Sen. Brian Schatz Says It’s a Crime to Lie Before the Senate – Implicates Christine Blasey Ford
Like Hawaii Senator Mazie Hirono, her male equivalent senator, Brian Schatz, continues to bring great embarrassment to the Aloha State. (RELATED: Hawaii Dem Sending Fund-Raising Emails During Ford Testimony.)
Sen. Schatz, like his fellow Democrats, has spent the past two weeks conjuring up plenty of pointless and paranoid objections to the confirmation of Brett Kavnaaugh to the Supreme Court. It’s truly a sight to be seen, as Democrats aren’t even trying to hide the fact that they’re only acting this hysterically to delay Kavanaugh’s confirmation indefinitely. Whether or not Christine Blasey Ford is actually a victim is secondary to them.
Take the case of the FBI investigation of Kavanaugh Democrats have been demanding. Did anyone in their right mind actually think an FBI investigation would shut them up? Of course not. The second an FBI investigation (which would be pointless) was approved, the narrative changed from “we need an FBI investigation” to “even if the FBI exonerates Kavanaugh, it doesn’t matter.”
See this example from ultra-liberal Senator Chris Murphy.
Before & after GOP agreed to investigation pic.twitter.com/v4XUpW7wsb
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) September 29, 2018
Sen.Schatz, meanwhile, accidentally made the case that Ford could face legal penalties for her testimony. “Lying to the Senate is illegal. That’s all for now,” he wrote in a tweet. He followed that up with another: “Sorry. One more thing. It’s not like it’s ‘technically illegal’ or something. It’s legit illegal. With penalties and such. OK that’s it.”
Take a look:
Sorry. One more thing. It’s not like it’s “technically illegal” or something. It’s legit illegal. With penalties and such. Ok that’s it. https://t.co/vQVSjnMnO9
— Brian Schatz (@brianschatz) October 1, 2018
He was trying to take a dig at Kavanaugh, but, seemingly, couldn’t find a single example where Kavanaugh was untruthful in his testimony. Ford’s testimony, on the other hand, was full of contradictions. She had a number of inconsistencies during her remarks. (RELATED: Rachel Mitchell Details Multiple Inconsistencies in Kavanaugh Accuser Christine Blasey Ford’s Account.) Here is a quick summary:
When Was the Party?
- In a text to The Washington Post, Ford claimed the assault happened in the “mid 1980s”
- Ford told Dianne Feinstein in her July letter that the assault happened in the “early 1980s”
- By September 16th, Ford narrowed down her timeframe to the “summer of 1982”
Who Heard Who?
- In her letter to Feinstein, Ford says she heard Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge talking to other party-goers after the assault, as she hid in the bathroom. In her Senate testimony, she says she couldn’t hear them downstairs.
How Many Party-goers?
Ford’s claim under oath that there were “4 boys and a couple of girls” at the party contradicts prior accounts from Ford and her lawyers. In her letter to Feinstein, Ford claimed that there were “four others” present. She also told The Washington Post that there were “four boys at the party”
A Fear of Flying
- Ford’s lawyers cited a fear of flying as an excuse for delaying Ford’s testimony. Under oath, Ford testified that she flies all the time as part of her work with an Australian consulting firm, to visit family on the East coast, and to visit Hawaii. She also flew to the hearing.
Who Attended the Party with Ford?
- Ford says she attended the party with friend Leland Keyser, who Ford apparently left alone in the house she was assaulted in. Keyser has no recollection of the party or any assault. We’re also supposed to believe that Keyser didn’t follow up with Ford as to why she suddenly disappeared from the party, and that the alleged attempted assault was never mentioned to Keyser.
- Ford blamed Keyser’s refutation of her claims by stating that “she [Keyser] has health problems and needs to be taken care of.” Something tells me we wouldn’t be hearing about Keyser’s supposed health problems if she corroborated Ford’s account.
All these inconsistencies aren’t necessarily lies – if Ford’s memory truly is faulty. But if that’s the case, why believe her on details regarding the assault, given that everything else she remembers is so inconsistent with reality?
And as a final point: Sen. Schatz’s words shouldn’t be forgotten. If it’s proven that Ford lied under oath, which could be found this week during the FBI investigation, she could be in major legal trouble.