Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: We are supposedly less than a half hour away from the Senate Judiciary Committee voting Brett Kavanaugh out to a recommendation of the full Senate to be confirmed to the United States Supreme Court. It’s gonna be an 11-10 vote with the announcement today by Jeff Flake and Bob Corker that they are going to vote “yes” on Kavanaugh.

Democrats on the committee are speechifying and walking out of the committee. The last senator to speak was Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut. Honestly, I understand Connecticut’s a big blue state, and I understand it’s just overflowing with New York Times-groveling-and-reading voters. Democrats. But this guy Blumenthal… I don’t know how many people know this, and if you did know it, how many of you remembered it. You remember yesterday…? Well, you probably don’t. Blumenthal, when it was his turn to interrogate (if you will) Justice Kavanaugh, came up with a Latin phrase and asked Kavanaugh if he knew what it was.

“Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.” You know, legal people like to use Latin and throw it around so that we don’t know what they’re talking about. It sounds sophisticated and educated to start tossing around Latin. “Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.” What it means is… It’s a principle in trial that if a witness is shown to have lied about one thing, then you can go ahead and proceed on the basis that a witness has lied about everything, and this is why it’s always dicey for lawyers to put known liars on the witness stand.

This is one of the problems with having defendants testify. If there’s a record of them lying, it’s a legitimate question: “Well, how do we know you’re telling the truth now? “‘Cause I am! I am! I am! I’m not lying now.” But you have, and so it’s just an automatic strike against one’s credibility. The legal principle of “falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus” means that if you lie about one thing, then it’s perfectly acceptable — and even, in some cases, required — to believe that you would lie about everything.

I thought, “What a guy to bring that up! Richard Blumenthal!” Richard Blumenthal, senator from Connecticut, lied for years about serving in Vietnam. Not just serving in Vietnam, serving with great valor. He lied for years thinking it would help his resume and that it would counter some of the beliefs that people have about left-wingers being pansies and this kind of thing. So he routinely lies, and the press doesn’t challenge him on it because they don’t want to challenge him on it because they don’t want to believe that he might be lying about it.

If anybody came forward and said that he is lying about it, then they would defend him. Finally, the heat got so bad that he had to admit it. To watch him trying to talk about “falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus,” trying to say, “Kavanaugh, you lied about one thing. We can infer you’re lying about everything”? Same goes for you, Senator! Goose for gander. Kettle calling black. Everything works here. If you’re gonna start holding other people up to that standard, then you better look at it and have it apply to yourself.

The specific translation for “falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus” means somebody who would lie about his military service will lie about anything. That’s how we seek to define it here. So there he is questioning Kavanaugh — Kavanaugh’s honesty and Kavanaugh’s credibility and so forth. This is the kind of thing that when people find out about it, it just rubs them raw.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This