned presentation on a full stomach, Mr. Feet. Perhaps she had surf ‘n’ turf for lunch w/t Turtle and the Thespian.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  106. @103. Yes. It’s good.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  107. ugh

    she’s buying way more into Christine’s phony allegations than is necessary or even decent

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  108. Greeeaaattt, some down east sea island is gonna get a bridge from Happys favorite cabinet member.

    urbanleftbehind (61ee40)

  109. Collins is really nailing it and rallying her Republican colleagues.

    whembly (b9d411)

  110. so how sleazy is the ABA?

    We’ve known for decades that the ABA will commit partisan hackery if their feet aren’t held to the fire–there was a passage from The Brethren that noted that Senator Eastland had heard rumors that they were considering giving Rehnquist a “not qualified” vote for his nomination to Harlan’s seat, but they backed down rather quickly when Eastland threatened to drag the entire committee before the Judiciary Committee to testify to their reasons under oath. Rehnquist ended up getting mostly “highly qualified” votes with the rest stating that they were not opposed to the nomination.

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  111. I have a mental image of Mrs. Kavanaugh and her daughters, sitting on a couch together and probably holding hands, listening to Sen. Collin’s speech. God bless them.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  112. Where the he** has this Collins been? She allowed this circus to go on unabated with zero disapprobation from her. If she has been THIS convicted as to the farce of it all, how could she stand mute for all this time?????

    Until there was corroboration, there was no corroboration. By her own words, the standard to deny Kavanaugh was never met. Not even close.

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  113. it’s not just that she was too cowardly to say that rape hoaxes like the kind Feinstein and Ford tried to pull off are completely unacceptable

    she didn’t address the overarching aim of this rape hoax: to make it more difficult to attract people to positions what have to be confirmed by the trash that comprise the dirty american senate

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  114. Now surround Flake with enough Amazonian female bodyguards with handcannons to take out an invading army until the vote is taken.

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  115. A bit over the top on the caliber of his character but a stellar presentation by Sen. Collins. That choirboy-boy scout crap was way over sold. But high character isn’t a premium these days for high government office. We’ve seen the man-child in temperament surface under pressure but then our Captain is cut from the same cloth as are many of his cronies and associates.

    Kavanaugh’s credentialed and clearly qualified for the gig. Manchin says yes, too.

    Show is over. Vote already. October is meant for baseball.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  116. collins says yes dems will crawl out of woodwork to vote in november. many republicans and independents will now be satisfied.

    lany (40d137)

  117. Yo’ Bart! It’s ‘Miller Time,’ big fella! But tonight, tonight, tonight… let it be Lowenbrau.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  118. She delayed her announcement precisely because she wanted attention given to the words of her speech

    I liked it a bit over a week ago when she proposed that the respective counsel’s Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford be allowe to question the other principal. The committee didn’t take her up on her suggestion, which would have been very good.

    She shows why she deserves to be elected.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  119. 113. She didn’t want to rush to judgement.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  120. The case against Kavanaugh, objectively, was not close.

    For essentially every Democrat in the country, though, the objective analysis is not what they’re interested in, for a variety of (mostly related) reasons.

    I’ve no fault to find with Collins delaying her public announcement on how she will vote until now. By so doing, and by being conspicuous in her willingness to hear Ford out, she has heretofore avoided being dismissed as a Trump puppet before this afternoon.

    Moreover, she has effectively become the voice of women Republicans/conservatives through her handling of this and, ultimately, her decision. She explained it articulately, in a dignified fashion.

    And thus, as a purported traitor to all womankind, she’ll now be characterized by the left and the MSM as the person principally at fault for the Kavanapalypse (a word which, to my mild surprise, my Google browser readily recognizes).

    I give her 10.0 scores in every category. I’m relatively sure Mitch McConnell and Don McGahn and Leonard Leo and even Judge Kavanaugh himself would score her at at least as a 9.0.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  121. There’s a line from Pulp Fiction that applies here. Let’s get the car to the salvage yard before we start celebrating.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  122. congrats on putting open misogynist and almost certainly rapist Kavanaugh on the SCOTUS. DOn’t think for a second the left will ever let you forget it. Nor should you doubt that for the rest of his life we’ll be there to remind him what a piece of shit he is. Any decision he signs off on will perpetually have a * next to it and you can bet the right’s enormous demographic problem just became a lot worse.

    So party it up for your “victory.”

    Tlaloc (d38a6f)

  123. Manchin will vote yes, so he’s in.

    Gotta give it to Grassley – he was dealt a sh*t hand and took their shirts…

    Dave (e3e7e1)

  124. @ lany, who wrote (#117):

    collins says yes dems will crawl out of woodwork to vote in november.

