Staggering
Another Yale buddy turns up to say no actually Kavanaugh drank like a fish and could barely stay upright when he did.
A Yale classmate of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh’s accused him on Sunday of a “blatant mischaracterization” of his drinking while in college, saying that he often saw Judge Kavanaugh “staggering from alcohol consumption.”
The classmate, Chad Ludington, who said he frequently socialized with Judge Kavanaugh as a student, said in a statement that the judge had been untruthful in testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee when he had denied any possibility that he had ever blacked out from drinking.
Mr. Ludington said that Judge Kavanaugh had played down “the degree and frequency” of his drinking, and that the judge had often become “belligerent and aggressive” while intoxicated. Other former classmates have made similar claims.
And one of the things that makes the claims credible is the fact that Kavanaugh got so very belligerent and aggressive right in front of us. The guy is obviously a belligerent asshole even when sober.
Mr. Ludington, a professor at North Carolina State University who appears to have made small political contributions to Democratic candidates, said to The New York Times on Sunday that he had been told by the F.B.I.’s Washington, D.C., field office that he should go to the bureau’s Raleigh, N.C., office on Monday morning. He said he intended to do that, so he could “tell the full details of my story.”
It is illegal to lie to Congress. But it was unclear whether the F.B.I. would add Mr. Ludington’s accusations to the newly reopened background investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct against Judge Kavanaugh, which has been limited in scope and time by the White House and Senate Republicans.
Because they are determined to get an angry hostile pugnacious drunk onto the Supreme Court.What could possibly go wrong?
Democrats in Washington reacted with anger on Sunday as the narrow scope of the new F.B.I. background inquiry became clear, warning that it threatened to become a sham.
Senator Mazie K. Hirono, a Hawaii Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, said on ABC’s “This Week” that any investigation that limits whom the F.B.I. can interview and which leads agents can follow would be a “farce.”
Senator Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat who is also on the committee, described what she said was micromanaging from the White House: “You can’t interview this person, you can’t look at this time period, you can only look at these people from one side of the street from when they were growing up.”
“I mean, come on,” she said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
Yes but did you ever black out from drinking?
Trump says stay tuned.
Wow! Just starting to hear the Democrats, who are only thinking Obstruct and Delay, are starting to put out the word that the “time” and “scope” of FBI looking into Judge Kavanaugh and witnesses is not enough. Hello! For them, it will never be enough – stay tuned and watch!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 30, 2018
“Threatening” to become a sham? I think we’re way past that point.
And of course they had to mention that his political contributions were to Democrats. That immediately gives all Trumpists, and a lot of “moderates”, permission to ignore what he says. Because Democrats.
For any experienced police investigator, the fact that a party at a crime scene acts to steer them to one part of the scene and away from another will automatically draw their attention precisely to the location that party is trying to steer them away from.
“Don’t look there, look here” invites a derisory response and rebuke and a ‘thanks for the tip’.
You forgot partisan!
I think it’s more accurate to say they are determined to get someone onto the court who can be trusted to protect the crime syndicate currently posing as a political party.
Their problem is finding anyone who meets that requirement who isn’t also a raging asshole.
Snerk. That’s an inherent ambiguity in language – I didn’t mean they want to put any generic angry hostile pugnacious drunk who comes along on the Court, I meant they want to put this specific guy who is an angry hostile pugnacious drunk on the Court. I’m sure they would have preferred a much smoother operator so that their complete abandonment of many of their own purported values would not have been so obvious, but angry hostile pugnacious drunk is what they had to work with.
To follow up on Omar’s point, what happens if the FBI do follow a lead the WH considers off limits? Especially if it produces something damning? Investigations are funny things and can lead to places nobody expects, even with deliberate constraints.
I don’t know. A public fight, for sure, but who will win, and how, I don’t know. Probably no one does – the Trump White House smashes precedent with everything it does, which makes it very hard to figure out what happens if X.
Yes, but Gorsuch is already there.
Claire, #7, if the FBI has been let off the leash to investigate as they see fit then this comment is purely academic, but presumably the WH lawyers would have tried to have any information that was obtained from sources outside of the allowed perimeters declared inadmissible and struck from the record. My guess is that they would have tried to demand a look at the investigation’s findings and attempt to pcensor it prior to it being presented to the hearing, preventing it from entering the record in the first place.
At this stage, I wouldn’t be remotely surprised if Trump is using the desperation of the Republicans to load the court with ‘their people’ to further a much more sinister agenda – i.e. to get men onto the court who will bring it into such disrepute that he can abolish it, along with the FBI and any other branch of law and government that might threaten to restrict him in any way.
tiggerthewing, removing all opposition has been his goal since day one. I remember something he said about the political system in (I think) S. Korea when he mused ‘Ruler for life; imagine that.’