Sunday, September 23, 2018

The Bladensburg Peace Cross

Occasionally we come to a point where you have to ask yourself whether you really do support the Constitution of the United States of America, or whether you think it just introduces a bunch of rules and head-in-the-clouds ideas that should be ignored or undermined.

And so we have the Bladensburg Peace Cross, a very large cross commemorating the sacrifices of forty-nine Prince George's County men who gave their lives in World War I. The forty-foot high cross was erected in 1925 and is a local landmark; it sits on a third of an acre of land owned by the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission, in the median of the intersection of Bladensburg Road and Baltimore Avenue in the suburb of Bladensburg, northeast of DC in PG County, near Hyattsville.

The Post oversimplifies a bit, but ... here's the problem:
A federal appeals court ruling on a challenge brought by atheists has said the Peace Cross is an unconstitutional government endorsement of religion and told a state commission that maintains the cross on public land to remove it, reshape or reassign its ownership. A World War I cross under siege
In 2015 a federal court ruled that because the purpose of the cross was not fundamentally religious, it did not violate the Constitutional provision that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” The American Humanist Association appealed the ruling, and this week the Supreme Court will decide whether to take on the case.

It is not quite correct to call the American Humanist Association "atheists." The group's web site describes humanism as encompassing a "variety of nontheistic views (atheism, agnosticism, rationalism, naturalism, secularism, and so forth) while adding the important element of a comprehensive worldview and set of ethical values -- values that are grounded in the philosophy of the Enlightenment, informed by scientific knowledge, and driven by a desire to meet the needs of people in the here and now."

While many of them might not specifically call themselves "humanists," surveys show that about a fifth to a third of the American population do not have a religious affiliation. This proportion has been growing steadily since the 1990's. Most of these people believe in a higher power or spiritual force, they just don't accept the teachings of any particular religion. On the other hand, about three-fourths of Americans identify themselves as Christian with less than two-thirds belonging to a church congregation.

A symbol such as the Peace Cross creates a sort of dilemma for patriotic Christians; while they themselves may find the symbol to be consistent with their personal beliefs, their commitment to the Constitution and to the comon good of the country leads them to conclude that such a symbol should not be placed on government-owned land. As the humanists point out in their complaint, "[One of the plaintiffs ] believes that the Bladensburg Cross associates a Christian religious symbol with the State and gives the impression that the State supports and approves of Christianity, as opposed to other religions, and that the state may even prefer Christians and Christianity over other religions."

This is of course obvious.

It would be easy, though intellectually dishonest, to typify this dispute as if one side was less patriotic or less spiritual than the other, or as if one side values the sacrifices of fallen soldiers more than another. I don't see anything on the humanists' web site that says they are pacifists, or are opposed to traditional American values in any way, there is nothing here about honoring servicemen. The situation brings into focus a very specific violation of a very specific requirement of the Constitution, which is the founding document of the principles and laws upon which our civil society depends. The question is simple: do you support the Constitution, or not?

There can be no question that a forty-foot cross on government land in the middle of a busy intersection is a violation of the Establishment Clause, and I doubt that anyone is going to try to argue that. The cross is a Christian symbol, it has Christian wording on it and Christian services have been held there. I don't recall that the New Testament has any special comment about the mortality of soldiers, but the symbol of the cross suggests that the citizens hope that the soldiers who died in war will go to heaven and enjoy a Christian afterlife. There is no argument to be made that the humanists have misinterpreted this.

The question simply forces a choice. Are we as a nation committed to following the framework of the Constitution, or are we not? The Establishment Clause, and its counterpart the Free Exercise Clause, are clearly the result of some hard thinking and debate by the Framers. Though most of them went to church on Sunday and many would be described as Christians, they realized the danger that religion could have if it were able to insinuate itself into the processes of government. When they added a Bill of Rights to the Constitution, this was put into the very first amendment. There are lots of countries where religion is central to the government, and while it might work here and there it is intentionally and explicitly not the way we do it here. The ideal we call "freedom" or "liberty" is at the core of our understanding of what it means to be Americans. Our freedom is constantly under threat, and that threat almost always comes from within our borders.

Seems like there are two obvious solutions to this problem with the Bladensburg Peace Cross. They could knock it down, or they could transfer its ownership away from the state. There have been some legal ambiguities in the past about who actually owned that land, settled in 1960 with a judgment that the state of Maryland owned it. The cross was conceived and implemented by the American Legion, and they still have an interest in it. Why not give it to them, sell it for a dollar or something? I'm sure volunteers could work to keep the monument in good shape.

The humanists are not complaining because there is a cross. Clearly there are religious symbols everywhere you go, and religious expression is protected by the Constitution -- just not religious expression by government. Humanists don't care if people are religious. They are complaining because the state of Maryland is making a statement that favors one particular religion, in violation of the First Amendment.

There is a uniquely poignant irony in commemorating the lives of men who died to preserve our freedom as written into the Constitution by erecting a monument that violates that freedom.

No facts are under dispute. The cross is just what the Constitution forbids. Until now people have been willing to look the other way, but now the court will almost certainly be forced to rule that the law is being violated. Because it is.

I am hoping the American people are smart enough to work out a solution here. Everybody supports a monument honoring fallen soldiers. And even humanists can live with a big cross in the median, it doesn't hurt them in any way. The Constitution is a good idea and should not be treated like an imposition or an obstacle. The First Amendment is truly a cornerstone of our society which has offered Americans the freedom that makes this country what it is. You don't want to blow it off here.

I am hoping that the state and the citizens figure out a way to sell that little patch of land to a private investor. This cross is a prominent feature of the local landscape, with deep significance in respecting those who have lost their lives in service to their country. But it does violate the Constitution, when it is owned by the state.

This could become another polarizing moment in our turbulent time, and it probably will. Or it could become an occasion for people to work together, to see if there isn't a way we can make a small adjustment that lets the people of Bladensburg keep their monument.

173 Comments:

Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Along with the cross and "In god we trust" on their money, these sort of American government promotions of christianity show the hypocrisy of conservative judges. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh can laughably claim they are "unbiased umpires calling balls and strikes" but that is not even remotely the truth.

Its an open and shut legal case that a cross like this and "In god we trust" on money is unconstitutional but conservative judges always make up some bullshit about how an obvious endorsement of christianity is somehow not religious.

The truth is conservative justices aren't impartial umpires calling balls and strikes, they choose what policy outcome they want and then work backwards to whatever sort of bullshit legal reasoning will provide a facade for their decision.

Research shows this to be true.

"[Professor Geoffrey] Stone concludes that the moderately liberal justices apply an approach in line with “the original concerns of the Framers of the Constitution and in their distinctive understanding of the special responsibility of courts in our constitutional system,” while the Court’s conservatives’ “votes cannot be explained by any consistent theory of constitutional interpretation” but are instead driven by their own policy preferences.

September 23, 2018 1:13 PM  
Anonymous A married couple with adopted children is too a family! said...


Bigoted conservative justices like to argue that laws should be judged based on the framers original intent and so things like gay marriage should be considered unconstitutional despite never being addressed in the constitution.

The truth is the founding fathers never intended the constitution to be a "dead" document that never changes, they recognized that future generations would gain wisdom that allowed them to make improvements to the constitutions:


"The warmest friends to and the best supporters of the Constitution, do not contend that it is free from imperfections; but these were not to be avoided, and they are convinced if evils are likely to flow from them, that the remedy must come thereafter; because, in the present moment it is not to be obtained. And as there is a Constitutional door open for it, I think the people (for it is with them to judge) can, as they will have the aid of experience on their side, decide with as much propriety on the alterations and amendments which shall be found necessary, as ourselves; for I do not conceive that we are more inspired--have more wisdom--or possess more virtue than those who will come after us. The power under the Constitution will always be with the people."
-- G. Washington, to Bushrod Washington, Nov. 9, 1787

September 23, 2018 1:17 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...

Central to finding the truth of Christine Blasey Ford's claim that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh tried to rape her is interviewing the witnesses present at the party.

Kavanaugh friend Mark Judge was in the room when the assault happened but now claims either he doesn't remember or it didn't happen and is adamant that he doesn't want to testify under oath under any circumstances.

Two other people were mentioned by Dr. Ford as being present at the party.

An honest search for the truth would demand that these people be interviewed but of course Rethuglicans on the judiciary committee refuse to subpoena Mark Judge to appear or have the other two witnesses appear when Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford testify about the sexual assault. Because those Republicans don't give a damn about the truth, they couldn't care less if Kanaugh sexually assaulted anyone. Or that Kavanaugh lied repeatedly under oath during his confirmation hearing about not having received documents stolen from Democrats back when he was working for the Bush White house and counseling judicial nominees to be deceptive to get confirmed.

September 23, 2018 1:23 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

To conservatives honesty, fairness, and equality are secondary to gaining power over people they don't like.

That's why liberals are more moral than conservatives.

September 23, 2018 1:27 PM  
Anonymous A married couple with adopted children is too a family! said...


Despite the fact that the hearing on the sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh has yet to be held several Republican politicians like McConnell, Mike Pence, Tяump and many others have said they couldn't care less what comes out of the hearing they're going to force through the Kavanaugh confirmation regardless.

Virtually every woman has been sexually assaulted or knows a woman who has. The callous indifference and corruption shown by Republicans rushing through the confirmation of a nominee credibly accused of sexual assault will turn a large percentage of women who voted Republican against the Republican party for many years to come.

September 23, 2018 1:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Christine Ford says Kavanaugh tried to rape her.

She passed a lie detector test.

Kavanaugh refuses to take one.

She's telling the truth.

September 23, 2018 3:24 PM  
Anonymous homosexuality never produces life, two of 'em ain't marriage said...

It was a week of pure political theater, a disgrace to everything this country used to stand for, and Democrats loved every minute of what they’d created. Between the faux outrage and the pearl-clutching across liberal Washington, there wasn’t a fainting couch that wasn’t engaged. It was all garbage.

We will never know happened to Christine Blasey Ford in the early 80s, even after she tells her story. Frankly, I don’t care anymore. When she first came forward I was willing to hear her out. It quickly became clear, whatever her story was, that her story didn’t matter. By Monday it was a liberal feeding frenzy and I was out.

In a country with more than a million lawyers, Ford ran into the arms of a liberal activist attorney you’d pick if you were looking for a political outcome, not justice. Maybe she was poorly advised by the Democrats she’d come out to months earlier, or maybe she was a willing participant. But people looking for justice don’t both want to remain anonymous and hire a lawyer, contact the media on background, take a polygraph test, and wipe clean their Internet footprint without some semblance of a plan.

Either Ford is a naïve 50-something woman with a Ph.D. or she’s a willing participant in this garbage show. It no longer really matters which.

If it did, if she were sincere, she wouldn’t be a willing participant in this circus.

September 24, 2018 6:06 AM  
Anonymous homosexuality never produces life, two of 'em ain't marriage said...

On Monday, her lawyer and Democrats demanded she be allowed to testify. They insisted she was eager to do it. When Republicans immediately agreed, the demand changed to requiring an FBI investigation first. This occurred despite there being nothing for the FBI to investigate, since her story has evolved slightly but still lacks any details that could prove or disprove anything. Once that attempt at delay was played out, Republicans set a deadline: decide to testify by Friday at 10:00 am or there will be a Committee vote Monday.

As if it weren’t weird enough already, leftists issued more demands. She would tell the story she was supposedly itching to tell if, and only if, her wish list was granted. After days of liberals decrying the idea “a bunch of white men” asking her questions, she insisted that only those white men be allowed to ask her questions – none of this having a female staff lawyer ask her anything. Optics suddenly became more important than “her truth.”

She also wanted Judge Kavanaugh to testify first. While Kavanaugh has been unequivocal in his denials and never waived from his commitment to rebut any allegation, you can’t rebut allegations that haven’t been testified to. The accused never goes first, it’s un-American.

That didn’t matter, Democrats were immediately on board because they wanted anything to delay the process further. The concept of not allowing Ford and her team to dictate how the United State Senate conducts its business was irrelevant, and anything short of complete appeasement was declared “bullying.” In fact, everything was declared bullying. Every time Republicans agreed to what she wanted they were called bullies, chastised for “re-traumatizing” Ford for not agreeing to simply believe her.

Guilty was the only answer they’d accept, though they’d likely declare that not enough if they’d gotten it.

Senator Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, kept setting deadlines for her to agree to testify or he’d call for a vote. She wouldn’t, then he’d change them. His leadership made Barack Obama look strong on chemical weapons use in Syria.

On Friday, Ford came up with a new excuse as to why she can’t testify on Monday – she’s uncomfortable with confined spaces, so she won’t fly to DC. She’ll drive, probably, but couldn’t possibly make it till Thursday. She’s had all week to decide this, but didn’t mention anything about this “phobia” until yet another deadline approached.

It worked, Grassley’s deadline was moved again.

September 24, 2018 6:07 AM  
Anonymous homosexuality never produces life, two of 'em ain't marriage said...

After that, Senator Dianne Feinstein, who started all of this by hiding Ford’s letter for 6 weeks, had the nerve to say, “We must treat sexual assault survivors with respect, not bully or try to silence them.”

There was no bullying and there was nothing more Republicans could do to hear her story, her team was delaying again because delay was their only play.

Feinstein’s lies were not unique to her. Miraculously, every Democrat and journalist switched stories the way a baby has their diaper changed, and none of them missed a beat or were bothered by contradicting themselves, sometimes from just hours earlier. It was disgusting.

I don’t know what happened for Ford, but I do know she doesn’t want to talk about it under oath. In the past 2 months, she’s talked to probably dozens of Democrats at this point, elected and activist, the Washington Post on multiple occasions, a therapist, a polygraph operator, her husband, friends, but no one under oath.

Kavanaugh has submitted a statement that is subject to perjury laws, as have the others Ford said were at the party she can’t remember the location or year of, but she hasn’t. Her team is doing everything possible to avoid it, they want this hanging out there as long as possible to weaponize the charge without having it questioned. The Soviet Union used to do this, not America.

Facts no longer matter when the target is a conservative. Reality is whatever liberals want it to be at any given moment and whatever they declared it to be beforehand, even if it was the exact opposite of what they say it is now, doesn’t matter and it’s bullying to point it out.

It needs to stop. But Democrats won’t stop doing it because they pay no price for it, the “referees” in the media are wearing a blue uniform under their suits. The only way this madness stops is for it to stop working on Republicans. The “moderate” Senate Republicans need to choose to put the country over their reelection. They’d likely be surprised to find having a spine is good for job security. All Republicans would likely find the same thing.

Enough is enough, it’s time to stop begging Ford to testify and simply move on. When she shows up on 60 Minutes, telling her story in yet another venue that won’t question her in any serious way, it won’t be lost on the public that she was given more opportunities to testify than anyone in modern history yet always only ever chose partisan outlets. For someone uncomfortable telling her story, liberals seem to think she’d be willing to tell it just before the midterms. So what?

It’s time to hold the vote. It’s time to confirm Judge Kavanaugh. You can only give someone everything they want so many times before you have to accept that they really wanted something else, in this case it’s delay.

There will be another outrage, either way. The entire Democratic Party campaign strategy is to keep their base angry and afraid to motivate them to the polls. The only way to counter that outrage is to deliver on promises and stand up to it like that guy stood up to the tanks in Tiananmen Square, because it’s the same philosophy driving both. Hold the damn vote already.

September 24, 2018 6:10 AM  
Anonymous heterosexuality: society's greatest asset said...

An uncorroborated, decades-old claim that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh exposed himself to a college classmate did not pass The New York Times' smell test, according to the White House.

The claim by Debbie Ramirez that the federal judge sexually harassed her during a Yale University party is the latest to rock the confirmation process. It was published by The New Yorker, despite the fact that none of the people Ramirez said could back her story did so.

“The Times had interviewed several dozen people over the past week in an attempt to corroborate her story, and could find no one with firsthand knowledge," the Times wrote in a story that followed the New Yorker report. "Ms. Ramirez herself contacted former Yale classmates asking if they recalled the incident and told some of them that she could not be certain Mr. Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself.”


The White House pointed to several other potential inconsistencies as it mounted an aggressive pushback to the latest Kavanaugh bombshell. As Kavanaugh himself denied the accusation, the White House noted the accuser admitted there were “gaps” in her memory as she had been drinking at the time, she spent six days “assessing her memories” in conversations with her attorney and the magazine acknowledged no other eyewitnesses backed up the account.

The claim followed that of a California woman who alleges Kavanaugh held her down and tried to force himself on her while both were in high school. Like Ramirez's claim, that charge, by Christine Blasey Ford, has not been corroborated.

Sen. Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, late Sunday slammed Senate Democrats for withholding information from the committee regarding the new sexual misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh.

The Iowa Republican said the committee will attempt to evaluate the new claims, but said in a statement “it appears that they [Democrats] are more interested in a political takedown" than “pursing allegations through a bipartisan and professional investigative process.”

His office released the statement after two new allegations emerged against Kavanaugh. A third potential allegation has arisen from Michael Avenatti, the attorney for porn star Stormy Daniels, who claims Kavanaugh and others targeted women with "alcohol/drugs" to allow men to gang rape them at high school parties. This accusation also has lacked any corroboration to date.

September 24, 2018 8:59 AM  
Anonymous sayanora, gay agenda said...

on PBS last night, a homosexual was convicted of sodomy and they tied a millstone around his neck and pushed him into the sea

Even before President Trump’s election, hatred had begun to emerge on the American left—counterintuitively, as an assertion of guilelessness and moral superiority. At the Women’s March in Washington the weekend after Mr. Trump’s inauguration, the pop star Madonna said, “I have thought an awful lot of blowing up the White House.” Here hatred was a vanity, a braggadocio meant to signal her innocence of the sort of evil that, in her mind, the White House represented.

For many on the left a hateful anti-Americanism has become a self-congratulatory lifestyle. “America was never that great,” New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo recently said. For radical groups like Black Lives Matter, hatred of America is a theme of identity, a display of racial pride.

For other leftists, hate is a license. Conservative speakers can be shouted down, even assaulted, on university campuses. Republican officials can be harassed in restaurants, in the street, in front of their homes. Certain leaders of the left—Rep. Maxine Waters comes to mind—are self-appointed practitioners of hate, urging their followers to think of hatred as power itself.

How did the American left—conceived to bring more compassion and justice to the world—become so given to hate? It began in the 1960s, when America finally accepted that slavery and segregation were profound moral failings. That acceptance changed America forever. It imposed a new moral imperative: America would have to show itself redeemed of these immoralities in order to stand as a legitimate democracy.

The genius of the left in the ’60s was simply to perceive the new moral imperative, and then to identify itself with it. Thus the labor of redeeming the nation from its immoral past would fall on the left. This is how the left put itself in charge of America’s moral legitimacy. The left, not the right—not conservatism—would set the terms of this legitimacy and deliver America from shame to decency.

This bestowed enormous political and cultural power on the American left, and led to the greatest array of government-sponsored social programs in history—at an expense, by some estimates, of more than $22 trillion. But for the left to wield this power, there had to be a great menace to fight against—a tenacious menace that kept America uncertain of its legitimacy, afraid for its good name.

This amounted to a formula for power: The greater the menace to the nation’s moral legitimacy, the more power redounded to the left. And the ’60s handed the left a laundry list of menaces to be defeated. If racism was necessarily at the top of the list, it was quickly followed by a litany of bigotries ending in “ism” and “phobia.”

The left had important achievements. It did rescue America from an unsustainable moral illegitimacy. It also established the great menace of racism as America’s most intolerable disgrace. But the left’s success has plunged it into its greatest crisis since the ’60s. The Achilles’ heel of the left has been its dependence on menace for power. Think of all the things it can ask for in the name of fighting menaces like “systemic racism” and “structural inequality.” But what happens when the evils that menace us begin to fade, and then keep fading?

September 24, 2018 12:14 PM  
Anonymous sayanora, gay agenda said...

It is undeniable that America has achieved since the ’60s one of the greatest moral evolutions ever. That is a profound problem for the left, whose existence is threatened by the diminishment of racial oppression. The left’s unspoken terror is that racism is no longer menacing enough to support its own power. The great crisis for the left today—the source of its angst and hatefulness—is its own encroaching obsolescence. Today the left looks to be slowly dying from lack of racial menace.

A single white-on-black shooting in Ferguson, Mo., four years ago resulted in a prolonged media blitz and the involvement of the president of the United States. In that same four-year period, thousands of black-on-black shootings took place in Chicago, hometown of the then-president, yet they inspired very little media coverage and no serious presidential commentary.

White-on-black shootings evoke America’s history of racism and so carry an iconic payload of menace. Black-on-black shootings carry no such payload, although they are truly menacing to the black community. They evoke only despair. And the left gets power from fighting white evil, not black despair.

Today’s left lacks worthy menaces to fight. It is driven to find a replacement for racism, some sweeping historical wrongdoing that morally empowers those who oppose it. (Climate change?) Failing this, only hatred is left.

Hatred is a transformative power. It can make the innocuous into the menacing. So it has become a weapon of choice. The left has used hate to transform President Trump into a symbol of the new racism, not a flawed president but a systemic evil. And he must be opposed as one opposes racism, with a scorched-earth absolutism.

