It's now being reported (by none other than the NY Times) that the FBI will be done with their updated background check by tomorrow. This will come as a shock to many and will likely trigger more foot stomping temper tantrums from the left.
Given the fact that the FBI was given permission to "expand" their investigation into the allegations of Ramirez and Swetnick, and to interview anyone they believe to be relevant, it should be hard to demand that they didn't cover all the bases. Of course, that won't stop the rabid left from objecting. Look for a whole lot of screaming and hollering that the FBI didn't do enough to investigate the exact amount of beer Judge Kavanaugh drank in college, or hire a historian familiar with early 80's yearbook jargon to decipher the secret year book messages.
The problem with all three of these allegations is that there are a very limited amount of people who are confirmed witnesses to these events. They have already interviewed everyone associated with the Professor Ford allegation. They interviewed Ramirez over the weekend, and may or may not feel her statements are worth much follow up. Considering she provides no witnesses to corroborate (and likely the FBI is not interested in hearsay witnesses from 35 years ago), who is it that the FBI is supposed to interview?
As has been pointed out, the Swetnick story has changed from what she first told Avenatti and what she stated during her television interview. In fact, according to what she stated in her interview there are no actual allegations of much of anything surrounding Judge Kavanaugh, other than the allegation that he occasionally congregated near doorways, gave plastic beverage cups to other people, and was occasionally "handsy" with women. Moreover, NBC was unable to find a single witness that corroborated her story in spite of her providing six names. Of course, three of those corroborating witnesses are dead, two are not bothering to return the NBC phone calls, and the sixth stated she had no idea who Swetnick even was.
So we have the three accusers, three witnesses named by Ford, a handful of witnesses suggested by Ramirez, and three living witnesses named by Swetnick. We may only be looking at nine or ten overall witnesses. Even if there was follow up to these, chances are good these would be very limited. Bottom line: There are likely many many more FBI agents on the case, than potential witnesses. So in some regards, it's hard to imagine why it took as long as it did.
Flake, Collins, Murkowski, Manchin and others suggested that they needed to hear from the FBI regarding the sexual allegations against Kavanaugh before making a decision. None of them have suggested they care one way or the other about whether he ever got drunk in high school or college, or what he may have written in a high school year book. The FBI report should satisfy these fence sitters, and there is literally no reason "not" to have a vote by Friday.
83 comments:
Ford's team is complaining that the FBI didn't contact them. Which problably says volumes about her credibility.
Bottom line, they heard enough from her testimony and felt she had nothing useful to add.
And her story didn't check out.
Kavanaugh Letter Admits He and His Friends Were Drunks
7:45 pm EDT
New York Times:
“The beachfront property was rented, the guests were invited and an ever-organized Brett Kavanaugh had some advice for the seven Georgetown Preparatory School classmates who would be joining him for the weeklong escapade.
“In a 1983 letter, a copy of which was reviewed by The New York Times, the young Judge Kavanaugh warned his friends of the danger of eviction from an Ocean City, Md., condo. In a neatly written postscript, he added: Whoever arrived first at the condo should ‘warn the neighbors that we’re loud, obnoxious drunks with prolific pukers among us. Advise them to go about 30 miles…'”
Report this ad
FBI Won’t Investigate Possible Kavanaugh Perjury
“The FBI has been granted broader authority to investigate sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, but isn’t doing its own deep dive into his alcohol use or whether he committed perjury when he testified last week,” Bloomberg reports.
“The limits that remain on the investigation are significant because some Democrats and others opposed to Kavanaugh contend there are red flags in terms of whether he was honest in his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee.”
“We can’t have that on the Court.”
— Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), quoted by The Atlantic, after calling Brett Kavanaugh’s interactions with senators “sharp and partisan.”
“The Republican Party is the president’s party right now. But it won’t always be. And it can’t be if we’re going to be a major political force in the future.”
— Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), quoted by the Washington Post.
