Thursday, September 27, 2018
Feinstein just blamed the victim for leaking her story!
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Oh, so this is political.
If these cowards and slime in the US Senate refuse to confirm Kavanaugh, I hope he runs for president
Brett Kavanaugh is the great man Donald Trump only dreams he could be.
Donald Trump fights for Brett Kavanaugh like he fights for his wall
"I'm going to see what happens tomorrow. I'm going to be watching," he said during a rare solo news conference. "I'm going to see what's said. It's possible they will be convincing." "I can be persuaded also," the President went on. "I can't tell you if they're liars until I hear them."
Brett Kavanaugh's deeds are plain for all to see, his accusers' dark and filthy
Nor need I speak my deeds, for these you see:
The sun and day are witnesses for me.
-- John Dryden
Tim Walberg just blamed no funding for the wall on Democrats Chuck Shumer and Debbie Stabenow
Just now on the Steve Gruber Show.
Walberg knows damn well Republicans control the Congress and can pass such spending if they want to. Spending bills don't require supermajorities.
Republicans simply don't want a wall.
Wednesday, September 26, 2018
Ford took polygraph Aug. 7 in MD, told Feinstein she'd be back in CA after Aug. 10: How'd she do it if afraid to fly?
She protested Grassley's invitation to testify so quickly partly on the grounds of fear of flying.
NBC lies about Senate probe of recent anonymous allegation dating to 1998
The Senate has already dismissed the anonymous allegation. There is no "probe", just hysteria.
Julie Swetnik's former boyfriend briefly got restraining order against her
Julie Swetnick, the woman who accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and a friend of attending house parties where women — including herself — were sexually assaulted, had a restraining order filed against her years later in Miami by her former boyfriend.
Julie Swetnick was in college when Brett Kavanaugh was 17: Maybe she supplied them the alcohol and drugs
Questions About Julie Swetnick’s Claims: She Was in College When Brett Kavanaugh Was in High School:
[A]ccording to the New York Times, “Ms. Swetnick grew up in Montgomery County, Md., graduating from Gaithersburg High School in 1980 before attending college at the University of Maryland, according to a résumé for her posted online. Judge Kavanaugh graduated from Georgetown Prep in 1983.” That means she would have met Kavanaugh while she was 17 or 18, and he was 15 or 16 years old. It also would mean that she was attending high school parties while in college.
Brett Kavanaugh's girlfriend when he was 17 backs him up
The Wall Street Journal reports here:
Maura Kane, who dated Judge Kavanaugh for several months when they were both 17-year-old high-school students, said in an interview Wednesday that she didn’t know Ms. Swetnick and didn’t believe such parties occurred. “The allegations are so outrageous and insane,” Ms. Kane said in an interview. “It’s absolutely ridiculous, and we stand by Brett.”
Rasmussen Generic Congressional Ballot Wednesday 9/26/18
46-43-3-8
Democrat-Republican-other-undecided
AM radio's incessant propagandists for women and LGBTs of the Ad Council lied in 2012 that they created Rosie the Riveter
And their lie remains on the record, here at HuffPo, because, you know, women can never lie:
“Only You Can Prevent Forest Fires.” “Friends Don’t Let Friends Drive Drunk.” “Loose Lips Sink Ships.” “Take a Bite Out of Crime. “A Mind is a Terrible Thing to Waste.” You’ve heard these slogans, right? Whether you’re old enough to remember them or they’re familiar because they’ve seeped through our popular culture (Rosie the Riveter paraphernalia is everywhere these days), they ring a bell. They’re memorable and iconic. And they were created by the Ad Council. ... You know about Rosie the Riveter, but did you know that she helped recruit over two million women to join the workforce during the war?
