_______
Example of one of the witnesses that Ramirez's attorney listed for the FBI to talk to is a classmate named Kenneth G. Appold. Appold demands that he is 100% sure that "he was told" about this incident. He provided the name of the person who told him to the New Yorker, when he was unable to reach him. When the New Yorker contacted Appold's source, that source had no recollection of the event in question, much less any memory of talking to Appold about it.
So this was a supposed hearsay witness, who's source denied any recollection of any of it. But the Democrats wanted the FBI to talk to this person anyways? Ugh!
But let's be clear here folks. There were a limited amount of people who were supposed witness to these accounts. These would be the only witnesses of real interest to the FBI. 35 year old hearsay is not evidence, at least not as far as the FBI would be concerned.
So this was a supposed hearsay witness, who's source denied any recollection of any of it. But the Democrats wanted the FBI to talk to this person anyways? Ugh!
_______
The FBI is said to have contacted 10 witnesses, interviewed nine. We have been told that there were five witnesses interviewed regarding the Ford allegation, we have been told that Ramirez was interviewed, so that would leave four other witnesses contacted regarding the Ramirez allegation. It would appear that one of them must have turned down the FBI for that interview, meaning three others who Ramirez has said were at the party in question have provided information to the FBI. According to what is being said so far, none of those nine witnesses have corroborated either allegation.
_______
Democratic Senator Coons was one of two Democratic Senators on the Judicial committee who didn't sign the letter disputing the Chuck Grassely claim that none of the previous background checks suggested any alcohol abuse or sexual allegations. When questioned regarding this, he undermined his colleagues by stating that there was nothing disqualifying or any sort of bombshell in those previous checks and even implied that he was uncertain specifically what the letter referred to.
_______
Obviously the FBI 302s did not uncover any proof or corroboration of the sexual allegations by either Christine Ford or Deborah Ramirez. Julie Swetnick never actually alleged that Kavanaugh did anything that would be considered any sort of sexual assault of any kind. Every GOP Senator coming out has stated that there was no corroboration, while the Democrats are crying about a cover up.
But let's be clear here folks. There were a limited amount of people who were supposed witness to these accounts. These would be the only witnesses of real interest to the FBI. 35 year old hearsay is not evidence, at least not as far as the FBI would be concerned.
As long as the FBI interviewed (or attempted to interview) everyone said to have been at either of these events, they would have done their job 100%. The argument that Kavanaugh and Ford needed to be interviewed "again" is not a very good argument for quite a few obvious reasons. Even had they been interviewed, it would not have satisfied the Democrats in question.
Democrats wanted more witnesses for more delay. Common sense tells you that if nobody saw the alleged events, and considering both accusers claim to have not told anyone at the time, the only other pertinent witness would be someone who could testify to some sort of confession from the accused.
45 comments:
Kavanaugh Confirmation Will Come at Huge Cost
First Read: “If Kavanaugh gets confirmed, he heads to the U.S. Supreme Court with an indelible asterisk next to his name (and with more than 1,000 law professors signing a New York Times op-ed that he shouldn’t be confirmed). There’s also a good chance there will be future investigations into Kavanaugh if Democrats win control of Congress. And it will be hard to forget his ‘revenge on behalf of the Clintons’ and ‘what goes around comes around’ lines.
“If Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell pushes Kavanaugh across the finish line, he’ll get another nominee on the court by a party-line (or close to it) vote — but at great cost to the Supreme Court’s legitimacy, especially after Merrick Garland.
”If President Trump gets his man, he’ll have united Republicans, but he possibly also exposed Senate and House candidates in blue/purple/urban/suburban areas, as well as some current GOP senators (up for re-election in 2020 and beyond) who might not have wanted to take this vote.”
___________________
Republicans Will Ignore Kavanaugh’s Lies
Jonathan Chait: “The FBI investigation into Brett Kavanaugh has turned out to be a fig leaf. Multiple reports tell the same story: The White House has controlled the probe, ignoring the attempts by multiple witnesses to reach investigators and wrapping up its work well before its already-tight deadline.
“In the meantime, however, significant new evidence has appeared from the news media. It demonstrates beyond a doubt that Kavanaugh’s emotional testimony was a farrago of evasions and outright lies.”