Kavanaugh Made the Case to Vote Against Him
Benjamin Wittes:
“These are words I write with no pleasure, but with deep sadness. Unlike many people who will read them with glee—as validating preexisting political, philosophical, or jurisprudential opposition to Kavanaugh’s nomination—I have no hostility to or particular fear of conservative jurisprudence. I have a long relationship with Kavanaugh and I have always liked him. I have admired his career on the D.C. Circuit. I have spoken warmly of him. I have published him. I have vouched publicly for his character—more than once—and taken a fair bit of heat for doing so.
“Despite all of that, if I were a senator, I would vote against Kavanaugh’s confirmation. I would do it both because of Ford’s testimony and because of Kavanaugh’s. For reasons I will describe, I find her account more believable than his. I would also do it because whatever the truth of what happened in the summer of 1982, Thursday’s hearing left Kavanaugh non-viable as a justice.”
Anti-Kavanaugh protesters accosting senators have ties to Soros
Well he pays antifa as well so what did you expect? The party of scumballs.
Senator Coons says agreeing to an FBI investigation meant that Democrats had to accept possibility that Kavanaugh could be cleared.
Have the vote then each senator can explain their vote to their constituents.
Two former Yale classmates withdraw support for Kavanaugh
1 hr ago
A pair of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's former classmates at Yale Law on Tuesday withdrew their support of him after previously endorsements.
Michael Proctor and Mark Osler wrote in a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and ranking member Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) that they can no longer support Kavanaugh's confirmation because of the "nature" of his testimonty in front of the committee last week while addressing accusations of sexual misconduct.
"In our view that testimony was partisan, and not judicious, and inconsistent with what we expect from a Justice of the Supreme Court, particularly dealing with a co-equal branch of government," they wrote.
They added that their decision to withdraw their support was not based on the allegations made by Christine Blasey Ford, who has said that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her in high school.
Or in Flake's case explain his vote to his doners.
He's going for the kind of doners that will give to more principled candidates in a saner republican party
Looks like Trump has tax woes
politicalwire.com
The Numbers On Kavanaugh Are In And They’re A Disaster For Democrats
A majority of voters supports the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court if the FBI finds no corroborating evidence to back up claims of sexual assault made against the nominee, according to a Monday poll.
Following Thursday’s testimonies from Kavanaugh and his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, 60 percent of voters are in favor of confirming the judge to the nation’s highest court if no supporting evidence of sexual assault turns up, according to a Harvard University September 2018 Center for American Politics (CAPS) Harris Poll.
Three quarters of voters said California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein should have given the letter from Ford — in which she alleged the judge assaulted her — to the Senate Judiciary Committee when she first received it in July instead of holding it until the middle of Kavanaugh’s confirmation process.
Most voters were strongly displeased with the Kavanaugh confirmation process, saying it was “politicized and mishandled.” Sixty-nine percent of voters called the process a “national disgrace,” according to the poll.
Collins is now supporting McConnell moving ahead for the vote.
Anyone seen Jane Today?
IF the delays after
Delay,
Lie, after lie
Smear after smear
By the socialist
Does not turn on the Conservative voter I don't know what can.
Socialism must be defeated.
Trump is mocking Christina Blasey Ford at tonight's rally (however everything he said about her testimony is factually true). Convention wisdom would say this is a very bad political move as it will alienate "women" (for the life of me I can't understand why C.W. says women must be loyal to each other because they share the same set of internal plumbing).
However Trump has an uncanny instinct to go for the juggler when he precieves weakness in an opponent. Before and during Ford's testimony Trump held his fire now he mocking her. Why?
1. Well it was certainly popular with his supporter at the rally and a suspect his supporters overall. I don't think these people were willing to just believe her. I think they were deeply suspicious of her from the beginning especially when her story was so vague that it couldn't be coorborated.
2. However it may be due to a couple stories flying around the internet that if true would destroy Ford's credibility. The first one is the home improvement that Ford said was the trigger to her first marriage counsoling session happen more than two years before her first session. This was confirmed through a review of building permits for the improvements on their Palo Alto house.
The second more damaging one is that Ford testified under oath that she never coach, give advise, or give any tip to people taking a polygraph test. The Judiciary Committee has in it's possession a written statement in which he said she coach people on how to take a polygraph test. In addition, he also said that while he knew her she showed no fear of flying or being in any tight places.
Both statements are under oath or subject to feloney lying to Congress. If
Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.
