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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Monday September 24th.

In your opinion, will:

A. Brett Kavanaugh be confirmed?

B. Brett Kavanaugh not be confirmed?



I pick A.

B

B

B. And I think there is some kind of movement brewing to get him off the bench for good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:K is in a bind (of his own making). He should have withdrawn for the "blah blah, my family blah blah, good of the country" reasons last week - probably about when his buddy Whelan was pushing the evil twin theory. But he waited . . . and now things are looking infinitely creepier, and if he withdraws at this point folks will definitely/universally (always and forevermore) think there is (significant) substance to the (many and varied - I'm looking at you Avenetti! - allegations.

Which means he'll probably double down and go for broke. Going to be a crazy week!

Or he should have said, "In my student days I drank too much on occasion and sometimes was boorish with women. Although I have no memory of the particular allegations [or don't remember them the same way], it is clear that these women have carried a terrible burden, and I am profoundly sorry. I am a different man today, and a father with daughters. "

Then he could survive it.

BS. Liberals wanted to take him or anyone Trump nominated to replace Kennedy down at all costs., But keep repeating this so you all feel better while you happily spread rumors and gossip to destroy a man and his family.

No, Gorsuch went through without issue. Maybe the problem is the nominee and his sordid past.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/23/second-woman-assault-kavanaugh-837678?nname=playbook&nid=0000014f-1646-d88f-a1cf-5f46b7bd0000&nrid=00000158-54fe-dbe6-a978-56fefe6e0000&nlid=630318

Avenatti told POLITICO he represents a group of individuals who can corroborate allegations involving Kavanaugh and his longtime friend in the 1980s.

Avenatti said he’d describe just one of the individuals as a victim.

“She will testify,” he said. “But before she does, she will likely appear on camera for an interview.”

He said the others were witnesses to the allegations. Avenatti would not elaborate on the number of clients but said he represents them alone.

“I represent multiple clients, they are witnesses. I’m representing multiple individuals that have knowledge of this, there’s no other attorneys involved,” Avenatti told POLITICO. Asked if the witnesses attended Georgetown Prep’s sister school, he said they went beyond that. “They went to schools in the same general areas. These house parties were widely attended.”

Avenatti said his new claims are "not out of character from what Dr. Ford said.”

Get buttered popcorn ready. Trump will explode in the UN meeting today. I am worried that this UN meeting is about Iran and he would do something crazy to distract us from the Kavanaugh show. It must be killing hi that Kavanaugh has taken all the air time for last week.

Thanks for that anxiety. You make a good point.

Trump just made a statement that he is with Kavanaugh (or something like that). I cannot believe they are doubling down on this guy. I actually thought Trump was smarter than this. Dragging this on likely means they will not get a conservative on the court and midterms are going to be an abomination for the GOP. Unbelievably stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No. Everyone will understand exactly what a UN tantrum would be for. World has his number

Everyone in the world but about 20% of Americans including 50% of the Congress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is interesting.

Stacy Washington is reporting that her FB posts are being dug up (internet is forever folks) and In March of 2017, Christine Blasey Ford posted on Facebook that someone needed to come forward an accuse Gorsuch of rape to derail his SCOTUS nomination. She further said such accusations should continue until Trump nominates Merrick Garland

This appears to be fake news. Unless you have better sourcing, Stacy Washington's Twitter feed simply shows her retweeting a meme from other person who appears to have deleted the original tweet. The meme doesn't even show a Facebook post, but simply makes the claim.

Give it time.

This is easy enough to settle. She is scheduled to testify on Thursday. Question from Senators: “There was a claim on Twitter that before you scrubbed your social media, you made a post on FB that someone needed to come forward and make accusations to accuse a SCOTUS nominee of misconduct to derail the nomination. Did you make any FB posts alluding to taking action to derail a SCOTUS nominee?” Follow up: “What type of political posts have you made on FB?”

[Anonymous]

How many more nutty women with spotty memories are the Dems going to dig up? This whole thing is a joke and the Republicans are being played.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:K is in a bind (of his own making). He should have withdrawn for the "blah blah, my family blah blah, good of the country" reasons last week - probably about when his buddy Whelan was pushing the evil twin theory. But he waited . . . and now things are looking infinitely creepier, and if he withdraws at this point folks will definitely/universally (always and forevermore) think there is (significant) substance to the (many and varied - I'm looking at you Avenetti! - allegations.

