Nanker Posted September 4, 2019 Author Share Posted September 4, 2019 12 minutes ago, DC Tom said: Well, at least she wasn't assaulted. Well, she assaulted him. Hell, she assaulted US. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 WE ALWAYS KNEW THAT: Christine Blasey Ford’s Lawyer: Okay Fine, Protecting Abortion Was Part of Why She Accused Kavanaugh. And so did all the people eagerly promoting her bogus victimhood. Democrats will always kneel at the altar of Abortion. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 GIVING UP THE GAME: “Even before attorney Debra Katz took on Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s primary accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, as a client, she was someone the abusive and unscrupulous should have feared. At least, that’s how she was portrayed in the press:” As it turns out, Katz wasn’t as opposed to a “highly politicized environment” as she maintained. “In the aftermath of these hearings, I believe that Christine’s testimony brought about more good than the harm misogynist Republicans caused by allowing Kavanaugh on the court,” Katz told attendees at the University of Baltimore’s Feminist Legal Theory Conference this past April. “He will always have an asterisk next to his name. When he takes a scalpel to Roe v. Wade, we will know who he is, we know his character, and we know what motivates him. And that is important; it is important that we know, and that is part of what motivated Christine.” Only someone with a lawyer’s gift for prevarication could fail to comprehend Katz’s meaning. In this textbook definition of the Kinsley gaffe, Katz has revealed that not only was she motivated to litigate the claims against Kavanaugh for the advantageous political effect they would have but that her client was, too. And what was that desired effect? Affixing an “asterisk” to Kavanaugh’s record so that his judgments and decisions would be regarded as animated by biases and prejudices and would be, therefore, suspect if not entirely illegitimate. This is an admission entirely against interest, in part, because you do not have to announce the presence of an asterisk if it truly exists. The Democratic partisans who insist Justice Clarence Thomas has been similarly undermined are screaming into a void. His concurrences and dissents still carry as much moral and intellectual weight as any other justice. He still influences the evolution of legal thought as much as or more than his colleagues on the bench. His clerks still get confirmed to federal judicial appointments in striking numbers. The notion that Kavanaugh’s reputation had been irreparably tarred in some way by his confirmation hearings isn’t an observation. It’s a self-affirmation. Read the whole thing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted September 8, 2019 Share Posted September 8, 2019 On 9/4/2019 at 6:29 PM, B-Man said: WE ALWAYS KNEW THAT: Christine Blasey Ford’s Lawyer: Okay Fine, Protecting Abortion Was Part of Why She Accused Kavanaugh. And so did all the people eagerly promoting her bogus victimhood. Democrats will always kneel at the altar of Abortion. More like they use it as an excuse. I've been hearing the 'overturn abortion' hysteria since Reagan and yet 40 years later.....abortion is still legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 9, 2019 Share Posted September 9, 2019 DARK MONEY IS ONLY BAD WHEN REPUBLICANS SPEND IT: Soros Fuels Dark Money Judicial Group That Fights Kavanaugh, Trump Nominations. . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted September 9, 2019 Share Posted September 9, 2019 On 9/8/2019 at 12:19 PM, KD in CA said: More like they use it as an excuse. I've been hearing the 'overturn abortion' hysteria since Reagan and yet 40 years later.....abortion is still legal. the GOP doesn't want to overturn it 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 9, 2019 Share Posted September 9, 2019 6 minutes ago, row_33 said: the GOP doesn't want to overturn it Just like no one wants to fix immigration law, either. They'd rather use the issues to rile up the base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted September 10, 2019 Share Posted September 10, 2019 11 hours ago, row_33 said: the GOP doesn't want to overturn it Exactly. The pro-life movement is one of accomodation not action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 15, 2019 Share Posted September 15, 2019 3 minutes ago, B-Man said: The FBI talked to Ramirez, followed what they could find credible, but likely found what Ronan Farrow found— one of the main pushers of Ramirez’s story had only ever heard it secondhand... from someone who has no memory of it. Nonsensical hearsay. https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/will-the-fbi-ignore-testimonies-from-kavanaughs-former-classmates … Read this paragraph from the New York Times, then re-read it. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/23/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford-testify.html … The Ramirez/Kavanaugh story completely fell apart under scrutiny and the reporters who wrote it despite embarrassing sourcing took major reputations hits. That it still somehow found it’s way into a book with even the slightest editing and scrutiny should be shocking, but isn't The desperation of the Left is apparent for all to see.............. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 15, 2019 Share Posted September 15, 2019 18 minutes ago, B-Man said: The desperation of the Left is apparent for all to see.............. It's about history now for them, whitewashing it, smearing Kavanaugh purely for future purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 15, 2019 Share Posted September 15, 2019 (edited) NEW YORK TIMES PUBLISHES NEW UNCORROBORATED ALLEGATION AGAINST BRETT KAVANAUGH BY FORMER CLASSMATE. There’s also a crucial bit of information in the book not included in the article, “The book notes, quietly, that the woman Max Stier named as having been supposedly victimized by Kavanaugh and friends denies any memory of the alleged event. Seems, I don’t know, significant.” So, Max Stier named the alleged victim of the incident, but she denies the story. Wow. Why are we even talking about this? Exit question from Sean Davis of the Federalist: “Is that the same Max Stier who was one of Clinton’s defense attorneys? Yes, yes it is.” “And yet liberals wonder why public trust in the media has plummeted.” Edited September 15, 2019 by B-Man 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 16, 2019 Share Posted September 16, 2019 NYT explains why the Kavanaugh story wasn’t in the news section of the paper (Hint: It’s not even close to being good enough) So Journolist is back?? See if you notice a common refrain in the latest Brett Kavanaugh outrage Democrats and the press (to traffic in redundancy) are bleating loudly today about nothing new regarding the allegations we have all heard — and which have been disproven. Now we do not intend to suggest that there is coordination at play in all of this. That would be journalistically wrong. So instead we will do something the press avoids doing — we will show evidence. More at the link Liberals are scum. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 16, 2019 Share Posted September 16, 2019 15 minutes ago, B-Man said: NYT explains why the Kavanaugh story wasn’t in the news section of the paper (Hint: It’s not even close to being good enough) So Journolist is back?? See if you notice a common refrain in the latest Brett Kavanaugh outrage Democrats and the press (to traffic in redundancy) are bleating loudly today about nothing new regarding the allegations we have all heard — and which have been disproven. Now we do not intend to suggest that there is coordination at play in all of this. That would be journalistically wrong. So instead we will do something the press avoids doing — we will show evidence. More at the link Liberals are scum. . Interesting perspective: (thread) 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 16, 2019 Share Posted September 16, 2019 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 16, 2019 Share Posted September 16, 2019 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 16, 2019 Share Posted September 16, 2019 This is why they ran the story on a Saturday night. Fewer people will stick around to see how quickly it fell apart. . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted September 16, 2019 Share Posted September 16, 2019 The stupid of this story, it really does burn. Ruthie must not be doing very well if they are going this route... someone said something happened to someone who said "no it didn't" so let's push it anyway and hope for a SCJ impeachment, seems reasonable. 6-3 decisions after she is gone (I'm betting Roberts gets a spine once it no longer matters) are going to make the Trump election night meltdowns seem tame. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted September 16, 2019 Share Posted September 16, 2019 On 9/9/2019 at 6:05 PM, row_33 said: the GOP doesn't want to overturn it They would be terrified if their dog actually caught that mail truck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 16, 2019 Share Posted September 16, 2019 And NO it would not have: The move now is to deligitimize the courts because the DNC and the left do not believe in peaceful transitions of power. They want a war. And if they're not careful, they'll get one and it won't go the way they envision. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 16, 2019 Share Posted September 16, 2019 It won't stop until they have power again. Which should be enough incentive to make sure they NEVER get power again for any rational thinking American. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts