New Kavanaugh accuser “reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the alleged [Yale] incident with certainty”
But “after six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, … she felt confident enough of her recollections to say that she remembers”
There is a reason Democrats and Ford’s team have been stalling both a committee vote and testimony in the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings. They managed to postpone things until Thursday, in an obvious attempt to gain as many extra days as possible. We covered today’s developments in Kavanaugh accuser to testify Thursday even though all her eyewitnesses dispute her story.
They’ve been hoping, and probably working on finding, someone else to make an accusation. Looks like they found a person who initially told the New Yorker there were gaps in her memory of the incident in college that prevented her from “characterizing Kavanaugh’s role” in an alleged incident, but after six days of thinking about it and consulting with attorneys, she was finally ready to make the accusation.
This latest move is part of Democrats’ total personal war on Brett Kavanaugh.
Drudge teased it:
Here’s the story (emphasis added):
As Senate Republicans press for a swift vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, Senate Democrats are investigating a new allegation of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh. The claim dates to the 1983-84 academic school year, when Kavanaugh was a freshman at Yale University. The offices of at least four Democratic senators have received information about the allegation, and at least two have begun investigating it. Senior Republican staffers also learned of the allegation last week and, in conversations with The New Yorker, expressed concern about its potential impact on Kavanaugh’s nomination. Soon after, Senate Republicans issued renewed calls to accelerate the timing of a committee vote. The Democratic Senate offices reviewing the allegations believe that they merit further investigation. “This is another serious, credible, and disturbing allegation against Brett Kavanaugh. It should be fully investigated,” Senator Mazie Hirono, of Hawaii, said. An aide in one of the other Senate offices added, “These allegations seem credible, and we’re taking them very seriously. If established, they’re clearly disqualifying.”
The woman at the center of the story, Deborah Ramirez, who is fifty-three, attended Yale with Kavanaugh, where she studied sociology and psychology. Later, she spent years working for an organization that supports victims of domestic violence. The New Yorker contacted Ramirez after learning of her possible involvement in an incident involving Kavanaugh. The allegation was conveyed to Democratic senators by a civil-rights lawyer. For Ramirez, the sudden attention has been unwelcome, and prompted difficult choices. She was at first hesitant to speak publicly, partly because her memories contained gaps because she had been drinking at the time of the alleged incident. In her initial conversations with The New Yorker, she was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the alleged incident with certainty. After six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, Ramirez said that she felt confident enough of her recollections to say that she remembers Kavanaugh had exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party, thrust his penis in her face, and caused her to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away. Ramirez is now calling for the F.B.I. to investigate Kavanaugh’s role in the incident. “I would think an F.B.I. investigation would be warranted,” she said.
In a statement, Kavanaugh wrote, “This alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. The people who knew me then know that this did not happen, and have said so. This is a smear, plain and simple. I look forward to testifying on Thursday about the truth, and defending my good name–and the reputation for character and integrity I have spent a lifetime building–against these last-minute allegations.”
The White House spokesperson Kerri Kupec said the Administration stood by Kavanaugh. “This 35-year-old, uncorroborated claim is the latest in a coordinated smear campaign by the Democrats designed to tear down a good man. This claim is denied by all who were said to be present and is wholly inconsistent with what many women and men who knew Judge Kavanaugh at the time in college say. The White House stands firmly behind Judge Kavanaugh.”
The memory gaps which were filled in recently are suspect:
Ramirez acknowledged that there are significant gaps in her memories of the evening, and that, if she ever presents her story to the F.B.I. or members of the Senate, she will inevitably be pressed on her motivation for coming forward after so many years, and questioned about her memory, given her drinking at the party.
And yet, after several days of considering the matter carefully, she said, “I’m confident about the pants coming up, and I’m confident about Brett being there.” Ramirez said that what has stayed with her most forcefully is the memory of laughter at her expense from Kavanaugh and the other students. “It was kind of a joke,” she recalled. “And now it’s clear to me it wasn’t a joke.”
There are denials from people who knew Ramirez:
The New Yorker has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party….
One of the male classmates who Ramirez said egged on Kavanaugh denied any memory of the party. “I don’t think Brett would flash himself to Debbie, or anyone, for that matter,” he said. Asked why he thought Ramirez was making the allegation, he responded, “I have no idea.” The other male classmate Ramirez said was involved in the incident commented, “I have zero recollection.”
In a statement, two of those male classmates who Ramirez alleged were involved the incident, the wife of a third male student she said was involved, and three other classmates, Dino Ewing, Louisa Garry, and Dan Murphy, disputed Ramirez’s account of events: “We were the people closest to Brett Kavanaugh during his first year at Yale. He was a roommate to some of us, and we spent a great deal of time with him, including in the dorm where this incident allegedly took place. Some of us were also friends with Debbie Ramirez during and after her time at Yale. We can say with confidence that if the incident Debbie alleges ever occurred, we would have seen or heard about it—and we did not. The behavior she describes would be completely out of character for Brett. In addition, some of us knew Debbie long after Yale, and she never described this incident until Brett’s Supreme Court nomination was pending. Editors from the New Yorker contacted some of us because we are the people who would know the truth, and we told them that we never saw or heard about this.”
The former friend who was married to the male classmate alleged to be involved, and who signed the statement said of Ramirez, “This is a woman I was best friends with. We shared intimate details of our lives. And I was never told this story by her, or by anyone else. It never came up. I didn’t see it; I never heard of it happening.” She said she hadn’t spoken with Ramirez for about ten years, but that the two women had been close all through college, and Kavanaugh had remained part of what she called their “larger social circle.” In an initial conversation with The New Yorker, she suggested that Ramirez may have been politically motivated. Later, she said that she did not know if this was the case.
The corroborating source of the account is anonymous and was not present at the time but says he's "100 percent" sure he was told by someone present. https://t.co/GH9Ph1nwrA pic.twitter.com/rLQC7cJBsh
— John McCormack (@McCormackJohn) September 24, 2018
New Yorker hasn't confirmed the story w/ other eyewitnesses who were allegedly present. Several who were allegedly present denied the incident. One classmate who was not in the room said another student told him about the incident either the same night or the next day https://t.co/Y9rDkVdJqK
— Jeremy Diamond (@JDiamond1) September 24, 2018
They will find a line of people with no proof to do this until next year. Schedule the vote. This is crap. https://t.co/DubRGveqw7
— Jazz Shaw (@JazzShaw) September 24, 2018
I have not tweeted one word doubting Ford's story (thought I have certainly mocked and criticized the process to get her to testify) and have been waiting to hear her out. But this Ramirez story reads so insanely fake I can't believe it's being entertained.
