Results 1 to 6 of 6
Like Tree5Likes
  • 1 Post By Airbornesapper07
  • 1 Post By Airbornesapper07
  • 2 Post By Airbornesapper07
  • 1 Post By Airbornesapper07

Thread: Judiciary Committee refers man who made false allegation against Kavanaugh to the FBI

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member Airbornesapper07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018

    Judiciary Committee refers man who made false allegation against Kavanaugh to the FBI

    Judiciary Committee refers man who made false allegation against Kavanaugh to the FBI

    If the guy had come forward and said that Kavanaugh and a space alien raped a woman, would that have been a top story on CNN?

    September 30, 2018
    By Rick Moran

    With so many women coming forward with allegations of sexual misconduct against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh that may or may not be true, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley, wants to make sure what's in store for those who make blatantly false allegations.

    A man claiming that he knew a woman who was raped aboard a boat in 1985 by Kavanaugh and later retracted the allegation has been referred to the FBI to determine if his false charge obstructed the committee's deliberations.
    "Such acts are not only unfair; they are potentially illegal," committee Chairman Chuck Grassley wrote in a letter Saturday to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and FBI Director Chris Wray.
    Grassley wants the FBI and DOJ to investigate whether the individual potentially obstructed the committee's nomination process of Kavanaugh by providing fraudulent information to committee investigators.
    "It is illegal to make materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements to Congressional investigators. It is illegal to obstruct Committee investigation," the Iowa Republican wrote.
    The office of Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat who sits on the Judiciary Committee, received a call on Monday concerning an allegation -- now found to be false -- of a 1985 incident in Newport where a woman was sexually assaulted on a boat by two heavily inebriated men she referred to as "Brett and Mark."
    The person being referred has had his name redacted from the materials released. He said he heard of the assault that same day and physically confronted the two attackers, according to the documents. He falsely claimed that he realized one of the attackers was Kavanaugh after seeing his yearbook photo on TV over the weekend.
    Kavanaugh was interviewed by the committee on Tuesday about the allegation and categorically denied the claim.
    "I was not in Newport, haven't been on a boat in Newport. Not with Mark Judge on a boat, nor all those three things combined. This is just completely made up, or at least not me," Kavanaugh told the committee, according to transcripts.
    The committee said after the transcripts of the interview became public on Wednesday, the individual "recanted" and apologized for the claim through a social media post.
    In his letter to Sessions and Wray, Grassley wrote that the committee is "grateful to citizens who come forward with relevant information in good faith, even if they are not one hundred percent sure about what they know."
    "But when individuals provide fabricated allegations to the Committee, diverting Committee resources during time-sensitive investigations, it materially impedes our work," he said.
    How about making Whitehouse an accessory? How about making all Democrats accessories for encouraging this kind of hysterical witch hunt?
    I think it's probable that committees of congress get these sort of bizarre, false allegations against every nominee for a government position. So why did this one end up on the front pages of America's newspapers?
    If the guy had come forward and said that Kavanaugh and a space alien raped the woman, would that have been a top story on CNN? The entire process reminds me of the effort by porn impressario Larry Flynt in his quest to find dirt on Republicans during Clinton's impeachment. Flynt offered a million dollars to any woman who had an affair with a Republican politician to come forward.
    Kavanaugh's third accuser, Julie Swetnick, who is represented by the bombastic, sneering porn lawyer Michael Avenatti, has been exposed as someone who has lied about being sexually harassed in the past. Should she be referred to the FBI too?
    People have to be held responsible for making false allegations or there will be no end to it.

    Judy likes this.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Airbornesapper07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Democrats ask for the FBI and now they’d better be prepared for the consequences

    In the course of the FBI's hurry-up full field effort, very interesting heretofore hidden information previously posted on social media sites will be captured and reviewed via the awesome power of computer forensic tools of our 21st Century Surveillance State

    September 30, 2018
    By Ed Timperlake

    Over the next week the FBI will collect evidence and report back to the Senate what they could find out about in any discrepancies in the testimony of both Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Ford.