For Martin Luther King Jr., hatred was not necessary as a means to power. The actual details of oppression were enough. Power came to him because he rejected hate as a method of resisting menace. He called on blacks not to be defined by what menaced them. Today, because menace provides moral empowerment, blacks and their ostensible allies indulge in it. The menace of black victimization becomes the unarguable truth of the black identity. And here we are again, forever victims.

Yet the left is still stalked by obsolescence. There is simply not enough menace to service its demands for power. The voices that speak for the left have never been less convincing. It is hard for people to see the menace that drives millionaire football players to kneel before the flag. And then there is the failure of virtually every program the left has ever espoused—welfare, public housing, school busing, affirmative action, diversity programs, and so on.

For the American left today, the indulgence in hate is a death rattle.

September 24, 2018 12:17 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


White House leaks that Kavanaugh is struggling with questions about drinking and sex life in prep for hearings

And another woman has come forward and accused supreme court nominiee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual abuse. She says when they were in university together they were at a party and a drunken Kavanaugh pulled out his penis and waved it in her face until she had to slap it away.

And lawyer Michael Avenatti says a third woman has contacted him to say Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her. Avenatti is requesting to speak and ask questions at the hearing into Kavanaugh's sexual assault on Christine Blasey Ford.

No wonder Kavanaugh in mock questioning is having trouble answering questions about his drinking and sexual activity!

Kavan-naugh-naugh
Kavan-naugh-naugh

Hey, hey

GOOD BYE!

September 24, 2018 1:30 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Balko Proves the Systemic Racial Bias in Law Enforcement

My friend Radley Balko’s work on our criminal (in)justice system is absolutely invaluable. I consider him to be an indispensable journalist on the topic. In his column at the Washington Post, he puts up a very long and detailed post that links to dozens of studies that prove beyond all reasonable doubt that there is systemic racism at every level of law enforcement and the courts. And he describes what this means:

Of particular concern to some on the right is the term “systemic racism,” often wrongly interpreted as an accusation that everyone in the system is racist. In fact, systemic racism means almost the opposite. It means that we have systems and institutions that produce racially disparate outcomes, regardless of the intentions of the people who work within them. When you consider that much of the criminal-justice system was built, honed and firmly established during the Jim Crow era — an era almost everyone, conservatives concluded, will concede rife with racism — this is pretty intuitive. The modern criminal-justice system helped preserve racial order — it kept black people in their place. For much of the early 20th century, in some parts of the country, that was its primary function. That it might retain some of those proclivities today shouldn’t be all that surprising.

In any case, after more than a decade covering these issues, it’s pretty clear to me that the evidence of racial bias in our criminal-justice system isn’t just convincing — it’s overwhelming. But because there still seems to be some skepticism, I’ve attempted below to catalog the evidence. The list below isn’t remotely comprehensive. And if you know of other studies, please send them to me. I would like to make this post a repository for this issue.

I would challenge anyone to dispute this overwhelming evidence. It shows pervasive racial bias from police officers, prosecutors and judges at every level. There simply is no more rational dispute over this, only ignorant denial by those who prefer to stick their heads in the sand and pretend that America is perfect. This is why Colin Kaepernick and other athletes protest. This is why Black Lives Matter exists and is important. This is why all of us have to do what we can to fix it, particularly those of us who have greater political power as a result of our privilege.

September 24, 2018 1:31 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Racists Wyatt/Regina/bad anonymous repeatedly deny that there is serious racism in police forces and the justice system. I posted an article about research showing that black defendents get substantially longer prison sentences than similarly situated white defends and noted that the study controlled for income so the possiblity that the longer prison sentences were due to blacks not being able to afford as good legal defence as whites was ruled out. Willfully blind Wyatt/Regina/bad anonymous fatuously claimed afterwards that the longer prison sentences blacks got were due to them not being able to afford as good legal defence as whites! You're obviously a serious racist when you do that.

September 24, 2018 1:31 PM  
Anonymous A married couple with adopted children is too a family! said...


Fox "News" Jeanine Pirro: Kavanaugh Accuser May Have Been Hypnotized!

Lol! The desperation of the lickspittles at Fox over the unravelling of the Kavanaugh Supreme Court nomination is hilarious!

September 24, 2018 2:00 PM  
Anonymous sayanora, gay agenda said...

"the questions were designed to go over the line and that he struck the right tone"

key phrase in the article the lyin' Canadian troll posted

Brett's doing fine with the questions

you can post all the studies you want,

you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows

it's obvious systematic racism no longer exists

there is racism, just not any that is insurmountable,

certainly not any the justifies governmental intervention

right now, under the Trump administration, blacks are enjoying the lowest unemployment rate in the modern era

further, Trump is pursuing other policies to improve the lives of blacks like school choice and fighting inner city violence

explains why there's a shift away from Dems since 2016

this is going to be a catastrophe of historic proportions for the party that started Jim Crow and the KKK.

remember the date: October 1

here comes the Dems' 19th nervous breakdown

September 24, 2018 2:10 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Suddenly, vulnerable House Republicans no longer bash Obamacare on their websites

At least 20 Republican incumbents either softened their language about the Affordable Care Act or removed references to their attacks on it.

Republicans initiated a court case to make it illegal to require insurance companies to provide medical insurance to people with pre-existing health conditions.

Obviously any claims by Republicans that they will require coverage for pre-existing conditions at some nebulous time in the future are false.

100 million Americans have pre-existing health conditions. If you want to lose coverage for them, by all means, vote Republican. If you want to continue to be covered for your pre-existing condition VOTE DEMOCRATIC!

September 24, 2018 2:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So now there are two more kavanaugh accusers in addition to Christine Blasey Ford.

Let's hope there aren't another 16 of them because then we have to make Kavanaugh president - it's just math.

September 24, 2018 2:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's hilarious that they went with "hard partying drunken 17 year old also kept meticulous records of his time, parties, and leisure activities in the summer of 1982.

I can't believe there aren't other womb police on the Federalist Society's list of right wing Nazi judicial candidates. Is Kavanaugh really the least rapey one? Are the others actually worse?

September 24, 2018 2:21 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Senior Republican staffers learned last week about the allegations by Deborah Ramirez against nominee Kavanaugh and in conversations with The New Yorker expressed concern about its potential impact on Kavanaugh's nomination. Soon after, Senate Republicans issued renewed calls to accelerate the timing of a committee vote to confirm Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh is the least popular Supreme Court nominee since polling began. A few days ago 9% more Americans opposed his confirmation to the Supreme Court than supported it. Kavanaugh is the first Supreme Court nominee to have a negative approval rating amongst the public.

This is why Republicans have been so desperate to rush through to a vote on Kavanaugh - public support for him has been dropping like a rock and they know it will only get worse as more time allows more to come out about him.

September 24, 2018 2:37 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Tяump ordered the Department of Justice to release James Comey and Andrew McCable's text messages related to the Russia investigation.

Any criminal defendant would dearly love to know what the investigation into them has discovered prior to trial. Its a huge aide in formulating a strategy against prosecution, that's why investigations are always kept secret from all criminal defendants and the public.

You know the president is corrupt when he demands sensitive information relating to the investigation of himself and his friends but he won't release his own taxes!

September 24, 2018 2:43 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Wyatt/Regina/bad anonymous said "explains why there's a shift away from Dems since 2016".

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Oh. My. God. I can't believe how far you've stuck your head in the sand, lol!

Since 2016 Democrats have won one election after another that historically they've lost by double digit numbers, like in Alabama where historically the Republican has won by 20-30 percentage points and Democrat Doug Moore was elected. You remember that one Wyatt, during the election you said "there aint' no way Alabama is sending a Democrat to Congress."

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

There's been up to a 20 to 30% swing towards Democratic candidates in elections since 2016, Democrats are winning in districts that went double digits for Tяump and even in those elections in deep red states Republicans have won in have been won by very small margins compared to the historically huge margins they had won by in the past.

Polls for the mid term elections since Tяump got elected have favoured Democrats by high single digit and low double digit numbers. The latest polls show a 12 percent lead for congressional Democrats!

Reality is just too painful for you, eh Wyatt/Regina? You're so upset by the massive rejection of Republicans by the public you've totally blanked out reality and are living in a fantasy of your own making, lol!

September 24, 2018 2:56 PM  
Anonymous October is looking good with Brett judging the gay agenda said...

"So now there are two more kavanaugh accusers in addition to Christine Blasey Ford.

Let's hope there aren't another 16 of them because then we have to make Kavanaugh president - it's just math."

no doubt, Dems have a stable of women willing to make this charge

they just save them for the optimal moments

once Brett is on the court, an ethics probe needs to be done of the Dems' antics

is it a coincidence that the second Ford agrees to testify, thus losing her ability to delay the vote any longer, a new accuser shows up?

of course, the Dems's used their most "credible" accuser first

you know - the one who says she was attacked but doesn't know where or when or who was there, although she was sure her 15-year-old self had only one beer at the party, and she never told a soul, ad she seems to be avoiding testifying under oath and, if she does she wants an FBI investigation report and for Brett to testify first so she know what lies she can get away with

and she's their most "credible" accuser

basically, because there's no way to prove anything

now, we're moving on to the less "credible" accusers

the latest one named many witnesses, all of whom deny the story is true

September 24, 2018 3:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It would be hard to let go of a Supreme Court pick if you worked hard to put him in your pocket, by picking up his gambling tab say, and were inclined to disbelieve and dismiss women generally, while you were facing legal jeopardy that could end up before the Supreme court.

A theory.

September 24, 2018 3:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dr. Christine Ford says Brett Kavanaugh tried to rape her.

She passed a lie detector test.

Kavanaugh has refused to take one.

He's lying.

She's telling the truth.

September 24, 2018 3:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

For a guy who's a judge, Brett Kavanaugh seems to really hate the idea of going through a fair, methodical process where information is gathered and opposing points of view are expressed so that we can find out the truth.

Christine Blasey Ford is coming forward and putting her life on the line. She's gotten so many death threats she and her family have been forced to leave their home and go into hiding.

Six years ago she didn't sit in a therapy session and make up a story about almost being raped and fearing for her life and have the doctors take notes in the thinking that Brett Kavanaugh would be a Supreme Court nominee. Everything you've got tells you this woman has no incentive to make it up whereas Judge Kavanaugh has every incentive to deny it.

September 24, 2018 3:13 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Prior to his nomination Kavanaugh had $200,000 in credit card debt from his gambling problem.

It suddenly disappeared with him having no apparent means to pay it off.

He owes someone (Tяump?) a BIG favour.

September 24, 2018 3:17 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Hey Wyatt, how come on the weekends when you're off work you hardly post at all but during your workday you post over and over?

September 24, 2018 3:33 PM  
Anonymous homosexuality never ever produces life. two homosexuals never produce a marriage said...

"For a guy who's a judge, Brett Kavanaugh seems to really hate the idea of going through a fair, methodical process where information is gathered and opposing points of view are expressed so that we can find out the truth."

an odd thing ti say when Kavanaugh was willing to drop everything and testify under oath while Ford has done everything she can think of o avoid it

Judge Kavanaugh labels The New Yorker’s report a “smear, plain and simple.” He should be applauded for his restraint. I am struggling to remember reading a less responsible piece of “journalism” in a major outlet.

The piece starts out not with a summary of the story, but with the news that Democrats in Washington are taking it seriously — a weaselly attempt to pass the buck if I ever saw one (“People are saying!”). After that throat clearing, it is acknowledged that the person making the accusation around which the piece revolves had not mentioned it until Kavanaugh was nominated, “was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the alleged incident with certainty,” and agreed to make the charge on the record only after she had spent “six days carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney.”

There are no corroborating witnesses. None. Of the “dozens” of classmates The New Yorker contacted, all either failed “to respond to interview requests . . . declined to comment, or said they did not attend or remember the party.” Indeed, we learn late in the piece that the authors could not establish that Kavanaugh was even there. “The New Yorker,” the tenth paragraph begins, “has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party.” The only “evidence” provided comes from a “classmate” who was not at the party, but is certain he heard about the incident, and from “another classmate” who thinks he heard about an incident that could vaguely resemble the one alleged, but doesn’t know to whom it was done, or by whom. Or, as we would traditionally put it: The only proof provided is rumor.

There are a few quotes from figures who attest to the accuser’s character. And, cutting in the other direction, there is a classmate who suggest that the accuser’s accusation “may have been politically motivated.” But these contributions are so much gossip and should be treated as such. What matters is that there is no scaffolding beneath this story. As the New York Times reports:

The Times had interviewed several dozen people over the past week in an attempt to corroborate her story, and could find no one with firsthand knowledge. Ms. Ramirez herself contacted former Yale classmates asking if they recalled the incident and told some of them that she could not be certain Mr. Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself.

Which is to say that there is as much corroboration behind this accusation as there was behind the last one: None. In and of itself, this makes The New Yorker’s story irresponsible, albeit not out of character for Jane Mayer. But when one considers that the forces arrayed against Kavanaugh’s nomination have taken to arguing that the mere existence of an unsubstantiated allegation should be sufficient to cause a withdrawal . . . well, it looks reckless beyond all reason.

Which may, of course, have been exactly the point.

September 24, 2018 4:26 PM  
Anonymous The staggering hypocrisy of Brett Kavanaugh said...

"...To say that the questions Kavanaugh came up with for Clinton were prurient doesn’t do justice to the gross invasiveness and detail he sought. These queries are of the sort that are even now uncomfortable to write out and list in a family newspaper, or discuss in mixed company. Sexual proclivities? “If Monica Lewinsky says you inserted a cigar into her vagina while you were in the Oval Office area, would she be lying?” and “If Monica Lewinsky says that you masturbated into a trashcan in your secretary’s office, would she [be] lying?”

Starr’s team never asked such questions to Clinton in as specific a way as Kavanaugh drew up. Despite that, they remained, as Clinton put it at the time, “questions no American citizen would ever want to answer.” Those American citizens now apparently include Kavanaugh, who would rather not address his sexual past and apparently believes we should all honor that request.

Please. The allegations made by Christine Blasey Ford and now Kavanaugh’s Yale classmate Ramirez do not, like Lewinsky and Clinton, involve two consenting adults. They are, instead, accusations of serious, nonconsensual sexual misconduct. They raise questions much more legitimate than the questions Kavanaugh would have had Clinton answer. They indicate, to use Kavanaugh’s own words, a possible “pattern of behavior.”

Republican pols have long operated under a wildly generous the “do as I say, not as I do” standard, even as they castigate Democratic rivals for the tiniest infraction. When it comes to living up to the standards they would impose on others, Republicans escaped that accountability for so long that they appear blindsided when called to explain their actions. That Kavanaugh was pursuing Clinton and Lewinsky to a point of humiliation, while there was potentially much worse behavior in his own past, simply adds to gross hypocrisy on display.

But 20 years later, it turns out there was a purpose and need for those questions for Clinton — just not one Kavanaugh or anyone else could have imagined at the time. Thanks to their existence, we can say with certainty that Kavanaugh is not just the nice, aw-shucks guy he would have us think.

The questions Kavanaugh wanted to ask of Clinton — long before anyone went public with allegations against him — are clear proof there is a side to Kavanaugh that many of his defenders, both male and female, do not want to acknowledge. Now that he faces not one, but two accusations of misconduct, he deserves every question that comes his way, no matter how invasive.

What goes around comes around."

September 24, 2018 4:39 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Christine Blasey Ford says supreme court nominee Brett Kavanaugh that tried to rape her.

There are three things here that enhance her credibility. One that she passed a lie detector test, two, that she has invited the scrutiny and the turning upside down of her life by the FBI of what she describes as painful memory. The third thing she's done that gives her credibility is putting at the scene Kavanaugh's close friend Mark Judge, someone who is likely to take his side and yet she says "He was there, ask him."

Mark Judge has angrily said he doesn't want to testify under any circumstances and the Republican members of the judiciary committee have refused to subpoena him. This strongly suggests Mark Judge is afraid of perjuring himself and that Republicans are afraid of what he might say under oath.

Republicans heard several days ago of a second accuser of Kavanaugh and shortly thereafter pressed hard to have a vote on him as soon as possible, no doubt because they were afraid of what would happen if the story came out before they could vote to confirm him.

Republicans trying to forcefully rush this confirmation through are basically saying to all American women: "We don't believe these women and we don't care if its true or not that Kavanaugh is a predator".

Research shows that only 2% to 6% of sexual assault allegations are false. Now that there are three (and possibly four given Ronan Farrow's reporting) women accusing Judge Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct it is extremely unlikely that Kavanaugh is innocent.

A supreme court judge should be held to a higher standard than others. A supreme court judge should be above suspicion and of undeniably good character. Obviously Kavanaugh is not remotely either of those things and clearly does not belong on the court making judgments about women's rights over their own bodies.

September 24, 2018 5:02 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


A drunken, rapey douche-bro never goes for an attempted rape one time and then says, "Y'know, that's good enough. I'm done. Don't need ever to do this for the rest of my life."

September 24, 2018 5:03 PM  
Anonymous sayanora, gay agenda said...

you're confused

Kavanaugh is not under criminal investigation

Clinton was

the law under which Clinton was investigated has expired and was not renewed by Congress

right now, the only issue is do the Senators on the Judiciary Committee think Kav would be an acceptable justice of the Supreme Court?

they will decide credibility by gut instinct and then decide if they think there is a reasonable possibility to resolve the conflicting stories and, if not, will vote to seat Kav on the court for Oct 1.

that is what will happen

September 24, 2018 5:11 PM  
Anonymous A married couple with adopted children is too a family! said...


Contrary to Wyatt/Regina/bad anonymous's claim that there was no corroboration of Deborah Ramirez's accusation against Kavanaugh:

Some recall hearing about the alleged incident

One student, who chose to remain anonymous, told The New Yorker that he recalled being told about the alleged incident that night or the next day. He said he was "100 percent sure" that the person who told him about it identified Kavanaugh as the student who exposed himself.

Another classmate at Yale, now-emergency room doctor Richard Oh, remembered a tearful female student describing the incident but he could not recall who the student was.

According to The New Yorker, Ramirez told her mother and sister at the time that something upsetting had happened to her but did not share details with them because she was too embarrassed.

Kavanaugh's roommate at the time of the alleged incident, James Roche, said he never witnessed Kavanaugh commit any act of sexual misconduct but he told The New Yorker that Kavanaugh was "frequently incoherently drunk."

Roche became friends with Ramirez, whom he called "exceptionally honest and gentle." He said he could not "imagine her making this up" and said it was "believable" that Kavanaugh could have been involved in an incident like the one alleged by Ramirez.

September 24, 2018 5:15 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...



Kavan-naugh-naugh
Kavan-naugh-naugh

Hey, hey

GOOD BYE!

September 24, 2018 5:21 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Wyatt/Regina/bad anonymous said "you're confused Kavanaugh is not under criminal investigation."

No one said Kavanaugh is under criminal investigation.

That's just another attempt by the TTF troll to try to distract and create confusion because the truth is taking down one of their favourite christian sharia law advocates.

The truth is that there is no statute of limitations on sexual assault in Maryland and although Kavanaugh is not currently under criminal investigation, at any time Dr. Ford could make a complaint to her local police department and he WOULD BE under criminal investigation for attempted rape.

In the unlikely event that Kavanaugh were confirmed to the Supreme Court he might end up being a sitting judge under criminal investigation for sexual assault and every decision he made supporting a supreme court ruling would have an asterisk beside it calling into question its legitimacy. The American Supreme Court would be forever tainted by Kavanaugh's presence.

September 24, 2018 5:34 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Kavanaugh's "character" witness Mark Judge, who apparently was present when Kavanaugh tried to rape Christine Ford, reportedly admitted to "taking turns' having sex with a drunk girl despite his now claiming that "no horseplay" occurred at the Georgetown Prep parties he and Kavanaugh attended.

September 24, 2018 5:38 PM  
Anonymous October is looking good with Brett judging the gay agenda said...

"Contrary to anonymous's claim that there was no corroboration of Deborah Ramirez's accusation against Kavanaugh:

Some recall hearing about the alleged incident

One student, who chose to remain anonymous, told The New Yorker that he recalled being told about the alleged incident that night or the next day. He said he was "100 percent sure" that the person who told him about it identified Kavanaugh as the student who exposed himself.

Another classmate at Yale, now-emergency room doctor Richard Oh, remembered a tearful female student describing the incident but he could not recall who the student was.

According to The New Yorker, Ramirez told her mother and sister at the time that something upsetting had happened to her but did not share details with them because she was too embarrassed."

embarrassed because some guy showed her his penis in college?

did anyone here actually attend college in the 80s? this incident seems pretty tame

pretty hard to believe it was the talk of the campus, and that specific names were going around

the story Ramirez relates is that the group, including her, was playing a game with a game piece spinner in the shape of a penis and that one of the guys exposed his when he got druk

all pretty sleazy but it's difficult to believe any college student of the era would be traumatized enough to remember the whole thing, or would be spreading the story around

"Kavanaugh's roommate at the time of the alleged incident, James Roche, said he never witnessed Kavanaugh commit any act of sexual misconduct but he told The New Yorker that Kavanaugh was "frequently incoherently drunk."

Roche became friends with Ramirez, whom he called "exceptionally honest and gentle." He said he could not "imagine her making this up" and said it was "believable" that Kavanaugh could have been involved in an incident like the one alleged by Ramirez."

nothing here approaches corroboration

September 24, 2018 6:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"We are aware of significant evidence of multiple house parties in the Washington, DC area during the early 1980s during which Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge and others would participate in the targeting of women with alcohol/drugs in order to allow a ‘train’ of men to subsequently gang rape them. There are multiple witnesses that will corroborate these facts and each of them must be called to testify publicly."
-Michael Avenatti

September 24, 2018 6:42 PM  
Anonymous October is looking good with Brett judging the gay agenda said...

"No one said Kavanaugh is under criminal investigation."

what someone here is saying is that Kavanaugh was a hypocrite for objecting to being treated like Bill Clinton

Clinton was under criminal investigation, Kav is not

he is under no obligation to entertain any questions about his sex life beyond the allegation being made

Senators are making a judgment call not a legal decision

"That's just another attempt by the TTF troll to try to distract and create confusion"

anyone with a passing familiarity to this blog knows that you are the troll from a foreign country who hates America and would like to sow division

not much different than Putin's trolls

"because the truth is taking down one of their favourite christian sharia law advocates."

my favorite?

I greatly preferred Amy Coney Barrett

I'm personally sick of every justice on the Supreme Court being from an Ivy League school

and, frankly, sick of all the conservatives being Roman Catholic

but regardless of that, he is being slandered and his family put through hell on the basis of allegations that everyone knows are not true

if Diane Feinstein thought they were, she should have brought it up during the interview and hearing phases

I personally think her conduct merits expulsion from Congress

Dems say they are justified in bringing these spurious charges because Repubs didn't confirm Merrick Garland

but no one slandered or made false charges of heinous behavior by Garland

"The truth is that there is no statute of limitations on sexual assault in Maryland and although Kavanaugh is not currently under criminal investigation, at any time Dr. Ford could make a complaint to her local police department and he WOULD BE under criminal investigation for attempted rape."

yes it WOULD

and you notice she isn't doing that

because then she would in legal jeopardy if she was discovered to be lying

she clearly wants to avoid going under oath or having to answer questions from a defense lawyer

so, this will never be a criminal matter

that would require proof and accountability for false statements

"In the unlikely event that Kavanaugh were confirmed to the Supreme Court"

it's actually very likely

the only thing that could stop it is if both Collins and Murkowsky would flip because Ford's testimony is so convincing

"he might end up being a sitting judge under criminal investigation for sexual assault and every decision he made supporting a supreme court ruling would have an asterisk beside it calling into question its legitimacy. The American Supreme Court would be forever tainted by Kavanaugh's presence."

which is the goal of Dems

just like they go around calling Trump "pussy grabber" every chance they get

Dems have made the crass commonplace and Americans don't appreciate it

Dems are a gangrene on our society, we need a new second party

September 24, 2018 6:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Information released during Supreme Court Justice confirmation hearings:

Elena Kagen - 99% of records released

Sonya Sontomayer - 100% of records released.

Brett Kavanaugh - 90% of records NOT released

September 24, 2018 6:49 PM  
Anonymous homosexuality never produces life. two homosexuals never produce a marriage said...

"We are aware of significant evidence of multiple house parties in the Washington, DC area during the early 1980s during which Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge and others would participate in the targeting of women with alcohol/drugs in order to allow a ‘train’ of men to subsequently gang rape them. There are multiple witnesses that will corroborate these facts and each of them must be called to testify publicly."
-Michael Avenatti

time was up long ago on this publicity hog

if he actually has something, e could give it to Congress and they could consider impeachment of Kav after the investigation is over

but, we all know he has nothing

September 24, 2018 6:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find Brett Kavanaugh's 1,000,000 hidden records.

September 24, 2018 6:50 PM  
Anonymous October is looking good with Brett judging the gay agenda said...

"Information released during Supreme Court Justice confirmation hearings:

Elena Kagen - 99% of records released

Sonya Sontomayer - 100% of records released.

Brett Kavanaugh - 90% of records NOT released"

didn't you hear?

your friends already tried this deception

it didn't work

so Fruitcake Central wants to focus on impossible to corroborate slander about sexual assault from Brett's years as a minor

"Russia, if you're listening, dock this guy's pay. He's not following the agenda

September 24, 2018 7:09 PM  
Anonymous The Virgin Mary said...


I was betrothed to Joseph but I was told I would have someone else's baby. I was not given a choice.

#MeToo #Rape #Adultery

September 24, 2018 7:34 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...

Meanwhile in Kavanaugh's closet...

September 24, 2018 7:50 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Senate Judiciary Committee Contacts Michael Avenatti Over Claim He Has New Client With Dirt On Kavanaugh


CNBC reports:

The Senate Judiciary Committee contacted Michael Avenatti after the lawyer claimed to represent a client who has damaging information about Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

On Sunday, the attorney — who represents porn star Stormy Daniels in her lawsuit against President Donald Trump — claimed he represents a woman “with credible information” regarding Kavanaugh and friend Mark Judge. Mike Davis, the chief counsel for nominations for the Senate Judiciary Committee, emailed him requesting the information, according to a message Avenatti publicly shared.

Avenatti responded that he and his client would provide “additional evidence” related to explosive allegations of misconduct “in the coming days.” It is unclear what evidence the lawyer has. He told Politico that he represents “multiple individuals that have knowledge” of misconduct.

The Daily Mail reports:

Avenatti late Sunday demanded Kavanaugh be asked about a yearbook entry that says: ‘FFFFFFFourth of July’ – and Avenatti, who says he now represents a client with a sensational charge against Kavanaugh, believes he has cracked the teen code.

Describing the yearbook entry, Avenatti wrote: “We believe that this stands for: Find them, French them, Feel them, Finger them, F*ck them, Forget them.” The high-profile attorney also asked that the high court nominee be asked about the term ‘Devil’s Triangle,’ a term that also shows up in the yearbook entry.

September 24, 2018 7:59 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

@MichaelAvenatti "Warning: My client re Kavanaugh has previously done work within the State Dept, U.S. Mint, &DOJ. She has been granted multiple security clearances in the past including Public Trust & Secret. The GOP and others better be very careful in trying to suggest that she is not credible"

September 24, 2018 8:05 PM  
Anonymous A married couple with adopted children is too a family! said...



Kavan-naugh-naugh
Kavan-naugh-naugh

Hey, hey

GOOD BYE!

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!

September 24, 2018 8:10 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Deborah Ramirez says when she was in universirty with Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh he was stumbling drunk and waved his penis in her face until she had to slap it away

New Yorker’s Mayer: Ramirez Was Not Initial Source—Other Yale Grads Were


The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer, one of the authors of the story detailing Deborah Ramirez’s account of alleged sexual misconduct perpetrated by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, said that rumors of the alleged episode were so widespread that the New Yorker reached out to Ramirez—not the other way around.

“She didn’t come forward with it,” Mayer said Monday on NBC’s “Today.” “What happened was, the classmates at Yale were talking to each other about it, they were emailing about it. We’ve seen the emails, back in July before Christine Blasey Ford came forward, and eventually the word of it spread.”

“It spread to the Senate. It spread to the media,” she continued. “And [we] reached out to her. After giving it really careful consideration for six days, she decided to talk to [Ronan Farrow].”

So much for the false assertion that there were "no corroborating witnesses" to Ramirez's accusation!

September 24, 2018 8:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

2015, Kavanaugh: "What happens at Georgetown Prep, stays at Georgetown Prep. That's been a good thing for all of us, I think."

These are not the words of someone who has changed severely from his college/high school days. These are not the words of someone who has nothing to fear from their actions in those days.

These are the words of someone who has lived a privileged life, assured that he could get away with things, and did, and continues to pass that message of "it won't matter" to the next generation.

September 24, 2018 9:13 PM  
Anonymous sayanora, gay agenda said...

"New Yorker’s Mayer: Ramirez Was Not Initial Source—Other Yale Grads Were

The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer, one of the authors of the story detailing Deborah Ramirez’s account of alleged sexual misconduct perpetrated by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, said that rumors of the alleged episode were so widespread that the New Yorker reached out to Ramirez—not the other way around."

really? let's have some names

other sources have reported both the New Yorker and Ramirez called around trying to get someone to back up the story and had no luck

how were the rumors so widespread and yet the FBI missed it on six different background checks?

so, let's bring in the FBI to get to the bottom of it all

in fairness, maybe that was the when Mueller or Comey the FBI

hahahahahahahahaha!!!!

"So much for the false assertion that there were "no corroborating witnesses" to Ramirez's accusation!"

let's hear from some

"2015, Kavanaugh: "What happens at Georgetown Prep, stays at Georgetown Prep. That's been a good thing for all of us, I think."

These are not the words of someone who has changed severely from his college/high school days. These are not the words of someone who has nothing to fear from their actions in those days."

it's a common phrase used throughout our culture

it could mean anything from those crazy days when we stayed up all night bingeing on pizza to the time the whole lacrosse went skinning dipping in the headmaster's pool

yours are not the words of integrity

say, you must be a TTFer!

"These are the words of someone who has lived a privileged life,"

ah, we knew we'd get here

class warfare

Dems will keep it in their back pocket just in case the sexual assault slander falls apart

Dems hate anyone with privileges

unless they're Dems

"assured that he could get away with things, and did, and continues to pass that message of "it won't matter" to the next generation."

wow! you sure read into the deck alot

truth is, kids of all classes might say the same thing

truth is, our society is aspirational not resentful

go to France

they think like you

September 24, 2018 11:27 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Report: Fourth Kavanaugh Accuser Comes Forward

The Montgomery Sentinel reports:

Investigators in Montgomery County confirmed Monday they’re aware of a potential second sexual assault complaint in the county against former Georgetown Prep student and Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. While investigators weren’t specific and spoke on background, they said they are looking at allegations against Kavanaugh during his senior year in high school after an anonymous witness came forward this weekend.

This would potentially bring the number to four women accusing Kavanaugh of wrongdoing and comes after Deborah Ramirez, a former Yale college student, stepped forward this weekend to accuse Kavanaugh of exposing himself to her in college, and after attorney Michael Avenatti tweeted out a message saying he represents a woman with “credible information regarding Judge Kavanaugh and Mark Judge.”

Kavan-naugh-naugh
Kavan-naugh-naugh

Hey, hey

GOOD BYE!

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!

September 24, 2018 11:51 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Sleazy Lindsey Graham said he doesn't care about whether or not Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh tried to rape Christine Blasey Ford, he's going to vote to confirm him regardless of what the truth is. "I’m not going to ruin Judge Kavanaugh’s life over this." he absurdly said.

Ruin his life? Ruin his life?!

He makes well over 100,000 a year in a cushy job with lots of perks. Not becoming a supreme court justice in no way "ruins" his life.

Ruining someone's life is imprisoning them for a non-violent drug crime which prevents them from getting a job in the future. Ruining someone's life is convicting them of murder based on solely on eyewitness testimony that is notoriously unreliable and then decades of prison later having them exonerated by DNA evidence.

Preventing an overpaid elite from being overpaid by an even greater amount in no way ruins his life!

September 24, 2018 11:53 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...


GOP on Bill Cosby: Thank god they finally got him 35 years later.

GOP on the Catholic Church: Thank god they're finally getting those monsters that molested little boys 35 years ago.

GOP on Dr. Ford: She is lying, if this really happened she would have reported it 35 years ago.

Research shows only 2% to 6% of sexual misconduct allegations are false. Dr. Ford passed a lie detector test, Kavanaugh refused to take one.

September 25, 2018 12:05 AM  
Anonymous homosexuality never produces life, two of 'em ain't marriage said...

"Kavan-naugh-naugh
Kavan-naugh-naugh

Hey, hey

GOOD BYE!

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!"

here we have Priya expressing sorrow at the horror that happened 35 years ago and scarred a "credible" women's life forever

so deep is the lasting anguish of that fateful day in, well, whenever it was, that this women was in need of therapy thirty years later

and Priya has a limerick to share with us about it

pretty obvious no one takes this seriously beyond a political game

"Sleazy Lindsey Graham said he doesn't care about whether or not Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh tried to rape Christine Blasey Ford, he's going to vote to confirm him regardless of what the truth is. "I’m not going to ruin Judge Kavanaugh’s life over this." he absurdly said."

Ford apparently doesn't care either, since she has yet to file charges even though she has nothing to lose at this point

"Ruin his life? Ruin his life?!"

yes, and that's part of the Dem's plan

who would want to be nominated for Supreme Court after this?

knowing they'll dig through their entire life, trying to find anyone willing to make an unverifiable accusation, and then presume the accusation is true because "they have no incentive" to lie

"He makes well over 100,000 a year in a cushy job with lots of perks."

this is not very high, it would pretty hard to get by on that in MC

being a judge isn't all that cushy

"Not becoming a supreme court justice in no way "ruins" his life."

if he's rejected for the Supreme Court, he could he continue to be a judge at any level?

"Ruining someone's life is imprisoning them for a non-violent drug crime which prevents them from getting a job in the future."

I agree, let's stop doing that. President Trump has asked for any such cases so he can issue pardons.

"Ruining someone's life is convicting them of murder based on solely on eyewitness testimony that is notoriously unreliable and then decades of prison later having them exonerated by DNA evidence."

true again, but what that got to do with Dems pushing unsubstantiated charges to achieve political goals

you didn't the GOP doing this to Merrick Garland

they opposed him using the power they possessed not by engaging in sleazy tactics

"Preventing an overpaid elite from being overpaid by an even greater amount in no way ruins his life!"

your perspective is sadly warped if you think judges are overpaid

"GOP on Bill Cosby: Thank god they finally got him 35 years later.

GOP on the Catholic Church: Thank god they're finally getting those monsters that molested little boys 35 years ago."

in these cases, dozens of accusations were made

"GOP on Dr. Ford: She is lying, if this really happened she would have reported it 35 years ago.

Research shows only 2% to 6% of sexual misconduct allegations are false. Dr. Ford passed a lie detector test, Kavanaugh refused to take one."

so, everyone who makes an accusation is automatically true?

move to Moscow

you'd love it there

Kavanaugh has made statements under oath, Ford has done everything she can think of to avoid it and tried to get the FBI to give her all the evidence they could find and get Kavanaugh to make his defense before she would decide what she would say under oath

that's highly suspicious and sounds like someone is trying to see what kind of story she can get away with

not even as many as 2% to 6% of sexual violence victims behave as Ford has

she acts like she is trying to deceive and she acts like she is working with the Dem party to achieve a political goal

her goal is to make sure that Kavanaugh doesn't get on the Supreme Court and she's been given an opportunity to make that case to the Judiciary Committee

if she wants to press charges, she can do so also

if she prevailed, Kavanaugh would be impeached

but we all know she won't press charges and she would never prevail

she's not telling the truth

September 25, 2018 6:00 AM  
Anonymous a word from America's mothers said...

Mothers of sons everywhere, women every one, are terrified by the constant destruction of men by duplicitous, lying women and an overzealous and political Senate confirmation process. All a scheming broad has to do these days is claim that your son touched her inappropriately more than two decades ago and she can derail his career. Worse, if your son ever happens to end up in front of the Senate, U.S. senators may drive his wife to suicide. The Senate confirmation hearing for Miguel Estrada, a Bush choice, was so stressful that Estrada's wife had a miscarriage, developed a drinking problem, and overdosed on pills and died.

Estrada withdrew his name twenty-eight months after being nominated. During the confirmation struggle, Estrada’s wife miscarried; in November, 2004, she died, of an overdose of alcohol and sleeping pills. The death was ruled accidental by the medical examiner. Rove said that Mrs. Estrada had been traumatized by the nastiness of the process.
The confirmation process for the Supreme Court should not be killing people and yet, here we are again in the nastiest battle yet. Judge Brett Kavanaugh is being put through the wringer by a bunch of political assassins who couldn't care less if lives are destroyed as long as they get their way. So far his wife seems to be holding up admirably, but for how much longer, no one knows. She's got the vicious press camped out in her yard where her children used to play. If it were me, the cupcakes I would be making for them would be laced with Ex-Lax.

The best video on the internet this week is this panel segment on CNN where a bunch of women are asked what they think of the detestable Christine Blasey Ford and her allegations against Brett Kavanaugh. The responses were not what CNN expected or they would never have aired it.

It is no surprise to me that the mothers of America have had enough of this nonsense. They aren't just women. They are mothers of sons. They love their boys at a level that is hard to put into words.

The press has underestimated the mothers of America who are watching this process of destroying a good man with horror and anger. What can we do as mothers to make sure this doesn't happen to our sons? It begins with training them from a young age to protect themselves from unscrupulous girls. A long time ago the worst you had to worry about was a girl trapping your son by getting pregnant. Now it's much worse.

September 25, 2018 10:18 AM  
Anonymous a word from America's mothers said...

Here are a few ideas with which to move forward in this terrifying #MeToo era.

1. Take him to church and make sure the lessons stick

Make sure your son knows how to treat others, what his moral obligations to himself and his family are, and to follow God's laws in regards to dating and marriage. Try to impart the importance of saving sex for marriage. What can happen to him if he fails to do that (poverty, child support, disease, death, false rape charge) isn't worth it.

2. Train him to document any unusual circumstance

If something happens to your son at school or elsewhere involving a girl that might be misconstrued or even if he just feels uncomfortable with it, teach him to email it to himself with details, dates, and witnesses. These emails are admissible in court. It will also solve the problem of not being able to remember details years later if accused.


3. Teach your son to assume he will one day have a position of high importance and encourage him to live accordingly

This is the Mike Pence school of behavior that will serve him well. Do not be alone with a woman who is not your wife if you are married. If you are not married, then try to have witnesses when dealing with women. Double-dating may soon be the only smart thing for a man to do when looking for a mate to protect himself from dangerous women who would like to hurt him. Teach him that anything he might say or do today could affect him and cost him a job 30 years from now. Show him what's happening to Brett Kavanaugh. Teach him to choose his friends wisely, to stay sober, and to stay away from shenanigans that could come back and haunt him.

4. Don't trust women

Sorry to say it, but my sex offends and horrifies me. Between Stormy Daniels and Ford, women are a disgrace. Contrary to the saccharine platitude that "women don't lie," women lie all the time. They lie like crazy. The younger they are, the more they lie and scheme. It's probably the rage of hormones and insecurity that contribute to it, but most women lie and scheme. Teach your sons to search out morally upstanding girls and to avoid drama queens. The religious ones are usually better. Stay very far away from party girls and girls who use drugs or drink underage. Those girls are momentarily fun, but ultimately trouble. Teach him to stay away from those girls.

Even if a man does all these things there's no guarantee some lying hussy won't try to screw up his life over a romantic poem, but it should help to give him evidence with which to fight back.

September 25, 2018 10:18 AM  
Anonymous latest Gallup poll: Americans view Republicans more favorably than Democrats said...

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Forty-five percent of Americans now have a favorable view of the Republican Party, a nine-point gain from last September's 36%. It is the party's most positive image since it registered 47% in January 2011, shortly after taking control of the House in the 2010 midterm elections. Forty-four percent give the Democratic Party a favorable rating.

September 25, 2018 10:25 AM  
Anonymous October is looking good with Brett judging the gay agenda said...

for those who think it's OK to slander Brett Kavanaugh just to achieve a political goal, here's a quote from Martin Luther King:

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere"

September 25, 2018 12:09 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Mitch McConnel says all these women coming forward and accusing Kavanaugh of sexual assault is "a Democrat smear campaign due to his conservative judicial philosophy". If that's true then why did no one come forward to accuse Supreme Court justice Neil Gorsuch of being a sexual predator prior to his confirmation to the court?

Maybe the Republicans just didn't vet Brett Kavanaugh as thoroughly as they would normally do with a Supreme Court nominee. He wasn't on the list of candidates the Federalist Society had recommended. Kavanaugh was added at the last minute to the list and pushed tot he top of the list.

The question is why?

Could it be in his writings Kavanaugh strongly asserted that the president should be immuned from criminal investigation or prosecution during his tenure?

Could that be the reason Kavanaugh is being fast tracked through the Senate and not fully investigated by the FBI as was done with all other judicial nominees, including Clarence Thomas when Anita Hill accused him of sexual harrasment? Back then Orin Hatch said that re-opening the FBI background check into Thomas in light of Hill's accusation was "the very right thing to do" and what "every other chairman and ranking member have done in the past." Now Hatch and Republicans are absurdly asserting that the FBI just doesn't do that sort of thing. If this is all "a smear campaign" they should very badly want the FBI to investigate and clear Kavanaugh. But they oppose an FBI investigation because they don't want the truth to come out before they vote.

September 25, 2018 1:35 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Christine Blasey Ford's lawyers sent a letter of concern to the Republican Judicial committee regarding the promises they made so she would agree to appear at the hearing on her claims on Thursday.