CH: "... there is literally no reason "not" to have a vote by Friday."
HERE'S A REAON:
GOP Coy on Final Kavanaugh Vote
The Hill:
“GOP leadership wants to take up the nomination by the end of the week, and senators say they have been told to be ‘on call’ to vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination during a rare weekend session. But they’ve been wary of publicly locking down a timetable for floor action — beyond saying a vote will take place ‘this week.‘
”A specific timing plan could spook swing votes and/or look like they are rushing the FBI to wrap up its ongoing investigation on Kavanaugh.”
SORRY, CH, BUT---
FBI Expands Interviews In Kavanaugh Probe
10:54 pm EDT
Washington Post:
“On Tuesday, the FBI moved beyond those initial four people, interviewing Tim Gaudette, a Georgetown Preparatory School classmate of Kavanaugh. Gaudette’s attorney, Kenneth Eichner, said an FBI interview took place but declined to comment further. Gaudette’s home was the site of a July 1, 1982, party that Kavanaugh references on his calendar and has become the focus of lawmakers’ concerns.
“FBI agents have also interviewed Mark Judge, a key Kavanaugh high school friend who has denied any knowledge of a teenage gathering like the one described by Kavanaugh’s first accuser.
”Another friend from Kavanaugh’s high school days, Chris Garrett, has also completed an FBI interview.
Josh Marshall makes a pretty good case that Garrett is a key person in this story.
Thanks for all your "advise" "pastor". You've been consistently wrong or is it just fucking lies?
Did you see the poll saying Democrats are getting killed on this?
Quite different than what you were spamming from political lire.
So thanks but no thanks.
ROFLMFAO !!!
Guess that should be political liar.com
ROFLMFAO!!!
The Midnight Massacre
The self made man
Mr. Trump won the presidency proclaiming himself a self-made billionaire, and he has long insisted that his father, the legendary New York City builder Fred C. Trump, provided almost no financial help.
But The Times’s investigation, based on a vast trove of confidential tax returns and financial records, reveals that Mr. Trump received the equivalent today of at least $413 million from his father’s real estate empire, starting when he was a toddler and continuing to this day.
Much of this money came to Mr. Trump because he helped his parents dodge taxes. He and his siblings set up a sham corporation to disguise millions of dollars in gifts from their parents, records and interviews show. Records indicate that Mr. Trump helped his father take improper tax deductions worth millions more. He also helped formulate a strategy to undervalue his parents’ real estate holdings by hundreds of millions of dollars on tax returns, sharply reducing the tax bill when those properties were transferred to him and his siblings.
The FBI can investigate this but you wouldn't have to hold up the confirmation for it:
Christine Blasey Ford ex-boyfriend says she helped friend prep for potential polygraph; Grassley sounds alarm
In a written declaration released Tuesday and obtained by Fox News, an ex-boyfriend of Christine Blasey Ford, the California professor accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault, directly contradicts her testimony under oath last week that she had never helped anyone prepare for a polygraph examination.
The former boyfriend, whose name was redacted in the declaration, also said Ford neither mentioned Kavanaugh nor mentioned she was a victim of sexual misconduct during the time they were dating from about 1992 to 1998. He said he saw Ford going to great lengths to help a woman he believed was her "life-long best friend" prepare for a potential polygraph test. He added that the woman had been interviewing for jobs with the FBI and U.S. Attorney's office.
He further claimed that Ford never voiced any fear of flying (even while aboard a propeller plane) and seemingly had no problem living in a "very small," 500 sq. ft. apartment with one door -- apparently contradicting her claims that she could not testify promptly in D.C. because she felt uncomfortable traveling on planes, as well as her suggestion that her memories of Kavanuagh's alleged assault prompted her to feel unsafe living in a closed space or one without a second front door.
Ford "never expressed a fear of closed quarters, tight spaces, or places with only one exit," the former boyfriend wrote.
However, on Thursday, Ford testified, "I was hoping to avoid getting on an airplane. But I eventually was able to get up the gumption with the help of some friends and get on the plane." She also acknowledged regularly -- and, in her words, "unfortunately" -- traveling on planes for work and hobbies.
