President Donald J. Trump's Supreme Court Associate Justice Kavanaugh

[Buffalo_Gal]

Ashley Kavanaugh Receiving Death Threats

via WSJ:  
 

Judge Kavanaugh’s wife, Ashley Estes Kavanaugh, also has faced threats, which are being investigated by the U.S. Marshals Service, a senior administration official said Thursday.

Mrs. Kavanaugh has received two profane notes in her work email account in recent days, the official said. Both notes, which have been reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, were sent from the same email address.

One of the notes to Mrs. Kavanaugh, a town manager in the suburbs of Washington, D.C., reads, “May you, your husband and your kids burn in hell.” The other, whose subject line reads, “Hi, Ashley,” says she should tell her husband to “put a bullet in his … skull.”

[B-Man]

 

Quote

 

Seung Min Kim‏Verified account @seungminkim

FollowFollow @seungminkim

--Ford does NOT want Kavanaugh in the room when she testifies, and she asked that Kavanaugh testify first

4:51 PM - 20 Sep 2018

 

 

 

Quote

 

Jeff B.‏Verified account @EsotericCD

FollowFollow @EsotericCD

Jeff B. Retweeted Seung Min Kim

As per usual with Ford's attorney, they are going for the Impossible Ask, a request no reasonable side could ever agree to. In this case, the poison pill is her going second and him going first. That inverts every principle in the book (no chance to rebut accusations).

 

 

 

 

 

The reason you make impossible demands (in any context, legal or otherwise) is because you are secretly unwilling to perform, but you don't want the onus of demurring to fall on you. You make it about other party's "unwillingness to compromise." Textbook stuff.

 

 

 

1. Stephen Miller‏Verified account @redsteeze 12m12 minutes ago

   Ford’s lawyers & Democrats have made their demands and then obstructed the process every single time their demands are met.

    

   - Show up Monday.

   - Answer our questions

   - If security is concern. Do it in private

   If not, schedule the vote & be done with this.

    
2. “We can’t have old white republican men questioning her.”

    

   “Okay we’ll have female outside counsel do it.”

    

   “No deal.”

.

[bbb]

 

[3rdnlng]

Obfuscation has always been the dems MO. They don't want to solve anything that will take away their talking points. See DACA.

[4merper4mer]

30 minutes ago, Cinga said:

Holy crap!

WTF am I missing?  I gave up after 9 paragraphs of "Seniors don't study much".

[DC Tom]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

But justice victimizes the accusers.

 

It's why the Obama administration grossly abused Title IX to force schools to levy administrative punishment, on a "preponderance of evidence" rather than "reasonable doubt" basis.  This is pretty much the same thing - administrative punishment for an accusation of a criminal act, because the justice system "won't believe the victim."

[B-Man]

Normal Americans don't want to live in a world where the anonymous charge rules over logic and rational inquiry and empiricism.

 

 

“You can’t prove he DIDN’T do it” is the position of idiots, liars, or craven political activists.

 

 

 

 

ADDED:

 

 

Quote

 

Stephen Miller‏Verified account @redsteeze 3h3 hours ago

More

I knew it was bad news that Chevy Chase was back in the news.

 

 

 

?

Edited September 21, 2018 by B-Man

[Cinga]

6 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

WTF am I missing?  I gave up after 9 paragraphs of "Seniors don't study much".

Just the top link alone exposes the fact it is the students that literally run the all girls school. I only read parts of one of the pastebin ones,  but the pics in the yearbook along with the stories, could be easily verified in the pastebin as a girls party school....

 

I would not in the least be surprised to learn the accusation suit her, more than him

[DC Tom]

1 minute ago, B-Man said:

Normal Americans don't want to live in a world where the anonymous charge rules over logic and rational inquiry and empiricism.

 

 

  Yes they do.  They just want their irrationalism to reign supreme.

 

I so want to start an invitation-only political "Rational Party."  The only platform being: we only care that you act like a rational adult and back up your position with verifiable facts.  Problem is, maybe only six people would be eligible for party membership.  