But this so-called Rosie the Riveter isn't Rosie, and wasn't created until 1943, and not by the Ad Council but by Westinghouse's artist, a man, J. Howard Miller, for internal use only and was little seen:
"We Can Do It!" is an American World War II wartime poster produced by J. Howard Miller in 1943 for Westinghouse Electric as an inspirational image to boost worker morale. The poster was very little seen during World War II. It was rediscovered in the early 1980s and widely reproduced in many forms, often called "We Can Do It!" but also called "Rosie the Riveter" after the iconic figure of a strong female war production worker. The "We Can Do It!" image was used to promote feminism and other political issues beginning in the 1980s. ... [D]uring the war the image was strictly internal to Westinghouse, displayed only during February 1943, and was not for recruitment but to exhort already-hired women to work harder. ... No more than 1,800 copies of the 17-by-22-inch (559 by 432 mm) "We Can Do It!" poster were printed. It was not initially seen beyond several Westinghouse factories in East Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and the midwestern U.S., where it was scheduled to be displayed for two five-day work weeks starting Monday, February 15, 1943. ... During World War II, the "We Can Do It!" poster was not connected to the 1942 song "Rosie the Riveter", nor to the widely seen Norman Rockwell painting called Rosie the Riveter that appeared on the cover of the Memorial Day issue of the Saturday Evening Post, May 29, 1943. The Westinghouse poster was not associated with any of the women nicknamed "Rosie" who came forward to promote women working for war production on the home front. Rather, after being displayed for two weeks in February 1943 to some Westinghouse factory workers, it disappeared for nearly four decades.
Byron York thinks Feinstein call to postpone Thursday's hearings designed to give cover to Ford to back out
Here:
Are the new protests a prelude to Ford rejecting yet another hearing date? That's not yet clear. But if she does, she'll have the support of Senate Democrats.
Dianne Feinstein calls for immediate postponement of Kavanaugh confirmation after second accuser emerges
Dianne Feinstein calls for immediate postponement of Kavanaugh confirmation after second accuser emerges
Tuesday, September 25, 2018
The Rush Limbaugh lie of the day: "Drain the swamp" is why Trump was sent to Washington
"Drain the swamp" was a late development in the campaign, courtesy of the libertarian Steve Bannon and former Cruz campaign manager Kellyanne Conway, also a libertarian. Arguably if Trump had dropped that rhetoric and pretended to make nice with the Establishment after he'd won we'd see far more of the things Trump ran on accomplished by now than we do.
Trump distinguished himself from every other candidate in the primaries by making the border with Mexico the central issue from the time he walked down that elevator until mid-August 2016, which, when solved, would help to solve many other problems, like drugs, disease, and crime. After Bannon and Conway came on board replacing Manafort, however, that message began to be played down, to the point that Trump's campaign nearly cratered in the Arizona town hall in late August with Sean Hannity when Trump wavered badly on the issue, polling the crowd for its opinion. That was not the same man we had been seeing for an entire year.
Rush Limbaugh is also a libertarian, and characteristically doesn't give a damn about the border. He never has. He just licked his finger and checked the wind in his support of border security under Trump. But illegal immigration was never on Rush's radar, just as it wasn't on Ted Cruz' either. Rush was for that dual citizen, remember?
Here is Rush today, still trying to co-opt the Trump base:
That’s why at every Trump rally, what is the No. 1 sign they see, outside of Make America Great? What’s the number one sign you see at a Trump rally, Mr. Snerdley? (interruption) Nope. “Drain the swamp.” “Drain the swamp” is the No. 1. “Build the wall,” No. 2. (“Lock her up” is really a chant.) But “drain the swamp” is why Trump was sent there, and declassifying these documents would be a giant step for mankind in draining the swamp.
Wikipedia gets some things right:
False accusations of rape occur at rates 2 to 6 times higher than for other false accusations, over 40% of accusations recanted
From SEX, LIES, AND RAPE:
It is a primary tenet of “feminist jurisprudence” that women never lie when complaining of sexual abuse. This delusion is as ludicrous as the notion that all women think alike.
Any man who states the obvious, however, puts his career at risk. Even liberal Law Professor Alan Dershowitz was accused of sexual harassment just for discussing in class the possibility of false rape allegations. In 1993 Dershowitz told author David Horowitz that he began videotaping classroom lectures on the subject for his own protection, and that other experts in the field stopped teaching rape law rather than take the risk.
According to a report of the Defense Department Inspector General released in 2005, approximately 73% of women and 72% of men at the military service academies believe that false accusations of sexual assault are a problem. But military officials keep pretending that the problem does not exist.
Monday, September 24, 2018
Rush Limbaugh just read the riot act to Chuck Grassley, telling him Republicans had better vote on Kavanaugh
Good! But I doubt Chuck is listening. He's been asleep since September 21st.