— Karol Markowicz (@karol) September 24, 2018
This will dominate the headlines through Thursday. And expect Democrats to roll out even more accusers:
Republicans were played for fools. This should have been voted out of committee last week.
The question is if a second and third and fourth unsubstantiated accusation will cause any weak Republicans to flee voting for Kavanaugh. If that happens, he’s done. That’s the tactic being used.
It’s pure Borking. Throw so much at the nominee that he can’t get enough floor votes.
UPDATES
And of course Democrats now want a delay of any further hearings
NEW: @SenFeinstein sends Ltr to @ChuckGrassley calling for “an immediate postponement of any further proceedings related to the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh.”
Feinstein also asks that the new allegations be referred to the FBI: pic.twitter.com/cnwcOoEDYE
— Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) September 24, 2018
NEW: @SenFeinstein sends Ltr to @ChuckGrassley calling for “an immediate postponement of any further proceedings related to the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh.”
Feinstein also asks that the new allegations be referred to the FBI: pic.twitter.com/cnwcOoEDYE
— Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) September 24, 2018
Republicans have a choice.
https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1044040710960427008
NY Times passed on the story
Ronan Farrow has disgraced himself. NY TIMES:
The Times had interviewed several dozen people over the past week in an attempt to corroborate her story, and could find no one with firsthand knowledge. Ms. Ramirez herself contacted former Yale classmates asking if they recalled the incident and told some of them that she could not be certain Mr. Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself.
“The Times had interviewed several dozen people over the past week in an attempt to corroborate her story, and could find no one with firsthand knowledge.”
~The NYTimes on Kavanaugh’s second accuser https://t.co/6yQmjVyNGi— Joe Scarborough (@JoeNBC) September 24, 2018
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
In other words, trash looking for more trash.
I’m a 69 year old female and I spent inordinate amounts of time watching the Duke Lacrosse HOAX, finally seeing the boys declared INNOCENT by a Democrat A.G., now the Democrat governor of N.C. It took over a year and HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS in legal fees for the “system” to figure out that Crystal Gale Mangum was a LIAR and had made up the whole story. At least, Crystal Mangum was lying for personal financial gain, not political gain- that was Mike Nifong, the Durham district attorney. I have more respect for Mangum than for that slime, NIFONG.
I AM ABSOLUTELY FURIOUS that Judge Brett Kavanaugh, his wife and his daughters are having to go through this Star Chamber production. The Democrats have no shame, no conscience, and no decency.
I will put MY ANGER to use. I will contribute more than I EVER have to any REPUBLICAN candidate for this election- and I will start right now, tonight! I will talk to ALL of my friends about getting their rear ends to the voting booth to defeat the Democrats.
The DEMOCRATS have kicked over a hornet’s nest by trying to destroy this good man- Judge Brett Kavanaugh- and their slander will not stand!
Charlie Kirk
Dianne Feinstein did not want Bill Clinton impeached over allegations supported by DNA evidence
However, she does want Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation vote delayed over an unsupported allegation and stays silent on Keith Ellison’s documented abuse
Politically motivated hack
9:14 PM · Sep 23, 2018
https://mobile.twitter.com/charliekirk11/status/1044047336991846400?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1044047336991846400%7Ctwgr%5E373939313b636f6e74726f6c&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftheconservativetreehouse.com%2F2018%2F09%2F23%2Fsketchy-business-grassley-releases-original-ford-letter-to-feinstein%2Fcomment-page-1%2F%23comments
to quote my old Motor Sgt, who used to stutter *just* a bit when he’d had a few…(and he was Old Army where drinking was a way of life):
“Sir? That’s Bu-Bu-Bu-Bu-Bull5hit, Sir!”
and yes, he had ZERO F’s to give for some young shavetail.
he was also an awesome mechanic.
BTW: if BK has calendars from his *High School* days, what makes you think he doesn’t have them for college too?
over/under he was *never* part of the party scene at either level?
vote him forward already.
So …once again… using today’s snowflake fragility to weigh the boozy party years ago? The Dems are the party of the Lolita Express, of Sen. Harris (going vertical by going horizontal) and Booker (Roam’n Hands and all), Ellison and Clinton.
Today’s feminists can have their rabbits and sperm donors. Stay away from them.
In an initial conversation with The New Yorker, she suggested that Ramirez may have been politically motivated. Later, she said that she did not know if this was the case.
—
of COURSE it’s politically motivated…
all these years and them BOOM! it’s an issue?
me/ throws the BS flag with great force
Oh, look. The circus has come to town. And I blame the spineless Republicans. Had they insisted that the proceedings follow proper order, this idiocy would not be happening. I am disgusted with the state of our Congress.
It’s the GOPussies that have my ire.
Reply button is too close to the down vote, sorry wasn’t meant to be down voted.
Anyway,turns out the probable reason ford sent her letter to rep.eshoo is that the lying to Congress law isn’t applicable it seems. Had she sent the letter to feinswine then anything in the letter that was a lie would be a felony.
Who told ford all about that?
https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1043698026521317377?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
A plain reading of 18 USC 1001 suggests that in the matter of a specific presidential nomination pending before the U.S. Senate, statements made to a House member on that matter may not be covered by the statute’s prohibition on false statements. pic.twitter.com/gla8uiBqUE
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) September 23, 2018
No worries about the down vote, 4fun. I’ve done it too. 🙂
This is why those who make false allegations must be prosecuted.
It’s a little late for that now.
But in the interest of enacting positive change, here’s another suggestion going forward:
Remove all Senators not up for re-election from the Judiciary committee when there’s a SCOTUS nomination.
They quote a guy who wasn’t at the party but who heard about it from someone else that they thought it was Kavanaugh. Hearsay
And this:
“The New Yorker has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party.”
Democrats fight like their life is at stake.
Republicans don’t.
Way to go, pansies.
What Colonel Travis said.
To my senators from Georgia, but especially John Isakson:
It’s a disgrace that you hide in the shadows and don’t come out full bore in support of Trump, his nominees and his policies.