[whatdrought]

My real questions is what percentage of those who identify with the Democratic Party actually believe these accusations? 

We know the dem senators don’t, or else they wouldn’t have sat on it for so long.

[DC Tom]

Accuser just offered to testify: Thursday, without Kavanaugh present.  

 

Republicans should schedule the vote tomorrow for next Friday, then Tuesday accept this offer.  Because !@#$ this nonsense.

[TakeYouToTasker]

7 minutes ago, B-Man said:

Normal Americans don't want to live in a world where the anonymous charge rules over logic and rational inquiry and empiricism.

 

 

“You can’t prove he DIDN’T do it” is the position of idiots, liars, or craven political activists.

 

 

 

 

ADDED:

 

 

 

 

?

 

On the upside, I guess atheism and agnosticism are things of the past?

[DC Tom]

9 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

My real questions is what percentage of those who identify with the Democratic Party actually believe these accusations? 

We know the dem senators don’t, or else they wouldn’t have sat on it for so long.

 

Doesn't matter if the accusation is true.  It only matters that it can be true, because it's illustrative of the systemic misogyny of toxic masculinity in American culture, which Kavanaugh represents.  Thus, he can't be confirmed under any circumstances.

 

Really, that's funny.  Thinking the truth of an accusation matters to these people.  You're talking about people who have explicitly stated that false accusations should be made to highlight the problem of toxic masculinity.  Truth doesn't enter in to it.  

 

EDIT: you also have to consider that they likely do not want these charges heard.  The rampant speculation provides Democrats more benefit than having the accusation aired, and NOT having it heard lets them play the victim card even harder.

Edited September 21, 2018 by DC Tom

[4merper4mer]

2 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

Accuser just offered to testify: Thursday, without Kavanaugh present.  

 

Republicans should schedule the vote tomorrow for next Friday, then Tuesday accept this offer.  Because !@#$ this nonsense.

Asking that he not be present seems ok to me.  Asking that he testify first seems unreasonable.

[Buffalo_Gal]

5 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

Accuser just offered to testify: Thursday, without Kavanaugh present.  

 

Republicans should schedule the vote tomorrow for next Friday, then Tuesday accept this offer.  Because !@#$ this nonsense.

And only wants questions from senators that believe her story. Ummm sure. 

[DC Tom]

Just now, 4merper4mer said:

Asking that he not be present seems ok to me.  Asking that he testify first seems unreasonable.

 

Not sure it's reasonable to ask Kavanaugh to not be present at his own confirmation hearings.  

 

What...no one caught that?  This is still Kavanaugh's confirmation hearing we're talking about.  Democrats are trying to change the actual purpose of the hearings from Senate confirmation hearings to a referendum on sexual assault.  

 

1 minute ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

And only wants questions from senators that believe her story. Ummm sure. 

 

Didn't see that part.  She only wants Senate Democrats present?  At Judiciary Committee hearings on SCOTUS confirmation?    That takes some balls...

[Buffalo_Gal]

2 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Asking that he not be present seems ok to me.  Asking that he testify first seems unreasonable.

What happened to being able to confront your accuser? 

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

Didn't see that part.  She only wants Senate Democrats present?  At Judiciary Committee hearings on SCOTUS confirmation?    That takes some balls...

 

I didn't see it as a request for only dem senators present.  But maybe it was?

[DC Tom]

Just now, Buffalo_Gal said:

What happened to being able to confront your accuser? 

 

It re-victimizes the victim.  

 

Again: same people who abused Title IX for this purpose, to avoid recognizing the rights of the accused.  (And if you point this out to anyone who support that, they'll say the accused shouldn't have rights, because they're criminals.)

2 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

I didn't see it as a request for only dem senators present.  But maybe it was?

 

How could it not be?  Think it through...not just a request to not be questioned by anyone who disbelieves her, but by anyone who insists on being objective on the matter.  If you merely want to hear her story, she doesn't want you asking about it.

 

"Only those who believe me" is a high bar, and eliminates anyone who hasn't already pre-judged Kavanaugh.  

[B-Man]

12 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

Accuser just offered to testify: Thursday, without Kavanaugh present.  