_____________________
Too Early to Say Who ‘Wins’ from Kavanaugh Fight
Nate Silver: “Overall, I’m inclined to conclude there’s actually something there for Republicans — that their position has genuinely improved from where it was a week ago (although, not necessarily as compared to where it was a month ago). But I’m also wary of the idea that this is necessarily a turning point, since it wouldn’t take much — a couple of good generic ballot polls for Democrats, plus a handful of good state-level results in places like North Dakota — to reverse the GOP gains in our forecast. There is truth in the idea that Republicans have had a decent week of polling, but it can also be exaggerated by cherry-picking data that’s consistent with a particular narrative.
“Finally, it should go without saying that this is still a dynamic situation, and it doesn’t necessarily follow that the party that ‘wins’ the battle over Kavanaugh will benefit electorally. The opposite could prove true.”
_________________________-
Democrats Pledge to Get Trump’s Tax Returns
“Democrats will seek a firsthand look at President Trump’s tax returns if they take control of the House or Senate after next month’s election, according to the key lawmakers who would gain the authority to get the documents,” the Wall Street Journal reports.
Said Rep. Richard Neal (D-MA), who is in line to chair the House Ways and Means Committee: “We will do that.
“Under the tax code, the Ways and Means chairman can demand and receive any taxpayer’s records from the IRS for confidential review. Neal wouldn’t need approval from the full House, the Senate, or the administration.”
A Kavanaugh Bounce for Republicans?
Top Republicans tell Axios that they’re seeing a surprising and widespread surge in GOP voter enthusiasm, powered largely by support for Brett Kavanaugh and his Supreme Court nomination.
Said GOP operative Josh Holmes: “The Kavanaugh debate has dropped a political grenade into the middle of an electorate that had been largely locked in Democrats’ favor for the past six months. Private polling shows the enthusiasm shift is … unmistakable in the red states that will determine control of the Senate.”
_________________
Republicans Face Big Risks In 6 California Races
A new Los Angeles Times poll finds Republicans are at risk of a wipeout in California’s six most hotly contested congressional races, “a result that could radically reshape the state’s political map, with major consequences nationally.”
“The Democratic tide threatens to swamp congressional districts in Southern California’s suburbs that Republicans have controlled for decades. That would significantly boost Democrats’ chances of gaining the additional 23 seats they need to win a majority in the House.
“But if the tide ebbs only slightly, the GOP could emerge with much of its control intact.”
_______________
GOP Struggles to Put Away Vulnerable Democrats
“The Senate majority remains up for grabs five weeks before Election Day, with Republicans struggling to put away nearly half a dozen Democratic incumbents they had expected to beat and Democratic challengers remaining surprisingly resilient in three Republican-held seats,” Politico reports.
“At least six Senate races — three currently held by Democrats and three held by Republicans — are too close to call, according to a dozen senators, strategists and pollsters in both parties interviewed by Politico for this story. That means even a slight shift in the national political environment between now and Election Day could be the difference between a slim Democratic majority and firm Republican control. And another handful of races on both sides are not yet out of reach.”
___________________
Manchin Likely to Vote for Kavanaugh
Politico: “Manchin, for his part, sounds like he’s leaning ‘Yes,’ and it certainly is gettable for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and the GOP leadership. It’s clear Manchin doesn’t want to be the 50th vote for Kavanaugh, but it seems like he’d be OK with being the 51st or 52nd, barring any new developments.”
____________________
FBI Report on Kavanaugh on Capitol Hill
“The White House has found no corroboration of the allegations of sexual misconduct against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh after examining interview reports from the FBI’s latest probe into the judge’s background,” the Wall Street Journal reports.
Mike Allen: “An administration source tells me there’s nothing in it that’s likely to stall confirmation.”
The report is now on Capitol Hill where it will be viewed by senators.
Playbook: “Today, reporters are going to stake out the room where senators are reading the report. As each Republican senator exits, they’ll be asked about the contents of the FBI memo — and whether it’s going to affect their vote. This will likely go on all day.”
Trump Unlikely to Face Consequences of Tax Dodging
President Trump “is unlikely to pay a legal or financial price even if new allegations of extensive tax dodging by him and his family are borne out. Multiple factors could offer Trump a shield, not the least of which is time: The questionable practices outlined in a New York Times report happened so long ago that a case would be difficult to make today, especially given statutes of limitations,” Politico reports.
