United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Senate panel formally postpones Kavanaugh vote
Source:
The Hill
URL Source: https://thehill.com/homenews/senate ... mally-postpones-kavanaugh-vote
Published: Sep 18, 2018
Author: Jordain Carney
Post Date: 2018-09-18 21:19:28 by Hondo68
Keywords: JJ Swamp posponed indefinately, yet to say when Senate, panel will vote, no comment
Views: 11045
Comments: 133
The Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday formally postponed a vote on Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination, canceling a meeting set for later this week where a vote was initially expected to happen
Staffers for Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) sent out a notice that the Thursday business meeting had been canceled. The Senate is expected to leave town for the week on Tuesday.
The delay for a vote to advance Kavanaugh's nomination was widely expected following allegations from Christine Blasey Ford, a professor who alleges that Kavanaugh held her down and tried to remove her clothes at a party in the early 1980s when both were in high school.
Kavanaugh has denied the allegations.
Grassley announced this week that Kavanaugh would testify before the Judiciary Committee for a second time next Monday, days after the initial committee vote was scheduled
Grassley has yet to say when the Senate panel will now vote on Kavanaugh's nomination
The chairman declined to comment when leaving a closed-door meeting of Judiciary Committee Republicans on Monday night. Grassley also dodged questions about it on Tuesday morning during an interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt
Kavanaugh's nomination first appeared on the Judiciary Committee's agenda roughly a week after the initial round of hearings took place.
President Trump on Tuesday ramped up his defense of Kavanaugh amid the allegations, saying he "is not a man who deserves this." Kavanaugh confirmation before midterms will result in GOP loss of the HOR, he's that bad.
The GOP wing of the party will totally lose the HOR if they confirm *JJ Swamp before the midterm elections.
*Jesuit Judge Swamp
Now Kavi can go back to picking up Hillary's spent shell casings, and other cover up ops to protect her.
Poster Comment:
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: hondo68 (#0)
Now Christine Blasey Ford's by her attorneys want a full FBI investigation before appearing. The FBI has never investigated alleged crimes which cannot prosecuted. The FBI also lacks jurisdiction to investigate non-federal crimes. The blatant purpose of delay, delay, delay becomes ever more obvious with this farce. Ford is never going to appear. Ltr of Christine Blasey Ford attorneys to Sen Grassley (18 Sep 2018) re FBI investigation
Had to believe that the Republicans let this happen. They have the power, and could simply ignore the nonsense and plow ahead. Let's say that Kavanaugh did what was said: locked a girl in a room 30 years ago. Who cares? It's long done. The statute of limitations has run. The whole thing is ridiculous.
What, exactly, did those parasites do during this grueling 2-day workweek? Kavanaugh's in - the girl's running away from her lies and Feinswine's diaper stench.
"Dr." Ford can shove her lies up her barack and fuck off; enough of this lying leftist. Call the vote, Grassley, and get it done. Then we move on to replacing the decrepit old bridge troll next year with Amy Coney Barrett.
I agree with you on that. There are many good reasons not to confirm Kavanaugh, but that ain't one of them.
You are too kind. She deserves no title besides lying snowflake cunt.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
No they can’t, dip shit. It will cause a blue wave at the next election cycle. Have you been sleeping under a rock since 2008? It’s OVER SENSITIZED AMERICA. The majority has to at least make it look like they have sympathy for the lying bitch... and POLITELY discredit her without being too mean and male chauvinistic. Just exactly how have you become this friggin retarded, as of lately?
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
That is not what Dr. Ford actually said, although it is what was originally reported. Dr. Ford wrote she was pushed into the bedroom where Kavanaugh held her down, and when Judge jumped on them she got free, ran to the hallway bathroom where she locked herself in, stayed about 15 minutes until she heard them go down the stairs, and she let herself out and left the house and went home. Allegedly. While the bedroom door was locked, it kept others from coming in. When she got free and ran to the hallway bathroom, the locked bedroom door did not stop her from leaving. While she was locked in the bathroom, she locked herself in and then let herself out. Allegedly. https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/16/politics/blasey-ford-kavanaugh-letter-feinstein/index.html CONFIDENTIAL Senator Dianne Feinstein Dear Senator Feinstein; I am writing with information relevant in evaluating the current nominee to the Supreme Court. As a constituent, I expect that you will maintain this as confidential until we have further opportunity to speak. Brett Kavanaugh physically and sexually assaulted me during high school in the early 1980's. He conducted these acts with the assistance of REDACTED. Both were one to two years older than me and students at a local private school. The assault occurred in a suburban Maryland area home at a gathering that included me and four others. Kavanaugh physically pushed me into a bedroom as I was headed for a bathroom up a short stair well from the living room. They locked the door and played loud music precluding any successful attempt to yell for help. Kavanaugh was on top of me while laughing with REDACTED, who periodically jumped onto Kavanaugh. They both laughed as Kavanaugh tried to disrobe me in their highly inebriated state. With Kavanaugh's hand over my mouth I feared he may inadvertently kill me. From across the room a very drunken REDACTED said mixed words to Kavanaugh ranging from "go for it" to "stop." At one point when REDACTED jumped onto the bed the weight on me was substantial. The pile toppled, and the two scrapped with each other. After a few attempts to get away, I was able to take this opportune moment to get up and run across to a hallway bathroom. I locked the bathroom door behind me. Both loudly stumbled down the stair well at which point other persons at the house were talking with them. I exited the bathroom, ran outside of the house and went home. I have not knowingly seen Kavanaugh since the assault. I did see REDACTED once at the REDACTED where he was extremely uncomfortable seeing me. I have received medical treatment regarding the assault. On July 6 I notified my local government representative to ask them how to proceed with sharing this information . It is upsetting to discuss sexual assault and its repercussions, yet I felt guilty and compelled as a citizen about the idea of not saying anything. I am available to speak further should you wish to discuss. I am currently REDACTED and will be in REDACTED. In confidence, REDACTED.
Is this the counseling that she refers to? I wouldn't call it medical treatment, but that's just me.
A committee vote to recommend or not recommend the nomination is not an actual necessity. The necessity is to report the nomination out to the Senate. It may be reported out with a recommendation to approve, to disapprove, or with no recommendation. Even where the committee majority is against the nomination, it is still reported out to the Senate for their consideration. It may be reported out with or without a printed report. The chair of the Judiciary Committee may file a one page document reporting a nomination to the Senate. Only two nominations have been reported out without recommendation; Wheeler H. Peckham in 1894 (rejected by the Senate) and Clarence Thomas in 1991 (approved by the Senate). Just get it done before going out of session.
I do not believe that has been made clear. It is possible she had individual counseling/therapy before couples counseling. I believe either would qualify as "medical treatment" under modern definition. Modern language abuse includes certain things as a "disease" or "medical treatment" to make it payable by health insurance.
GI>> lying snowflake cunt Another reason Trump hasn’t gone to the mat for Kavanaugh is that he’s said to be suspicious of Kavanaugh’s establishment pedigree. “He’s a Bush guy, why would I put myself out there defending him?” Trump told people “Trump wants this guy on the court, but Trump knows there are five other people he could put on the court if this falls apart,” a former official said. OMG, crucify him, crucify him. I have no choice but to follow this soap opera. It makes me slightly ill, but I'll watch what happens.
Trump knows that if the GOP loses the Senate after the election, he will not get any of the other five. It is thoroughly sourced.
Well, at least the great, the magnificent President Donald J. Trump told "people" and not dogs or cats or walls.
I saw that she received the couples counseling in 2012 and had individual counseling the following year after that. To be clear, there had been no suggestion that she sought any sort of medical attention at the time of the alleged incident, circa 1982.