And Ford explicitly told Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., on Thursday that she had a second front door installed in her home because of "anxiety, phobia and PTSD-like symptoms" that she purportedly suffered in the wake of Kavanaugh's alleged attack at a house party in the 1980s -- "more especially, claustrophobia, panic and that type of thing."
In a pointed, no-holds-barred letter Tuesday evening that referenced the ex-boyfriend's declaration, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley demanded that attorneys for Ford turn over her therapist notes and other key materials, and suggested she was intentionally less than truthful about her experience with polygraph examinations during Thursday's dramatic Senate hearing.
"Your continued withholding of material evidence despite multiple requests is unacceptable as the Senate exercises its constitutional responsibility of advice and consent for a judicial nomination," Grassley, R-Iowa, wrote.
Under questioning from experienced sex-crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell last week, Ford said that she had "never" had "any discussions with anyone ... on how to take a polygraph" or "given any tips or advice to anyone who was looking to take a polygraph test." She repeatedly said the process was stressful and uncomfortable.
Alky what is the phone number and name of your lawyer? I'd like to talk with her/him.
TY.
FDR progressive damage still felt today.
The heart of undermining American labor.
"The Bracero Program grew out of a series of bi-lateral agreements between Mexico and the United States that allowed millions of Mexican men to come to the United States to work on, short-term, primarily agricultural labor contracts. From 1942 to 1964,"
Shocking the New York Times discovers 17 year-old boys engaged in a conspiracy to commit partying.
Anyone want to venture a guess to the author of this little passage?????
In a neatly written postscript, he added: Whoever arrived first at the condo should “warn the neighbors that we’re loud, obnoxious drunks with prolific pukers among us. Advise them to go about 30 miles...”
17 year old boys....asshole on a mission of illegal drinking and debauchery.......asshole
FBI can investigate this but you wouldn't have to hold up the confirmation for it:
And they also can investigate if pigs fly!!!! What a crock of contrived desperate BS.....
There's a sworn statement that directly contradicts her testimoney under oath. That is neither contrived or a crock but it's definitely a subject for an investigation.
Who knew Dennis was such a Puritain. Almost like he wants to shove his cultish morality down everybody's throat.
Who knew Dennis was such a Puritan
And I always knew you to be a moronic cultist who thinks women as objects of procreation only......asshole''
Puritan....LOLOLOL...NY drinking age in HS was 18 and ID's were easy to get, you should post things you know about, like GW is a hoax....idiot
He and his siblings set up a sham corporation to disguise millions of dollars in gifts from their parents, records and interviews show. Records indicate that Mr. Trump helped his father take improper tax deductions worth millions more. He also helped formulate a strategy to undervalue his parents’ real estate holdings by hundreds of millions of dollars on tax returns, sharply reducing the tax bill when those properties were transferred to him and his siblings.
"disguise"
"improper"
nice hit piece alky.
you know the word that's conspicuous in its absence?
"ILLEGAL."
you know... the only word that really matters.
hack, hack, hack...
To expand on the hack's quote, when it comes to tax law "improper" is a matter of opinion and not a very informed opinion at that.
This was a hit job and the Times didn't even bother to hide it.
To the idiot Dennis.
if you locked of every kid who used a fake ID to get beer the jails would be overflowing.
Good God. Did you ever have a life??
it comes to tax law "improper" is a matter of opinion
Opinion from the tax lawyer's of cramps and rectum......too funny!!! Wonder when those audited tax returns will be made available???? My guess is when congress investigates trump...
Revealing private financial information with out due process is the grosses violation of trust between the government and it's citizens.
And it doesn't matter whether it is a humble shop keeper or the president of the United States.
