Democrats Try To Make Case For Brett Kavanaugh Perjury With Past Emails (1823 hits)
Democrats Try To Make Case For Brett Kavanaugh Perjury With Past Emails
Rachel Maddow shows how e-mail evidence released by Democrats senators on the Judiciary Committee contradict sworn testimony Brett Kavanaugh in this week's confirmation hearing, as well as his past confirmation hearings, raising the suggestion that Kavanaugh could face impeachment as well as confirmation.
One of the unexpected things that happen this day Stevie, That Brett Kavanaugh Perjury himself with Past Emails, that the Trump and his administration "DID NOT WANT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO SEE." In those E-mail's that Trump did not want you to see clearly shows that Brett Kavanaugh LIED to the SENATE on a host of things.
This is what Trump and the republicans chairperson on the committee, did not want you, his base supporters and the American people to see in this attempt to RAM-ROD Brett Kavanaugh through is nomination Committee.
The evidence Steve is right here for you to see what happen this day, take a look.. And they ask yourself, Is this America?
Do you support this action Steve?
Saturday, September 8th 2018 at 7:32PM
Dea. Ron Gray Sr.
More evidence about what Kavanaugh said in 2006, more evidence about Charles Pickering and especially, more evidence about why the Democrats think Kavanaugh would lie for such a trivial reason as because he was embarrassed about Pickering.
Now if that is what you are interested in why the Democrats think Kavanaugh would lie? The evidence is right here in this video report Steve. You see and hear Kavanaugh testifying under oath what he said about Charles Pickering.
You also see some E-mails from Brett Kavanaugh, that The Trump Administration did not want the American People to see because those Kavanaugh E-mails put a different light, on what he said under oath.
Steve, it is right here in front of your eye's, you are looking at the proof.
It all comes up to this, who are you going to believe, them or your lying EYES?
Chris Wallace had Senator Kennedy on his show this morning. Senator Kennedy came on but all 10 Democrats on the committee were also invited and none of them accepted. They are not trying to make a case because they have no case to make.
It is not time yet. Getting back to the material in this blog.
You also see some E-mails from Brett Kavanaugh, that The Trump Administration did not want the American People to see because those Kavanaugh E-mails put a different light, on what he said under oath.
Steve, it is right here in front of your eye's, you are looking at the proof.
It all comes up to this, who are you going to believe, them or your lying EYES?
Lying eye's are someone telling you that what you see, is not real, not the truth. You remember what Trump said about his, Donald Trump inauguration crowd photos, he said it was larger then Obama's which you can clearly see with your own eyes, THAT WAS A LIE, PRIME example. .
So, who are you going to believe, ME or your lying EYE'S.
Lying eyes make no sense Ron. Evidence is either there or not, it has nothing to do with eyes, it has to do with your brain. For example, the average democrat tends to believe his lying brain.
In the example of Donald Trump's inauguration crowd photos, he said it was larger then Obama's which you can clearly see with your own eyes, THAT WAS A LIE, PRIME example.
Steve, you see the evidents with your eye's and not with your brain. Steve, you continually heard that Trump crowds was larger then Obama's, when your eye's see the truth. In short, Trump was telling his supporters, that his crowds was bigger, when your eye's was telling you a different story.
Trump was saying to the American people, not to believe what you see with your own EYE's because they are LYING to you so, believe what I tell you, Trump was saying..
That is what I mean, when I say: "So, who are you going to believe, ME or your lying EYE'S."
Now, was Trump tell you the truth about the size of his inauguration crowd being larger then Obama's, when you saw the photo's of both crowds in Washington D.C. with your own eye's?
Forgot crowd sizes Ron. Show my eyes where in this video "You also see some E-mails from Brett Kavanaugh, that The Trump Administration did not want the American People to see..."