"As Dr. Blasey Ford has been clear since her experience first became public she came forward because she believes its her civic duty to tell the truth about the sexual assault she experienced. You said in your letter that you intend to provide a fair and credible process that provides Dr. Blasey Ford fair and respectful treatment. Yet earlier today the majority leader Mitch McConnell dismissed Dr. Ford's experience as a "smear campaign" claiming mistakenly that witness statements to the committee constitute "a complete lack of evidence", implying that there has been a thorough investigation. This and statements he has made previously are flatly inconsistent with your letter."

To paraphrase, the lawyer is saying "you're promising us that you on the judiciary committee are going to be fair but here's the top Republican in the Senate already proclaiming this done, proclaiming my client to be a liar essentially"

The letter continues:
"The refusal of the White House to request that the FBI re-open Judge Kavanaugh's background check precluded a thorough non-partisan investigation of this matter and the hearing plan that your staffer Mike Davis described [in an earlier communication] does not appear designed to provide Dr. Blasey Ford with fair and respectful treatment."

The behavior and statements of Republicans show there are serious concerns about how they are handling the hearing over the alleged sexual assault of Dr. Ford by Judge Kavanaugh. The hearing is scheduled for Thursday but it is unclear if the hearing will, or should go ahead on that day. Republicans have clearly shown they do not intend an honest, fair, or thorough search for the truth.

September 25, 2018 1:36 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Canada legalized marijuana to ease the chronic pain of living next to Tяumplandia

September 25, 2018 1:37 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

OKLAHOMA: Former Tяump Campaign Chair Gets 15 Years For Sex Trafficking Of Teenage Male Prostitute

Tulsa’s NBC affiliate reports:

A former Republican state senator in Oklahoma has been sentenced to 15 years in prison on a child sex trafficking charge. Ralph Shortey was sentenced Monday in federal court in Oklahoma City. He had faced a sentence of up to life in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.

Shortey pleaded guilty in November in exchange for prosecutors dropping three child pornography charges against him.

He said the plea deal was in the best interest of him and his family. The 36-year-old Shortey was arrested in March 2017 after police found him in a suburban Oklahoma City motel room with a then-17-year-old boy. He resigned shortly after the arrest.

Prosecutors say Shortey, then-married and father of four girls, sought out and sexually exploited other children engaged in child pornography dating back as far as 2012, exchanged drugs for sex with a 16-year-old boy, kept an extensive network of contacts — including children, possessed child pornography, and was well aware of the legal consequences of human trafficking of minors as he voted on legislation increasing state penalties.

During his seven years in the state senate, he regularly voted with his Republican colleagues on bills targeting the LGBTQ community.
----------------------------------

As we see again and again, the people with the greatest desire to oppress the LGBT community are the ones deeply involved in immoral actions. Isn't that right, Wyatt/Regina/bad anonymous.

September 25, 2018 1:38 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Right now, all over the country, teenage girls are waking up to newsfeeds full of posts written by adults in their lives that say teenage boys attempting to rape them is "just how boys are" and "They can't help themselves" and "They grow out of it" and "it was just a little harmless fun." Think about what that must be doing to them. And when you're done thinking about that, imagine all the teenage boys reading the same thing.

September 25, 2018 1:39 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Research shows only 2% to 6% of sexual misconduct allegations are false. Dr. Ford passed a lie detector test, Kavanaugh refused to take one.


With four women accusing supreme court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct the odds that he is innocent are virtually zero.

September 25, 2018 1:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Since Trump was elected he's sent us more rapists than Mexico.

September 25, 2018 2:11 PM  
Anonymous Ruling announced said...

Bill Cosby no less than 3 years and no more than 10 years in prison.

September 25, 2018 2:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nothing brings Republicans together like the opportunity to attack a sexual assault victim.

September 25, 2018 2:21 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Why did Tяump nominate Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court?

in 2009 he argued that presidents can't be criminally prosecuited or sued in civilian court while in office and shouldn't even be questioned in a criminal investigation.

So Tяump, a president under FBI investigation and the subject of multiple civil lawsuits likely to reach the Supreme Court, just nominated his OWN judge to protect him from both. Most corrupt president in U.S. history, PERIOD!

September 25, 2018 2:36 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Christian Sharia law advocate Franklen Graham: Attempted rape is not a crime. Kavanaugh "respected" his victim by not finishing.

For religious bigots like Franklin Graham, somehow consensual monogamous sex between two men is evil but there's nothing immoral about trying to rape a woman.

September 25, 2018 2:49 PM  
Anonymous heterosexuality should be societally preferenced because it alone brings life said...

"Could that be the reason Kavanaugh is being fast tracked through the Senate and not fully investigated by the FBI as was done with all other judicial nominees"

this is a typical lie by Priya

Kavanaugh was fully investigated by the FBI in the same way all other judicial nominees have been

indeed, Kavanaugh has been investigated by the FBI six times before, it being a requirement of his past positions, as well

and he was already investigated again this go-around

what Dems are saying is that the the FBI failed to find this and needs to reopen its investigation

no FBI official has backed this view

indeed, when they were given the information, belatedly, by the despicable Diane Feinstein, they simply chose to add it to his file

if Feinstein had forwarded the information to the FBI when she received it, they would have made evaluation of the charge part of the original investigation

but, no matter

the effect would be the same because there is noting specific enough in the allegation to investigate

it would be like trying to prove there is no gold in Alaska

"Mitch McConnel says all these women coming forward and accusing Kavanaugh of sexual assault is "a Democrat smear campaign due to his conservative judicial philosophy". If that's true then why did no one come forward to accuse Supreme Court justice Neil Gorsuch of being a sexual predator prior to his confirmation to the court?"

it's because Gorsuch wasn't a swing vote, he replaced another conservative

Kavanaugh horrifies them because he threatens their favorite tactic: legislation by court order

indeed, he represents the nail in the coffin of the gay agenda

just ask the gays who harassed Ted Cruz at Fiola last night, that's what they kept chanting

Bill Cosby is the first of the prominent Democrats who have abused and raped women to be sentenced. Hopefully, he won't be the last.

Proof is a wonderful thing.

Maybe Brett Kavanaugh is a gang-raping attempted murderer who managed to live a public life of acclaim and honor. Maybe the devotion to his wife and two daughters, his respect for countless women and their careers, and his wisdom on the bench are parts of an elaborate plot to get away with it. Anything is possible.

But the idea that the country should convict him and destroy his life with no evidence other than recovered and uncorroborated memories and creepy porn lawyer Michael Avenatti’s say-so is quite insane.

President Donald Trump, who was elected by people who cared deeply about fighting the progressive takeover of the courts, nominated Brett Kavanaugh to fill Anthony Kennedy’s seat. D.C. establishment figures on the right revere Kavanaugh, and praise his extensive judicial record. Before meeting with him or holding hearings, most Democratic senators said they planned to vote against him.

The hearings ricocheted from interesting discussions of judicial philosophy to clownish “I am Spartacus” moments and radical abortion protesters screaming about their love of killing unborn children.

Only upon completion did Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein release news that she’d sat on a claim of sexual assault for six weeks. The media then began running with uncorroborated and disputed allegations ranging from Christine Blasey Ford saying she thought Kavanaugh was trying to rape her and might kill her to Avenatti suggesting that Kavanaugh is a gang raper.

Republicans on the Judiciary Committee — in part thanks to Sen. Jeff Flake, cowering in the face of a smear campaign — bent over backwards to accommodate the first accuser, no matter how outlandish her requests to delay the hearing. As was easily predictable, the media and other resistance members put forth additional claims — somehow even less substantiated than the initial one — as the days passed.

This all has political significance, but let’s take a step back and think through the ethics of destroying a man without evidence to warrant it.

September 25, 2018 2:55 PM  
Anonymous heterosexuality should be societally preferenced because it alone brings life said...

Standards Of Evidence Must Be Kept High

We have rules for evidence in our court rooms that provide excellent guidance in the general culture. One of these is that the burden of proof is not on the accused but the accuser. First the accuser presents his or her case, buttressing it with all the evidence at hand. Then the accused responds to the accusation using the evidence he or she has. It is easy to make an allegation but difficult to prove one. This is as it should be.

Our Founding Fathers were well aware of the danger posed by people throwing accusations against political enemies. The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does a good job of explaining some of the rights of the accused in our political system:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Kavanaugh isn’t facing criminal prosecution in part because his accusers have come nowhere near the standard required for criminal prosecution. And senators predisposed to vote against him are not the definition of an impartial jury. That does not mean disputed allegations should form the basis of destroying a man’s life, career, and reputation. It also does not mean that a precedent should be established of allowing the left to weaponize use of disputed allegations to thwart the seating of justices.

September 25, 2018 2:59 PM  
Anonymous heterosexuality should be societally preferenced because it alone brings life said...


Journalists Should Not Engage In Mob Justice

No profession has as high a self-conception as journalism. And yet in recent weeks, in an environment where they are accused of being partisan activists instead of truth tellers, they have dropped their standards somehow even further.

Presumably out of a shared belief that the sacrament of abortion might be threatened by a second Trump nominee serving on the court, some in the media are running multiple stories based on reputation-destroying allegations that have not come close to meeting a journalistic standard.

The New Yorker’s laughably disreputable Jane Mayer and previously well-regarded Ronan Farrow wrote up a story claiming that a progressive activist recovered a memory of sexual assault only after being prodded by Senate Democrats to do so. Even The New York Times — which doesn’t have a sterling track record when it comes to running with wild accusations — interviewed dozens of people in an attempt to corroborate the allegation and was not able to do so. They found that the accuser Deborah Ramirez had recently told classmates she could not be certain Kavanaugh was the man who she says exposed himself to her.

Journalism can and should be an important check on declining standards. Instead of demanding that accusers make reasonable cases, they are helping them overcome the flaws in their own stories in an effort to defeat a Supreme Court nomination.

Are Our Senators All Children?

Democratic senators announced at the outset of the Kavanaugh nomination that they would do what it took to stop him. They have held to their word, believing that any means necessary is morally defensible.

Republican senators, however, seem to lack the discernment to understand when they’re getting played by people who hate them and want them destroyed.

It’s not just that they’re losing a political battle, but that they’re allowing Democrats and the media to destroy a man and his family for political gain. There is no virtue in allowing a man to be smeared without evidence.

Wielding Political Power Morally

When President Barack Obama nominated Merrick Garland in the closing months of his presidency, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell invoked the Biden Rule, named after the former senator’s view that Supreme Court vacancies in the waning months of a presidency should be filled after the election. It was the use of raw political power, even one with precedent, and it angered Democrats. That anger is at least defensible.

But thank God that Republicans didn’t kill the Garland nomination by tearing down the man and spending months trying to find high school classmates to claim attempted rape and near-death experiences.

At some point one must consider whether evil means are justified for progressive ends. The bottom line is that this media-enabled Democratic smear campaign simply can’t be the standard by which we destroy people. Watching this miscarriage of justice is radicalizing those who care about rule of law and political processes that have a semblance of sanity.

September 25, 2018 3:04 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

The first British royal same-sex wedding was last weekend. Lord Ivar Mountbatten married James Coyle. Congrats and much happiness to them!

September 25, 2018 3:05 PM  
Anonymous A married couple with adopted children is too a family! said...


Kavanaugh's Yale roomate:

"Based on my time with Debbie, I believe her to be unusually honest and straightforward and I cannot imagine her making this up." [She says a drunken Kavanaugh stuck his penis in her face, forcing her to touch it against her will when she pushed him away]
"Based on my time with Brett, I believe that he and his social circle were capable of the actions that Debbie described...I would see [Brett] when he returned from his nights out with his friends. It is from this experience that I concluded that although Brett was normally reserved, he was a notably heavy drinker, even by the standards of the time, and that he became aggressive and belligerent when he was very drunk. I did not observe the specific incident in question, but I do remember Brett frequently drinking excessively and becoming incoherently drunk."

Kavanaugh unconvincingly claimed in his Fox interview that he "rarely drank" in his college days.

September 25, 2018 3:11 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Brett Kavanaugh sputters, trips over repeated talking points in bizarre Fox News interview

Brett Kavanaugh had home field advantage this evening when he appeared on pro-Trump propaganda outlet Fox News for an interview about the mounting sexual assault accusations against him. All he had to do was answer the straightforward questions he knew were coming. Instead he found himself stumbling, sputtering, invoking the same obviously rehearsed talking points and phrases over and over again, and coming off like an idiot.

For instance, when Brett Kavanaugh was asked about the accusations made against him last night by Deborah Ramirez, he insisted that if it had happened, it would have been the “talk of the campus.” This rang false, as Yale University is a large school, and by all accounts, drunken debauchery was going on left and right. Kavanaugh belonged to a fraternity whose treatment of women was so outrageous, Yale ended up suspending it years later.

So “the talk of the campus” was a bad answer to begin with, the kind that would only make sense to you if you didn’t think about it at all. But then Kavanaugh made it worse by using the exact same “talk of the campus” talking point in response to a different question. It became painfully clear that Kavanaugh had been fed these kinds of phrases by his preppers before the interview, and that he didn’t have enough of them to work with. He also kept saying “I just want a fair process where I can be heard” so many times, in those exact words, we lost count. The whole thing was just bizarre.

Somewhat surprisingly, Fox News went ahead and asked Brett Kavanaugh about the still-developing accusation that he participated in several gang rapes in his youth. Kavanaugh forcefully denied it in generic terms, but became visibly nervous in the process, suggesting that his handlers hadn’t prepped him for the late-breaking allegation. But Kavanaugh’s weakest moment was when he suggested that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford may have merely been sexually assaulted by someone else at some point in her life. It was equal parts insulting and pathetic, and it will not play well with the general public.

September 25, 2018 3:12 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Builders estimate that construction costs for rebuilding in the Carolinas could be 20 to 30 percent higher than they would have been without Tяump's tariffs.

September 25, 2018 3:13 PM  
Anonymous Society should preference gays raising kids heteros abandoned said...



Kavanaugh began his career as a political operative willing to use whatever deceptive means necessary—from leaking in the special counsel’s office to dealing with stolen documents in court fights while in the White House. Worse than that, though, when he attempted to transition into a career in the judicial branch, he neither changed his ways nor owned up to his past behavior. Instead, he repeatedly misled the Senate about his prior deceptions, from one confirmation hearing to the next.

Kavanaugh may have rightly believed that, with the Senate controlled by other partisan Republicans, lying and misconstruing facts regarding his record would have no consequence. Indeed, Senate Republicans have blocked any review of the vast majority of his record, so
this list of false and misleading statements represents only a small portion of the total
. But, as his Supreme Court confirmation process comes to a head—hinging precisely on whether his denials of credible accusations against him should be believed—Kavanaugh’s record of almost casual deception has caught up with him. The American people simply have no reason to believe him.

September 25, 2018 3:50 PM  
Anonymous sayanora, gay agenda said...

"All he had to do was answer the straightforward questions he knew were coming. Instead he found himself stumbling, sputtering, invoking the same obviously rehearsed talking points and phrases over and over again, and coming off like an idiot"

he came off fine

the questions he didn't answer straightforwardly were things he shouldn't answer straightforwardly: speculating about intentions and making sweeping generalizations

he demonstrated that he possesses the quality most needed by judges: the ability to resist the temptation to make conclusions without evidence

I realize you don't understand that because you're just a Canadian and, thus, have no concept of what a true democracy is

"Society should preference gays raising kids"

the ideal is for both parents to raise a kid

that can never happen with two homosexuals

two homosexuals never comprise a valid marriage

btw, this time next week, Brett Kavanaugh will be at the Supreme Court, smilin'

September 25, 2018 4:50 PM  
Anonymous Society should preference gays raising kids heteros abandon said...


One of Tяump's greatest fears is being laughed at. He talks about it all the time and how the world isn't going to laugh at the USA any more.

Well, he couldn't be more wrong about that. Tяump speaking to world leaders at the U.N. claimed that no American administration has accomplished more than his in history.

That prompted laughter throughout the assembly of world leaders. :)

Tяump, you've made the United States a joke. You've destroyed your country's crediblility. The world is laughing at the USA because of you.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

September 25, 2018 4:52 PM  
Anonymous Society should preference gays raising kids heteros abandon said...


Polls: Only 19% of Americans believe Kavanaugh is not guilty of sexual assault.

Only 31% of Americans support Kavanaugh's appointment to the Supreme Court. It’s very unusual for the public to oppose confirmation of a SCOTUS nominee on balance but far more Americans oppose Kavanaugh being on the Supreme Court than support that.

September 25, 2018 5:00 PM  
Anonymous Society should preference gays raising kids heteros abandon said...



The ability or desire to have children has never been a requirement of marriage and never will be.

In fact, in some states it is a requirement for first cousins to marry that they be unable to have children.

The world has finite resources and overpopulation is gradually destroying it.

Society can no longer afford to encourage and reward uncontrolled procreation, it threatens the very survival of humanity.

September 25, 2018 5:07 PM  
Anonymous Making babies is no accomplishment, gays raising them well is said...


To maintain the current population heterosexual couples can have no more than 2.1 children.

Overpopulation is killing the planet.

It is immoral for a couple to have more than 2 or 3 children.

September 25, 2018 5:16 PM  
Anonymous you caught me smilin', again said...

"The ability or desire to have children has never been a requirement of marriage and never will be"

no one is talking about "requirements", you imbecile

we were talking about societal preferences

things like tax breaks, inheritance laws, adoption standards, et al

hetrosexuality should be preference because it produces life

Priya hates life

"The world has finite resources and overpopulation is gradually destroying it.

Society can no longer afford to encourage and reward uncontrolled procreation, it threatens the very survival of humanity."

see, Priya clearly sides against life

engaging in homosexuality opposes life

so, Priya,

if you think that inconvenient children should be killed before birth, are you in favor of decreasing the "surplus population" by killing any other weak individuals?

"Only 19% of Americans believe Kavanaugh is not guilty of sexual assault."

right now he only needs one

Susan Collins

she is going to vote or him

by this time next week, Brett Kavanaugh will be at the Supreme Court, smilin'

September 25, 2018 5:37 PM  
Anonymous it's beginning to look alot like Supreme Court Justice Brett said...

well, it's starting to look like the Dems don't want Ford to testify under oath

Ford's lawyer says McConnell broke his promise to stay neutral and so Ford may not testify with him there

and Feinstein wants all hearings stopped until the FBI investigates the Ramirez claim

and, privately, Dems are telling Stormy Daniels' porn lawyer that he's not helping so please, please shut up

and the whole wide world is watching

September 25, 2018 6:19 PM  
Anonymous Making babies takes no skill, gays raising them well is skillful said...


Poor, poor Wyatt/Regina/bad anonymous. Trying desperately to come up with an excuse to deny equality to gays and lesbians and they just can't find one that isn't full of holes.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

September 25, 2018 7:47 PM  
Anonymous Welcome to tЯumplandia said...


"and the whole wide world is watching"

That's for sure. They can't believe what's happening to the good old dependable USA.

And today world leaders laughed at one of Trump's best pep rally lines, claiming to have done more than just about any president ever.

Such delusions of grandeur!

In normal times, people should just get along. Cultural and political disagreements are no reason to harass anyone.

But these aren't normal times.

These are times when a president elected by a minority of Americans has chosen to appoint rapists, white supremacists, warmongers, and incompetent economists who are radically removed from the mainstream to permanent or semi-permanent government positions. These are times when the opinions of neo-Nazis and fascists are actively solicited to contribute to mainstream discourse.

Young people, if this is the first presidency you've paid attention to, trust me: This is not the way it's supposed to be. These loons, who've been on the mad fringe of the Western World's politics since 1945, are now back in positions of power. We know how that turned out back in the mid 20th Century. The main difference today is that the American descendants of Europe's murderous fascists now have access to weapons of destruction and political suppression that the Nazis and fascists could never imagine.

And so, the fact that Ted Cruz was heckled out of a nice quiet meal is more than justifiable. As long as Cruz is in office, I have no problems with anyone interrupting his mastications in order to protest his outrageous actions. They must be stopped.

There is nothing I'd like more than to have a Congress filled with genuinely diverse viewpoints. Instead, our present Congress is stocked with neo-Nazis, fascists, racists, and apologists for the madmen of the extreme right. This isn't a mere difference of opinion, this is existential lunacy and most of the country knows it. We should never let them forget how unwanted they are.

PS. Once Cruz is safely out of my government, I will gladly defend his right to eat in peace anywhere he wants. But frankly, if I was dining next to him, I'd walk out. No reason to get indigestion.

September 25, 2018 9:28 PM  
Anonymous it's beginning to look alot like a LBGQT loss said...

"Trying desperately to come up with an excuse to deny equality to gays and lesbians and they just can't find one that isn't full of holes"

nobody is guaranteed that their way of life will be celebrated

homosexuals have the same rights as everyone else

no one has the right to approval

heterosexuality is preferenced because it, and it alone, produces right

homosexuality, by its precise nature, prevents life

there is no comparison

how terribly desperate

haha!

"Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!"

this is how Priya concedes defeat

"They can't believe what's happening to the good old dependable USA.

And today world leaders laughed at one of Trump's best pep rally lines, claiming to have done more than just about any president ever.