Which means he'll probably double down and go for broke. Going to be a crazy week!

Or he should have said, "In my student days I drank too much on occasion and sometimes was boorish with women. Although I have no memory of the particular allegations [or don't remember them the same way], it is clear that these women have carried a terrible burden, and I am profoundly sorry. I am a different man today, and a father with daughters. "

Then he could survive it.

BS. Liberals wanted to take him or anyone Trump nominated to replace Kennedy down at all costs., But keep repeating this so you all feel better while you happily spread rumors and gossip to destroy a man and his family.

No, Gorsuch went through without issue. Maybe the problem is the nominee and his sordid past.

More BS. Gorsuch was confirmed and passed the Senate because he replaced Scalia so Gorsuch’s appointment wasn’t a threat to maintaining the status quo on the court. Kavanaugh’s appointment would tip the court to a more conservative leaning and that is why Dems are playing so dirty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:K is in a bind (of his own making). He should have withdrawn for the "blah blah, my family blah blah, good of the country" reasons last week - probably about when his buddy Whelan was pushing the evil twin theory. But he waited . . . and now things are looking infinitely creepier, and if he withdraws at this point folks will definitely/universally (always and forevermore) think there is (significant) substance to the (many and varied - I'm looking at you Avenetti! - allegations.

Which means he'll probably double down and go for broke. Going to be a crazy week!

Or he should have said, "In my student days I drank too much on occasion and sometimes was boorish with women. Although I have no memory of the particular allegations [or don't remember them the same way], it is clear that these women have carried a terrible burden, and I am profoundly sorry. I am a different man today, and a father with daughters. "

Then he could survive it.

BS. Liberals wanted to take him or anyone Trump nominated to replace Kennedy down at all costs., But keep repeating this so you all feel better while you happily spread rumors and gossip to destroy a man and his family.

No, Gorsuch went through without issue. Maybe the problem is the nominee and his sordid past.

More BS. Gorsuch was confirmed and passed the Senate because he replaced Scalia so Gorsuch’s appointment wasn’t a threat to maintaining the status quo on the court. Kavanaugh’s appointment would tip the court to a more conservative leaning and that is why Dems are playing so dirty.

+1

It's all about Roe v. Wade and making sure the Supreme Court doesn't return it to the states. Nothing else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe Brett Kavanaugh is the hill some of you cretins want to die on. Good God. I’m sure his wife, if she has had the sense the Lord gave a goose, is begging him to withdraw his name and end this as a story for the likes of Farrow and Meyer to continue exploring. Every single person they have profiled to date has at minimum lost his job, and/of been charged (Weinstein, Schneiderman, Moonves).

BK is not the hill I want to die on. Pushing back against how the liberal Democrats have handled this whole process is the hill I am willing to die on. Liberals would have done this to anyone Trump nominated to replace Kennedy. Anyone. Trump could have nominated Mother Theresa and liberals would have dragged her through the mud. And for the record, I think what the Republicans did to Garland was wrong too. But this has sank to a new level of low that disgusts me. I don't know if I will ever be able to vote for a Democrat again and I am a currently a registered Democrat.

I agree. Time to #WalkAway.

Fine, you two -- vote for Trump and others like him, if you think that is somehow better than voting for a Democrat who is committed to providing health care to all Americans and keeping families together at our borders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is interesting.

Stacy Washington is reporting that her FB posts are being dug up (internet is forever folks) and In March of 2017, Christine Blasey Ford posted on Facebook that someone needed to come forward an accuse Gorsuch of rape to derail his SCOTUS nomination. She further said such accusations should continue until Trump nominates Merrick Garland

This appears to be fake news. Unless you have better sourcing, Stacy Washington's Twitter feed simply shows her retweeting a meme from other person who appears to have deleted the original tweet. The meme doesn't even show a Facebook post, but simply makes the claim.

Give it time.

