Reckless disregard

This business with the Supreme Court is like with global warming: there are just enough idiots around even in the parties of the right that everything must be done gently gently. And were not talking about voter-idiots. We mean elected-idiots, like actual Senators in the US or cabinet ministers in Australia, who have to be cajoled along so that they do not side with our enemies. A kind of round up from around the web on where we are with trying to get Kavanaugh onto the Supreme Court. The left are wreckers with no idea the amount of damage they may cause but do this with reckless disregard about any of the consequences that are certain to follow, with the rule of law in jeopardy along with much else.


BATTLE OF BRETT!
Fight roils already ugly political climate...
Trump raises doubts about Kavanaugh's accuser...
Christine asks for ANOTHER day to make decision about testifying...
'If he becomes nominee, I'm moving to another country'...
Republicans decline to subpoena classmate, rejects other demands...
Lawyer Caught On Camera: 'Going To Resist'...
Wearing Socialist Power T-Shirt?
Memory's frailty may be playing role...
U.S. Marshals Probe Threats Against Kavanaugh Family...
Dems: We Already Know He's Guilty...

 

BELIEVE ALL WOMEN: Keith Ellison says his accuser fabricated domestic violence abuse  story, can’t be sure others won’t ‘cook up’ allegations. Related: Keith Ellison pounded about abuse at debate. Watch him blame accusers, say women can make things up! He’s co-chair of the Democratic Party. They’re allegedly investigating him, but they’re slow-walking it past the election. 

 

Women rally in support of Kavanaugh:
´We know the man, we know his heart´
Fox News, by Lauren Lee    Original Article
Dozens of female colleagues, classmates and friends of Brett Kavanaugh rallied in support of the embattled Supreme Court nominee on Friday, saying they don’t believe the sexual assault allegation against him. The women, who last week wrote a letter of support for Kavanaugh, spoke at a Washington press conference in front of a banner that blared “#IStandWithBrett.” “Brett stood out as the most responsible guy who treated us with kindness and respect,” said Megan McCaleb, a former classmate and longtime friend of Kavanaugh.

 

Booker on Kavanaugh: Delay and Destroy

The Circus is the Showtime series that touts a look inside Washington politics via hosts John Heilemann and Mark McKinnon. The current episode (season 3, episode 7) aired on September 16. The episode can be accessed online here if you jump through a few hoops. At around 23:00 it briefly takes up the Democrats’ efforts to delay and obstruct the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court in the Senate Judiciary Committee. The episode does not linger over the proceedings; the Democrats seem to be playing a losing hand of no particular appeal for the crowd to whom the show caters.

McKinnon catches up with Senator Spartacus in the hallway outside the hearing room, before the emergence of Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations against Judge Kavanaugh. We see this exchange:

McKinnon: You don’t think [Kavanaugh’s confirmation] is a done deal?

Booker: I’m going to hold on till the last minute because this is not done until the last vote is cast. And I’ll tell you right now: a lot more can come out. You never know.

And there you have it.

 

OK. But we shall see. At this stage, the only way the Republicans can screw this up is if Kavanaugh is not confirmed. But the fact is, even this is not beyond them.

This entry was posted in American politics, Politics of the Left. Bookmark the permalink.

37 Responses to Reckless disregard

  1. Jannie

    It is bizarre, beyond a circus, an asylum where the lunatics have literally taken over. The Left have weaponised allegations of sexual assault to the point of lethality. The only way to stop the threat to all men is to respond with extreme prejudice.

  2. Zatara

    Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley agreed late Friday to allow Christine Blasey Ford more time to determine whether she will testify about her allegations in front of the committee next week. She now has until 2:30 pm on Saturday.

    Conditions? Senator Grassley denied the outlandish requests from the lunatic attorneys representing Christine Ford.