Just keep hiding to keep your job.
“In no way does this even come close to mimicking the charges against Roy Moore, for example.”
Definition of your “Pansies”. If you wouldn’t fight against the unsubstantiated charges against Moore, you are one of the pansies.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/09/kavanaugh-open-thread-bring-on-more-hearings/comment-page-2/#comment-880634
You’ll need to fight such filth even when you don’t like the accused if you hope to win.
Kavanaugh is accused of rape (Ford).
Kavanaugh has more than one accuser.
The only difference is age. Which is of course, no difference at all.
Digging up a post from week ago?<—- get a life, maybe?
Roy Moore could not defend himself like Kavanaugh because the specific details are not the same. Do I need to go through them again? For some weird reason I don’t think that would matter. Does this crap come from the same (D) playbook? Yes. Just like with Clarence Thomas, Herman Cain, blah, blah, blah.
Roy Moore wasn’t a good candidate, sorry. His own defense out of his own mouth was terrible. “I dated a lot of young ladies” is not the kind of defense you want to hear against the charges he faced. Did he have 65 women vouching for his character like Kavanaugh? Nope. Even the editor of freaking Breitbart said he believed one of the women. Kavanaugh has the backing of much of the (R) party, although not enough, because the charges against him were brought way later than the charges against Moore and the charges are laughable based on what we know about Kavanaugh and Ford’s own testimony. Now we have some dead-drunk loser who doesn’t remember anything except what someone told her Kavanaugh did. Roy Moore’s own words sunk him because he made the many charges from many women with specific places and times and circumstances (unlike Ford) against him seem plausible. Moore didn’t have the backing of the (R) party on the whole. Why? Ask Roy “I dated a lot of young ladies” Moore. I listened to him on Hannity’s radio show, wanting him to blow the charges out of the water. What happened? Moore sucked. Gee, generally, I didn’t date teenagers as a 30-year-old.
Good one, Roy.
Another reason this is different is because Roy Moore wasn’t appointed by the (R) party to become a Senator. He was a candidate for public office in Alabama. The voters of Alabama decided that race, not the (R) party itself. If the people of Alabama didn’t want him, that’s on them. Hello, is this thing on?
Nope.
So, no, the circumstances of both men – even though bombarded by the same leftist tyrants – do not mimic one another otherwise.
I’ve got a life, one is exposing hypocrites that hurt the conservative cause. All you wright is pure BS.
I don’t like Moore, never have. Period. But I defended him against allegations that were from 30+ years ago, unprovable and unsubstantiated. It is not a crime nor immoral for a 30 year old to date an 18 year old. That is not proof of any immoral / criminal behavior that was alleged.
You claimed it was different because: there was only a single Kavanaugh accuser. Surprise (boy was that hard to figure)
You claimed it was different because: The allegations against Moore were more serious. Nope, Kavanaugh is accused of rape, Moore was not.
You claimed it was different because: Moore was in his early 30’s when the supposed sexual misconduct occurred and Kavanaugh was a teenager. Geez, when the allegations are pure BS, made up, unsubstantiated, you think the age makes Moore guilty?
Fight them all. Especially the ones you find unpleasant or this is what you get.
It was 1 vs. 9 now it is 2 vs. 9.
Let me know when Kavanaugh has 10 so he can take the lead.
I claimed it was more serious? Go back and tell me where I wrote that, Mr. I Expose Hypocrites? You even linked to a week-old comment that you didn’t bother to read. How about this? Instead of making up crap, why don’t you stick to what I actually wrote?
And then you can stick to other things like:
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/13/woman-accuses-roy-moore-of-trying-to-rape-her-when-she-was-a-teenager.html
In Ford’s letter, she wrote:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/16/politics/blasey-ford-kavanaugh-letter-feinstein/index.html
When she starts claiming “rape” I’ll adapt to the change.
No, I think the age difference makes him appear creepy and doesn’t help his defense. Why do you insist on making up what I think? This is why it’s impossible to have a rational conversation with you. You have to make up crap, which is ironic, because you claim to hate this.
Moore lied. Repeatedly. His wife lied. He’s a creep. His wife’s a creep enabler.
Moore’s accusers lied, repeatedly. And you enabled them, supported them. Same MO as with Kavanaugh. Not one bit of difference.
They’ll keep doing it because it works.
Moore’s lies and those of his wife are clear on the record. As are yours.
That’s right, Barry. We enabled liars (whatever the hell that means) and supported liars. How? Well, that’s part of the messy details you skip. All that matters is the charge, right? I like how you do the very things you claim you can’t stand.
Hypocrite much, Hypocrite Hunter?
The difference between Moore & Kavanaugh are the facts
Moore exhibited numerous behavioral characteristics that were consistent with the allegations.
Few if any facts support Christine’s allegations, in fact all the witnesses name deny the event.
Kavanaugh’s behavioral characteristics dont support the likelihood of the allegation.
The Ramirez allegation on its face is absurd. All witnesses named denied the event took place, and the only person corrobarating the event is based on third party hearsay, with said person who has not been located.
Lastly – the allegations against moore were credible. Same as the allegations against Eillison, clinton, Packwood, etc. I am not about to defend someone against credible allegations solely because they are on the same side of the political fence as I am.
Notice a recent poll that showed less than 5% of minnesota democrats believe the allegations against Eillison
“I claimed it was more serious? Go back and tell me where I wrote that, Mr. I Expose Hypocrites?”
Sure, happy to oblige:
“In no way does this even come close to mimicking the charges against Roy Moore, for example.”
That was your statement. Perhaps you should learn to proofread if you cannot understand you are alleging the accusations against Moore were more serious than those against Kavanaugh. Of course, I think you understand completely what you said. Your just one of those pussies you were bitching about in your comment above.
“When she starts claiming “rape” I’ll adapt to the change.”
I did forget that Nelson alleged rape, so my mistake. Of course, you conveniently disregard the rape allegation of Ford: “Katz also said bluntly that Ford is alleging Kavanaugh attempted to rape her.” “She clearly considers this an attempted rape. She believes that if it were not for the severe intoxication of Kavanaugh, she would have been raped,” Katz told “Today.”
So adapt, whatever that means, since rape has been alleged on her behalf by her lawyer.
“It was 1 vs. 9 now it is 2 vs. 9.”