You may want to follow the polygraph Q&A where no deception was detected. by Eddie Scarry [excerpt] Ford “engaged Debra Katz, a Washington lawyer known for her work on sexual harassment cases,” said the Post report, detailing how Ford recently decided to go public with her accusation. “On the advice of Katz, who said she believed Ford would be attacked as a liar if she came forward, Ford took a polygraph test administered by a former FBI agent in early August. The results, which Katz provided to the Post, concluded that Ford was being truthful when she said a statement summarizing her allegations was accurate.” The report included no other information about the test. A subsequent story by the New York Times identified the polygraph administrator as Jerry Hanafin, whose website says he is a retired FBI agent based in Virginia. According to the Times, Hanafin said the result of the exam was that there was “no deception indicated,” meaning Ford “was being truthful” when he questioned her for the test. Well, isn't that just special? She was not detected being deceptive when she said a statement summarizing her allegations was accurate; i.e., it accurately described her allegations. The statement summarizing her allegations could be a 100% accurate summary, even if the allegations themselves were 100% fiction. Now why didn't this trained former FBI agent ask her about whether her allegations were truthful?
The blue wave with be overmatched by a red wave if the Republicans press ahead and motivate their voters. If the Republicans don't use their power and fail to put Kavanaugh on the court, there will be a blue wave ANYWAY - the Left hates Trump and they will come out and they will vote. But there will be no countervailing red wave. The Right will be demoralized and will stay home. The Democrats use their power, all of it. And that's why the whole national policy agenda is their belief system. The Republicans don't, so they lose anyway, and they don't get their agenda. Insult me all you want. You sound like a coward. A lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court is at stake - and you, and the Republicans, are so afraid of an election cycle that you're going to squander that opportunity, to simply lose anyway? I'm not a retard, but you guys are pussies. That's why the Democrats win: they always fight. It's their cardinal advantage over you guys. They fight, and you run away from the fight. Every time.
I don't care if he raped her. It's 30 years ago. They were minors. It doesn't matter, to me. Republicans are such stupid, sniveling cowards. Clinton? Obama? What these men did thirty years ago was also disgraceful. Republicans bring the stuff up and bandy it around, AS IF it were important, and the Democrats fucking ignore them and plow ahead and win. Republicans tried to impeach Clinton for lying over a blowjob, and a blue wave came out and gave the Democrats MORE SEATS in a mid-term lame-duck election. Never happens, but it happened, because in the end Democrat voters are smart enough to realize that the moral failings of individual men are TOTALLY IRRELEVANT when power and policy are at stake. ALL MEN are sinners - and Democrats don't hold their leaders accountable for that fact, and they don't LET the Republicans hold them accountable for it either. They ignore the bitching, ignore the complaints, put their heads down and charge through. Democrats are like Patton - they fight to win.. Republicans HAVE the power and can bulldoze through right now, like Democrats. Instead, they're actually stalling and CARING about some guy's high school sexual hijinks 34 years ago, and in the process squandering their opportunity to control the Supreme Court, because some girl was groped in the 1980s. If the Republicans blow this, they deserve to lose, and they will, and that will be it. Game over. The Democrats have no power. The Republicans are GIVING THEM power. Just before an election that Republicans are very likely to lose. If high school sexual hijinks are disqualifying from office, the Republican party is doomed. Strike the colors and go home. The proper response to this is what the Democrats do: give the opposition the finger, use power, ignore their bleating, plow forward and impose their will.
No. What she wants is to drag this out for another 2-3 months then refuse to testify under oath. She's using the #metoo movement to bully the Republicans. Fine. When this is over we'll use her lies to bully the #metoo movement.
In a sane world that's what they would do. But they'd get crucified by the MSM and the #metoo movement for their lack of sensitivity and for ignoring the victims of sexual abuse.
They gave a lot of interviews. They furrowed their brows and frowned. They displayed concern and compassion. Being phony takes a lot of work. Two days of that and they're exhausted.
Let's compromise. Dr. Lying Snowflake Cunt.
Hold on here. Which Democrat has "gone to the mat" for this lying bitch? Name one Democrat who has said "I believe her". When this whole thing blows up, no Democrat wants to be on record as being a part of it. Where are the Hollywood types stating they believe her 100%? The MSM? The liberal talk shows? The late night comics? SNL? Her peers at the university? Her friends? If they believe her, I haven't seen or heard anything.
Anonymous, of course.
This murdering cunt right here Sen. Hirono: Men Need To "Shut Up," Kavanaugh Accuser Needs To Be Believed And I Believe Her
Just for the record, I don't believe she mentioned Kavanaugh's name during those sessions.
They care about how this will make them look. They could give a FF about some teenage groping incident 35 years ago. And so should we. But the MSM and the #metoo movement will never allow that.
She believes the accuser because, well, the accuser said so. Kavanaugh said it didn't happen ... but she doesn't believe him. Let's say the accuser comes forward and admits she was confused and it was some other guy. Will Sen. Hirono then vote to confirm Kavanaugh?
That's as likely to happen as Kavanaugh saying I didn't do that to her, I did that to Betty Boop.
I think it's dawning on her that she's in waaaay over her head. Someone miscalculated and told her the Republicans, misogynists all, would try to bury it and go forward with the vote despite the accusation. And that would be that. Then the Democrats would have the excuse they were looking for to vote "no". I don't think she ever envisioned herself testifying, under oath, on national television, in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. But she's been in academia her entire life. She doesn't know the real world.
With her not remembering when this happened exactly and whose home it was, her credibility is at stake. I think she mentioned only two people present at the party by name, Kavanaugh and Judge. She may be telling the truth like I said before, but there is no way to prove it. How can Kavanaugh testify about something that he claims didn't happen? I'll guess he'll make a short statement to that effect and be done with it.
Correct. But according to her there was another girl and two other boys. Where are they? Don't they see the news? Why aren't they stepping forward to either confirm or deny her story? I'm still confused as to why she said Mark Judge was there. She had to know he'd deny it making it two against one.
Maybe he'll testify he was out of the country that year. If she provided more more more specifics as to the date and location he could defend himself. But that vagueness along with the passage of 35 years, makes it difficult. Very unfair to any defendant.
Those are good questions although the other three may have been unaware at the time that there was alleged hanky panky going on in the other room. Yes, where are they? Well, I'm off to lunch now.
Criminal Democrat-Communists and stupid Republicrats: This bitch wrote a similar letter during Judge Gorsich's hearing. It has been covered up, but some honest Congressmen remember it well. So Why not trample over the evil Democraps and vote Kavanaugh in!
Liberals are like Slinkys. They're good for nothing, but somehow they bring a smile to your face as you shove them down the stairs.
One last thought, the Pubbies played this one pretty well. Borrowed these comments from another site.
True. But they could testify a) there was a party, b) Kavanaugh and Judge were there, and c) they were both very drunk. Given the statements on record by Kavanaugh and Judge, that alone would be damning. Or they could say there was a party but the two drunk boys were Brett Kavastein and Mark Juggs.
They were given lemons and made lemonade. I would have shoved the lemons up Feinstein's ass, but that's me.
Really? Like exactly WHAT??
Kavanaugh confirmation before midterms will result in GOP loss of the HOR, he's that bad. Back it up or STFU.
Really? Like exactly WHAT?? Like the fact he led the Starr “investigation” into the death of Vince Foster, and concluded against all logic and all the evidence that he killed himself in Fort Marcy Park. You have to be quite a “judge” to support these kinds of impossible official narratives. By anyone’s standards, Kavanaugh proved his establishment mantle in that “investigation” alone. Kavanaugh, as White House counsel under Bush, also sought to limit compensation under the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund. "If you're not cop...you're little people" Pity the Poor Stormtroopers: Baby Bou-Bou Ambushed Them
You have to be quite a “judge” to support these kinds of impossible official narratives. By anyone’s standards, Kavanaugh proved his establishment mantle in that “investigation” alone. Is that your party's (D) opinion and quibble? And btw -- why should I believe you and your alleged "source"? You guys do nothing but lies your azzes off 110% of the time. Kavanaugh, as White House counsel under Bush, also sought to limit compensation under the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund. Are you seeking the hangman's noose or electric chair, Madam?
