Who do we like for SCOTUS?

[KAPA]

Seems to be down to 3.

Amy Coney Barrett
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amy_Coney_Barrett?wprov=sfla1

Raymond Kethledge
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Kethledge?wprov=sfla1

Brett Kavanaugh
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brett_Kavanaugh?wprov=sfla1

Personally I like Barrett but she has no history on 2A. Libs heads would explode for sure.

I'm good with whoever interprets the Constitution the way it was intended and I think all three would do that.

Thoughts?

[Bailey Guns]

Based only on what I've read from various sources over the last day or two I'd have to say Kavanaugh would be my first pick. He seems to be the most conservative.

Whomever is nominated by Trump to replace Kennedy will be a damn sight better than anyone Hillary would've nominated.

Get this right and the court will be reliably conservative for the next 20 years, at least.

[hatidua]

Whomever is nominated by Trump to replace Kennedy will be a damn sight better than anyone Hillary would've nominated.

that.

[KAPA]

For the left, this is all about abortion. With Barret being an attractive woman with 7 kids who became super successful, you can assume where she leans on the abortion issue and that will stir up a liberal hornet's nest like the night Trump won. If I knew she was pro 2A she could be perfect!

Tough to find any 2A history on the other two also.

[KAPA]

that.

No doubt. America as we knew it for the first 240 years would be lost forever.

[Great-Kazoo]

I don't care. Whoever makes the left's and D's in general head explode the most

[68Charger]

I don't care. Whoever makes the left's and D's in general head explode the most

Just like that scene in The Kingsman...

[ghettodub]

I like Barrett mainly because of her pro-life stance, but need to research the others more.

[BPTactical]

Barret would be a wise choice. If the Libbys try to block her it shoots them in the foot on the entire "War on Women" mantra and seriously damages their stance.

Although from purely conservative side Kavenaugh is solid.

[CS1983]

BP, your statement would indicate the Barrett is not solid in that regard compared to Kavenaugh. Is that your belief? If so, I'm wondering why.

[Bailey Guns]

I don't think progressives give a rat's ass about trashing a conservative woman. Never have, never will. Their rules don't apply to them. All you need to do is look at how they've treated ANY conservative woman over the last 20 years. There's no better example than Melania Trump. The things they say about her are some of the most vile, disgusting things ANYONE has ever said about a woman.

[Rucker61]

BP, your statement would indicate the Barrett is not solid in that regard compared to Kavenaugh. Is that your belief? If so, I'm wondering why.

Just guessing - we don't know anything about Barrett's 2A position.

[Irving]

I don't think Melania gets any worse treatment than Michelle did, but I'm not exactly paying attention. Also, is Melania even "conservative?"

I'm not disagreeing with your post though. Conservative women are barely even considered women to liberals that disagree with them.

[Skip]

I don't care. Whoever makes the left's and D's in general head explode the most

So all three?

Trump could pick Wendy Davis and heads would still explode. Nothing is based in reality now for Libs, it's all psychosis.

[BPTactical]

I don't think Melania gets any worse treatment than Michelle did, but I'm not exactly paying attention. Also, is Melania even "conservative?"

I'm not disagreeing with your post though. Conservative women aren't even considered women to liberals.

RUFKM?
Melania has publicly been excoriated by not only Dems but the media has well.

Had any group gone after the wookie or it's crotch fruit the way this administrations spouse/ kids have been it would have been the hate crime of the century.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Thomas is 70 years old presently, and in 2020, will be 72. By 2024 he would be 76. So even with this appointment, there's a reasonably high chance that between 2020 and 2024, the court will shift majority socialist/liberal.

Granted, a lot of judges make it to 80 still serving, but it's a high stakes gamble to say he (and all the others) will be okay in 20. Especially when you have a lot of money and people quite interested in making sure he's not.

So once again, the news of Kennedy's retirement is good, but the realization our fucked up system works this way is not so much. We're good now, but irreparably screwed very, very soon, my money is on "less than a decade". Thing is constitutional people respect jurisprudence, socialists do not, so they'll just ignore any prior ruling, 2A or otherwise, and make the new rule of the land regardless.

Thomas could keel over at anytime, and if the Dems get the Senate back, Trump won't get another pic through on a "Garland on Steroids" Rule.

[Irving]

RUFKM?
Melania has publicly been excoriated by not only Dems but the media has well.

Had any group gone after the wookie or it's crotch fruit the way this administrations spouse/ kids have been it would have been the hate crime of the century.

My only experience is reading stuff from this website, so naturally you can see where I'm coming from.

[BPTactical]

My only experience is reading stuff from this website, so naturally you can see where I'm coming from.

Free your mind, your ass will follow....

[Vic Tory]

Two of these guys clerked for Kennedy. Barrett clerked for Scalia.

I'd like Barrett. (Or Mike Lee.)

[CS1983]

I have the same thoughts, Vic. A early mentor in any industry or career really shapes a person's approach later on. Having a person from the school of Scalia seems better in the long run.

[KAPA]

Two of these guys clerked for Kennedy. Barrett clerked for Scalia.

I'd like Barrett. (Or Mike Lee.)

Yes, Sen Mike Lee from Utah seems to be the dark horse. He was also interviewed by Trump and honestly it seems that he has the best record in terms of 2A. I feel like Trump will go with Barrett though. She will probably score him the most political points with her being female. The mom of 7 thing will score points with all those housewife types that couldn't quite bring themselves over to his side and pulled the lever for Hillary last time around. If she checks all his boxes, politically, she is a no brainer pick. Lets just hope one of his key boxes to check is the 2A box.

Still hoping for known quantity in Lee but a pro 2A Barrett would be even better.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

I was reading that one of the picks had actually ruled against AWB and mag bans, can't remember who? Who ever did that gets my meaningless vote. Abortion should be not legislated from the bench. I am very opposed to it, but the real solution to that one is getting people to respect life and not get abortions. Forcing that one just makes it worse.

The abortion issue will be resolved when they find the 'gay gene' and you can abort your kid if they have it. All of a sudden all the left wingers will finally find the moral issues with abortion.

We get a 'ban' on AWBs and the silly mag limits and we take a major amount of the tinder for a wild fire. Then we can have a real discussion about what we can really do about violence.

Lee, with no bench experience and being a pol has zero chance. He may be Kennedy re-incarnated and it won't fly.

At least it looks like we'll break the Yale-Harvard duopoly on SCOTUS?

[BPTactical]

A justice needs to be a justice, not a politician.

[sampson]

That would be refreshing

[CS1983]

A justice needs to be a justice, not a politician.

you keep that separations of powers crap to yourself before you get in trouble.

[Big E3]

It will likely become a moot point who is picked because if the dims get control again they will expand the SCOTUS to eleven members just to cancel out Trumps picks and create a socialist court. That’s the way demonrat socialists work, their agenda at any cost.

[Will1776]

I was reading that one of the picks had actually ruled against AWB and mag bans, can't remember who? Who ever did that gets my meaningless vote. Abortion should be not legislated from the bench. I am very opposed to it, but the real solution to that one is getting people to respect life and not get abortions. Forcing that one just makes it worse.

The abortion issue will be resolved when they find the 'gay gene' and you can abort your kid if they have it. All of a sudden all the left wingers will finally find the moral issues with abortion.

We get a 'ban' on AWBs and the silly mag limits and we take a major amount of the tinder for a wild fire. Then we can have a real discussion about what we can really do about violence.

Lee, with no bench experience and being a pol has zero chance. He may be Kennedy re-incarnated and it won't fly.

At least it looks like we'll break the Yale-Harvard duopoly on SCOTUS?

Kavanaugh actually ruled against an AWB and apparently “insiders” are saying he’s Trump’s favorite

[Bailey Guns]

Did Orrin Hatch spill the beans on Trump's pick:

From FoxNews:


In an op-ed for The Deseret News, Hatch explains what he thinks will happen when Trump makes his Supreme Court pick on Monday to replace retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy. In it, he predicts a nasty political battle in the Senate.

“Given their vision of a politicized judiciary, we should not be surprised when Democrats cry bloody murder at the announcement of the president’s Supreme Court nominee,” the retiring senator writes. “The coming meltdown on the left is sure to be as sensational as it is predictable.”

But, interestingly in the piece, he makes references to the nominee as “her.”

“Just as he did with Neil Gorsuch, the president has promised to nominate an impartial judge, a wise and seasoned jurist committed to upholding the Constitution at all costs,” he writes. “But no matter the nominee’s background or credentials, progressives will do everything they can to paint her as a closet partisan, if not an outright extremist” [emphasis added.]

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

It will likely become a moot point who is picked because if the dims get control again they will expand the SCOTUS to eleven members just to cancel out Trumps picks and create a socialist court. That’s the way demonrat socialists work, their agenda at any cost.

Can you imagine the blow back from that? That is Banana Republic stuff, and all the things that go with it.

[Justin]

FDR also tried to pack the Supreme Court by attempting to get Congress to pass a law for more justices.

They shot him down on that one.

[Zundfolge]

FDR also tried to pack the Supreme Court by attempting to get Congress to pass a law for more justices.

They shot him down on that one.

Not only that but that act is primarily what inspired the rather rapid passage of the 22nd Amendment.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

https://www.livescience.com/9857-9-supreme-court-justices.html

Fun historical read. So I think we might need to anticipate there only being 8 justices going forward. Yet another historical possibility in our banana republic.

[dig]

4-4 is worse for us. That means all the silly 9th and the rest of the gun grabbers decisions stand.

[Bailey Guns]

Kavanaugh

[Bailey Guns]

After doing some further research I was growing pretty fond of Coney Barrett, too. Maybe next time when Ginsburg retires.

[Will1776]

He actually ruled against an AWB, I like him.

[beast556]

Nice, no matter how you look at it he is 100 times better than who ever Clinton would of picked.

[Gman]

Nice, no matter how you look at it he is 100 times better than who ever Clinton would of picked.

Winner winner, chicken dinner.

Won't surprise me if RBG kicks off in the next year or two. I think her life may become a bit more stressful.

[Skip]

Given his 2A record, this is winning.

Bigly.

[Justin]

Here's hoping he's not the sacrificial first choice a la Bork.

[spqrzilla]

Kavanaugh is a great 2A pick.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Post someone with no experience and case history like Lee and the left would scream about the lack of background. This guy will suffer because they say that there could be MILLIONS of documents to review. From his cases to his time in the White House. So they can't get through all that in time.....

Sometimes I think I have an on-line problem. But how do people like this and FBI Strock have so many comments, emails and memos to review? They must always be typing.

[hobowh]

I'd love to see them go for someone like Rick Green and maybe start moving it back to what it is supposed to be... But that's a pipe dream

[DavieD55]

Ammoland Inc. Posted on July 12, 2018 by David Codrea

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “This week, President Donald J. Trump announced his intent to nominate Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by Justice Anthony Kennedy’s assumption of senior status,” the White House announced Monday. “Judge Kavanaugh has earned a reputation as a brilliant jurist with impeccable legal credentials, and he is universally respected for his intellect, as well as his ability to persuade and build consensus.”You expect them to say that about Kavanaugh’s legal qualifications. He’s their guy. But what does a legal expert from “the other side” have to say about him?

Yale Law School Professor Akhil Reed Amar, who “strongly supported Hillary Clinton for president as well as President Barack Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court, Judge Merrick Garland,” had good things to say about the nominee (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/09/opinion/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-trump.html?smid=tw-nytopinion&smtyp=cur)[after which he has now been harassed and threatened by the left]. In The New York Times of all places…

“… Judge Kavanaugh … prioritizes the Constitution’s original meaning. A judge who seeks merely to follow precedent can simply read previous judicial opinions. But an ‘originalist’ judge … also cares about what the Constitution meant when its words were ratified in 1788 or when amendments were enacted…”
That’s encouraging. Coming from a Hillary supporter, it’s also suspect. So what can gun owners glean about Kavanaugh’s disposition toward issues most affecting “legal” recognition of the right to keep and bear arms?
National Review outlined an important consideration:

“Enforcing the Second Amendment. Kavanaugh argued (in dissent) that the District of Columbia’s ban on possession of most semi-automatic weapons and its registration requirement for all guns violated the Second Amendment.”
His views could be critical if and when SCOTUS hears a case challenging state bans on what they pejoratively term “assault weapons.” It still doesn’t get us to a birthright “to keep and bear … ordinary military equipment … that … could contribute to the common defense,” but it’s a better starting place than a court with many of the previous “Republican” picks on the bench (case in point: John Paul Stevens).
Giving further insight, attorney and author David Kopel offers perhaps the most comprehensive analysis of Kavanaugh’s Second Amendment inclinations.

“Judge Kavanaugh's text, history, and tradition methodology for Second Amendment cases will not please people who believe that all gun control is impermissible, nor will it please advocates who want to make the Second Amendment a second-class right,” Kopel notes. Significantly, he appears supportive of a rationale for licensing, and does not appear to agree that “in common use” should apply to arms a militia would need to be an effective counterforce, not just to what is commercially “popular” for civilian uses.

At least Kavanaugh admits that even though he might personally support some “gun control” goals and laws, “our task is to apply the Constitution and the precedents of the Supreme Court, regardless of whether the result is one we agree with as a matter of first principles or policy.”

And there’s another threat critical for gun owners to fight against (even if some use a hollow “single issue” excuse to avoid addressing it) that NRO touches on:

“Ruling for the American worker. In dissents in immigration-related cases, Kavanaugh has opined that illegal-immigrant workers are not entitled to vote in union elections and that ‘mere economic expediency does not authorize an employer to displace American workers for foreign workers.’ He has also recognized the government’s interest in ‘supporting American farmers and ranchers against their foreign competitors.’”
That still comes up short from the real concern, “amnesty” and a “pathway to citizenship” (https://www.ammoland.com/2017/07/changing-demographics-add-further-evidence-of-greatest-threat-to-gun-owner-rights/). All credible polling and real-world experiences (think “California”) show that will result in millions of new anti-gun Democrat voters, unchallengeable majorities in the legislatures, and confirmations of anti-gun activist judges who will uphold whatever infringements come before them.
Going back to Professor Amar’s assessment at The Times, he offers an interesting “compromise.” While normally wary of such “offers,” this one has merit:

“Each Senate Democrat will pledge either to vote yes for Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation — or, if voting no, to first publicly name at least two clearly better candidates whom a Republican president might realistically have nominated instead (not an easy task). In exchange for this act of good will, Democrats will insist that Judge Kavanaugh answer all fair questions at his confirmation hearing.”
I like it, since questioning such candidates is something I advocate despite a tradition of giving judicial nominees a pass.
Think of one job you’ve ever applied for where you’d have gotten it if you decided to play coy with the hiring managers. While it may be “inappropriate” for a judge to weigh in on a specific case before confirmation, there’s no reason why general principles of understanding should be off-limits.
As such, here are questions gun owner rights advocates should rightfully want to see answered:


What did the Founders mean by “A well-regulated militia”?
What did the Founder mean by “being necessary to the security of a free State”?
What did the Founders mean by “the right of the people to keep and bear arms”?
What did the Founders mean by “shall not be infringed”?
How can past Supreme Court opinion specifying protected arms as those being “in common use at the time” not apply to the types of firearms needed for militia service?