Such delusions of grandeur!"

the laughing hyenas of the worthless UN?

yes, they are deluded

"These are times when a president elected by a minority of Americans has chosen to appoint rapists, white supremacists, warmongers, and incompetent economists who are radically removed from the mainstream to permanent or semi-permanent government positions. These are times when the opinions of neo-Nazis and fascists are actively solicited to contribute to mainstream discourse."

pretty much all of this is a lie

"Young people, if this is the first presidency you've paid attention to, trust me: This is not the way it's supposed to be. These loons, who've been on the mad fringe of the Western World's politics since 1945, are now back in positions of power."

the people shouting at Cruz in a restaurant are just like the Nazis who started fights in beer halls

the Dem legislators who slander BK are just like the Nazi propaganda machine

"We know how that turned out back in the mid 20th Century. The main difference today is that the American descendants of Europe's murderous fascists now have access to weapons of destruction and political suppression that the Nazis and fascists could never imagine."

the main difference and all the rest of the differences is everything

their is simply no sense in which they are comparable

"And so, the fact that Ted Cruz was heckled out of a nice quiet meal is more than justifiable. As long as Cruz is in office, I have no problems with anyone interrupting his mastications in order to protest his outrageous actions. They must be stopped."

I know, by any means necessary, the cry of all fascists

"There is nothing I'd like more than to have a Congress filled with genuinely diverse viewpoints."

another lie

"Instead, our present Congress is stocked with neo-Nazis, fascists, racists, and apologists for the madmen of the extreme right. This isn't a mere difference of opinion, this is existential lunacy and most of the country knows it. We should never let them forget how unwanted they are."

well, if you can't engage in discussions just because you always lose, you're the problem

"PS. Once Cruz is safely out of my government, I will gladly defend his right to eat in peace anywhere he wants. But frankly, if I was dining next to him, I'd walk out. No reason to get indigestion."

maybe the gays that harassed Cruz last night should try that

maybe it's time for the whole divisive lot of you to walk out of the country

September 25, 2018 11:59 PM  
Anonymous A married couple with adopted children is too a family! said...


Brett Kavanaugh's Body Language Says It All, According To An Expert

Thanks to Senate confirmation hearings, we now have hours and hours of video of Judge Brett Kavanaugh at our disposal. If there were any body language pattern to establish from these, it's that he seems scared. He squirms, he smirks, he mugs — and he evades questions.

Kavanaugh has reason to be scared — he has had multiple sexual assault allegations brought against him, and on Thursday, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford is slated to testify in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee about the night he allegedly drunkenly forced himself on her in high school.

"What happened was very complex," she tells Refinery29. "It was not a real interview. He controlled what was happening. He was not surprised by any questions. He spent the majority of the time, according to my transcript analysis, talking about what a good guy he was."

When analyzing the transcript of the Fox News interview, Wood highlighted two types of statements: Kavanaugh's denials ("I’ve never sexually assaulted anyone in high school or otherwise") and his statements about how wholesome he is ("I was focused on trying to be number-one in my class and being captain of the varsity basketball team and doing my service projects, going to church").

She found that the amount of time he spends on his good-behavior statements — when he talks about church, friends, and school — far outweighs how long he dedicates to denials. "Normally an innocent person wants to spend a lot of time denying what happened," she says. "They want to make sure you know they didn’t do it. They don’t change the subject to another part of their life and talk about going to church."

In his confirmation hearing he has an exchange With Kamala Harris About Mueller Investigation

In this particularly tense exchange, Kavanaugh deviates from what Wood calls his "baseline" behavior. Every time Sen. Harris asks him the question, there is at least 10 seconds of silence before he starts talking, while normally his responses would be quicker. He evades the question, asks Harris questions in response, and touches his face "in self-comfort."

September 26, 2018 12:25 AM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


"It's as though there's a game taking place," Wood says, recalling White House press secretarySarah Huckabee Sanders' common expression of "duping delight,"or smiling out of context because your subconscious mind is taking pleasure in having fooled somebody. "The self-satisfied smile — that smug grin — is on the very edge of 'duping delight,' something Sarah Huckabee Sanders does full-on. He's in game mode there, and she, well, she's always in game mode. He's thinking,I'm winning in this game, I'm getting away with not giving you the answer."

At one point, a protestor bursts into the hearing, yelling, "Be a hero and vote no!" After that, Wood notes (around 4:12), Kavanaugh takes a sip of water and sticks his tongue out in what she calls a "tongue thrust."

"Think someone who got away with something on the playground, like got something over on a bully, and they stick their tongue out rather than punch the bully," she says. Taking a sip of water, she adds, is a way of covering his true emotions. "That is a coached move and he is using it to cover his anxiety and the tongue thrust shows his suppressed anger."

When Harris questions him again, he again doesn't answer the question, and he holds his body away from her. "It's interesting that he is 'acting' like he does not understand what she is asking," says Wood. "I know he is acting as I have analyzed his baseline and compared his responses to more difficult and complex questions.

Just as Kavanaugh gets up for a recess, Fred Guttenberg, the father of Parkland victim Jaime Guttenberg, approaches him and tries to shake his hand. Kavanaugh briefly looks at him with bewilderment, then doesn't shake his hand, and quickly walks in the other direction. Later, he would say he didn't recognize Guttenberg. "It had been a chaotic morning,"Kavanaugh wrote. "I unfortunately did not realize that the man was the father of a shooting victim from Parkland, Florida. Mr. Guttenberg has suffered an incalculable loss. If I had known who he was, I would have shaken his hand, talked to him, and expressed my sympathy. And I would have listened to him."

To put this in context, Kavanaugh has been skeptical about any type of gun reform. "He is clearly on the record expressing the view that it is illegal to restrict access to assault weapons like the one used in Parkland," Adam Skaggs, chief counsel at the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, toldVice. "He has made fairly clear that he believes regulating who can carry concealed weapons in public is constitutionally suspect. And he has outlined a view of how courts should approach Second Amendment questions that would call into question a host of the types of laws legislatures in many states have passed after Parkland."

You can see Kavanaugh's face go from bewilderment to anger to sadness as he turns away from the father of the Parkland victim.

The sadness is particularly telling, Wood says. "Sadness in that context wouldn't make sense to me with a stranger. What would make sense to me is that he did recognize who this was."

September 26, 2018 12:26 AM  
Anonymous Society should preference gays raising kids heteros abandon said...


Federal Communications Commission hiding evidence of suspected Russian role in ending Net Neutrality: Lawsuit

Net Neutrality requires internet service providers to provide access to all web sites at the same speed. The Republican head of the FCC sought to end Net Neutrality so internet service providers could slow down access to web sites they don't like or control in order to speed up access to web sites they do own or which pay them more.
-----------------------------------

Mitch McConnell ignored Obama's warnings and suppressed CIA evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Now he refuses to allow a vote on a bill to protect the Mueller investigation into Russian interference in 2016 election.

His PAC has received $3.5 million in contributions from Russian oligarch Blavatnik.

September 26, 2018 12:28 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

The law must be clear that anti-discrimination laws exist to protect people, NOT BELIEFS!

If you bake cakes for a living it does you no harm to bake a cake for a gay wedding. Anti-discrimination laws don't exist to allow you to spit in the face of people you want to feel superior to. The trivial satisfaction you get out of that in no way justifies an attack on another's dignity.

September 26, 2018 2:32 AM  
Anonymous life should be preferenced, homosexuality prevents life said...

"Mitch McConnell ignored Obama's warnings and suppressed CIA evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election"

this is a load of crap

Obama the Worst was the President and did nothing about reports that Russians were seeking to influence

of course, that's because Russia has always done these kind of things and the common wisdom among intelligence agencies that the appropriate way to fight this was in the dark world of espionage not through public actions

"Now he refuses to allow a vote on a bill to protect the Mueller investigation into Russian interference in 2016 election"

Mueller has looked into this, unimpeded by the Trump administration, for two years

he's found nothing

indeed, he's wasted time prosecuting and convicting several people on unrelated charges

he's obviously found nothing better to do

"His PAC has received $3.5 million in contributions from Russian oligarch Blavatnik"

how nefarious!

what about the money the Russians gave to the Clintons while the Obama administration catered to Russian interests around the world?: unilaterally removing anti-ballistics from Eastern Europe, ignoring the red line in Syria, refusing military aid to the Ukraine, et al

--------------------------------------------------------

The law must be clear that anti-discrimination laws exist to protect people, NOT ACTIONS!

relating to people based on their actions is perfectly acceptable and not discriminatory

religious beliefs, btw, are protected by the Constitution, not legislation

"If you bake cakes for a living it does you no harm to bake a cake for a gay wedding"

in America, we believe that slavery IS harmful

"Anti-discrimination laws don't exist to allow you to spit in the face of people you want to feel superior to"

looks like Priya has mixed up the message here

regardless, anti-discrimination laws preferencing homosexuals violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution

people have the right to associate and do business with whoever they choose

in the case of the Colorado baker, however, he was fine providing services to homosexuals

he just refuses to participate in the celebration of an immoral event: homosexuals pretending to be married to another of their gender

"The trivial satisfaction you get out of that in no way justifies an attack on another's dignity."

there is a constitutional right to attack another's dignity

homosexuals do it routinely

look at Ted Cruz trying to eat dinner at Fiola's, look at Sarah Huckabee being asked to leave a restaurant in Lexington

the idea of homosexuals is to attack anyone's dignity if they don't endorse the gay agenda

"Society should preference gays raising kids heteros abandon"

the state should protect the interests of kids, not expose them to the shame of being raised by homosexuals

September 26, 2018 7:31 AM  
Anonymous life should be preferenced, homosexuality prevents life said...

Enough is enough. It’s time for Senate Majority Leader McConnell, to call the vote and confirm Brett Kavanaugh as a Supreme Court justice now. Sure, a Republican senator or two might flake out and join Democrats in their perpetual opposition, but it’s time to end this charade and move on. The Democrats and their allies in the media are pulling out their hair about these decades-old, previously unreported sexual assault allegations but their motivations are entirely political, and it’s obvious to anyone paying attention.

This is the same party that has spent countless Senate floor speeches over the years to lionize Ted Kennedy, ignoring his responsibility in the death of Mary Jo Kopechne. They can’t imagine Kavanaugh as a Supreme Court justice, but they were happy to nearly hand Kennedy their party’s presidential nomination even though he drove off a bridge and left a woman to drown in his car. But you don’t need to go back to Ted Kennedy to showcase the Democrats’ selective “wokeness” on this issue.

It was like pulling teeth for the public to convince Al Franken that, yes, molesting women in their sleep and taking pictures of it was something over which you should resign. Yet, just days after Franken’s resignation, Democratic senators began voicing their regrets over his resignation. Now, of course, these same Democrats want you to believe they are very serious about sexual harassment claims, even though many of them would still like for Franken to be back in their midst.

We shouldn’t be surprised by this, given the company that so many on the left keep. These folks are the ones who went hat-in-hand to disgraced Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein, who turned sexual assault into an Oscar-winning endeavor; they were happy to take endorsements, campaign cash and party invitations from elite members of Hollywood. They were more than happy, in the light of very credible reports of rape, to shelter Bill Clinton. If Democrats would like to go back over 35 years and investigate such matters — which Hillary Clinton, among others, is calling for with Kavanaugh — then fine, let’s do it, and examine Juanita Broaddrick’s or Kathleen Willey’s claims regarding sexual assaults by Bill Clinton.

But let’s bring it up to even a more immediate example: We shouldn’t accept anything the media or the Democrats have to say on this issue until they call on Congressman Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) to resign. Ellison has been accused of domestic violence and more; his accuser has made text messages, medical reports and much more publicly available to law enforcement, the media and, of course, the Democratic Party. The DNC, which Ellison helps to run as its deputy chairman, is largely silent on this accusation.

With Democrats, the pattern is clear: Use sexual assault allegations as a cudgel against your political enemies but obfuscate, ignore and downplay anything that might hurt the blue team. After decades of not taking this issue of sexual abuse seriously when it dealt with people they wanted to protect, Democrats still aren’t taking this issue seriously. Their current behavior is deeply damaging to real cases of sexual abuse, not the ones they’re deploying against Kavanaugh. So we should discount everything they have to say on the matter.

Republicans, you’re in charge. Act like it. Call a vote, and let’s confirm Kavanaugh and move on.

September 26, 2018 7:46 AM  
Anonymous life should be preferenced, homosexuality doesn't bring life said...

Christine Blasey Ford’s story is growing less believable by the day. Here are eight reasons:

1) For starters, Ford still can’t recall basic details of what she says was the most traumatic event in her life. Not where the “assault” took place — she’s not sure whose house it was, or even what street it was on. Nor when — she’s not even sure of the year, let alone the day and month. Ford’s not certain how old she was or what grade she was in when she says an older student violently molested her.

2) Ford concedes she told no one what happened to her at the time, not even her best friend or mother. That means she can rely on no contemporaneous witness to corroborate her story.

3) Worse, the four other people she identified as attending the party, including Kavanaugh, all deny knowledge of the gathering in question, including Leland Ingham Keyser, who she calls a “lifelong friend.”

Keyser’s lawyer told the Senate Judiciary Committee: “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.”

The other two potential witnesses — Mark Judge and Patrick “P.J.” Smyth — also deny any recollection of attending such a party. The committee took their sworn statements “under penalty of perjury.” In her original letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Ford claimed that Kavanaugh talked to Keyser and Smyth right after he assaulted her. Yet neither shares her memory.

This is, to say the least, highly problematic for her case. No witness corroborates any part of her story.

4) Her own immediate family doesn’t appear to be backing her up, either. Her mother, father and two siblings are all conspicuously absent from a letter of support released by a dozen relatives, mostly on her husband’s side of the family.

5) This summer, Ford tried to reach out to old friends from high school and college to jog her memory. They couldn’t help her.

6) Yet she still pushed forward with her bombshell charge, contacting The Washington Post tip line and Democratic lawmakers, while hiring a Democratic activist lawyer. Ford is also a Democrat, as well as an anti-Trump marcher, raising questions about the motive and timing of the allegations along with their veracity.

7) Ford contends that notes her therapist took in 2012 corroborate her account. But they don’t mention Kavanaugh. They also point up inconsistencies in her story. For instance, her shrink noted that Ford told her there were “four boys” in the bedroom, not two as she now says. The notes also indicate Ford said she was in her “late teens” when she was assaulted. But Ford now says she may have been only 15.

8) In another inconsistency, Ford told The Washington Post she was upset when Trump won in 2016, because Kavanaugh was mentioned as a Supreme Court pick. But Kavanaugh wasn’t added to Trump’s list of possibles until November 2017, a full year later.

Democrats have already tried and convicted Kavanaugh of sexual assault. Without hard evidence, without substantiation, some even go beyond Ford’s claims to call him an out-and-out “rapist,” “sexual predator,” even a “child predator.”

As a result, Kavanaugh and his family, “including his two young daughters, have faced serious death threats and vicious assaults,” Grassley said. “And they’re getting worse each day.”

Ford, who also has received threats, is by all accounts a respected scientific researcher in the field of psychology with an impressive pedigree. Right now, however, her story is not credible. Unless she can fill in the many holes, Kavanaugh deserves the presumption of innocence.

September 26, 2018 9:54 AM  
Anonymous homosexuality never produces life. two homosexuals never produce a marriage said...

Anyone tuning in to the first Senate Judiciary Committee hearings earlier this month surely thought they had flipped to a circus show featuring Cory Booker as Spartacus. Then later, Dianne Feinstein entered as the fire-juggler, who, in the eleventh-hour jumps through a blazing hoop to magically produce a damning accusation of sexual assault against the Supreme Court nominee

Attendant sideshows this past week have included protesters crowding Senate office buildings and, Monday night, chanting "We believe survivors!" at Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and his wife at a Washington restaurant until the couple left.

Monday night's mini-mob was like a flock of crows, picking, pecking and screeching at the still very-much alive Cruz, all because? He's a longtime friend of Kavanaugh's and sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee. This is the reward we give to those who choose to serve the public. One female protester who claimed to be a victim of sexual assault demanded to know if Cruz would vote for Kavanaugh. Let me help you here: They've been friends for 20 years, Cruz is a pro-life Republican, yes.

In a snit of levity, another heckler shouted that Cruz's opponent in his bid for re-election, Texas Rep. Beto O'Rourke, "is way hotter than you are!" (alert: the protester was a rude homosexual)

You see, life really is a continuous re-enactment of high school — a "Groundhog Day" reordering of how things should have been. A group calling itself #SmashRacismDC celebrated Monday's hecklefest with a promise on Facebook: "This is a message to Ted Cruz, Brett Kavanaugh, Donald Trump and the rest of the racist, sexist, transphobic, and homophobic right-wing scum: You are not safe. We will find you. We will expose you. We will take from you the peace you have taken from so many others."

They also tweeted, "Fascists not welcome!"

Irony, meet your executioner.

While these virtual and real tantrums were taking place, Kavanaugh (along with his wife, Ashley) was making a public appearance from the safety of Fox News. At times, Kavanaugh visibly struggled to maintain his composure and stick to the three points he clearly came to make: "I've never sexually assaulted anyone"; "I just want a fair process"; and "I'm not going anywhere."

One might have hoped for something less-scripted, but obviously he wasn't about to make headlines with speculation about his accusers' motives or character. Christine Blasey Ford, who claims Kavanaugh tried to rape her at a party in the early 1980s, is scheduled to testify before the Judiciary Committee Thursday — as is Kavanaugh.

One also wouldn't expect Kavanaugh to comment on Deborah Ramirez, who told The New Yorker, "after six days of carefully assessing her memories," that Kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a Yale party when they were undergraduates there. Apparently, drinking was involved. The New York Times, which had also researched her claim, was unable to find anyone to corroborate the tale. In a complicating wrinkle, Kavanaugh's Yale roommate has said that he believes Ramirez, even though he provided no reason other than he liked her.

There's nothing good about any of this.

Those who come forward as survivors of sexual assault deserve our respect and a fair hearing, without qualification. But so do the accused. To conflate support for due process in a trial-like setting with attacking the alleged victim is to misunderstand the exquisitely designed presumption of innocence — the liberal core of our justice system.

What we have now amounts to gossip until both sides can be heard. In the meantime, before they switch places with the benighted GOP, Democrats would do well to loudly condemn hecklers. These misguided champions of chaos do harm not just to the social order but to the very causes with which they align themselves.

They also remind us that civilization hangs by a thread — and is unraveling before our eyes.

September 26, 2018 10:07 AM  
Anonymous sayanora, gay agenda said...

to those of you who think that slandering an innocent man and attacking his family are acceptable ways to fight a Supreme Court nominee, we bring you the words of Martin Luther King:

"injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere"

September 26, 2018 10:30 AM  
Anonymous Sayanora GOP majority said...

Republicans are performing critical triage to their midterm spending strategy as they seek to hold on to their House majority in a difficult midterm year.

The House GOP’s campaign arm pulled the plug on its remaining ad buys last week for the Pittsburgh media market, where Rep. Keith Rothfus (R-Pa.) is desperately fighting to hang on to his seat in a race against Rep. Conor Lamb (D-Pa.).

It’s grim news for Rothfus, who has largely been seen as a dead man walking since redistricting left him with a Democratic-leaning district and a difficult opponent in Lamb.

For the GOP, it’s likely a sign of things to come as the party seeks to target its money toward the races most likely to save its majority. Democrats need 23 seats to take back control of the House, and the GOP is defending dozens of seats that are seen as vulnerable.

“It’s a giant chessboard,” said one longtime GOP operative. “There’s obviously limited resources, and you need to make tough decisions. This is sort of an art form as opposed to a science.”

The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) must decide if it should put energy into competitive and Democratic-leaning districts that Hillary Clinton carried in 2016 — or if the party is better served protecting GOP strongholds that could be in play if a “blue wave” materializes.

If the news turns bad, it will lead to difficult calls between the NRCC and incumbent GOP lawmakers.

“There could be a bunch more. It all depends on the polling. People evaluate these things on an hourly, daily basis,” said one former NRCC staffer. “These decisions aren’t made lightly. If you have a race that’s just not winnable and you have limited resources, you can’t spend just to make somebody feel better.”

Besides Rothfus, the GOP incumbents who are locked in competitive races tilted in Democrats’ favor include Reps. Barbara Comstock (Va.), Erik Paulsen (Minn.), Jason Lewis (Minn.) and Rod Blum (Iowa), according to the nonpartisan Cook Political Report.

“Any time you cut bait, especially on a member of Congress, it’s a hard decision — but one that has to be made,” the former staffer added. “It’s always a stab in the back whenever that happens to a campaign.”

Democrats have better-sounding decisions to make, though the party will be second-guessed if it makes the wrong calls on where to put its money a little more than 40 days before the elections.

On Monday, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) canceled all remaining TV spending planned in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, where Democrats are feeling increasingly confident about their chances of flipping a seat.

“It’s a good problem to have for the Democrats,” the GOP operative said.

Midterm elections are historically tough for the president’s party, which typically loses around 30 seats in the president’s first midterm. President Trump’s low approval ratings and the intense political passions that have stirred over the past two years have Democrats hoping that they’ll ride a large wave to a House majority this fall.

Democrats also have more money, as the DCCC has nearly $70 million in cash on hand, compared to the NRCC’s $65 million, according to the latest data filed with the Federal Election Commission.