At best, you've proven Kavanaugh scores a 9 out of a perfect 10. Wanna start making arguments to dismiss YOUR judges over "qualifications"? START WITH YOUR PARTY'S (D) fake/partisan SCOTUS judges: Bader-Ginsburg, "The Wise Latina," and the other chubby man-hating ACLU/anti-Constitution judge. And don't forget Prog-globalist, Breyer.
"Damning" in what context?? Teen-age high school kids getting drunk? Big whoop. This is all bullsh**. 100% of Democrats facing an iota of proper, reasonable scrutiny would all be JAILED. NONE of this desperate fairy tale "GOTCHA!" and so-called "Litmus Test" by the highly criminal Democrat Party should be humored.
For starters, Kavanaugh is on record saying he wasn't at that party.
Get your facts straight Sparky - I'm not a Democrat. Partisan politics is Kabuki theater for the rubes.
"If you're not cop...you're little people" Pity the Poor Stormtroopers: Baby Bou-Bou Ambushed Them
Another name. "PJ". Turns out to be Patrick Smyth who says he wasn't at any such party. “I understand that I have been identified by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford as the person she remembers as ‘PJ’ who supposedly was present at the party she described in her statements to the Washington Post,” Smyth says in the letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, according to CNN. “I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh.”
But...you join them in their fatwa against Trump. And the Bible/gun clingers. This isn't a fake/Dubya "you're either for us or against us" BS choice; It's real. The Dems are at war. And "freedom" is NOT on their menu.
Yes...But here's my point: Even IF he was -- *would* it be "damning" to be drinking at a party as a teenager? This bizarre standard created out of thin air by Dems (which began with Moore) shouldn't be considered even slightly seriously.
Kavi & Crisco are from the same Jesuit mobster zone, the MD/NJ swamp. Authoritarian goons, aka tyrants. It's a miracle that Judge Napolitano turned out so well, he's old school patriotic American. Gonna busta cap on the tyrants! Father Rodreguez & the Boys, Team Kavanaugh. (some say that they're not REAL Jesuits)
I don't have a fatwa against Trump ass-clown. I disagree with him on completely different reasons than the Dems - but by all means, keep playing that false left-right paradigm card. You just don't get it Poindexter - one can be critical of Trump and not be a Democrat. I'm just not into the cult of personality like so many of you here seem to be. I've already stated that he's done some good things. I think he's an obnoxious clown, a megalomaniacal narcissist, but still - he's better than Hillary. Speaking of Hillary - when is Trump going to make good on his campaign promise and "LOCK HER UP"? Oh wait, that's right - he says "she's suffered enough". How's that "swamp draining" thingie coming along?
"If you're not cop...you're little people" Pity the Poor Stormtroopers: Baby Bou-Bou Ambushed Them
In your paranoid mind, maybe so. And "freedom" is NOT on their menu. Apparently, not on yours either. If you Trump-ettes had your way, you would silence anyone who isn't totally on board the Trump Train. I don't mind Trump so much, his childishness and whining aside - it's his genuflecting worshipers like you who are simply over the top with your idolizing the guy.
"If you're not cop...you're little people" Pity the Poor Stormtroopers: Baby Bou-Bou Ambushed Them
Great chart - at one time Luberator would have seen the Trump presidency for what it really is. Nowdays, he's too busy drinking the kool-aid. Drain the swamp? When is that going to start?
"If you're not cop...you're little people" Pity the Poor Stormtroopers: Baby Bou-Bou Ambushed Them
You're missing the point. He said he wasn't there. If the other three (now 2) say there was a party and he was there, the left will say he's a liar and we can't trust anything he says. He's toast. But why would he lie about not being there? Too many witnesses. If he was there he could have very easily said he was but he was sober and never left the downstairs.
Have you been smoking crack? Ron Paul and company are doing themselves a big disservice by acting like spoiled rotten children. You are just like the demoncrats in having a tantrum! I really think you guys are mad that Trump is actually accomplishing everything you wanted by different means and you are not part of it!
Love the chart and its footnote. It's great to be on Team God!
True. She is never going to appear and never had intent to appear. Let the confirmation proceed after she does not appear. Regardless of any potential mid-term fallout, this appointment could determine the makeup of the court for the next 20 years of so. Not making the appointment could make the senators up for reelection an endangered species with the GOP voters.
A major miscalculation was the possibility that it would stop the nomination to SCOTUS and that would be that. If the allegation is sufficient to disqualify Kavanaugh from SCOTUS, it is sufficient to impeach and remove him from the Circuit Court. Blasey Ford would still be in the middle of a shit storm.
For those keeping score, there has been a third male, Patrick J. (P.J.) Smyth who was alleged to be at the party, and he has denied the allegation. https://nypost.com/2018/09/19/kavanaughs-prep-school-pal-fords-wrong-i-was-never-at-party/ By Yaron Steinbuch September 19, 2018 | 8:40am | Updated Another former classmate of Brett Kavanaugh denied attending a party like the one described by the woman accusing the Supreme Court nominee of sexually assaulting her during a party in 1982 when they were teens, according to a report. Patrick J. Smyth — who graduated with Kavanaugh from Georgetown Prep in North Bethesda, Md., in 1983 — also denied seeing any “improper conduct” from the nominee, CNN reported, citing a letter written by Smyth’s lawyer and sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee. “I understand that I have been identified by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford as the person she remembers as ‘PJ’ who supposedly was present at the party she described in her statements to the Washington Post,” Smyth says in the statement, “I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh. “Personally speaking, I have known Brett Kavanaugh since high school and I know him to be a person of great integrity, a great friend, and I have never witnessed any improper conduct by Brett Kavanaugh towards women,” he continued. “To safeguard my own privacy and anonymity, I respectfully request that the Committee accept this statement in response to any inquiry the Committee may have.” The letter was expected to be sent Wednesday to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and ranking Democrat Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). Earlier this year, before Ford’s allegations against Kavanaugh became public, Smyth signed a letter testifying that the judge “is singularly qualified to be an Associate Justice on the US Supreme Court,” along with a dozen more of the all-boys school’s alumni. Kavanaugh has vehemently denied attending the party and the allegation of sexually and physically assaulting Ford. On Tuesday evening, Ford’s attorney Lisa Banks told CNN that Ford will talk with the committee — but that she’s not prepared for a hearing as soon as Monday. “This just came out 48 hours ago,” she told CNN’s Anderson Cooper, referring to her client’s account in the Washington Post. Mark Judge, another friend and classmate of Kavanaugh’s, has been named as the other person who was in the room when the alleged incident took place. He also has denied the incident took place.
I think you're an attorney, right? Well, believe it or not, I actually knew all that but didn't want to complicate my answer. Plus, politics dictates the committee vote be taken to report a recommendation, and Grassley's not going to call the vote until he's sure he'll get a positive result - however much arm-twisting that takes. I'd forgotten about Clarence Thomas' outcome, though.
Ken Starr was the Independent Counsel. Hickman Ewing was Starr's Deputy Independent Counsel. Young Brett Kavanaugh was an Associate Independent Counsel. "Kavanaugh's" report, in October 1997, concluded that the death of Foster resulted from suicide. The investigation was led by Ken Starr and it is the Starr Report. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=pur1.32754067900252;view=1up;seq=2 http://www.fbicover-up.com/ewExternalFiles/Purdue%20University%20vol.1.pdf To sum up, the OIC has investigated the cause and manner of Mr. Foster's death. To ensure that all relevant issues were fully considered, carefully analyzed, and properly assessed, the OIC retained a number of experienced experts and criminal investigators. The experts included Dr. Brian D. Blackbourne, Dr. Henry C. Lee, and Dr. Alan L. Berman. The investigators included an FBI agent detailed from the FBI-MPD Cold Case Homicide Squad in Washington, D.C.; an investigator who also had extensive homicide experience as a detective with the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington, D.C., for over 20 years; and two other OIC investigators who had experience as FBI agents investigating the murders of federal officials and other homicides. The OIC legal staff in Washington, D.C., and Little Rock, Arkansas, participated in assessing the evidence, examining the analyses and conclusions of the OIC experts and investigators, and preparing this report. The autopsy report and the reports of the pathologists retained by the OIC and Mr. Fiske's Office demonstrate that the cause of death was a gunshot wound through the back of Mr. Foster's mouth and out the back of his head. The autopsy photographs depict the wound in the back of the head, and the photographs show the trajectory rod through the wound. The evidence, including the photographic evidence, reveals no other trauma or wounds on Mr. Foster's body. The available evidence points clearly to suicide as the manner of death. That conclusion is based on the evidence gathered and the analyses performed during previous investigations, and the additional evidence gathered and analyses performed during the OIC investigation, including the evaluations of Dr. Lee, Dr. Blackbourne, Dr. Berman, and the various OIC investigators.
Text at page 32-35, footnote 123 at page 32. Usually within a week of the end of hearings, the Judiciary Committee meets in open session to determine what recommendation to “report” to the full Senate. The committee may report favorably, negatively, or make no recommendation at all. A report with a negative recommendation or no recommendation permits a nomination to go forward, while alerting the Senate that a substantial number of committee members have reservations about the nominee. If a majority of its members oppose confirmation, the committee technically may decide not to report a nomination, to prevent the full Senate from considering the nominee. However, since its creation in 1816, the Judiciary Committee’s almost invariable practice has been to report even those Supreme Court nominations that were opposed by a committee majority,123 thus allowing the full Senate to make the final decision on whether the nominee should be confirmed.124 This committee tradition was reaffirmed in June 2001 by the committee’s then-chair, Senator Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT), and its then-ranking member, Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT), in a June 29, 2001, letter to Senate colleagues. The committee’s “traditional practice,” their letter stated, ... has been to report Supreme Court nominees to the Senate once the Committee has completed its considerations. This has been true even in cases where Supreme Court nominees were opposed by a majority of the Judiciary Committee. We both recognize and have every intention of following the practices and precedents of the committee and the Senate when considering Supreme Court nominees.125 In recent decades, reporting to the Senate frequently has included a printed committee report, although the three most recent Supreme Court nominations were reported without printed reports.126 Prepared behind closed doors, after the committee has voted on the nominee, the printed report presents in a single volume the views of committee members supporting a nominee’s confirmation as well as “all supplemental, minority, or additional views ... submitted by the time of the filing of the report....”127 No Senate committee, however, is normally obliged to transmit a printed report to the Senate. Instead, the chair of the Judiciary Committee may simply file a one-page document reporting a nomination to the Senate and recommending whether the nomination should be confirmed. A printed report, it can be argued, is valuable in providing for Senators not on the Judiciary Committee a review, in one volume, of all of the reasons that the committee’s members cite for voting in favor or against a nominee.128 A written report, however, might not always be considered a necessary reference for the Senate as a whole. For instance, in some cases, Senators not on the Judiciary Committee might believe they have received adequate information about a nominee from other sources, such as from news media reports or gavel-to-gavel video coverage of the nominee’s confirmation hearings.129 Further, preparation of a written report will mean additional days for a nomination to stay with the committee before it can be reported to the Senate.130 In some situations, this might be viewed as creating unnecessary delay in the confirmation process, particularly if there is a desire to fill a Court vacancy as quickly as possible.131 The Senate usually, but not always, has agreed with Judiciary Committee recommendations that a Supreme Court nominee be confirmed.132 Historically, negative committee reports, or reports without recommendation, have been precursors to nominations encountering substantial opposition in the full Senate, although a few of these nominations have eventually been confirmed by narrow margins.133 - - - - - - - - - - 123 Since its creation in 1816, the Judiciary Committee has reported to the Senate 106 Supreme Court nominations. Of the 106, seven were reported unfavorably—those of John Crittenden (1829), Ebenezer R. Hoard (1869), Stanley Matthews (1881), Lucius Q.C. Lamar (1888), William B. Hornblower (1894), John J. Parker (1930), and Robert H. Bork (1987). Two were reported without recommendation—those of Wheeler H. Peckham (1894) and Clarence Thomas (1991). See CRS Report RL33225, Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2009: Actions by the Senate, the Judiciary Committee, and the President (under heading “Nominations Reported Out of Committee to Full Senate”). - - - - - - - - - -
The equivalent of a "sweeper" who brushes out the illegal aliens footprints with a branch, so that the Border Patrol won't know that they invaded the USA. Covering up the Clinton's tracks gets you an A+ rating in the D&R party.
Thanks for that. I would have used the terms recollection or memory rather than knowledge. Again, that is just me talking. Okay, the score is 3-1 against the accuser.
I meant to ping you to my last reply even though it is nothing earth shattering.
The Associate Counsel falls under the General Counsel and Deputy General Counsel in the scheme of a legal organization. The Associate Counsel does not run the show.
Neither does a "sweeper", numbnuts. But as a SCOTUS Justice, yes he would run the show. DUH!
And you imagine the CHIEF JUSTICE takes orders from the JUNIOR Associate Justice?
All Kavi would have to do is to tell the chief justice that he just gave Hillary a brand new box of hollow points, and the vote would go his way. Hondo, thanks for helping lower this collective forum IQ into lower primate territory. Your posts are increasing more bizarre and irrelevant than the last. Btw -- Must you now sport a pink p*ssy-hat EVERY minute of the day?
Still covering up for Hillary's murder of Vince Foster i see. George Soros & the Pink Pussyhats must be proud of you.
Further evidence you are either demented or just a bullshitter.
You just don't get it Poindexter - one can be critical of Trump and not be a Democrat. I'm just not into the cult of personality like so many of you here seem to be. This "False left-right paradigm card" actually IS still in play; Just NOT by Trump. That is IF you've actually been playing attention. It's participants are establishment Republicans (Bushies) v. Dem-Left. MEMO: Donald Trump is NOT. ONE. OF. THEM. (and neither are the Republican Conservative Caucus.) Maybe you're just overwhelmed by the sheer insane volume of upheaval and chaos. This is thanks to the successful PTB tactics and execution of several Psy-Ops simultaneously, like: Cloward and Piven, Hegelian dialectic, and Alinsky etc. Again, all of which Donald Trump is NOT PART OF. (THIS is the problem. FOR the Left and Establishment PTB.) Here's an analogy and perspective that may be helpful in understanding and appreciating Trump: FLASHBACK: The effete US Brass during WW2 whined, b*tched, moaned and groaned about General Patton's style and stragegy, "disagreeing" with nearly everything HE did; Meanwhile he ignored THEIR backbiting and professional sabotage as he stayed aggressive and he led and held the US Army together long enough TO HELP WIN THE WAR. Sadly, you're overlooking an insight and foresight in understanding what's at stake in what has emerged into the turning point of the Left-Right paradigm of power. What's at stake is...the US Constitution, Rule of Law, Process of Justice -- our very Republic. I'm not saying there aren't issues of which to criticize Trump or ANY politician; What I'm saying is, your sense of propriety AND priority are myopic and your fighting spirit and energies wildly misplaced. A coup is still being waged against President Trump. That has NOT ended. Have you been following these events at all?? For instance: Are you aware that Swamp-Rats Brennan and Comey were both officially Communists? That Brennan and Democrats are encouraging further subordination at the Swamp-Central at FBI, routinely committing sedition? The SCOTUS process has been hijacked by the Left; its exposed and revealed the extent of their war against (especially) truth, against justice & fairness, against men, and against logic. A REAL live hot-war is being waged right before our very eyes -- and here you are kvetching over the equivalent of a "bad sprig of parsley" as you were served a gourmet meal at a 5-Star restaurant. Speaking of Hillary - when is Trump going to make good on his campaign promise and "LOCK HER UP"? But...Doesn't that require an actual Attorney General who's NOT "part of the Swamp"?? (or hadn't you noticed Sessions was indeed PART of it since Day-One of his bizarro-world "recusal" ?) How's that "swamp draining" thingie coming along? Brennan: GONE. Comey: GONE. McCabe: GONE. Others: GONE. Do you really expect five decades of the Globalist-Leftist Foggy Bottom hive to just surrender their power in a snap of Trump's finger? He's fended off every dirty trick they had. And still they are fighting Trump. But you don' see it STILL?? You can't be this naive or stupid. Then again...your priorities have been about the abuse of power at the BOTTOM of the authoritah food-chain. NOT the Top.