October 2, 2018 The Honorable Charles E. Grassley Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate 224 Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 The Honorable Dianne Feinstein Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate 152 Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Re: Nomination of Brett M. Kavanaugh for United States Supreme Court Prior letter of August 27, 2018, from some members of Yale Law School Class of 1990 Dear Chairman Grassley and Senator Feinstein: On August 27, 2018, a letter was transmitted to you in support of the confirmation of Judge Brett
M. Kavanaugh’s
appointment to the United States Supreme Court. The letter was signed by twenty-
three classmates of Judge Kavanaugh’s at Yale Law School, including
us. We identified ourselves as a bipartisan group of supporters who have had our ideological difference over the years with Judge Kavanaugh, but who nevertheless supported his confirmation. The letter relied on, among other
things, Judge Kavanaugh’s “exemplary judicial temperament.” It emphasized Judge Kavanaugh’s
lack of partisanship, his fair-mindedness and reasonableness, and his collegiality. And it emphasized that the signatories also knew Judge Kavanaugh as a friend. Since that letter was submitted, the Committee held a hearing on Thursday, September 27, 2018, in which both Judge Kavanaugh and Professor Christine Blasey Ford testified. The allegations are currently being investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and we will not comment on them here. However, having watched those hearings, it gives us no pleasure to advise you that we must withdraw our
support for that letter and Judge Kavanaugh’s
confirmation. The reason for our withdrawal is not the truth or falsity of Dr.
Ford’s allegations, which are still
being investigated, but rather was
the nature of Judge Kavanaugh’s testimon
y. In our view that testimony was partisan, and not judicious, and inconsistent with what we expect from a Justice of the Supreme Court, particularly when dealing with a co-equal branch of government. This is not a judgment on Brett Kavanaugh as a human being. It is, rather, a conclusion rooted in what is institutionally required from a Supreme Court Justice. In our democracy, the legitimacy of our Supreme Court arises from the confidence Americans have that it deliberates and decides cases based not on partisanship, but based on principles. Judge Kavanaugh, earlier in the confirmation
process, observed that “t
he Supreme Court must never be viewed as a partisan institution.
”
He was right. Under the current circumstances, we
fear that partisanship has injected itself into Judge Kavanaugh’s
candidacy. That, and the lack of judicial temperament displayed on September 27 hearing, cause us to withdraw our support.
It was illegal.
But the statute of limitations doesn't allow charges to be filed.
Revealing private financial information with out due process is the grosses violation
Unless you are POTUS and promised to release them like every modern POTUS has done??? Think he is hiding his charitable work or how many loopholes he took?????? Idiot
How any women other than a rabid cultists wife. can support this asshole just defies any explanation...
Trump mocks Kavanaugh accuser at Mississippi rally
President Trump, in a riff that has been dreaded by White House and Senate aides, attacked the story of Christine Blasey Ford at length — drawing laughs. It was his strongest attack of the testimony of Ford, who has accused Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh of sexual assault.
Coward scum flake is a NO Vote.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
It was illegal.
But the statute of limitations doesn't allow charges to be filed.
if what you say is true it should have been reported as such.
but it wasn't.
so i'll remain convinced that you - and the ny times - are full of shit... again.
my only question is - why does intellectual honesty remain so elusive for you folks?
i mean, if it was illegal then, they should have said so. if trump avoided criminal consequences because of the statute of limitations, they should've said so. instead we get weasel words like - "disguise" and "improper." i suppose the times should change their motto to: "all the innuendo that's fit to print" because that's all they do these days.
that was a feature piece, alky. a lot of time and effort was put into that pile of shit. those who hate trump will be fortified. everyone else will see it for what it is - baseless claims to smear the president.
you got one thing going for you though - NYS tax and finance was stupid enough to fall for it. so a significant pile of my tax dollars will be set ablaze for nothing as part of an "investigation."
The Dairy Farmers love the Trump Trade deal.
So does the UAW.
Funny how our chickenshit anonymous poster from kansas calls a brave senator scum......you should have such intestinal fortitude, asshole....
The Dairy Farmers love the Trump Trade deal.
I haven't seen that reaction asshole.....They get a minuscule opening in canada.....and its the automakers who see benefit since the agreement will not move work back to the US and not cause them any angst....IOW'a status quo
Thomas Friedman nails it.
In essence, we’ve moved from “partisanship,” which still allowed for political compromises in the end, “to tribalism,” which does not, explained political scientist Norman Ornstein, co-author, with Thomas Mann, of the book “It’s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremism.” In a tribal world it’s rule or die, compromise is a sin, enemies must be crushed and power must be held at all costs.