Kooky "Macro Tourist" tells us to put aside our political views, uses crabbed Talking Points Memo graph to warn us about Republican federal spending increases
Although the Republicans are supposedly the party of fiscal conservatism, we all know that sort of talk is only for when they are not in power. ... There should be little surprise that under Republican stewardship, the greatest fiscal stimulus in the past decade has been instituted. Not saying if it is good or bad because my opinion is completely irrelevant. ... You would be foolish to ignore the dramatic change in the world’s attitude towards economic policy. “Tight fiscal and easy monetary policy” is being replaced with “easy fiscal and (somewhat) tighter monetary policy”. And ironically enough, the Republican Party under Trump’s “leadership” is at the forefront of this change.
Apparently the guy can't figure out the facts for himself, which show that Trump is projected by the center left Tax Policy Center to be in the same league as Obama through fiscal 2020, not in the Reagan league, not in the Nixon league, not in the Bush 41 league, either. Hell, he's not even projected to make the Bush 43 league, which was bad enough. Spending is going up under Trump, too be sure, but it's a world away from previous Republican administrations.
What really matters for spending is who controls the purse strings, which is Congress. Until Clinton, Republican presidents had to bargain with Democrat Congresses to get what they wanted. That often meant agreeing to big spending bills. The Republican resurgence in Congress under Clinton marked a new era in spending, which comparatively speaking is way down on a compound annual growth rate basis, even under spendthrift Bush 43.
Personally I'm less fearful than I had been of a new spending spree under Trump with Republicans in control of Congress. Trump is adversarial with the Republican Establishment in a way that no Republican president of the past has been. Getting what he wants hasn't been at all easy for this very reason. Republicans are obstructing him no less than Democrats are even as Trump folds like a house of cards on taxes and regulation without getting anything in return, like a wall. At some point he's going to veto something, or go down to electoral defeat.
At any rate, talk of a new dramatic change is simply kooky.
Sunday, September 23, 2018
I just found out my new neighbor is in the bottom 2.88% of the population
He's a fat, white, father of two young girls whose idea of fun is spending the day at the pool, and he's a Twitter follower of Rachel Madcow.
Thank God for carvedilol.
Thank God for carvedilol.
John Brennan is the Democrats' self-admitted communist, James Comey is the Republicans'
Mr. Comey Goes To Washington (New York Magazine, 20 October 2003):
Comey has been savaged by William Safire and lauded by Chuck Schumer; just what kind of Republican is he, anyway? This sets Comey howling again. “I must be doing something right!” he says. “In college, I was left of center, and through a gradual process I found myself more comfortable with a lot of the ideas and approaches the Republicans were using.” He voted for Carter in 1980, but in ’84, “I voted for Reagan—I’d moved from Communist to whatever I am now. I’m not even sure how to characterize myself politically. Maybe at some point, I’ll have to figure it out.”
Dianne Feinstein shouldn't only be censured by the US Senate, California voters should vote for her opponent in November
From the story here:
Regardless of the fate of Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination, the Senate should censure the ranking Democratic member of the Judiciary Committee, Dianne Feinstein. Her deception and maneuvering, condemned across the political spectrum, seriously interfered with the Senate’s performance of its constitutional duty to review judicial nominations, and unquestionably has brought the Senate into “dishonor and disrepute,” the standard that governs these matters. As a matter of institutional integrity, the Senate cannot let this wrong go unaddressed. ... Feinstein ... sought to keep her committee from timely and properly investigating an apparently serious charge of misconduct, and is still doing so, even in the face of criticism from all (or most) quarters. ...
As the second-richest member of the Senate, with a net worth of $94 million, Feinstein is presumably above the temptations to which [censured Senators] Dodd, Talmadge, and Durenberger succumbed. She does, however, face a difficult reelection campaign, with a serious enthusiasm gap on her left, the California Democratic party having refused to endorse her bid for a sixth term in office. Her conduct in arranging matters to make her appear the champion of an allegedly abused constituent, and perhaps positioning herself as the woman who sank the Kavanaugh nomination, can only help on that flank. Is a nakedly political motive for senatorial misbehavior any less reprehensible than a financial one?
Maureen Dowd admits Ford is purely political, calls her a woman daring to obstruct a conservative nominee
If Brett Kavanaugh were a liberal nominee, this wouldn't be happening.
From the column here:
But I most dread the rhyming history we are plunged into now: the merciless pummeling of a woman who dares to obstruct the glide path of a conservative Supreme Court nominee.