In your paranoid mind, maybe so. Did you say, "Paranoid"?? From the same guy who hides under his bed with and laptop scoping out the latest "COP SHOOTS DOG!" stories at "Reason" and "Thought-Project"?? AS the USA becomes a Banana Republic and an active ongoing coup by the Democrats, GOPe and Deep State are still in progress? If you Trump-ettes had your way, you would silence anyone who isn't totally on board the Trump Train...it's his genuflecting worshipers like you who are simply over the top with your idolizing the guy. Stop being a selfish contrarian crusader. It's beyond ridiculous. The PTB's abuse of institutional power and manipulating the rest of us won't and cannot stop until their entire machination is punctured. Without Trump to battle and expose them, your supposed "Crusade for Liberty" is political roadkill.
That's what watching too much CNN will do to you...
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
That is definitely bad for mental health.
This is true. Let's say that Kavanaugh did what was said: locked a girl in a room 30 years ago. Who cares? The man probably had such a squeeky clean record in College they had to go back to High School to find something. Ok, Don't know about you Vic but there are many things I did in High School I am not proud of. It's long done. The statute of limitations has run. The whole thing is ridiculous. Not to be callous I have to agree. There was no police report, rape kit no evidence it is the classic "he said, she said" scenario from 35 years ago. The Democrats apparently believe in sinless perfection. Go figure.
Indeed.
Given the exclusive nature of the academy she went to, the 'others' are probably in the Senate or House and have a (D) next to their name and know the truth.
Even when I was going for my military security clearance as a college student, the background investigators only asked for job history going back to High school. Man if they asked fellow students about drinking and partying, no one would get a security clearance.
That was hilarious no? LOL. I never had to turn in my Jesuit decoder ring.
Point, match you are correct.
Words don't help you understand. Crayons won't help. Maybe THIS simple photo and graphic will:
That's a different point. I'm simply exposing the bizarro-world over-reaching contentions of 36 year-old "indictments of character": TEENAGERS DRINK ALCOHOL! AND AT TIME GROPE EACH OTHER! But why would he lie about not being there? Too many witnesses. Again -- I'm NOT saying that he lied or would lie about this fake incident; Only that the so-called bogus "criminal-charge" is: FOR BEING MEN. FOR BEING WHITE. FOR BEING HETEROSEXUAL.
Maybe THIS simple photo and graphic will: You need to ask?
Regardless of any potential mid-term fallout, this appointment could determine the makeup of the court for the next 20 years of so. Gentlemen, I believe the American public is being bamboozled. Any "Fall-Out" is pure myth. Any negative "fall-out", controversy, and "contention" is based SOLELY on the MEDIA'S usual psyop character assassination of Republicans, Whitey, Men, Conservatives, Trump, etal "evil" fantasy portrayals of the Left's opponents. (What's they'll NEVER concede: Trump has succeeded in his own psyop: "FAKE NEWS".) Q: HAS THE MEDIA NOW "OUT-KICKED ITS COVERAGE" and OVERESTIMATED THEIR ACTUAL INFLUENCE? Q2: IF REPUBLICANS REALIZE THIS IS THE CASE AND STOP FEARING MEDIA RETRIBUTION, AREN'T THE DEMOCRAT-TERRORISTS FINISHED?
Lotta assumptive worst-case scenarios there. If that flimsy allegation is sufficient to prevent the nomination of Kavanaugh, Due Process is dead. And so is the USCON. With respect to Ford's Blatant Lie and Smear and "justice", let's remember Hitlery,0bama, etal should also be in jail serving a 500 year term. BUT SHE AND THEY AREN'T.
"Kavanaugh's" report, in October 1997, concluded that the death of Foster resulted from suicide. The investigation was led by Ken Starr and it is the Starr Report. Thank you for clarification. And the truth of the matter. I'm not a big fan of subverted "truth" and disinfo campaigns.
Can't he be both?
That's what watching too much CNN will do to you... THAT. And hanging way too much over at Reason, Thought Project, and other fake "libertarian" propaganda sites.
This is true. Disagree. This is absolutely predictable. (You guys see who the (R)s on the Judiciary committee are?? Flake. Corker. Collins. BY DESIGN they "Designated Wild-Cards", aka RINOs/GOPe.) The man probably had such a squeeky clean record in College they had to go back to High School to find something. Ok, Don't know about you Vic but there are many things I did in High School I am not proud of. Yup. That's exactly the case. They had to go 36 years back into HS Daze. And even at that, this is still a trumped up, bogus allegation. (Imagine the chaos created were the Dem-Terrorists to "find" multiple (lying) witnesses?? On your last note Red, for sure -- ALL of us are guilty of doing stupid things -- not only in our teens, but into our early 20s (and beyond.) But is THAT what this insane War-on-Men has come to?? THAT is exactly what this bogus charge is about; That and...oh, and "The War on Whitey".
Absolutely the case. The problem as you well know at this point is: "BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY".
Man if they asked fellow students about drinking and partying, no one would get a security clearance. Yep... But even BEYOND that; The Dem-Left-Terrorists seem to be creating a whole new precedence and criteria for political appointments and security clearance based on lies, rumor, innuendo, and POLITICAL AFFILIATION and MOB RULE. (this trend can't turn out well if it gains even an inch of traction)
Rejecting Ford out of hand would have been bad politically. She can have an opportunity to be heard, but she cannot further delay and dictate terms. If the GOP wants to see real fallout, they can just fail to grow a pair and bring the nomination to a vote.
Listening in to Mark Stein in for Rush today. He quoted from Acts 23 where under Roman law an accused must first hear the accuser before delivering a defense. Did you see how Ford and the Demoncrats want her to go after the accused? 2000 years of legal precedence where an accused hears the charges before defending themselves is being thrown out the window. This on a Judiciary committee which should know better.
I can't disagree with that; Those optics would have been bad. But they have already been patient with this stunt. She can have an opportunity to be heard, but she cannot further delay and dictate terms. THIS is where the entire stunt jumps the shark. (And when the GOP should have blown their fuse at the the Dem-Terrorists AND Ford. Again, the usual GOP problem: FEAR OF MAINSTREAM MEDIA REPRISAL) If the GOP wants to see real fallout, they can just fail to grow a pair and bring the nomination to a vote. As much as I'd like to believe that's the case, it's....not. Again, just look at who was chosen for that Judiciary Committee: Flake?? (PULEESE) Corker?? (Publicly HATES Trump) Collins?? (A Dem). And wasn't McStain on it as well? These are "Republicans In Name Only". The GOPe has consistent given the Finger to (R) voters. Fearlessly.
Nice. The mention of Acts 23 (even under Roman Law!) reinforces our own constitution-based criteria for "justice" and due process. As well as GOD'S justice. THIS was sickeningly lacking in this case. That any of our "Due Process" is being reduced and/or eliminated means the End of Justice, End of Law, and...ANARCHY. WARNING: TANGENT... This whole War on Cops, War on ICE, War on Whitey and Men, and push to de-criminalize CRIMINALS is by design. (IMO by the Shadow Government and its LE Gestapo: "The Deep State". All in the name of the Globalist-Elites, aka The NWO.) Anarchy ----> Chaos ----> Martial Law ----> "RE-ORDER"/FASCIST CONTROL
I will freely and candidly admit every immoral thing I ever did. The reason I keep my mouth shut about all of it is not to protect me. It is to protect the other half of the relationships. They have families and children and reputations too. Mine will shrug their shoulders - I never claimed to be a saint. People hide things for a reason. It is not my place to go exposing them.