    – The Senate Judiciary Committee will NOT allow Christine Ford to speak first — that is not how the rule of law works.
    – The Senate Judiciary Committee will NOT allow Christine Ford to stall the proceedings -she is only required to tell her 36-year-old story.
    – The Senate Judiciary Committee will NOT allow only senators to question Ford — a female staff attorney will be questioning Ford (this was a Democrat tactic to berate and harass white men in their campaign ads. Democrats are sick people.)

    (Quotes from several sources)

    If Ford doesn’t respond in the next 1 hour and 43 minutes the vote is going to take place Monday morning (assuming of course the weak arse Republicans don’t punk out on their deadline again).

  3. Zatara

    Christine Blasey Ford, accuser of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, agrees to testify with details yet to be worked out

    Sooo, unless Grassley stands his ground we are right back where we were when this story broke and the delay tactics continue to make the republicans look like jelly spined morons.

    I will not testify in a car.
    I will not testify near or far.
    I will not testify in a train.
    I will not fly in a plane.
    I will not testify, here or there.
    I will not testify anywhere.
    I will not testify first. Or last.
    I will not testify slow or fast.
    There’s nothing more for me to say.
    I can’t remember, anyway.

  4. Mark A

    Zatara
    #2822142, posted on September 23, 2018 at 5:41 am

    Sooo, unless Grassley stands his ground we are right back where we were when this story broke and the delay tactics continue to make the republicans look like jelly spined morons.

    If they agree to this the are jelly backed morons.
    What’s the point of her testifying?
    Testifying to what?
    She can’t remember any real detail, she doesn’t have a witness.

  5. Like I suggested before, if Trump could nominate Jesus, Mohammed or a gay, black, man/woman that identifies as a woman/man to the Supreme Court, the Democrats would do everything in their power to find dirt, manufacture dirt and delay the process.

  6. Tel

    What’s the point of her testifying?

    Under oath, with consequences for getting caught telling lies.

  7. Zatara

    with consequences for getting caught telling lies.

    They wouldn’t dare. The only consequence would be taking a few pity points off her score and she’s still way ahead.

    On the other hand, if she comes off as a complete kook, AND the Dimms can’t cover for her fast enough, that will put serious points on the board for Kavanaugh.

  8. Suburban Boy

    The image in the Fox News report on the sixty-five: BeckyFest ’18.

  9. Megan

    I know I don’t speak for all women but I’m pretty sure that most people who have had any kind of traumatic and unwanted sexual experience remember every tiny detail. The fact she can’t recall even time and place is incredibly weird. The whole thing about trauma and PTSD is that you can’t forget and you sure as hell would know precisely how old you were when your life changed that dramatically for the worse.

  10. Linden

    That’s it, would not matter if he nominated Clinton herself, LOL

  11. OldOzzie

    From WSJ – Kavanaugh Accuser Moves Closer to Deal on Testifying

    Chrstine Blasey Ford ‘accepts’ the request to testify but stops short of agreeing to do so on Wednesday as Republicans have proposed

    Her lawyers hadn’t agreed to a request that Dr. Ford testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, as Republicans on the panel proposed. They also didn’t agree that outside counsels would do the questioning instead of solely lawmakers on the committee.

    Dr. Ford “accepts the Committee’s request to provide her first-hand knowledge of Brett Kavanaugh’s sexual misconduct next week,” her lawyers said in a statement that appeared to send a positive signal for testimony without locking her into an ironclad agreement. “We are hopeful that we can reach agreement on details,” they said.

    A senior Trump administration official said that the response from Dr. Ford’s camp “wasn’t a yes.”

    “They have blown past several deadlines and continue to want to negotiate further,” the official said. “Her side is continuing another delay tactic. I don’t know how what they’re saying right now is different than what they’ve been saying for several days.”

    The official added that Judge Kavanaugh “was prepared to testify this week and he’s prepared to testify next week.”

    Also on Saturday, the Senate Judiciary Committee said that an adviser temporarily hired to help advance Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination resigned from his post following allegations of sexual harassment in a previous job. The adviser, Garrett Ventry, denied the allegations.