Republicans have more than one reason to not want to cut off support to some of their vulnerable members.

The optics of cutting off support to a female lawmaker like Comstock — especially at a time when the GOP is already poised to lose 25 percent of its female elected officeholders — could be detrimental.

September 26, 2018 11:14 AM  
Anonymous And then there were three said...

...A third woman came forward Wednesday to accuse Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, saying he was physically abusive toward girls in high school and present at a house party in 1982 where she says she was the victim of a “gang” rape.

The woman, Julie Swetnick, a Washington resident, is represented by lawyer Michael Avenatti, who revealed her identity on Twitter and posted her photograph.

The Post has not independently verified her allegations regarding President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee.

In a declaration, Julie Swetnick, who attended Gaithersburg High School, said she observed Kavanaugh drinking excessively at house parties and engaging “in abusive and physically aggressive behavior toward girls.”

Swetnick said she witnessed efforts by Kavanaugh and others to get girls inebriated so they could be “gang raped” in side rooms at house parties by a “train” of numerous boys....

September 26, 2018 12:28 PM  
Anonymous Society should preference gays raising kids heteros abandon said...


The new Republican Party:

We'll elect every playground-skulking pedophile and pussy-grabbing traitor with a pulse and make every rapist a Supreme Court Justice to cut taxes for the wealthy and make women have babies because Jesus.


Kavan-naugh-naugh
Kavan-naugh-naugh

Hey, hey

GOOD BYE!

September 26, 2018 1:09 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


Misogynistic christian Activist On Brett Kavanaugh: The Bible Says It’s Not Rape If The Woman Doesn’t Scream For Help

Christian activist Don Boys has published a jaw-dropping take on the Kavanaugh accusations for Liberty Counsel radio host Matt Barber’s site, Barbwire. An excerpt:

"Some common sense definitions are necessary regarding this accusation. Rape is having sex with a woman while she screams for help. No scream, no rape according to Deuteronomy 22:23-24. Ford says Kavanaugh held his hand over her mouth so did she scream for help when his hand was elsewhere? After all, it was in a bedroom of a house; surely, one of the other 4 teens could have heard him scream when she bit his hand.

Did she bite his hand? Poke him in the eye? Women know instinctively how to protect their honor: screaming, shouting, slapping, spitting, slugging, and stabbing with a finger, pencil, or hat pin. Since she did not cry out or stab him, I will not believe her without a film of the event."

You disgusting scumbag, he put his hand over her mouth so she could not scream! They also turned up the music so the others in the house wouldn't identify her screams!

Most rape victims are afraid to physically attack their rapist out of fear of a larger and stronger person who may, as Dr. Ford said, kill them.

So, according to the bible, you can drug a woman and have sex with her unconcious body and its totally not rape because she didn't scream for help! Nice "moral guide" you have there! That kind of thorough, fair, and deep thinking obviously could have only come from a god!

Evangelical christians see women as inferior, as possessions who matter less than men.

September 26, 2018 1:10 PM  
Anonymous Society should preference gays raising kids heteros abandon said...


Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh implausibly claims to have been a virgin until "many years after" he left college.

He has been accused of exposing himself to one woman and pinning another down while trying to take her clothes off. Being a virgin wouldn't disprove either of those allegations. That he would use his alleged virginity as a defence says a lot about how he views women even beyond his guilt or innocence. For that reason alone it would be a travesty of justice if this man was placed on the Supreme Court to make rulings about women's control over their own bodies.
----------------------------------

Asked if he thought Kavanaugh's accusers were lying, Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.) said “I have no way of knowing that yet,”. Then asked if there’s any reason to believe they are lying, Perdue appeared taken aback. “I have no comment on that comment.”
------------------------------------

Right now, all over the country, teenage girls are waking up to newsfeeds full of posts written by adults in their lives that say teenage boys attempting to rape them is "just how boys are" and "They can't help themselves" and "They grow out of it" and "it was just a little harmless fun." Think about what that must be doing to them. And when you're done thinking about that, imagine all the teenage boys reading the same thing.

September 26, 2018 1:11 PM  
Anonymous life should be preferenced, homosexuality doesn't bring life said...

"...A third woman came forward Wednesday to accuse Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, saying he was physically abusive toward girls in high school and present at a house party in 1982 where she says she was the victim of a “gang” rape.

The woman, Julie Swetnick, a Washington resident, is represented by lawyer Michael Avenatti, who revealed her identity on Twitter and posted her photograph.

The Post has not independently verified her allegations regarding President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee.

In a declaration, Julie Swetnick, who attended Gaithersburg High School, said she observed Kavanaugh drinking excessively at house parties and engaging “in abusive and physically aggressive behavior toward girls.”

Swetnick said she witnessed efforts by Kavanaugh and others to get girls inebriated so they could be “gang raped” in side rooms at house parties by a “train” of numerous boys...."

brought to you today by Comet Ping Pong

she also says she was good friends with Judge and Kavanaugh

so, she's saying she went to house parties (that's plural) where these guys gang raped drugged girls and she was still good friends with them?

and she witnessed gang rapes and didn't report it to police?

well, gee, there should have been plenty of witnesses and victims

is she an accomplice?

time to end this circus and vote

if credible evidence ever suraces, he can be impeached

right now, the Dems are simply orchestrating a delay

"Right now, all over the country, teenage girls are waking up to newsfeeds full of posts written by adults in their lives that say teenage boys attempting to rape them is "just how boys are" and "They can't help themselves" and "They grow out of it" and "it was just a little harmless fun.""

and to think, none of it would be happening if the Dems had not chosen to slander an innocent man to achieve their political goals

time to throw the bums out!

September 26, 2018 1:30 PM  
Anonymous No one believes you anymore said...

"life should be preferenced, homosexuality doesn't bring life"

From the same side that refuses to allow any form of gun control, so those kids can grow up and be shot at in school.

From the same side that consistently promotes more and more funding for wars, and less and less on health care.

From the same side that would prefer poor pregnant mothers fend for themselves, rather than get a bit of maternity health care help from the richest country on the planet.

From the same side that wants to shut down all education about contraception, so that ignorant teenagers have babies and continue a cycle of generational poverty, rather than learning better ways to deal with their lives and build a better future for themselves and their families.

From the same side that keeps promoting the unfettered birth of more and more humans, while the earth is experiencing the largest mass extinction event in millions of years. This is not to be misconstrued as putting animal live above that of humans, but to point out that if we lose a large portion of the animals and plants on this planet, (because of over-population, pollution, and over-consumption) the damage to human life will be immeasurable.

Your empty slogans rang hollow years ago.

September 26, 2018 1:30 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

"the earth is experiencing the largest mass extinction event in millions of years....if we lose a large portion of the animals and plants on this planet, (because of over-population, pollution, and over-consumption) the damage to human life will be immeasurable."

Hear Hear, Good Anonymous!

Humans and our feed animals make up half the biomass of the earth - our population is way out of whack with the natural balance of our world. The overwhelming consensus amongst scientists is that biodiversity is crucial to the health of the planet (and us).

September 26, 2018 1:49 PM  
Anonymous Society should preference gays raising kids heteros abandon said...


Christine Blasey Ford is getting death threats and she and her family have been forced to leave their home and go into hiding. She is coming forward and putting her life on the line. Six years ago she didn't sit in a therapy session and make up a story about almost being raped and fearing for her life and have the doctors take notes in the thinking that Brett Kavanaugh would be a Supreme Court nominee. Everything you've got tells you this woman has no incentive to make it up whereas Judge Kavanaugh has every incentive to deny it.

September 26, 2018 1:50 PM  
Anonymous Marriage gay or not has never required children and never will said...


"Go ahead and rape our daughters" doesn't seem like a winning slogan for the Republicans in 2018

"Boys will be boys: Girls should shut up" doesn't have much of a ring to it either.

September 26, 2018 2:00 PM  
Anonymous And then there were three said...

"and she witnessed gang rapes and didn't report it to police"

Oh really, when did she say that?

I read she said “I have a firm recollection of seeing boys lined up outside rooms at many of these parties waiting for their ‘turn’ with a girl inside the room. These boys included Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh.”

Seeing boys lined up outside rooms is not witnessing gang rapes.

September 26, 2018 2:11 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Politico reports that right now Kavanaugh doesn't have the votes to be confirmed, Republicans privately admit.

That was obvious or the vote would have been held already. You can also tell because Republicans are so angry about what has become public about Kavanaugh.

Hee Hee Hee!

September 26, 2018 2:23 PM  
Anonymous Judicial Crisis Network On Kavanaugh Allegations: ‘We Have To Look Into This Further’ said...

Carrie Severino, chief counsel and policy director of the Judicial Crisis Network, would not definitively state Wednesday that Judge Brett Kavanaugh should still be confirmed as a Supreme Court associate justice, saying allegations of misconduct should be further examined.

“I think we have to look into this further,” Severino said when asked by MSNBC’s Craig Melvin whether Kavanaugh should still be confirmed. “From what we know so far, we don’t have corroboration yet. If the Senate votes on this soon, I think they would have to go on what they know so far. I know the Senate Judiciary Committee is going to look into this before they would move forward to a vote.”...

The Judicial Crisis Network sits at the center of a network of groups and conservative legal activists behind the selection of judges by President Donald Trump. JCN was co-founded by Leonard Leo, the Federalist Society executive who pushed Kavanaugh’s nomination on Trump, as the society’s political arm to publicly advocate for judicial nominees.

The role of JCN is to publicly support those nominees with seven-figure television advertising buys and extensive advocacy on television programs, such as the one Severino, a former clerk to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, appeared on.

That Severino is hedging now is significant ― it’s her job to promote Kavanaugh’s confirmation, and she’s previously been one of his biggest defenders. She told MSNBC on Tuesday that the accusations of sexual misconduct by Kavanaugh are part of a “partisan smear campaign” led by Democrats.

In a Sept. 18 interview with CNN, Severino downplayed the accusations of Christine Blasey Ford, who claims Kavanaugh pinned her down, groped her and tried to remove her clothes at a party when the two were in high school in the 1980s. Severino said Blasey’s accusations “cover a whole range of conduct, from boorishness to rough horseplay to actual attempted rape.”

“There’s 35 years of memory that we’re trying to play with here, and I’m saying the behavior she described could describe a whole range of things,” Severino said.

As Severino hedged her support of Kavanaugh Wednesday, the White House continued to stand by its candidate, with press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders telling CNBC that Trump still has confidence in his pick.

Kavanaugh was one of 25 candidates named in a list of acceptable conservative court picks provided by The Federalist Society to Trump. Kavanaugh’s name was added late as a bid by his friends Leo, White House counsel Don McGahn and conservative activist Ed Whelan to get Trump to choose him.

September 26, 2018 2:28 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Just in case this wasn't clear the first time: When Republicans learned of Deborah Ramirez's not yet public allegations against Brett Kavanaugh they tried to speed up the process of confirming him.

The GOP is a sexual predator protection racket.

September 26, 2018 2:28 PM  
Anonymous life should be preferenced, homosexuality doesn't bring life said...

they should have held the vote the second Ford refused to show up for Monday's hearing

Ramirez' story lacks credibility to the extent that even the NY Times wouldn't print it

and they don't exactly have high standards

the Dems are trying to delay

next, they'll be finding people who allege he shoplifted when he was 12 years old and once littered when he was 15

September 26, 2018 3:00 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

#BREAKING Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford has four people who corroborate her sexual assault claims, documents sent to Senate show

So, yeah, as you probably expected, Lindsey Graham and other Republicans who repeatedly claimed there was "no corroboration of her claims" have been lying through their teeth.
------------------------------

Number of combined sexual misconduct, assault and rape allegations:

Tяump and Kavanaugh: 23
Obama and Garland: 0

--------------------------

New York Times Maggie Haberman:

"Tяump is sounding somewhat fatalistic about Kavanaugh in private discussions. Annoyed by the interview and talking repeatedly about needing to see how the hearing goes before knowing what can happen next."

September 26, 2018 3:12 PM  
Anonymous Everything is turning up roses for Democrats! said...


WISCONSIN: Democratic Governor Candidate +7 Over incumbent Republican Scott Walker


USA Today reports:

New polls show Democrats doing well in the Great Lakes industrial states that were crucial to President Donald Trump’s victory.

Democratic senatorial candidates have double-digit leads in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, according to Ipsos Public Affairs polls released Wednesday. Democrats running for governor in those states also have healthy advantages.

Democratic challenger Tony Evers is ahead of Wisconsin Republican Gov. Scott Walker 50-43 percent. More than half (54 percent) of likely voters are motivated to vote for a candidate who opposes Trump compared with 42 percent who want a candidate who supports Trump.

September 26, 2018 3:18 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

NYT Paul Krugman. The Party of No Ideas

"Republicans aren’t even trying to run on their policies.

In short, the American public seems to have wised up; voters seem to have recognized the G.O.P.’s reverse Robin Hood agenda of taking from ordinary families and giving to the rich for what it is."

September 26, 2018 3:45 PM  
Anonymous heterosexuality should be societally preferenced because it alone brings life said...

"So, yeah, as you probably expected, Lindsey Graham and other Republicans who repeatedly claimed there was "no corroboration of her claims" have been lying through their teeth."

I just read that

doesn't really qualify as corroboration

quite honestly, to be "shaking" about it 35 years later is a little ridiculous

glad she's seeing a therapist

September 26, 2018 3:52 PM  
Anonymous Good for the Gander said...

"the Dems are trying to delay"

So they took a page from the Mitch McConnell "How to Delay a Supreme Court Justice Nominee" book.

It's about time Democrats started playing hardball with the Republicans. It took them long enough.

Maybe once Republicans start tasting some of their own medicine, they'll start behaving better.

But I'm not holding my breath.

September 26, 2018 4:04 PM  
Anonymous sayanora, gay agenda said...

"So they took a page from the Mitch McConnell "How to Delay a Supreme Court Justice Nominee" book.

It's about time Democrats started playing hardball with the Republicans. It took them long enough."

glad to hear you acknowledge that the sanctimonious oratory is all fake

now, since you like hardball so much, we can vote Brett in

the GOP delayed Garland without lies and slander

the Dems will do anything to save a court that makes law

they need that because they can rarely make a good case to the voters for their policies

the GOP stopped Garland with the power they were given by voters

"Maybe once Republicans start tasting some of their own medicine, they'll start behaving better."

they've behaved like adults while the Dems behaved like children

"But I'm not holding my breath."

good idea

ou can't afford to lose any more brain cells

September 26, 2018 4:37 PM  
Anonymous Keep playing hardball said...

"the GOP delayed Garland without lies and slander"

Or even a plausible excuse, or precedent. If they really thought he wouldn't be approved through a vote, they should have done their constitutional duty and put Garland up for a vote.

Funny how the GOP is slandering all these women without even hearing their testimony. Depending on which study you like to use, 90 to 98% of sexual assault allegations have turned out to be true. If I had to bet, I'd put all my money on the women 7 days of the week.

I have no problem acknowledging all the sanctimonious GOP oratory is BS.

September 26, 2018 4:57 PM  
Anonymous No wonder Judge fled to hide in Bethany said...

The onetime girlfriend of Mark Judge, who is alleged by Christine Blasey Ford to have been present while Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her in the 1980s, has emerged as a pivotal if hidden figure in this whole affair — and now she’s prepared to speak to the FBI and the Judiciary Committee about what she knows, according to a letter from her lawyer that I’ve obtained.

Judge’s college girlfriend, Elizabeth Rasor, is represented by lawyer Roberta Kaplan, who sent a letter to the Judiciary Committee today. The letter, which was provided to me by a senior Senate Democratic aide on the committee, says that Rasor “would welcome the opportunity” to speak to “agents of the FBI as part of a reopened background investigation” into Kavanaugh’s conduct.

After Ford alleged to The Post that Kavanaugh and Judge had assaulted her — something Kavanaugh and Judge have both denied — Rasor and what she knows became a subject of interest in this whole affair when she spoke to the New Yorker. In that piece — which was primarily about the second Kavanaugh accuser, Deborah Ramirez, who claimed Kavanaugh exposed himself to her at Yale in the 1980s — Rasor did not make any allegations about Kavanaugh.

But Rasor did say that Judge had confided in her about a group sex incident at the time. As the New Yorker piece put it:

Rasor recalled that Judge had told her ashamedly of an incident that involved him and other boys taking turns having sex with a drunk woman. Rasor said that Judge seemed to regard it as fully consensual. She said that Judge did not name others involved in the incident, and she has no knowledge that Kavanaugh participated in it.

The letter from Rasor’s attorney confirms that this account faithfully reflects what she recalls — and, now, what she is prepared to tell the FBI...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/09/26/mark-judges-girlfriend-is-ready-to-talk-to-fbi-and-judiciary-committee-her-lawyer-says/

September 26, 2018 5:08 PM  
Anonymous homosexuality never ever produces any life. two homosexuals just ain't a marriage said...

"Or even a plausible excuse, or precedent. If they really thought he wouldn't be approved through a vote, they should have done their constitutional duty and put Garland up for a vote."

it was actually the Biden rule that was invoked

so there's your sought-after precedent

no excuse is needed to utilize the powers given to them

as it was, the steps in the "advise" are committee chaired considers

if he thinks committee might approve, he sets up hearing

after holding the hearing, the committee thinks the Senate might approve they orward the nomination to them

Garland didn't get past the first step

"Funny how the GOP is slandering all these women without even hearing their testimony."

they are giving reactions based on what the women sent to them

that's actually their job

Dems are confused

diligently scrutinizing an accusation is not slander

to give you an example of slander:

when Juanita Broderick accused Bill Clinton of raping her, Hillary said "it's amazing what you come up with when you drag a dollar bill through a trailer park"

now, that's slander

September 26, 2018 5:15 PM  
Anonymous Try again said...

"it was actually the Biden rule that was invoked"

No. There is simply no such thing as the "Biden rule." In a speech, Biden mused out loud about delaying a nomination if a seat became vacant during the summer recess, but the dems never did it, and no law was ever passed which codified it or implemented it. And there were 11 months left in Obama's term - it wasn't the summer before the election.

It's just a convenient excuse the GOP likes to use to cover their @$$es with and try to blame it on the Dems. We've come to expect this kind of behavior from "the party of personal responsibility."

September 26, 2018 5:33 PM  
Anonymous Have some facts said...

On February 24, 2016, a group of U.S. constitutional-law scholars sent an open letter to President Obama and the U.S. Senate urging the president to nominate a candidate to fill the vacancy and the Senate to hold hearings and vote on the nominee.[29]

The letter, which was organized by the American Constitution Society, stated that it would be "unprecedented" for the Senate to fail to consider a Supreme Court nominee, and "would leave a vacancy that would undermine the ability of the Supreme Court to carry out its constitutional duties."[29]

The signatories wrote: "the Senate's constitutional duty to 'advise and consent'—the process that has come to include hearings, committee votes, and floor votes—has no exception for election years. In fact, over the course of American history, there have been 24 instances in which presidents in the last year of a term have nominated individuals for the Supreme Court and the Senate confirmed 21 of these nominees."[29][30] Among the 33 professors signing the letter were Dean Erwin Chemerinsky of the University of California, Irvine School of Law; Adam Winkler of the UCLA School of Law; Kermit Roosevelt III of the University of Pennsylvania School of Law, and Gene Nichol of the University of North Carolina School of Law.[30]

In a letter sent to President Obama on March 3, 2016, a different group of predominately progressive scholars of American history, politics, and the law wrote to President Obama to "express our dismay at the unprecedented breach of norms by the Senate majority in refusing to consider a nomination for the Supreme Court made by a president with eleven months to serve in the position."[31] The scholars wrote that:

It is technically in the power of the Senate to engage in aggressive denial on presidential nominations. But we believe that the Framers' construction of the process of nominations and confirmation to federal courts, including the Senate's power of "advice and consent," does not anticipate or countenance an obdurate refusal by the body to acknowledge or consider a president's nominee, especially to the highest court in the land. The refusal to hold hearings and deliberate on a nominee at this level is truly unprecedented and, in our view, dangerous...

The Constitution gives the Senate every right to deny confirmation to a presidential nomination. But denial should come after the Senate deliberates over the nomination, which in contemporary times includes hearings in the Judiciary Committee, and full debate and votes on the Senate floor. Anything less than that, in our view, is a serious and, indeed, unprecedented breach of the Senate's best practices and noblest traditions for much of our nation's history.[31]

September 26, 2018 5:39 PM  
Anonymous Have some more facts said...

Signatories to this letter included, among others, Thomas E. Mann, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution; Norman J. Ornstein, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute; presidential historian Doris Kearns Goodwin; Pamela S. Karlan of Stanford Law School; Yale Law School professor Harold Hongju Koh; Geoffrey R. Stone of the University of Chicago Law School; and historian James M. McPherson of Princeton University.[31]

On March 7, 2016, a group of 356 law professors and other legal scholars released a letter (organized through the progressive judicial advocacy group Alliance for Justice) to the Senate leadership of both parties urging them "to fulfill your constitutional duty to give President Obama's Supreme Court nominee a prompt and fair hearing and a timely vote."

