Pressley to introduce resolution to open impeachment inquiry against Kavanaugh

  
Via:  it-is-me  •  one month ago  •  99 comments

Pressley to introduce resolution to open impeachment inquiry against Kavanaugh
"We must demand justice for survivors and hold Kavanaugh accountable for his actions."

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) plans to introduce a resolution on Tuesday that would call for an impeachment inquiry to be opened against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh following a newly-reported allegation of sexual misconduct.

"I believe Christine Blasey Ford," she said in a statement. "I believe Deborah Ramirez. It is our responsibility to collectively affirm the dignity and humanity of survivors."

"Sexual predators do not deserve a seat on the nation's highest court and Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation process set a dangerous precedent," she continued. "We must demand justice for survivors and hold Kavanaugh accountable for his actions.

Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
Find text within the comments Find 
 
It Is ME
1  seeder  It Is ME    one month ago

The 4th member of the "Taliban 4" goes all "Stupid" too. jrSmiley_90_smiley_image.gif

Not one accusation in the "Kavanaugh Trail" was "Proven to be True. Including this latest accusation. NOT ONE FRIGGIN THING !

What is it with this "Taliban Squad" anyway. They haven't been "Correct" on anything they want to accomplish yet ! jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

And folks actually "Rally" behind these idiots. jrSmiley_98_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sparty On
1.1  Sparty On  replied to  It Is ME @1    one month ago
And folks actually "Rally" behind these idiots

Yup which leads to "consider the source" and those who support it.

It's not really a surprise that the people of that district are just as coo-coo as she is .....

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.1.1  seeder  It Is ME  replied to  Sparty On @1.1    one month ago
It's not really a surprise that the people of that district are just as coo-coo as she is .....

We seem to have a (4) district problem. jrSmiley_30_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sparty On
1.1.2  Sparty On  replied to  It Is ME @1.1.1    one month ago

Yeah we have one of them in Michigan.   Old "happy fingers" John Conyers old district that's basically ALWAYS been Democrat.

As bad as Tlaib is, she could still win that district if another marginally acceptable Dem doesn't run.   Abe Lincoln could run against her in that district and she would still win.

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.1.3  seeder  It Is ME  replied to  Sparty On @1.1.2    one month ago
Abe Lincoln could run against her in that district and she would still win.

That's just "Bad" for Michigan !

 
 
 
Sparty On
1.1.4  Sparty On  replied to  It Is ME @1.1.3    one month ago

Yeah, not "Pure Michigan" that's for sure.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1152726699777220608

Nice job 13th district.

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.1.5  seeder  It Is ME  replied to  Sparty On @1.1.4    one month ago

Seems Michigan made it to the top 10 of all 50 states of folks moving OUT !

https://patch.com/michigan/across-mi/people-are-fleeing-michigan-here-s-why

10. Michigan, 55 percent 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  It Is ME @1    one month ago
And folks actually "Rally" behind these idiots.

Just the other hate filled progressives. We shall overcome!

 
 
 
TTGA
1.3  TTGA  replied to  It Is ME @1    one month ago
The 4th member of the "Taliban 4" goes all "Stupid" too.

Actually, they aren't stupid at all.  It's just a political tactic that they're employing that they think will work.  Back in the 80's, when the Leftist scum started trying it, it was called "The Politics of Personal Destruction".  They don['t have to be correct, all they are trying to do is de-legitimize all of their opponents in the eyes of the public.  The libel laws currently in place make it almost impossible for a public figure to sue in order to get the accusers into court to make them back up their tripe with actual evidence.  Besides which, the biased media would simply ignore such a trial while heavily publicizing the initial slander.

Old "happy fingers" John Conyers old district that's basically ALWAYS been Democrat.

I believe that district includes Hamtramick, which has the largest percentage of Muslims in its population of any city in the country.  Used to be Polish, now it's Muslim.

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.3.1  seeder  It Is ME  replied to  TTGA @1.3    one month ago
Actually, they aren't stupid at all.  It's just a political tactic that they're employing that they think will work.

If they haven't figured out by now, their tactics are ridicules, and get shutdown by numerous "Important" folks as idiotic (Reference AOC and her stupid complaints about "Illegals", and her FAKE crying), That makes them "STUPID" !

Remember when Mike Tyson got new management, that just kept telling him he was great, with not much training going on like it used to be when he was "Bad Ass" ?

That's the "Taliban 4" in a nutshell. Their self management SUCKS !

 
 
 
Tacos!
1.3.2  Tacos!  replied to  TTGA @1.3    one month ago
It's just a political tactic that they're employing that they think will work.