Yes. Via Kangaroo Court and False Witness. This not only cannot be allowed to stand but heads should roll. 2000 years of legal precedence where an accused hears the charges before defending themselves is being thrown out the window. This on a Judiciary committee which should know better. Yup. There quite a bit of that "thousands-of-years-of-precedence" getting tossed out the window (as in "Marriage" and the natural roles/inclinations of Males and Females.) This Judiciary Committee DOES "know better"; However as you know, the Dems are possessed, and the Pubbies are either cowards OR owned. We are witnessing the further crumbling of a political infrastructure and will to stand on righteousness.
Sound judgement and sense.
I agree. They gave her Monday. She can't do it? Tough.
PJ Media did a nice little satire piece:
Thanks. That was excellent! (and basically the way it actually is in this New Mad Magazine World.)
Much of the GOP base vote was concerned with Supreme Court nomnations. Give them the finger, don't even bring the nomination to a vote, and see how many 2016 voters stay home in November.
The Interrogation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh That was good. You may enjoy a new HuffPo poll. https://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/athena/files/2018/09/19/5ba234fde4b046313fc11590.pdf Huffington Post has a YouGov poll with Question #9 regarding Christine Blasey Ford — "9. Credible accusation Do you think that the allegation of sexual assault against Brett Kavanaugh generally is or is not credible?" The results show that the following percentages found her allegation credible: 26% — total 26% — total All that huffing and puffing and still no sale. A HuffPo poll. That had to sting.
53% Dem. I think they read the questions as, "Do you want to believe that the allegation of sexual assault against Brett Kavanaugh is credible?"
Here is the latest delaying tactic from Dr. Ford. From Burgess Everett, Politico political reporter https://twitter.com/burgessev/status/1043204451253727233 Dr. Ford has indicated to Republicans she doesn't want to fly, in part revealing why she doesn't want the hearing to be on Monday She probably just rediscovered a long repressed memory that she does not fly.
Dr. John Madden Ford? I hate flying too. Its the prices and pat downs that irk me.
Walking or driving 4,000 miles pisses me off way more that your pat-down irritation. Don’t be a cheap fuck at your age. You can’t take it with you, grandpa.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
That’s right. Republicans have to fight to the death on this one.
You know just as well as I do that they don't give one damn about that poll no matter how stupid it makes them look. It's all about the end game which is make sure Kavanaugh is not confirmed.
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Is that Gatlin??
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
No, there are still way too many stupid/naïve people out there in the world.
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
I'll bet we can find dozens of times in the past where she did fly, and for lesser reasons. I hope someone on the committee finds out then confronts her with it to illustrate her lack of candor.
That's what happens when you putt with a driver.
So she could be groped by TSA?
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
You misspelled putz.
Your post is full of BS as is usual.
She completed her Ph.d. with an internship in Hawaii. I read she was in D.C. twice last year for seperate events.
Nah. That's spelled h-o-n-d-o-6-8.
And this includes WV senator Manchin (D). He's toast if he does not vote to confirm. Trump will see to that with just one rally in his home state.
You see this one yet? Montgomery County police: No word from Christine Blasey Ford about Kavanaugh investigation The helmet BDE is on the move there.
Yea, verily. People counting only Republicans are probably miscounting. There are two or three Dems who will be deeeply engangered by a "nay" vote. Just imagine if one of the Pubbies votes "Nay" followed by a Dem "Yea." That Pubbie would face a tough time for reelection.
I'm calling it now. Kavanaugh will be confirmed. All 51 Republicans will vote for him. The GOP will hold both houses of Congress. Rosenstein will deliver a nice October Surprise in Trump's favor. Bookmark it and ball up your fists to laugh at me when it turns out otherwise. But have a frozen crow ready in the fridge for when I turn out right.
Murkowski is waffling from recent reports. But Manchin is not speaking with reporters. Might be 50 votes with Pence deciding.
Is McCain's replacement seated?
Jon Kyl was appointed but won’t start serving until after the new year.
Well, that’s stupid timing re: Kyl. So it’s a 50-49 body now. Any single Republican can blow it up, which means that a few of them will need to be bought off with pork. And there’s the guy who’s leaving office - Flake - he has no future election to protect and can vote his conscience, which could make it 49-49, Pence breaks the tie. Collins, Murkowski, Snowe - Alaska and Maine are going to be getting some serious pork. Just sayin’. Definitely worth it. If the Republicans fail on Kavanaugh, they will lose both houses, and the Trump presidency will devolve into what the Clinton presidency did after the Republicans took over Congress.
Montgomery County police: No word from Christine Blasey Ford about Kavanaugh investigation The helmet BDE is on the move there. Yea I responded to it bta you probably already know that by now :)...
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Ringo over there was exploding last night. Lol.
Lol. Yeah he's been sitting on a couple of the Kavanaugh threads for a couple of days now. You would think he has something better to do but I guess not. He was on the board almost continuously from 10AM to 2AM and made about 40 posts strictly on Kavnaugh. And I'd bet if I took the time to read from his very first post on the subject the theme would be "Kavanaugh is guilty he needs to be hung, neutered, drawn and quartered". AAARRRGGGHHHH....... That subject most be his only assignment from his handlers lol... BTW I sent you a PM.
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Grassley announced this week that Kavanaugh would testify before the Judiciary Committee for a second time next Monday, days after the initial committee vote was scheduled.
As the Judiciary Committee has recognized and done before, an FBI investigation of the incident should be the first step in addressing her allegations. A full investigation by law enforcement officials will ensure that the crucial facts and witnesses in this matter are assessed in a non-partisan manner, and that the Committee is fully informed before conducting any hearing or making any decisions.
#2. To: hondo68 (#0)
#3. To: hondo68 (#0)
The Senate is expected to leave town for the week on Tuesday.
#4. To: nolu chan (#1)
(Edited)
And no more bullshit about Strong Independent Leftist Womyn anymore either. Shove that up your baracks too, 'Rats.
#5. To: Vicomte13 (#2)
locked a girl in a room 30 years ago. Who cares?
#6. To: Hank Rearden (#4)
“Dr." Ford
#7. To: Vicomte13 (#2)
(Edited)
They have the power, and could simply ignore the nonsense and plow ahead.
#8. To: Vicomte13, hondo68 (#2)
(Edited)
Let's say that Kavanaugh did what was said: locked a girl in a room 30 years ago. Who cares?
July 30 2018
#9. To: nolu chan (#8)
I have received medical treatment regarding the assault.
#10. To: Hank Rearden (#4)
Call the vote, Grassley, and get it done.
#11. To: Fred Mertz (#9)
Is this the counseling that she refers to? I wouldn't call it medical treatment, but that's just me.
#12. To: GrandIsland, Ivanka cut bait, Kavi is chum, dump Bush guy (#6)
(Edited)
“Cut Bait”: As the Kavanaugh Nightmare Escalates, Trump Is Gripped with Uncertainty as Ivanka Suggests Cutting the Judge Loose
The threat of losing the House and Senate has stopped Trump from going scorched-earth on Christine Blasey Ford. If Trump antagonizes women voters, it could increase the odds Republicans would lose both houses in Congress.
White House has heard rumors that Ford’s account will be verified by women who say she told it to them contemporaneously. People worry, without apparent evidence, of another Ronan Farrow bomb dropping. One source says Ivanka Trump has told her father to “cut bait” and drop Kavanaugh.
#13. To: hondo68 (#12)
“He’s a Bush guy, why would I put myself out there defending him?” Trump told people
#14. To: hondo68, GrandIsland (#12)
[Vanity Fair/Gabriel Sherman] “Trump wants this guy on the court, but Trump knows there are five other people he could put on the court if this falls apart,” a former official said.