The letter-writers argued that Senate Republicans' announcement that they would refuse to consider any Obama nominee was a "preemptive abdication of duty" that "is contrary to the process the framers envisioned in Article II, and threatens to diminish the integrity of our democratic institutions and the functioning of our constitutional government."[32] Among the signatories to this letter were prominent law professors Charles Ogletree, Kenji Yoshino, and Laurence Tribe.[32]

On March 9, 2016, in a letter to Obama and Senate leadership, a group of almost 250 prominent corporate lawyers urged the Senate to hold hearings on the president's nominee.[33] The letter stated that "When a vacancy on the court arises, the Constitution is clear ... Article II, Section 2 states that the President 'shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ... judges of the Supreme Court' ...

Though the Senate may ultimately choose not to consent to the president's nominee, it would be unprecedented for the Senate to refuse to perform its 'advice and consent' role in this context. Not only does the Constitution direct the sitting president to nominate an individual to fill a vacancy on the court no matter whether it is an election year, nearly one third of all presidents have nominated a justice in an election year who was eventually confirmed."[33] The letter, organized by the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law,[34] also expressed concern about the "profound effect" about the effects of an under-staffed Court on the national economy, particularly in close cases.[33] Signatories to the letter came from a number of national law firms, and well as counsel for Google Inc..[34]

On March 10, 2016, the Democratic attorneys general of 19 states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia released a letter to Obama and Senate leadership in both parties calling for prompt Senate action on the president's nominee.[35] The letter stated that "the states and territories have a unique and pressing interest in a full and functioning Supreme Court" and that refusal to consider a nominee would "undermine the rule of law and ultimately impair the functioning of state governments."[35]

In March 2016, former Utah governor Jon Huntsman Jr., a Republican, and former Connecticut U.S. senator Joseph Lieberman, an independent, both co-chairs of the problem-solving group No Labels, wrote that "There is no modern precedent for the blockade that Senate Republicans have put in place. Even highly-contentious nomination battles in the past, including those over Robert Bork and Justice Clarence Thomas, followed the normal process of hearings and an up-or-down vote.

Leaving the current blockade in place could leave a seat on the Court vacant for the remainder of this term and perhaps the next as well, which could leave major cases in limbo until 2018. That is simply not acceptable. We cannot let today's crisis of leadership turn into a full-blown constitutional crisis."[36]

September 26, 2018 5:41 PM  
Anonymous And a few more said...

In March 2016, John Joseph Gibbons and Patricia Wald, the former chief judges of the Third Circuit and D.C. Circuit, respectively, warned that the Senate's refusal to act on a Supreme Court nomination "would set a dangerous precedent, and invite attempts to extend it to other situations where the Executive and the Legislative branches are in political conflict with one another." Gibbons was appointed by a Republican president, while Wald was appointed by a Democratic president.[36][37]

In April 2016, a letter signed by sixty-eight of Garland's former law clerks urging his confirmation was delivered to Senate leaders. The Washington Post summarized the letter as painting "a familiar portrait of Garland as a careful judge, a hardworking public servant and a devoted family man." The former clerks wrote: "There are not many bosses who so uniformly inspire the loyalty that we all feel toward Chief Judge Garland. Our enthusiasm is both a testament to his character and a reflection of his commitment to mentoring and encouraging us long after we left his chambers."[38]

Law professors Robin Bradley Kar and Jason Mazzone, in a May 2016 study published in the NYU Law Review Online, called the situation "unprecedented," noting that the Senate had never before transferred a president's appointment power in comparable circumstances to an unknown successor.[39][40][41]

September 26, 2018 5:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If confirmed Kavanaugh would be the first supreme court justice who would not be allowed to set foot within 1,000 feet of a school.

September 26, 2018 6:11 PM  
Anonymous Senate questioned Kavanaugh this week about another allegation said...

The Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday questioned Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh about another assault allegation.

Republican Senate investigators asked Kavanaugh about an anonymous complaint alleging the Supreme Court nominee physically assaulted a woman in 1998, according to a transcript from that phone call.

The complaint was originally sent to Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.). Gardner's office did not immediately respond to The Hill's request for comment.

An investigator during the phone call read parts of the complaint to Kavanaugh, who denied the allegation.

"I will remain anonymous, but I feel obligated to inform you of this 1998 incident involving Brett Kavanaugh," the complaint says, according to the transcript.

The complaint's author, who is anonymous, wrote that the incident involved her daughter and several other people.

"[My daughter's] friend was dating him, and they left the bar under the influence of alcohol," the complaint reads. "They were all shocked when Brett Kavanaugh shoved her friend up against the wall very aggressively and sexually."

"There were at least four witnesses, including my daughter," it continues. "Her friend, still traumatized, called my daughter yesterday, September 21, 2018, wondering what to do about it. They decided to remain anonymous."

The letter's author did not provide any names.

Kavanaugh during the phone call said he had read the letter and denied the account.

"Did the events described in the letter occur?" one investigator asked.

"No, and we're dealing with an anonymous letter about an anonymous person and an anonymous
friend," Kavanaugh said. "It's ridiculous. Total twilight zone. And no, I've never done anything like that."

Kavanaugh has been publicly accused of sexual misconduct by three women, two of whom allege he acted while under the influence of alcohol. He has denied all of the allegations....

September 26, 2018 8:01 PM  
Anonymous Pussy Grabbing is fine. Cross-dressing? Hell no. said...

It's funny how hard the "religious right" work to keep innocent trans women out of restrooms, yet have no problem admitting a man with serious credible sex crime allegations against him on to the Supreme Court.

Gotta love those abusive heterosexuals.

September 26, 2018 8:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There's no reliable evidence that Brett Kavanaugh has sexually assaulted a women within the past 24 hours - there's no reason not to confirm him!

September 26, 2018 8:58 PM  
Anonymous Ed Hanratty said...

I Revealed A Priest Abused Me 30 Years Ago. If I’m A Hero, Why Isn’t Christine Blasey Ford?

September 27, 2018 9:38 AM  
Anonymous life should be preferenced, homosexuality doesn't bring life said...

Julie Swetnick, the woman who accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and a friend of attending house parties where women — including herself — were sexually assaulted, had a restraining order filed against her years later in Miami by her former boyfriend.

A Miami-Dade County court docket shows a petition for injunction against Swetnick was filed March 1, 2001, by her former boyfriend, Richard Vinneccy, who dated her for four years before they broke up.

According to Vinneccy, Swetnick threatened him after they broke up and even after he got married to his current wife and had a child.

“Right after I broke up with her, she was threatening my family, threatening my wife and threatening to do harm to my baby at that time,” Vinneccy said.

"She’s not credible at all,” he said. “Not at all.”

September 27, 2018 9:44 AM  
Anonymous studies show only 0% who confess to attempted rape are lyig said...

WASHINGTON - The Senate Judiciary Committee has questioned two men who say they, not Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, had the disputed encounter with Christine Blasey Ford at a 1982 house party that led to sexual assault allegations.

The revelation was included in a late-night news release by Sen. Chuck Grassley, the top Republican on the committee. The release includes a day-by-day view of the committee's investigative work over the last two weeks since the allegations surfaced targeting Kavanaugh.

Ford claimed Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed, groped her and attempted to pull off her clothes while both were high school students in 1982. Since then a number of accusations have piled on, including that of a physical assault and several other sexual encounters.

Kavanaugh has repeatedly denied all the allegations lodged against him.

The committee has interviewed two men who came forward about the disputed assault at a summer house party. Both told the committee they, not Kavanaugh, "had the encounter with Dr. Ford in 1982 that is the basis of his complaint," the release states.

The previously unknown interviews could add a new layer to the evolving saga on the eve of a possible explosive hearing between Kavanaugh and Ford.

One of the men was interviewed twice by committee staff. He also submitted two written statements, one on Monday and a second, more in-depth statement on Wednesday.

Committee staff spoke to a second man over the phone Wednesday who also said he believed he, not Kavanaugh, had the disputed encounter with Ford. "He explained his recollection of the details of the encounter" to staff, the release states.

Both men were not named.

The committee has said it is investigating all claims made in the Kavanaugh saga, attempting to "make sure no stone was left unturned."

In this regard, the committee has also questioned Kavanaugh.

The release also outlines a number of others the committee has interviewed, including friends of Kavanaugh.

September 27, 2018 9:51 AM  
Anonymous heterosexuality should be societally preferenced because it alone brings life said...

Democrats plan at Thursday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing to use the high school yearbooks of embattled Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, which they say imply he and his prep school pals regularly got drunk and boasted of sexual conquests, to discredit what they call his “choir boy defense” against sex-assault charges leveled by Christine Blasey Ford.

But Ford, whose story suffers from significant gaps in her memory, wasn’t exactly a choir girl. In fact, her own yearbooks, among other things, present a potential issue for her and her character, and Republicans are prepared to cite them in questioning her story through the female sex-crimes expert they’ve hired.

A committee staffer said, “We have her yearbooks,” which had been mysteriously scrubbed from the Web prior to Ford coming out with her allegations. “She will not make a good witness."

The source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, noted that the annual class books feature a photo of an underage Ford attending at a party, alongside a caption boasting of girls passing out from binge drinking. Her yearbooks also openly reference sexually promiscuous behavior by the girls, including targeting boys at Kavanaugh’s alma mater, Georgetown Prep, an all-boys school in the affluent Maryland suburbs of Washington, D.C. Ford attended neighboring Holton-Arms School, an all-girls academy.

September 27, 2018 9:59 AM  
Anonymous No sex required said...

Test tube babies are thing now.

No sex required.

Just thought you should know.

September 27, 2018 1:19 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Sanders Dodges Question About Tяump Always Defending Those Accused of Rape

Tяump press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders did an interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News and he brought up several instances in which Tяump reflexively, automatically, defended men accused of rape without having ever looked at the evidence. Their mere denial was enough for him. She first tried to change the subject, then just invented a new reality:

“It does seem that the president has already reached a judgment about their stories,” Stephanopoulos said, “and when Roy Moore and Bill O’Reilly and Roger Ailes, Rob Porter accused and now when Brett Kavanaugh is accused, the president consistently, every single time, takes the side of the man.”…

Stephanopoulos pointed out that Tяump had never sided with accusers, and instead always defended men.

“That’s not true,” Sanders said, but did not provide evidence. “In this case, the president knows Brett Kavanaugh, he’s heard his story. There hasn’t been a shred of evidence to corroborate the other individual stories, and there has been a lot of individuals that have come forward and talked about the Brett Kavanaugh that they know and they’re confident these things didn’t happen.”

First of all, he does not know Brett Kavanaugh except in the most facile sense. He’s met him maybe twice for a short period of time. All he knows, and all he cares about, is that Kavanaugh is on his side and is therefore perfect and holy and could not possibly have ever done anything wrong in his entire life (unless he gets on the court and writes a ruling Tяump doesn’t like, then he’ll suddenly become the most horrible person on earth).

But while Sanders apparently couldn’t think of a single instance in which Tяump did not defend those accused of rape, I can: The Central Park Five, a group of young black boys accused of raping a jogger. Tяump took out a full page ad in the newspaper demanding their execution and declaring them guilty. And even after DNA evidence proved that they did not rape the jogger, he continued to insist that they must be guilty.

Gee, what could the difference be between that situation and all the others? I can’t quite put my finger on it…

September 27, 2018 2:08 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Harvard Law Professors Call for Investigation into Kavanaugh

Several Harvard Law School professors said they were troubled by the sexual assault allegations recently levelled against Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh and called for further investigation into his alleged misbehavior.

Kavanaugh has taught as a lecturer at the Law School since 2008, and a number of professors and Law School Dean John F. Manning lauded him in the days after Trump announced his nomination. In the wake of the assault allegations, though, some of Kavanaugh's colleagues at the school have joined a growing chorus calling for a serious investigation into the allegations — and for senators to vote against Kavanaugh if the women's stories are true.

Law School Professor Michael J. Klarman, a constitutional law scholar, wrote in an email Sunday that, while some have argued that Kavanaugh’s actions as a 17-year-old are not relevant to the judge's ability to serve on the Court, he does not buy that reasoning.

“I certainly agree with the idea that we should be pretty forgiving toward youthful mistakes. But attempted rape is a really serious charge. And serving on the Supreme Court is a privilege, not a right,” Klarman wrote. “So my view, though I think reasonable people can differ on this, is that if he committed the assault, as alleged, his confirmation should be rejected.”

“It is hard to understand how Republicans can justify not conducting a more thorough investigation than it appears they will do,” Klarman wrote.

September 27, 2018 2:09 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Ain't buying that VIRGIN thing

September 27, 2018 2:10 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Research shows only 2% to 6% of sexual misconduct allegations are false. Dr. Ford passed a lie detector test, Kavanaugh refused to take one.

All three accusers have been getting death threats, Christine Ford and her family have been forced out of their house and into hiding. Her life has been turned upside down as she knew it would if she came forward. She obviously didn't make up her story knowing she'd go through this.

Julie Swetnek signed an affadavit attesting to the accusations she's made against Kavanaugh. If is shown to have lied she loses her security clearances, her job, and goes to jail. She is obviously not going to risk all that to lie about Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh has every incentive to lie, these women have tremendous disincentive to lie.

They're all telling the truth.

September 27, 2018 2:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not only will Judge Kavanaugh fail to make it onto the Supreme court, given all that's come out (from his lying repeatedly under oath during his various confirmation hearings to his predatory sexual behavior) he may very well lose his present job...as he should.

September 27, 2018 2:27 PM  
Anonymous Dr. Joy Bothers said...

Trump is an idiot. He's a fucking moron. He is abysmally stupid. (He's also psychologically unwell and has cognitive decline, but those are separate issues from his IQ). I can't believe that there are still people who question this against all evidence. And to me it is transparently clear why. They question it out of hurt pride, because no matter what, they don't want to believe that a nation as powerful and wealthy and technologically advanced as the USA could willingly elect somebody so incredibly stupid to its highest office. Their self-worth is to some extent wrapped up in being Americans, and they don't, won't believe that Americans did something so colossally stupid. But they did.

Trump's greatest achievement in life was being able to convince millions of people that because he inherited billions and was on teevee, that that somehow made him "smart" or a "deal maker." But that isn't a testament to his credit so much as a testament to the decline of the American educational system and the nearly equal decline/incompetence/complicity of the American media.

September 27, 2018 2:44 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Shorter Wyatt/Regina/bad anonymous:

"Christine Ford was a drunken slut so its her own fault Kavanaugh tried to rape her."

September 27, 2018 5:37 PM  
Anonymous She said, he said said...

One witness, Ford, wanted to see additional investigation to help reconcile the conflicting accounts. The other, Kavanaugh, repeatedly refused the invitation to ask for the FBI to reopen its probe.

September 27, 2018 8:10 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Fox’s Chris Wallace: This Is A Disaster For Republicans


Fox News anchor Chris Wallace said Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony in front of the Senate was so a “disaster” for Republicans because Ford came off as a credible witness.

“Extremely emotional, extremely raw, and extremely credible,” Wallace said during a break in the hearing. He added that Ford was “obviously traumatized by an event” and said that “this is a disaster for Republicans.”. He added you can't watch and "have your heart not go out to her."

Brit Hume, an analyst for Fox, added that Ford came across “very sympathetic” in the first part of her testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee.


Wallace said the cross-examination format “is a disaster for the Republicans.”

September 27, 2018 9:12 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

It's difficult understanding how any self-respecting person with any compassion whatsoever with any ability to empathize with other people - can identify as Republican today.

September 27, 2018 9:13 PM  
Anonymous There’s an Entry on Kavanaugh’s 1982 Calendar That Supports Ford’s Story Better Than His Own said...

Much of Brett Kavanaugh’s testimony Tuesday focused on calendars he kept in the summer of 1982, where he detailed a few months that consisted mostly of hanging out with friends and sports camps and, Kavanaugh pointed out, few weekends spent in the Washington area as he traveled to the beach and other summer destinations. He insisted that his calendars proved he could not have been present at a gathering like the one described by accuser Christine Blasey Ford—a small group of friends drinking at a house when no parents were home.* Kavanaugh maintained that he recorded all his social engagements and that no entry on his calendar matches the vague outlines of the get-together Ford detailed. But one entry shows that he went “to Timmy’s for skis w/Judge, Tom, PJ, Bernie, Squi."

Ford had identified Mark Judge as in the room while Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her and said that “P.J.”—a man named Patrick Smyth—was elsewhere at the gathering. (Smyth denied to the Judiciary Committee being present at any such gathering.) Ford also noted that it appeared that Judge and Kavanaugh had been drinking beforehand and were far more intoxicated than the other people there.

In Thursday’s hearing, Kavanaugh was asked about the July 1 entry by Rachel Mitchell, the lawyer representing Republican senators, and replied, “It looks like we went over to Timmy’s” and identified the other boys who’d joined him. That was as far as that line of questioning went.

Video of the exchange https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-E2GKARnSE

July 1 was a Thursday. Kavanaugh’s defense also relied on his insistence that the gathering could not have happened on a weeknight. “The event described by Dr. Ford presumably happened on a weekend because I believe everyone worked and had jobs in the summers,” he said. Kavanaugh later said his summer job in 1982 was mowing lawns. (“I had my own business of sorts.”)

Speaking of summer jobs, a book written by Judge says that the summer before his senior year of high school, “to raise money for football camp, I spent a few weeks working as a bag boy at the local supermarket.” This supports another statement of Ford’s when she described seeing Judge after the alleged incident at his job at a local Safeway supermarket. Judge writes in his book that, by then, he was “completely hooked” on alcohol and was frequently drunk. “Invariably I would be hungover” while working there, he wrote, which would mean drinking on weeknights.

Is it possible that teenagers might gather to drink on a Thursday night in the summer at a house with no parents home? Is it possible Kavanaugh went over to Timmy’s for “skis” (brewskis, apparently) and he and Judge journeyed on to another gathering? Could the night of July 1 be the night Ford was assaulted? Sounds worthy of further interrogation.

Philip Bump✔
@pbump

That key July 1 calendar entry recorded by Kavanaugh came up by the Republican prosecutor. Despite how it overlapped with Ford's allegations, the prosecutor let him walk away from it. https://wapo.st/2DCojkR

September 27, 2018 9:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Devils Triangle
A threesome with 1 woman and 2 men.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Devils%20Triangle

But suddenly Wikipedia entry for 'Devil's Triangle' changed to match Kavanaugh's answer

congress-edits
‏@congressedits

Devil's Triangle (disambiguation) Wikipedia article edited anonymously from US House of Representatives
2:18 PM - 27 Sep 2018

September 27, 2018 10:08 PM  
Anonymous Fox News anchor says Kavanaugh case prompted his own daughters to reveal their stories said...

Moments before a much-anticipated hearing Thursday about sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh, Fox News Channel anchor Chris Wallace said his own daughters revealed details about incidents they had faced during their adolescence.

While waiting for Kavanaugh and one of his accusers, Christine Blasey Ford, to arrive at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Wallace said on live television that over the past week, his relatives, “like a lot of American families,” have been discussing and debating the controversy surrounding allegations against Kavanaugh. During those conversations, he said, “two of my daughters told me stories that I had never heard before about things that happened to them in high school.”

Wallace acknowledged that the allegations were not as serious as those against Kavanaugh, but, he said, “the point is that there are teenage girls who don’t tell stories to a lot of people, and then it comes up.”

“And I don’t think we can disregard that,” he added. “I don’t think we can disregard Christine Blasey Ford and the seriousness of this. I think that would be a big mistake.”

September 28, 2018 7:48 AM  
Anonymous sayanora, gay agenda said...

"Speaking of summer jobs, a book written by Judge says that the summer before his senior year of high school, “to raise money for football camp, I spent a few weeks working as a bag boy at the local supermarket.” This supports another statement of Ford’s when she described seeing Judge after the alleged incident at his job at a local Safeway supermarket."

he had a job at Safeway and she says she saw him at Safeway

that does it, that proves she was raped by Kavanaugh

also, don't be fooled by the fact that she went up and said "hi" to a guy who was recently an accomplice in an attempted rape where she thought she was going to die

after all, she said he looked awkward

I feel very nervous, gimme some caffeine

"Judge writes in his book that, by then, he was “completely hooked” on alcohol and was frequently drunk. “Invariably I would be hungover” while working there, he wrote, which would mean drinking on weeknights."

OK, that puts a piece in the puzzle

he drinks on weeknights and she says he was drinking that night

one of the rare teenagers in the early 80s who drank

don't be fooled by the fact that Ford also was one of those odd teens who drank

"Is it possible that teenagers might gather to drink on a Thursday night in the summer at a house with no parents home?"

sure, everything's possible

do you think it's possible that Ford was lying when she said she couldn't attend last Monday's hearing because she has a fear of flying?

sounds like in the last year she has flown to Maine, Baltimore and Latin America

don't fooled she is very credible, which is proof Kavanaugh her and multiple girls in his high school days

"Is it possible Kavanaugh went over to Timmy’s for “skis” (brewskis, apparently) and he and Judge journeyed on to another gathering?"

Judiciary Committee field trip!!

Grassley and Feinstein on the party bus!!

don't let those two go up to the bedroom alone!!