    In the course of their hurry-up full field effort very interesting heretofore hidden information previously posted on social media sites will be captured and reviewed.
    Additionally any electronic information (e-mails) discussing how to orchestrate such a shameful last minute attacks to destroy a human being will be reviewed and analyzed. There can be no compromise on that point thanks to Senator Graham’s historic moment:
    GRAHAM: If you wanted a FBI investigation, you could have come to us. What you want to do is destroy this guy's life, hold this seat open and hope you win in 2020. You've said that, not me.
    America will live through this week long FBI “sprint” trying to shed as much light on the most infamous “He said/She” said moment in American history.
    It was commendable that Judge Kavanaugh furnished all the documents that he could, including his summer of ‘82 contemporaneous personal calendars. His submission was then used against him by a US Senator apparently making it up as he was going along. Bryn York reports in the Washington Examiner:
    On Friday morning, after Thursday's testimony, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse produced an enlarged poster of the calendar entry and laid out the Democratic theory.
    Reporter York then put the calendar entries in his article while naming names:
    Examining the calendars from the summer of 1982 that Kavanaugh gave the committee days earlier, they focused on an entry for July 1, 1982 — 36 years and three months ago…
    Most notably, if the July 1 party were the event at which Ford claims she was assaulted, what about Timmy, Tom, Bernie, and Squi? They are, respectively, Kavanaugh high school friends Tim Gaudette, Tom Kane, Bernie McCarthy, and Chris Garrett. What might they know about what took place?
    If the July 1 party were the event in question, the presence of Garrett would be especially noteworthy. In her testimony, Ford said she was going out with Garrett at that time in the summer of 1982. Today, she remembers him well.
    America is now living the moment that the Democrats strived for, because with the FBI involved, the awesome power of computer forensic tools of our 21st Century Surveillance State will become engaged.
    Breaking down that day in July is not the point of this article, though it should and probably will be looked into. The real point is Judge Kavanaugh’s calendar is now part of the investigation. But turnabout is fair play: what about all the earlier reported erased social media accounts of Christine Ford?
    Since she initially posted, and now disappeared, information on her social media accounts, she should have no expectation of privacy, and likewise with any earlier biographical information she posted about her professional tittles.
    More than a few of our elected officials have a very nasty character trait in that everyone is expendable in their keeping power.
    Senators and Congressman are protected by the “Speech and Debate Clause” of the Constitution that gives protection for our elected Legislators to pretty much say anything that pops into their heads and remain judgment-proof. Everyone else who is not an elected representative is expendable and may face significant legal peril if they lied to the Senate or furnished false information.
    This is not an abstract debating point because Chairman Grassley recently fired a momentous legal shot against anyone who lied to his Senate Committee:, via The Washington Times:
    “Such acts are not only unfair; they are potentially illegal. It is illegal to make materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statements to congressional investigators. It is illegal to obstruct committee investigations,” Mr. Grassley wrote in a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and FBI Director Christopher A. Wray.
    The vicious enemies of Judge Kavanaugh got what they asked for, now the FBI is involved, and it is time for sunlight, transparency, and possible legal payback.
    Many commentators speculate that after the FBI finishes their week-long investigation, Americans will not know any more than they did after the Hearing. I bet that is true for Judge Kavanaugh: his words personified “the truth is the truth” However, for many of his nasty enemies in one of the ugliest conspiracies in American history, their day of reckoning may be fast approaching.

    Judy likes this.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Judy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Looks like Kavanaugh is going to the US Supreme Court and these fake accusers are going to the Pokey!!

    Don't you just love our country? We're the best when the going gets tough, the tough get going!!

    A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation - Ronald Reagan
    Save America, Deport Congress! - Judy

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at

  4. #4
    Senior Member Airbornesapper07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    For Democrats, the Kavanaugh game is 'delay and destroy'

    Their political game is getting obvious.

    September 30, 2018
    By Trevor Thomas

    Counting today (Sunday, Sept. 30) it’s been 84 days since Trump nominated Brett Kavanaugh to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. Of those on the current Supreme Court, the average time for Senate confirmation was 67 days. From 1967 to 2010, the median time for confirmation was 69 days. Going all the back to the beginning of our nation, the average time for confirmation is 23 days. In spite of what some have implied—hoping to encourage even further investigation of a 36+ year-old supposed assault involving teenagers—there’s been no “rush” to confirm Brett Kavanaugh. In fact, it’s been quite the opposite.