“If Trump inherited undervalued assets, as the Times report alleged, he wouldn’t be liable for underpayment of gift taxes because the tax liability falls on the donor — his father, Fred Trump, who died in 1999.”
_______________________
Senate Will Move Ahead on Kavanaugh Nomination
The U.S. Senate will move ahead on Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination with a procedural vote expected Friday, the Washington Post reports.
“McConnell’s move came as five senators — three Republicans and two Democrats — have not said how they would vote following an FBI investigation into misconduct allegations against Brett Kavanaugh. A simple Senate majority to end debate would clear the way for the Senate to confirm Kavanaugh as the next justice this weekend.”
The Hill: “If Kavanaugh overcomes the procedural hurdle, the Senate could then take a final vote on his nomination as early as Saturday.”
______________________
Republicans Shift To Attacks on Kavanaugh Accuser
New York Times: “The president’s scathing and derisive impression of Dr. Blasey, who has accused Judge Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her when they were teenagers, came at the same time his Republican allies stepped up their efforts to challenge her veracity. Seizing on a sworn statement from a former boyfriend, Republicans suggested that she had not been fully truthful in her testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week.
“The gloves-off approach could further complicate Mr. Trump’s efforts to confirm Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court by winning over three undecided Republican senators who have insisted that Dr. Blasey’s allegation be taken seriously, Susan Collins of Maine, Jeff Flake of Arizona and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. All three condemned the president’s rally riff on Wednesday, using phrases like ‘wholly inappropriate,’ ‘kind of appalling’ and ‘just plain wrong.'”
The Hill: Trump’s shot at Christine Blasey Ford seems to backfire.
___________________
Kavanaugh Probe Appears to Be Highly Curtailed
Washington Post: “The FBI background check of Brett Kavanaugh appeared to remain curtailed in its scope Wednesday even as agents neared the end of their work, opening up the possibility that the bureau would again face criticism over what some will view as a lackluster investigation.
“Though complete details of the FBI’s findings had yet to be released Wednesday evening, the bureau’s inquiry seems to have focused mostly on an allegation by a California professor who claims Kavanaugh assaulted her decades ago at a party in Maryland, when both were high school students.”
What the pederasts crap is worth
caliphate4vr said...
What the pederasts crap is worth
Rather than apologize for the falsehoods (lies) he copied/spammed over yesterday he tries spamming even more.
Just a crazy, lying POS "pastor" who must be an embarrassment to anyone of faith.
And a fucking asshole
ROFLMFAO !!!
To recap:
1. Just before she fingered Kavanaugh, Ramirez was telling classmates she could not be certain it was Kavanaugh.
2. Ramirez admits her drinking that night clouded her memory.
3. Only after six days of talking to her attorney, a Democrat politician, was Ramirez able to remember it was Kavanaugh.
4. Every single one of Ramirez’s so-called witnesses sides with Kavanaugh.
5. The only so-called corroboration Ramirez had was a guy who heard about the incident from someone else.
6. That someone else says he has no memory of the incident.
7. Ramirez is a Democrat activist.
https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/10/04/nolte-latest-ronan-farrow-report-further-discredits-deborah-ramirez-brett-kavanaugh-allegation/
EXCLUSIVE: 'Christine Ford threw her under the bus.' Strained 'sex assault' witness Leland Keyser is seen for the first time as close family member confirms she did NOT corroborate school friend Ford's story to FBI
A weary-looking Leland Keyser was seen for the first time since Christine Ford named her as a corroborating witness to claims Brett Kavanaugh attempted to rape her
•Keyser, 52, whom Ford described as her 'best friend' at Holton-Arms preparatory school in Bethesda, Maryland, was her final hope for corroboration However, the former pro golfer couldn't corroborate Ford's story when she was interviewed by the FBI on Saturday
•Pictured in DailyMailTV exclusive photos for the first time since news Ford named her, Keyser showed the stress of being put into the national spotlight
•The close relative expressed anger at Ford's suggestion that Keyser could not recall the party because of the 'significant health challenges'
•The 'health challenges' have not impaired her memory but being caught up in the Kavanaugh scandal has proved physically trying
•The relative said: 'Leland is not a well woman. She has had years of injuries that have seen her have 14 operations. She just wants to get better'
Christine Ford's high school friend, Leland Keyser, was 'completely blindsided' and left 'reeling' when the woman accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of attempted rape named her as a corroborating witness.