  12. mh

    Message to Republicans: grow a pair and VOTE MONDAY.

  13. mh

    Once again George Soros is calling the shots by funding Christine Ford’s attorney.

    And the Republicans play right into his grubby hands.

  14. I know I don’t speak for all women but I’m pretty sure that most people who have had any kind of traumatic and unwanted sexual experience remember every tiny detail.

    Men as well and even when very young. I can well remember when I was about four, a car pulling up in front of our house in Geelong and the door opening with a guy leaning out asking if I wanted some lollies. Dad was in the front yard and yelled to get away. At that the car sped off.

    I can also vividly remember as a six year old in Footscray, while parents were in a nearby laundromat, I was standing in an alcove looking into a jewellers store window when some guy came up behind me, ran his finger up my arse and asked me if I’d like to see his dick. I was out of there like the Flash. He was long gone by the time my dad went looking for him.

    Needless to say I don’t have fond feelings towards a certain group of sickos.

  15. H B Bear

    Uncle George is like a global Bucket Guts. Always present but one degree of freedom removed from any criminal or shady activity that has taken place.

  16. I am bespoke

    I have to point out that we have a problem hear with alleged RW media pundits wilfully riding the trial by media and at best a limp resistance to setting up the same university kangaroo court system that has destroyed peoples lives in the US.

  17. Ellen of Tasmania

    “… So by all means, teach your sons to really respect what no means. But while you are at it, you should also teach them what justice is, what credible charges are, what dirty politics refers to, what due process means, and why the presumption of innocence is so important. …

    Second, there is a difference between adverbs and adjectives, between “credibly alleged” and “credible allegation.” What is being said about Kavanaugh might be a credible allegation. We would have to examine the evidence to see. We would have to cross-examine the witnesses. We should follow the rules of due process. But there is no way in blue blazes that this is credibly alleged. A forty-year-old charge being trotted out by political enemies on the eve of an important “advise and consent” vote regarding the highest judicial office in the land? Are you kidding me? You people could make a cat laugh.”

    (https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/the-man-with-the-quivering-red-laser-dot-on-his-chest.html)

  18. This is beyond a joke. Even one of the female witnesses to the alleged event, a life-long friend of Ford, says this never happened: https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/09/22/politics/kavanaugh-ford-accuser-nomination/index.html?__twitter_impression=true.

  19. Death Giraffe

    Needless to say I don’t have fond feelings towards a certain group of sickos.

    ..
    The dirty bastards were everywhere.
    This idea that men can’t know what it is like, so we should shut up is bullshit.

  20. cohenite

    Zoe Daniel of the stinking abc’s coverage of Kavanaugh as analysed by Tony Thomas. A good read but likely to upset:

    The ABC, Witness for the Persecution

    Tony Thomas Quadrant Online September 22nd 2018

    Democrats sat on a fact-lite accusation of sexual assault against SCOTUS nominee Brett Kavanaugh, then summoned US media allies for a last minute pile-on. From this melange of innuendo and pearl-clutching horror, the ABC’s Zoe Daniel extracted only the worst to ‘inform’ her Australian audience

    Zoe Daniel is the ABC’s Washington-based North America bureau chief. In other words, her ABC daily mission is to bash Trump using the Democrat storylines. She sometimes finds a storyline of her own, such as interviewing her own children, Arkie, 10, and Pearl, 8, when Trump was elected. That story began, “Donald Trump’s victory has provoked fear and concern for some children…”

    Her ‘shocked’ Arkie thought Trump should be given a chance despite his alleged racism, sexism, assaults on gay people and Latinos, “and all those people who have done nothing in their life for Trump to hurt their feelings that way,” he continued, claiming to quote his primary-school pals. Pearl, who had switched from backing Bernie Sanders to Hillary, was convinced Trump was going to “kick out” Mexicans en bloc, including her Mexican school buddies, which would “just be mean”. Pearl found consolation and inspiration in Hillary’s concession speech.