 

Republicans should schedule the vote tomorrow for next Friday, then Tuesday accept this offer.  Because !@#$ this nonsense.

 

Yashar Ali  ?‏Verified account @yashar 23m23 minutes ago

M

Yashar Ali  ?Retweeted Manu Raju

A senior Senate staffer tells me that both of these are non-starters.

1. Kavanaugh will testify after Ford so that he can respond to her accusations the staffer told me

2. They will not allow witnesses to dictate who does/doesn't get subpoenaed.

 

 

 

 

JULIE KELLY: Ladies, We Don’t Need To Be Part Of Your Group Therapy. 

 

“By ‘we,’ I mean America. And by ‘this,’ I mean some form of forced group therapy session for adult women who cannot move past an ugly event from their teen years and feel the need to relitigate it in public nearly four decades later. A serious vetting process for a Supreme Court nominee has suddenly devolved into the GenX version of ‘The Big Chill.'” 

 

 

 

.

[4merper4mer]

11 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Not sure it's reasonable to ask Kavanaugh to not be present at his own confirmation hearings.  

 

What...no one caught that?  This is still Kavanaugh's confirmation hearing we're talking about.  Democrats are trying to change the actual purpose of the hearings from Senate confirmation hearings to a referendum on sexual assault.  

This crap stopped resembling a confirmation hearing long before this stuff.

 

If Kavanagh is sitting there or not, the Dems are going to be campaigning only.  They have no respect for Ford, Kavanagh or any other individual.

[DC Tom]

1 minute ago, B-Man said:

 

Yashar Ali  ?‏Verified account @yashar 23m23 minutes ago

M

Yashar Ali  ?Retweeted Manu Raju

A senior Senate staffer tells me that both of these are non-starters.

1. Kavanaugh will testify after Ford so that he can respond to her accusations the staffer told me

2. They will not allow witnesses to dictate who does/doesn't get subpoenaed.

 

 

 

 

JULIE KELLY: Ladies, We Don’t Need To Be Part Of Your Group Therapy. 

 

“By ‘we,’ I mean America. And by ‘this,’ I mean some form of forced group therapy session for adult women who cannot move past an ugly event from their teen years and feel the need to relitigate it in public nearly four decades later. A serious vetting process for a Supreme Court nominee has suddenly devolved into the GenX version of ‘The Big Chill.'” 

 

 

 

.

 

Of course they're non-starters.  Democrats don't want further hearings, they just want to delay this as long as possible, and cast as much doubt on the confirmation as possible.

7 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

This crap stopped resembling a confirmation hearing long before this stuff.

 

If Kavanagh is sitting there or not, the Dems are going to be campaigning only.  They have no respect for Ford, Kavanagh or any other individual.

 

And let's not forget, no small reason the Democrats want more time is to line up more disruptions for the hearing.  

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[B-Man]

NOTHING TO SEE HERE, MOVE ALONG: BILL CLINTON’S FORMER ‘WAR ROOM’ DIRECTOR QUIETLY ADVISING KAVANAUGH ACCUSER.

 

 

 

.

 

[Koko78]

I'd be ok with Kavanaugh testifying first. Ask him his hat size, thank him politely for his testimony, then call the B word to testify. When she's done, recall him to rebut her nonsense.

Edited September 21, 2018 by Koko78

[boyst]

7 hours ago, BringBackOrton said:

Well they were high-profile.  I'm sure there were several thousands that weren't.

3.  3 is bigger than 2.  So it's obvious to assume that actually means 1000000000

 

Like. Wait.  How many died 3 years ago in that hurricane?

[KD in CA]

GOP should just call for the vote on Monday and be done with it.

[boyst]

4 hours ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

Tom’s point and your second paragraph are the slut shaming that was bound to follow any woman who comes forward with an allegation. 

 

And why don’t women report sexual assault?

 

There’s no evidence here that we’ve seen. The confirmation will proceed, as it should, unless something else comes out. But I won’t stoop to calling her a slut or being “50-50” on stories about how she wrote a letter about Gorsuch that originated with a Q-amplifier guy on Twitter. 