I haven't seen any sign that anyone in that group has a sense or mastery of tactics, political or otherwise. Unless the Senate were to flip Democratic, there's no reason this tactic would work. And smearing a SCOTUS justice isn't going to move any elections.

 
 
 
TTGA
1.3.3  TTGA  replied to  Tacos! @1.3.2    one month ago
I haven't seen any sign that anyone in that group has a sense or mastery of tactics,

They may not be but the people giving them their orders are.

And smearing a SCOTUS justice isn't going to move any elections.

The objective is to drive all the competent conservatives out of politics, including the judiciary.  That will just leave the Leftists, who have no moral standards anyway, to assume the offices.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
1.3.4  Drakkonis  replied to  Tacos! @1.3.2    one month ago
I haven't seen any sign that anyone in that group has a sense or mastery of tactics, political or otherwise. Unless the Senate were to flip Democratic, there's no reason this tactic would work. And smearing a SCOTUS justice isn't going to move any elections.

I think you might be missing something. Our education system. Right now, our system isn't teaching kids how to think critically. They are teaching them to think emotionally. As such, their tactics will work, eventually. 

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.4  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  It Is ME @1    one month ago

Another "squad" member with a totally screwed up moral compass. Must be prerequisite for membership....

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.5  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  It Is ME @1    one month ago

I honestly believe Ford may have been assaulted. I just don't believe she accused the right person.

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.5.1  seeder  It Is ME  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.5    one month ago
I honestly believe Ford may have been assaulted. I just don't believe she accused the right person.

She was waaaaay too happy at that "Trail". And this two front door thing of hers....well …..lots of folks have two front doors.

320

And her constant consulting with lawyers when she was asked a question ……. "What should I say here" …… was just obvious as to her ignorance on her own subject !

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.5.2  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  It Is ME @1.5.1    one month ago

To say Ford was "coached" would be a vast understatement.

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.5.3  seeder  It Is ME  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.5.2    one month ago
To say Ford was "coached" would be a vast understatement.

jrSmiley_79_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sparty On
1.5.4  Sparty On  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.5.2    one month ago

Yeah, it was pretty unconscionable how the left used her.

They didn't give shit about her.   They just wanted Kavanaugh.

Whatever it took .....

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.5.5  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Sparty On @1.5.4    one month ago

Yep, she was just a tool.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
1.6  Freedom Warrior  replied to  It Is ME @1    one month ago

 So now the question I have is who is going to hold Cavanaugh‘s accusers accountable for their actions 

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.6.1  seeder  It Is ME  replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.6    one month ago
So now the question I have is who is going to hold Cavanaugh‘s accusers accountable for their actions 

That's not Important. /s jrSmiley_98_smiley_image.gif

Just wait and see what happens when some "Red Flag" law gets passed. You think dishonest irresponsible accusations are flying now...…...It will have no limits then !

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.6.2  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  It Is ME @1.6.1    one month ago

Don't expect the progressive liberal left Democrats to. They are absolutely convinced the did nothing wrong. Sorry this comment was in response FW's comment above.

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.6.3  seeder  It Is ME  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.6.2    one month ago
They are absolutely convinced they did nothing wrong...

They've been telling themselves that for Decades and Decades !

It must be True !

 
 
 
squiggy
1.6.4  squiggy  replied to  It Is ME @1.6.1    one month ago

"Just wait and see what happens when some "Red Flag" law gets passed."

It's not hard to see that as the new swatting or vengeance game.

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.6.5  seeder  It Is ME  replied to  squiggy @1.6.4    one month ago
It's not hard to see that as the new swatting or vengeance game.

For sure !

Give the folks permission to "Tell All", they'll oblige ten fold, just to get on TV.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.6.6  Ozzwald  replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.6    one month ago
So now the question I have is who is going to hold Cavanaugh‘s accusers accountable for their actions 

No one. 

For them to be held accountable, there would have to be a full investigation on those accusations to prove them false and malicious.  Republicans, in case you haven't noticed, are  completely and unanimously opposed to any investigation involving Kavanaugh.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.6.7  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @1.6.6    one month ago

Impeachment proceedings against Kavanaugh will be as successful as the pathetic liberal attempt to derail his confirmation.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.6.8  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ozzwald @1.6.6    one month ago
ere would have to be a full investigation on those accusations to prove them false and malicious

Two New York Times investigative reporters just spent a year investigating Kavanaugh and their big scoop is that Ford's friend who was supposedly at the party thinks Ford's story isn't credible and that Ford's friends threatened her to try and get her to lie. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
1.6.9  XDm9mm  replied to  Ozzwald @1.6.6    one month ago
any investigation involving Kavanaugh.

