WaPo: Mark Judge’s Former Girlfriend Wants To Chat With FBI, Senate Judiciary

apdst said:

That's only during a criminal investigation.

Click to expand...

That's not what I've read...

https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual-916-false-statements-federal-investigator

https://law.yale.edu/student-life/c...ly-understanding-government-background-checks

Big Ed said:

So, you expect Judge to admit to a felony?? Why??

Do you expect Judge to say anything to the FBI without his lawyers present?? Would you after signing such a document??

Click to expand...

You don't sound convinced that Judge wasn't in that room. Ford gave a very credible and believable testimony. I think it's in the best interest of the country, for Mike Judge himself to make his statement to the FBI. Put it this way. If Kavanaugh really is lying, and I don't know that he is, does anybody really want him on the Supreme Court of our land?

JasperL said:

I haven't seen anyone say that. I'm sure if the FBI does any investigation at all they'll interview them all, as they should.

The problem is the other witnesses say they don't remember the party and there is no good reason they should, nor can they say what did or didn't happen. They might be able to confirm A party took place, but there is a party with 2 of the 3 named men on K's calendar, which the entry says was for 'skis' or beer. So we know at least one party like that took place that summer.

Click to expand...

If Ford's claim that she was one of two females at "the" house party with (four?) underaged drunk males, was physically/sexually attacked and suddenly left (ran 7 miles home?) then that would leave her (best?) friend alone with (at least) two alleged known rapists. How that (best?) female friend neither noticed nor ever question Ford's (sudden?) absence leaving her as the only female amid drunken rapists does not pass the smell test. At the least, it is likely that both females (besties?) would have discussed "the" (most traumatic in Ford's life?) house party after returning to school.

Kal'Stang said:

1: Hot air. That alone is worth dismissing it.

2: Even if true...Before believing an ex we should probably determine if their breakup was cordial or not. If no, I'd say that we dismiss the charge as pettiness.

Click to expand...

Can we dismiss the nominee as unfit for the office?

Media_Truth said:

Correct. It only proves (or implies fairly strongly) that Mike Judge is a liar. So it's time for the FBI to have a little chat with Mike Judge. Let's see if he was in that room with Kavanaugh and Ford. Kavanaugh should welcome this, right - to clear his good name???

Click to expand...

Oh come on, don't hedge. It's proof enough for a liberal.

LAFFRIOT

Media_Truth said:

You don't sound convinced that Judge wasn't in that room. Ford gave a very credible and believable testimony. I think it's in the best interest of the country, for Mike Judge himself to make his statement to the FBI. Put it this way. If Kavanaugh really is lying, and I don't know that he is, does anybody really want him on the Supreme Court of our land?

Click to expand...

Her testimony was believable and credible based on what exactly ??

Fenton said:

Her testimony was believable and credible based on what exactly ??

Click to expand...

Did you see her testimony? First, she was consistent, steadfast and professional. Some analysts say that she wasn't afraid to say, "I don't know", which evidently is a trademark of somebody that makes up a story. She took a lie detector test (Kavanaugh didn't, Judge didn't). And her certainty that attacker was Kavanaugh was riveting.

Media_Truth said:

Did you see her testimony? First, she was consistent, steadfast and professional. Some analysts say that she wasn't afraid to say, "I don't know", which evidently is a trademark of somebody that makes up a story. She took a lie detector test (Kavanaugh didn't, Judge didn't). And her certainty that attacker was Kavanaugh was riveting.

Click to expand...

Lol !!! She was so " riveting " and credible the Democrats immediately moved onto attacking Kavanugh as a stumbling drunk and alcoholic.

Of-course she impressed you, all you needed was a allegation to be impressed. The rest of us wanted corroberation and evidence, and we didn't get that

Kal'Stang said:

1: Hot air. That alone is worth dismissing it.

2: Even if true...Before believing an ex we should probably determine if their breakup was cordial or not. If no, I'd say that we dismiss the charge as pettiness.

Click to expand...

Could you help me out. I'm putting together a list of all of the requirements a woman has to meet before we're willing to listen to her testimony.

So far I have

1. Make sure she's attractive, but obviously not too hot.
2. Not a prude (ich), but also not a slut (also ich)
3. Hadn't been drinking (Their brains shut off, it's science)
4. No mistakes or wrongdoing ever in her life (No psychos!)
5. Did she break up with that person? (Ugh.. probably revenge.)
6. Full testimony corroborated by at least one man

Fenton said:

Lol !!! She was so " riveting " and credible the Democrats immediately moved onto attacking Kavanugh as a stumbling drunk and alcoholic.