There are 3 against Kavanaugh if “Ragspierre’s” favorite lawyer is to be believed. And we are not done just yet. There were only 2 serious allegations against Moore plus a but swatting allegation as I recall.
“No, I think the age difference makes him appear creepy and doesn’t help his defense.”
BS. If the allegations are false the age makes no difference.
People like you should refrain from calling others pussies.
Hypocrite.
“The difference between Moore & Kavanaugh are the facts”
There is no difference in the “facts”. They are all unsubstantiated allegations. No proof exists in either case. They are allegations from 30+ years ago in both cases.
“Moore exhibited numerous behavioral characteristics that were consistent with the allegations.”
No, he simply dated women younger than him when he was a young man. That is not a behavioral characteristic consistent with allegations of sexual misconduct.
“We enabled liars (whatever the hell that means) and supported liars. How? Well, that’s part of the messy details you skip”
I’ll add stupidity to the charges. You would not support Moore when he was charged with unsubstantiated allegations. You claim they in “…no way does this even come close to mimicking the charges against Roy Moore, for example.”
Defend those you don’t like when the allegations are unsubstantiated or be the “pussie” you’re calling others.
There is no difference in the “facts”.
____________________________________________
Well, only day and night.
But one great big hairy one is the Kanvanaugh has not lied on the record as did Moore and his wife.
Just like you. You are so invested in defending that creep, you are frothing.
Let me repeat myself:
Christine is a Professional Greade Head-Case.
I don’t know if she is Bi-Polar, Manic Depressive, or Schizophrenic…
Those are all merely details to me anyway.
Suffice to say ” Crazy ”
And the only crazier thing that I can think of is being her Council, and letting her talk.
Quoting Tony Danza in Taxi. ” There is a medical term for what is wrong with you ,You got a screw loose”
Everything you said is true yet none of it makes any difference. The other side isn’t interested in playing fair. The only question is what our representatives will do about it, and the answer seems to be “roll over on command.”
If this works, the democrats will never allow another white, male, conservative to run for office or be nominated for anything ever again. I found it interesting that Ford and his friends were described as having a “Lord of the Flies” level of behavior when you consider what these people are doing. Ford at least kind of looked like a victim for the first 5 minutes but Ramirez, with her brand new recollections, courtesy of DNC lawyers, is either stupid and being used by the left or she’s fully complicit with their agenda and doesn’t really give a shit about the harm she’s about to inflict upon legitimate survivors of sexual abuse.
Should read “Kavanaugh and his friends”.
I think we’re already there, Sanddog, because I think that the Republicans in Congress don’t actually want to win. They say what they think the rubes want go hear when they’re forced go speak to them. Otherwise, they really just want to maintain the status quo and feather their own nests.
I apologize for the typos. I am on my phone. Those “go”s should be “to”s.
The word you are looking for is “Republican.” Don’t forget the test cases, Clarence Thomas and Herman Cain.
Before that, it was Emmitt Till.
Drinking at the time. Memory gaps. Accusation of behavior so un-Kavanaugh like, at least what we’ve come to know of him.
One would think that the Demon-crats would at lest get a new script. This aside when the smoke clears who is going to give this man his good, decent reputation back to him?!
Sadly his public reputation is gone. As Raymond Donovan, Reagan’s Secretary of Labor famously said* “Which office do I go to to get my reputation back?”
* After the trial of Donovan and his “co-conspirators”, the Jurors held a single quick vote for acquital on each of the defendants. One Juror stated that little discussion was needed to vote for acquital.
Oh I don’t know, Kavenaugh is looking more and more like a victim of femnazi smear tactics and this isn’t lost on American men. Regardless of their party. This kind of brings home the idea that it could happen to them.
Let’s hope that what’s happening to Kavanaugh isn’t lost on the mothers, wives, and sisters of American men.
Didn’t we see this same tactic by the Democrats with Moore? Doesn’t matter if it is credible, or even true, they just need to get some activist woman to make a claim.
These leftists are truly horrible people. I am glad I will not be them come judgement day.
Yep.. and too many purists in the GOP were all too happy to see Judge Moore get sandbagged. Purity of essence or somesuch. I saw a direct link.
Bork… Thomas…. Moore…. and now Kavanaugh.
Next up…. any judge nominated by President Trump, much less the GOP. The Democrats are willing to burn the place down when they don’t get their way…
If there isn’t a massive red wave in November, I cannot imagine how crazy it’s gonna get. ( I’ll be crazy WITH a red wave , but at least the Donks will not be running committees in the House )
Gee. Color me shocked. And here comes the screeching about how a hearing is no longer needed, because the hacks who already declared him guilty without a shred of evidence, will declare him double guilty without a shred of evidence. This is disgusting, and it’s going to rip this country further in two. But that’s ok. They don’t care what or who they destroy as long as they can keep their ability to lawfare what they want into existence.
Thors, tearing the country in two is a feature, not a bug, to dems.
And the GOP goes along, because of short-terms advantages to them personally. Keep their jobs and their perks.
Oh gee… another headache:
Here you go…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6q_nFgvyZqo
Thank you, Chuck Grassley, for being a gentleman in the Collusim. Now the lions have entered and Mr. Kavanaugh is about to be eaten! I dare say almost any man can be charged with something if enough time and msm attention is spent on looking for it.
It’s not just Grassley. The entire party is full of people who do not care if they get steamrolled. Been like that as long as I’ve been alive. I don’t understand it and never will, but it is what it is.
Even worse (and the actual root of the problem): there’s a whole bunch of people who keep voting for people who don’t care if they get steamrolled.
Thanks to Grassley’s incompetence and weakness, the Democrats are pouncing.
Enough with this farce. Hold the vote. If the RINO hacks want to vote against him then throw them out.
I was 90% sure that all the stalling around Ford was so they could find a 2nd accuser
This accusation is so vague that if this works, any future nominee and can be taken down by activists who simply vaguely remember something bad happened and it might have been the person being nominated
This is so awful an approach that no person is ever safe in any senior job anywhere.
I will have to teach my children how to safeguard themselves against these incidents for life because a 15-minute online mob can destroy anyone and everyone.
This is the future. Perpetual war. A cognitive war, a disinformation war, a character assassination war.
Do we have a team in Washington, DC that is willing to fight it? I sure hope so.
Confirm Kavanaugh already.