It would be easy to blame both sides equally for this shift, noted Ornstein, but it is just not true. After the end of the Cold War, he said, “tribal politics were introduced by Newt Gingrich when he came to Congress 40 years ago,” and then perfected by Mitch McConnell during the Barack Obama presidency, when McConnell declared his intention to use his G.O.P. Senate caucus to make Obama fail as a strategy for getting Republicans back in power.
They did this even though that meant scuttling Obama’s health care plan, which was based on Republican ideas, and even though that meant scuttling long-held G.O.P. principles — like fiscal discipline, a strong Atlantic alliance, distrust of Russian intentions and a balanced approach to immigration — to attract Trump’s base.
Flake, the departing Arizona Republican, called this out this week: “We Republicans have given in to the terrible tribal impulse that first mistakes our opponents for our enemies. And then we become seized with the conviction that we must destroy that enemy.”
The shift in the G.O.P. to tribalism culminated with McConnell denying Obama his constitutional right to appoint a Supreme Court justice with almost a year left in Obama’s term. As NPR reported: “Supreme Court picks have often been controversial. There have been contentious hearings and floor debates and contested votes. But to ignore the nominee entirely, as if no vacancy existed? There was no precedent for such an action since the period around the Civil War.”
The American Civil War, Part II https://nyti.ms/2NZzGYI
I suspect that the ABA will not support Kavanaugh. They may even come out against his nomination. That's his peers. From all sides .
Don't see love mentioned in this piece on new trade deal....jag off goat fucker...
Dairy farmers are hopeful that the new U.S. trade deal with Mexico and Canada may help alleviate some of the pain they've experienced the last few years as the price of milk has cratered, threatening their livelihoods.
The overhaul of NAFTA, now dubbed USMCA for the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, aims to end discriminatory pricing and limit Canadian policies regarding its dairy powder exports. U.S. dairy farmers claim those policies have
One common theme is that anything that shows that the President has committed crimes in the past is prejudicial reporting. rrb would gladly support legislation or an executive order directing that any reporting negative statements about the President are a threat to national security and therefore cannot be printed or withdrawn upon the threat of prosecution.
For those unable to get the point the first time.
"
KDOctober 3, 2018 at 7:27 AM
Coward scum flake is a NO Vote.
Lol, Denise, because you don't see the positive reaction by the US Dairy Farmers. Does not mean it is not happening. I have posted 5 positive Dairy Farmers stories.
UAW is pleased that they have a pro-union pro-blue collar President.
After the Lost years.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
One common theme is that anything that shows that the President has committed crimes in the past is prejudicial reporting.
this is what i was referring to when i asked -
why does intellectual honesty remain so elusive for you folks?
the times showed no evidence of CRIMES. "disguise?" not a crime. "improper?" not a crime.
the only thing that was missing in that entire piece was ACTUAL EVIDENCE OF A FUCKING CRIME.
like dan rather would say - "other than that the story was accurate."
you fail on the fundamental logic, and as usual your only retort is fucktarded nonsense like this:
rrb would gladly support legislation or an executive order directing that any reporting negative statements about the President are a threat to national security and therefore cannot be printed or withdrawn upon the threat of prosecution.
publish some facts for a change, alky. the bar is not set that high. not only are you intellectually dishonest, you're incredible intellectually lazy.
the only thing you consistently "prove" around here is that your repeated claims to possess an IQ of 137 has always been a total and complete LIE.
Unless you are POTUS and promised to release them like every modern POTUS has done???
Just because some presidential candidates have release their tax returns doesn't mean all candidates have to release them. It is strictly voluntary on their part.
Just like college transcripts. While Obama was only to happy to release his tax returns he wasn't so forth coming about his college transcripts.
It's his right not to release them. The voter in turn get to weigh that willingness or unwillingness to release them and in Trump's case they didn't think it was all that important.
I do find it amusing that the Democrats would so willingly set aside the right to privacy for not very much political advantage.
DFA whole heartedly supports the Trump-Canada Fairy Agreement . Why?
Simply put. They have been in on the entire negotiations. They gave a wish list to the President. He delivered.
Why didn't The One get this done during The Lost Years?
Blogger Roger Amick said...
Thomas Friedman nails it.
yeah... he loves totalitarian regimes -
One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century.