Grow a pair.   Life must suck to live on a collar.   

 

She's not a slut. She's an attention whore, a liar, a hypocrite and a disgusting human who should be put down.

 

.........

Edit

Cluck sans the l is now word filtered. ?

How insecure must someone have been to report it

Edited September 21, 2018 by Boyst62

[B-Man]

DANIEL HENNINGER: What Democrats Have Become.

Consider the spectacle: Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination for the U.S. Supreme Court, the embodiment of a modern rule of law, is being decided in the Senate by the medieval practice of trial by ordeal, such as surviving immersion in fire or ice. Trial by ordeal was outlawed by the Lateran Council in 1215.

 

Or worse, the standards of the mob in the Roman Colosseum, turning thumbs up or down on the combatants. Though unlike the Senate Democrats, the Roman mob at least had an open mind.

 

Incidentally, the standard trope that Donald Trump has degraded our politics? We don’t need to hear that anymore. Or about the moral certitudes of the religious right.

 

Is there a sadder figure in the modern Democratic Party than Sen. Dianne Feinstein? Elected to the Senate in 1992, Mrs. Feinstein has produced a creditable career. Her above-it-all reputation was never quite deserved, but she has at least performed with dignity.

 

Now, seeking re-election at 85, she is getting heat from the progressive-dominated Democratic Party in California, the world capital of identity-only politics. By withholding from the committee the accusatory Ford letter that came into her possession nearly two months ago, Sen. Feinstein ensured the nomination’s descent into such a hapless, cynical moment. This will be the most remembered event in Sen. Feinstein’s career.

 

The Kavanaugh nomination, “given what we know,” has come down to an undiscoverable accusation. The defeat of a Supreme Court nominee on this basis would be a victory for a level of conscious political nullification not seen in the U.S. for a long time. Republicans in the Senate shouldn’t allow it, and voters in November should not affirm it.

 

 

This is a joke. Hold the vote tomorrow.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

68Posted 

[Buffalo_Gal]

Just a thought......If Christine Ford declines to be interviewed Monday.... I’m available to answer questions about my Rape by Bill Clinton.

 

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/atensnut/status/1042570489619722247

 

 

 

[B-Man]

Ford’s requests made by her attorney, per NBC News:

 

-Hearing Thurs. earliest

-Kavanaugh testifies first

-Kavanaugh not in room when she is

-no outside counsel for questioning

-subpoena Mark Judge

-no time limit on her opening statement

-pool camera only

-movement plan for security

 

 

My counter offer would be we're confirming him now

 

 

 

 

.

[4merper4mer]

42 minutes ago, B-Man said:

Ford’s requests made by her attorney, per NBC News:

 

-Hearing Thurs. earliest

-Kavanaugh testifies first

-Kavanaugh not in room when she is

-no outside counsel for questioning

-subpoena Mark Judge

-no time limit on her opening statement

-pool camera only

-movement plan for security

 

 

My counter offer would be we're confirming him now

 

 

 

 

.

In about 6 years Harvey Weinstein will be hailed as a champion of women when he makes a movie about all of this.

[bbb]

On 9/17/2018 at 8:50 AM, Tiberius said:

If no other women come forward in the next two weeks then his nomination should go forward. I just hope he crashes and burns, though. 

 

Come on ladies! Come forward!! 

 

Where are all the other ladies? 

[Doc Brown]

1 hour ago, bbb said:

 

Where are all the other ladies? 

Is it fair to dismiss her allegations based on nobody else coming forward?  Probably not. 

Does it make it more likely that she's either making it up or has a faulty memory of what actually happened that night?  Yes.

Do I think this is a Hal Mary play by the Dems to somehow prevent a lifelong Republican from joining the Supreme Court?  Yes.

Is another goal to further the Mad Men society that Democrats are accusing Republican politicians of still embracing with the emphasis on Trump?  Yes.

Would Republican politicians go down this same path if the shoe was on the other foot?  Absolutely. 