Woman, still alleged by The Washington Post and Ford to be present at an assault by Kavanaugh, denies being at party or knowing Kavanaugh
That makes four such denials: Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge, Patrick J. Smyth and now Leland Keyser.
Here:
"Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford," said Howard Walsh, who said he has been "engaged in the limited capacity" of corresponding with the committee on behalf of Keyser.
Walsh's email was in response to a missive from one of the lawyers for the GOP majority staff, which stated: "I understand that you have been identified as an individual who was in attendance at a party that occurred circa 1982 described in a recent Washington Post article."
Ford stated in her letter to Feinstein back in July that there were only five at the assault including herself:
"The assault occurred in a suburban Maryland area home at a gathering that included me and four others."
But the original September 16th Washington Post article does not mention another female present, only boys:
The [therapist's] notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room.
The Washington Post, however, and Ford, still acknowledge TODAY the presence of a female, Leland Keyser, which would make the party of five SIX:
As negotiations continued, Leland Keyser, a woman Ford told The Washington Post was present at the party where she alleges Kavanaugh assaulted her, came forward to say she “does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present,” according to an email her lawyer sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee, obtained by The Post. In a brief interview at her home in Silver Spring, Keyser said that she did not recall the party, but that she was close friends with Ford and that she believes Ford’s allegation. Before her name became public, Ford told The Post she did not think Keyser would remember the party because nothing remarkable had happened there, as far as Keyser was aware. Ford has said she did not tell anyone about the alleged assault until 2012.
So how many were there? Ford can't really say, or won't say.
This whole thing smells to high heaven of nothing so much as a political operation, which is proved by the fact of Feinstein's scurrilous behavior in withholding what she knew from the Senate committee since July 30th. Any woman who was really concerned about another woman's sexual assault wouldn't do this. And Ford wouldn't put up with it if she were really concerned about it.
Sexual assault isn't something that can be litigated in the newspapers, let alone in the Judiciary Committee of the US Senate.
Since the statue of limitations has not expired in Montgomery County Maryland, Ford should take her allegations there and file her complaint. If she had anything but politically motivated lawyers that's what they would have told her to do, too.
The Senate should categorically refuse to be the venue for this circus.
And Christine Blasey Ford should put up, or shut up.
Saturday, September 22, 2018
More gas lighting from CNBC on Kavanaugh, averring Kavanaugh is surrounded by harassers
The GOP aide wasn't "for Brett Kavanaugh". The GOP aide wasn't even an "aide for the nomination" since Trump nominated Kavanaugh. No, the aide was the spokesman for Grassley's committee. Kavanaugh had no say whatsoever in who works for Grassley and who doesn't.
Total cheap shot. Total bs. Totally corrupt manipulation of language.
No wonder CNBC closed comments on its articles long ago. They're all like this.
Ford, Dems, media manipulate the public, say she agrees to meet (next Thursday when the deal was Monday)
Grassley's Twitter feed has nothing about this.
Ford says she agrees to meet next Thursday, that's all, and wants to continue the "negotiations" this afternoon.
Total bull!
When Grassley says No they'll attack him again.
Christine Blasey Ford, accuser of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, agrees to Senate testimony about sexual assault claim
Democrats are experts at gas lighting.
Democrats are experts at gas lighting.
Dan Henninger: The Democrats summon Hurricane Christine
Here:
Surely someone pointed out that based on what was disclosed, this accusation could not be substantiated. To which the Democrats responded: So what? Its political value is that it cannot be disproved. They saw that six weeks before a crucial midterm election, the unresolvable case of Christine Blasey Ford would sit like a stalled hurricane over the entire Republican Party, drowning its candidates in a force they could not stop. ... Republicans in the Senate shouldn’t allow it, and voters in November should not affirm it.
The un-American Christine Ford insists Brett Kavanaugh be denied his rights
CNN this morning here:
Ford also requested that at no point during any potential hearing would she be in the same room as Kavanaugh.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Gullible Gregg Jarrett of FOX News takes the NYT's bait
Rosenstein should be fired immediately. Proposing to secretly record the president is, at the very least, a violation of regulations that govern a security clearance.
Oh yeah, that'll be helpful on November 6th. Let's fire the guy that fired Comey and make ourselves look completely insane.
There's plenty of time to fire Rod Rosenstein starting on November 7th.