Here's a hint...   JUSTICE Kavanaugh has been investigated numerous times.

Further, when a supposed victim, can't remember when an incident occurred, where the incident occurred, and the named "witness" refutes the allegation and indicates that she has no idea what the victim is claiming, I'd say the FBI has pretty much summed up what can be investigated.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.6.10  Tessylo  replied to  Ozzwald @1.6.6    one month ago

Yup, he was never investigated at all regarding his drunken raping ways and his exposing his dick.

I LIKE BEER.  

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
1.6.11  Freedom Warrior  replied to  Ozzwald @1.6.6    one month ago

We already know them to be false and there already was an investigation.

Sounds like you approve of the Dems psychotic behavior.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.6.12  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @1.6.7    one month ago
Impeachment proceedings against Kavanaugh will be as successful as the pathetic liberal attempt to derail his confirmation.

Since you can see the future, what are this weekend's Power-Ball numbers?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.6.13  Ozzwald  replied to  XDm9mm @1.6.9    one month ago
Here's a hint...   JUSTICE Kavanaugh has been investigated numerous times.

By the FBI concerning sexual assault accusations, or are you trying to deflect?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.6.14  Ozzwald  replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.6.11    one month ago
We already know them to be false 

Because you were a witness at the party in question? 

and there already was an investigation.

What law enforcement conducted these interviews?

Sounds like you approve of the Dems psychotic behavior.

So you feel that requesting a criminal investigation, because of a witness supported sexual assault accusation, is psychotic ?

i-do-not-think-it-means-what-you-think-i

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.6.15  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @1.6.12    one month ago

no need to be clairvoyant when dealing with left-wing nutjob dreams of impeachment of Kavanaugh.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.6.16  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @1.6.15    one month ago
no need to be clairvoyant when dealing with left-wing nutjob dreams of impeachment of Kavanaugh.

Only when it is right wing nut jobs that are dealing with them.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.6.17  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ozzwald @1.6.13    one month ago

Do you know what the FBI does? Why not be mad the CIA hasn't investigated Kavanugh for running a red light in 1986?  Maybe then the FBI can then investigate the theft of a snickers bar that took place at some point in the 1980s at a convience store at some location in Iowa, even if the owner of the convenience store never claimed a snickers bar was stolen.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.6.18  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @1.6.16    one month ago

Deal with them?

Most on the right are laughing at the stupidity of some Democrats and can hardly wait to see how this clownshow turns out.

Democrats surely are smart enough to know that impeachment of Kavanaugh is going nowhere, right?

Or are you still clinging to some weird fantasy that you can and will actually remove a  member of SCOTUS? That is freaking priceless!

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.6.19  Ozzwald  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.6.17    one month ago
Do you know what the FBI does?

Law enforcement.

Why not be mad the CIA hasn't investigated Kavanugh for running a red light in 1986?

CIA is not law enforcement.

Maybe then the FBI can then investigate the theft of a snickers bar that took place at some point in the 1980s at a convience store at some location in Iowa, even if the owner of the convenience store never claimed a snickers bar was stolen.

That would be local law enforcement, not federal.

I answered all your questions truthfully, I have no clue what you were trying to imply, but you failed utterly in it.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.6.20  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @1.6.18    one month ago
Most on the right are laughing at the stupidity of some Democrats and can hardly wait to see how this clownshow turns out.

Most on the right are still laughing at Hee Haw reruns and mourning the day it went off the air.

Democrats surely are smart enough to know that impeachment of Kavanaugh is going nowhere, right?

Surely you are smart enough to understand how important it is to make sure a multiple sex offender is not appointed to the highest court in the land?  So why is the right so fearful of an investigation?

Or are you still clinging to some weird fantasy that you can and will actually remove a  member of SCOTUS? That is freaking priceless

So you feel SCOTUS is above the law?  If Clarence Thomas goes out tomorrow and rapes and kills a 12 year old child, your response would be, "oh well, what can you do about it"?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.6.21  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ozzwald @1.6.19    one month ago

I know Progressives don't care about civil liberties and think federal police agencies exist to investigate people who progressives don't like upon their whim, but, believe it or not, the FBI doesn't have the legal power to  investigate any of this. 

What jurisdiction you imagine the FBI has to investigate an allegation of a local crime from almost 40 years ago where even  the supposed victim doesn't believe it happened?  What federal crime do you imagine Kavanaugh could be prosecuted for, even if the allegations from almost 40 years ago were 100% accurate?  

