“The devil’s triangle” is not and has never been a drinking game
A Facebook post (I don’t know who O. B. is):
O.B. : I was a dude who went to parties in the eighties, and worked on the yearbook staff, so let me shed some light on a few things:
“Boofing” doesn’t refer to farts or flatulence. Boofing is a very specific category of anal insertion. He lied about that. Under oath.
A comment said it’s a variant of BuFu, geddit?
“The devil’s triangle” is not and has never been a drinking game. It’s a euphemism for a threesome involving two men and one woman. He lied about that too. Under oath.
Yearbook editors do not doctor or change copy provided by students for their dedication page without their permission. Whatever he wrote in his yearbook is 100% his own words. He lied about that as well. Under oath.
Just like he lied about his drinking, just like he lied about never having assaulted anyone, just like he lied about the reasons why he won’t agree to an FBI investigation to prove his innocence, just like he lied about not having tried to rape Dr. Ford at that party.
The boy who tried to rape Dr. Ford at that party was exactly the same entitled, binge-drinking jock douchebag who got away with the same exact crap at your school in the eighties and nineties.
That’s who Brett Kavanaugh is.
I don’t even have to believe Dr. Ford. I do, but I don’t have to. I just don’t believe him. None of what he said today was true, and it was obvious. His lies were absurd and easy to debunk. He isn’t even a good liar.
Here’s a photo of the real Brett Kavanaugh. Not the sniveling gaslighting jackass in a cheap suit who barked at Senators today and whined about not being handed a job he feels entitled to.
Here’s the guy who shoved an innocent girl into a room with his friend, locked the door, tried to rape her, and then went on about his day. That’s his true face.
He lied under oath for the better part of an hour today, and every man who grew up in the same era fucking knows it.
Now the FBI is going to spend the next week investigating him.
I was surprised how willing he was to tell such transparent lies under oath.
Even if you don’t know the term, obviously “have you boofed yet?” is not referring to farting. Who would ask someone if they’d farted yet? It would clearly seem from the context to refer to something scandalous they’d been talking about doing.
For me nothing tops him claiming the “ralph club” referred to his weak stomach and not to him drinking to the point of vomiting. Come on.
It really blows my mind that so many on the right were excited and emboldened by his “fiery” performance, including many that were waffling beforehand. I suppose the more charitable explanation is that they took his anger as a sign that the charges weren’t true after all, so that made them feel better about supporting him. Even if that’s what they got out of his anger, you’d think they’d still be disgusted by how he casually lied again and again while under oath, and how he acted like a total jackass much of the time.
Still, I think he’s unlikely to be confirmed. I think a few Republicans will jump ship.
One thing has just occurred to me; leaving aside barely-coded references in yearbooks (about as difficult to decipher as c.b. radio jargon!) and Kavanaugh’s calendar collection, why are there no photographs?
I don’t mean photo’s of actual assaults (although, well, you never know; I’m sure some of those rich boys had a 35mm and access to a darkroom) and I know that the 1980’s was before smart phones, but there has to have been people at those parties with Polaroids, 110 Instamatics, 35mm ‘proper’ cameras or even 8mm cine cameras (the video cameras in the ’80s were, if memory serves, not as portable as the adverts claimed).
It seems odd that nobody has produced pictures of Kavanaugh at parties, either sitting quietly and soberly and reading poetry to his friends, or off his face and ogling the pretty girls. OK, I doubt the former would exist, but surely a man who studiously saves calendars to remind him of his college days would also keep photographs of the ‘good times’. Even if not, there has to be pictures in somebody’s old albums or in envelopes stuffed in boxes in lofts and basements.
Give me an hour and I could put my hands on a wealth of embarrassing shots of me through the years – although nothing incriminating, unless one counts the 18″ high Mohican I sported in 1976 as illegal, that is – and I don’t believe for a minute that Kavanaugh or his old friends could not do the same unless they weren’t exactly helpful to his defence.
A pity the F.B.I. can’t subpoena his entire collection of school memorabilia or obtain a warrant to look for it. I’m sure it would be illuminating.
From Skeletor @1
I’m also amazed how Kavanaugh’s outrage won some people over. How did that work?
My best guess is that his outrage worked as a “labor saving device” to help some people resolve cognitive dissonance. (I say “labor saving device” from Why Truth Matters, Benson & Stangroom, 2006.) I need to resolve these two bullets in my mind:
• From Dr. Ford’s testimony, I believe: 1) She was attacked as she described, and 2) She would know her attackers were Kavanaugh and Judge. Those two points rest in my mind comfortably as established facts.
• But from Kavanaugh’s testimony, I feel cognitive dissonance when I try to make sense of his claims. Maybe he was flat-out lying about everything, which is thinkable when I remember Lawrence Krauss’s nine pages of denials followed by ASU’s determination against him. And/Or maybe Kavanaugh felt he was a good Catholic (a virgin, confessing his sins, and not counting this as a sin). And/Or maybe he didn’t register the incident the same way Dr. Ford did. My point in this paragraph is that trying to make sense of Kavanaugh’s testimony takes me a lot of work. I’m willing to do the work, but not everybody has the time or inclination.
Trump advised Kavanaugh to go with hard denial of everything. Trump has a lifetime of intuition and experience at manipulating people, and Trump was speaking from experience that angry denial works (with some people, as the saying goes, you can fool some of the people all of the time). And at the end of the day, Lindsey Graham framed the proceeding itself as an outrage, and those people can ignore all of Ford’s testimony at that point.
a little evidence would help.
Dave, your ‘Trump advised Kavanaugh to go with hard denial of everything. made me think of a scene from the Speckled Jim episode of the classic Blackadder Goes Forth’. The hapless Private Baldrick is to testify at Captain Blackadder’s court martial for killing and eating General Melchard’s favourite pigeon, the eponymous Jim. Melchard is, of course, not only aggrieved victim but also the trial judge.
Blackadder has coached Baldrick, telling him to deny everything.
In court, Melchard (the glorious Stephen Fry) has Baldrick called to the stand, and Captain Darling begins the questioning.
Darling. ‘Are you Private Baldrick?’
Baldrick. ‘No! And Captain Blackadder did not eat that delicious, plump-breasted bird’.
jammski, epistemically, you might prefer an analysis of the lies Kavanaugh told under oath in the hearing Thursday. A short example is here, a longer example here. Then evidence of the original incident is moot.
Coincidence! I just read that Current Affairs piece a couple of hours ago. Informative.
You people are morons..I grew up in the early 80’s and never heard of boofing,or the devils triangle meaning a threesome…minage a trois is a threesome…why would any highschooler want derogatory shit to be published in his yearbook..and I also found it odd that Blasey Ford referred to his school as “Elite”..Instead of just naming his school…how you libtards lie and change shit so easily is sickening…