Pages

Tuesday, September 18, 2018

This is how it will work...

  • The Republicans will politely listen to the 36 year old accusations from Christine Blasey Ford. 
  • They may or may not probe her on some of the murky details that seem inconsistent.
  • The Republicans will politely listen to the denials from Brett Kavanaugh. 
  • They may or may not probe into more specifics of those denials. 
  • Short of some new-found evidence or proof that Kavanaugh is lying, the Republicans will vote to confirm him (as they should).

All this being said, I have no idea what stunts the Democrats will pull. I doubt that they will politely listen and let things play out respectfully to all parties involved. That sort of defeats the whole purpose of this. More likely than not, they will put most of their energies into demands of more testimony, more investigations, more hearings, more time. The bottom line to them is to delay the vote by any and all means possible. The "truth" in these regards is irrelevant to them (as well as fundamentally impossible to determine).  

Whether or not you are a fan of the whole #metoo movement, the reality is that even the best of causes can be used for the worst of intent. I have no doubt that there are some people who simply believe every allegation to be true, until proven false beyond all shadows of any doubts (and then they still think it's half true). But I think most people in this case will understand the need to weigh the reputation of a Brett Kavanaugh against out of the blue allegations from 36 years ago, that offer no shred of evidence to back them. 

There is a fine line between encouraging women to come forward and giving them the benefit of the doubt, and allowing any and all allegations of sexual assault to be used as a blunt social and political weapon to "bring someone down". Once you cross that line, it undermines everything that the #metoo movement is about. 

82 comments:

commie said...

The Republicans will politely listen to the 36 year old accusations from Christine Blasey Ford.

And then do what old white men do....protect the party instead of the women...nothing new there!!!!!!

Of course the women is a liar....and of course the old white men support the pussy grabber who had 17 women lie about him and did nothing....I hold no hope of anything coming out of this other than a confirmation....November is coming and McJowls is jamming this as fast as he can go.....oh well.....




cowardly king obama said...

conncarroll

HELLO FBI I WANT TO REPORT A CRIME

where did it happen?

I DON'T KNOW

when did it happen?

I DON'T KNOW

how many witnesses were there?

I DON'T KNOW

How long ago was it?

30 YEARS. NO, 32. MAYBE 36


C.H. Truth said...

Denny -

It's not about Trump or Ford.

The only issue here is whether or not Brett Kavanaugh is qualified to sit on the USSC. To suggest that a single 36 year old allegation with no evidence, no corroboration, no witnesses to back it up... is disqualifying is dubious at best, blatantly corrupt at worst.

rrb said...


REX


@_ImperatorRex_
Follow Follow @_ImperatorRex_
More
1. OK.

Something very strange is going on.

Holton-Arms, the exclusive girls school of fraud #ChristineBlaseyFord Blasey (class of '84), has WIPED all their online yearbooks, within the last 24 hours.

https://twitter.com/_ImperatorRex_/status/1042004460543672320




huh. concealing dr. cray cray's past has become a top priority for someone.


cowardly king obama said...

past - Democracy dies in darkness

current - Quick, turn off all the lights

rrb said...



i'm not on twitter, but if anyone here is besides the alky here's a link to dr. cray cray's classmates.com page:

http://www.classmates.com/siteui/people/christine-ford/4000171206186


maybe someone can get that to rex. the yearbooks are on it.

Roger Amick said...

To accept the fact that he sexually assaulted her 36 years ago but still support his nomination will be the position of Republicans who will vote to confirm.

cowardly king obama said...

Roger Amick said...
To accept the fact that he sexually assaulted her 36 years ago but still support his nomination will be the position of Republicans who will vote to confirm.


What you call "facts" simply are not

You are way off the deep end

rrb said...

Blogger Roger Amick said...

To accept the fact that he sexually assaulted her 36 years ago but still support his nomination will be the position of Republicans who will vote to confirm.


that's how fake news media will try to spin it, but intelligent people with no predisposition to actually believe her will not be moved.

she's a liar. straight up. a fucking psycho bitch who volunteered to be a liberal tool and can't even get her bullshit straight.

