Kavanaugh vote postponed. Judiciary Committee hearing on Sexual Assault complain Monday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Did Avenatti post this?

Ok can someone tell me what the hell this post is about?

Screen shot from Avenatti twitter account. Avenatti posted his list of questions for Grassley's Senate Judiciary nominating committee head detailing a list of questions that they would like to know about alleged gang rape that involved presumably Judge and Kavanaugh

Who is making an allegation of gang rape, and it seems mighty unprofessional for an attorney to post his list of questions on twitter. Is this normal protocol?

What is mighty unprofessional is how GOP is trying hide all the dirt on Kavanaugh and rush this nomination so that the mighty unfit president can have his back covered for subpoena. Why should Avenatti write in secret when he knows fully well that anything he writes in GOP's views will be hidden from public and also from their Democrats colleagues. Are you kidding me? Mighty unprofessional, huh!

Unprofessional? It’s straight-up corruption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll just go on the record now and say when the next democrat nominates someone, I will claim they touched me when I was a little boy.

Go for it, as long as you do it with your name attached to it and say that you want the FBI to investigate fully.

Why not? He would be able to inflect a considerable amount of damage, and no one would be able to prove he was lying.

There are plenty of conservative picks that could have been made, Barnett, Thapar, others. None of them would reduce the country or DCUM to this level.

Don't blame this on MeToo or Democrats. Blame this on Kavanaugh

Barnett can not be confirmed because of her writings on Roe. She is not a serious candidate.

Her last name is Barrett.

Whatever, no point in learning the spelling, she isn’t going anywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll just go on the record now and say when the next democrat nominates someone, I will claim they touched me when I was a little boy.

Terrific. provide a polygraph.

It’ll be a few years from now, so I can already say I mentioned it in 2018.

More importantly, will you subject yourself to an FBI interview?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll just go on the record now and say when the next democrat nominates someone, I will claim they touched me when I was a little boy.

Terrific. provide a polygraph.

It’ll be a few years from now, so I can already say I mentioned it in 2018.

Yes, and it will be really effective since you said you would make it up in advance.

Maybe you don’t get it. If someone asks in 6 years “did you ever mentioned it before now?” I can say yes, and it will be truthful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll just go on the record now and say when the next democrat nominates someone, I will claim they touched me when I was a little boy.

Go for it, as long as you do it with your name attached to it and say that you want the FBI to investigate fully.

Why not? He would be able to inflect a considerable amount of damage, and no one would be able to prove he was lying.

There are plenty of conservative picks that could have been made, Barnett, Thapar, others. None of them would reduce the country or DCUM to this level.

Don't blame this on MeToo or Democrats. Blame this on Kavanaugh

Barnett can not be confirmed because of her writings on Roe. She is not a serious candidate.

And in an obscure quasi-religious cult to boot. Next?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll just go on the record now and say when the next democrat nominates someone, I will claim they touched me when I was a little boy.

Go for it, as long as you do it with your name attached to it and say that you want the FBI to investigate fully.

Why not? He would be able to inflect a considerable amount of damage, and no one would be able to prove he was lying.

There are plenty of conservative picks that could have been made, Barnett, Thapar, others. None of them would reduce the country or DCUM to this level.

Don't blame this on MeToo or Democrats. Blame this on Kavanaugh

Barnett can not be confirmed because of her writings on Roe. She is not a serious candidate.

That's what I tend to think. But then, Kavanaugh wasn't a great candidate either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Underwhelming. Exposing yourself while drinking actually is standard college fare, unlike attempted rape.

Where the hell did you go to college?

University of Iowa, c/o 2008. I'm surprised anyone is surprised?

I went to a SLAC that I won't name. graduated in 2000. I saw much crazier drunken and druggy behavior. I'm not surprised. The thing is, none of my crowd is nominated for SCOTUS, nor will we ever be.

Nobody gets nominated to the Supreme Court unless they went to Yale or Harvard. Full stop.

Thurgood Marshall did not attend Yale or Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else think it’s scary that those with power and influence can come forward with bogus claims and destroy someone’s life just because they don’t like your politics? I’m a woman and not one shred of my being believes any of this. It’s simply not credible or substantiated in any way. This kind of underhanded slander that can come out of nowhere and destroy someone for no reason is truly alarming.

I doubt you are a woman.

She's correct. -Another Woman

[Anonymous]

Someone being interviewed last week on a conservative talk show said "The Dems will trot out a bunch of allegations on Sunday evening. Just watch. It's what they do". And look at that!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else think it’s scary that those with power and influence can come forward with bogus claims and destroy someone’s life just because they don’t like your politics? I’m a woman and not one shred of my being believes any of this. It’s simply not credible or substantiated in any way. This kind of underhanded slander that can come out of nowhere and destroy someone for no reason is truly alarming.

I doubt you are a woman.

She's correct. -Another Woman

And another

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll just go on the record now and say when the next democrat nominates someone, I will claim they touched me when I was a little boy.

No, he RAPED you. I saw him! I swear!

Yeah, you two are not even brave enough to put your name on a DCUM post but you want us to believe you would endure the hell that Ford and Ramirez are facing?

Oh please, they’re the darlings of the left right now. They will be taken care of and I’m sure celebrated in their liberal bubble social circles.

Exactly, I really don't see how they are being "brave". They are receiving the full sympathy and commendation from the type of people who matter to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone being interviewed last week on a conservative talk show said "The Dems will trot out a bunch of allegations on Sunday evening. Just watch. It's what they do". And look at that!

So everyone’s a liar except Kavanaugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not surprising that more women came out. There are almost certainly others who are still keeping quiet. Kavanaugh really ought to pull the plug on this nomination. If he makes it to the court under this cloud through a rushed process, many will see him and the entire court as illegitimate. That’s not what the country needs.

You're right, it's not surprising. Bet the sheep and goats start talking next

I've bolded the goal

[Anonymous]

Funny how nothing came up in July when he was confirmed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Alan Dershowitz: Every civil libertarian in the country, liberal, conservative, Republican, Democrat, led by the Civil Libertarian Union should be outraged by this demand. It is so un-American. You’re the accuser. You get on the witness stand. You testify. You make your accusation. You get cross-examined. THEN the accused responds. It turns the entire legal system on its head. It is INSANE to ask an accused person to deny the accusation before he has heard the accusation being made and cross-examined. Sure, the FBI should continue its background check. It should also call everyone else who may have been at this party. All of that is true. But the idea that he goes first? I want to hear from the American Civil Liberties Union. Where are they? This is the most fundamental denial of due process.

+1,000,000