I haven’t. My opinion that be probably lied proves nothing, just like your opinion.
Give us an example of where he committed perjury and the TFK legal minds can consider it.
This is fascinating to watch.
The pretend “professor” is still banging away on the keyboard in his pretend office with the very real drool coming down his chin, and still unable to answer a simple question.
I’ll ask it again: Should a perjurer be on the Supreme Court?
Obviously not. Now give us an example of where you believe he perjured himself. I don’t believe he did, but I actually understand what the word perjury means, unlike you. What a waste that state funded journalism education was on someone who doesn’t understand a basic legal term.
Thanks.
So you’ve admited that Barf is a perjurer.
And in response to the question of whether a perjurer should be on the Supreme Court, you say:
Therefore, you admit that all this is cut and dried.
Barf is not fit to be on the Supreme Court.
Checkmate.
No more questions, your honour.
1 Like
Sad @Sidney has been banging on about perjury now for over a month, claiming Kavanaugh perjured himself during his hearing. Let’s consult Sid’s favorite left wing source, vox.com. Vox consulted with legal scholars and the conclusion was Kavanaugh did not perjure himself. But the mad cunt living in his parent’s basement in Galway knows better 
Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court hearing: the perjury controversy, explained - Vox
You still don’t understand what perjury is,fascinating.
Read the vox article I posted for you, you absolute clown.
You’re reduced to arguing against yourself now. 
Passes the time for you in your pretend “professor’s office”, I guess.
Fascinatinger and fascinatinger.
This is what it’s all about.
For plenty of the Democrats, I have no doubt that there is some genuine concern about Ford’s allegation and if Kavanaugh did it. The delay in bringing it to everyone’s attention was nakedly partisan, however. The allegation could have been looked at behind closed doors far easier, but that wouldn’t have given the big show that the Democrats wanted. Even if Kavanaugh is truthful, they get to roll out that he was a frat boy who drank a bit much in college. There is absolute no way that someone drinking in college would have been worthy of a Senate going over without this allegation. Without the allegation, it doesn’t get brought up.
At the moment, Ford’s allegation still fails the epistemological pub test. There has been a paucity of detail, people get worked up about victim shaming but she has actually been treated very well for what are serious allegations presented in a pretty weak manner. She couldn’t place it in any sort of time or place. She can’t remember how she got to this place that remains unknown. Every person she cited as being there cannot remember such an event. The details in the time since, not brought up by Ford, adds more questions than answers from her perspective.
Him being a frat boy drunk with the questionable answers over his time in the Bush administration probably makes him usuitable from an optics perspective, but you have to acknowledge the partisan way it was brought up. You also have to acknowledge that this is a difficult situation - if he withdrawns then his name is forever blackened in a far worse manner than just a SC justice failure.
Both sides of the aisle are as bad, despite the holier than thou messaging from the Blue corner. Always have been, always will be. That’s politics and a study of the US Congress will tell you that the meme that things have never been as bad in Congress is just not true.
The sad cases a few thousand miles away enjoying how their team are going has not always been the case. It’s straight up weird.
1 Like
…another white flag flutters in.
Back on topic, do you think Blasey Ford perjured herself?
Do you understand what perjury is mate?
You should stop digging now.
I’ll take that as a no.
No. I believe her and think Barf is a lying, perjuring, attempted raping shit. I’ve been quite consistent on this.
That’s your call.
1 Like
Kav told at least one definite 100% lie, he said he had no connections at Yale. I’m surprised Sidney hasn’t spotted this. He’s not the great detective I thought:-
https://www.newsweek.com/kavanaugh-said-he-had-no-connections-yale-he-was-legacy-student-1145286
You spelled defective incorrectly.
Of course you believe her, that’s your default position to believe anyone who supports your position. It’s called confirmation bias. Will you still believe her if she’s shown to be a liar?
Did you believe Bill Clinton when he said he did not have sex with that woman?
Do you believe Senator Blumenthal was in Vietnam?
Did you believe the woman who accused the Duke Lacrosse team of raping her?
Having a default position of believing people is a simpleton approach. Especially believing people who are heavily invested in not telling the truth.
She’s invented the “hidden memory” story to make herself look less bad about sitting on it. Her motivation is revenge but it’s personal revenge not party-political revenge. Romney would have just nominated another judge. Trump unexpectedly didn’t do that because of the Presidential-immunity issue. She was never that scared of coming forward but just couldn’t be bothered unless she thought Kav would get the Supreme Court. That was one injustice too far for her. She’s probably hamming up the trauma and PTSD a little to make her sitting on the incident seem less bad.
I’d say she’s probably telling the truth about the actual incident itself, as she remembers it, but I’d say Mark Judge was the real instigator.
Minor point but I thought she’d come up with a location and part of Kav’s defence is that it’s far away and she couldn’t drive?
I think I hear the sound of an empty, inarticulate(d) vehicle reversing into a wall somewhere in Nebraska.
“BEEP, BEEP, BEEP… BANG!”