Instead they were dealing with Trump,and instead of backing off,he doubled down and the accusers had no choice but to admit they had lied under oath,or to go ahead and testify and hope the DNC could cover it for them. The DNC didn't,so now they are facing federal felony charges.

Frankly,if Trump doesn't have sometime talking "plea agreement and naming names in exchange for immunity from prosecution against them",I am going to be shocked.

‘No, no, no. I did that as a way to grab attention. I am not Jane Doe … but I did read Jane Doe’s letter.

What? Who? When? WTF kind of gobbledygook is that?

There must be repercussions for perjury, libel, slander... and doing so frivolously.

The Corporate Mainstream Fake-Media must be held accountable.

FUCK THE POLITICAL PARTIES.

Wait -- Isn't it always the DEMOCRATS who always pull these stunts? Dividing the country by whatever means? Calling for mutiny and CW2?

The problem is NOT Republicans. (Unless we consider its establishment NWO Globalist-Wing of RINO.)

What happened here is the Dims thought they were still dealing with the Bush Crime Family,and the multiple allegations alone would be enough to get them to tell their nominee to drop out so "we can all get along".

Instead they were dealing with Trump,and instead of backing off,he doubled down and the accusers had no choice but to admit they had lied under oath,or to go ahead and testify and hope the DNC could cover it for them. The DNC didn't,so now they are facing federal felony charges.

Good analysis.

Trump ain't playing Bushie-Party "business as usual" with the Dems. OR with the GOPe for that matter (which is exactly why Ryan, Kascich, Flake, Corker, etal HATE Trump and always will.)

Donald Trump is as you noted has been doubling down (which in the past the case would be Republicans folding while holding full-houses or Royal Flushes.)

It'll be interesting how Trump handles ALL of these same kinds of cases where Dems and Bushies have been busted stone-cold. There are very serious crimes being committed against Trump personally and/or against We The People.

Given he's the "King of the Deal", we may or may not see exactly how he's negotiated the "Final Payout".

The problem is NOT Republicans

Yeah. The problem is ALWAYS the other guy.

The nation was not founded upon "political parties;" the nation was founded upon individual liberties and freedoms.

Given he's the "King of the Deal", we may or may not see exactly how he's negotiated the "Final Payout".

He loves to seem to be a world-class fool because that's how he suckers people into underestimating him,but I am guessing he is "keeping a list and checking it twice",but we won't find out for sure whose names are on the list until after his re-election.

It's going to be a bumpy road for some people in 2021 if he is re-elected in 2020.

What? Who? When? WTF kind of gobbledygook is that?

https://heavy.com/news/2018/11/judy-munro-leighton-5-fast-facts-you-need-to-know/

Judy Munro-Leighton: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

At the link are images of the handwritten Jane Doe letter, the typewritten Judy Munro-Leighton typewritten letter claiming to be the author of the Jane Doe letter, and Grassley's letter of referral for criminal prosecution.

Now she tells investigators she was not Jane Doe.

" Whose head(s) will roll?? "

No one. It will be just like LOCK HER UP, LOCK HER UP !!

A lot of bluster, but no action !!

This Tuesday, I will vote straight Republican, because of the alternative. But with no enthusiasm !!

Here is a clue, if someone hates Trump... them silly fuckers are libtarded. Period.

Meaning the original Jane Doe and the original accusations are still out there.

if someone hates Trump... them silly fuckers are libtarded. Period.

Fake News!

Woman Who Claimed Brett Kavanaugh Raped Her Now Admits She Never Met Him

Misleading headline. Should be:

Woman Claiming To Be The "Jane Doe" Who Wrote That Brett Kavanaugh Raped Her Now Admits She Lied About Being Jane Doe

You live in a 3rd world jungle... why worry about anything?

I sent the losers to your home.

Meaning the original Jane Doe and the original accusations are still out there.

And her typewritten letter suffices to establish her criminal misconduct.

And her typewritten letter suffices to establish her criminal misconduct.

And what criminal misconduct was that? She said she was Jane Doe ... then retracted that statement.

How many people walked into the San Francisco police station in the late 60's claiming to be the Zodiac killer? Happens all the time in high profile cases.

And what criminal misconduct was that? She said she was Jane Doe ... then retracted that statement.

How many people walked into the San Francisco police station in the late 60's claiming to be the Zodiac killer? Happens all the time in high profile cases.

She now alleges she sent a letter falsely claiming to be Jane Doe. Walking into a San Fran police station and making a false statement to officer Clancy is not a crime. Making a false statement to Federal officials, to include senators, is a felony. It is what Martha Stewart went to prison for.

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-11-02%20Kavanaugh%20Report.pdf

414 pp.

Senate Report at page 28:

As noted in the Committee’s referral of Mr. [REDACTED] , Mr. Avenatti, Ms. Swetnick, and Ms. Munro-Leighton, making any knowing and materially false statement to Committee investigators is a crime.⁸⁴ Such conduct wastes Committee time and resources, has the potential to significantly interfere with congressional investigations, and greatly hinders the Committee’s ability to assist the Senate in performing its constitutional responsibilities. The Committee is ready and willing to speak with any individual who comes forward with critical information in good faith. However, the Committee will not tolerate efforts to obstruct its work.

⁸⁴ 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and § 1505.

At page 26:

The California Allegation

On September 25, 2018, Senator Harris’s staff referred a handwritten letter to the Committee signed by Jane Doe. Senator Harris’s San Diego office received the letter; however the envelope listed no return address. According to the letter, Justice Kavanaugh, with the help of a friend, sexually assaulted Doe while driving her home from a party. Doe claimed that Justice Kavanaugh slapped her, forced her to perform oral sex, and groped her. Doe also claimed that both men raped her “several times each” and that Justice Kavanaugh warned her that no one would believe her if she reported the incident. The author did not provide the year or any location (city, state, or country) in which this incident allegedly took place. Because the author’s identity was unknown, the Committee was only able to interview Justice Kavanaugh regarding the allegations. He denied ever engaging in the misconduct described.

After the Committee released the transcript of the interview with Justice Kavanaugh, a woman named Judy Munro-Leighton sent an email to the Senate Judiciary Committee claiming to be Jane Doe. She included a version of the letter’s text and said she felt compelled to contact the Committee because she “refuse[d] to allow Donald J. Trump to use me or my story as an ugly chant at one of his Republican rallies.” The Committee quickly concluded that Munro-Leighton was unlikely to be the author. The text of the letter in Munro-Leighton’s email to the Committee differed from the original handwritten letter in several respects, including punctuation and the omission of a duplicate instance of the word “and.” Committee investigators determined that the text from Munro-Leighton’s email was, however, identical in all respects to the previously publicly released transcript from the telephonic interview, suggesting she copied it from the press. Investigators also examined Munro-Leighton’s background and determined she was a liberal activist who resided in Kentucky, far from the location of the letter’s San Diego postmark. Committee investigators tried to contact her on multiple occasions. On November 1, 2018, Munro- Leighton called back and admitted that she was not “Jane Doe” and that her email to the committee “was just a ploy” and that she used it as a way to “get attention.” Investigators asked her if she had ever met Justice Kavanaugh, to which she replied, “Oh Lord, no.”

She now alleges she sent a letter falsely claiming to be Jane Doe.

Yes. She claimed to be Jane Doe … then later retracted that claim. She wasn't the one who sent the original Jane Doe letter containing the false allegations.

She claimed to be Jane Doe … then later retracted that claim.

The felony of Julie Munro-Leighton — claiming, among other things, to be Jane Doe. Stating she retracts the statement(s) does not absolve the felony committed. Senate and FBI investigators had already chased their tail over Ms. Munro-Leighton's nonsense.

She wasn't the one who sent the original Jane Doe letter containing the false allegations.

The felony of the unidentified Jane Doe.

Senate and FBI investigators had already chased their tail over Ms. Munro-Leighton's nonsense.

No, Senate and FBI investigators chased their tail over Jane Doe's nonsense.

Ms. Munro-Leighton's nonsense consisted simply of claiming to be Jane Doe. She then retracted that claim, meaning the real Jane Doe is still out there, meaning Senate and FBI investigators need to continue chasing their tail.

Ms. Munro-Leighton's nonsense consisted simply of claiming to be Jane Doe.

The Senate Committee specifically referred Judy Munnro-Leighton to the justice Department for investigation regarding "knowingly providig material false statements," and "obstruction of a congressional investigation."

On November 2, 2018, the Committee referred Judy Munro-Leighton to the Justice Department for investigation of potential violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 (knowingly providing materially false statements) and 1505 (obstruction of a congressional investigation).

If they choose to prosecute it, she is toast.

If they choose to prosecute it, she is toast.

I see. Since they can't find the real Jane Doe, they'll go after the one who claimed (then retracted) to be her.

My only reason for posting on this thread was to point out that the headline "Woman Who Claimed Brett Kavanaugh Raped Her Now Admits She Never Met Him" is misleading. The woman who claimed Kavanaugh raped her is Jane Doe. Judy Munro-Leighton claimed (then retracted) to be Jane Doe.

Meaning, the "Woman Who Claimed Brett Kavanaugh Raped Her" is still out there. Reading that headline leads one to believe that the case is closed.

My only reason for posting on this thread was to point out that the headline "Woman Who Claimed Brett Kavanaugh Raped Her Now Admits She Never Met Him" is misleading. The woman who claimed Kavanaugh raped her is Jane Doe. Judy Munro-Leighton claimed (then retracted) to be Jane Doe.

Judy Munro-Leighton also claimed Brett Kavanaugh raped her. The subject line of her message was, "I am Jane Doe from Oceanside CA – Brett Kavanaugh raped me."

The crime was committed. Admitting she lied and retracting her statement does not retract the crime. That works about as well as a perjurer, after being caught in her perjury, retracting her perjurious statements. It does not absolve the crime.

As a technical point, her transcription of the published Jane Doe allegations is neither a copy of, nor identical to, the Jane Doe letter, and stands as a new document.

https://www.scribd.com/document/392333282/Senate-Judiciary-Committee-Kavanaugh-Report

Then why did the article mention the Jane Doe letter?

So the headline, "Woman Who Claimed Brett Kavanaugh Raped Her Now Admits She Never Met Him" is referring to Judy Munro-Leighton, not Jane Doe?

Yes.

Then why did the article mention the Jane Doe letter?

It is an integral part of the Munro-Leighton story.

It is an integral part of the Munro-Leighton story.

The headline gives the impression that Munro-Leighton IS Jane Doe and the case is now closed. How about:

Woman Who Claimed To Be Jane Doe Retracts Her Claim"