I’d also add a tangentially-related question, one not directly part of the “single issue,” but one that nonetheless is being used to undermine it:

What Constitutional basis is there to “secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” by exercising protective measures over who may enter the country and who may become a citizen?
Don’t expect any of these to be asked. And do expect the Democrats to pull every filthy trick in the book to try and destroy Judge Brett Kavanaugh and bring pain to him and to his family.

Ammoland Full Article (https://www.ammoland.com/2018/07/kavanaugh-a-mixed-bag-on-guns/#axzz5LUMirhaC)

[Skip]

Feinstein sends letter to FBI and makes the following press release...


Sep 13 2018
Washington—Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) released the following statement:

“I have received information from an individual concerning the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. That individual strongly requested confidentiality, declined to come forward or press the matter further, and I have honored that decision. I have, however, referred the matter to federal investigative authorities.”

Sources...

https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=FB52FCD4-29C8-4856-A679-B5C6CC553DC4

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/feinstein-says-she-referred-letter-concerning-kavanaugh-to-federal-investigators/2018/09/13/d99cfb1c-b775-11e8-a7b5-adaaa5b2a57f_story.html?utm_term=.59bc6407b69a

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/13/feinstein-releases-cryptic-statement-about-brett-kavanaugh-nomination-amid-intrigue-over-secret-letter.html


Speculation is that it has something to do with #MeToo in his high school years. The release implies criminality but, of course, it's from a Democrat. Earlier today the cry was to delay the confirmation for an investigation of unknown behavior/accused by an unnamed party.

Attempt has blown up in her face. FBI refuses to investigate and adds "info" to Kavanaugh's background file.

The folks who say Democrats and Republicans are the same are being proved wrong on a daily basis. This is a new level of low.

[Zundfolge]

I still contend that Trump could nominate Merick Garland and the democrats would still try to derail it.

[Bailey Guns]

Fuckin' democrats. I really hate them. Really.

Newsflash for the commies: Trump won. The fucking witch lost. Grow the fuck up and get over it already. Stop trying to destroy the country with your stupid games. This coming from the moron senator from CA who had a Chinese spy working for her for 20 years. FFS.

[Great-Kazoo]

I still contend that Trump could nominate Barack Obama and the democrats would still try to derail it.

[hurley842002]

Fuckin' democrats. I really hate them. Really.

Newsflash for the commies: Trump won. The fucking witch lost. Grow the fuck up and get over it already. Stop trying to destroy the country with your stupid games. This coming from the moron senator from CA who had a Chinese spy working for her for 20 years. FFS.For the win!

[Skip]

Details coming out...

A Sexual-Misconduct Allegation Against the Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh Stirs Tension Among Democrats in Congress

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/a-sexual-misconduct-allegation-against-the-supreme-court-nominee-brett-kavanaugh-stirs-tension-among-democrats-in-congress

Best part...


In the letter, the woman alleged that, during an encounter at a party, Kavanaugh held her down, and that he attempted to force himself on her. She claimed in the letter that Kavanaugh and a classmate of his, both of whom had been drinking, turned up music that was playing in the room to conceal the sound of her protests, and that Kavanaugh covered her mouth with his hand. She was able to free herself. Although the alleged incident took place decades ago and the three individuals involved were minors, the woman said that the memory had been a source of ongoing distress for her, and that she had sought psychological treatment as a result.

[snip]

In a statement, Kavanaugh said, “I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”

Kavanaugh’s classmate said of the woman’s allegation, “I have no recollection of that.”

The woman declined a request for an interview.

So Kavanaugh is an attempted rapist. No actual assault happened.

Accuser stayed silent for ~30 years. Accuser won't be named or interviewed.

I can't say this is how it happened here, but we saw with Judge Roy Moore and Trump how it works. They assemble a pool of money (compensation) and start looking for people who will make allegations in bad faith. Typically, so far in the past they are impossible to disprove in the short term. Then they hire a high profile "feminist" attorney with ties to Dems to shield the whole operation and make it look legitimate.

Nothing even goes to court or faces an evidentiary standard. No one is put under oath.

This accusation didn't organically happen. Feinstein is a CA senator. None of this involves her district.

If you have a penis and haven't worn a body cam your whole life, the same can be done to you.

[cstone]

Still no pubic hair and a Coke can. Welcome to the bench Justice Kavanaugh.

[Bailey Guns]

I don't believe this at all. Not a bit. Another fabricated lie by democrats.

I hate 'em. But by God they are persistent.

[Skip]

Still no pubic hair and a Coke can. Welcome to the bench Justice Kavanaugh.

Perfect response! [LOL]

You think Thomas and Kavanaugh just became friends?


I don't believe this at all. Not a bit. Another fabricated lie by democrats.

I hate 'em. But by God they are persistent.

It's 11th hour BS. The way it was drafted also implies criminality when it turns out the accuser didn't even accuse Kavanaugh of a crime, just an "attempt."

People on socials are saying Feinstein sat on this from July on and waited. We all know why... Less time = less time to prove innocence and #MeToo demands the presumption of guilt.

[Aloha_Shooter]

Over on Legal Insurrection, they said this very thing was predicted -- the Dems knew Grassley's staff would be organized so they staged a hit on his character for after hearings ended in order to upset Murkowski and Collins.

https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/09/kavanaugh-on-post-hearing-hit-job-i-categorically-and-unequivocally-deny-this-allegation/

https://t.co/TMWf9uzzEV

[BPTactical]

Kabuki Theater at its sickest.

[10x]

This 11th hour accuser. Just the accusation with all the TV play makes him "guilty" in the Democrats mind. Any excuse they can make to derail a good man.

[Aloha_Shooter]

Same play they employed against Clarence Thomas. At a minimum, they hope to besmirch him forever like they did to Thomas and on the outside they hope to derail or delay his confirmation.

I don't have a problem with resurfacing an allegation that's decades old but 1) this is fuzzy, 2) Feinstein held onto it all summer as a last-ditch weapon instead of pushing it immediately to the FBI for confirmation or negation, 3) a clinical psychologist from CA who remembers this 30 years later during a marriage counseling session? Really? Juanita Broadrick's accusations (which were conveniently ignored by the mass media until they could say it was "old news") had contemporary corroboration -- she told people immediately after it happened, even if she didn't file charges.

Ole Bill had a fairly open history of using political, legal, and even physical force on women but the press conveniently ignored it all to focus on Bush's "lack of spine". I was less offended by how much Bill let the little head do his thinking than by the outright partisan skullduggery on the part of the mass media. Similarly, I am less concerned about the last minute allegations than the way Feinstein manipulated the process and clearly chose 2 months ago to hold onto this as a political attack. She ought to be vilified by the feminist press for this (but won't be).

[Skip]

They are trying to make this blow up and the accuser has stepped forward...

https://apnews.com/e2c35c0fb46f4464bcda77441caf1f7b/Woman-accusing-Kavanaugh-of-sexual-misconduct-comes-forward


“I thought he might inadvertently kill me,” said Ford, now a 51-year-old research psychologist in northern California. “He was trying to attack me and remove my clothing.”

Ford, 51 and a clinical psychology professor at Palo Alto University in California, says she was able to get away after a friend of Kavanaugh’s who was in the room jumped on top of them and everyone tumbled.

So definitely not a politicized Dim then.



Ford’s husband, Russell Ford, also told the newspaper that his wife described during therapy being trapped in a room with two drunken boys and that one of them had pinned her to a bed, molested her and tried to prevent from screaming. He said he recalled his wife using Kavanaugh’s last name and expressing concern that Kavanaugh — then a federal judge — might someday be nominated to the Supreme Court.

Uh huh.

I too worry about all the Federal judges who might someday because Supreme Court Justices but only if I disagree with them.



The therapist’s notes say four boys were involved, but Ford says that was an error by the therapist. Ford says four boys were at the party, but only two boys were in the room at the time.

Sounds like Duke Lacrosse team party. Where she was the only female. Where she got every detail wrong and it doesn't matter because she's a victim. This all sounds very familiar.

And then kept her mouth shut from 198x (we still don't have a date/place) - 2012 because Kavanaugh is so dangerous he should be allowed to get rapey for 30+ years.



Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., a committee member, told The Washington Post and Politico in interviews Sunday that he’s “not comfortable” voting for Kavanaugh until he learns more about the allegation. Flake is one of 11 Republicans on the committee, whose 10 Democrats all oppose Kavanaugh. A potential “no” vote from Flake would complicate Kavanaugh’s prospects.

Feinstein applauded Flake’s call to slow things down.

“I agree with Senator Flake that we should delay this week’s vote,” she said. “There’s a lot of information we don’t know and the FBI should have the time it needs to investigate this new material.”

Thanks FLAKE.

Anyone know how the FBI investigates a non-crime that happened 30 years ago? Let alone gives Congress a definitive opinion on what happened.


The Legal Advisor for Kavanaugh’s Accuser Is a Big Time Democratic Donor, Thinks People Who Work for Trump Are 'Miscreants'

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/timothymeads/2018/09/16/kavanaugh-accusers-lawyer-part-of-resistance-big-democrat-donor-and-has-trashed-paula-jones-n2519525

This one is good too. The people behind this are anything but objective.

Hey, it's all for women. Do you hate women?

[BPTactical]

Oh, it gets better....





Kavanaugh Accuser Signed Letter Fighting Trump Border Enforcement

The woman accusing President Trump's United States Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of a "rape attempt" when the two were in high school previously signed a letter fighting Trump's "Zero Tolerance" policy at the U.S.-Mexico border.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)an open borders advocacy organizationletter was written and sent to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and Attorney General Jeff Sessions in June.

Christine Blasey Ford, a psychology professor, signed the ACLU letter as "Christine Blasey Ph.D. Psychologist," signing off on statements that accused Trump of using southern border enforcement to "traumatize children" and claimed the Zero Tolerance policy was "violating fundamental human rights."

The policy to prosecute all illegal border crossers, enacted by the Trump administration, including illegal alien adults who cross the border with children, results in border-crossing parents having their children taken into federal custody. This is a loophole known as the Flores Settlement Agreement.

Detaining child border crossers was a policy during the Obama administration when Breitbart Texas exclusively reported on the conditions in which unaccompanied minors were being packed into crowded cells and holding facilities. As Breitbart News reported, the federal government has separated adult border crossers from the children they have brought with them into the U.S. as far back as 2001, court records reveal.

The ACLU letter, signed by Blasey, demanded the Trump administration stop the border enforcement policy, claiming the enforcement measure was an "intentional infliction of pain on children," calling it "inhumane."

Read the full letter here: https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/09/16/kavanaugh-accuser-signed-letter-fighting-trump-border-enforcement/

And the brother works for Fusion GPS??

https://www.linkedin.com/in/ralph-blasey-5a84515/

http://walkersresearch.com/profilePages/Show_Executive_Title/Executiveprofile/R/Ralph_G_Blasey_100020756.html


Sour grapes?

https://af-mg.com/2018/09/17/breaking-news-christine-fords-parents-were-defendants-in-a-1996-foreclosure-case-guess-whos-mom-was-the-judge/

[Zundfolge]

So in addition to Kavanaugh's accuse being a leftist activist and agitator, it appears that she may have a beef with the Kavanaugh family because:
Martha G. Kavanaugh, the mother of Brett Kavanaugh was a Maryland district judge in 1996. In an amazing coincidence, Martha Kavanaugh was the judge in a foreclosure case in which Christine Blasey-Ford’s parents were the defendants. Now it all becomes clear. Blasey-Ford is going after Brett Kavanaugh, not because of what he did in high school. Instead, Christine Blasey-Ford is going after Brett Kavanaugh out of spite and revenge for a case ruled on by Brett Kavanaugh mother. Martha Kavanaugh, Brett’s mother was Montgomery County Circuit Court judge from 1993 until she retired in 2001. During a 1996 foreclosure case, Martha Kavanaugh ruled against the parents of Christine Blasey-Ford in a foreclosure case.

The foreclosure case against Paula K. Blasey and Ralph G. Blasey was opened on August 8, 1996. The case number is 156006V


https://archive.fo/69gvf

If you go here: http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/casesearch/inquiry-index.jsp and search for case number 156006V

You get the actual case (just can't link to it), so this is a pretty reliable source if you ask me.

[Skip]

I really think the Civil Justice system needs to change to address situations like this. A baseless accusation (proved by preponderance) should mean losing everything financial with the accuser's name on it.

I also think the Senate needs to subpoena and get her on the record. That way the accusation can't move as more facts (if any) are discovered.

One of the things people forget about Justice Thomas' hearing is that Anita Hill admitted to lying as soon as she was put under oath. She lied about coordinating the attack on Thomas with Congressional Dems. She had to admit to those communications under oath which seriously damaged the credibility of her claim.

[Bailey Guns]

I think the case involving Judge Kavanaugh (the mom) is going to turn out to be not such a big deal. From what I can tell she presided over the case which resulted in a settlement between the Blasey's and the lender. The Blasey's were able to keep the home. It appears they sold it in 2011.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6177971/Kavanaughs-mother-ruled-against-accusers-father-1996-court-case.html

[Eric P]

Rake this person over the coals. No need to be civil, destroy her in the same manner she and other accusers are ruining others lives.

[Will1776]

This lady decides to bring this up now when he is getting confirmed under Trump? But silence for 30 years and when he was getting confirmed under Bush (2004?)? This is insane. Just another tactic from the left.

[Skip]

News today is she won't testify until after the FBI investigation. Why she gets to make that call is beyond me. She should be subpoenaed!

I think the reason why is fairly apparent. She hasn't given a date/location of the incident. And it's not hard to see how risky that is if the FBI finds dates/locations which indicate Kavanaugh couldn't have done it. Having the FBI go first means they can manage the testimony/details to be consistent.

They learned well from Anita Hill who's credibility was challenged once put under oath, had to stop lying, and was asked about her previous lies/forced to admit them.

Think of the absurdity of this whole thing... A person can come out of the woodwork, accuse from 35 years ago, not have to give details until the FBI provides date/locations/details that can be worked into the testimony. Kavanaugh must be guilty! Somehow, some way.

This is well beyond the "deep state," this is some top level Stasi bullshit!

[cstone]

Any investigation would need to start with her interview by the FBI. If she were to knowingly provide this interviewing agents with false information she is in violation of 18 USC 1001.

The FBI doesn’t have any jurisdiction here as rape, sexual assault are state crimes in Maryland. This would be investigated by the Montgomery County Police Department if the allegation contained enough details to warrant a case being opened.

IMO Ms Ford’s attorneys are making these demands to slow the vote till after the midterm elections while making the GOP force the vote without giving her a full investigation. This tactic reinforces the “war on women” theme the Democrats have been so consistently harping on. The only thing missing from this allegation is the Rev Al Sharpton and the Duke lacrosse team.

[Firehaus]

They learned well from Anita Hill who's credibility was challenged once put under oath, had to stop lying, and was asked about her previous lies/forced to admit them.

Think of the absurdity of this whole thing... A person can come out of the woodwork, accuse from 35 years ago, not have to give details until the FBI provides date/locations/details that can be worked into the testimony. Kavanaugh must be guilty! Somehow, some way.

This is well beyond the "deep state," this is some top level Stasi bullshit!

Anita Hill jumping in...so predictable and reeks of desperation.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/09/19/anita-hill-urges-fbi-probe-before-kavanaugh-accuser-ford-testifies.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skip]

Any investigation would need to start with her interview by the FBI. If she were to knowingly provide this interviewing agents with false information she is in violation of 18 USC 1001.

[snip]

I would hope, but that is the old thinking. It is now perfectly acceptable to lie to the FBI if you are advancing the Lib agenda. There are plenty of politicized DoJ employees to cover that up or decline to prosecute.

"I got confused" "I blocked it out" "It was so long ago, my memory was..."

Libs would screech such accountability is victim shaming. They are already saying her life is in danger so she can't testify. Convenient, right?

Everyone should face the fact that these exercises are relatively free (even lucrative) for #MeToo accusers under the new rules. That is the entire idea of building #MeToo as a movement and a device to attack.

[cstone]

I think in old ways. It comes natural to me. [Flower]

[Skip]

I think in old ways. It comes natural to me. [Flower]

That's the way it should be!

But the law is no longer the law.

[DireWolf]

This would be investigated by the Montgomery County Police Department if the allegation contained enough details to warrant a case being opened.

Correct me if this is wrong, but even if she was telling the flat truth (while not impossible, is about as unlikely as anything I can think of), is there any scenario where MCPD would spend any time/resources investigating something which I would imagine has far exceeded the SOL (whatever that is in this instance)? I wouldn't think so...

[Skip]

Correct me if this is wrong, but even if she was telling the flat truth (while not impossible, is about as unlikely as anything I can think of), is there any scenario where MCPD would spend any time/resources investigating something which I would imagine has far exceeded the SOL (whatever that is in this instance)? I wouldn't think so...

Well the story has changed a bit.

[pileoshit]

At first it was "attempted rape" which is a non-crime. Covering her mouth (as she claimed) is simple assault and I think SOL has run out.

Now she says he groped her, over her clothes, as he was covering her mouth and attempting to undress her.

So that is sexual assault. Speculation on the socials is that Maryland has no SOL on sex assault. I don't have a link.

Any investigation is unlikely to produce any concrete evidence as the accuser will not name a location/date/time, so what can investigators find after 35 years? The witnesses (now two) of them saying this never happened have been already dismissed by #MeToo. The risk to the accuser is that she claims a location/date that doesn't work which is why they want the FBI (DoJ) in first and then she will testify once she can get her story to align.

It wouldn't surprise me one bit if they have a person(s) in the FBI who is ready to leak time windows/locations that can be used.

[cstone]

Attempted rape is sexual battery and Maryland has no statute of limitations on most sexual assault crimes.

Most departments would first need a report filed containing the basic allegations with the who, what, where, how’s filled in. Then a supervisor for the detectives reviews it for “solvability” which in this case would be pretty low.

I just worked a ten year old rape allegation with an east coast city police sex crimes detective. In the end the prosecutor’s office politely declined to file charges in the case. Something about no possibility of obtaining a conviction given the facts we could prove.

No one is suggesting that Ms Ford’s allegations be used to bring criminal charges. I believe the Democrats who are funding and otherwise supporting her would be satisfied with destroying Judge Kavanaugh’s reputation and any chance of him becoming a justice on the Supreme Court. This is the revenge for Merrick Garland’s nomination never being considered. When you think progressives remember “the truth is not in them.” They don’t care about process, only results. If millions need to die for them to achieve their idea of utopia, so be it.

[Skip]

Attempted rape is sexual battery and Maryland has no statute of limitations on most sexual assault crimes.

[snip]

Legally, yes. (I think morally too)

But the goalposts in 2018 do not require unwanted physical contact to be "attempted rape." Making out and touching without explicit consent = rape. Along with... "Stare Rape," regret sex rape (consent revoked after act), and some feminists even claim all PIV (Penis In Vagina) to be rape because the man is in a position of power even if the woman freely consents.

I hate to keep being that guy, but the role of #MeToo is being completely downplayed. #MeToo is extralegal. People need to start understanding this. Easy to dismiss as PC bullshit and then it gets used against you or your kid, or used to shape the makeup of the highest court!

And as you point out, they demand the impossible. But it will yield info that they can use to strengthen her testimony.

Personally, I'm fine with the investigation; FBI or MD. But she should be under oath and on the record first.



[snip]

No one is suggesting that Ms Ford’s allegations be used to bring criminal charges. I believe the Democrats who are funding and otherwise supporting her would be satisfied with destroying Judge Kavanaugh’s reputation and any chance of him becoming a justice on the Supreme Court. This is the revenge for Merrick Garland’s nomination never being considered. When you think progressives remember “the truth is not in them.” They don’t care about process, only results. If millions need to die for them to achieve their idea of utopia, so be it.

BOOM! Agree 100%.

If Trump dropped the Kavanaugh nomination there wouldn't be a single call for justice in Ford's name.

[Skip]

We need to judge Brett Kavanaugh, not just by what he may or may not have done, but how he treats a woman’s pain. And that is something I’m going to be paying attention to on Monday. How does he respond to what’s happening. Whether or not he agrees that this happened with her, does he take her pain seriously? Do the people interrogating her pain take her pain seriously? Now, I’ll give you a spoiler alert, I don’t think Brett Kavanaugh takes women’s pain very seriously, and I know that because of the decisions he’s made as a judge.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/36025/watch-msnbc-commentator-just-said-most-disgusting-ben-Shapiro


She, of course, is under no obligation to consider the pain inflicted on Kavanaugh or his family.

And if the pain isn't genuine? Doesn't matter. Kavanaugh is guilty.

[Skip]

Grassley has today offered to send staffers to Ford in CA to get her testimony in light of claims of threats being made. $~200K has been raised for her security costs and the family has left their Palo Alto home for their Santa Cruz beach house. Life is tough when you have to leave for your beach house, or so I've read.

There is no excuse for not testifying. For the Senate to allow this to be held up by a (living) party who is able and refuses to testify is relatively unprecedented. I can't recall a single case of it. Even invoking 5A requires an appearance.

Lots of pressure to start an FBI investigation but still not willing to do an interview with the FBI either.

This whole thing still rests on one #MeToo attorney and a letter from Feinstein.

[Zundfolge]

f Trump dropped the Kavanaugh nomination there wouldn't be a single call for justice in Ford's name.

And it doesn't matter who he picks to replace Kavanaugh, they would get the exact same treatment (just like it doesn't matter what Republican won in 2016 they would still be "literally Hitler").

There is no rational or reasonable way to deal with the modern Democrat party.

[Skip]

And it doesn't matter who he picks to replace Kavanaugh, they would get the exact same treatment (just like it doesn't matter what Republican won in 2016 they would still be "literally Hitler").

There is no rational or reasonable way to deal with the modern Democrat party.

I think you and cstone are absolutely right on this point!

Trump's win meant a more Conservative Court and they are doing everything the can, short of violence, to stop it.

---

Kavanaugh accuser Christine Ford opens door to testifying next week

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/20/kavanaugh-accuser-christine-ford-opens-door-to-testifying-next-week.html


According to an email sent by her attorney Debra Katz and first obtained by The New York Times, Ford would appear as long as senators provide “terms that are fair and which ensure her safety." Fox News has also obtained the email.

“As you are aware, she has been receiving death threats, which have been reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and she and her family have been forced out of their home,” the email continued. “She wishes to testify, provided that we can agree on terms that are fair and which ensure her safety.”

A Monday hearing still appears unlikely, though.

In the letter Thursday, Ford's attorney wrote that it “is not possible" for Ford to testify on Monday. She added that "the Committee’s insistence that it occur then is arbitrary in any event.”

Of course it's arbitrary on an 11th hour shenanigan! Even so, testifying before the Senate isn't like making dinner reservations.

It's not clear if Grassley will hold to his Monday deadline or not.


---

Ford taps Obama, Clinton alum to navigate Senate hearing

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/407662-ford-taps-obama-clinton-alum-to-navigate-senate-hearing


Seidman, now a senior principal at TSD Communications, confirmed her role in an interview with Politico.

Seidman worked as Joe Biden’s communication’s director during the 2008 general presidential election campaign after Biden was picked as Barack Obama’s running mate. She also assisted in guiding Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation to the Supreme Court.

Before then, Seidman was a deputy communications director in the Clinton White House.

[snip]

“This feels more like a Democratic super PAC than a legal effort to get at the truth,” a senior Republican official told Politico.

Seems legit.

And just where is all this money coming from?!?

[Great-Kazoo]

And it doesn't matter who he picks to replace Kavanaugh, they would get the exact same treatment (just like it doesn't matter what Republican won in 2016 they would still be "literally Hitler").

There is no rational or reasonable way to deal with the modern Democrat party.

Like i said, If he nominated Barack Obama they'd still fight it

[Bailey Guns]

I don't think this has anything to do with revenge re: Garland. Or maybe that aspect is just seen as a fringe benefit.

I think this is about abortion. Simple as that.

Now...to those of you who say democrats and republicans are the same, look at democrat behavior since Trump was elected, including this perversion of our government and Constitutional process, and tell me you still believe that.

[BPTactical]

Hmm, 10am EST has passed.
That was the deadline for Ford.

[Irving]

Now...to those of you who say democrats and republicans are the same, look at democrat behavior since Trump was elected, including this perversion of our government and Constitutional process, and tell me you still believe that.

I think you're referring to me, so feel obligated to respond. Pretty much I do still feel the same as before. No two groups are going to do everything alike, but in the end I see no difference in the way that Libs/Cons hold tightly to their beliefs and are easily pulled along by false narratives and automatically recoil away from anything suggested by someone on the other side just to reaffirm their position within their group.

[Irving]

The #metoo standard really needs to be, if you cannot substantiate your allegation in any way shape or form, then you shouldn't make it, regardless of if you believe it yourself or not. We're destroying the standard of reputation in our country and turning the reins over to the malicious. Sure, there are a lot of crimes that cannot be substantiated... what about their voice? Well, we are innocent until proven guilty - which takes priority. Our current more of "any accusation must be kinda true, and we can never harm the potential victim" has turned our country into one where anyone's reputation and career can be destroyed at the whim of anyone else - for any reason, factual or otherwise.

You know what it's akin to? The crusades and other related actions (of other religions as well). Largely indiscriminate holy wars that kill a lot of "bad guys" but also kill a lot of everyone else in the process.

There's just no defense for this for the innocent accused of this. You're steamrolled by a armored horse of SJW, which rewrites history with every hoof print, unless you have 24/7 body camera footage archived of every day and minute of your life from the time you were 5.

Modern witch hunting for sure. If you weigh less than a duck, then you're a sexual abuser.

[RblDiver]

I wish someone would have the balls to call out this SJW crap.

Start by saying America was founded on the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Go into Kavanaugh's legal career and the number of background investigations he's passed, including prior appointments. Then go into his accuser, a California professor, and perhaps, her political leaning and history. Then, the fact that this was sat on until the legitimate hearings were over. Then, go into the 65 women from his high school who sent a letter of support, and Ford's own "witness" who recanted and admitted she had no first hand knowledge.

Then, I'd go into research studies that show a great number of memories of any individual are false, and moreover, around 1-4% of the population is just flat out pathological, of which certainly there would be a few women that went to his high school and college, and at least a few that are politically motivated to "DO ANYTHING TO STOP HIM* *MOUTH FOAM* up to and including flat out lying or at minimum, gross exaggeration. This is a national level, I have a hard time believing one of the chicken little liberals who went to his schools wouldn't want to *fall on the sword* for their cause. And I'd openly, flat out fucking say, if this had any legitimacy it wouldn't have been used in a predictable, 13th hour, malicious political ploy by two woman who has political incentives to try to delay as long as possible.

I wish someone would publicly say, IM TIRED OF A MERE UNSUBSTANTIATED ACCUSATION BEING TREATED AS EVIDENCE. Then, you are subpoenaed and WILL come here on ----- at --:-- to testify or warrant will issue and YOU WILL will be arrested and brought in chains and handcuffs. There is no "agreements" to testify on your fucking terms. And if we find your claim lacking in any evidence, if witnesses do not collaborate your story, you will be transferred and handled by the FBI/DOJ with our recommendation to find ANY and ALL charges that will stick, to set an example, for once.

Then go off and ask why the Dems aren't as gung-ho about prosecuting DNC deputy chair Keith Ellison, or how Cory Booker admitted that he groped a girl at the same age, or how MoveOn (which just produced a video of "We believe her") was founded to try to, well, move on from much more credible allegations against Bill.

[Skip]

The #metoo standard really needs to be, if you cannot substantiate your allegation in any way shape or form, then you shouldn't make it, regardless of if you believe it yourself or not. We're destroying the standard of reputation in our country and turning the reins over to the malicious. Sure, there are a lot of crimes that cannot be substantiated... what about their voice? Well, we are innocent until proven guilty - which takes priority. Our current more of "any accusation must be kinda true, and we can never harm the potential victim" has turned our country into one where anyone's reputation and career can be destroyed at the whim of anyone else - for any reason, factual or otherwise.

[snip]

Agree with you 100%!!! But I have to point out to everyone, this was the whole idea.

#MeToo does the following...

1. Demands a presumption of guilt over innocence
2. Denies the guilty party due process
3. Prohibits any evidentiary standard that disadvantages the accuser (this changes based on the case)


Don't agree to all of these and you "hate women." Feminists have said over and over again, the facts don't matter, it's what a woman feels that matters.

#1 means Kavanaugh is no longer eligible for USSC because he can't prove his innocence even though Ford hasn't given an official testimony with a date/location.

#2 is Katz (Ford's lawyer) trying to make Kavanaugh testify again, prohibiting Kavanaugh from being the room, and dictating other terms. Under those terms, it's not even clear if Kavanaugh would get to address Ford's testimony (which may/may not happen).

#3 means that applying even "preponderance..." is intolerable. Hell, what test do you apply to a 35 year old he said/she said? Presumption of innocence defaults to Kavanaugh but then there's that #1.

---

Today has been nuts. Libs are 100% invested in Ford's story being true. And they know the odds as well as we do so if this falls apart it's going to be a Nov 2016 level meltdown.

After the Kavanaugh Allegations, Republicans Offer a Shocking Defense: Sexual Assault Isn’t a Big Deal

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/after-the-kavanaugh-allegations-republicans-offer-a-shocking-defense-sexual-assault-isnt-a-big-deal?mbid=social_twitter


You can read the whole thing if you'd like but the headline makes it plenty clear.

No one has said sex assault isn't a big deal but this is what you get if you ask for testimony, due process, and careful consideration instead of participating in the Lib lynch mob.

[Skip]

Then go off and ask why the Dems aren't as gung-ho about prosecuting DNC deputy chair Keith Ellison, or how Cory Booker admitted that he groped a girl at the same age, or how MoveOn (which just produced a video of "We believe her") was founded to try to, well, move on from much more credible allegations against Bill.

The accessory to #MeTo is the allegation of "whataboutism" which is a device that doesn't require Dims to address those people. Even though it's the same issue and even the same exact behavior.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

[Skip]

[snip for scrollers]

Yup, you're nailing it!

The theory on testimony avoidance is the two things we've been seeing and discussed; perjury and needing details. She has no details. None! She vaguely described a colonial style house. She named witnesses who said it never happened. There's nothing to go on.

I still think they (Katz + Feinstein/Dims + financiers) wanted the Senate to give them a long delay, wanted the FBI to come up with time/location gaps that work, and then assemble all this into her committee performance using their DoJ leakers.

The risk here is big. It's better for Dims to leave this one a murky question mark than for her to appear, get caught lying, and face perjury charges. They wouldn't be able to use #MeToo for a long time.

Kavanaugh going first? Why? To again deny it as he's already done under oath? Makes zero sense if Ford is telling the truth! If Kavanaugh is lying they could use Ford's details to catch him in his lie.

Oh, and now she's afraid to fly!!! [LOL]

Social media was scrubbed during the Feinstein letter window (July - Sept) so don't have pics of her in exotic vacation spots, but she's a Phd who lives in Palo Alto with a beach house in Santa Cruz. This math ain't hard: She flies. A. lot.

Grassley is keeping the vote on Monday!!!

https://apnews.com/8f5fc89473d8429f90af397ce0ae6b97/GOP-to-Kavanaugh-accuser:-Reach-deal-or-panel-votes-Monday?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP_Politics&utm_campaign=SocialFlow

[Bailey Guns]

I think you're referring to me, so feel obligated to respond. Pretty much I do still feel the same as before. No two groups are going to do everything alike, but in the end I see no difference in the way that Libs/Cons hold tightly to their beliefs and are easily pulled along by false narratives and automatically recoil away from anything suggested by someone on the other side just to reaffirm their position within their group.

No, I wasn't referring to you. No everything is about you, Stu.

[Coffee]

Actually, I was also talking about the political parties/politicians. Yes, most politicians are scumbags and in the biz for personal power and enrichment. There are some that do it for the right reasons.

But in terms of parties, there is no comparison between the two when you're talking corruption and failure to follow the rule of law.

Even in this case, democrats are trying to control everything thru lies and manipulation. Of course, with the media we have these days, which is basically just the propaganda arm of the democrat party, it makes their (the democrats) job much easier. They're trying to change rules of procedure, evidence, senate rules...you name it they want to change it to their advantage. The republicans are bending over backwards to make an appearance by this woman possible. They should be telling her to pack sand. She, nor the democrat party, should be allowed to change the entire system to fit her/their agenda. She's demanding that Kavanaugh testify first, for example. Well, that's not how it works. The victim/prosecution lays out the charges first then the defense/accused responds.

This lady is demanding an investigation but can't even provide basic facts about the alleged offense. "I was sexually assaulted by this person but I don't know when or where. All I know is it was 36 years ago, give or take." She's identified one other person as a witness and that witness, along with the accused, vehemently deny the allegations. She has NOTHING else.

This is nothing more than a political move and she's been turned into the pawn of the day by DiFi and the democrat party who are now trying to make republicans look like the bad guys. Democrats have no conscience and everything they say, everything they believe in, is based on lies and hypocrisy. They're making a huge deal out of this alleged, likely fabricated incident, yet they're ignoring a REAL case of abuse by one of their own, Keith Ellison, with overwhelming evidence that the accused committed the offense. Democrats care about one thing and one thing only....staying in power. That's it.

The democrat party is the greatest threat to freedom and liberty in this country since it was founded. All you have to do is look around at what they're doing these days to know that's true.

[Skip]

Grassley might be waffling. He's made some tweets that are a little vague.

Grassley grants Kavanaugh accuser another extension

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/22/grassley-grants-kavanaugh-accuser-another-extension.html


The new deadline was unclear, but Ford had requested that a 10 p.m. ET Friday deadline be extended until Saturday.

[snip]

Grassley initially invited Ford to testify Monday and gave Ford until 10 a.m. Friday to respond. That deadline passed Friday without a deal after Ford’s attorneys made clear this week Ford didn’t want to testify Monday but suggested she would do so on another day.

This is disappointing, people are looking for him to hold firm to his Monday deadline.

I think this is all managing optics at this point knowing she won't testify but Republicans want it obvious that she was given every chance.

[Bailey Guns]

I think this is all managing optics at this point knowing she won't testify but Republicans want it obvious that she was given every chance.

You're probably right. On the other hand, most rational people realize she's had 36 years worth of chances to say what she's wanted to say. Testify or don't but stop playing your stupid fuckin' games.

[cstone]

I re-watched a couple hours of Justice Thomas’ Senate confirmation hearing. Orin Hatch and Joe Biden were so much younger in 1991...but so was I.

[sampson]

You're probably right. On the other hand, most -->> RATIONAL<<-- people realize she's had 36 years worth of chances to say what she's wanted to say. Testify or don't but stop playing your stupid fuckin' games.

Not sure how many rational people are voters.

[Skip]

Pussyhatters aren't giving this up. But a lot admit they are using this as payback for Garland. Which should expose them as cheapening sexual assault/claims.

The latest objection against flying, as trivial as that sounds, has actually made a difference for people.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DntteXzXgAYg0lG.jpg:small

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DnteBaBUYAAbp09.jpg:small


ETA:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DntvS7wW0AIwswl.jpg:small
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DntvS77XoAAO9Bm.jpg:small

[Skip]

BREAKING

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dnt_XXjX4AUbouk.jpg

So some time next week...

"Negotiations?" Lulz. No truth teller needs to negotiate testimony.

I wouldn't be surprised if some new development changes things. Ford is taking on a lot of risk.

[Skip]

There is mass confusion over that attorney letter.

Media (incl. Drudge) has reported this as an agreement to appear. While it seems that way, it asks to continue negotiations. So no one knows what is going on right now.

This is all pretty disingenuous. Can't say it makes the victim look good at all.

[Skip]

Media has probably given up trying to accurately report testimony arrangement but I’m hearing Thursday.

Second witness named by Ford has denied any knowledge...

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/22/kavanaugh-ford-woman-party-letter-836913


To recap, the two people she named as seeing it all happen have said it didn’t. Only explanation is that she is lying.

It’s not looking good for her and since her testimony could result in perjury, I can’t imagine her counsel lets her testify.


Jack Posobiec has rundown on protest/disruption plans for next week...

https://mobile.twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1043637625247227905

[Eric P]

So it it is 2018.... the modern age doesn't need to meet face to face.

Have the skank video conference from a courthouse in CA after being sworn in. Same with any other witnesses. Hell, they could have her teleconference from anywhere.

Why does congress live in the technological dark ages??? Screw traditions and take full advantage of modern conveniences.

Maybe rosie is right and these current dinosaurs need to retire. D and R.

[Bailey Guns]

It appears Ford has named another witness who claims no knowledge of the party at all.


Another person claimed by Christine Blasey Ford to have attended a gathering decades ago during which, Ford claims, she was sexually assaulted by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh has denied any recollection of having attended the party.

In an email to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Saturday, Leland Ingham Keyser, a former classmate of Ford's at the Holton-Arms all-girls school in Maryland, said she doesn’t know Kavanaugh or remember being at the party with him.

“Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford,” lawyer Howard J. Walsh III of Bethesda, Md., conveyed in an email to the committee that was obtained by Fox News.

This fiasco needs to be put to rest. Initially I was at least supportive of letting her tell her side of the story. But the more her and her lawyers drag this out and continue on making unreasonable demands the less sympathetic I am to her claim. She's basically holding the entire country hostage to a vague memory of an incident that no one else remembers.

[Skip]

It appears Ford has named another witness who claims no knowledge of the party at all.

This fiasco needs to be put to rest. Initially I was at least supportive of letting her tell her side of the story. But the more her and her lawyers drag this out and continue on making unreasonable demands the less sympathetic I am to her claim. She's basically holding the entire country hostage to a vague memory of an incident that no one else remembers.

I think the other good question is if this is a legitimate memory of hers at all.

[Bailey Guns]

Ford's attorneys have admitted to CNN that Ford and Keyser are life-long friends. Gonna be pretty hard to say this person is just trying to protect Kavanaugh.

That's enough for me. Ford has zero credibility and I believe her claim is fabricated. Whether or not it was her idea or she's just a democrat party stooge remains to be seen.

[Skip]

The involvement of Diane Feinstein, Debra Katz, Ricki Seidman, and now Michael Bromwich makes me think this was all a hit job and Ford was a willing participant. I think there is a substantial pool of money not only paying this team but also making sure Ford is taken care of because her life as she knew it is over. Her family will be wrecked too.

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/09/20/hmmm-ford-hires-former-clinton-biden-adviser-potential-hearing-sherpa-attorneys-bargain-time/


Seidman, a senior principal at TSD Communications, worked as Joe Biden’s communications director during the 2008 general election campaign, after he was named Barack Obama’s running mate. In 2009, according to her online biography, she helped the White House manage the confirmation of Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor.

Before that, she worked in the Clinton White House as deputy communications director.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/20/politics/ford-attorneys-democrat-fundraiser/index.html


Kavanaugh's accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, is being represented by attorneys Debra Katz and Lisa Banks, both of whom are listed as headliners in a "cocktails and conversation" event for Baldwin, a Wisconsin Democrat who is facing re-election this fall. People are asked to contribute up to $1,000 to attend the October 1 event, and a source familiar with the matter said it is slated to take place at their law firm Katz, Marshall & Banks.


https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/blink-and-you-may-have-missed-it-andrew-mccabes-lawyer-is-on-christine-fords-legal-team/


Andrew McCabe‘s attorney Michael R. Bromwich, along with his strategic consulting firm The Bromwich Group, have joined Dr. Christine Blasey Ford‘s legal team.

[snip]


Within the past few days I have been asked to be one of Christine Blasey Ford’s attorneys. My role will likely require me to appear publicly on Dr. Ford’s behalf, and the Senate is being advised of my involvement this afternoon. Because objections have been raised within the partnership to my doing so while employed by the firm. I am resigning from the firm effective immediately. This obviously is happening on a schedule that could not be anticipated.

What objections? Blowback for subornation of perjury?

[Skip]

Within 16 hours of losing the last of Ford's named witnesses (i.e. the Ford story exposed as a lie) they have found a new "victim."

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/senate-democrats-investigate-a-new-allegation-of-sexual-misconduct-from-the-supreme-court-nominee-brett-kavanaughs-college-years-deborah-Ramirez


The claim dates to the 1983-84 academic school year, when Kavanaugh was a freshman at Yale University.

[snip]

She was at first hesitant to speak publicly, partly because her memories contained gaps because she had been drinking at the time of the alleged incident. In her initial conversations with The New Yorker, she was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the alleged incident with certainty. After six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, Ramirez said that she felt confident enough of her recollections to say that she remembers Kavanaugh had exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party, thrust his penis in her face, and caused her to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away.

[snip]

A third male student then exposed himself to her. “I remember a penis being in front of my face,” she said. “I knew that’s not what I wanted, even in that state of mind.” She recalled remarking, “That’s not a real penis,” and the other students laughing at her confusion and taunting her, one encouraging her to “kiss it.”

[snip]

“Somebody yelled down the hall, ‘Brett Kavanaugh just put his penis in Debbie’s face,’ ” she said. “It was his full name. I don’t think it was just ‘Brett.’ And I remember hearing and being mortified that this was out there.”

[snip]

In an initial conversation with The New Yorker, she suggested that Ramirez may have been politically motivated. Later, she said that she did not know if this was the case.



I would encourage everyone to read the whole, see how they operate.

It's the same deal... 35 years later, speculative corroboration, no one under oath, etc, etc... Took six days of memory assessment?!? WTF does that even mean? If you are assaulted, you know it. Those six days line up with Feinstein's release and the hiring of Ford's team.

Not really sure what the crime here is because the "victim" can't be sure it was a real penis or that it was on her face (just that someone said it was). Gave Kavanaugh's full name. Sure.

Michael Avenetti (Stormy Daniel's lawyer) claims he has a third "victim" that is also very credible and will change everything.

You guys may want to assess your memories and see if Brett Kavanaugh raped you, or did the penis/face thing.

[Irving]

I want to say that this is getting ridiculous, except it started ridiculous.

[Bailey Guns]

This really makes me wonder exactly how far they're willing to go to get this guy.

Just when you think democrats have reached the pinnacle of sleazedom, they somehow manage to become even more disgusting. All of this just to hold on to a little political power.

Fuckin' liberals.

[Skip]

I want to say that this is getting ridiculous, except it started ridiculous.

Yes.

People are saying Trump should drop Kavanaugh and pick someone else (Barrett). The problem is they could do this to anyone.



This really makes me wonder exactly how far they're willing to go to get this guy.

Just when you think democrats have reached the pinnacle of sleazedom, they somehow manage to become even more disgusting. All of this just to hold on to a little political power.

Fuckin' liberals.

It's personal but it's really not about Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh swings the court Conservative. They looked at Gorsuch at maintaining the status quo.

[BPTactical]

Fuck this bullshit.
Grassly and McConnel need to sack up, see this sham for what it is, play hardball with the Demons and confirm Kavanaugh.

[TFOGGER]

Girl from Kavanaugh's kindergarten: "One time at recess, Brett showed me his weewee..."

FFS, now some girl that was blackout drunk at a frat party "thinks" someone, maybe named "Brett" might have stuck a penis in her face? 35 years ago?

[CS1983]

I wanna see Trey Gowdy and Jason Chaffetz have 15 minutes of gloves-off questioning with her. Those dudes would make me question whether or not water is wet when they get going.

[Skip]

I wanna see Trey Gowdy and Jason Chaffetz have 15 minutes of gloves-off questioning with her. Those dudes would make me question whether or not water is wet when they get going.

There are serious doubts on if Thursday will even happen.

Nothing scheduled to question the new (Boulder Lib) accuser.

Dims are dancing on the lines of legality here. The accusers can lie with only civil liability, the lawyers get away with, the politicians get away with it, the high priced Dim "team" that is doing this gets away with it. But if the accusers go on the record, it creates criminal liability; perjury and subornation of perjury.

These women can be sued for libel/slander/defamation but with the money behind them, I wonder if the damages aren't already in escrow. If I were lying for Dims I would insist on nothing less.

[ChickNorris]

Girl from Kavanaugh's kindergarten: "One time at recess, Brett showed me his weewee..."

I probably shouldn't say this but whatever, here goes it:

If only I had a $1 bill for every occurance by every fellow, near or far from my vacinity who tried to show me his .....SQUIRREL!

[Bailey Guns]

I probably shouldn't say this but whatever, here goes it:

If only I had a $1 bill for every occurance by every fellow, near or far from my vacinity who tried to show me his .....SQUIRREL!

Was Kavanaugh one of them? Its OK if you need to take 6 days to carefully assess your memories.

[ChickNorris]

Was Kavanaugh one of them? Its OK if you need to take 6 days to carefully assess your memories.

Smart ass. I know what you meant though so it's okay to vent your frustration framed as a joke, this time. ;)

Im not going to pretend that I know anything about this with all it's facets. In my little world it's not complicated, if an individual tries to physically hurt me, I get away or I hurt them until it's settled one way or another. If it's criminal then it's addressed formally, period. Don't think I'll ever understand the act of inaction & the ancillary notion of wait & happen to mention it to strangers half a lifetime later. I just don't get it & might not ever.

The way I see it, to address a situation as that, in this arena now is not justice be it her aim or another's. FWIW, I'd toss libel in the pot too.

Simple, yes. Ignorant, maybe so.

[crays]

From The Daily Wire (Ben Shapiro's site)


Read Kavanaugh's full letter below:

When I testified in front of the Senate three weeks ago, I explained my belief that fair process is foundational to justice and to our democracy.

At that time, I sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee for more than 31 hours and answered questions under oath. I then answered more questions at a confidential session. The following week, I responded to more than 1,200 written questions, more than have been submitted to all previous Supreme Court nominees combined.

Only after that exhaustive process was complete did I learn, through the news media, about a 36- year-old allegation from high school that had been asserted months earlier and withheld from me throughout the hearing process. First it was an anonymous allegation that I categorically and unequivocally denied. Soon after the accuser was identified, I repeated my denial on the record and made clear that I wished to appear before the Committee. I then repeated my denial to Committee investigators—under criminal penalties for false statements. All of the witnesses identified by Dr. Ford as being present at the party she describes are on the record to the Committee saying they have no recollection of any such party happening. I asked to testify before the Committee again under oath as soon as possible, so that both Dr. Ford and I could both be heard. I thank Chairman Grassley for scheduling that hearing for Thursday.

Last night, another false and uncorroborated accusation from 35 years ago was published. Once again, those alleged to have been witnesses to the event deny it ever happened. There is now a frenzy to come up with something—anything—that will block this process and a vote on my confirmation from occurring.

These are smears, pure and simple. And they debase our public discourse. But they are also a threat to any man or woman who wishes to serve our country. Such grotesque and obvious character assassination—if allowed to succeed—will dissuade competent and good people of all political persuasions from service.

As I told the Committee during my hearing, a federal judge must be independent, not swayed by public or political pressure. That is the kind of judge I will always be. I will not be intimidated into withdrawing from this process. The coordinated effort to destroy my good name will not drive me out. The vile threats of violence against my family will not drive me out. The last minute character assassination will not succeed.

I have devoted my career to serving the public and the cause of justice, and particularly to promoting the equality and dignity of women. Women from every phase of my life have come forward to attest to my character. I am grateful to them. I owe it to them, and to my family, to defend my integrity and my name. I look forward to answering questions from the Senate on Thursday.

[RblDiver]

Amen and amen. If somehow he ends up not being confirmed, I sure as hell hope he goes after them for libel. Damages would be pretty easy to prove.

[Skip]

Grassley has emerged from weekend hiding and tweeted about.... corn.

https://twitter.com/ChuckGrassley/status/1044309213646925825


Interview with Kavanaughs schedule tonight with Martha Maccallum at Fox.

The Left's narrative has shifted today from "must believe women" to "Merrick Garland" which I think shows this is all a cheap political stunt. But it also messages that many on the Left know these claims are false (ends justify the means) so it's not about women but payback.

[Skip]

More concern Thursday testimony won't happen. GOP appoints a sex crimes expert to do the interviewing of Ford. Ford team objects and I think this is their biggest issue. They want a name (supposedly female), resume, and an explanation of this person's role.

https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1044384069226778624

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn5lxZBW0AAiIM-.jpg:small

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn5lxZhVsAAxJTA.jpg:small


I think they wanted the negative optics of old white men being insensitive towards Ford should any meaningful questions be asked. That way if Ford is further exposed as a liar, they can shift to feels.

Again, a truth teller doesn't pull this bullshit.

[Bailey Guns]

Well she's a liberal democrat. Therefore we already know she's not a "truth teller".

[BPTactical]

The really pathetic and sad thing:

A homeless crackhead facing indecent exposure charges would be treated more fairly than a highly qualified and respected justice being considered for the highest court in the nation.

Fucking sad

[Great-Kazoo]

The really pathetic and sad thing:

A homeless crackhead facing indecent exposure charges would be treated more fairly than a highly qualified and respected justice being considered for the highest court in the nation.

Fucking sad

How Fucking True



Oh Yeah in for the

[Alrigh]

[WETWRKS]

The more they try this garbage the more certain I am that this is the person who needs to be in the position.

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

Welcome to Salem.

[Zundfolge]

Remember that Andrew Breitbart was "red pilled" by watching the mistreatment of Clarence Thomas by the Democrats.

How many Andrew Breitbarts have they created in the last couple weeks?

[Bailey Guns]

McConnell says he has the votes. Then vote. Fuck the progressive scumbags.

[RblDiver]

So, this IS 4Chan we're talking about, so there's a decent chance it's not true. But it's still entertaining to think about what if it is! Scumbag lawyer Avenatti was recently saying how he had some slam dunk dirt on Kav, but he just locked his Twitter account.

Is this why?
76187

Source: https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2018/09/25/holy-wow-if-this-is-true-wait-is-this-why-michael-avenatti-locked-his-twitter-account/

[Skip]

Avenatti says he was too fragile to leave the account open...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn9kUMQXUAIdauH.jpg:small


We blew it up yesterday and he has nothing. He wants attention just like throughout all the Trump claims.

My guess is that he either did in fact get trolled or will go away after the vote.

[Skip]

Grassley has stopped tweeting about corn long enough to find he still has a pair.


https://twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1044688224529141761

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn96Kc9VYAACcNk.jpg:small
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn96LxrUcAAKf6v.jpg:small


Three important things in that letter...

- It's Thursday. No more delays
- He called out the Dims for withholding the info and then going public rather than to committee
- He touches on perjury, I think this is a strong hint that he wants to go back to counsel

[Bailey Guns]

Mitch either grew a pair or borrowed someone's. Whatever...good for him for telling DiFi to piss up a rope.

[Skip]

Committee vote schedule for Friday 9:30AM...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn-PJkAXkAA6Ib4.jpg:small


They are giving themselves all day Thursday to deal with Ford's theatrics, assuming she even shows.

[RblDiver]

Oh that's good. Republicans invoked the Biden Rule in 2016 to avoid voting on Garland. Here in 2018, they should invoke Biden Rule #2 - On FBI investigations in Supreme Court Nominations.
https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2018/09/25/enjoy-this-clip-of-joe-biden-telling-clarence-thomas-that-an-fbi-report-isnt-worth-anything/

[crays]

Hate to be Debbie Downer, but do we know that this Grassley letter is legit?

Sent from somewhere...

[Bailey Guns]

It's legit.

[DireWolf]

It's legit.I wonder how much it even matters at this point?

From what I was reading, it seemed to be a moot point now due to an inability to fully complete the process prior to the beginning of the new term.

Is this another instance of R's appearing to step up but (intentionally) "just barely missing" the deadline? Hope that's not the case...

[Great-Kazoo]

I wonder how much it even matters at this point?

From what I was reading, it seemed to be a moot point now due to an inability to fully complete the process prior to the beginning of the new term.

Is this another instance of R's appearing to step up but (intentionally) "just barely missing" the deadline? Hope that's not the case...

Not sure how this is playing out along the front range of CO. Down here disgusted and very openly vocal about it would be an understatement.

[Bailey Guns]

I wonder how much it even matters at this point?

From what I was reading, it seemed to be a moot point now due to an inability to fully complete the process prior to the beginning of the new term.

Is this another instance of R's appearing to step up but (intentionally) "just barely missing" the deadline? Hope that's not the case...

No, I don't think so. If Kavanaugh misses the first few cases he can still hear cases during the term. Unless I'm missing something, I think republican leadership handled this about as well as can be expected for the most part. I know, I know...it's really hard to believe.

[TFOGGER]

http://scontent.fapa1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/42460485_270528947003186_4755063429906038784_n.jpg ?_nc_cat=110&oh=9238a14a6eb7864462e6d1b897b352a1&oe=5C58FF83

[Skip]

Third accuser is on the record with a declaration from CreepyPornLawyer Michael Avenatti.

Read it very carefully to see how this game is being played.

All allegations made are vague. No locations but we get "approximately 1982." [LOL]

When she accuses Kavanaugh of a specific behavior, it then switches to "boys" in general. So K would get girls drunk so they could be raped and then "boys" would gang rape. She saw "boys" lined up to rape. K wouldn't take no for answer. For what? Touching without consent? Were they making out?

And the worst part: She saw all of this gang raping, said nothing, and then it was her turn. She claims K was there but wasn't he one who raped her. Nor did Judge.

This went on for two years according to accuser. Not a single parent, teacher, or LEO was told about all this raping. Young women (not clear if she was of age at the time) allowed each other to be victims.

https://twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti/status/1044960428730843136

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoBx3JaWkAEAyhX.jpg:small
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoBx6BUWkAYL7aU.jpg:small

[RblDiver]

The woman graduated in 1980. She claims this happened "Around 1982." ...So, was she attending high school parties where gang rapes were occurring? Yet another story with tons of holes (color me shocked).
https://hotair.com/archives/2018/09/26/hearing-tomorrow-still/

[Skip]

Ford's polygraph results released. She was asked two questions!!! [LOL]

The questions were based on the hand written statement which changes the number of witnesses at the house and doesn't specifically mention Kavanaugh mentions Brett. Does mention Mark Judge by name.

https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1045017188929687552

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoClf7NU0AAB9k_.jpg:small
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoClf8KU0AAT0r6.jpg:small
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoClf_GUcAA9Zhl.jpg:small

[Bailey Guns]

I may be entirely wrong on this, but I think this "third victim" might actually help Kavanaugh's chances at confirmation rather than harm them. This affidavit is so poorly written, incomprehensibly vague, it's outrageous in the context of the claims and it just reeks of being a hastily prepared outline of lies.

The behavior detailed, not by those alleged of wrongdoing, but by this woman herself is just morally reprehensible. By her own admission she was: an adult going to underage drinking parties, a second year college student hanging out with high-schoolers, attended about 10 of these parties where gang rapes and the illegal drugging of minors took place, never reported any of these brutal and serious crimes (that no one else, including God knows how many supposed victims, reported either, to anyone) and never told anyone for decades. This is so over-the-top that it's almost impossible to believe.

I'm waiting for the 4th victim to show up and say she was abducted by aliens who, with the help of Kavanaugh, conducted sexual experiments on her in their spaceship.

[TRnCO]

that hand written note done by a 3rd grader?

I think three people should be investigated by the FBI, and they are the 3 people accusing 1 person of wrong doing. After all, when the cops investigate a crime do they not look at everyone as possible suspects? And what ever happened to being innocent until proven guilty. Where's the proof? That's right, there ain't NONE......

[Great-Kazoo]

She had no issues going to Maryland for a 2 question poly, but made the senate bend to her demands for more time because flying gave her flashbacks.

[Skip]

I may be entirely wrong on this, but I think this "third victim" might actually help Kavanaugh's chances at confirmation rather than harm them. This affidavit is so poorly written, incomprehensibly vague, it's outrageous in the context of the claims and it just reeks of being a hastily prepared outline of lies.

The behavior detailed, not by those alleged of wrongdoing, but by this woman herself is just morally reprehensible. By her own admission she was: an adult going to underage drinking parties, a second year college student hanging out with high-schoolers, attended about 10 of these parties where gang rapes and the illegal drugging of minors took place, never reported any of these brutal and serious crimes (that no one else, including God knows how many supposed victims, reported either, to anyone) and never told anyone for decades. This is so over-the-top that it's almost impossible to believe.

I'm waiting for the 4th victim to show up and say she was abducted by aliens who, with the help of Kavanaugh, conducted sexual experiments on her in their spaceship.

Yes!!! I'm seeing this same opinion a lot today! And after hours of debate and review, I am coming to agree.

The next level is snuff films, then aliens after that. But only if the aliens are Republicans.


P.S. If I seem wound up on this topic, I am. This is our Republic being destroyed right in front of us. We finally win a big election and have the chance to change the court and it is being denied. Not through the proper course of debate/confirmation but fraud.

If Kavanaugh gets pushed through to the objections of the Lib Oligarchy and their army of mouth-breathing feminists/SJWs, you can expect a disregard for the Court and violence. If Kavanaugh doesn't get through, we surrender to thugs and the big pockets who are funding this (we still don't know who).

Every thread where we discuss the merits of voting for the Court (Foxtrot is right!!!) reinforces how important this is.

I'm pissed.

[Skip]

She had no issues going to Maryland for a 2 question poly, but made the senate bend to her demands for more time because flying gave her flashbacks.

And look at that date: August 10, 2018.

That's enough time to WALK to DC!

This was held to the last minute because it would have fallen apart in July/Aug. It's falling apart now after two weeks!

Ramirez and Swetnick are worse. The statements they've made (declaration and media) are incredible and contradict within themselves.

[Bailey Guns]

I agree with you, Skip. I've never been more infuriated at the lack of adherence to procedure and the complete disregard for the rule of law, not to mention decency, as I am at democrats right now.

The current democrat party is the greatest, most dangerous and imminent threat to the literal survival of our republic. I sincerely don't believe that's hyperbole in any way. They are destroying the foundation of our system of government right before our eyes.

And the worst part about it is you and I have almost no voice to make our opinions and displeasure heard. Almost the entirety of the media is nothing more than the propaganda wing of the democrat party.

Democrats are pure evil. I truly believe that. And I also believe the only weapon they have left in their arsenal is violence. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, and if the midterms don't go in favor of democrats, I'm convinced they will increasingly resort to violence. They've tried everything else.

[RblDiver]

I'm waiting for the 4th victim to show up and say she was abducted by aliens who, with the help of Kavanaugh, conducted sexual experiments on her in their spaceship.

Ask and ye shall receive (well, close enough): https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2018/09/26/anonymous-complaint-alleges-brett-kavanaugh-physically-assaulted-a-woman-in-1998/

[Bailey Guns]

FFS...

[Skip]

Ask and ye shall receive (well, close enough): https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2018/09/26/anonymous-complaint-alleges-brett-kavanaugh-physically-assaulted-a-woman-in-1998/

Letter sent September 24, 2018. Two days ago!

This is what the GOP has invited with every delay and was probably the reason for Ford's stalling tactics all along. We still don't know if testimony is happening tomorrow.


I agree with you, Skip. I've never been more infuriated at the lack of adherence to procedure and the complete disregard for the rule of law, not to mention decency, as I am at democrats right now.

The current democrat party is the greatest, most dangerous and imminent threat to the literal survival of our republic. I sincerely don't believe that's hyperbole in any way. They are destroying the foundation of our system of government right before our eyes.

And the worst part about it is you and I have almost no voice to make our opinions and displeasure heard. Almost the entirety of the media is nothing more than the propaganda wing of the democrat party.

Democrats are pure evil. I truly believe that. And I also believe the only weapon they have left in their arsenal is violence. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, and if the midterms don't go in favor of democrats, I'm convinced they will increasingly resort to violence. They've tried everything else.

Well said! I think there are low-info people who read headlines caught up in these accusations but it's past time for any reasonable person to think the Democrat party is anything but "Party over all." There are people who think blocking Kavanaugh (views on abortion, constructionism) is worth any price.

I struggle think of these people as Americans. But the probably think their fight is well grounded in the Constitution.

To elaborate on potential violence...

https://farleftwatch.com/antifa-podcast-host-discusses-easily-concealable-guns-ambushes-and-assassination/


“Hey quick little question for military minded lefties: should leftists train/organize in a “insurgent” focus where they blend into a civilian population for potential attacks or a more “militia” structure focused on holding/maintaining turf?”
[snip]

At one point he asked if “ambushes” and “assassinations” would be more effective in southern states. He also suggest using “easily concealable [weapons] platforms” so as not to “tip anyone off”.

They are mapping out terrorism and clearly planning to project violence into Conservative areas of the country. It doesn't take much imagination to see how this could all come together during an uncertain time.

And working to create confusion on legitimacy...

Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley seeks injunction to delay Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court vote

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2018/09/merkley_to_seek_court_injuncti.html

How many Leftists think hamstringing the Legislative using judicial activists ("judge in Hawaii") is appropriate? And on the very issue of judicial confirmations! To even ask this, risking a Constitutional crisis, tells us all we need to know about Dims.

[DavieD55]

Good info. Excellent posts Skip!

[Eric P]

The Senate can ignore any injunction. What is that judge going to do?

[Erni]

I listened to a bit on the way in. This is a fucking witch trial. Dems are making her a couragous hero, trauma survivor, etc. Reps are being extra gingerly, and she has trouble keeping her story straight. Uses a bunch of scientific terms to bolster all her claims and keeps correcting things.
This is like a one sided canguroo court, it's like she and all the stupid senators are testifying.
If they get away with this rule of law is dead. Anyone can and will be tried for anything at anytime. There is a reason court proceedings have a certain structure, and these hearings just threw out all legal precedence and history
Fuck I'm mad. Mad enough to vote straight R no questions asked. Mad enough to voulenteer for a local campaign.

[Skip]

The Senate can ignore any injunction. What is that judge going to do?

If the judge (in Hawaii) is stupid enough to go for it, create a massive Constitutional crisis.

---

Tons of news overnight and I hope everyone is following this and watching as much testimony today as possible. I don't have links to everything.

We learned that accuser #4 was anonymous letter sent to Cory Gardner from Denver on Sept 24th (after the circus began). The media didn't really correct the record, they just dropped the story. We are back down to 3 accusers who are all named.

Twitchy (of all places) broke a story that Swetnick (accuser #3) was previously represented by Katz who is currently representing Ford. This is a coincidence and has nothing to do a Rolodex of willing participants...

https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2018/09/26/report-kavanaugh-accusers-julie-swetnick-and-christine-blasey-ford-have-an-interesting-connection/

Swetnick was paid a settlement. This, along with "racial discrimination" settlements, is a known racket.

Swetnick was also the subject of a restraining order from some drama with an exboyfriend in which she allegedly threatened him and his family well after their breakup.

Seems mental.

---

Testimony is a circus as we expect. We're learning more about the timelines. IMHO Ford seemed well prepped, unable to deviate from script, and very fragile. Social reaction is very divided.

Ford went to media before Feinstein...

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/huge-blasey-ford-contacted-the-media-before-congress/?utm_content=buffer5001a&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer


Feinstein hasn't participated in the investigation...

https://twitter.com/senjudiciary/status/1045357321361260544


Ford says she doesn't know who paid for polygraph. Ford's team has refused to release any of the poly details beyond what was released yesterday. There is video! The poly was administered on the same day as her grandmother's funeral so she says she was rushed.

All of this involved air travel which has come up multiple times. She claims she is claustrophobic.

Ford's team will not release the medical record/therapist notes citing privacy but Ford continues to refer that session as proof she discussed the assault prior to the nomination.

https://twitter.com/NoahCRothman/status/1045344833911619585

Some portion of those notes were provided to WashPoo but she can't recall doing it.

https://twitter.com/RobGeorge/status/1045341587277049857


She was asked about the inconsistencies in the number of witnesses she initially claim and dismissed it due to bad memory. She still can't say where it happened or when. She doesn't remember how she got to the house or home. She thinks she was driven. She offered to draw a floorplan of the house in which it happened.

In spite of "bad memory" she remains consistent that it was Brett Kavanaugh.

Senate seems to be entrenched in camps but all eyes are on Collins and Murkowsk. They are likely debating the factual inconsistencies with the optics of "war of women."

I'm sure there will be clips, recaps, and more solid links coming all day.

[Rumline]

Thanks for the update. I'm feeling like Erni and I can't bear to read the hyperventilating WaPoo or other clearly liberal media to see what is going on. Even Fox News had some liberal on there spouting off about how this is the end of the republican party.

[Bailey Guns]

What struck me as odd about Ford's testimony is she never said that she told the person who assaulted her to stop nor did she say "no", etc. If she did I missed it. Now that doesn't give the person permission by any means...but it strikes me as odd. Every sex assault I ever investigated the victim said they told the suspect to stop...unless they were incapacitated.

She also speaks like a 16 year old valley girl and comes across to me as very naive and fragile and not very intelligent for someone who's a doctor.

The Democrat senators are predictably pathetic and dishonest.

[Bailey Guns]

I also noticed she emphasized a few points that people were questioning before. She's been well prepared, no doubt.

[Skip]

What struck me as odd about Ford's testimony is she never said that she told the person who assaulted her to stop nor did she say "no", etc. If she did I missed it. Now that doesn't give the person permission by any means...but it strikes me as odd. Every sex assault I ever investigated the victim said they told the suspect to stop...unless they were incapacitated.

She also speaks like a 16 year old valley girl and comes across to me as very naive and fragile and not very intelligent for someone who's a doctor.

The Democrat senators are predictably pathetic and dishonest.

She claims Kavanaugh covered her mouth to muffle her screams and that there was music playing in the room. She says Kavanaugh held her down with the weight of his body on a bed while he tried to remove her clothes.

This has been dissected a bit on the socials because it creates a nuance for witness statements (e.g. being there but hearing/seeing nothing). To which it's been pointed out the witnesses didn't even put Kavanaugh at ANY party with Ford.

I think you are right about the preparation and I think the fill in of these critical details was well rehearsed. The testimony was very detailed about the emotional aspects of the alleged assault but not the details that would substantiate Ford's claim.

---

Sheila Jackson Lee is caught on camera handing a note to Bromwich (second Ford counsel)... Speculation that it was questioning info.

(I can't embed Twitter vids, but you can watch at link)

https://twitter.com/therealcornett/status/1045357993246838789

[Irving]

I think you are right about the preparation and I think the fill in of these critical details was well rehearsed. The testimony was very detailed about the emotional aspects of the alleged assault but not the details that would substantiate Ford's claim.



I only heard some at the beginning, and some just before the break, but this is what struck me the most. I get that there is some story telling element to all this, but without trying to sound callous, how important is it that anyone knows how it affected Ford? It seems to me that the real question is whether or not it happened.

[hollohas]

This is maddening. The media/Dems, etc think it's a'ok to destroy a good man over something that may, or more likely may not have, happened when he was a boy. Makes me sick.

As for her obvious BS. I partied a lot in HS. And I can remember every house we partied at. The notion that she "remembers" in such great detail what "happened" but can't remember where it happened is horseshit.

Listening to Dem congressmen complain about how sad it is that the country has become so uncivilized and mean, when they are the worst offenders as they destroy a good man with ZERO evidence and with political motives, puts my blood pressure through the roof.

This Republic is in major trouble...

[SamuraiCO]

No other girls at the same party that had been assaulted at the same party have come forward. Her story is just that, a story. No evidence. Just the Dem machine in full retard mode to kill this nomination, hopefully take the senate and have control on the next SCOTUS nomination.

[Skip]

I only heard some at the beginning, and some just before the break, but this is what struck me the most. I get that there is some story telling element to all this, but without trying to sound callous, how important is it that anyone knows how it affected Ford? It seems to me that the real question is whether or not it happened.

This seems to be the dividing line between both camps.

You have Libs saying that her emotional testimony creates credibility but then Conservatives looking at the cold facts and not able to find anything this morning that increased Ford's credibility.

There seems to be a strong feeling on the Left that her emotion presents a very real account that doesn't require any validation.

---

Ford has just claimed Leland (Ingram) Keyser (one of her best friends and named witnesses) has mental issues in response why Keyser can't corroborate any of her claims.

---

Can't even consistently name the year between all statements made in the last two months...


Christine Blasey Ford admitted under oath that she crossed out the word "early" in her August 7th post-polygraph notes.
She couldn't say for certain on August 7th the Kavanaugh incident happened in the "early" 1980's but now she knows it happened in 1982? #KavanaughHearings

https://twitter.com/infolibnews/status/1045377987468828674

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoHtnsPVsAcRKhm.jpg:small

[Skip]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJORwf3izUU

[davsel]

My 14yo writes better notes than that.
Ford is a useful idiot.

[Skip]

Chris Garrett--not sure where this going...

Backstory: A guy who seemed a little off (Ed Whelen) had presented a theory on twitter that this was a case of mistaken ID. I didn't post it because, frankly, Whelen was doing exactly what Ford was doing to Kavanaugh by implicating someone who couldn't be proven to have assaulted Ford.

Whelen got his pecker smacked good, apologized, and has deleted the thread. It was very involved right down to the flooplan of Garrett's family home matching Ford's description.

At the time Ford said she knew Garrett but couldn't possibly confuse them.

https://twitter.com/PeterAlexander/status/1042952281061240833


She has now admitted to dating him.

Lots more...

https://jonathanturley.org/2018/09/21/reasonable-doubt-republicans-throw-chris-garrett-into-the-fray/

https://i0.wp.com/jonathanturley.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/IMG_0026.jpg

[Bailey Guns]

Yeah, I heard her say she tried to "yell" for help and that her attacker covered her mouth. That's not the same as saying, "Stop! Don't do that. NO! I don't want to." That's the sort of thing that a victim will inevitably say she said to her attacker, especially in a relatively non-violent incident like this one.

Ford and the entire democrat machine is full of shit.

[Bailey Guns]

Kavanaugh to senate democrats: "You have replaced 'advise and consent with search and destroy'". Kavanaugh is hammering democrats.

[Irving]

Yeah, I heard her say she tried to "yell" for help and that her attacker covered her mouth. That's not the same as saying, "Stop! Don't do that. NO! I don't want to." That's the sort of thing that a victim will inevitably say she said to her attacker, especially in a relatively non-violent incident like this one.

Ford and the entire democrat machine is full of shit.

You can't be serious.

[Bailey Guns]

Kavanaugh's opening has been fucking bulletproof. And he's pissed.

[Skip]

Kavanaugh is... wow. His opening was amazing. He clearly and emotionally denied it all again. He graciously said he believes that she might have been a victim at sometime, someplace... but not by him.

He has brought up his family (kids and parents) several times and choked up on what has been done.

He will go for the jugular either way. They made a serious enemy!

He is now walking through the facts of the witnesses refuting Ford's own claims. Number by number.

[Bailey Guns]

You can't be serious.

I'm dead serious. But what specifically are you referring to?

[Irving]

I don't really want to start a big argument, but I see that particular part that I quoted as utter bullshit. There seems to be plenty of ways to poke holes in her account, but whether, or what she said out loud during the alleged assault seems like a pretty low road to take. As someone who spent a career investigating crimes, I'd assume you'd be in the position to know that what you think people should do in a certain situation, and what they actually do, are almost never the same. People don't have to check certain victim boxes to be victims.

I don't know how much of her story is true, but I sure wouldn't try to write her off just because she did or didn't say something during the encounter.

[Bailey Guns]

Well without going into a huge explanation, of course accounts are different. But in any investigation of similar crimes there are certain things you can count on people saying. That was, and still is, my point. It's not meant to minimize what may have happened to Ford. It's just one more thing that sticks out in my mind about her story. And this "attack" was relatively low level in terms of sexual assault severity, though, if it happened, obviously it wasn't "low level" to her.

That, and taking the totality of this circus into consideration, democrats and Ford are full of shit. If she was attacked, it wasn't Kavanaugh. I'm convinced of that.

[Skip]

It's competely immaterial in my mind.

If no one can put Kavanaugh and Ford in the same house, the debate over consent doesn't matter.

IF witnesses said they were "making out" or "in a room" then I'm interested because that nuance matters.

---

Kavanaugh opener over. Questioning starts now.

And I need to get run in!!! I can't look away!!!

[Skip]

Feinstein now including Ramirez and Swetnick in the circus. Bringing up the FBI talking point again as if that's proof of guilt.

He's blasting her! [LOL]

Kavanaugh says he wanted the hearing the next day. Blames media and kicks it back to the committee.

[hollohas]

The Judge is a good man. No doubt in my mind.

He has a letter from 65 women from his high school years vouching for him. That letter came together in a single night. And more from college. And more from his adult life.

Ford has only her own story and nothing more.

How could any sane person think her story is more believable then his backed up by literally 100+ people?

We live in crazy town.

[Skip]

Hard "NO!" on saying more about Swetnick.

I think he passed by an opportunity here but he knows more than I do.

[Bailey Guns]

He made DiFi look like an idiot. To be fair, she didn't need much help.

[Skip]

"Have you ever grinded or ground your genitals on her"

[ROFL2]

That just didn't sound right.

[TFOGGER]

Once again, no matter what happens, this is a win for the Democrats. If Kavanaugh's nomination is blocked, they now have a successful strategy to go after all future nominees. If he is confirmed, they can use a broad brush to paint ALL Republicans as callous misogynists that are morally bankrupt. By developing the #metoo campaign and promulgating the notion that a mere accusation is equivalent to conviction, regardless of evidence or a total lack thereof, liberals/progressives/socialists have developed a strategy that conveniently bypasses any presumption of innocence. They have always been better than we have at long term strategic planning, and we have been fighting from a position of reacting rather than acting for generations. Now their plans have come to fruition: We have both houses of Congress and the Presidency, and are in a position to set the course of the Supreme Court for at least the next 30 years, and we can't do dick, because they have outfoxed us.

[Irving]

I don't disagree with the democrats being full of shit part at all. This entire thing seems very orchestrated to me, and it puts absolutely no one in an admirable position. Anyone who seems skeptical comes across as callous and uncaring by asking pointed questions about the story, or just trying to brush off something that happened a long time ago. Alternatively, if she is found to have fabricated any part of this, the Democrats will look like terribly sore loser cry babies. I can't imagine it would hurt the Democrats status much, because they already seem like sore loser cry babies, but the Republicans will still end up looking like they don't believe women and just got lucky once. The timing of all of this just couldn't be better for Democrats. In the heat of the #metoo movement, everyone is hesitant to be out spoken about not believing someone who's come forward about some past assault, because we as a society have been going through that constantly for the past few years. On top of all that, there is Cosby and Weinstein, who are perfect examples of abusers of women on a large scale, which is pretty much the picture they are trying to paint of Kavanaugh.

[10x]

I do not like how emotional he is, crying, I am not sure how that will go across with the swing senators.

I wish the Republican Senators would be lending more support, not just leaving it to the attorney/prosecutor.

[Bailey Guns]

This isn't a new strategy for democrats and I disagree they've "outfoxed" us. One difference between republicans and democrats is this: for dems, the end justifies the means, where republicans believe in the process. The ideals of our justice system mean something to republicans...only the outcome means anything to democrats.

And democrats have been doing this for as long as I can remember. Hell...they used basically the same playbook to turn America against the Viet Nam war. Lie and organize...it was harder back then than it is now but they managed. They did it to Bork and to Clarence Thomas. They tried it with Gorsuch.

For democrats, lying is the strategy. It's just a matter of deciding what lie they need to tell and who they can use to best guarantee their desired outcome. They've gone all in with Ford. I think they overplayed their hand.

After watching Kavanaugh's opening statement, I'd say his odds of being confirmed have increased dramatically over even just earlier today.

[hollohas]

The timing of all of this just couldn't be better for Democrats. In the heat of the #metoo movement, everyone is hesitant to be out spoken about not believing someone who's come forward about some past assault, because we as a society have been going through that constantly for the past few years.

The Dems literally created the MeToo movement as part of their efforts to destroy Trump after the release of the Access Hollywood video. They created the movement to try to swing the population away from Trump. Unfortunately for them, it's been almost completely big name Dems that have been caught-up in/exposed by the movement up until now.

[KAPA]

Lindsay Graham is KILLIN the Dems right now. Confirm this man right now!!!!

[Skip]

I do not like how emotional he is, crying, I am not sure how that will go across with the swing senators.

I wish the Republican Senators would be lending more support, not just leaving it to the attorney/prosecutor.

If he sounded like a robot, they would say he was a psychopath.

[KAPA]

I think Alyssa Milano almost sh1t her pants at the end of that speach by Graham. Ha, great!!!!

[Bailey Guns]

Lindsey Graham just went ballistic. It's great to see republicans grow a pair for a change.

[Skip]

Once again, no matter what happens, this is a win for the Democrats. If Kavanaugh's nomination is blocked, they now have a successful strategy to go after all future nominees. If he is confirmed, they can use a broad brush to paint ALL Republicans as callous misogynists that are morally bankrupt. By developing the #metoo campaign and promulgating the notion that a mere accusation is equivalent to conviction, regardless of evidence or a total lack thereof, liberals/progressives/socialists have developed a strategy that conveniently bypasses any presumption of innocence. They have always been better than we have at long term strategic planning, and we have been fighting from a position of reacting rather than acting for generations. Now their plans have come to fruition: We have both houses of Congress and the Presidency, and are in a position to set the course of the Supreme Court for at least the next 30 years, and we can't do dick, because they have outfoxed us.

It ain't over yet!

And I will remind everyone that the threat of civil litigation along with continued investigation exists long after this. Remember, we are two weeks into this with Dr. Ford. She is now on the record under oath (Federal jurisdiction).

We just learned of the Katz association last night too.

Oh, and talk to women, don't assume. Even Lib biased women have been saying they don't have a good feel for Ford's testimony this morning. It's been explained to me as feels sincere but she isn't "right."

[Skip]

Whitehouse just wasted time going over the yearbook in every detail. [LOL]

Flatulence, drinking games, and nicknames for friends.


FFFFFFuck

[KAPA]

And the Lindey Graham is forever etched in stone:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKSRUK-l7dM

Sums up this whole circus.

[10x]

I liked Graham's statements.

[crays]

I love how they are begging him to ask for the FBI investigation, which is their stall tactic. Some of the dim senator seem a little uneasy about following their strategy.

ETA: Specifically, Klobuchar seemed like she didn't feel comfortable hanging him out to dry. Although she did push on.

[Skip]

I love how they are begging him to ask for the FBI investigation, which is their stall tactic. Some of the dim senator seem a little uneasy about following their strategy.

Huge part of their plan!

Feinstein and now Klobuchar tried.

Grassley is commenting now. It's BS.

[roberth]

And the Lindey Graham is forever etched in stone:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKSRUK-l7dM

Sums up this whole circus.

He ripped the communists a new one. We'll see if this is a one-time performance or if he continues this through the end of his senate career.

[Skip]

Coons moving the goalposts to "sloppy drinking." They are trying to make everything an issue of credibility. Kavanaugh's friends have given conflicting subjective statements on his drinking.

No one this did this to Ford this morning! She would have fallen apart.

Coons brining up the FBI again. Asking for another week.

And as a reminder, here is some good analysis on the questions that Ford might still have to answer in other forums that DID NOT get asked today. Ford is not off the hook.

https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2018/09/27/the-45-tough-forbidden-questions-a-normal-person-would-ask-christine-blasey-ford-n2522938


2. And it’s true that you wouldn’t want Future Justice Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court because of his conservative judicial philosophy regardless of the alleged incident?

3. Your lawyers are Democrat activists, right?

4. Are they working for free, or do you intend to pay them with the several hundred thousand dollars the various GoFundMe campaigns in your name have raised?

6. So, Dr. Ford, let’s get to the basics. Exactly what day and time did this incident happen?

7. Exactly where did this incident happen?

8. How many people were in the house at the time?

17. And you didn’t call the cops, right?

18. You didn’t tell your parents?

19. You didn’t even tell your friends?

20. But you happened to tell your therapist in 2012, right around the time Future Justice Kavanaugh’s name was being brought up as a Supreme Court candidate?

[Skip]

Fucking baseball tickets again!!!

Blumenthal tries to ask "do you believe Anita Hill?" But his time was up. If that doesn't that show this isn't about legitimate allegations against K, I don't know what else can.

[Irving]

I don't really like how he's dancing around the drinking questions. Asking about a sloppy drunk seems like very low hanging fruit. EVERYONE is a sloppy drunk. That said, slurring words, getting loud, being belligerent, none of those things equate to sexual violence.

Commentators on NPR are bringing up his filibustering of the questions within the time limit, but it seems like a drop in the bucket compared to the Dems withholding information for however many days.

[hollohas]

I'm listening mostly on the radio. Anyone else think the Judge sounds exactly like Ray Romano?

[Irving]

I'm listening mostly on the radio. Anyone else think the Judge sounds exactly like Ray Romano?

That's funny, he kind of does. If he's going to constantly list his academic achievements, he needs to end each time with "drunks don't achieve that."

[Skip]

That's funny, he kind of does. If he's going to constantly list his academic achievements, he needs to end each time with "drunks don't achieve that."

The subjects/answers are getting repetitive because there is nothing else to explore. The facts and absence of facts are out which makes the FBI investigation crys that much more amusing.

It's all up to Collins and Murkowski. Rumor is Flake is now onboard.

Spartacus up now. Being an asshole from the beginning.

[Skip]

Feinstein asked for personal privilege to try and defend herself from the delay.

It's blowing up in her face. Claims her office absolutely did not leak the story to media.

Cruz pointing out Feinstein could have confidentially brought the matter to the committee.

Cornyn not letting the leak issue go. Feinstein said one of Ford's friends might have leaked. It's unresolved.

Harris asking about polygraphs. Same talking points.

[Irving]

The more I listen to this, the more of a shit show it is. I didn't really know anything about Kavanaugh before this and had neutral feelings, but listening to him all day is not doing anything to make me like him more. I keep hearing about how smart this guy is, but it's not really showing with his responses.

[Skip]

The more I listen to this, the more of a shit show it is. I didn't really know anything about Kavanaugh before this and had neutral feelings, but listening to him all day is not doing anything to make me like him more. I keep hearing about how smart this guy is, but it's not really showing with his responses.

It's not about Kavanaugh being smart or clean as the driven snow, it's about the facts. We're on hour 7 (I think). There are no more facts for accusers to present that haven't been disputed and Kavanaugh's exculpatory evidence/witnesses/claims have been reviewed.

What you're hearing now is his response to Dim grandstanding.

Harris just asked him about his relationships with women. Seriously?

[Skip]

Adjourned!

[Irving]

It's not about Kavanaugh being smart or clean as the driven snow, it's about the facts. We're on hour 7 (I think). There are no more facts for accusers to present that haven't been disputed and Kavanaugh's exculpatory evidence/witnesses/claims have been reviewed.

What you're hearing now is his response to Dim grandstanding.

Harris just asked him about his relationships with women. Seriously?

I understand. No one really comes out of something like this looking great. I also understand there are certain tactics that each side takes to disrupt their opponent.

[Skip]

Someone on Capitol Hill just doxxed Republican Sens. Mike Lee, Orrin Hatch, and Lindsey Graham

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/someone-on-capitol-hill-just-doxxed-republican-sens-mike-lee-orrin-hatch-and-lindsey-graham


Wikipedia was used to distribute cells phone numbers of the GOP Senators and some family members.

[Bailey Guns]

I didn't really know anything about Kavanaugh before this and had neutral feelings, but listening to him all day is not doing anything to make me like him more.

And I feel just the opposite. Anybody who stands up to progressives like he is, uses their same bullshit tactics against them and just generally irritates them has my support.

If the 9:30 meeting tomorrow is still on, Grassley has the 11 votes to move this out of committee to the full senate for a vote.

[Skip]

I understand. No one really comes out of something like this looking great. I also understand there are certain tactics that each side takes to disrupt their opponent.

I think reasonable people really wanted more facts and only the facts. Most of today was subjective and emotional. So I understand the frustration.

But expectations shouldn't have been high with 36+ year old allegations. The fact Kavanaugh has his calendar is amazing!

Had the witnesses been able to corroborate any of Ford's story, there would have been more to see/hear. Or if just one witness agreed with Ford. But no one could even put them at the same party.

I also continue to think we'll know more about Ford, Ramirez, and Swetnick with time. If Kavanaugh get confirmed or not.

[Skip]

P.S. I also think a lot of people will feel sorry for Ford once the truth is known. She's being used. Ramirez maybe too. My feel on Swetnick is that she's an opportunist in partnership with CreepyPornLawyer.

I think Ford might have serious mental health issues. But that's just me.

[crays]

It's not just you...

Sent from somewhere...

[hurley842002]

The more I listen to this, the more of a shit show it is. I didn't really know anything about Kavanaugh before this and had neutral feelings, but listening to him all day is not doing anything to make me like him more. I keep hearing about how smart this guy is, but it's not really showing with his responses.I think that would certainly put you in the minority (the left being an exception), especially if you heard his opening statement.

[Irving]

Unfortunately I missed much past her opening statement, and I didn't hear his opening statement at all (heard it was good). I guess the point is that when someone has their past dragged out in public, and is forced to defend it, no one will come off looking fantastic. Mostly I was tired of his dancing around questions. As Skip pointed out, I understand that was part of the strategy to defend against what was pretty much a witch hunt from what I heard. The dems questions were pretty leading and ridiculous.

[hurley842002]

Unfortunately I missed much past her opening statement, and I didn't hear his opening statement at all (heard it was good). I guess the point is that when someone has their past dragged out in public, and is forced to defend it, no one will come off looking fantastic. Mostly I was tired of his dancing around questions. As Skip pointed out, I understand that was part of the strategy to defend against what was pretty much a witch hunt from what I heard. The dems questions were pretty leading and ridiculous.Fair response, and admittedly I cringed at a couple of his answers (dancing around), but after thinking about the question, I don't know that he had much choice but to "divert" the audience with his accomplishments.

[Skip]

Fair response, and admittedly I cringed at a couple of his answers (dancing around), but after thinking about the question, I don't know that he had much choice but to "divert" the audience with his accomplishments.

I was actually wondering how many people could honestly handle that level of scrutiny into their teenage/college years. Putting myself in his shoes to have your whole life opened up like that...

I'd be ashamed. No animals were harmed, but there are stories! And wasn't just "boys club" either because I had female friends (not relationship).

I would be hoping for drinking and farting questions.

[Irving]

I was having this discussion with my wife that under enough scrutiny, almost no one on this planet would be hired for a job given this level of scrutiny. "Hey, remember saying this when you were 16? Does that represent the entirety of the person that you are today?"

Nina Totenberg on NPR was talking about some conversation she had with some other conservative about how can Kavanaugh not be expected to recuse himself from anything having to do with the Senate after pretty much declaring them his enemies. I'm not well versed enough to know exactly what she was talking about. On that note though, I'd have had a hard time not acting snarky or straight up disrespectful myself. "This person said you drank enough to slur your words?" Me: "Oh no shit?! If you drink enough you slur your words? Must mean I'm a gang rapist by default. Guess you should have saved us all six hours and asked that one first!"

[BPTactical]

Awww, too bad.
Elections have consequences.
If Kavanaugh is confirmed (and I feel he will be) I think he will have an elephants memory of today and the last month.

Scorched earth.
Watching what little bit I did of him he was rightfully enraged at the shit flung at him.



Ford was a fool to be a tool, only to be used then discarded.

[Bailey Guns]

^^ I thought the same way. Senate democrats will have a lifelong enemy on the bench.

But then I thought he has way too much integrity and self-respect. Not to mention respect for the law. He's angry now and rightfully so. I doubt that anger will carry over once he's confirmed.

[Bailey Guns]

Isn't it ironic that if (when) Kavanaugh is confirmed it'll be largely due to DiFi? She's the reason for this shit-show and I think almost every republican knows it, and condemns it.

[Irving]

Isn't it ironic that if (when) Kavanaugh is confirmed it'll be largely due to DiFi? She's the reason for this shit-show and I think almost every republican knows it, and condemns it.

Are you thinking less Republicans would have voted for him before all this? I have no opinion as I didn't follow until now, just curious.

[hurley842002]

But then I thought he has way too much integrity and self-respect. Not to mention respect for the law. He's angry now and rightfully so. I doubt that anger will carry over once he's confirmed.

Completely agree, Kavanaugh is a good man.

[BPTactical]

^^ I thought the same way. Senate democrats will have a lifelong enemy on the bench.

But then I thought he has way too much integrity and self-respect. Not to mention respect for the law. He's angry now and rightfully so. I doubt that anger will carry over once he's confirmed.


I do wholeheartedly agree, the man could have never achieved what he has if he was not fair, balanced and of integrity.
But you know there will always be a case of the ass there.

He had no bones squaring off with Feinstink.
I loved it and Graham was awesome as well.

[davsel]

Just finished watching her testimony. What a miserable liberal twit. No surprise she's a psychology "professor."
She thinks she was mentally struggling before; just wait and see how miserable she has just guaranteed the rest of her life is going to be.
Karma

[Irving]

I do wholeheartedly agree, the man could have never achieved what he has if he was not fair, balanced and of integrity.


I'm not saying he's not those things, but there is no shortage of very successful people that aren't complete dirtbags.

[hurley842002]

I'm not saying he's not those things, but there is no shortage of very successful people that aren't complete dirtbags.So is your position more of a devil's advocate type position, or do you actually believe Kavanaugh may be a dirtbag?

[Irving]

I'm not trying to play devil's advocate so much as I'm trying to raise the minimum level of commentary. If we're going to complain about the Dems trying to draw completely BS inferences between things like high school drinking and partyig being indications of being a rapist, then if we at the same time make equally BS inferences of equating success to being fair and having integrity, that just makes us hypocrites.

I get so tired of the double standards and looking the other way for your team but not the other. Anyway, that was my point. I'll knock it off in this thread.

[Rucker61]

I'm not trying to play devil's advocate so much as I'm trying to raise the minimum level of commentary. If we're going to complain about the Dems trying to draw completely BS inferences between things like high school drinking and partyig being indications of being a rapist, then if we at the same time make equally BS inferences of equating success to being fair and having integrity, that just makes us hypocrites.

I get so tired of the double standards and looking the other way for your team but not the other. Anyway, that was my point. I'll knock it off in this thread.

"Age 20 isn't mature enough to own a gun".
"Age 17 is mature enough to be responsible".

[Irving]

Can't argue with that. I can tell you what, I like to drink beer as much as he did and I don't even keep a calendar now, let alone when I was 17. The event calendar was pretty impressive IMO.

[Skip]

The problem with that line of thinking, in this case, is that Kavanaugh had a pretty impressive portfolio of people saying he was a good man and great jurist. Six FBI BGCs.

No one said anything different that I saw. I think Dims we’re frustrated by this—he appeared almost boring other than his constructionist views.