Proactive instruction in inoculating one’s self against potential contrived and false accusations will now become a necessary task for diligent parents of young boys, males in their early teens and college-age men. As will the parents cultivating relationships with competent civil and criminal defense attorneys.
The second accuser was obviously absolutely necessary to keep Ford from having to actually “testify”. Now the song is back to “we need an investigation”. Neither of these accusers will ever end up in a Senate committee room. All they have to do is stall a little longer and (they think) they’ll take the Senate and no Trump nominee will ever be confirmed (unless, of course, the Dems get to pick the nominee).
Democrats took out a few of their own to weaponize the metoo movement. Now they c as n find a dem BBC willing to make and claim against any man they need to get rid of.
Professor Jacobson is right: The Republicans have allowed themselves to be played for fools. Trump will withdraw the nomination before Thursday, possibly tomorrow after Avanetti’s press conference.
Nope, I think McConnell with say enough of this crap. Let end it and pull it for a vote.
I think you are right.
If Trump gives up he should be impeached
When you throw fame and glory thru a liberal trailer park – you always can get what you want.
Gee, another accuser who’s stated corroborating witnesses claim they have no recollection of the incident. Who’d a thunk it. You would think the Democrats would at least find some people who could be coached to back up the story and feed their names to the accuser.
These people are evil. How can they live with themselves?
Hannah Arendt’s study of the “Banality of Evil” seems especially relevant, today.
Destroying an innocent man’s life and reputation is justified, because of Party dogma, mob bloodlust, because of “Me-Too,” because of past injustices; etc., etc. The lemmings who serve an evil agenda can always couch and rationalize their conduct a thousand different ways, in laudable terms. We know that’s how it has always been.
So, did Brett sign her yearbook, as well?
This BS worked against Roy Moore. And, the libs/progressives/Dems expect it to work again. they will just keep trotting out women who have had an epiphany that they were “molested” bu Kavanaugh 30+ years ago. And, because of the age of the allegations and lack of evidence, there is no way that he can defend himself, other than to deny it.
The only good thing about this is that it will kill the #MeToo movement. Now, unless there are video or audio tapes, no woman who makes any allegation against a man will be believed. Gotta love it when a plan comes together.
Not to mention that if they were not so quick to throw Roy Moore under the bus, he could have won, and now we would have a 52-48 Senate and things would be going a bit smoother. Not completely, but with that little extra wiggle room the dissidents would not feel so free to throw their weight around.
They’ll keep doing it until it doesn’t work. That may be quite a while judging from all the support Moore got from “people of character”. You know who they are.
Entirely predictable.
But, this is even better. In the case of Ford and Ramirez, all of the witnesses supplied by the accusers have been interviewed and ALL have categorically denied that these incidents ever happened. And still, they are being reported.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/09/23/new-yorker-publishes-accusation-containing-zero-evidence-to-support-and-100-of-evidence-to-refute/#more-154444
Mark45… it doesn’t matter. ” Seriousness of the Charge ” and all that crap. These are unprovable accusations. There is NO way to defend against them, just as there is no way to prosecute them. It’s all BS. They are ruining the life of a Federal Judge.. and his family… I think the Donks are counting on Judge K withdrawing due to stress on his wife and kids. That’s what they want to happen.
And right on cue, Sen. Feinstein has called for an “immediate halt” to any plans for a Thursday hearing. Does anyone here think she won’t get it. I repeat, Trump will withdraw the nomination within 48 hours.
I really hope he has the balls not to. Make them vote him down.
Hmm, Wing, care to change your prediction?
You still have a few hours…
After the last witness comes forward, I believe that a GOP Senator ( probably Ted Cruz, he’s the one the balls to do it ) should announce that a person has come forward and asked to be heard. He should then call out Anita Broadrick who can testify what it is really like to be raped, and how three of the Democratic Senators in the committee — you know, those saying every woman has a right to be heard — refused to listen to her.
If he was worth the post he holds, John Isakson, R. Ga., would do it.
also bring in the Ellison accuser – you know the one that is being told to sit down and shut up?
Duh, we did not see this one coming?! You know darn well they are planning on doing this 5 more times before Thurs. Call the vote on Monday and tell them to pound sand. Should have done it last week.
Time to start filling defamation charges against them including Fienstein. I really do think they crossed the threshold of malice that a public figure is required to meet.
Good lord. This is getting out of control.
Maybe they should delay the vote until after the election and meanwhile just campaign hard on the issue to sweep the House and the Senate. The Senate obviously so we can get Kavanaugh through but also the House because I really think those idiots in the Democrat party would actually try to impeach Kavanaugh along with Trump.
This is really depressing. The Democrats are literally tearing the process apart. I fear that if this doesn’t stop we might start seeing violence.
Oh wow. Sleinstein has released the letter finally. The finny thing is that the first line of the second paragraph is much bigger then the rest of the letter. Plain to anyone not a Democrat.
What is she hiding?
Evidence tampering? COoe come… how could that be?
There are font changes within words, something not seen since the Rather Papers.
Something much more nefarious is going on here.
Nah, same old crap: leftists trying to criminalize politics.
So basically you have an accuser who admits to being so falling down drunk that she could not get up or speak properly, which means her accusation has no credibility.
Also so far either the people named have said it didn’t happen or have only “heard” others talk about it happening…wait I am sure there is a name for that….Hearsay? Yea that’s the one.
Gremlin: “Hearsay” is too dignified for it. Rumor fits much better.
Now Kavanaugh and Judge set up women for gang rapes…. I kid you not.
Dems have a very vivid imagination…..
AlaskaBob: Considering who creepy-porn-lawyer Avenetti is hanging out with, I would say a “train” of men having sex with a woman is not that imaginative. I mean, in the porn world his client Daniels inhabits, they do far more perverse acts than that.
This is hysteria. A psychologist said recently he thought the transgender movement was like the false preschool memory hysteria. I think this is too. It went from dry humping to a penis in the face to gang rape. Now Mark Judge is part of the story. He’s a private citizen. Does he have to get a lawyer, etc.? Will he be fired, or blacklisted? They don’t care about the truth. They are hitmen.
BTW has Ramirez’s social media been scrubbed too?
Her Facebook page said it was too drunk to remember anything since 2007.
Only a Catholic Church sex abuse angle is lacking, now. I’m sure the Dumb-o-crats are working on it, as we speak.