    All along, the name of the game for Democrats in this whole fiasco has been delay and destroy! Sen. Lindsey Graham was exactly right, the Democrats want to destroy Judge Kavanaugh, hold the seat open, and hope they can fill it in 2020. The Democrats didn’t really want an FBI investigation. If they did, it would’ve happened weeks ago, prior to Judge Kavanaugh’s first appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee. They didn’t really want one, because almost certainly they knew where it would lead: nowhere.
    Again, Democrats want further delays so they can hurl more lies. And an evil and eager media will almost certainly aid and abet. With this extra time that the latest investigation (that makes seven) into his life allows, if liberals continue to assault Judge Kavanaugh and his family with their ugly lies, Sen. Jeff Flake will be an accomplice.
    Flake—after a confrontation in an elevator with those who have no qualms about assaulting the unborn, and after a conversation with those bent on destroying a good man in the name of assaulting girls in the womb—decided that we needed to drag the ugly circus that is Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation out even longer.
    The elevator confrontation preceded Flake’s conversation with Democrat Sen. Chris Coons, which led to this new “investigation” of Ford’s uncorroborated accusation of a 36+ year-old assault. In the elevator, two women—Ana Maria Archila and Maria Gallagher—screamed at Flake,
    Archila screamed, “What you are doing is allowing someone who actually violated a woman to sit on the Supreme Court. This is not tolerable. You have children in your family. Think about them. I have two children. I cannot imagine that for the next 50 years they will have to have someone in the Supreme Court who has been accused of violating a young girl. What are you doing, sir?”
    Gallagher added, “I was sexually assaulted and nobody believed me. I didn't tell anyone and you’re telling all women that they don’t matter, that they should just stay quiet because if they tell you what happened to them you are going to ignore them. That’s what happened to me, and that’s what you are telling all women in America, that they don’t matter. They should just keep it to themselves because if they have told the truth you’re just going to help that man to power anyway.”
    Flake appeared totally surprised and scared to death, and had no words for the two women whose whole verbal assault was premised on a lie. (Thus, why should we assume either woman was telling the truth about their own lives—falsus in uno, falsus in omnibusright Senator Blumenthal?) Any conservative politician of Flake’s experience who has no sound answer for such “nasty” attacks should get out of the game (as Flake is doing).
    Of course, there’s absolutely no evidence Brett Kavanaugh “violated” or “assaulted” anyone! Thus support of Judge Kavanaugh in no way implies anything untoward about women and sexual assault or any other such wickedness.
    Again, this confrontation was little more than a miniature version of a “nasty” woman’s protest. Yet Sen. Flake couldn’t or wouldn’t see it for what is was. Just after Trump’s inauguration, I told the GOP to gird themselves for this fight. It seems Sen. Flake was not ready for what many of us knew was coming.
    After President Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court, in early 2017, Bloomberg reported that there were over 200 liberal groups across the U.S. who were organizing and mobilizing opposition to Gorsuch. Marge Baker, executive vice president of People for the American Way, said, “We’ll make sure the narrative makes clear he is out of the mainstream, is extreme and in many ways is to the right of Scalia.”
    Ahh, again with “the narrative.” As I noted a few years ago, for liberals, it seems it’s always about the narrative. As has been demonstrated for decades now, liberalism is quite adept at creating “narratives,” i.e. making its own “truth,” which can easily change as soon as it’s advantageous. Such skill and flexibility is very necessary when one needs political power to make sure the preferred notion of “truth” rules the day.

    This notion of ones’ own “truth” was trumpeted proudly by liberals who hailed Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. A smug Sen. Corey Booker told Judge Kavanaugh, “She came forward. She sat here. She told her truth.” A “hyper-partisan” Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand told MSNBC:
    Well, I think Dr. Blasey Ford’s testimony was incredible. I thought she was so heartfelt. She spoke her truth so passionately, with such candor; with such emotion, I was really inspired by what she did today.
    There is no “her truth” or “his truth” or “your truth” or “my truth.” There is only the truth. Sadly, most liberals today long ago abandoned such a notion, which is why we’ve had to endure this evil circus that is the Senate confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh. roy.html

  5. #5
    Senior Member Airbornesapper07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Judy and Beezer like this.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Airbornesapper07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    How will Democrats explain this about one of Kavanaugh's accusers!