    I can’t recall ever seeing such a candid admission from someone on your side that Democrats are cockroaches. I think that’s a bit harsh, but I commend your concision and imagery.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  125. The speech itself is among the finest orations in Senate history.

    My issue is the aid and comfort – and crucially, COVER, her silence throughout gave to the enemies of our republic.

    This was an occasion where the politics simply had to be shoved aside for core principle. YMMV.

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  126. There should be a barrage of ads coming from the RNC in the near future–a montage of despicable Democratic politicians and talking heads, along with deranged lefty protesters. Jackson Cosko should be the central figure connecting all of them with the message–these corrupt and deranged people will seize power in Congress in November if you don’t stay angry and engaged and get out to vote.

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  127. Good strategists maintain a strategic reserve, Ed. Even when at war, you don’t need or want all your combat force engaged continuously from the beginning.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  128. rape hoaxes are wrong

    someday maybe Susan will understand this

    but today is not that day

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  129. Video of Senatr Susan Collins speech on the Senate floor:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRpSJed5xsA

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  130. Beldar, at 124:

    I read lany as saying that the ‘crawl out of the woodwork’ imagery was *collins’*, not lany’s.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  131. By holding back, Ed, Sen. Collins also permitted some red-state Dems (e.g., Heitkamp, Donnelly, McKaskill) to climb farther out on their limbs, hoping Collins, Flake, and/or Murk would vote “nay” and sink the nomination, sparing each of them any political heat.

    This is a good thing for the GOP: They’re too far out now to inch back to the trunk, much less to climb back down from the tree. If you need proof of that, the contrary case — Manchin, who just announced “yay,” after refusing ferocious efforts by his Dem colleagues to go ahead & commit — provides it.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  132. I get that, Beldar. I also believed from the beginning that Kavanaugh was in like Flynn, unless some unreal and disgusting truth emerged about him.

    Anyway…I now will thoroughly enjoy the Dems reaping what they have sown. There are going to be some sublime moments as they come to understand what they have unleashed against themselves.

    And…I have to give DJT props. He kept taking the fight to them. Then, he acted as you would have had him act in granting the final FBI background check. Neither Bush would have done anything like this.

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  133. Avenatti pushes back after Collins blasts client’s allegations in Senate floor speech

    now per “the hill” we have to pretend the milquetoast lobsterpot bim just “blasted” rape hoaxer Christine Ford’s contrived and deeply silly sexual assault allegations

    gotta tell ya I didn’t see that coming

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  134. Can waiting till creepy Joe Biden run and this Ad hits the market …

    Coons daughter plus creepy Joe touching child plus #MeToo on the bottom.

    Bob the Builder (9af831)

  135. oh wait i got confuzzled

    they’re saying Collins blasted *swetnik*

    which, that’s overstating it but ok

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  136. She says at 15ff that Judge Kavanaugh believes honoring precedent is required by the cnstituion itsekf in Article III.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  137. It looks like he has the votes he needs.
    Fine. If the court is bad enough, we’ll have to implement term limits.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  138. Except for some brief reerences at the start, She didn’t get to discussing other than legal issues till past 23 minutes, more than halfway through the speech. I will see when she gets into this. The video I linked interrupts itself with ads (that can be killed soon)

    At 23:09, after sayng that Bett Kavanaugh is more of a centrist than credited – that he agreed over 90% wth Merrick Garland – she gets into this.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  139. so there’s just right at a month or so left of jeff flakey-poo’s senate career

    that’s so cool

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  140. 137. It looks like he has the votes he needs.
    Fine. If the court is bad enough, we’ll have to implement term limits.

    Tillman (61f3c8) — 10/5/2018 @ 1:47 pm

    You want to politicize the court even more? THIS is how the courts be politicized.

    whembly (b9d411)

  141. the important thing is to prosecute Christine Ford for her dirty rape lies

    and the sleazy FBI chick too

    and Feinstein needs to go to jail as well

    but how can we do this without a functional Department of Justice?

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  142. Senator Hatch’s speech

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KL4TddNQWkw

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  143. Happy, happy, happy:

    I like your spirit, but sometimes you just have to chill, sit back, and enjoy the lamentations of your enemies’ women:

    “Jim Acosta

    More
    Replying to @zackroday @StewSays
    It’s bullying the press. And it’s shameful. My goodness. Can’t you guys win gracefully?

    2:01 PM – 5 Oct 2018″

    https://twitter.com/DWaughNBCBoston/status/1048308809343623171

    And for that matter, the near-total repentance of your onetime enemies:

    https://twitter.com/EWErickson/status/1048170408170668037

    Pencil-Necked Pundit (302967)

  144. ….results speak volumes against the hateful liberal Marxist left….