Of-course she impressed you, all you needed was a allegation to be impressed. The rest of us wanted corroberation and evidence, and we didn't get that

Click to expand...

I'm curious why Kavanaugh and Judge won't take a lie detector test. You have all the answers. Do tell.

Media_Truth said:

Ford claims that Mark Judge was in the bedroom, while Kavanaugh assaulted Ford. Judge claimed that he doesn't recall the incident. How reliable are Mark Judge's comments?

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/09...r-girlfriend-wants-chat-fbi-senate-judiciary/

After seeing Judge’s denial, Elizabeth Rasor, who met Judge at Catholic University and was in a relationship with him for about three years, said that she felt morally obligated to challenge his account that “ ‘no horseplay’ took place at Georgetown Prep with women.”
...
Rasor recalled that Judge had told her ashamedly of an incident that involved him and other boys taking turns having sex with a drunk woman. Rasor said that Judge seemed to regard it as fully consensual.
...
The aide added that this raises further question about why “Mark Judge is hiding out in Bethany Beach and Republicans refuse to call him as a witness.”

Mark Judge is fair game for the FBI probe.

Click to expand...

A new Harvard Harris Poll finds majority of voters ( 60% ) support Kavanugh's confirmation if FBI investigation fails to corroberate the allegations of his accusers

Also 69% agree with Kavanugh's statement that this procceedings had become a " National disgrace " and 75% agreed that Feinstein should have turned over the letter immediately.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/409167-kavanaugh-polling-fbi-on-the-hot-seat

Kal'Stang said:

1: Hot air. That alone is worth dismissing it.


2: Even if true...Before believing an ex we should probably determine if their breakup was cordial or not. If no, I'd say that we dismiss the charge as pettiness.

Click to expand...

It's on one of multiple sources, but the one posted sucks, so you dismiss it. But if you do not dismiss it for that reason, you will assume that the woman is telling horrible lies about her ex out of pettinesss unless:

(1) you determine what counts as a break-up that is sufficiently "cordial" enough that a woman would not likely to make up horrible lies out of pettiness; and

(2) you determine that the person describing the break-up is someone you want to trust about the level of cordiality present; and

(3) you determine that the break up was indeed sufficiently "cordial" enough that you will not assume it's all lies out of pettiness.

That sure sounds like something that would be said by someone who is objectively considering the available testimony and other circumstantial/corroborative evidence.

But perhaps you've been too fair. One must also consider the possibility that even if the break-up was the height of cordiality, the person is suffering from "transference" such that Mark Judge wasn't the one who told her about any of this, and any of it is about persons other than Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh.

Media_Truth said:

I'm curious why Kavanaugh and Judge won't take a lie detector test. You have all the answers. Do tell.

Click to expand...

:roll:

They've both issued statements under oath. If that's not good enough for you people, then kindly go pound sand

We shouldn't have to make special considerations for the worst among us, the people who sought to destroy the reputation and character of a innocent man for politcal purposes
Those people should be castigated, not rewarded.

Media_Truth said:

The origin of the article is WAPO, but I don't have a subscription, and many readers probably do not either...

The article cites a second women from that area, during that time, who states something similar. And the main point here is that Mark Judge should be grilled by the FBI. His lawyer's written regurgitation of the "Mark Judge statement" just doesn't seem genuine.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I usually the "it's a paywall and I can't get around it" when I try linking to NYT or WaPo. Though, it's pretty easy to get around both their paywalls.

Fortunately, it looks like the GOP is betting that enough reasonable people around the center still vote, such that there actually is going to be something of an investigation into the allegations. And, I hope, they'll have to wrestle with the question of whether they lose out if it turns out that even more comes out later and it looks like their failure to look into things might have been a contributing cause to that.

Fenton said:

:roll:

They've both issued statements under oath. If that's not good enough for you people, then kindly go pound sand

We shouldn't have to make special considerations for the worst among us, the people who sought to destroy the reputation and character of a innocent man for politcal purposes
Those people should be castigated, not rewarded.

Click to expand...

Well then he has nothing to lose. A lie detector test would be just the thing so this "innocent man" can prove his case.