Speaking exclusively to DailyMailTV a family member close to Keyser, 52, said: 'Christine didn't give her so much as a heads up - as far as I know they haven't really spoken for several years and they're certainly not close anymore.
'Leland was completely blindsided by her name being thrown into it all. The first thing she knew about it was when she woke up on Thursday morning and her name was just everywhere. It was crazy.'
Pictured here for the first time since the news Ford had named her as a witness, Keyser showed the strain of being catapulted into this political maelstrom.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6235463/amp/Christine-Fords-high-school-friend-blindsided-named-corroborating-witness.html?__twitter_impression=true
_____________________________________________
British press covers story the US FAKE NEWS won't...
Cruz up 6 points in Texas.
Nice Job .
The Hill.
Kavanaugh will be confirmed. You hate my predictions. I hope that I am wrong again.
The not Fake News.
Sen. Jeff Flake (Ariz.), a key swing Republican vote, said Thursday that a new FBI report on Brett Kavanaugh has failed to corroborate Christine Blasey Ford's allegation of sexual assault against the Supreme Court nominee.
Flake said there was nothing in the FBI's supplementary background check to corroborate the claims from Ford, which threw Kavanaugh's nomination into turmoil starting last month.
The Arizona Republican said he agrees with fellow GOP Sen. Susan Collins (Maine) in viewing the FBI report as thorough and failing to back up Ford's claims that Kavanaugh assaulted her at a house gathering in 1982, when both were in high school.
"I think Susan Collins was quoted saying it was very thorough but no new corroborative information came out of it. That's accurate," Flake told reporters after reviewing the FBI report in the secure compartmented information facility in the Capitol Visitor Center.
"I wanted this pause, we've had this pause. We've had the professionals, the FBI, determine - given the scope that we gave them, current credible allegations - to go and do their review which they've done," Flake said.
"Thus far we've seen no new credible corroboration, no new corroboration at all," he said.
Flake, Collins and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) are the three Republican senators who are undecided on Kavanaugh.
I was hoping for the right thing to happen.
The Hill: Flake: No corroboration for Ford's claims in FBI report.
https://thehill-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/thehill.com/homenews/senate/409903-flake-no-corroboration-for-fords-claims-in-fbi-report?amp
Josh Hawley up 4 in MO.
"Senate Will Move Ahead on Kavanaugh Nomination".
Democrats shit on themselves.
Roger, two things.
How you doing?
And
Still waiting for your lawyers name and phone number.
I agree with both of them, but it seems that we will see him confirmed soon.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Calif.), the top Democrat on the committee, later told reporters that “the most notable part of this report is what’s not in it.”
Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), who appeared beside her at a news conference, blamed the White House for the limited scope of the latest probe.
“We had many fears that this was a very limited process that would constrain the FBI from getting all of the facts,” he said. “Those fears have been realized.”
You hate my predictions.
i absolutely cherish your political predictions, alky.
they have provided some of the best laughs i have ever had on this blog.
Manchin says he's looking at kavanaugh from age 22 to 53 to base his vote.
How reasonable of him.
Dems really shit on themselves over this.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Calif.), the top Democrat on the committee, later told reporters that “the most notable part of this report is what’s not in it.”
Yeah... it contained no evidence or corroboration.
Yeah... it contained no evidence or corroboration.
and the donks are saying that's because the FBI was not allowed to interview those who could provide evidence and corroboration.
i swear, one of the biggest reasons the democrat party exists is because the dumbest fucks in our nation deserve representation too.
brett kavanaugh stole my g.i. joe when i was 6 years old:
https://youtu.be/PSED1t1fknk
"You hate my predictions.
i absolutely cherish your political predictions, alky.
they have provided some of the best laughs i have ever had on this blog.
"
Exactly what I thought.
" Touchdown Denver" At the time in the fourth, Denver up by 10.
Actual outcome Chiefs 27 Alky Donkey 23.
Yeah but your baby brother has to cooraberate it.