The Progressives' ploy is so obvious, they demand something that would be impossible (a federal investigation of a local crime from almost 40 years ago that no one has even criminally complained about) and even illegal, and unless their legally impossible demand is met, will claim Kavanaugh is guilty.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.6.22  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @1.6.20    one month ago
Most on the right are still laughing at Hee Haw reruns and mourning the day it went off the air.

Oh, yeah, most of the right is just a bunch of dumb rednecks. Pretty funny that the Democrats haven't figured out how to get rid of us yet.

Surely you are smart enough to understand how important it is to make sure a multiple sex offender is not appointed to the highest court in the land?  So why is the right so fearful of an investigation?

Multiple? Oh, man, you are killing me! There isn't even one credible claim. Investigate WHAT exactly? Some she said/he said some 30 years ago? LMFAO!

So you feel SCOTUS is above the law?  If Clarence Thomas goes out tomorrow and rapes and kills a 12 year old child, your response would be, "oh well, what can you do about it"?

Your words--not mine. That is intellectually dishonest and lazy to pretend that is what I said, implied, or meant.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
1.6.23  Freedom Warrior  replied to  Ozzwald @1.6.14    one month ago

 No  not because I was there it is because all it takes is a fucking brain to know the difference.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.6.24  Tessylo  replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.6.11    one month ago

There was no investigation whatsoever into Kavanaughs stumbling drunk raping and dick exposing 

 
 
 
MUVA
1.6.25  MUVA  replied to  Tessylo @1.6.24    one month ago

That's because there is no evidence he committed a crime.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.6.26  Ozzwald  replied to  MUVA @1.6.25    one month ago
That's because there is no evidence he committed a crime.

There is no evidence because there has been no investigation on the accusation which was backed up by witnesses.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.6.27  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @1.6.22    one month ago
Some she said/he said some 30 years ago? LMFAO!

Yes.  Does age make it less important?  

You mean "he said/they said"

FBI has not contacted dozens of potential sources in Kavanaugh investigation
With the investigation winding down, multiple individuals who have tried to contact the bureau have not heard back.

Your words--not mine. That is intellectually dishonest and lazy to pretend that is what I said, implied, or meant.

And yet, you don't disagree or deny it.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.6.28  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Tessylo @1.6.24    one month ago

Been there done that Tessy. Move along now.🤣

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.6.29  Tessylo  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.6.28    one month ago

How unoriginal.  Besides was I talking to you?  

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.6.30  Tessylo  replied to  MUVA @1.6.25    one month ago

Duh, they never investigated his drunken raping dick exposing plus what Oz said:

'There is no evidence because there has been no investigation on the accusation which was backed up by witnesses.'

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.6.31  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Tessylo @1.6.29    one month ago

Open forum and not your seed. I am free to comment where and when I choose as long as I do not violate the rules. Hasta la bye bye...

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.6.32  Tessylo  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.6.31    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.6.33  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Tessylo @1.6.32    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
XDm9mm
1.6.34  XDm9mm  replied to  Ozzwald @1.6.13    one month ago
By the FBI concerning sexual assault accusations,

Yes.  Do try to keep up.   Or is recent history to difficult to remember?

Now that President Donald Trump has ordered the FBI to conduct a supplemental background investigation into Brett Kavanaugh, the job of getting to the bottom of the explosive allegation of sexual assault that is holding up the Supreme Court nominee's confirmation may fall into the hands of the bureau's Washington-based team responsible for conducting background investigations for high-profile appointees.

Concentrated in the bureau's DC field office and supported by field offices across the nation, these agents routinely carry out the gumshoe probes that help elevate public servants into positions of power.

"You're basically knocking on doors and doing neighborhood canvasses and looking at the suitability and fitness for office of future FBI agents, of people who are undergoing a five-year re-investigation to maintain a top secret clearance, and for judicial nominees, like Kavanaugh," said retired FBI Supervisory Special Agent James Gagliano, a CNN law enforcement analyst.

On Friday, Trump directed the law enforcement agency to re-open the background investigation of his nominee after Sen. Jeff Flake, an Arizona Republican, sided with Democrats who had asked the FBI to look into allegations that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Dr. Christine Blasey Ford when the two were teenagers in Maryland.

The investigation will also look into an allegation made by Deborah Ramirez , who accused Kavanaugh of exposing himself to her at a party when they were students at Yale University. Kavanaugh and the White House have denied the allegation.

The FBI has reached out to Ramirez and she has agreed to cooperate, her attorney told CNN in a statement.

You can read more here if you're interested in the truth as opposed to innuendo, supposition, and conjecture bandied about by the left.

Source:  https://www.wktv.com/content/national/494690781.html

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.6.35  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @1.6.27    one month ago
And yet, you don't disagree or deny it.