    To get inside the mind of Daniel mère, pull on the gumboots, as you’ll be wading in ABC progressive-left-liberal mush. For example, on Friday Daniel was writing on ABC News about embattled Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, 53. “Can he really sit on the US Supreme Court dishing out morality now?” said the headline, under the ABC’s standing banners “Trump’s America” and “Planet America”. (There was never a standing ABC banner “Obama’s America”).

    Scene-setting is that the minority Democrat senators want to delay Kavanaugh’s elevation to the Supreme Court until the mid-term elections on November 6, when they might attain a majority and be in position to block’s Trump’s current pick and foil any further nominations of conservative jurists.[i] If the Democrats can’t block Kavanaugh appointment they face the prospect of a right-leaning SCOTUS for the next 30 years. Daniel speculates this could mean anti-abortion rulings.

    The Republican majority could simply ram his appointment through. Instead, they are being fastidious about protocol (as is Trump in this case) to avert any female voting backlash over perceived disrespect to the sex-assault claimant, psychology professor Christine Blasey Ford, 51, a registered Democrat and donor. She claimed, initially anonymously and this month on the record, that a drunken Kavanaugh groped and assaulted her at a school-brat party 35 years ago, about summer 1982, when she was about 15 and Kavanaugh 17.

    Daniel’s arguments are hard to follow (do Supreme Court judges “dish out morality” or just interpret the law?). She supposes that even if, as is likely, Christine Ford’s story is never verified, her mere allegation taints Kavanaugh forever and would make him look a moral hypocrite on the bench. Daniel claims her inane supposition is “roiling the nation”.

    Daniel knows the big question about senior Democrat panel senator Dianne Feinstein producing the allegation a fortnight ago is that she’d had the material since July but never mentioned it despite many opportunities during the regular hearings. This manifest abuse of process is, in Daniel-speak, “some superb timing in all of this for the Democrats”. She uses the oft-practised ABC reporters’ trick of reciting anti-Trump material with the ABC’s authority, but putting contrary and unwelcome facts into quotes from the malign president and his supporters.[ii] In this case, she says Trump is “joining a GOP chorus suggesting that Democrats are using the allegation to delay confirmation hearings”.

    Well they are, as they all but openly admit, so she got that bit right.

    Daniel makes no secret of her partiality towards the complainant. After the “alleged” assault, she writes, the young Ford “got away but has provided medical notes from therapists showing she’s struggled with men and relationships since. A polygraph test found she was telling the truth.” Two points: Ford didn’t “get away”, she alleges she got away from the alleged assault. And the polygraph didn’t find she was “telling the truth”, it found that she believed her own story, whether it was truth, fiction or anywhere in between.[iii]

    Another hallmark of ABC bias is strategic omission of key facts. Sure, there are word limits but Daniel might also have mentioned the 65 women who knew Kavanaugh at school and thereafter and have attested on the record to his good character.

    Instead, Daniel provides a link to purported corroborative “detail and worth a read” from the anti-Trump Los Angeles Times. The link, in fact, is to an opinion piece by a Clara Hall who pushes even more strident anti-Kavanaugh lines than Daniel and provides no corroborative detail whatsoever for Professor Ford’s case. That case, so far, has scant or no detail anyway — no date, no certainty of place, or how she arrived there and made it back home. Democrat Senator Feinstein herself says she doesn’t know how much of the complaint is true. Feinstein is 85 and tends to make embarrassingly contradictory remarks. The LA Times’ Hall says that Ford’s allegation includes graphic detail about her ordeal. “That doesn’t make her story automatically true,” she writes, “but the details make the allegation serious enough to be worth investigating [by the FB I].” A fallacy there, surely? Hall then cranks up the dial to 11:

    “Am I setting too high a bar?…All you men out there – when you were in high school, how many teenage girls did you pin down on a bed after a pool party and cover their mouths so they couldn’t scream? Right. Doesn’t sound like something you’d do.”