Well he was an altar boy …
Perhaps they are saving the Catholic Church angle for Amy Coney Barrett?
Well well.
We can thank the creepy porn lawyer for probably resurrecting Kavanaughs seat.
Avananti is now claim he has a witness who will assert that Kavanaugh was in a group of men who went around getting women drunk and then gang raping them.
Send in the USMC…round em’ all up. GITMO.
Maybe Republicans have to be castrated to getin ti the capital.
Anyone who tweets on this please use the hashtag #KavanaughDerangementSyndrome let’s see if we can’t get it trending.
I wonder if they are going to Bill Clinton diaries to get their material.
The new filibuster. They lost the filibuster and turned to sliming nominees.
Maybe this is how the Deep State protects itself from the revelations of their criminality: they sabotage the GOP base and put the Dems back in power, thus ending all investigations and any hopes of improving the country for the next two years.
At any rate, I still want to hear who is responsible for the hold up.
If Kavanaugh isn’t eventually seated on the Court, the GOP must change the Party name to “WOC” or “EOC” — “Wimpy Old Cuckolds,” or, “Emasculated Old Cuckolds.” Take your pick. Because, what is happening right now is nothing less than the broadest campaign of cuckoldry, in the history of cuckolding. Truly ambitious tactics from our Dumb-o-crat friends.
But, let’s give credit where credit is due, and, face facts — we’ve been marked — correctly — as weak-willed suckers and dupes, and, we’ve been played, accordingly.
And, we will fully deserve to lose both Houses, in the midterms. Because, what the heck is the point of getting out to the polls, if we can’t get our qualified judges confirmed and can’t otherwise accomplish a damn thing when we have control of both Houses?
Grassley should ask for the unredacted letter from Ford before any other decisions are made.
I thought I mentioned it. He got it. The first line of the second paragraph is with a font so much bigger that it is obviously been changes.
Recess and let Trump appoint Alex Jones.
I’m guessing Debbie did some of Dr. Ford’s recovered memory therapy during the past week and viola recovered that Kavanaugh memory.
Four Reasons the New Accusations Against Kavanaugh Are Weaker Than Ford’s https://pjmedia.com/trending/four-reasons-the-new-accusations-against-kavanaugh-are-weaker-than-fords/
I see reason 1 and I see reason 4 but 2&3 are missing.
Not sure what’s going on on your end but they’re there.
2. The New Yorker tried to find eyewitnesses… and failed
3. Others alleged to have been involved deny it happened
I hope people on our side come to their senses because this is a level of bad that doesn’t even rise to dog-ate-my-homework bad.
It’s time for the adults to take over and end this obvious attempt at character assassination. Now, we HAVE to confirm Kavanaugh to show that salacious smears don’t work, or the Dems will always use these dirty tricks, like they did successfully with Judge Roy Moore.
Assuming that Kavanaugh is confirmed, then he (like Clarence Thomas) will be a hard-nosed champion for the rights of the accused. You might think that the Dems would in favor of due process for accused persons, but you would be wrong.
It’s amazing, disgusting, and discouraging that people cannot distinguish between Kavanaugh and Moore, the two cases being about as different as they could possibly be.
THAT is what you choose to be outraged about? Interesting.
I wonder how different your commentary would be if Kavanaugh had been nominated by President Cruz…
WTF…???
Nobody suggested I’m “outraged” by noting the difference between the two cases. I am a Kavanaugh supporter.
You’re just trying to pick a fight.
“No one suggested I am outraged”
Amazed. Disgusted. Discouraged. Your own words.
‘You’re just – ”
I’m just spotlighting your hypocrisy.
If Kavanaugh was nominated by someone other than Trump, you would be singing an entirely different song.
I chose the words I did. You don’t get to put other words over them.
You are lying. I support Kavanaugh. I deplore Moore.
But that’s who you are.
The only real difference between the Moore and Kavanaugh cases is that Kavanaugh is a much more likeable person.
In both cases, we have unsubstantiated claims of incidents which were never reported to anyone else at the time and which are three decades, or more, old. The “witnesses”, who are produced, were allegedly told of these incidents years later. In the Kavanaugh case, none of the alleged eye witnesses support the accuser. In other words both cases are based upon totally unsubstantiated claims, for which no evidence, either physical or testimonial, exists. In both cases, multiple character witnesses have come forward to state that they find it very difficult, if not impossible, to believe the charges against the accused.
In order to deliver justice, all claims have to be gauged on the basis of empirical evidence, not on feelings. Just because you like a person does not make them guilty. Liking them does not automatically exonerate them. Under our system of justice, it is incumbent upon the accuser to prove the accusation made, at least by a preponderance of the evidence. In both the Moore and Kavanaugh cases, this has not been even remotely accomplished.
Perhaps it is time to return to judgement based upon a reasoned, rational analysis of actual evidence, rather than on “feelings”.
As usual, you’re completely full of shit.
Roy Moore’s conduct WAS made a matter of contemporaneous record.
He admitted dating several of his accusers…before lying about that.
Moore had a reputation in the community as being the creep he was and is.
BK is one of the most respected jurists in America. Moore is a nutter with no jurisprudence anyone can point to.
Once again you allow your views to be warped by your own prejudices.
Whether Moore lied or was mistaken or simple a horrible public witness is not relevant to the case. What is relevant is that NO evidence other than the unsupported word of a woman who was reportedly a young teenager when the alleged incident took place over 30 years prior. Now, if you are going to base your entire decision as to the truth of an accusation upon a single witness, you have to also examine that witnesses entire history. Moore’s accuser had a terrible history, one which was simply ignored by all who wished to see Moore eliminated. She would not have been a credible witness in a court of law and should not have been a credible witness in the court of public opinion.
Add to that the fact that Moore had several very credible character witnesses, some were women whom he dated when they were young, who testified that they found the charges against Moore to be incredible. And, finally, we have the other accusers who were essentially proven to be fabricating the incidents described.
Now, you are, allegedly, an attorney. So, you understand(?) the rules of evidence. While the case against Kavanaugh is weaker than the one against Moore [so far ALL of the Kavanaugh accusers’ witnesses have categorically refused to support his accusers’ allegations, where there were no named eye witnesses in the Moore case] the same standards for determining guilt and innocence apply. And, in both cases, there is NO evidence that either man committed any of the acts claimed.