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/opinion/09friedman.html
the "enlightened" can "impose."
alky, there's a reason there's a tom friedman column generator available on line to mock him. he's an imbecile who married well and who passes himself off as an intellectual.
kinda like you without the marrying well part.
http://thomasfriedmanopedgenerator.com/about.php
Roger "Touchdown Denver"
Ok, up by 10 pts. Alky calls it, Denver in a landslide.
Only one problem, final score Chiefs 27 alkys team 23.
LOL -
STEALTH JEFF
@drawandstrike
Follow Follow @drawandstrike
More
Today the ranking member on the Democratic side of the Senate Judiciary Committee Sen. Dianne Feinstein [D-Politcal Smear] demanded the results of the FBI investigation she & other Democrats insisted upon be sealed & kept confidential so the public never ever sees the results.
8:55 PM - 2 Oct 2018
1,239 Retweets 1,868 Likes FlatteryMayGetYouSomewhereThe Truth BombB-radTruth4Allbam-bamkate hendersonMike SullivanEmX2Betty S Smith MAGA
157 replies 1,239 retweets 1,868 likes
Reply 157 Retweet 1.2K Like 1.9K
https://twitter.com/drawandstrike/status/1047334262612144128
If Roger is going to use the "appeal to authority" logical fallacy you would think he would pick better authorities.
You didn't deny what I said about you.
Maybe because it's so absurdly stupid on it's face it's not worth responding to.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
You didn't deny what I said about you.
you talking to me, alky?
let me put it to you this way -
i've spent a lifetime "not denying" what some people have said about me. and the reason is simple... what they and you have had to say is so patently false and ludicrous it's not worthy of a refutation.
you stumble around on this blog constantly copy/pasting some of the most inaccurate and inane falsehoods available from the press on any given day. for example, and i'm surprised you haven't picked up on this one; trump was "mocking" ford last night. now, nothing could be further from the truth, as anyone who actually saw or heard the speech will testify, but it hasn't kept the usual journOlist assholes from repeating the lie.
here's part of a piece that coincidentally nails the press, and in turn those who blindly copy/paste them, for their blatant bias and intellectual dishonesty:
I could go on for pages about all of this, but here’s the point: On nearly every question and issue, the tenor of the press — shockingly — mirrors the tenor of the Democrats who insist that it falls to Kavanaugh to disprove these allegations. That is an understandable (albeit morally grotesque) position for partisan Democrats who’ve made it clear they will do whatever it takes, again, as Chuck Schumer admitted, to block Kavanaugh.
But that’s not your job, you supposedly objective journalists. You should care every bit as much about disproving the allegations of Swetnick, Ramirez, and — yes — Ford as proving them. Your job — as you’ve said countless times, preening in your heroic martyr status in the age of Trump — is to report the facts. If Swetnick is lying, you should want to report that every bit as much as you would if you could prove that Kavanaugh is. Because you’re not supposed to have a team. It’s fine if you support the #MeToo movement in your private time, but you’re not supposed to lend any movement aid and comfort, never mind air cover, in your reporting.
Now, I get that most journalists are liberal, even if they deny it. I understand that most think they’re just seeking the truth. But, dear champions of the Fourth Estate, you might take just a moment to understand that you need to be fair to the other side of the argument even if you disagree with it.
You might also consider why millions of people love it when Trump says you are the enemy of the people: It’s because of how you are behaving right now. You’re letting the mask slip in Nielsen-monitored 15-minute blocks of virtue-signaling partisanship. You’re burning credibility at such a rate, you won’t have enough to get back to base when this is all over.
Yes, Donald Trump has done the country a disservice by how he talks about the press. But so have you, because you have made it so easy for him — and you’re making it worse right now.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/kavanaugh-hearings-partisan-reporters-making-it-worse/
since yesterday it has been revealed that ford lied through her fucking crooked and yellow teeth. about virtually everything. the polygraph, the 2nd door, fear of flying... the lies are fucking legion. why is that not front page ny times, amazon post, MSDNC, CNN, etc.???
you know why. and never trumper goldberg lays it out quite well.
so back to your original question - i don't deny your claims because you just don't fucking matter. you're not serious, you're not honest, and you can't formulate a thought without the coaching and content of others. people like you are not and never will be worthy of serious consideration. so there you go.