This is easy enough to settle. She is scheduled to testify on Thursday. Question from Senators: “There was a claim on Twitter that before you scrubbed your social media, you made a post on FB that someone needed to come forward and make accusations to accuse a SCOTUS nominee of misconduct to derail the nomination. Did you make any FB posts alluding to taking action to derail a SCOTUS nominee?” Follow up: “What type of political posts have you made on FB?”

Any Senator who asked that question based on an obvious hoax should be forced to resign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:K is in a bind (of his own making). He should have withdrawn for the "blah blah, my family blah blah, good of the country" reasons last week - probably about when his buddy Whelan was pushing the evil twin theory. But he waited . . . and now things are looking infinitely creepier, and if he withdraws at this point folks will definitely/universally (always and forevermore) think there is (significant) substance to the (many and varied - I'm looking at you Avenetti! - allegations.

Which means he'll probably double down and go for broke. Going to be a crazy week!

Or he should have said, "In my student days I drank too much on occasion and sometimes was boorish with women. Although I have no memory of the particular allegations [or don't remember them the same way], it is clear that these women have carried a terrible burden, and I am profoundly sorry. I am a different man today, and a father with daughters. "

Then he could survive it.

BS. Liberals wanted to take him or anyone Trump nominated to replace Kennedy down at all costs., But keep repeating this so you all feel better while you happily spread rumors and gossip to destroy a man and his family.

No, Gorsuch went through without issue. Maybe the problem is the nominee and his sordid past.

More BS. Gorsuch was confirmed and passed the Senate because he replaced Scalia so Gorsuch’s appointment wasn’t a threat to maintaining the status quo on the court. Kavanaugh’s appointment would tip the court to a more conservative leaning and that is why Dems are playing so dirty.

. Kavanaugh is the cause of his own problems. I thought republicans were the party of personal responsibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow! Farrow says Ramirez came forward because Senate Democrats came looking?

Any other source for this?

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/ronan-farrow-new-kavanaugh-accuser-came-forward-because-democrats-came-looking/

And why the heck didn't the Republicans go looking before they nominated BK? Why? What a mess.

Because the FBI did go looking.

These stories were developed AFTER he was nominated. Except for Ford telling her husband after she saw Kavanaugh was on Romney's short list for SC.

There is no corroboration to either story. Read the New Yorker story carefully:
1. Took the woman six days with her lawyer to work out her "memories.'
2. Only corroborating witness, is only relying on hearsay and wishes to remain nameless.
3. People who were supposedly at this party, according to Ramirez, deny its veracity. They don't even recall Kavanaugh being at the party.

That right wing rag, NYT, would not run the story because there were too many gaps in it.

Even Farrow said in an interview, that Ramirez came forward because the Dems were looking.

But, hey, if your politics outweigh your sense of decency and justice, I guess it doesn't matter.

[Anonymous]

Sexual harassment and assault is ok with the GOP. Kavanaugh will go through.

[Anonymous]

To all those whining about nasty liberals making a fuss over Kavanaugh, how did Roberts, Alito and Gorsuch sail through their confirmations? And lest we forget, the GOP doesn't need a single Democratic vote to see this through.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is interesting.

Stacy Washington is reporting that her FB posts are being dug up (internet is forever folks) and In March of 2017, Christine Blasey Ford posted on Facebook that someone needed to come forward an accuse Gorsuch of rape to derail his SCOTUS nomination. She further said such accusations should continue until Trump nominates Merrick Garland

This appears to be fake news. Unless you have better sourcing, Stacy Washington's Twitter feed simply shows her retweeting a meme from other person who appears to have deleted the original tweet. The meme doesn't even show a Facebook post, but simply makes the claim.

Give it time.

This is easy enough to settle. She is scheduled to testify on Thursday. Question from Senators: “There was a claim on Twitter that before you scrubbed your social media, you made a post on FB that someone needed to come forward and make accusations to accuse a SCOTUS nominee of misconduct to derail the nomination. Did you make any FB posts alluding to taking action to derail a SCOTUS nominee?” Follow up: “What type of political posts have you made on FB?”

Any Senator who asked that question based on an obvious hoax should be forced to resign.

Sure. But, what Kamala Harris did during the hearings is “brave.”