And he has no memory of GI Joe being in the house.
Rush is playing the " Transformers" protesting voices. Their white hot love of abortion is on full ass display.
OT. CNBC
"Amazon's hourly workers lose monthly bonuses and stock awards as minimum wage increases
Amazon warehouse workers are no longer eligible to receive monthly bonuses and stock awards.Amazon made the change as it announced a minimum-wage increase on Tuesday.The change could make some longtime workers to make less."
Many of Brett Kavanaugh's ex-classmates wanted to talk — but FBI reportedly 'ignored' them
Dozens of people reportedly reached out to the FBI in recent days in the hopes of sharing potentially helpful information with the bureau as it conducted its “limited” probe into the sexual misconduct allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
But the individuals say investigators did not respond to their outreach — a silence that has prompted questions about just how “limited” in scope the inquiry really was.
The White House announced in the middle of the night on Thursday that it had sent the results of the FBI’s supplemental background investigation of Kavanaugh to the Senate. “With this additional information, the White House is fully confident the Senate will vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court,” deputy press secretary Raj Shah said on Twitter.
Hours earlier, NBC News reported that more than 40 people “with potential information into the sexual misconduct allegations” against Kavanaugh, including multiple high school and college classmates of the judge, had tried to contact the FBI to no avail.
Attorney Alan Abramson told the outlet that he’d reached out to the bureau on behalf of his client, who he described as a friend of Deborah Ramirez, the Yale classmate of Kavanaugh’s who has accused the judge of thrusting his penis in her face at a college party.
Abramson said Ramirez had told his client in the early ‘90s “about an incident that happened during Ms. Ramirez’ freshman year at Yale.” He said his client was willing to provide this “pertinent information” to the FBI — but said he had not heard back from the bureau.
Kenneth Appold, a professor at Princeton Theological Seminary who’d been a suitemate of Kavanaugh’s when the alleged incident with Ramirez occurred, told The New Yorker that he’d also not been contacted by investigators despite having reached out to the FBI and submitting a statement through the bureau’s website.
Appold said he had not been present at the party where the alleged incident had taken place but he said an eyewitness had told him about it soon after it occurred.
“I can corroborate Debbie’s account,” Appold told the magazine. “I believe her, because it matches the same story I heard 35 years ago, although the two of us have never talked.”
According to The New Yorker, several other former Yale classmates of Kavanaugh’s said they’d reached out to the FBI about the judge “but had not received a response.” Two high school acquaintances of Kavanaugh’s said they’d submitted sworn declarations to the FBI but had not been contacted by the bureau.
Also on Wednesday, CNN published several more examples of former Yale classmates of Kavanaugh’s whose attempts to contact the FBI with information had amounted to naught. The outlet noted that none of these individuals claim to be direct witnesses of the alleged incident with Ramirez.
Liz Swisher, a former classmate of Kavanaugh’s who had ... questioned Kavanaugh’s truthfulness about his drinking at Yale in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, told CNN she had not been contacted by the FBI. Chad Ludington, another former classmate who said he often drank with Kavanaugh during their early years at Yale, also filled out a form, but had not been contacted back by the FBI as of Wednesday afternoon.
[...] Mark Krasberg, an assistant professor of neurosurgery at the University of New Mexico who was also a classmate of Kavanaugh’s and Ramirez’s without direct knowledge of the alleged incident, had also not heard back from the FBI despite numerous attempts to reach out to lawmakers’ offices and FBI offices directly.
Quoting security experts, CNN noted that it’s not unusual for the FBI to ignore requests from people who reach out to them with information.
“As a general matter, if the FBI is conducting an investigation ... they decide who they need to talk to,” said Carrie Cordero, a former counsel to the U.S. assistant attorney general for national security.
Still, Democratic lawmakers have expressed alarm at the FBI’s apparent overlooking of potentially important witnesses in their probe of Kavanaugh.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said in a statement Wednesday that she had “serious concerns that this is not a credible investigation.”
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer that the FBI’s investigation did not appear to be sufficiently thorough.
″[It] doesn’t sound like the complete, thorough investigation that frankly senators deserve and would be due if you had a thorough background check,” Gillibrand said.
"There are witnesses who can corroborate, and possibly substantiate, those kinds of allegations, that still have not been interviewed."