    The Blacksphere

    One Democrat Kavanaugh Accuser BITES THE DUST

    By Kevin Jackson -
    September 30, 2018

    Democrats really know how to pick their poster children.

    I guess the fact that Plaintiff #3 against Kavanaugh was represented by creepy porn lawyer, Michael Avenatti didn’t raise any “blue” flags.

    With Democrats, the sleazier the people involved, the more “credible” Democrats claim them to be.
    Just like Julie Swetnick. Look at how she has backfired, as this tweet suggests:
    BREAKING: Michael Avanetti’s client Julie Swetnick was sued in 2000 for making false sexual assault allegations.
    Trending: Why Leftists Don’t Want Blasey Ford’s Past Examined
    Her employer determined she engaged in “inappropriate conduct” & made “false & retaliatory allegations” of sexual harassment against two male co-workers
    Amy @RightHook99

    BREAKING: Michael Avanetti's client Julie Swetnick was sued in 2000 for making false sexual assault allegations.

    Her employer determined she engaged in “inappropriate conduct" & made “false & retaliatory allegations” of sexual harassment against two male co-workers.
    5:27 PM - Sep 29, 2018

    Say it isn’t so. But one of Kavanaugh’s accusers has a history of lying about sexual abuse?!

    And if that isn’t enough, she’s been accused of “unwelcome, sexually offensive conduct”?
    So says The Daily Caller:
    The woman who charges she was gang-raped at a party where Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh was present, Julie Swetnick, had a lawsuit filed against her by a former employer that alleged she engaged in “unwelcome, sexually offensive conduct” towards two male co-workers, according to court documents obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

    Get it; not one, but two male co-workers.
    Apparently Swetnick wasn’t just going to the “gang rapes” to observe. Recall that Swetnick admitted to attending as many as ten gang-rapes. Even braindead Democrats knew they hired the wrong woman for this gig.
    One gang rape and people might think you were tricked into going. Ten gang rapes, and let’s just call things as they are. Sex parties, and Swetnick enjoyed them.
    Next, Swetnick has another problem. Her issue pertains to her academic credentials. The article continues,
    WebTrends, a web analytics company headquartered in Portland, filed the defamation and fraud lawsuit against Swetnick in Oregon in November 2000 and also alleged that she lied about graduating from Johns Hopkins University.
    Yes, the old academic credentials. How many Lefties have faked their credentials, Senator Blumenthal?

    Ford lied as well, saying she was a licensed psychologist, when in fact she isn’t licensed at all. She’s an academic.

    Democrats handled Ford with kid gloves, speaking of her courage. They gloated over her clinical description of the drama that supposedly occurred at the hands of Brett Kavanaugh. They offered excuses for her lack of emotion in describing the supposed horrific event. Simply put, Democrats cover for her lies. And there is a reason they didn’t bring up Plaintiffs 1 or 2 in the Senate hearings on Kavanaugh. Lack of credibility.
    Ford has lost credibility as well. Real survivors of sexual assault didn’t buy her act. More will say the same. Thus Democrats will look for more “survivors” of Kavanaugh.
    We will continue to ask questions about the 2 and 3. Why aren’t we having hearings into their allegations? We all know the answer.
    Beezer likes this.

Similar Threads

  1. BREAKING: Judiciary Refers Potential False Allegations Against Kavanaugh For Crimina
    By Airbornesapper07 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 10-01-2018, 04:49 AM
  2. Judiciary Talks With 2 Men Who Think They Assaulted Ford, Not Kavanaugh, Report Says
    By Airbornesapper07 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-27-2018, 02:09 AM
  3. Judiciary Committee's Lindsey Graham: "I'm Not Going To Ruin Judge Kavanaugh's Life
    By Airbornesapper07 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-23-2018, 05:58 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-17-2018, 10:34 PM
  5. Bill O'Reilly's Accuser Arrested for False Allegation of Crime
    By lorrie in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-18-2017, 02:22 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts