Like i said, If he nominated Barack Obama they'd still fight itQuote:
Originally Posted by Zundfolge
Printable View
Like i said, If he nominated Barack Obama they'd still fight itQuote:
Originally Posted by Zundfolge
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.
Hmm, 10am EST has passed.
That was the deadline for Ford.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
Modern witch hunting for sure. If you weigh less than a duck, then you're a sexual abuser.Quote:
Originally Posted by foxtrot
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by foxtrot
Agree with you 100%!!! But I have to point out to everyone, this was the whole idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by foxtrot
#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-c...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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by RblDiver
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
Yup, you're nailing it!Quote:
Originally Posted by foxtrot
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/8f5fc89473d8429f9...ign=SocialFlow
No, I wasn't referring to you. No everything is about you, Stu.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
[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.
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...extension.html
This is disappointing, people are looking for him to hold firm to his Monday deadline.Quote:
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip
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.
Not sure how many rational people are voters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
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
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.
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.
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/...-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/JackPosob...37625247227905
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxNews
I think the other good question is if this is a legitimate memory of hers at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
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/...-bargain-time/
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/20/polit...ser/index.htmlQuote:
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.
Quote:
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...ds-legal-team/
What objections? Blowback for subornation of perjury?Quote:
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]
Quote:
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.
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-...eborah-Ramirez
I would encourage everyone to read the whole, see how they operate.Quote:
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.
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.
I want to say that this is getting ridiculous, except it started ridiculous.
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.
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
People are saying Trump should drop Kavanaugh and pick someone else (Barrett). The problem is they could do this to anyone.
It's personal but it's really not about Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh swings the court Conservative. They looked at Gorsuch at maintaining the status quo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
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.
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?
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by CavSct1983
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.
I probably shouldn't say this but whatever, here goes it:Quote:
Originally Posted by TFOGGER
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChickNorris
Smart ass. I know what you meant though so it's okay to vent your frustration framed as a joke, this time. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
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.
From The Daily Wire (Ben Shapiro's site)
Quote:
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.
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.
Grassley has emerged from weekend hiding and tweeted about.... corn.
https://twitter.com/ChuckGrassley/st...09213646925825
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.