"Could the night of July 1 be the night Ford was assaulted?"

either that or never, right?

all the other nights were taken up with arranging other gang bangs

"Sounds worthy of further interrogation."

OK, one more day

but that's it!!

September 28, 2018 8:08 AM  
Anonymous American Bar Association urges postponement of Kavanaugh vote said...

"The ABA which had so highly praised Brett Kavanaugh, now calls for a delay in the vote until an FBI probe is conducted on the sexual-assault allegations facing the Supreme Court nominee.

“The basic principles that underscore the Senate’s constitutional duty of advice and consent on federal judicial nominees require nothing less than a careful examination of the accusations and facts by the FBI,” ABA President Robert Carlson wrote late Thursday to Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and ranking Democrat Dianne Feinstein of California, according to The Washington Post.

“Each appointment to our nation’s Highest Court (as with all others) is simply too important to rush to a vote,” Carlson wrote. “Deciding to proceed without conducting an additional investigation would not only have a lasting impact on the Senate’s reputation, but it will also negatively affect the great trust necessary for the American people to have in the Supreme Court.”

As he vigorously denied allegations by Christine Blasey Ford that he sexually assaulted her when they were teens, Kavanaugh touted his “well-qualified” rating by the ABA for the Supreme Court, saying he was “thoroughly vetted” by the 400,000-member group..."

Did he show the ABA his "calendar diaries" and did the ABA know of Dr. Ford's accusations when they "thoroughly vetted" him?

The FBI did not investigate Dr. Ford's claims and did not see Judge Kavanaugh's "calendar diaries" either.

Before she was guided to look at an August entry by Kavanaugh himself and before the all male GOP Senators pulled sex crime expert Rachel Mitchell from asking the witnesses questions, it became clear in yesterday's testimony that July 1, 1982 is documented by Kavanaugh's own records as the night Kavanaugh and his HS drinking buddy, Mark Judge, had the spontaneous party Dr. Ford described when both of them formed their own version of a devil's triangle 15 year old Christine Blasey.

September 28, 2018 8:28 AM  
Anonymous Key Moments in the Senate Testimony of Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh said...

Republicans Stop Having Prosecutor Ask Questions After She Presses Kavanaugh on July 1, 1982 Calendar Note

As several observers have noted, Republican senators have reclaimed their time from Rachel Mitchell, the sex crimes prosecutor they brought in to conduct questioning on their behalf.

Matt Pearce ��✔
@mattdpearce
The sex-crimes prosecutor has discontinued asking questions of the person accused of sex crimes.
5:41 PM - Sep 27, 2018

emptywheel
@emptywheel
Again: Why does the alleged victim have to be questioned by a prosecutor, but not the alleged perpetrator?
5:45 PM - Sep 27, 2018

Seung Min Kim✔
@seungminkim
Rachel Mitchell is still here, in case you all were wondering
5:44 PM - Sep 27, 2018

The change in tactics came just after Mitchell zeroed in on Kavanaugh’s entry on his calendar for the night of Thursday, July 1, 1982.

The entry recorded Kavanaugh’s plan to “Go to Timmy’s for Skis, w/ Judge, Tom, PJ, Bernie, Squi.”

The slang word “brewskis” was a common term for “brews” or beers in the 1980s, so this appears to be about a planned drinking session on the Thursday before the Fourth of July weekend.

In her prepared testimony, Christine Blasey Ford said that she was assaulted in the summer of 1982 at a house party attended by her friend Leland Ingham, as well as “Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge, P. J. Smyth and one other boy whose name I cannot recall.”

Kavanaugh’s calendar says that he was with Judge, and P.J. on July 1 that summer. In response to questioning from Rachel Mitchell, Kavanaugh said that “Squi” was a nickname for a high school friend, Chris Garrett.

A letter to the judiciary committee from Kavanaugh’s classmates at the Jesuit high school Georgetown Prep, attesting to his good character, includes the name Christopher Garrett.

Last week, a Republican operative named Ed Whelan suggested in a long Twitter thread that Ford might have been assaulted not by Kavanaugh but by the friend known as Squi, and argued that the attack described by Ford took place in a home that seemed to match the one inhabited by Squi at the time.

During questioning by Mitchell on Thursday, Ford said that she had been introduced to Kavanaugh and Judge by the boy known as Squi. Although she refused to identify him by name, to respect his privacy, Ford said that she and had socialized with the boy for a few months that year before the attack.

“He was somebody that, I will use the phrase ‘I went out with,'” Ford said. “I wouldn’t say ‘date.’ I would say ‘went out with’ for a few months. That was how we termed it at the time.”

“He also was a member of the same country club, and I knew his younger brother as well.”

So, far from establishing his innocence, Kavanaugh’s handwritten calendar appears to offer a possible date for a binge drinking session on which the assault could plausibly have taken place.

September 28, 2018 8:33 AM  
Anonymous Such drama said...

A father of one of the victims of the massacre at a Parkland, Florida, high school lashed out at Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, tweeting early Friday that he was unconvinced by the judge's emotional testimony.

Fred Guttenberg, whose 14-year-old daughter, Jaime, was killed during the Feb. 14 shooting that left another 16 dead and 17 others injured, remained unsympathetic.

"Justice Kavanaugh your life and family are not ruined," he also tweeted. "Try having a child murdered by a weapon that you refer to as 'common use.' You will get through this and hug both of your children tonight."

.
.
.
I hope Lindsey Graham heard John McCain rolling in his grave last night after auditioning before tЯump to be Jeff Session's replacement at DOJ.

How do you look at yourself in the mirror after that display of hysteria, Lindsey?

Poor little Lindsey, worked himself up to having the 'vapors' and nearly fainted!

September 28, 2018 9:26 AM  
Anonymous Even the Catholic/Jesuit Review withdraw their support of Kavanaugh said...

The Editors: It is time for the Kavanaugh nomination to be withdrawn

Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee today clearly demonstrated both the seriousness of her allegation of assault by Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh and the stakes of this question for the whole country. Judge Kavanaugh denied the accusation and emphasized in his testimony that the opposition of Democratic senators to his nomination and their consequent willingness to attack him was established long before Dr. Blasey’s allegation was known.

Evaluating the credibility of these competing accounts is a question about which people of good will can and do disagree. The editors of this review have no special insight into who is telling the truth. If Dr. Blasey’s allegation is true, the assault and Judge Kavanaugh’s denial of it mean that he should not be seated on the U.S. Supreme Court. But even if the credibility of the allegation has not been established beyond a reasonable doubt and even if further investigation is warranted to determine its validity or clear Judge Kavanaugh’s name, we recognize that this nomination is no longer in the best interests of the country. While we previously endorsed the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh on the basis of his legal credentials and his reputation as a committed textualist, it is now clear that the nomination should be withdrawn....

September 28, 2018 9:47 AM  
Anonymous David Mack said...

David Mack
‏Verified account
@davidmackau

A sexual assault survivor just confronted Jeff Flake (who just announced he's voting for Kavanaugh): "Don't look away from me! Look at me and tell me that it doesn't matter what happened to me, that you will let people like that go into the highest court of the land"
6:40 AM - 28 Sep 2018

Watch the video.

September 28, 2018 10:20 AM  
Anonymous Yet somehow July 1, 1982 did not stand out to him??? said...

MITCHELL: I would like you to look at the July 1st entry.

KAVANAUGH: Yes.

MITCHELL: The entry says — and I quote — “Go to Timmy’s (ph) for skis (ph) with Judge (ph), Tom (ph), P.J. (ph), Bernie (ph) and Squee (ph)”?

KAVANAUGH: Squee. That’s a nick…

MITCHELL: What does…

KAVANAUGH: … that’s a nickname.

MITCHELL: OK. To what does this refer, and to whom?

KAVANAUGH: So first, says “Tobin’s (ph) house workout”. So that’s one of the football workouts that we would have — that Dr. (inaudible) would run for guys on the football team during the summer.

So we would be there — that’s usually 6:00 to 8:00 or so, kind of — until near dark. And then it looks like we went over to Timmy’s — you want to know their last names too? I’m happy to do it.

MITCHELL: If you could just identify, is — is “Judge,” Mark Judge?

KAVANAUGH: It is.

MITCHELL: And is “P.J.,” P.J. Smith?

KAVANAUGH: It is.

So — all right. It’s Tim Gaudette (ph), Mark Judge, Tom Caine (ph), P.J. Smith, Bernie McCarthy (ph), Chris Garrett (ph).

MITCHELL: Chris Garrett is Squee?

KAVANAUGH: He is.

MITCHELL: Did you in your calendar routinely document social gatherings like house parties or gatherings of friends in your calendar?

KAVANAUGH: Yes. It — it certainly appears that way, that’s what I was doing in the summer of 1982. And you can see that reflected on several of the — several of the entries.

MITCHELL: If a gathering like Dr. Ford has described had occurred, would you have documented that?

KAVANAUGH: Yes, because I documented everything of those kinds of events, even small get-togethers. August 7th is another good example where I documented a small get-together that summer, so yes.

MITCHELL: August 7th. Could you read that?

KAVANAUGH: I think that’s go to Becky’s, Matt, Denise, Lori, Jenny (ph).

MITCHELL: Have you reviewed every entry that is in these calendars of May, June, July and August of 1982?

KAVANAUGH: I have.

MITCHELL: Is there anything that could even remotely fit what we’re talking about, in terms of Dr. Ford’s allegations?

KAVANAUGH: No.

September 28, 2018 10:29 AM  
Anonymous life should be preferenced, homosexuality doesn't bring life said...

the Democrats, with a chance to question Brett yesterday, showed little interest in any facts surrounding the alleged incident and focused on whether there should be an FBI investigation

their antics yesterday will cost them in November.

The Senate Judiciary Committee moved toward a vote on Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court Friday with Republicans, united in support of him.

Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., who had been undecided, announced he will support Kavanaugh despite leaving Thursday's emotional hearing regarding accusations of sexual assault "with as much doubt as certainty."

"Our system of justice affords a presumption of innocence to the accused, absent corroborating evidence," Flake said in a prepared statement. "That is what binds us to the rule of law."

The Republican-led committee announced it would vote on Kavanaugh by 1:30 p.m., and it turned aside Democrats' effort to subpoena Mark Judge, a potential witness to the alleged assault. At that point, many of the panel's Democrats walked out, as did Democratic lawmakers and Ford supporters who had filled the last two rows of the committee room.

“We should not rush to judgment,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the ranking Democrat on the panel. She couldn't explain why she didn't ask the FBI to look into this in July.

After the committee approves the nomination, it will go to the full Senate over the weekend, with a final up-or-down vote on Tuesday.

By slandering a man and putting his wife and kids through hell, the Democrats have delayed the court's shift to originalism by perhaps two days.

I guess in the world of the heinous and despicable, that's considered worth it.

September 28, 2018 10:35 AM  
Anonymous homosexuality is anti-life said...

As soon as Judge Kavanaugh completed his opening statement, it became clear what the afternoon matinee would contain: Republicans showing more spine than they have in years, accompanied by Democrats making total asses of themselves.

This is what Kavanaugh’s riveting certitude did to both sides. It energized Republicans to solidly back the judge, and additionally inspired them to call out committee Democrats for the shameful scam they have deployed to poison the nomination process.

There had been a question at daybreak as to whether Dr. Ford would cry— she came close—but little speculation that Judge Kavanaugh would well up. But when he did, in describing his teenage calendar habit as an inspiration from his father, it cleared the decks for other halting moments, as when he shared what his family has been through at the hands of his tormentors.

When their time came to badger Judge Kavanaugh, the Democrat decisions to obsess about a useless FBI probe or leer over arcane references in his high school yearbook made them look microscopically small. And when the rotation turned to Orrin Hatch, John Cornyn and the consummately inspired Lindsey Graham, the tide had turned completely. America went to lunch wondering about Kavanaugh’s fate but had to wonder if he might be confirmed by dinner.

The weekend will dictate the path toward Judge Kavanaugh’s fate. Any Republicans still wondering about his worthiness need to have their heads examined. There may even be Democrats up for re-election in Trump states rethinking the “no” votes that seemed defensible just days ago.

No matter how the judge’s fate unfolds, history will well remember Lindsey Graham’s fiery rebuke of Democrats for the behavior they have displayed for decades. Is this a long overdue reckoning that will change their behavior? That seems unlikely as the midterms approach and 2020 looms. But if Cory Booker and Kamala Harris think they boosted their stock for the presidency, they may soon learn otherwise.

Compactly contained within one day witnessed by millions, we saw Democrat behavior so unhinged and repulsive that Republicans finally came out of their shells and called them on it. It was glorious.

The confirmation of Kavanaugh is now a moral necessity—so that a good man’s reputation can be restored, rules of basic decency upheld, and viciously craven political tactics dealt the death blow they deserve.

September 28, 2018 11:09 AM  
Anonymous Yet another Catholic behaving badly said...

Even if the hearings yesterday didn't convince one of the innocence or guilt of either Ford or Kavanaugh, it did show one thing VERY clearly.

Kavanaugh simply doesn't have the temperament to be a Supreme Court justice. His constant equivocation and inability to give a straight answer to even simple questions alone should disqualify him. It also appears he made up new definitions for words in order to minimize how atrocious his high school behavior really was. His comments about the proceedings made him look like a partisan hack - not the kind of independent arbiter of law the position requires. But that's not what conservatives want in that position anyway - he fits their agenda perfectly - potential criminal history be damned.

If anything, yesterday's hearings showed that Ford would be a better fit for the Supreme Court than Kavanaugh. No, she doesn't have a law degree - but she isn't afraid of the truth, facts, or giving a straight and simple answer. It's not clear Kavanaugh would even know what that looked like if it was standing right in front of him.

September 28, 2018 11:27 AM  
Anonymous here comes the new Super Tuesday said...

"Even if the hearings yesterday didn't convince one of the innocence or guilt of either Ford or Kavanaugh, it did show one thing VERY clearly"

yes, that Ford's story doesn't really make sense

to give one example: she says she escaped and left out the back of the house alone, leaving her best friend behind; she has no idea how she got home; she was too young to have a license and she lived six miles away, down by Glen Echo

"Kavanaugh simply doesn't have the temperament to be a Supreme Court justice."

I think is temperament was appropriate for someone accused of gang rape 35 years ago, without any evidence at all, and the media presumes his accuser is right because it coincides with their political agenda

meanwhile who knows what his 12- and 10-year old daughters are going through in school, you vicious creeps

this is all to preserve the right to kill unborn children

"His constant equivocation and inability to give a straight answer to even simple questions alone should disqualify him"

actually, he wasn't asked any factual questions

he was continually asked whether he supported things that would further delay the process, like an FBI investigation

Ruth Bader Ginsburg also didn't give straight answers to simple questions during her hearings

to answer some questions impairs the independence needed to be a judge

"It also appears he made up new definitions for words in order to minimize how atrocious his high school behavior really was."

unless Ford's incident is true, and there's no reason to believe it is, his high school behavior was commonplace in the early eighties, at least for unchurched kids

"His comments about the proceedings made him look like a partisan hack"

unfortunately, there is some truth to this

but the Dems made it unavoidable

"If anything, yesterday's hearings showed that Ford would be a better fit for the Supreme Court than Kavanaugh. No, she doesn't have a law degree"

well, I agree te SCOTUS could use a justice or two without a degree

"- but she isn't afraid of the truth, facts, or giving a straight and simple answer. It's not clear Kavanaugh would even know what that looked like if it was standing right in front of him."

please

all the conditions had to be just right for her even to attend

she couldn't even be in the same room with a person she's accusing and look him in the eye

to be perfectly honest, watching her, I had trouble believing she teaches classes

September 28, 2018 12:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah, it's called PTSD.

It's common among sexual assault victims.

What's your excuse?

September 28, 2018 1:14 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Upcoming SCOTUS Case Could Enable Tяump To Pardon CoConspirators & Explains Kavanaugh Rush

So the upcoming Supreme Court case of Gamble v. USA is essential to Tяump dispensing with various states holding him and his co-conspirators legally accountable in the event he starts handing out Presidential pardons for federal crimes. The case has to do with State’s Rights, Double Jeopardy and the concept of Dual Sovereignty.

Orrin Hatch has done his bit by writing a letter in favor of dispensing with States’ rights to prosecute certain cases under the Dual Sovereignty doctrine. This is probably a huge factor in the desperate rush to get a pro-Tяump lackey installed onto SCOTUS in time for the Gamble case. As it stands now, if Tяump pardons his co-conspirators, various states with legal standing may then indict these same people for related crimes. That’s what is at stake in the upcoming Gamble case.

September 28, 2018 1:54 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

•Kavanaugh wasn't even on the Federalist Society's SCOTUS list until Tяump put him there.
•Tяump is too ignorant to have known about Kavanaugh himself so someone else told Tяump to add him to the list.
•Kavanaugh has a gambling problem and is unable to live within his means.
•Someone paid off Kavanaugh's $200,000 credit card debt, but we don't know who.
•The NRA is also broke, and has come out in support of Kavanaugh.
•The NRA funneled Russian money to Tяump.
•Mitch McConnell has promised to push Kavanaugh through no matter what.
•Mitch McConnell accepted $2.5 million from Leonard "Len" Blavatnik, a Ukrainian-born oligarch who is the business partner of two of Russian president Vladimir Putin's favorite oligarchs and a Russian government bank.
•Lindsay Graham accepted $800,000 from Leonard "Len" Blavatnik.
•Lindsay Graham just had a pro-Kavanaugh meltdown.

September 28, 2018 1:55 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

The new Republican Party:

We'll elect every playground-skulking pedophile and pussy-grabbing traitor with a pulse and make every rapist a Supreme Court Justice to cut taxes for the wealthy and make women have babies because Jesus.

September 28, 2018 1:56 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Hillary Clinton: Cool as a cucumber for 11 straight hours of questions.

Brett Kavanaugh: Shouting and crying in the first 20 minutes of questions.

And they say women are too emotional to handle important political jobs?

September 28, 2018 1:57 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Tяump Administration Emissions Report Predicts Seven Degree Rise In Global Temperatures By The Year 2100

"Last month, deep in a 500-page environmental impact statement, the Tяump administration made a startling assumption: On its current course, the planet will warm a disastrous 7 degrees by the end of this century. A rise of 7 degrees Fahrenheit, or about 4 degrees Celsius, compared with pre-industrial levels would be catastrophic, according to scientists.

Many coral reefs would dissolve in increasingly acidic oceans. Parts of Manhattan and Miami would be underwater without costly coastal defenses. Extreme heat waves would routinely smother large parts of the globe. But the administration did not offer this dire forecast as part of an argument to combat climate change. Just the opposite: The analysis assumes the planet’s fate is already sealed."

If you read reports around the globe crops are already failing in record numbers due to drought and floods and heat etc. This is only going to escalate and its happening much much faster than predicted. Soon within years masses of people are going to start moving looking for food as they starve. Its already happening. Millions upon Millions upon Millions will be moving looking for food or die. Countries that manage to somehow have enough food to scratch along will be forced to deal with this.

In this rare instance I agree with the Tяump administration, its too late to stop catastrophic global warming, the planet is going to die far before its time. What I strenuously disagree with is that we should throw up our hands and continue to pollute with wild abandon. We may not be able to stop global warming, but we can ameliorate its effects and maximize the amount of time life on earth has - that's worth doing.

September 28, 2018 1:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Flake will vote no on Kavanaugh unless there is a one week investigation by the FBI into the latest allegations raised yesterday.

September 28, 2018 2:10 PM  
Anonymous And then there were two said...




Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), considered another swing vote, said in an interview that she supports Flake’s call for a delay.

With a slim 51-49 majority in the Senate, it would be difficult for the GOP to press ahead with a procedural vote on Saturday if two Republican senators defect.

September 28, 2018 2:47 PM  
Anonymous Breaking news said...



BREAKING: Senate Republican leaders agree to new FBI background investigation of Kavanaugh

September 28, 2018 3:55 PM  
Anonymous that's a wrap for the gay agenda said...

it sounds fine

there's a week limit on the investigation

will give them time to conduct interviews and convey the results to the Senate

although all relevant parties have already submitted definitive statements under penalty of perjury

that should be in plenty of time for Brett to get on the court and protect Trump's veto power

September 28, 2018 4:07 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Lindsey Graham's argument that the fact that a person is successful and powerful proves he didn't do bad things in the past is really conservatism boiled down to its essence.

September 28, 2018 11:09 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Research shows only 2% to 6% of sexual misconduct allegations are false. Dr. Ford passed a lie detector test, Kavanaugh refused to take one.

All three accusers have been getting death threats, Christine Ford and her family have been forced out of their house and into hiding. Her life has been turned upside down as she knew it would if she came forward. She obviously didn't make up her story knowing she'd go through this.

Julie Swetnek signed an affadavit attesting to the accusations she's made against Kavanaugh. If is shown to have lied she loses her security clearances, her job, and goes to jail. She is obviously not going to risk all that to lie about Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh has every incentive to lie, these women have tremendous disincentive to lie.

All Kavanaugh's accusers are telling the truth.

September 28, 2018 11:10 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Tяump staffer General Kelly watching the Tяump press conference yesterday. How embarrassing Tяump will never learn his stupidity shows every time he speaks

September 28, 2018 11:11 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home