"but, but, but she took a lie detector test."

did she. where's the evidence of that?

after kavanaugh is confirmed this fucking nutbag needs to be utterly destroyed.

Roger Amick said...

This is so typical of you. Even if probable cause supports her allegations you will find a way to support his lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.

The Republicans got away with this in 1991. In 2018 and 2020 they will pay an electoral defeat of epic proportions.

You don't give a shit if he got drunk and attacked her. It's just politics.

Roger Amick said...

Scott, if despite the allegations pass the legal standard of reasonable doubt that she was sexually assaulted, the Republicans will ignore her and vote to confirm.

The reason why she was so reluctant to come forward is this:

that's how fake news media will try to spin it, but intelligent people with no predisposition to actually believe her will not be moved.

she's a liar. straight up. a fucking psycho bitch who volunteered to be a liberal tool and can't even get her bullshit straight.

"but, but, but she took a lie detector test."

did she. where's the evidence of that?

after kavanaugh is confirmed this fucking nutbag needs to be utterly destroyed.


And you will never respond with a condemnation of such behavior. Your intellectual property is deeply troubling.

rrb said...



Even if probable cause supports her allegations

a lawyer you are not.

there's a reason we have statutes of limitations. memories fade and become unreliable. but you don't care about that. you're willing to utterly destroy a man because of pure political treachery.

there's no fucking probably cause here. no one other than the psycho bitch even places him at that party. dozens have testified to his character. he's been investigated and vetted more than any nominee in history. and he claims to have not even been there. so we are to automatically believe her why, exactly?

this is just the dirtiest of dirty tricks being played entirely due to democrat desperation.

next monday the republicans on the committee need to be clear, concise, and extremely polite in their questioning. this woman can be made to look like the mentally ill pathological liar that she is if they do it right.

anyone who's intellectually honest can see what's going on here. that excludes you, alky.

rrb said...




And you will never respond with a condemnation of such behavior. Your intellectual property is deeply troubling.


start your own blog, asshole. you have what - 2, maybe 3 twitter followers? have at it. show us what you got.

maybe mail order can help you duct tape your tablet to your walker.

cowardly king obama said...

Roger Amick said... The Republicans got away with this in 1991. In 2018 and 2020 they will pay an electoral defeat of epic proportions.

You don't give a shit if he got drunk and attacked her. It's just politics.


Your own argument is all about politics and your desired political outcome. And you don't realize it.

Roger Amick said...

Scott, you will never respond with a condemnation of such behavior.

This deeply disturbed child represents the Republican party of this era.

rrb said...



Your own argument is all about politics and your desired political outcome. And you don't realize it.

LOL. it sure is. but remember, the alky has an IQ of 137.

Roger Amick said...

My walker is folded up and put away.

You don't want to go to the gym with me and try to keep up with me.

commie said...

The only issue here is whether or not Brett Kavanaugh is qualified to sit on the USSC.

What ever you say scotty....My favorite line ever was Henry Hyde whose affair when he was 37 came to light stated it was a youthful indiscretion......and all was forgiven. You do realize sexual assault at 17 is an adult with it a felony crime!!!!...Yeah, he was young and if he folds under interrogation, IMHO....he should just go away....but he won't and the elections will tell us whom to believe...Dubious or not....the public and senate are done with trump and his antics....Brett may pay the price!!! LOLOL

rrb said...



Blogger Roger Amick said...
Scott, you will never respond with a condemnation of such behavior.



alky, you fucking assclown...

the only behavior that needs to be condemned is that of the democrats and dr. cray cray. to pull this shit and to destroy a man because of nothing more than partisan politics is as low as i've ever seen a political party sink.

the shit you're pulling is nothing short of pure fucking evil.

This is about sending a warning.

Democrats are warning conservatives, and those who would appoint them, that they will do anything to derail their nominations. That includes flagrant attempts at character assassination — even if that requires throwing out unverifiable allegations from the distant past at the 11th hour.