 

Kavanaugh doesn't come off as likable and charismatic as Roberts and Gorsuch did during their confirmation hearings so I'd be interested in seeing the polling on this.  My guess in today's political climate and the #metoo movement there would be a slight edge in those who disapprove of Kavanaugh being appointed with a lot of undecideds.

 

Edited September 21, 2018 by Doc Brown

[Tiberius]

5 hours ago, bbb said:

 

Where are all the other ladies? 

No where to be found it looks like. Too bad  

 

This guy is going to gleefully kill people 

[boyst]

8 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

No where to be found it looks like. Too bad  

 

This guy is going to gleefully kill people 

!@#$, I can't wait for the lulz.  Killing people, especially Americans!  Yaaaassssss!

 

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, Boyst62 said:

!@#$, I can't wait for the lulz.  Killing people, especially Americans!  Yaaaassssss!

 

I bet, got the lube out for when he helps destroy health care for millions of Americans. 

[boyst]

Just now, Tiberius said:

I bet, got the lube out for when he helps destroy health care for millions of Americans. 

Oh, Me, yes... Killing uninsured Americans!

 

[Buffalo_Gal]

4 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Is it fair to dismiss her allegations based on nobody else coming forward?  Probably not. 

Does it make it more likely that she's either making it up or has a faulty memory of what actually happened that night?  Yes.

Do I think this is a Hal Mary play by the Dems to somehow prevent a lifelong Republican from joining the Supreme Court?  Yes.

Is another goal to further the Mad Men society that Democrats are accusing Republican politicians of still embracing with the emphasis on Trump?  Yes.

Would Republican politicians go down this same path if the shoe was on the other foot?  Absolutely. 

 

Kavanaugh doesn't come off as likable and charismatic as Roberts and Gorsuch did during their confirmation hearings so I'd be interested in seeing the polling on this.  My guess in today's political climate and the #metoo movement there would be a slight edge in those who disapprove of Kavanaugh being appointed with a lot of undecideds.

 

 

This is the only poll I could find , and it was from several days ago. If it is accurate, it is the reason the squish Republicans found their backbone. Unless you were a woman that voted for Hillary,  you did not find his accuser in any way credible. (Since it is a HuffPo poll and likely to be the poll that most leans for Ford, my  guess is other polls are similar or worse... but that is just a guess.)

The dailycaller posts that poll's numbers in an easy to read chart. 

[Tiberius]

If he did do this, should he not be approved? 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

5 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Is it fair to dismiss her allegations based on nobody else coming forward?  Probably not. 

Does it make it more likely that she's either making it up or has a faulty memory of what actually happened that night?  Yes.

Do I think this is a Hal Mary play by the Dems to somehow prevent a lifelong Republican from joining the Supreme Court?  Yes.

Is another goal to further the Mad Men society that Democrats are accusing Republican politicians of still embracing with the emphasis on Trump?  Yes.

Would Republican politicians go down this same path if the shoe was on the other foot?  Absolutely. 

 

Kavanaugh doesn't come off as likable and charismatic as Roberts and Gorsuch did during their confirmation hearings so I'd be interested in seeing the polling on this.  My guess in today's political climate and the #metoo movement there would be a slight edge in those who disapprove of Kavanaugh being appointed with a lot of undecideds.

 

You could have stopped after "is it fair".

 

Of course it isn't.  The politics of personal destruction is an age old trick, as is the destroyers-in-fact claiming moral superiority. 

 

Many men have made false and unprovable allegations to f with someone else.

 

Many women have made false and unprovable allegations to f with someone else. 

 

Most politicians include the ability to do so as a job skill on their resume.

 

The true art is destroying someone else without getting your hands dirty. Joe Biden today on NBC news said their shoukd be an FBI investigation as they had with Clarence Thomas, that it took two days, CT was confirmed but senators were too tough on Anita Hill. He believed her, of course, so the FBI investigation that revealed nothing of merit...revealed what it only could reveal. He said. She said. 

 

Biden also made this really awkward comment along the lines of "Have you seen Deliverance? How would you like to be that guy tied to the tree?". What a stooge.