According to The New York Times, the FBI reached out to 10 people and interviewed nine as part of its probe into Kavanaugh’s past. Ramirez said she was interviewed by two agents at her lawyer’s office in Boulder, Colorado, last week; and three former classmates of Kavanaugh’s ― Mark Judge, Tim Gaudette and Chris Garrett ― were reportedly also questioned as part of the investigation.
Other than Ramirez, at least two other women have accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct: Christine Blasey Ford, a California professor who claims the judge sexually assaulted her when they were teenagers; and Julie Swetnick, who has accused Kavanaugh of being present during a “gang rape” in the early 1980s. Neither woman was interviewed by the FBI.
Kavanaugh has vehemently denied the misconduct allegations against him.
Speaking to The New Yorker, Ramirez said this week that she was troubled by what she described as the FBI’s apparent lack of willingness to substantiate her claims.
“I am very alarmed, first, that I was denied an FBI investigation for five days, and then, when one was granted, that it was given on a short timeline and that the people who were key to corroborating my story have not been contacted,” she said. “I feel like I’m being silenced.”
The White House refused to say on Wednesday whether the Trump administration had limited the scope of the FBI’s investigation into Kavanaugh.
Earlier in the week, President Donald Trump had claimed the bureau would have free rein to interview whomever they needed.
Appold said he had not been present at the party where the alleged incident had taken place but he said an eyewitness had told him about it soon after it occurred.
“I can corroborate Debbie’s account,” Appold told the magazine. “I believe her, because it matches the same story I heard 35 years ago, although the two of us have never talked.”
so this is what passes for intellect in the democrat party today.
"i was not present, yet i can corroborate."
behold the brilliance.
According to The New Yorker...
it was the new yorker who originally published the ramirez hit piece. even the ny times - the ny fucking times! - wouldn't touch that steaming pile with a 10-foot pole.
when a pack of seasoned liars like the ny times won't touch a pile of lies...
good one, pederast.
I'm looking at this situation as an analogy to Pete Rose. He's qualified for the the hall of fame for his performance as an player. But his behavior of betting on baseball while he was a manager will never get his appointment to the hall or fame.
Kavanaugh's behavior in his testimony disqualifies him for a lifelong seat as a associate justice on the Supreme Court interview for the job.
“I feel like I’m being silenced.”
so... a liar is being denied a platform on which to lie?
maybe we are coming to our senses.
Kavanaugh's behavior in his testimony disqualifies him for a lifelong seat as a associate justice on the Supreme Court interview for the job.
in case you missed this rog -
the destruction of kavanaugh, his family, his career, and his honor is quite real. he had every right to issue the statement that he did. and i would not have blamed him if he went down the democrat side of the dais swinging a fucking baseball bat.
this is why i believe that you and every democrat who thinks like you is an imbecile. you do what was done to kavanaugh - something so vile, so disgusting, so reprehensible. you make every effort to destroy the man. all in the name of politics. and this is not your first rodeo. you drove miguel estrada's wife to suicide, and had you done the same to the kavanaugh's you would've rejoiced.
you're lower than shit alky, you DO realize. whatever is lower than the most foul shit that oozes from the ass of the most foul creature known to man, that's what you are for what has been done to the kavanaugh's and your support of it all.
.
Tammy Duckworth provided the entertainment on the senate floor today:
"Judge Kavanaugh has a habit of appearing to lie under oath."
So how does one appear to lie:
1. Become a senator.
Next1
In any usual journalistic environment, Appold would be deemed useless as a result of this. Appold’s original testimony was that he had heard from a guy that something happened; subsequent investigation has confirmed that, like everyone else named as a witness, the guy that Appold said he heard it from denies remembering anything like it; and thus we reach the end of the road. Typically, this would be it. Typically, Appold’s involvement in any subsequent story would be nil. Typically, he would be regarded as unreliable, and his other claims would be treated accordingly. But for Jane Mayer and Ronan Farrow, the collapse of Appold’s story serves as an excuse to repeat their original charges in lurid detail, and to add some other swipes at Kavanaugh for good measure. In so doing they bring to mind the dishonest politician who uses preterition to spread his innuendos: “Given that he was cleared, I shall not mention that my opponent was accused of embezzlement.”