    Limelight

    Rush

    Living on a lighted stage
    Approaches the unreal
    For those who think and feel
    In touch with some reality
    Beyond the gilded cage

    Cast in this unlikely role
    Ill-equipped to act
    With insufficient tact
    One must put up barriers
    To keep oneself intact

    Living in the limelight
    The universal dream
    For those who wish to seem
    Those who wish to be
    Must put aside the alienation
    Get on with the fascination
    The real relation
    The underlying theme

    Living in a fish eye lens
    Caught in the camera eye
    I have no heart to lie
    I can’t pretend a stranger
    Is a long-awaited friend

    All the world’s indeed a stage
    And we are merely players
    Performers and portrayers
    Each another’s audience
    Outside the gilded cage

    Living in the limelight
    The universal dream
    For those who wish to seem
    Those who wish to be
    Must put aside the alienation
    Get on with the fascination
    The real relation
    The underlying theme

    Living in the limelight
    The universal dream
    For those who wish to seem
    Those who wish to be
    Must put aside the alienation
    Get on with the fascination
    The real relation
    The underlying theme
    The real relation
    The underlying theme

    Songwriters: NEIL ELWOOD PEART,GARY LEE WEINRIB,ALEX ZIVOJINOVICH

    © OLE MEDIA MANAGEMENT LP

    Where Eagles Dare (30c9de)

  145. You want to politicize the court even more?
    At this point, I’m wondering if it can be more politicized anyway.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  146. just go back and remember though Mr. Pundit

    when the freakshow senate decided to have the sleazy fbi do more investigation

    who did they talk to?

    dirty corrupt rod rosytwit not Jeff Sessions

    there’s something seriously sick and diseased at the DOJ and the FBI

    and now we know the filthy corrupt fbi was courtside on the entire christine ford rape hoax, trying to decide who should be on the supreme court

    that’s as third world as it gets

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  147. I laughed:

    Hey @LisaMurkowski – I can see 2022 from my house…— Sarah Palin (@SarahPalinUSA) October 5, 2018

    Beldar (fa637a)

  148. Oh the Dems went down to DC they were lookin’ for a seat to steal
    They were in a bind with polls behind and they were looking to make a deal
    Then they all came across a new young judge sharp as hell
    And they hopped up on the stand and said “Brett I got a story to tell”

    “I know we don’t act like it but we’re all law experts too
    And if you care to take a dare we’ll make a bet with you
    Now you make pretty good life choices boy but give our machine its due
    We’ll stop your SCOTUS track right here with Fake News from Big Blue”

    The Judge said “My name’s Kavanaugh and though it might be a sin
    I’ll take your bet that you’ll regret cause I’m the sharpest that’s ever been”

    Put together your statements, Kav, and play your calendars hard
    The Dems they deal, they lie, they steal as slippery as lard
    If you win then you’ll see grins from your daughters and your wife
    But if you lose the Dems will ruin your life!

    Pencil-Necked Pundit (23c7cb)

  149. @147 cute line, from Sarah. Shows some maturity. Who’d ‘a thought? (I guess we all get older and perhaps somewhat wiser, despite our native roadblocks.) And who can tell, a home-grown Palin revival? Stranger things have happened, surely – Heck we’re living through the strangest damn presidency in a century at least, I reckon. But mainly it’s a cute line Obliged.

    Q! (86710c)

  150. 137. It looks like he has the votes he needs.
    Fine. If the court is bad enough, we’ll have to implement term limits.

    Tillman

    Who needs Calgon!?!?

    “The greatest happiness is to vanquish your enemies, to chase them before you, to rob them of their wealth, to see those dear to them bathed in tears, to clasp to your bosom their wives and daughters.”

    —- Genghis Kavanaugh

    Colonel Haiku (c60926)

  151. 146:

    if Lindsay Graham can see the light I have no doubt that Rosenstein and the FBI can and have been feel ing the heat, time will tell if it takes but all signs are pointing to the fact that the globalist project was indeed buried with John McCain and populism is now the wave of the future.

    Have some faith in your President, who never lets temporary setbacks stop his progress and never lets depression OR euphoria stop him from advancing his agenda:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/10/05/after-just-months-office-federal-personnel-director-replaced-by-omb-official/?utm_term=.1dd774751235

    Pencil-Necked Pundit (c70753)

  152. It looks like he has the votes he needs.
    Fine. If the court is bad enough, we’ll have to implement term limits.

    LOL. Good luck with that. At most, you’ll win back the House and can throw temper tantrums for the next two years with the committees. It will remind people why they didn’t want to give Felonia von Pantsuit and her Merry Moonbat Minions control of the country in 2016.