Jarrett should listen to Mark Levin's argument. It was Comey ally Andrew McCabe who pressured Rosenstein to appoint the special counsel in the wake of the firing of James Comey. Rosenstein placated him by appointing Comey ally Robert Mueller. The Comey allies are behind this leak, seeking to weaken Trump.
Rosenstein is the monkey in the middle. The leak against him in the Times is a sign that he is no longer useful to the Trump opposition. It's also a sign that the Trump opposition is getting very desperate in the wake of Trump's declassification order, the results of which are going to take at least another week.
Perhaps Rosenstein will look better now to his future in the Trump administration. He was once useful to Trump by firing crooked Comey. He could be helpful again now that he's been chastised by his former "colleagues".
Friday, September 21, 2018
McCabe memos appear to have been leaked to NYT saying Rosenstein wanted to entrap Trump by wearing a wire
Mr. McCabe, who was later fired from the F.B.I., declined to comment. His memos have been turned over to the special counsel investigating whether Trump associates conspired with Russia’s election interference, Robert S. Mueller III, according to a lawyer for Mr. McCabe. “A set of those memos remained at the F.B.I. at the time of his departure in late January 2018,” the lawyer, Michael R. Bromwich, said of his client. “He has no knowledge of how any member of the media obtained those memos.” ...
One week after the firing [of Comey], Mr. Rosenstein met with Mr. McCabe and at least four other senior Justice Department officials, in part to explain his role in the situation.
During their discussion, Mr. Rosenstein expressed frustration at how Mr. Trump had conducted the search for a new F.B.I. director, saying the president was failing to take the candidate interviews seriously. A handful of politicians and law enforcement officials, including Mr. McCabe, were under consideration.
To Mr. Rosenstein, the hiring process was emblematic of broader dysfunction stemming from the White House. He said both the process and the administration itself were in disarray, according to two people familiar with the discussion.
Mr. Rosenstein then raised the idea of wearing a recording device or “wire,” as he put it, to secretly tape the president when he visited the White House. One participant asked whether Mr. Rosenstein was serious, and he replied animatedly that he was.
If not him, then Mr. McCabe or other F.B.I. officials interviewing with Mr. Trump for the job could perhaps wear a wire or otherwise record the president, Mr. Rosenstein offered. White House officials never checked his phone when he arrived for meetings there, Mr. Rosenstein added, implying it would be easy to secretly record Mr. Trump.
The suggestion itself was remarkable. While informants or undercover agents regularly use concealed listening devices to surreptitiously gather evidence for federal investigators, they are typically targeting drug kingpins and Mafia bosses in criminal investigations, not a president viewed as ineffectively conducting his duties.
In the end, the idea went nowhere, the officials said. But they called Mr. Rosenstein’s comments an example of how erratically he was behaving while he was taking part in the interviews for a replacement F.B.I. director, considering the appointment of a special counsel and otherwise running the day-to-day operations of the more than 100,000 people at the Justice Department.
Mr. Rosenstein’s suggestion about the 25th Amendment was similarly a sensitive topic. The amendment allows for the vice president and majority of cabinet officials to declare the president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.”
Merely conducting a straw poll, even if Mr. Kelly and Mr. Sessions were on board, would be risky if another administration official were to tell the president, who could fire everyone involved to end the effort.
Trump finally attacks the credibility of The Ford and Feinstein Farce, tells Ford to put up
Feinstein deliberately sat on the information since July and let the hearings conclude without introducing Ford's letter in evidence. Meanwhile Feinstein is under a cloud for letting a Chinese spy remain on her staff for two decades.
Trump, quoted here by AP:
“I have no doubt that, if the attack on Dr. Ford was as bad as she says, charges would have been immediately filed with local Law Enforcement Authorities by either her or her loving parents. I ask that she bring those filings forward so that we can learn date, time, and place!”
“Judge Brett Kavanaugh is a fine man, with an impeccable reputation, who is under assault by radical left wing politicians who don’t want to know the answers, they just want to destroy and delay. Facts don’t matter. I go through this with them every single day in D.C.”
Thursday, September 20, 2018
Senator John Cornyn is right: We've already had a hearing, and Ford & Democrats are hijacking the process
WaPo reports here:
Earlier Thursday, Senate Republicans had reiterated their resolve to press forward with a vote on Kavanaugh in the coming days if Ford chose not to testify before the 21-member Judiciary Committee.