Did you see this video report? If you did, you would have seen reference to documents and E-mails from Brett Kavanaugh, that The Trump Administration did not want the American People to see because those Kavanaugh E-mails put a different light, on what he said under oath about his handling of evidence about what Kavanaugh said in 2006, more evidence about his handling of Charles Pickering .
I stil have the same questions Ron, you haven't shown my eyes any of them.
More evidence about what Kavanaugh said in 2006, more evidence about Charles Pickering and especially, more evidence about why the Democrats think Kavanaugh would lie for such a trivial reason as because he was embarrassed about Pickering.
1. Steve, if you can't answer the question, if you saw this video report, speaks volumes to why to still have the same questions
2. why the Democrats think Kavanaugh would lie for such a trivial reason as because he was embarrassed about Pickering. Because LYING the congress is a very serious offence of committing perjury and you know we can't have a known Lier on The Supreme Court, now can we?
1. You asked me to watch this video Ron and I did. That is what you was supposed do, when making comments on a blog Steve.
2. I asked to see more evidence. That sounds like a plan.
3. You've failed to provide it, just keep referring me back to the same inadequate video we started with. Steve, you asked to see more evidence, that is your responsibility to do your own research to either to agree with this material or present your point of view, to refute the information presented in this blog. Do your own leg work STEVE!!!
Did you see my second answer to your question:
2. why the Democrats think Kavanaugh would lie for such a trivial reason as because he was embarrassed about Pickering. Because LYING the congress is a very serious offence of committing perjury and you know we can't have a known Lier on The Supreme Court, now can we?
One unexpected thing that happen, Kavanaugh revealed, A host of things. A couple of them blatant enough to follow him home even if he doesn't get confirmed to The Supreme Court.
The first has to do with his testimony in 2006 when he was A George W. Bush White House Lawyer who was up a judgeship on the D.C. Court of Appeals. The senators understandably planned to and did grill him about controversial issues that happen during his tenure in the George W. Bush White House.
Steve, if you did see this report, I am sure you remember that unexpected thing that happen, in this report, now don't you?
2. why the Democrats think Kavanaugh would lie for such a trivial reason as because he was embarrassed about Pickering. Because LYING the congress is a very serious offence of committing perjury and you know we can't have a known Lier on The Supreme Court, now can we?
Do you remember seeing this: "The first has to do with his testimony in 2006 when he was A George W. Bush White House Lawyer who was up a judgeship on the D.C. Court of Appeals. The senators understandably planned to and did grill him about controversial issues that happen during his tenure in the George W. Bush White House."
Steve, if you did see this report, I am sure you remember that unexpected thing that happen, in this report, now don't you?
"More evidence about what Kavanaugh said in 2006, more evidence about Charles Pickering and especially, more evidence about why the Democrats think Kavanaugh would lie for such a trivial reason as because he was embarrassed about Pickering."
I'm not satisfied with your answer. I'll find it myself like I always do. I'll get back to you.
I asked you three simple questions and you can't tell me basically, what you saw in this report? WOW!!! You are really looking real bad as far as your credibility is concern. We are taking a look at a real Trump support and the way he thinks.
Steve, was this apart of this video report?
2. why the Democrats think Kavanaugh would lie for such a trivial reason as because he was embarrassed about Pickering. Because LYING the congress is a very serious offence of committing perjury and you know we can't have a known Lier on The Supreme Court, now can we?
Do you remember seeing this: "The first has to do with his testimony in 2006 when he was A George W. Bush White House Lawyer who was up a judgeship on the D.C. Court of Appeals. The senators understandably planned to and did grill him about controversial issues that happen during his tenure in the George W. Bush White House."
Steve, if you did see this report, I am sure you remember that unexpected thing that happen, in this report, now don't you?
So who's the "known Lier"? It appears to be "Kavanaugh" and you know we can't have a known Lier on The Supreme Court, now can we?
Thursday, September 20th 2018 at 1:17PM
Dea. Ron Gray Sr.
