RSN Fundraising Banner
Bernie Sanders: FBI Must Determine if Kavanaugh Told the Truth Under Oath
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=49231"><span class="small">Mary Papenfuss, Reader Supported News</span></a>   
Monday, 01 October 2018 08:39

Papenfuss writes: "Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT.) has called on Judiciary Committee head Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) to direct the FBI to determine if Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh was truthful under oath in his testimony before the panel."

Bernie Sanders. (photo: Antonella Crescimbeni)
Bernie Sanders. (photo: Antonella Crescimbeni)


Bernie Sanders: FBI Must Determine if Kavanaugh Told the Truth Under Oath

By Mary Papenfuss, Reader Supported News

01 October 18


“Lying to Congress is a federal crime,” senator notes.

en. Bernie Sanders (I-VT.) has called on Judiciary Committee head Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) to direct the FBI to determine if Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh was truthful under oath in his testimony before the panel.

“Lying to Congress is a federal crime,” Sanders noted in a tweet that included a copy of a letter he sent to Grassley on Friday. “Kavanaugh’s truthfulness with the Senate goes to the very heart of whether he should be confirmed to the court.”

A determination of perjury in any statement in Kavanaugh’s testimony would threaten his confirmation.

The FBI was given a week to investigate allegations against Kavanaugh as part of a deal forged Friday by Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and committee Republicans.

“In order for the FBI investigation regarding Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to be complete, it is imperative the bureau must not only look into the accusations made by Dr. [Christine Blasey] Ford, Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick, it should also examine the veracity of his testimony before the Judiciary Committee,” Sanders wrote.

Several statements that Kavanaugh made Thursday were challenged after he defended himself under oath against Blasey’s accusation that he sexually assaulted her. She testified that he pinned her to a bed, tried to remove her clothing and placed his hand over her mouth when she tried to yell at a house party when they were both in high school.

Kavanaugh testified three times Thursday that Blasey’s friend Leland Keyser “refuted” Blasey’s claim “under penalty of felony.” While Keyser doesn’t recall the party where the attack allegedly occurred, she did “not refute Dr. Ford’s account, and ... she believes Dr. Ford’s account,” her attorney wrote in a letter sent Friday to the Senate Judiciary Committee. 

Kavanaugh’s Yale classmates have contradicted his characterization of his drinking in high school and college as moderate and that he never blacked out. Classmates said he was a heavy drinker and sometimes a belligerent, drunk. Blasey said that both Kavanaugh and his friend Mark Judge, who she said was in the room when the alleged assault against her occurred, were “stumbling drunk.”

Judge has written in his memoir, Wasted: Tales of a Gen X Drunk, that he and his friends were determined to drink 100 kegs of beer their senior year at Georgetown prep. Kavanaugh’s bio in the senior yearbook notes that he was a member of the “Keg City Club (treasurer) — 100 Kegs or Bust.”

Kavanaugh also testified that it was legal to drink as a senior when he attended Georgetown Prep, which is located in suburban Maryland. It wasn’t. The drinking age in Maryland was raised from 18 to 21 in 1982 when Kavanaugh was 17.

Kavanaugh also denied being in the same “social circles” as Blasey, indicating it was unlikely they’d be at the same party. Yet his calendar marks several get-togethers with a friend nicknamed “Squi” — whom Kavanaugh identified as Chris Garett — who was going out with Ford at the time, she testified.

Kavanaugh also testified he “never attended a gathering like the one” described by Blasey, but his own calendar and Judge appear to contradict that.

Kavanaugh’s insistence that words he used in his bio in his senior yearbook — “boofing,” “Devil’s Triangle,” and “Renate Alumnius” were relatively innocent have been widely contradicted. While he said Devil’s Triangle was a drinking game, for example, it’s also used as a term for a sexual threesome.

Sanders also lists several questionable statements under oath by Kavanaugh during his initial confirmation hearings earlier this month.

It’s unclear how much freedom the FBI will have in its investigation to determine Kavanaugh’s veracity under oath.

NBC reported Saturday that the bureau has been given a specific list of witnesses that can be questioned, and that contradictory information about his drinking at Yale will not be probed, according to sources. Agents will also not be allowed to investigate claims by Julie Swetnick, who has accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct at parties during high school, NBC reported.

But President Donald Trump insisted Saturday that the FBI has “free rein” to follow any leads.

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+16 # librarian1984 2018-10-01 09:46
Kavanaugh supporters are upset there's an investigation, saying it's so old there's nothing to investigate. That is wrong. The FBI has a Cold Cases Unit. They have experts in sexual assault cases. They are experts in interviewing witnesses.

There's a lot they can examine. They can figure out who was at this gathering and the location, and witnesses who can help determine if he committed perjury.

Most importantly, there's accomplice and eyewitness Mark Judge, who says he'll cooperate. Judge, all by himself, could sink Kavanaugh.

On a positive note, many of even the most vehement supporters say if there is proof Kavanaugh attacked Ford or others they'd reconsider their support.

I believe Ford so I think it's likely they will find corroborative evidence, and him and other witnesses can answer Sanders' questions.

I opposed Kavanaugh because of his policies, and having seen his performance, convinced he has no place on the Court. He's volatile, partisan and disruptive, not what the Court needs. Temperamentally he's like Trump, which will hurt the institution.
 
 
+4 # NAVYVET 2018-10-01 12:13
There seems to have long been a whole culture of drunkard, pussy-grabbing rich spoiled brats at Yale--and from all reports it still exists.

I wonder what the Puritans who founded Yale University would say to these Takers and Fakers? Maybe, in the words of Jonathan Edwards, an early Puritan, get ready to be JUDGED as "sinners in the hands of an angry God"?
 
 
+1 # dquandle 2018-10-01 22:07
The "institution" could hardly be more damaged than it already is, what with Obama and Bush inserting corporate, authoritarian, war criminal neocons, and now Trump trying equal or better them by inserting corporate, authoritarian, war-criminal, neocons who are attempted rapists and blatant perjurers.

The "institution" has zero credibility, and should be treated as having such by the American public.

It should be dissolved and replaced with popularly elected judges, complete with term limits. No power in choosing, whatsoever, should be granted to the executive or the congress.
 
 
+4 # librarian1984 2018-10-02 12:04
Agreed. We can't say Kavanaugh would ruin the Court. It's already compromised, since at least 2000, when they interfered in the FL recount and installed W.
 
 
+1 # gbdoc 2018-10-01 12:14
I’m a Bernie Sanders fan, and I greatly dislike the idea of Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court. But my experience in forensic psychiatry and psychiatric and psychoanalytic ethics proceedings dictates that I say something about truth and lying, especially with regard to investigations of emotionally highly-charged wrongdoing. Testimony, other than lies, is based, at least in part, on memory, and memory is fallible. Even in cases where all concerned are honestly telling the truth, this is only their truth – often, their conviction – of what happened. Criminal lawyers and investigators know this, and it was the basis of the classic film Rashomon. The investigation will probably prove nothing definitively, and the real truth, or lie, may never be known. Even if Senators vote according to their opinion, ideally reflecting the truth, they may be mistaken, regardless how they decide.
 
 
+5 # SusanT136 2018-10-01 14:55
Quoting gbdoc:
Testimony, other than lies, is based, at least in part, on memory, and memory is fallible. Even in cases where all concerned are honestly telling the truth, this is only their truth – often, their conviction – of what happened. Criminal lawyers and investigators know this, and it was the basis of the classic film Rashomon.


Yes, but as you know, this is NOT a criminal trial, & Kavanaugh is not at risk of imprisonment so the standard of proof is different. Some of his statements were laughably obvious lies, like that he didn't drink, was a church going virgin etc. There are plenty of other things Kavanugh lied about re: his time with the Bush administration etc. Perjury IS a crime.

If you ARE an expert in memory, you will understand, as Dr Bush so eloquently explained, that traumatic events are often indelibly imprinted on the brain. This is why many people are greatly troubled by PTSD for many years.

Even if the FBI investigation is severely hobbled, which of course it will be because Republicans only want to pretend to investigate, not to really investigate and try to uncover the truth, if there is ANY doubt whatsoever about Kavanaugh in a Senator's mind (and if even a few brain cells are working there should be doubts) he/she should not vote to confirm because an appointment to the Supreme Court is a PRIVILEGE, not an entitlement. If Kavanaugh loses this he goes back to being a judge elsewhere. Boo hoo for him.
 
 
+9 # janie1893 2018-10-01 14:17
Rich, educated, upstanding, religious, entitled white men never lie!! (unless they have to)
 
 
-1 # dquandle 2018-10-01 22:09
and they almost nearly aways have to
 
 
0 # Robbee 2018-10-02 17:51
Bernie Sanders: FBI Must Determine if Kavanaugh Told the Truth Under Oath, Mary Papenfuss, Reader Supported News, 1 October 18

- start with - midnight k was a hard partier and a mean drunk! - he lied -

1) about the extent of his frequent, binge drinking and the accuracy of his memory when drunk

2) that the first time he heard about ramirez's accusation was when the story broke publicly

3) that the miranda memos were stolen

4) anything mark judge, judge's ex-girlfriend, sweatnick, ramirez and/or other occasional witnesses collaborate

any investigation of facts that does not include taking k's sworn response to all allegations, one by one, in each, tending to prove or disprove, detail, is a sham!