“If she doesn’t want to participate and tell her story, there’s no reason for us to delay,” Sen. John Cornyn (Tex.), the No. 2 Republican in the chamber, told CNN. “I think it all depends on what she decides to do. We’ve all made clear this is her chance.” ...
Cornyn said Thursday that he sees no reason to call additional witnesses since the committee had already held a full hearing on Trump’s nominee.
“We already had a hearing,” Cornyn said. “That’s what I call hijacking the regular committee process to accommodate political interests.”
The news just now said Senator Susan Collins is moderate and believes in abortion rights
In what world is murder moderation?
If Christine Ford is apolitical, why did she hire such a political lawyer?
It's far more likely that Christine Ford premeditated this entire episode with the help of her attorney for political reasons and that her protestations of wanting to remain anonymous were a cover for the desperation of this Hail Mary attempt at the end of the confirmation process. Knowing the slim margins Republicans enjoy in the Senate for confirmation of Supreme Court nominees, all it would have taken to derail them is sowing just enough doubt in the minds of a few to sway a vote or two at the last second. They almost succeeded in the gamble. Retiring Republican Jeff Flake went on the record right away saying he was no longer comfortable voting Yes on Kavanaugh. It almost worked.
From the story here:
Since 2004, [Debra] Katz has donated at least $26,000 to Democratic politicians including Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Kerry. She also donated to groups such as MoveOn.org, the DNC Services Corp, and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
Likewise, in March 2017 Katz declared via Facebook that, "These people are all miscreants. The term ‘basket of deplorables’ is far too generous a description for these people who are now Senior Trump advisors," after a report surfaced that Department of Homeland Security advisor Frank Wuco made anti-Islamic remarks which prompted his resignation.
Rep. Anna Eshoo says Christine Ford doesn't have a political bone in her body, which is utterly ridiculous
Hasn't Ford involved politicians from the very beginning?
Here's Eshoo:
Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., met July 20 for roughly 90 minutes with Ford, who lives in her Bay Area district and is a professor of psychology at Palo Alto University, after Ford contacted Eshoo's office about Kavanaugh.
"It was more than obvious to me that she bore the scars of what she had been subjected to," Eshoo said in an interview with The Washington Post on Wednesday. "She doesn't have a political bone in her body. And she obviously was really terrified about what could become of her and her family." ...
Eshoo said her actions were dictated by Ford's desire for complete confidentiality about her allegations as she worked through whether and how to bring them to the attention of those vetting Kavanaugh and, potentially, the public. "I think it's difficult for people to understand if you haven't dealt with people that have been subjected to something like this," she said. "They keep it to themselves. They feel guilty. They bury it. They tell themselves to move on. And so there wasn't any kind of political process in her mind whatsoever."
The pair then took it to a higher political level in Senator Feinstein:
Ford's request for discretion was observed to the point, Eshoo said, that in her office only she and one other senior aide were fully aware of Ford's claims. When Eshoo and Ford mutually decided to take the matter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Ford's letter laying out her account was hand-delivered to a Feinstein aide in Washington, Eshoo said: "In other words, you don't drop it off at the receptionist's desk."
Ford is hardly otherwise apolitical:
Christine Ford ... signed a letter with other health professionals demanding that President Donald Trump stop his controversial policy on family separations at the border . . . an exhibit in an ACLU lawsuit against the Trump administration. ...
The Washington Post reports that she is a “registered Democrat who has made small contributions to political organizations.” A review of federal campaign finance records shows donations earmarked for Bernie Sanders, the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. ...
A 2017 article in the San Jose Mercury News says that Blasey was planning to attend a science march wearing a knitted brain hat that was supposed to resemble the pink p*ssy hats that many have used to protest Donald Trump and advocate for women’s rights. “It’s a science party!” the article quotes “biostatistician Christine Blasey, of Palo Alto” as saying. It says she would “wear an elaborately knitted cap of the human brain — yarn turned into a supersized cerebral cortex — inspired by the ‘pussy hats’ donned during the Women’s Marches.”
Wednesday, September 19, 2018
Latest victim of the Stalinists of #MeToo is the editor of the NY Review of Books
"All I know is that in a court of law he was acquitted, and there is no proof he committed a crime. The exact nature of his behavior — how much consent was involved — I have no idea, nor is it really my concern. My concern is what happens to somebody who has not been found guilty in any criminal sense but who perhaps deserves social opprobrium, but how long should that last, what form it should take, etc."