[Vanity Fair/Gabriel Sherman] According to three sources... a former West Wing official... According to sources... Two sources told me the White House has heard rumors that Ford’s account will be verified by women who say she told it to them contemporaneously... One source says Ivanka Trump has told her father to “cut bait” and drop Kavanaugh"
#15. To: hondo68 (#12)
“He’s a Bush guy, why would I put myself out there defending him?” Trump told people
#16. To: Fred Mertz (#11)
[nolu chan] It is possible she had individual counseling/therapy before couples counseling.
#17. To: Fred Mertz, hondo68 (#13)
I have no choice but to follow this soap opera. It makes me slightly ill, but I'll watch what happens.
Experts doubt claim of ‘truthful’ polygraph result from Kavanaugh accuser
Washington Examiner
September 17, 2018 04:31 PM
#18. To: GrandIsland (#7)
No they can’t, dip shit. It will cause a blue wave at the next election cycle.
#19. To: nolu chan (#8)
That is not what Dr. Ford actually said, although it is what was originally reported. Dr. Ford wrote she was pushed into the bedroom where Kavanaugh held her down, and when Judge jumped on them she got free, ran to the hallway bathroom where she locked herself in, stayed about 15 minutes until she heard them go down the stairs, and she let herself out and left the house and went home. Allegedly.
#20. To: nolu chan (#1)
Now Christine Blasey Ford's by her attorneys want a full FBI investigation before appearing.
#21. To: Vicomte13 (#2)
They have the power, and could simply ignore the nonsense and plow ahead.
#22. To: Hank Rearden (#3)
What, exactly, did those parasites do during this grueling 2-day workweek?
#23. To: GrandIsland (#6)
She deserves no title besides lying snowflake cunt.
#24. To: hondo68 (#12)
Another reason Trump hasn’t gone to the mat for Kavanaugh
#25. To: nolu chan (#14)
According to three sources... a former West Wing official... According to sources... Two sources told me the White House has heard rumors
#26. To: misterwhite (#24)
Which Democrat has "gone to the mat" for this lying bitch? Name one Democrat who has said "I believe her".
#27. To: nolu chan (#16)
I saw that she received the couples counseling in 2012
#28. To: Vicomte13 (#19)
"Instead, they're actually stalling and CARING about some guy's high school sexual hijinks 34 years ago"
#29. To: A K A Stone (#26)
Sen. Hirono: Men Need To "Shut Up," Kavanaugh Accuser Needs To Be Believed And I Believe Her
#30. To: misterwhite (#29)
Let's say the accuser comes forward and admits she was confused and it was some other guy
#31. To: Fred Mertz (#30)
That's as likely to happen as Kavanaugh saying I didn't do that to her, I did that to Betty Boop.
#32. To: misterwhite (#31)
#33. To: Fred Mertz (#32)
I think she mentioned only two people present at the party by name, Kavanaugh and Judge.
#34. To: Fred Mertz (#32)
How can Kavanaugh testify about something that he claims didn't happen?
#35. To: misterwhite (#33)
But according to her there was another girl and two other boys. Where are they? Don't they see the news? Why aren't they stepping forward to either confirm or deny her story?
#36. To: hondo68 (#0)
#37. To: misterwhite (#33)
Grassley and the GOP actually played this perfectly, and got the best result possible given Feinstein's dirty trick. They demonstrated good faith by delaying the committee vote and offering a chance to tell her story under oath, in public or in private. She has refused. In the minds of most voters, they acted with reasonable fairness.
#38. To: Fred Mertz (#35)
Those are good questions although the other three may have been unaware at the time that there was alleged hanky panky going on in the other room.
#39. To: Fred Mertz (#37)
One last thought, the Pubbies played this one pretty well.
#40. To: hondo68 (#5)
There are many good reasons not to confirm Kavanaugh...
#41. To: hondo68 (#0)
(Edited)
Poster Comment (Hondo):
#42. To: Liberator, hondo68 (#40)
There are many good reasons not to confirm Kavanaugh...
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much
#43. To: Deckard (#42)
Like the fact he led the Starr “investigation” into the death of Vince Foster, and concluded against all logic and all the evidence that he killed himself in Fort Marcy Park.
#44. To: Deckard (#42)
#45. To: misterwhite, Fred Mertz (#38)
They could testify a) there was a party, b) Kavanaugh and Judge were there, and c) they were both very drunk. Given the statements on record by Kavanaugh and Judge, that alone would be damning.
#46. To: Liberator (#45)
"Damning" in what context??
#47. To: Liberator (#44)
START WITH YOUR PARTY'S (D) fake/partisan SCOTUS judges
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much
#48. To: Fred Mertz (#35)
#49. To: Deckard (#47)
(Edited)
Get your facts straight Sparky - I'm not a Democrat.
#50. To: misterwhite (#46)
For starters, Kavanaugh is on record saying he wasn't at that party.
#51. To: Deckard, Liberator, Jesuit Mafia, Vicomte13, Christie, anti-Patriot Act, Fred Mertz (#42)
#52. To: Liberator (#49)
But...you join them in their fatwa against Trump.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much
#53. To: Liberator (#49)
This isn't a fake/Dubya "you're either for us or against us" BS choice; It's real.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much
#54. To: hondo68 (#51)
Kavi & Crisco are from the same Jesuit mobster zone, the MD/NJ swamp. Authoritarian goons, aka tyrants.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much
#55. To: Liberator (#50)
Yes...But here's my point: Even IF he was -- *would* it be "damning" to be drinking
#56. To: hondo68 (#0)
Kavanaugh confirmation before midterms will result in GOP loss of the HOR, he's that bad. The GOP wing of the party will totally lose the HOR if they confirm *JJ Swamp before the midterm elections. *Jesuit Judge Swamp Now Kavi can go back to picking up Hillary's spent shell casings, and other cover up ops to protect her.
#57. To: hondo68 (#51)
#58. To: misterwhite (#20)
No. What she wants is to drag this out for another 2-3 months then refuse to testify under oath.
#59. To: misterwhite, Fred Mertz (#31)
Someone miscalculated and told her the Republicans, misogynists all, would try to bury it and go forward with the vote despite the accusation. And that would be that. Then the Democrats would have the excuse they were looking for to vote "no".
#60. To: misterwhite, Fred Mertz (#38)
True. But they could testify a) there was a party, b) Kavanaugh and Judge were there, and c) they were both very drunk. Given the statements on record by Kavanaugh and Judge, that alone would be damning.
Kavanaugh’s prep school pal: Ford’s wrong, I was never at party
#61. To: nolu chan (#10)
(Edited)
A committee vote to recommend or not recommend the nomination is not an actual necessity.
#62. To: Deckard, Liberator, hondo68 (#42)
Like the fact he led the Starr “investigation” into the death of Vince Foster, and concluded against all logic and all the evidence that he killed himself in Fort Marcy Park.
X. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS
#63. To: Hank Rearden (#61)
politics dictates the committee vote be taken to report a recommendation, and Grassley's not going to call the vote until he's sure he'll get a positive result - however much arm-twisting that takes.
Reporting the Nomination
#64. To: nolu chan, sweeper coyote (#62)
Young Brett Kavanaugh was an Associate Independent Counsel.
#65. To: nolu chan (#60)
[PJ] “I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh.
#66. To: misterwhite (#65)
#67. To: hondo68 (#64)
The equivalent of a "sweeper" who brushes out the illegal aliens footprints with a branch, so that the Border Patrol won't know that they invaded the USA.
#68. To: nolu chan, clinton apologist, deep state swamp lover, D 'n R party hack (#67)
The Associate Counsel does not run the show.
#69. To: hondo68, asshole (#68)
Neither does a "sweeper", numbnuts. But as a SCOTUS Justice, yes he would run the show. DUH!
#70. To: nolu chan (#69)
(Edited)
And you imagine the CHIEF JUSTICE takes orders from the JUNIOR Associate Justice?