At this point, the only real question that needs an answer is whether Republicans will reward Democrats for their craven attempts to scare highly qualified conservatives away from public service.


https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/last-minute-attack-on-kavanaugh-is-meant-as-warning-to-all-conservatives/



honest and decent people see this for what it is.

partisan hack shitstains like you, feinstein and schumer are too corrupt and dishonest.

Roger Amick said...

This is about the attempt to make drunken sexual assault by a 17 year old irrelevant.

rrb said...



You don't want to go to the gym with me and try to keep up with me.

LOL.

alky, i don't rely on narcotics and i'm still working with the liver God gave me.

keep up you say? i'm already so far out in front of you it's not even funny.

you're life is dumpster fire failure of epic proportions.



rrb said...



You do realize sexual assault at 17 is an adult with it a felony crime!!!!


not after 36 years it's not, you fucking imbecile.

that's the point. this whole thing is one elaborate fabrication to destroy a good man in the name of partisan politics.

rrb said...




btw, what's the latest on keith ellison?

now there's a sexual assault that's recent and even supported by a police report.

i haven't heard a fucking word about him in ages.

oh yeah, i keep forgetting. he's a democrat. so his sexual assaults are to be rewarded.

commie said...

not after 36 years it's not, you fucking imbecile.

Keep slurping chump....I now understand why your wife walked.....@!!!!! Learn how to read....my statement is 1000% correct...moron....

commie said...

btw, what's the latest on keith ellison?


WHO FUCKING CARES OTHER THAN YOU AND THE LOWRETTA THEY DID IT TOO ARGUMENT....ASSHOLE!!!!!

I'm sure the voters will resolve any issues with him....

Roger Amick said...

These hearings are not legal investigation. It is deeply political. If she appears to be credible the Republicans are going to face a difficult situation.

rrb said...



Blogger Roger Amick said...
These hearings are not legal investigation. It is deeply political. If she appears to be credible the Republicans are going to face a difficult situation.



which makes it even more of a travesty.

and by your own admission you're rooting for a 'heads i win, tails you lose' scenario.

dr. cray cray is a piece of shit. i hope she cashed a sizable check because she sold her soul for it.

KD said...

dr. cray cray might be a no show -"
Which version will she swear to under penalty of imprisonment?

The left are nasty people ,she has been working on this since Bret was made the nominated.

KD said...

"probable cause supports her allegations"

Give us the evidence you have this actually happened .start with the basics, time , date and how many people where there.

COMMIE said...

Our goat fucker praying that....

dr. cray cray might be a no show -"

Which version do you believe....the old white men or the assaulted white women....I know the answer!!! ASSHOLE!!

Myballs said...

She won't be credible. She remembers nothing about an alleged event. Ted Cruz will crush her in cross.

C.H. Truth said...

Roger

There is absolutely ZERO manner in which "probable cause" would be relevant, since the event happened 36 years ago. Since "probable cause" is what is determined to garner an arrest warrant or issue an indictment.

What I believe you "mean" to argue is if it can be found by the "preponderance of evidence" that he sexually assaulted her, blah, blah, blah.

But you see Roger.

There is no "evidence" at all, much less enough to create a preponderance that would upset the idea that Kavanaugh should be seen as innocent (unless proven otherwise).

While I am aware of the fact that innocent until proven guilty is a "legal" determination, it's also the manner in which most Americans see things (as well they should), especially with issues like this.


Moreover, Rat is 100% correct. We have a statute of limitations for a reason. Just like we don't allow "hearsay" in trials for a reason. Memories from 36 years ago are untrustworthy (even if someone believes them).

I got together with some buddies and went back to our hometown. We started telling stories about things that happened back when we were in High School / College when we all met and originally hung out. Everyone remembers different things. Some remembers a story one way, another remembers it slightly different. One person remembers specific people that we forgot about. Things are hazy. There is no absolute truth to which memory is correct and which is not, and there is no way to time travel to tell for sure.