Christine Ford is Emma Sulkowicz, still carrying around a bed under her arm from 36 years ago
From the post here:
“We now have feminism that should be a movement of freedom and empowerment, but it has become an instrument of repression. I always identify very strongly with people like Charles Baudelaire, Oscar Wilde, or those figures from the last century who were very anti-bourgeoisie. That minister of justice of yours is just a bourgeois voice, it has nothing to do with the liberation of women. It is repression, shutting down the mind. But your mind must be completely free – expression must be completely free. Women should read great literary works. Psycho by Alfred Hitchcock, for example, Dostoevsky, Simone de Beauvoir, Albert Camus, to understand something about men. Instead of: “We need to reform men.” Stop it. Feminists discourse of sex and gender has become hopelessly careless and naive, okay, it is a self-cannibalizing ideology without reference to important research on human nature and other cultures.
“There are a lot of neurotic women who have clung to that feminist discourse, take Emma Sulkowicz, a 21-year-old student at Columbia University who spent nearly a year on campus with a mattress under her arm because she had allegedly been raped in her own bed by a fellow student. She received an award from the ‘National Organization of Women‘ because she is a ‘hero’. It was sick and neurotic behavior. That woman lied and every attempt to find out what happened was thwarted by herself, her story was inaccurate. But neurotic behaviour is apparently celebrated. The only thing that it accomplishes is that it alienates men even more from women. We are back in the fifties!”
Camille Paglia: Treating women as more credible than men is reactionary
From the essay here:
Modern democracy is predicated on principles of due process and the presumption of innocence. ... For all its idealistic good intentions, today’s #MeToo movement, with its indiscriminate catalog of victims, is taking us back to the Victorian archetypes of early silent film, where mustache-twirling villains tied damsels in distress to railroad tracks.
Possible foreclosure motive for Ford accusation falls apart: Kavanaugh's mother dismissed the motion
FOX reports here:
The records suggest that the dismissal was granted after the Blaseys and the bank cut a deal that avoided a sale of the property at a foreclosure auction.
Martha Kavanaugh signed off on the motion after the case had initally been assigned to another judge.
Tuesday, September 18, 2018
Send the FBI to Kavanaugh's accuser to take her statement
We'll see if she tells the same story she's peddling in the media.
You can't lie to the FBI and get away with it. (Oops, unless you are Hillary)
Hillary must be laughing to herself that Kavanaugh's accuser touts passing a lie detector test
Clinton is heard laughing as she describes how she succeeded at getting her client a lighter sentence, despite suggesting she knew he was guilty.
"He took a lie-detector test! I had him take a polygraph, which he passed, which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs," Clinton said about her client on the tapes, which were initially recorded, but never used, in the early 1980s.
The rest of the ABC News story from 2014 is here.
Ten years after fall of Lehman, lawyer still tracking down borrowers who committed fraud
From the story in The Denver Post, here:
“What I kept seeing over and over again is how greed manifests itself,” he said. “There was an unprecedented amount of fraud.” ... People lied about their income, they lied that a home would be a primary residence, they lied about how indebted they were, they even lied about who they were, using other people’s identities to take out loans.
“It was crime on a massive scale, but nobody viewed it that way,” he said.
Banking expert Chris Whalen sums up 2008 the same way, here:
People keep asking what we think of the 10-year anniversary of the collapse of Lehman Brothers. Our answer is that not much has changed. Lehman once had the best performing bank in the US and then it was gone. Why? Fraud on loans and securities.
It seems our biggest problem, from the top of our society all the way on down to the bottom, is that it is shot through with liars.
Remember that next time you read a poll, or a resume.
Let God be found true, though every man be found a liar. -- Romans 3:4
Monday, September 17, 2018
Wi Gu Wong Wei: China stock markets are down big since their 2015 highs
Shanghai is down 48.7% from its 2015 high.
Hong Kong is down 6% from its 2015 high.
Meanwhile the broadest measure of US stocks, the Wilshire 5000, is up 33.6% tonight from its 2015 high. Its total stock market capitalization currently represents about $36 trillion, up about $9 trillion in the last three years.
Rush Limbaugh ends his show saying the voters are idiots . . .
. . . Sean Hannity starts his show saying they're smart enough to decide for themselves if Brett Kavanaugh stands unjustly accused.