#71. To: hondo68, IQ, MINUS 1000 (#51)
#72. To: Liberator (#71)
#73. To: hondo68 (#70)
All Kavi would have to do is to tell the chief justice that he just gave Hillary a brand new box of hollow points, and the vote would go his way.
#74. To: Deckard (#52)
I don't have a fatwa against Trump ass-clown. I disagree with him on completely different reasons than the Dems - but by all means, keep playing that false left-right paradigm card.
#75. To: Deckard (#53)
("This isn't a fake/Dubya 'you're either for us or against us' BS choice; It's real.)
#76. To: Liberator (#75)
Stop being a selfish contrarian crusader. It's beyond ridiculous.
#77. To: CZ82 (#76)
That's what watching too much CNN will do to you...
#78. To: Vicomte13 (#2)
Had to believe that the Republicans let this happen. They have the power, and could simply ignore the nonsense and plow ahead.
#79. To: Vicomte13 (#19)
ALL MEN are sinners - and Democrats don't hold their leaders accountable for that fact, and they don't LET the Republicans hold them accountable for it either. They ignore the bitching, ignore the complaints, put their heads down and charge through.
#80. To: misterwhite (#33)
But according to her there was another girl and two other boys. Where are they? Don't they see the news? Why aren't they stepping forward to either confirm or deny her story?
#81. To: Liberator (#45)
"Damning" in what context?? Teen-age high school kids getting drunk? Big whoop. This is all bullsh**.
#82. To: Vicomte13 (#57)
Love the chart and its footnote.
#83. To: nolu chan (#59)
If the allegation is sufficient to disqualify Kavanaugh from SCOTUS, it is sufficient to impeach and remove him from the Circuit Court. Blasey Ford would still be in the middle of a shit storm.
#84. To: Deckard, hondo68, ALL (#54)
Great chart - at one time Luberator would have seen the Trump presidency for what it really is.
#85. To: misterwhite (#55)
You're missing the point. He said he wasn't there.
a) BS
b) IRRELEVANT
c) WELL-BEYOND ANY REASONABLE STATUTE OF LIMITATION
d) Is OBVIOUSLY designed to criminalize all men.
#86. To: Liberator, Deckard (#84)
Words don't help you understand. Crayons won't help.
#87. To: Justified, hondo68 (#56)
Have you been smoking crack?
#88. To: nolu chan, misterwhite, CZ82, redleghunter (#58)
(Edited)
Let the confirmation proceed after she does not appear.
#89. To: nolu chan (#59)
If the allegation is sufficient to disqualify Kavanaugh from SCOTUS, it is sufficient to impeach and remove him from the Circuit Court. Blasey Ford would still be in the middle of a shit storm.
#90. To: nolu chan, Deckard, hondo68 (#62)
Ken Starr was the Independent Counsel. Hickman Ewing was Starr's Deputy Independent Counsel. Young Brett Kavanaugh was an Associate Independent Counsel.
#91. To: nolu chan (#73)
Further evidence you are either demented or just a bullshitter.
#92. To: CZ82 (#76)
(Edited)
("Stop being a selfish contrarian crusader. It's beyond ridiculous.")
#93. To: redleghunter, Vicomte13 (#78)
Had to believe that the Republicans let this happen. They have the power, and could simply ignore the nonsense and plow ahead.
#94. To: redleghunter (#80)
'Others' are probably in the Senate or House and have a (D) next to their name and know the truth.
#95. To: redleghunter (#81)
Even when I was going for my military security clearance as a college student, the background investigators only asked for job history going back to High school.
#96. To: Liberator, misterwhite, CZ82, redleghunter (#88)
Any "Fall-Out" is pure myth.
#97. To: Liberator (#95)
#98. To: nolu chan, misterwhite, CZ82, redleghunter (#96)
(Edited)
Rejecting Ford out of hand would have been bad politically.
#99. To: redleghunter, sneakypete (#97)
(Edited)
Listening in to Mark Stein in for Rush today. He quoted from Acts 23 where under Roman law an accused must first hear the accuser before delivering a defense.
#100. To: redleghunter (#78)
Ok, Don't know about you Vic but there are many things I did in High School I am not proud of.
#101. To: redleghunter (#97)
(Edited)
Did you see how Ford and the Demoncrats want her to go after the accused?
#102. To: Vicomte13, redleghunter (#100)
The reason I keep my mouth shut about all of it is not to protect me. It is to protect the other half of the relationships. They have families and children and reputations too.
#103. To: nolu chan (#96)
She can have an opportunity to be heard, but she cannot further delay and dictate terms.
#104. To: Liberator (#102)
#105. To: redleghunter (#104)
#106. To: Liberator (#98)
As much as I'd like to believe that's the case, it's....not. Again, just look at who was chosen for that Judiciary Committee: Flake?? (PULEESE) Corker?? (Publicly HATES Trump) Collins?? (A Dem). And wasn't McStain on it as well? These are "Republicans In Name Only". The GOPe has consistent given the Finger to (R) voters. Fearlessly.
#107. To: redleghunter, Liberator, misterwhite (#104)
PJ Media did a nice little satire piece:
31% — registered voters
28% — male
25% — female
25% — 18-29
22% — 30-44
27% — 45-64
24% — white
42% — black
21% — hispanic
23% — other
53% — dem
19% — ind
04% — rep
62% — 2016 Clinton vote
04% — 2016 Trump vote
24% — <$50K
26% — $50-100K
33% — $100K+
31% — Northeast
29% — Midwest
21% — South
28% — West
#108. To: nolu chan (#107)
#109. To: misterwhite, Liberator, redleghunter (#108)
Burgess Everett @burgessev
#110. To: nolu chan (#109)
#111. To: Fred Mertz (#110)
(Edited)
I hate flying too. Its the prices and pat downs that irk me.
#112. To: nolu chan (#106)
#113. To: nolu chan (#107)
All that huffing and puffing and still no sale. A HuffPo poll. That had to sting.
#114. To: hondo68 (#86)
https://media.giphy.com/media/mpfMDb6MB6EWQ/giphy.gif
#115. To: Liberator (#88)
Q: HAS THE MEDIA NOW "OUT-KICKED ITS COVERAGE" and OVERESTIMATED THEIR ACTUAL INFLUENCE?
#116. To: nolu chan (#109)
Dr. Ford has indicated to Republicans she doesn't want to fly
#117. To: CZ82 (#114)
#118. To: misterwhite (#116)
I'll bet we can find dozens of times in the past where she did fly, and for lesser reasons.
#119. To: misterwhite, CZ82 (#117)
That's what happens when you putt with a driver.
#120. To: misterwhite (#20)
No. What she wants is to drag this out for another 2-3 months then refuse to testify under oath. She's using the #metoo movement to bully the Republicans.
#121. To: misterwhite (#116)
I'll bet we can find dozens of times in the past where she did fly, and for lesser reasons.
#122. To: hondo68 (#119)
You misspelled putz.
#123. To: Vicomte13 (#112)
That’s right. Republicans have to fight to the death on this one.
#124. To: CZ82 (#113)
#125. To: redleghunter, Vicomte13 (#123)
And this includes WV senator Manchin (D). He's toast if he does not vote to confirm. Trump will see to that with just one rally in his home state.
#126. To: redleghunter (#123)
#127. To: Vicomte13 (#126)
I'm calling it now. Kavanaugh will be confirmed. All 51 Republicans will vote for him. The GOP will hold both houses of Congress. Rosenstein will deliver a nice October Surprise in Trump's favor. Bookmark it and ball up your fists to laugh at me when it turns out otherwise. But have a frozen crow ready in the fridge for when I turn out right.
#128. To: redleghunter (#127)
#129. To: Vicomte13 (#128)
#130. To: redleghunter (#129)
#131. To: redleghunter (#124)
You see this one yet?
#132. To: CZ82 (#131)
#133. To: redleghunter (#132)
(Edited)
Ringo over there was exploding last night.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]