His own E-mail, after "Kavanaugh" testified in 2006 when he was A George W. Bush White House Lawyer who was up a judgeship on the D.C. Court of Appeals.
HE LIED AND YOU CAN SEE IT, IF YOU REVIEW THIS VIDEO REPORT!!!
Running to the right to receive your marching orders on how to answer that question, when the evidence is right in front of your face. All you need to do is talk about what you saw but you can't do that, WHY?
This is the evidence I want to see Ron. It's 3 1/2 hours long and will take some time.
MAY 9, 2006 Judicial Nomination Hearing Mr. Kavanaugh testified at a hearing on his nomination as a judge on U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Among the issues he addressed were his qualifications and service as White House counsel, his rating by the American Bar Association, and various legal matters in which the administration had been involved during his tenure as counsel. Many members expressed frustration with his vague answers to specific questions.
Now is this the evidence you wanted to see Steve? If so, I did not see any evidence of Mr. Kavanaugh's E-mails, which provides proof, that he Mr. Kavanaugh was LYING when it came to handling of Pickering.
LYING the congress is a very serious offence of committing perjury and you know we can't have a known Lier on The Supreme Court, now can we?
Steve, in my research I found that Kavanaugh lied to Congress under oath a few times.
Steve, Here's LIE #ONE Kavanaugh told congress under oath: In 2006, under questioning by the late Dem Senator Ted Kennedy, Kavanaugh said he wasn’t involved in the selection and vetting process of controversial conservative judge William Pryor. Turns out there are now emails proving Kavanaugh was intricately involved in Judge Pryor’s vetting.
Steve, Here's LIE #TWO Kavanaugh told congress under oath: During his 2006 confirmation hearings for the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, under questioning by Dem Senator Patrick Leahy, Kavanaugh outrightly denied ever receiving stolen Dem documents from Republican operative Manuel Miranda. Now during his confirmation hearings to the U.S. Supreme Court, after being confronted with emails between him and Miranda, he finally admitted to Senator Leahy that he did indeed receive the stolen Dem documents. He now contends however that he didn’t know they were stolen. A cursory look at the emails in question leads any reasonable person to the conclusion that Miranda did not get the Dem documents through legitimate channels making Kavanaugh’s assertion that he didn’t know Miranda acquired the Dem documents illegitimately an outright lie.
Steve, Here's LIE #THREE Kavanaugh told congress under oath. Kavanaugh also lied about George W. Bush administration’s “Terrorist Surveillance Program”. Kavanaugh initially testified under oath that he found out about the program through a 2005 New York Times article. Well, turns out there is a 2001 email in which Kavanaugh is asking a DOJ lawyer: “Any results yet on the 4A implications of random/constant surveillance of phone and e-mail conversations of non-citizens who are in the United States when the purpose of the surveillance is to prevent terrorist/criminal violence?”. This again proves that Kavanaugh knew about the terrorist surveillance program way back in 2001 but decided to lie to congress about it under oath.
It is well known that lying to congress under oath is a felony. Any reasonable person would therefore conclude that repeatedly lying to congress under oath is so serious, it should preclude anybody from assuming any judgeship, especially a judgeship at the U.S. Supreme Court.
This is the kind of person the Republicans wants to be on The United States Supreme Court as a Supreme Court judge.
You asked me to Give you the link to the emails then Ron. No Steve, I want you to refute what I said to be the truth so, get off your ass and prove me wrong and if you don't, Then what I said stands clear that Brett Kavanaugh was involved in Perjury and the proof was his own E-mail's.
Just like Dr. Ford wants Kavanaugh to respond to allegations BEFORE she testifies what her allegations are. No Ron, I'm going to take one thing at a time, in detail. Your evidence is inadequate and don't worry, I'll have no problem finding the emails. I just took another opportunity to prove your dishonest intent.
I've only watched a third of the testimony Ron. I'll look at the emails after I've finished reviewing the testimony. As you like to say, "what's the rush?"