Brett Kavanaugh's accuser might have had revenge motive for foreclosure on her parents' home
Brett Kavanaugh's mother apparently was the presiding judge in the foreclosure on the home of the parents of Kavanaugh's accuser.
Reported here.
Anne Applebaum for The Atlantic refuses to acknowledge the facts of illegal immigrant crime
The crimes of illegal immigrants, apart from being here illegally, continue as we speak, and continuously are noted in the Twitter feeds and websites of conservatives. Of course all of that is illegitimate to the Anne Applebaums of the world. Nothing is legitimate unless it is sanctioned by coverage in the press which her side owns, and this story is not covered by her press, for political reasons. That story forms the heart of the Trump political campaign, and to give it expression is to do the work of her political enemy, which is what the essay is really all about, her political enemies, in Poland, Hungary and the United States. At one point she even solemnly informs us that "(A ruling party that has politicized its courts and suppressed the media is a party that finds it much easier to steal.)", as if that isn't a perfect description of liberal democratic rule in the United States since FDR. It's now a country where the words "illegal alien" are banned on Twitter. That's how important cheap landscapers are to The Establishment.
From the story here:
Much as Trump used birtherism and the fabricated threat of immigrant crime to motivate his core supporters, Kaczyński has used the Smolensk tragedy to galvanize his followers, and convince them not to trust the government or the media. Sometimes he has implied that the Russian government downed the plane. At other times, he has blamed the former ruling party, now the largest opposition party, for his brother’s death: “You destroyed him, you murdered him, you are scum!” he once shouted in parliament.
Sunday, September 16, 2018
Brett Kavanaugh's pal was Mark Judge
The New York Times reported that the friend the woman alleged to be in the room with Kavanaugh was conservative writer Mark Judge, who attended Georgetown Prep with the nominee. On Friday, Judge told the Weekly Standard that no such incident took place. “It’s just absolutely nuts,” he said. “I never saw Brett act that way.” ... The amount of drinking Judge describes himself undertaking [at the time] might suggest that his memory of those days may not be entirely reliable.
Saturday, September 15, 2018
Barack Obama March 3, 2009: "Buying stocks is a potentially good deal if you've got a long-term perspective on it"
Here, after the 10 minute mark.
S&P 500, average nominal per annum return March 2009 - August 2018: 17.51%
Friday, September 14, 2018
Inflated death totals from Puerto Rico study not backed up by any names or cause of death
Julie Kelly, here:
There is just one little problem with the inflated death toll: There are no names of the newly-found victims or hundreds of bodies to be buried. The GWU research team reached the higher figure by comparing predicted fatalities to observed fatalities between September 2017 and February 2018. ... Also, the researchers did not specify how the nearly 3,000 people died. Lynn Goldman, the dean of the school that produced the report, confirmed the study’s limitations, telling the Washington Post, “we can come up with a hundred different hypotheses. What we don’t have is the ability today to tell you these are the factors that caused this.” The team also noted that mortality rates in low-income areas of the country were still elevated even past the study’s time frame, which could call into question the legitimacy of blaming all excess deaths on the storm.
Thursday, September 13, 2018
Indirect deaths from hurricanes from 1963-2012 numbered 1,418 but Maria in Puerto Rico alone caused 2,911?
My mother died of old age related heart failure two days after Hurricane Gustav made landfall in Louisiana in 2008:
My mother wasn't counted among the 41 indirect deaths in Louisiana, for the main reason that she died in a different state.
But . . .
Looking at 59 hurricanes in the Atlantic Basin from 1963 through 2012, the study found that those systems killed a combined 1,803 people directly – by forces like flooding and airborne debris that were caused by the storm itself. But there were also a slew of lingering impacts that proved deadly in those storms, which caused 1,418 "indirect" deaths, according to the findings. ... Nearly half of the indirect deaths attributed to these 59 hurricanes were heart attacks, according to the study's data. Automobile accidents were also a major threat to life, whether the crashes occurred during evacuation or after the storm.
So we're supposed to believe tonight that about 2,911 (2,975-64) Puerto Ricans died indirectly in consequence of one storm (Maria) over the next six months according to the new math of George Washington University and Harvard University when over the course of nearly 50 years' worth of hurricanes indirect deaths for all storms combined came to just 1,418.
Sure we are.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)