Lastly, credibility doesn't even matter much when it comes to decades old memories. You could be the most credible person in the world, but have an awful long term memory. Just because you are otherwise "credible" doesn't make your memory of something more valid than someone elses.



Again... let me repeat this. Unless there is actual "evidence" that comes forth or you can absolutely show that Kavanaugh is lying... he should be confirmed.

There is no way you can create a precedent that "any" allegation (proven or otherwise) made against someone from "any time" in their life is disqualifying.

rrb said...




Give us the evidence you have this actually happened .start with the basics, time , date and how many people where there.


i'm just slightly older than kavanaugh and attended dozens of parties in high school. the drinking age was 18, and we were even abusing that law by a couple of years. of all the parties i went to i can remember only snippets from a few of them. the point being - i am in no position to accuse anyone of any behavior from that long ago. no honest person would be.

dr. cray cray is not a victim and she's not even being brave. she's a lying piece of shit being handsomely paid by someone, and i would suspect that it's her inherent mental illness that's clouding her judgement in agreeing to cooperate. in spite of the pile of $$$ she'll collect for pulling this stunt, i suspect she'll live to regret it.

Roger Amick said...

Orrin Hatch: Even if Kavanaugh committed rape ‘it would be hard for senators not to consider who he is today’

rrb said...

Ted Cruz will crush her in cross.


which is exactly what democrats are banking on. ted needs to be devastatingly gentle with this psycho. if she's even half as fucked in the head as her students portray her, she'll turn on the waterworks during her testimony and a whole lot of sympathy will commence.

and this is what the alky is banking on, btw. dr. cray cray has a meltdown and public opinion swings her way.

KD said...

Ally lost his mind. Projecting what was never thought of, yet he is faking so called qoutes.

Roger Amick said...

Orrin Hatch: Even if Kavanaugh committed rape ‘it would be hard for senators not to consider who he is today’

I don't agree with you or him. I don't always want to be judged upon my behavior at 17, although I didn't drink or use any drugs at that time.

But I am not going to be appointed to the Supreme Court. I think that you need to consider his actions at that time need to be taken into consideration that he has stated repeatedly that the events didn't happen. So even if there is a shadow of doubt he should not be allowed to make decisions that can effect the country for decades or more.

KD said...

Attacking the Black Man
"Matthew Dowd, the chief political analyst for ABC News, smeared Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas with a “sexual predator” allegation on Monday.
Doing his part to derail Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court, Dowd tweeted that America already has one “sexual predator” on the Supreme Court — meaning Thomas."

Roger Amick said...

I don't always want to be judged upon my behavior at 17, although I didn't drink or use any drugs at that time.

But I am not going to be appointed to the Supreme Court. I think that you need to consider his actions at that time need to be taken into consideration that he has stated repeatedly that the events didn't happen. So even if there is a shadow of doubt he should not be allowed to make decisions that can effect the country for decades or more.

rrb said...



Roger Amick said...
Orrin Hatch: Even if Kavanaugh committed rape ‘it would be hard for senators not to consider who he is today’



this is an absolute lie. hatch did not say that and the recording proves he did not say that.

https://thinkprogress.org/hatch-kavanaugh-allegations-7ceb942aea22/



if your case is so strong alky, why resort to lying?


KD said...

High IQ Rog. Give us your best question you would ask Bret to prove he attempted to rape her?

And what would you ask her to prove her case

C.H. Truth said...

She won't be credible. She remembers nothing about an alleged event.

This is really, really simple.

Those who "want" to believe her, already do. Even if she is the worst witness of all time, those who "want" to believe her, will still believe her.

rrb said...



even di fi's hometown newspaper thinks she's an asshole:

https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Editorial-A-disturbing-11th-hour-allegation-13230890.php

KD said...

The Democrats are scum.

Roger Amick said...

She remembers nothing about an alleged event.

Bullshit

His behavior was specifically described as holding her down, attempting to remove her bathing suit and covering her mouth to keep her from screaming.