    Alleged victim Ford says she told no-one of the alleged assault because her parents would discover her forbidden partying. She first disclosed the matter in marital counselling in 2012, but she did not name Kavanaugh. In further therapy a year later, she referred to an alleged traumatic rape attempt.

    A classmate of Ford, Christina Miranda, in an attempt to bolster the case, came out saying, “This incident did happen. Many of us heard a buzz about it indirectly with few specific details. However Christina’s vivid recollection should be more than enough for us to truly, deeply know that the accusation is true.” The friend scuttled back into the woodwork when she realised she was contradicting Ford’s version — ie., that she had told no one. When this contradiction was noted and began to cop pushback on Facebook, she deleted her post and admitted she didn’t really know what had taken place. She explained that she had felt “empowered” making the post, but couldn’t defend it as TV interview requests poured in.

    Complainant Ford alleged that Kavanagh classmate Mark Judge had watched and laughed, then jumped drunkenly on Ford and Kavanaugh and thus terminated the alleged sexual assault. Daniel never raises a sceptical eyebrow, instead directing her readers to a Washington Post character-assassination of Mark Judge. Post reporter Avi Selk combed Judge’s high school yearbook of about 1983 and finds Judge put a caption on his page, “Certain women should be struck regularly, like gongs.” It’s a quote from the gay Noel Coward’s Private Lives (1930). In pre-Google 1983, Judge had a better handle on theatre than I did (zero) at his age. What 17-year-old boy in that era wouldn’t be a smart-arse about females? And why do women still flock to Coward’s comedies at the theatre?

    If Daniel wants mature-age men to be held accountable for schoolboy misdeeds, she could also monster her colleague, ABC science guy Robyn Williams, who in his 1950s London state-grammar school beat up a “weak” and “hopeless” boy, who was “as pugilistic as Bambi”. Williams “hit him hard in the face. He turned without resistance and so I pummeled his kidneys as if to break his back, simulating a cold frenzy.” Williams’ pals, initially gloating, got frightened and intervened at last to rescue the collapsed and coughing student. Williams never apologized to his “miserable, crushed victim” but did resolve to eschew such shameful violence henceforth. [iv]

    I’m not judgemental about Williams as a teen and he was brave to make the cathartic disclosure. But this whole distasteful Kavanaugh accusation involves schoolboy teens. All civilised states have separate, anonymous and sealed court jurisdictions for children (usually to 18th birthday) because of their immaturity and better prospects as adults. That said, it is arguable that a Supreme Court nominee is a special case, if the assault allegation is correct.

    Post reporter Selk’s desperate search for incrimination also finds in Judge’s yearbook, “’Ebony and Ivory’ beneath a photo of a white and a black student”, and “’Do these guys beat their wives?’ beneath a group photo of several boys.” Judge, a recovered alcoholic, wrote two memoirs about high school hi-jinks, where students attended “masturbation class,” “lusted after girls” from nearby Catholic schools and drank themselves into stupours at parties. No sexual assaults are mentioned. The worst to be found about Kavanaugh (dubbed “O’Kavanaugh”) is that he got drunk, puked and passed out as a car passenger.

    However, Judge became a columnist and the Post has found much in those columns to complain about. In what might be called “SafetyRazor-gate”, it found that in 2006 (yes, 2006) Judge had written in a piece, “Shaving like a man”, that safety razors were “girly” and he liked using the masculine classic razor. For the Post this was rampant misogyny. The paper then collapsed on itself – it had to correct that Judge’s “girly” reference was to disposable razors, not safety ones.[v]

    Getting back to the ABC’s Daniel, she finishes with a circular flourish that if Kavanaugh is guilty of that nasty assault, he would also be guilty of having “simply denied it ever happened”. Hence he would not have learnt from his mistake.

    “The whole thing has cast doubt on his character, and that will be hard to shake when the allegation will be impossible to fully prove or disprove so long after the event,” she writes. “In short, the judges need to be squeaky clean to dictate everyone else’s behaviour.”