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/ronan-farrow-disgraces-himself-brett-kavanaugh-story/
Geez
College students say they can't send in their absentee ballots because they don't know where to buy stamps
Appold said he had not been present at the party where the alleged incident had taken place but he said an eyewitness had told him about it soon after it occurred.
This was covered James...
The name of the person Appold told the New Yorker had been present and told him, had no knowledge of either the party in question or telling Appold anything.
Why would the FBI talk to a hearsay witness when the person he claims provided the information denies providing it?
I see this lunatic and racist bastard who has been expressing hatred for liberals, "socialist" and welfare moms is upset because a man who is a sexual predator is exposed by a victim of his sick behavior.
Bill Clinton?
College students say they can't send in their absentee ballots because they don't know where to buy stamps
It's called Publix. Or Kroger if your in the Midwest.
...because a man who is a sexual predator is exposed by a victim of his sick behavior.
exposed by a victim, alky?
not exactly. first you need some corroborating evidence. you currently lack that. everything that tumbled out of cray cray's mouth has been a lie. even the baby talk vocal fry wasn't convincing.
every single bit of this story has been a complete fabrication... all in the name of abortion.
you guys are so enslaved to the slaughter of the unborn, the depths to which you will sink have no bottom.
honestly alky, i'm surprised you guys didn't pull a repeat of your assassination attempt on steve scalise, et. al., and have some bernie bro lunatic take kavanaugh out.
btw, heidi heitkamp is voting no.
good riddance to bad rubbish.
College students say they can't send in their absentee ballots because they don't know where to buy stamps
like i said before, the democrat party exists to represent the dumbest fucks of our society.
Unconfirmed but with Flake it would not surprise me.
I’m told by source with direct knowledge that Flake is “still having issues” and that some colleagues are trying to “walk him through them.” Sen Coons tells me just now that Flake reached out to him and asked if they could speak at length later.
Then again it could be Coon's staff doing wishful thinking.
If kavanaugh had taken it all calmly, you would have said he looked defeated. But since he took it with understandable outrage, you say his temperament is poor.
No matter what, you would be critical.
Capitol police are arresting protesters for disorderly conduct.
LOL -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QY19q3nxSpQ
A commenter at Ann Althouse’s site neatly sums up the evolution of the Democrats’ attacks on Kavanaugh:
It’s not a bug, it’s a feature! Basically this entire process has been designed from the get go as a Kafkaesque trap:
1) Hey, there are some terrible accusations and if you don’t withdraw, they are going to come out and it’s going to be embarrassing for you and your family. You should withdraw.
2) Okay, you deny the accusations and aren’t withdrawing? Well we’re going to draw this out so that all the crazies can come out of the woodwork and accuse you of being a closet horrific criminal. Don’t make us have a hearing – you don’t want that.
3) Okay, you’re going to cause us to have a hearing? We’re going to make sure the salaciousness of every accusation is stretched out in loving detail on TV.
4) Oh, this makes you angry? Well that’s clearly a sign that you lack the temperament to be on the court.
5) You point out how partisan this has been? Clearly you’re not going to be a fair umpire on the court. We, who were never going to vote for your confirmation anyway, are shocked that any potential justice would consider these obviously partisan attacks as partisan.
6) Does this process make you angry bro? Well, by the way you’re acting, it’s possible to see that this has damaged your mind and you’re probably no longer fit to be on the court.
7) Oh, you got confirmed anyway? Nearly half the country is going to think of you as a rapist for the rest of your life. It’ll be mentioned in every biography ever written about you and will be one of the only thing that anyone remembers about you in the future.
I cannot wait to see who wants to go through this process in the future. And boy, howdy, I cannot wait for the next time a Democratic president tries to get someone confirmed. It’s gonna be lit!
#MeToo!
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/10/the-last-angry-man.php
Alky looks in mirror.
"who is a sexual predator"
Former presidential daughter Chelsea Clinton has reportedly realized a $6.6 million payday after joining the board of IAC/InterActiveCorp.
Clinton joined the board of the tech company, owner of several internet brands, back in 2011 earning a $50,000 retainer and $250,000 in restricted stock units per year bringing her current IAC stock portfolio to an incredible $6.6 million net worth, Barron’s reports."
Post a Comment