You have chosen to believe Cavanaugh despite even if he did it as described.

You and your deep state conspiracy theories have blocked your judgment since he was elected.

I think that you need to consider his actions at that time need to be taken into consideration that he has stated repeatedly that the events didn't happen. So even if there is a shadow of doubt he should not be allowed to make decisions that can effect the country for decades or more.

KD said...

"if your case is so strong alky, why resort to lying?"

Because it is what Roger does.

rrb said...

So even if there is a shadow of doubt he should not be allowed to make decisions that can effect the country for decades or more.


which very accurately describes the game that you're playing.

"if there is a shadow of doubt"

so what you're really saying is that if you're lucky you derail his nomination, and at the very least you smear the man for life like you did clarence thomas.

democrats really are pure fucking scum.

Roger Amick said...

I fully understand why wp has said that your behavior has made this blog very worthless.

KD said...

200 women have come out publically in support of Bret Kavanauagh.

"So even if there is a shadow of doubt he should not be allowed to make decisions that can effect the country for decades or more."

Roger, shall we judge you the same?

C.H. Truth said...

But I am not going to be appointed to the Supreme Court. I think that you need to consider his actions at that time need to be taken into consideration that he has stated repeatedly that the events didn't happen.

Obviously you are not going to be appointed to the Supreme Court.

But you draw up a valid question.

What does it take to be considered and nominated to the Supreme Court? The fact of the matter is that Brett Kavanaugh has gotten to the top of his field for a variety of reasons. He has earned the universal respect of the judicial community (including liberal Justices). Even Ginsburg thinks he is being treated like mud.

In other words, Roger... Kavanaugh was nominated because he has been the best of the best. Because he has been a great judge, a great person, a great friend to people, a great family man.

He lived a life THAT EARNED HIM the opportunity to be nominated to the USSC.


But you would toss everything he did to get the point he is at. Every thing that he has done to be considered for the highest honor. Everything he has done to become as highly respected as he has become (from within and outside of the Judicial community). Everything that it would take to find 65 women from an all women's school (who knew both Kavanaugh and the accuser) and flatly show the support for Kavanaugh.

You would toss it all out...

Because a liberal activist contacted a liberal politician, then hired a liberal activist attorney, and then at the very last minute... accused him of something (WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE) that she claimed happened somewhere between 35 and 37 years ago.


Pretend for a second that this wasn't political, and that Brett Kavanaugh was your neighbor who (like everyone who knows him) you thought was a great individual, a straight shooter, and an honest religious family man. Would you support some out of the blue sexual allegation against him?

Or is it all because he is a conservative who was nominated by Trump?

KD said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rrb said...



You have chosen to believe Cavanaugh despite even if he did it as described.


no, fuckstick...

what we've chosen is to not trust the memory of either of them after 36 years, and to dismiss this claim and call it what it really is - a dirty trick to derail kavanaugh's nomination.

stop acting like you give a fuck about dr. cray cray or her claim. this is a means to an end for you assholes. nothing more, nothing less.

as long as kavanaugh get's fucked, dr. cray cray could get hit and killed by a fucking bus the very next day and you'd breathe a sigh of relief that she got him before she became road pizza.

everything about you is disingenuous. stop pretending otherwise.




rrb said...

Blogger Roger Amick said...
I fully understand why wp has said that your behavior has made this blog very worthless.



SO START YOUR OWN.


rrb said...



Would you support some out of the blue sexual allegation against him?


he would if he knew for sure his neighbor was a registered republican.

rrb said...

DNC Deputy Chair and Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison has been accused domestic abuse by former girlfriend Karen Monahan. Monahan broke her story earlier in the year, claiming to have video evidence of Ellison physically abusing her and using sexist slurs toward her.

Monahan has been slowly telling her story through Twitter, explaining how Democrats in her state attempted to silence her and “isolate” her. When a follower asked if Democrats believed her claims, Monahan said, “I’ve been smeared, threatened, isolated from my own party.”