You are lying. Again.
“As usual, you’re completely full of shit.”
Says the man looking in a mirror.
…says the man who lies as his native language.
It’s not about the difference between Moore and Kavanaugh, it’s about the similarity of the tactics of the left. Moore was just a warm-up act for what’s happening now.
They are not different at all, not even one little bit. Same basic allegations by the same basic democrat operatives. Old, 30 plus years, impossible to prove. No facts to back them up.
Nope, no difference, except you don’t like Moore but do like Kavanaugh.
Hypocrite.
They are fundamentally different. In virtually every respect. You’d know this if you had any integrity. You don’t.
I blame Grassley for being a weak chair.
I blame the spineless Senate Republicans for fearing their own shadow.
I blame the RNC for taking us for granted and thinking we are ok with this.
Well I have some memories of being touched in a bad way by a creepy old lady. Now after 6 days of accessing my memories and smoking weed with my dog I have now become certain that it was Senator Dianne Feinstein. I demand her immediate resignation and an investigation by the Coast Guard!
The Ramirez accusations have damn near face-planted on launch. Even the New York Times is saying the story was shopped to them, and they couldn’t find any evidence or witnesses to confirm her accusations.
Just one anonymous source who was not there and did not witness it but says they heard about it at the time.
The left is now buying their accusations wholesale from the ACME company, like Wile E. Coyote. For you see, even the New York Times is casting doubt on the story Ramirez “sold” to young Dylan ande the New Yorker:
“The Times had interviewed several dozen people over the past week in an attempt to corroborate her story, and could find no one with firsthand knowledge. Ms. Ramirez herself contacted former Yale classmates asking if they recalled the incident and told some of them that she could not be certain Mr. Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself.”
Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/23/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford-testify.html
Of course, that was buried down in paragraph 16 of a 35-paragraph story. Still, when an elephant flies, you don’t blame him for not staying up there very long.
The ONLY way you are going to end this is by voting in conservatives in to the Senate so that the flakes don’t have to be appeased!
You WILL NOT change this if Democrats take control and you will not change this is the Republican majority is only 1!
You absolutely have to have REAL conservatives voted in to the Senate otherwise you are going to get this x100 when the next two Democrat Justices are up for replacement within the next 12 months.
Vote. Voye him in and tell the leftists to pund sand. Enough.
I haven’t been this angry about underhanded Dem tactics since Obamacare was shoved down our throats. I agree with an earlier poster…I am contributing more money and time to defeat any and all democrats than I ever have in my life! The red wave coming is one fueled by the intensity of our hate of what and who the Democrats are and their not just willingness but outright eagerness and enjoyment of destroying anyone or anything that stands between them and their goals. They are a force of evil that must be defeated
Time to stop pussy hatting around with these leftists.
Your anger is misdirected. The Left is doing what it always does. You need to place the blame on the feckless Roll-Over Party leadership that, like Charlie Brown with the teed up football, fall for their ploys every time. Anyone who didn’t see this latest accusation coming is not “woke”.
so the new strategy is blame the GOP? I knew it was coming, however, I don’t see it working.
Once again, Ayn Rand was prescient:
It sickens me how low and how evil the left sinks with these tactics.
It worked against Moore, where they knew it would gain enough traction to make sure he couldn’t win. This is the same thing. Getting people to go against Kavanaugh has been tougher due to the possible consequences they could face if they are made to testify under oath, but we see with the loony Ford, she so far won’t have to, even though the others have. I am sure this Bimbette democrat who is now claiming sure, he did antics in college won’t have to say anything under oath.
How about the FBI first talk to them, reminding them of the penalty they could face lying to the FBI, then make them testify under oath to their claims.
It won’t be a guarantee that they will clam up, but they face zero consequences right now for making these claims, and the left has been trying to derail Kavanaugh’s appointment to the Court. This is their last ditch effort.
Too many of these #MeToo claims have been false. Yet they ruined careers, families, lives, and little to nothing has been done against the women who make these claims.
The left knows this. This is why it isn’t all that terribly hard to come up with a couple of hard core nut jobs to be willing to lie for the National Socialist Democratic Party using the end justifies their means with promises of future rewards from the likes of Soros.
alot of this stems back to the Alabama Republican voters not showing up to dismiss the bogus claims made against Judge Moore
because if you don’t win these battles at the ballet box, then this sort of behavior continues in perpetuity
the one thing all these accusations have in common is the lack of any hard evidence whatsoever
it is all the “she said, he said” bs
yet the media hopes all the negative press is enough to dissuade the Republicans into standing up and with said accused person
it worked in Moore’s case where he got virtually no Republican party support thus the R-idiots in the state didn’t bother to show up and vote in the special election
had Moore won that race, these farces would likely not be even happening at all
so thanks Alabama for ALL this shit
Exactly! The Alabama GOP should have said FU to the accusers but they too were too weak to see into the future.
What was Moore actually accused of? Dating young women? Hardly a crime is it!
But thats the standard now. You don’t actually have to commit a crime because the left is now in control and will determine your guilt.
It’s called Vichy Mitchy’s revenge. Luther Strange was a flat-out crook, and AL voters correctly rejected him.
Strange was endorsed by T-rump. Alabama voter rejected him.
Moore was (eventually) endorsed by T-rump. Alabama voters rejected him.
Moore is a lying creep and nutter. Those are not crimes, but they’re ample reasons to keep him from being your senator.
Then by extension they’re reason enough to keep Kavanaugh off of the SC, keep any Trump appointee out of office, and turn the Senate blue.
“Alabama voters rejected him.”
Had the democrats and their handmaiden GOPe not been successful tarring Moore with unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct (supported by “ragspierre”) Moore would have won the election.
There is zero difference in what is being done to Kavanaugh and what was done to Moore. Zero.
There is EVERY difference. Moore is a demonstrated lying creep and nutter, who you defend. There’s no similarity with BK.
Ding! Follow the money. There is a nice financial reward waiting for you after you get out of prison. It reeks of the “72 virgins” promise of Islam.
Yet Sen. Grassley and the spineless Senate Republicans will want to hear from her and the line of women who are currently in therapy. I am amazed how the US Senate is being held hostage by unstable group therapy patients who would do better with Dr. Phil. Too bad Judge Kavanaugh and his family are suffering at the hands of weak willed adults called Republican Senators.