Until two weeks ago. And boom, we’re taking about high school drinking and fart jokes. :)

No one is perfect and the process did look at positives and negatives. It’s the Ford claim that has made this absurd.

[Irving]

I agree. It's not like he came out of the woodwork, he's had a long history of notoriety and plenty of time for people he's supposedly hurt to come out about it.

[flogger]

This is going to backfire on the liberal left pigs (can I call them pigs?) . I think the 'on the fence' unaffiliated female voter will see this as it is, a smear campaign by a party who will parade false 'victims' for the party cause with no consideration of the so called accusers who have been coached and used like a political tampon. I was able to listen to maybe 35% of the hearings on and off. If I was watching it I'm sure my eyes would be bleeding.

I am really ashamed of our Government right now. The entire world is watching our Republic falling apart and (as usual) the media is stoking the flames.
Time to wake up folks.

VOTE to keep these clowns at bay, really important to spread the word. Don't let these F*cks gain an inch!

[Irving]

This is going to backfire on the liberal left pigs (can I call them pigs?) . I think the 'on the fence' unaffiliated female voter will see this as it is, a smear campaign by a party who will parade false 'victims' for the party cause with no consideration of the so called accusers who have been coached and used like a political tampon. I was able to listen to maybe 35% of the hearings on and off. If I was watching it I'm sure my eyes would be bleeding.

I am really ashamed of our Government right now. The entire world is watching our Republic falling apart and (as usual) the media is stoking the flames.
Time to wake up folks.

VOTE to keep these clowns at bay, really important to spread the word. Don't let these F*cks gain an inch!

I heard it brought up, and I have to agree, that with a seven hour hearing, it will really depend which parts people heard. Even NPR said if you only heard the second half, you'd be wondering what in the hell kind of scam the Democrats were running, compared to if you just heard the first half, you'd be thinking about some brave victim. I really hope that people get to hear clips of both, but given the left lean of the media, I'm not holding my breath that clips aren't going to be chosen to favor the left over the right. I hope you're right though. I was also really impressed with Grahams little outburst. I thought he tempered it perfectly.

[BPTactical]

Drinking a beer in honor of Kavanaugh and one helluva day for him.

[hatidua]

Drinking a beer in honor of Kavanaugh and one helluva day for him.

That's diplomatic. I'll go with what you wrote as my version would probably ruffle some of the snowflake feathers on this forum.

[hurley842002]

That's diplomatic. I'll go with what you wrote as my version would probably ruffle some of the snowflake feathers on this forum.

Do we really have that many snowflakes here?

[Bailey Guns]

Are you thinking less Republicans would have voted for him before all this? I have no opinion as I didn't follow until now, just curious.

Yes. To be clear I'm talking about his testimony. I think that really turned the tide. Apparently, I'm not the only one. Bob Corker, who was leaning towards a "no" vote, has now said he'll vote for Kavanaugh. Joe Manchin is a strong possibility for a "yes" vote on the democrat side.

[Bailey Guns]

I'm not trying to play devil's advocate so much as I'm trying to raise the minimum level of commentary. If we're going to complain about the Dems trying to draw completely BS inferences between things like high school drinking and partyig being indications of being a rapist, then if we at the same time make equally BS inferences of equating success to being fair and having integrity, that just makes us hypocrites.

I get so tired of the double standards and looking the other way for your team but not the other. Anyway, that was my point. I'll knock it off in this thread.

Let's be clear and honest about the bullshit questions the democrats were asking. Those questions were asked because they had nothing else. Nothing. They fired everything they had at Kavanaugh and they missed. He's going to be confirmed. You have NEVER seen a democrat nominee, for anything, treated like this by republicans. Never. But it happens over and over with democrats. And frankly, I see people on the right constantly bitching and complaining about republicans in government who promise one thing and do another. McCain was a perfect example. Conservatives hated McCain as a senator. I know I did. Same for the limp dicks like Jeff Flake and Ben Sasse or RINOs like Murkowski and Collins.

Democrats showed their true nature with this fiasco and it's very, very ugly.

[Grant H.]

I didn't get to listen to the testimony today, but I have gone back and looked over a lot of the notes, and one thing is painfully clear...

If Kavanaugh isn't confirmed because of this horse shit, we will never see a conservative judge confirmed again. It'll be the same ******* circus of manufactured claims of inappropriate conduct every time.

[Firehaus]

🤞🏼

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180928/765bb4803c4c499934d134612c802473.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Joe_K]

🤞🏼

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180928/765bb4803c4c499934d134612c802473.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Dims went full retard. Never go full retard.


“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;”
‭‭1 Timothy‬ ‭2:5‬ ‭

[DavieD55]

The Supreme Court: Why the Stakes Are So High

09/26/2018 James Bovard
The furor over the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh is spurring many commentators to bewail that the Supreme Court has become too powerful. But the real problem is that the Court is now often little more than a fig leaf to provide legitimacy for a Leviathan that would have mortified the Founding Fathers. The Court’s betrayal of its constitutional role has vastly increased the stakes for the current and any future Justice nomination.

Kavanaugh’s owes his credibility as a nominee to the Supreme Court dodging key issues in recent decades. Kavanaugh worked as a White House associate counsel after 9/11 when Justice Department lawyers asserted that the president had a right to violate the law and the Constitution, the most brazen assertion of absolutism in modern times. Kavanaugh avidly supported nominating John Yoo as a federal judge despite a Yoo memo asserting that President Bush had a right to declare martial law and deploy U.S. troops in American cities. The Supreme Court never forthrightly condemned the Bush administration’s torture program that Yoo legally enabled.

The Supreme Court also shirked ruling on the National Security Administration illegal wiretapping, instead rejecting a challenge in 2013 because the defendants could not prove the feds secretly spied on them. The Court was shamed a few months later when Edward Snowden released a deluge of documents proving vast illicit surveillance of millions of Americans. But because the Court never stood up for Americans’ constitutional rights, Kavanaugh could get away with a 2015 appeals court decision in which he declared that “the Government’s metadata collection (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/11/20/the-metadata-collection-program-is-constitutional-at-least-) program is entirely consistent with the Fourth Amendment.”

The Court’s post-9/11 docility fits a long pattern of rulings which have practically defined “outrageous government conduct” such as entrapment out of existence. For practically a century, the Supreme Court has been “the dog that didn’t bark” when the executive and legislative branches trampled the Constitution. (In the 1892 story "Silver Blaze," Sherlock Holmes identified a horse thief thanks to his familiarity with a dog that failed to sound the alarm.)

In 1990, in the case of Michigan vs. Sitz (https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/496/444.html) (https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/496/444.html) , the Supreme Court upheld drunk driving checkpoints because the searches were equally intrusive on all drivers, so no individual had a right to complain. This stood the Bill of Rights on its head, requiring government to equally violate the rights of all citizens. The same legal mindset sanctifies Transportation Security Administration enhanced patdowns which pointlessly grope groins as long as the feds treat all travelers like terrorist suspects.

In 2001, in the case of Atwater vs. Lago Vista (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/532/318/) , the Court upheld the arrest of any citizen accused of violating any picayune local, state, or federal ordinance. This case involved a Texas woman who was driving slowly in a residential area; because her children were not wearing seatbelts, she was handcuffed and taken away. The Court declared that police can arrest anyone believed to have “committed even a very minor criminal offense.” This ignores the criminalization of everyday life that has occurred at every level of government, thus giving law enforcement pretexts to detain almost anyone they choose. (Police boast that they can find a reason to pull over almost any driver.)

In 2005, in the case of Kelo vs. New London (https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-108.ZS.html) , the Supreme Court approved local politicians confiscating private property as long as they believe that some other private use of the land would generate more tax revenue. Scuttling the Fifth Amendment’s Takings clause (which restricted the use of eminent domain), the Court instead empowered governments to commandeer any land for almost any purpose so long as government officials promised net benefits to society sometime in the future. This sweeping decision makes private property rights contingent on political candor - the shakiest of foundations.

Court decisions do occasionally throw a penalty flag on government abuses but the Justices are akin to a football referee that notices only every tenth clip or roughing of the quarterback. Unfortunately, the Court has consistently ruled that government officials are personally immune regardless of how they abuse private citizens.

If the Supreme Court had not long devoted itself to concocting judicial rationales for political power grabs, there would not be so much hatred and fear surrounding the Kavanaugh nomination. Because of the deference Court decisions receive, citizens view court nominees as the ultimate czars of whether they will be forcibly disarmed, stripped of their property, treated like prisoners when traveling, or denied sovereignty over their own bodies. Recent bitter experience confirms the wisdom of Thomas Jefferson’s 1820 warning that permitting judges to be “the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions” is “a very dangerous doctrine indeed.”

Rather than focusing on whether Kavanaugh or his accusers consumed excessive alcohol, we should recognize that the current frenzy is the result of a political class long since drunk with power. Regardless of the outcome of the Kavanaugh nomination, the Supreme Court should return to its long-lost role as a bulwark against tyranny. Unfortunately, there are not any mobs in the Washington streets howling for that salutary outcome.

https://mises.org/wire/supreme-court-why-stakes-are-so-high (https://mises.org/wire/supreme-court-why-stakes-are-so-high %20)

[10x]

What a disgusting process. I was angry all night at the way he has been treated. Even to tv panel on 5.1 said the democrats made them feel sick. I hope it does backfire on the dems and he gets in the supreme court.

[BPTactical]

����

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180928/765bb4803c4c499934d134612c802473.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



The next liberal sound you hear is "Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeee!"

[crays]

In here, mostly what I see is "win", and how this should sway on-the-fence folks, but have many of you had the displeasure of watching/listening to any news, radio, etc. last night or this morning?

The media (as expected) is cherry picking the sound bites and perspectives to continue to skew this left. Unfortunately, a large portion of the on-the-fence folks are also low info voters.
Should he be confirmed? I feel he should, and it should be done right away. We still have a huge uphill battle, and the dims are going to double or triple down after this. I also feel, and I do not wish harm or ill will on anyone, should any of the sitting judges become incapacitated due to medical or mental issues, the R's should immediately and forcefully nominate and confirm the next judge, providing they still hold the power to do so. You know the dims will, and they will rest on this debacle to justify it. Hell, if they gain enough power, they would likely move to increase the number of sitting judges, so they can regain the majority opinion.

If anyone feels this has exposed the dims true colors in a manner that will change the vast majority of the public opinion, I feel you are sadly mistaken.

[crays]

One other little tidbit.

As we are all aware, and willing to recognize, it is the lack of evidentiary facts that make Dr. Ford a less than credible victim. Namely, date, time and location. In light of Judge Kavanaugh's extremely fortuitous calendar system, I have had one nagging thought. Do teenage girls still keep diaries? Pretty sure a lot of them did when I was in high school in this same time frame.

You would thing the dims would have been clamoring to present that, were that the case (or they would at least been able to pin down date, time and place). Maybe they were saving it for the FBI investigation. LOL

I guess she didn't... Or did she?



And before anyone rushes to point out that this wasn't about a teenage assault: I know that, and fully understand the machination of the dims regarding this ploy.

[BPTactical]

LOL, Hirano, Harris and Booker walked out of the hearing...








...Affirmative Action hires seldom work out as planned

[Great-Kazoo]

LOL, Hirano, Harris and Booker walked out of the hearing...








...Affirmative Action hires seldom work out as planned

Booker walked out because he was afraid after fetchin coffee for Ford, she might recognize him from her past too.

[68Charger]

Booker walked out because he was afraid after fetchin coffee for Ford, she might recognize him from her past too.

did you just assume her gender preference?

[Irving]

In here, mostly what I see is "win", and how this should sway on-the-fence folks, but have many of you had the displeasure of watching/listening to any news, radio, etc. last night or this morning?

The media (as expected) is cherry picking the sound bites and perspectives to continue to skew this left. Unfortunately, a large portion of the on-the-fence folks are also low info voters.
Should he be confirmed? I feel he should, and it should be done right away. We still have a huge uphill battle, and the dims are going to double or triple down after this. I also feel, and I do not wish harm or ill will on anyone, should any of the sitting judges become incapacitated due to medical or mental issues, the R's should immediately and forcefully nominate and confirm the next judge, providing they still hold the power to do so. You know the dims will, and they will rest on this debacle to justify it. Hell, if they gain enough power, they would likely move to increase the number of sitting judges, so they can regain the majority opinion.

If anyone feels this has exposed the dims true colors in a manner that will change the vast majority of the public opinion, I feel you are sadly mistaken.

I even saw one piece calling for Ford to be nominated to the Supreme Court instead. :(

[Grant H.]

snip...

Hell, if they gain enough power, they would likely move to increase the number of sitting judges, so they can regain the majority opinion.



If they go that route, that will be the end of the USA as we know it. I agree, they would/will think about it and try it, but it will end very poorly for this country. Potentially at the level of the next civil war.




If anyone feels this has exposed the dims true colors in a manner that will change the vast majority of the public opinion, I feel you are sadly mistaken.



I actually know a few moderate liberals that have come away disgusted with this farce, and have become vocal about it.

In general, however, I agree. The left won't care. You can see their level of tolerance for the truly disgusting within their ranks by looking at their handling of Ellison.

[Zundfolge]

Hell, if they gain enough power, they would likely move to increase the number of sitting judges, so they can regain the majority opinion.

Last time they tried to pull that the constitution was amended to term limit presidents so fast it made people's heads spin ... had FDR been successful in packing the court it would likely have cause CWII and we were much more unified as a people back then.

Anyway, this was funny:

https://www.ar-15.co/attachment.php?attachmentid=76214&d=1538149877

[Skip]

One other little tidbit.

As we are all aware, and willing to recognize, it is the lack of evidentiary facts that make Dr. Ford a less than credible victim. Namely, date, time and location. In light of Judge Kavanaugh's extremely fortuitous calendar system, I have had one nagging thought. Do teenage girls still keep diaries? Pretty sure a lot of them did when I was in high school in this same time frame.

You would thing the dims would have been clamoring to present that, were that the case (or they would at least been able to pin down date, time and place). Maybe they were saving it for the FBI investigation. LOL

I guess she didn't... Or did she?

And before anyone rushes to point out that this wasn't about a teenage assault: I know that, and fully understand the machination of the dims regarding this ploy.

You are asking a very good question. Which is one of the many good questions that were not put to Ford yesterday. And I remind everyone -- Ford's statements were not scrutinized to any level beyond witness corroboration. GOP was afraid to, which is why they hired the female expert.

I think we can assume that any and all evidence that would corroborate Ford's claim would have been submitted. They even reneged on the medical records (2012 mention of assault before nomination).

We also don't any background info on Ford. I think that will change. They scrubbed her socials while the "working group" was plotting and timing. Her family has stayed completely silent. I think we will find she is an unwell woman who was desperate for validation.

This stunt has driven every mentally ill Lib out of the woodwork to project their real (or manufactured) victimization against Kavanaugh, Trump, and the GOP. Socials are full of it. It's sick.

You should see what they did to Flake this morning...

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1045671067270836224

[Skip]

Just watch the first 30 seconds and ask if you know any well people who talk this way. Watch her face.

This is becoming a meme but I think it's illness and probably shouldn't be mocked.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UZo-x2Ixlc


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UZo-x2Ixlc

[Justin]

One of the deepest fears that leftists seem to harbor is absolute terror at the notion of being outgrouped. It's notable that being outrgouped is her go-to in this situation.