Monahan alleges she provided medical records to back up her claims of abuse, but state Democrats did nothing: “I provided medical records from 2017, stating on two different Dr. Visits, I told them about the abuse and who did it. My therapist released records stating I have been dealing [with] and healing from the abuse.”

“I knew I wouldn’t be believed,” Monahan said of her Democratic colleagues.

https://dailycaller.com/2018/09/17/woman-accusing-dnc-chair-isolated/



so this year old claim is not to be believed, yet a claim from 36 years ago is.

hypocrisy. bedrock. liberalism.

rrb said...




"The problem is that if Kavanaugh is confirmed, a (likely vocal) segment of the public will forever accuse him of committing sexual assault and getting away with it — and if Ford is telling the truth, he did. If Kavanaugh is rejected, it means an accuser can come forward after 36 years, with no evidence beyond her own account, and not able to remember key details, and ruin the life and career of a man."

—Jim Geraghty

KD said...

The above describes today's Socialist Democrats.

Waiting on Roger to post evidence that is supported by a witness or physical evidence.

KD said...

President Trump's leadership on the Hurricane has silenced the Socialist Democrats.

Commonsense said...

Christine Ford and her lawyer haven't RSVP the senate's invitation to testify before the judiciary committee.

Looking more amd more like CH is right. If she refuses to show up, it will speak voliums.

Roger Amick said...

She is not helping her cause.

"The woman who has accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her decades ago has not yet confirmed her appearance at a public hearing the GOP is planning next week, a top Republican senator said Tuesday.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said that his staff has reached out to Christine Blasey Ford’s camp several times since the California-based professor came forward with her story of a high-school-era assault by President Donald Trump’s high court pick. Although Ford’s lawyer said that her client would be open to “a fair proceeding,” it remains unclear whether she would agree to a planned hearing on Sept. 24 that Republicans have set up to help save Kavanaugh’s nomination."

Politico

C.H. Truth said...

Hmmmmm...

Does anyone else see the workings of a "stall" tactic here. She will claim that she needs more time. The Democrats will demand that things need to wait on her. Tick tock, tick tock.

rrb said...




Waiting on Roger to post evidence that is supported by a witness or physical evidence.

and the point is... that's no longer required.

think about it - pick a politician you don't like. in my case it would be chuck schumer. schumer served in the NYS Assembly from 1975 to 1981. i suppose someone who was around albany at the time could write a letter to say, mitch mcconnell, and make a series of allegations against schumer that occured say, around 38 years ago, accusing schumer of sexual harassment, let the accuser be a male for added homosexual effect.

by the rules of today's game the accuser would automatically be believed, and the burden of proof would be on schumer to disprove the allegation.


rrb said...


Blogger C.H. Truth said...
Hmmmmm...

Does anyone else see the workings of a "stall" tactic here. She will claim that she needs more time. The Democrats will demand that things need to wait on her. Tick tock, tick tock.



absolutely. crazie mazie hirono has already stated that a USSC vacancy for up to two years would be just fine.


cowardly king obama said...

OT except to address Rogers Blue wave comment there is a poll out today by Monmouth polling California's 39th District - Kim vs. Cisneros with the Republican Kim up by 10 points. This is a district Cook has as leans Democratic (Brea, Fullerton, Yorba Linda) and voted for Hillary 52-42. Currently represented by a retiring Republican it's one of the seats Democrats are counting on flipping.... Early and hard to poll accurately but also not inline with the blue wave narrative... California also has a gas tax increase repeal on the ballot which could really help Republican turnout as they are supporting it and Brown is actively opposed.

Also the latest Cruz/Beto poll (Quinnipiac today) has Cruz up 9.... I'm still saying double digits for sure in November...

Back to on-topic discussions and the last gasp Democrats antics while trying to ignore Ellison's accuser who has real substantive proof...

rrb said...


Blogger Roger Amick said...