I don’t see this trolling effort to blame the GOP being successful. The Dems own this one.
It seems to be pretty effective among some of the weak knees here.
The vote on the nomination should have been held last Friday,when the deadline came and went.
Time to quit feeding the insanity of th Leftard’s !
I’m amazed that no one has written about the one thing missing from all these claims.
Something so basic it’s like air.
The missing thing in both cases is a close friend who says, “I believe her.”
Not, “I was there. I saw it.”
Not, “She told me about it at the time.”
Not, “I heard about it.”
Not even, “He was the kind of person who might do that.”
But simply, “She’s my friend. I believe her.”
Isn’t it odd that both of these accusers lack that simple thing.
Anyone at all want to make a bet that Michael Avenatti’s “woman with credible information” client on Judge Kavanaugh is another aging porn star trying to jump-start her well-past-dead career?
It’s Stormy. She was in bed with most of DC Metro.
Oh Come ON, Mr. Down-Twinkles. That was funny.
🙂
Probably “Ragspierre”. He thinks Avenatti is a fine lawyer and Stormy is a great producer.
Rags, fgs, why can’t you just be normal and make points without the personal attacks? Does belittling others somehow build you up? I just don’t get it. How is every issue facing our nation suddenly, in your hands, about some single LI commenter rather than about . . . oh, say, the actual issue?
I have no idea what your issues are, but you need to chill. Not only are you completely ineffective in attacking our readers on a personal level, but whatever point you may have is completely lost in the process.
You are about you, not about America, or the presidency, or anything. It’s all Rags all the time in your world, and it’s exhausting. You love you and your opinions, and we get that, Rags. However, you may not fully appreciate the complete lack of prestige, value, and authority you have here.
This is not the Rags Insults Whomever Hour. Stop it.
Both those statements are lies, obviously.
Notice that both accusers have degrees in psychology. One a Phd & the other a bachelors degree.
That profession is loaded with individuals with issues
How has our legislative branch come to this contentious point? It is all about power not justice or this “Me too” victims movement. The best thing our country can do to improve this are TERM LIMITS!! I equally affects both parties in a positive way that protects the CITIZENS of our country from deep destructive partisan politics.
While I support term limits, I don’t see how they’d work to keep totally unscrupled people from pulling stunts like we see here.
This is very much like the Salem witch hunt where anyone could denounce someone and the carnage went on until there were accusations against the societal leaders. It will only get worse. Now any woman who ever had the slightest contact with any man can come forward with “recovered memories” that are decades old, even when they have enormous political reasons for hating someone. Trump derangement syndrome may even create false memories. All this had made me angry enough to get out my checkbook and write some campaign contributions. Hopefully it will motivate Republicans to get out and vote in the midterms and to contribute. If it does that it will have some redeeming features.
“Now any woman who ever had the slightest contact with any man can come forward…”
Not any woman. This is an exclusive privilege for democrats only.
Great point!
They have an unlimited supply of women who are willing to allege sexual misbehavior by a Republican nominee. There is no downside. Can’t ever prove perjury. Always “he said–she said”. The only safe nominee is a teen-age nun.
What, a Catholic? Are you kidding?
I have been noticing lots of non-political regular Joes who normally never comment on politics are getting fed up with the obviously made up crap.
Once again you allow your views to be warped by your own prejudices.
Whether Moore lied or was mistaken or simple a horrible public witness is not relevant to the case. What is relevant is that NO evidence other than the unsupported word of a woman who was reportedly a young teenager when the alleged incident took place over 30 years prior. Now, if you are going to base your entire decision as to the truth of an accusation upon a single witness, you have to also examine that witnesses entire history. Moore’s accuser had a terrible history, one which was simply ignored by all who wished to see Moore eliminated. She would not have been a credible witness in a court of law and should not have been a credible witness in the court of public opinion.
Add to that the fact that Moore had several very credible character witnesses, some were women whom he dated when they were young, who testified that they found the charges against Moore to be incredible. And, finally, we have the other accusers who were essentially proven to be fabricating the incidents described.
Now, you are, allegedly, an attorney. So, you understand(?) the rules of evidence. While the case against Kavanaugh is weaker than the one against Moore [so far ALL of the Kavanaugh accusers’ witnesses have categorically refused to support his accusers’ allegations, where there were no named eye witnesses in the Moore case] the same standards for determining guilt and innocence apply. And, in both cases, there is NO evidence that either man committed any of the acts claimed.
This was intended to be a reponse to Rags’ post above. Please excuse the duplication.
You just lie like it’s your job.
I am an attorney, and I know the difference between the court and the voting booth.
You like to conflate them, which is an implicit lie.
If you’re an attorney you should be disbarred for unprofessional conduct.
“Cause I hurt your snowflake feeewings…???
Poor “Carl”.
There should be a minimum IQ level for lawyers.
I spent the most of the day in court (jury service). Less than impressed.
I bet they were…!!!
You didn’t make the cut, didja?
I bet Rags feels the same way about everyone who does not buy his line of BS.
You’d lose your bet, loser.
Moore was defeated by disgruntled Trumpbots staying home, beause he had the effrontery to defeat Trump’s handpicked RINO. The “scandal” was just their excuse. That much should be clear from their responses.
Leland Keyser, Christine Ford’s close friend and the woman Ford named as the 5th party-goer, says that she believes Ford.
Keyser says she never met Kavanaugh, has no recollection of the party Ford describes, but she believes Ford’s claim of assault.
https://www.newsweek.com/kavanaugh-accusers-friend-doesnt-remember-being-house-party-believes-1134728
Moore was just so awkward, making him an easy target. If someone is a serial attempted rapist, the behavior does not stop upon marriage. Moore never had a strong majority of voters. Kavanaugh’s confirmation was going to rest on a couple of senators.
As to the future, this is not going to stop. Ever. Unless voters come out en masse. November is a great place to begin.
Everyone is an easy target when decent people will not stand up to the monster. Moore was important. Senate at 52/48 is better than 51/49.
“after six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney”
Am I the only person who read that and thought “six days of having her memories (if real) contaminated by present day events” (a serious problem with recalling old events) and “burnishing the lie by eliminating inconsistencies with her lawyer’s help”?
Is there a way to investigate these marxist donkeys for conspiracy?