Roche has a personal axe to grind. The info Kavanaugh gave to the committee on his experience with Roche was ‘redacted’ and not presented in the public hearing setting. From the way Kavanaugh talked about it, it can be assumed the info would be publicly embarrassing or damaging to Roche. If Roche persists in this, maybe Grassley needs to “unredact” so the truth can be known.
Kav cannot be impeached for acts prior to becoming a SCOTUS Judge .... so CNN continues to beat a dead horse..
He lied. He got more drunk than he said he did, at least in Roche’s estimation, which he keeps qualifying and changing. As a SCOTUS justice, he would get drunk when he’s 17 every weekend.
We should sue CNN for animal cruelty. They mutilate dead horses all the time.
If the House votes favorably on articles of impeachment, he is impeached. If the Senate convicts, he is removed from office. There is nothing in the Constitution that says that the high crimes and misdemeanors had to occur during office.
Of course it will never happen, but it is not impossible.
I read somewhere that friends of Jamie Roche said he nailed a dead pigeon to the door of his gay/punk roommate.
When I saw that during the hearing, I figured Kavanaugh was trying to be nice because whatever was redacted was going to show that Roche was an a-hole
What a person did decades ago is not the criteria for determining his character and fitness for a job as opposed to his years since. But presently lying by denying allegations impugns (to say the least) the character of the person. As does lying in making allegations. However, if a candidate for the SCOTUS was proved to be a liar, then it should disqualify him from that job. But if the accuser is shown to be a liar, then they should not be able to get a job requiring moral character either.
And the media who goes about trying to indict persons on dubious testimony should at the least suffer serious loss of its credibility, which is more certainly the case with the MSM.