FBI found no need to interview Dr. Cray Cray. She has been repeatedly "heard" . Her problem is she had nada to say of value.
Well Done RRB.
Blogger KD said...
FBI found no need to interview Dr. Cray Cray. She has been repeatedly "heard" . Her problem is she had nada to say of value.
oh it had value all right. it's value as evidence of wildly blatant perjury. whether or not "she" believed it is beside the point. she'll be lucky not to end up in a facility for the criminally insane...
...unless of course it was all an act to begin with. then a standard women's prison will work just fine.
From a self proclaimed racist is meaningless.
Amusing, Rat's rant.
She is welcomed to check in at :
1300 Metropolitan Ave, Leavenworth, KS 66048
Alky why have you not posted your lawyers name and phone number?
I really want to talk him\her.
Oh psa , today you may get a text from President Trump. He wants you to know he cares about you.
Fred Trump was a Queens-based developer who made a fortune building drab but serviceable low-rise apartment blocks for a fast-growing city. When Donald Trump tells the story of his own origins in business, he often emphasizes that he was a self-made man — who didn’t need, or get, much help from his father.
“My father gave me a very small loan in 1975, and I built it into a company that’s worth many, many billions of dollars,” Trump said during a 2016 presidential debate.
The Times story says that account is false — that, in reality, Fred Trump spent decades quietly ceding his fortune and his business empire to his son, in ways that seemed designed to avoid taxes on gifts and inheritance.
KD said...
She is welcomed to check in at :
1300 Metropolitan Ave, Leavenworth, KS 66048
My client requires a cell with 2 doors and time to drive there and a guaranty she will be safe.
short version:
dad fred trump made money.
son donald trump inherited dad fred trump's money.
we at the ny times hate donald trump.
donald trump's inheritance is illegal because "resistance."
there's probably an algorithm out there that can boil down any 15,000 word ny times hit piece to 10 short sentences or less. this one was just easy.
$57,600,000 additional dollars flowing from Cananda to US Dairy Farmers.
Can't the fucking POS "pastor" ever keep on topic and not spam?
Rhetorical question
This is going to be a VERY PAINFUL WEEK for him, and just think, he sold his soul for this.
ROFLMFAO !!!
Pres. Trump used the tax fantasy story to teach about the basic financial principle of "TVM".
Time value of money (TVM) is the idea that money that is available at the present time is worth more than the same amount in the future, due to its potential earning capacity. This core principle of finance holds that providedmoney can earn interest, any amount of money is worth more the sooner it is received."
ABC NEWS
"The New York Times Co. nyt has approved a $250 million investment by Mexican telecommunications billionaire Carlos Slim Helu, a deal that could make him one of the largest shareholders of the Times Co.
The $250 million investment by tycoon Slim complements his telecommunications holdings in Latin America, and gives Slim, reputed to be the world's second-richest man, the prestige of owning one of the world's best-known and most influential newspapers.
"By having a stake in the New York Times, he's basically projecting himself as a powerbroker in this country, regardless of how his investment does," said Armand Peschard-Sverdrup, a senior associate of the Center For Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank."
since yesterday it has been revealed that ford lied through her fucking crooked and yellow teeth. about virtually everything. the polygraph, the 2nd door, fear of flying... the lies are fucking legion. why is that not front page ny times, amazon post, MSDNC, CNN, etc.???
Or as Blumenthal so snarky. put it "falsis in uno falsis in omnibus". Who knew that comment would so dramatically backfire on him.
Or as Blumenthal so snarky. put it "falsis in uno falsis in omnibus". Who knew that comment would so dramatically backfire on him.
and it drips with irony and exhibits a total lack of self-awareness. a stolen valor piece of shit who told such egregious lies about serving in vietnam is the last guy to be using that term.
btw, blumenthal picked up his current wife at a greenwich conn party when she was sixteen years old.
look it up.
Don't attack him, he is a freaking "War Hero".
Election 2020 .
IF, Bret is confirmed . Everyone of these women will be on stage.
Post a Comment