    To get inside Daniel’s head, as well as wearing the gumboots, maybe take a torch. It’s dim in there.

  21. Death Giraffe

    Good conservatives cannot let progressives continue to turn sexual violence allegations into a political game.
    Ultimately will discredit genuine cases.
    The dirty sons of bitches who do these things would love nothing better.

  22. Death Giraffe

    Just as real racists love the trivialisation of racism by progressives.

  23. I think one thing you can take as a given from this is that once Ford has served her purpose (and failed), the Democrats will drop her like a hot potato. Following that, she’ll have a nervous breakdown at best (given her history), or worse, dock herself.

  24. Mr Black

    There are only 40 some republicans in the Senate and perhaps a half dozen democrats calling themselves republicans. That is the problem here. If each republican voted Yes on the republican agenda this nonsense would not be possible. Traitors are always more deadly than an enemy who stands in front of you.

  25. There are only 40 some republicans in the Senate and perhaps a half dozen democrats calling themselves republicans.

    That’s pretty much today’s Liberal Party, though I think the ratio is far worse than in the US.

  26. mh

    There are only 40 some republicans in the Senate and perhaps a half dozen democrats calling themselves republicans.

    One less RINO now.

  27. OldOzzie

    Christine Blasey Ford could indeed be lying

    This whole confirmation process, in fact, has grown, in the words of Alice, curiouser and curiouser. The more we learn of Democratic funding to stop the Kavanaugh process, the more we learn of George Soros’ ties to groups like Demand Justice — a non-profit entity aimed at halting President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court picks that, coincidence-of-all-coincidences, just hired the same general counsel who worked for Sen. Dianne Feinstein — the more Wonderland this all becomes.

    What’s more, it’s gone around the bend of un-American.

    It’s just not constitutional to throw out unfounded, unsupported accusations against an individual and then sit back and watch the chaos that unfolds, all the while claiming some untouchable high ground of victimhood.

    If Ford has proof, it should’ve come at the same time as the accusation.

    If Ford has a compelling reason why that proof couldn’t come at the same time as the accusation, she should’ve made known that reason.

    If Ford has anything, anything at all that could show her claims against Kavanaugh are rooted in fact and truth, she needs to cough it up and cough it up quick. It’s not incumbent on Kavanaugh to prove his innocence.

    It is, however, incumbent on Ford to prove his guilt — to prove she’s not lying and using a shameful, despicable tactic to disrupt the Supreme Court proceedings and kill Kavanaugh’s nomination. After all, it may not happen often, but women can indeed lie about such matters. And when they do, they don’t just hurt the accused.

    And in the Meantime

    Radical Leftwing Groups Linked to Soros are Bussing in Protest Mobs for This Week’s Kavanaugh Hearings

    Christine Blasey Ford has made a Rod for her Back for the Future re not being able to Yly – As soon as she takes a Flight after this is all over she shows “Hmmmmmm.”

  28. On the other hand, if she comes off as a complete kook, AND the Dimms can’t cover for her fast enough, that will put serious points on the board for Kavanaugh.

    That’s why she won’t testify in the end.

  29. PB

    There are plenty of Republicans who will turn on Trump to satisfy their (((donors))).

  30. Tel

    That’s why she won’t testify in the end.

    Yup, we can start a book on how long she strings this out. I think she has another week left in it, so my estimate is 1st October for the confirmation vote with no testimony from Ford.

  31. thefrollickingmole

    Lets just go back to the simplest of principles.

    That which is presented without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

  32. .

    (((donors)))

    Hey PB what does this mean?

  33. Luke

    Once this is over he should systematically sue everyone who defamed him over this.

    To think this woman gets to mould impressionable minds.

  34. faceache

    Ford will get a very bad migraine about Wednesday afternoon.

  35. Leo G

    Hey PB what does this mean?

    Parenthetical Bird droppings?

Comments are closed.