She is not helping her cause.



she's not helping women's causes in general.

except for the hyper-partisan, most people are looking at this claim and calling bullshit. she can't remember most of what happened, what she does claim to remember has changed multiple times, and now she's reluctant to testify?

you guys had better hope this gambit works alky. and that roe v. wade is really worth it, because that's also what this is really all about. the singular blessed sacrament of liberalism - abortion.

caliphate4vr said...

Does anyone else see the workings of a "stall" tactic here. She will claim that she needs more time. The Democrats will demand that things need to wait on her. Tick tock, tick tock.

Exactly, the donks say no vote without an investigation and no investigation is possible

It smells of desperation

commie said...

it smells of desperation

Especially for Jowls Mcconnell and jamming this through before the election!!!!!!

commie said...

Monmouth polling California's 39th District - Kim vs. Cisneros with the Republican Kim up by 10 points.

And deservedly so...Cisnero's claim to fame is being a lottery winner while kim has creds ....about as qualified as you to be elected...Shows that individual races can be very interesting with very different outcomes...But, you get an A for effort but not a national trend much to your chagrin....

Roger Amick said...

I have a problem with not believing her accusations. A dear friend of mine who I have known since she was a child.

She was deeply troubled for many years. Drug dealing and abuse.

Twenty years later she got help and is successful. But our neighbor was a police officer who abused her for seven years.

She remembers it from she was 10.

Roger Amick said...

Bloomberg News’ Laura Litvan reports that Hatch was then asked how he would feel about Kavanaugh’s nomination if it turned out that the allegations were true, and Hatch replied that “if that were true, I think it would be hard for senators not to consider who he is today.”

commie said...

This will be fun 30 days before midterms....a memoir stormy daniels on how little trumps dick really is....


The tell-all book will come out a little over a month before the crucial Nov. 6 congressional elections. Democrats are seeking to take back control of one or both houses of Congress from Trump's Republican Party, a move that would imperil the president's legislative agenda and launch new oversight of his administration.

rrb said...




Blogger Roger Amick said...

I have a problem with not believing her accusations. A dear friend of mine who I have known since she was a child.



a poignant tale, alky. and if that's the basis for you believing dr. cray cray, you have the judgement of a 5 year old.

your dear friend has nothing at all to do with kavanaugh or dr. cray cray.

rrb said...


Blogger Roger Amick said...
Bloomberg News’ Laura Litvan reports that Hatch was then asked how he would feel about Kavanaugh’s nomination if it turned out that the allegations were true, and Hatch replied that “if that were true, I think it would be hard for senators not to consider who he is today.”



stop telling this lie, alky.

i gave you the link with the audio. hatch said nothing of the sort.

rrb said...




so denny, you seem to be infatuated with rectums and trump's penis.

methinks you're a pillow biter.

rrb said...




the latest alky lie comes to us via "raw story" and "democrat underground."

caliphate4vr said...

It’s the left’s MO just as what happened to Roy Moore in Bama, bring forth dubious accusations and proclaim them as fact

commie said...

what happened to Roy Moore in Bama,

Shouldn't you be on your salesman vacation and drinking???? Seattle must be boring or rainy....

commie said...

so denny, you seem to be infatuated with rectums and trump's penis.

Some call it obsessed, little jimmy!!!....I just try to express what others don't....especially for dirt bags like you who have trouble with reading comprehension.....You do seem to understand the language I choose....asshole

caliphate4vr said...

Shouldn’t a morbidly obese diabetic with plastic hips quite eating pies?

Fatty flew in the right seat of the Dehavalland Otter on the trip from Seattle to Roche Harbor and you were just trolling

It must suck to have no life like you

commie said...

Fatty flew in the right seat of the Dehavalland Otter

BIG FUCKING YAWN!!!!! Very old airplane with a big radial engine....Must be great having delusions of grandeur as you think a vacation you won matters....LOLOLOL!!! Keep drinking...it becomes you...asshole

Roger Amick said...

President Trump "we will see what happens".

caliphate4vr said...

Oh great aerospace expert the Beaver is a radial the otter is turboprop

LMAO