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  153. I look forward to hearing the anguished cries, rending of garments, gnashing of teeth and the lugubrious sounds of the bums defecating in the streets of the Bay Area, as the cacophony makes its way over the Berkeley Hills after the confirmation vote.

    Colonel Haiku (c60926)

  154. New post up re Collins.

    Dana (5040f5)

  155. I am proud to say that I had to Google who Amy Schumer was (while wondering if she was Chuck Schumer’s daughter). How many of you so-called conservatives can say the same?

    And I didn’t even bother with the lady with the Polish name. Too many letters to type on the Google search box.

    In many respects, this has been a media show for the benefit of B-listers, has-beens and never-weres.

    nk (dbc370)

  156. Susan Collins also noted that Brett Kavanaugh and Merrick Garland concurred on about 93% of cases, I very much look forward to throwing that in people’s faces (“Well, you could have had ESSENTIALLY Merrick Garland, but when you had the opportunity, you voted against someone that was CREDIBLY him, I don’t think you even BELIEVE in judicial activism, etc.”)

    Pencil-Necked Pundit (62e901)

  157. The OPM is an independent executive branch agency whose top several officials are political appointees subject to Senate confirmation. The change will again leave the agency without a confirmed leader for an indefinite time.

    Interesting. One might use promotion and dismissal as a controlled burn.

    felipe (023cc9)

  158. A controlled burn may have better optics than outright culling.

    felipe (023cc9)

  159. @ Pencil (#156): That’s an interesting and significant statistic, and it holds true across almost all circuit judges and circuits, and has for decades: Dissents in circuit court proceedings are quite rare.

    It does not hold true at the level of the SCOTUS, which by definition is only hearing a carefully selected set of the most important, and therefore the most likely to be contentious (in terms of law or practical results). The courts of appeals are most often reapplying precedents rather than making new ones, and they’re deciding the justness of individual results. The SCOTUS is the ultimate source of precedent, ignores cases where lower courts have applied it correctly, and can’t possibly try to correct unjust results in individual cases, but is instead concerned almost entirely with the precedent being set for future cases.

    I wrote the other day that this is a big fight over whether the man who was, as of July 1, 2018, the eleventh most powerful judge in the U.S. (that being Kavanaugh), will jump the then-tenth most powerful judge in the U.S. (that being Merrick Garland) to become, upon Kennedy’s departure and his successor’s confirmation, the ninth most powerful judge in the U.S. (behind Kagan). But (assuming no temporary vacancies on the SCOTUS), the gap between the ninth and tenth most powerful judges in the country is a huge, huge chasm. And at the SCOTUS, vastly moreso than on the D.C. Circuit, the gap in judicial philosophy between Kavanaugh and Garland would likewise be huge.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  160. Q! (86710c) — 10/5/2018 @ 7:57 am

    Try
    https://outline.com/

    It gets me WSJ articles. Incognito doesn’t work, nor does copy/pasting an article header into a Google search (those used to work, but WSJ finally got them some smarties working their paywall.)

    ColoComment (8277f9)

  161. It looks like he has the votes he needs. Fine. If the court is bad enough, we’ll have to implement term limits.

    Sounds like just another version of this:

    “I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin [Trenberth] and I will keep them out somehow, even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”

    https://www.azquotes.com/quote/836106

    harkin (f2bc98)

  162. 51 aye, 49 no

    aye

    Patterico (115b1f)

  163. 50-48, 1 voting present, 1 absent.

    #scoreboard

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  164. Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska had announced Friday night that she would vote present so as to enable Senator Steve Daines (R-Montana) to attend his daughter’s wedding without having to fly to Washington. (a pair with a Democrat would not have been possible)

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  165. This is Mark Judge’s 1997 book.

    https://openlibrary.org/books/OL8689283M/Wasted

    Wasted:Tales of a Genx Drunk by Mark Gauvreau Judge

    He also wrote a completely non-fiction book in 2005

    God and Man at Georgetown Prep
    by Mark Gauvreau Judge

    https://openlibrary.org/search?q=god+and+man+georgetown&mode=ebooks&m=edit&m=edit&has_fulltext=true

    Which everyone has somehow ignored. I guess it didn’t held Christine Blasey Ford’s case.

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    Wasted

    Tales of a Genx Drunk

    by Mark Gauvreau Judge

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  166. There has been some contradictory reporting about the number of FBI interviews in the last week.

    It was reported there were 10, and one refused. Then that there were 11 and 1 refused.

    Susan Collins told Face the Nation she had seen 12 interviews – two of the same person (that would be Mark judge, whose lawyer at one point said he had been interviwed and the FBI would be back for more)

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  167. Did retired FBI (whatever) Ms. McLean commit “witness tampering”?
    Aren’t there laws against that?

    askeptic (8d10f9)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4845 secs.