Absolutely no need to dignify bullshit.

I'll leave that for the gullible idiots who believe in that sort of crap.

Maybe they'll make you the lead "investigator"!!

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.6.36  Ozzwald  replied to  XDm9mm @1.6.34    one month ago
Now that President Donald Trump has ordered the FBI to conduct a supplemental background investigation into Brett Kavanaugh, the job of getting to the bottom of the explosive allegation of sexual assault that is holding up the Supreme Court nominee's confirmation may fall into the hands of the bureau's Washington-based team responsible for conducting background investigations for high-profile appointees.

Please explain to me how the FBI conducted an investigation without interviewing the suspect or any of the witness that contacted them.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.6.37  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ozzwald @1.6.36    one month ago

The FBI interviewed all the witnesses identified by Blasey Ford (all of whose testimony favored Kavanaugh) as well Ramirez and two people she claimed  witnessed  the event (none of them witnessed anything).

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.6.38  Ozzwald  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.6.37    one month ago
The FBI interviewed all the witnesses identified by Blasey Ford (all of whose testimony favored Kavanaugh) as well Ramirez and two people she claimed  witnessed  the event (none of them witnessed anything).

Did they interview the suspect?  I also notice that you ignored my previous link as well.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.6.39  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ozzwald @1.6.38    one month ago

What suspect? Was a criminal complaint ever filed? You keep using words related to a criminal investigation, even though no one ever filed a criminal complaint. 

You falsely claimed alleged witnesses weren't interviewed by the FBI.  They were.None of the them witnessed any wrongdoing by Kavanaugh.  Kavanaugh himself was interviewed under oath on multiple occasions by both Democrats and attorneys chosen by Democrats.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.6.40  Texan1211  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.6.39    one month ago

You have to admit, this whole Kavanaugh vs. Democrats II is very entertaining. They actually seem to think that he will be impeached!

Pretty sure the same results as the first fight will happen.

Ain't that a hoot?

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
1.6.41  Freedom Warrior  replied to  Tessylo @1.6.24    one month ago

Because it never happened.   Not that you would care.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.6.42  Ozzwald  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.6.39    one month ago
What suspect? Was a criminal complaint ever filed?

Ahhh, now you are arguing semantics over my use of the term "suspect", always a last ditch effort for a losing argument.

You keep using words related to a criminal investigation, even though no one ever filed a criminal complaint. 

See 1.6.34     XDm9mm , Trump ordered the "investigation".  FBI is law enforcement, if there had been evidence found he would have been charged.  Yet you claim it was not a "criminal investigation".  My claim is that there was no actual "investigation", just a dog and pony show to force Kavanaugh through and placate the right wing nuts with another fake talking point.

You falsely claimed alleged witnesses weren't interviewed by the FBI.

I did????   I linked an article with that claim, you have a problem with it, provide evidence to dispute it with.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.6.43  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Freedom Warrior @1.6.41    one month ago

Why let trivial things like truth and facts get in the way of good scandals?

 
 
 
Heartland American
1.7  Heartland American  replied to  It Is ME @1    one month ago

Yet another act of idiocy on the part of a member of the Jihad squad that will work to the benefit of the GOP. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
2  Ronin2    one month ago
confirmation process set a dangerous precedent,"

The only dangerous precedent being set is by the left. Or do they really think that all will be forgotten the next time they occupy the WH?

 
 
 
squiggy
3  squiggy    one month ago

“We are all human beings, we all have pasts,” Sotomayor told a judicial conference in Santa Fe last week, according to a Wall Street Journal report. “Now, whether things occurred or didn’t occur, all of that is irrelevant. It is yesterday, today is today, and moving forward, I have to work with him.” 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
4  Sean Treacy    one month ago

Great look on the same day the "reporters" who wrote published the story in the non-news section of the New York Times that is the impetus for this silly motion claim the NYT editors threw out the exculpatory information that they included in their submitted story.  

Now a member of Congress wants to impeach someone based on a story that was dishonestly edited to excite liberals.  This is the progressive movement in a nutshell, untethered to reality and lashing out as manipulated by tabloids. 

 
 
 
loki12
4.1  loki12  replied to  Sean Treacy @4    one month ago

Funny how this isn't front page news, Blasey Fords witness has gone a step further than not remembering.  She full on calls bullshit on the whole story. I guess she is tired of being bullied by the left.

Keyser reportedly remarked: "It would be impossible for me to be the only girl at a get-together with three guys, have her leave, and then not figure out how she's getting home." Keyser told Pogrebin and Kelly, "I just really didn't have confidence in the story."

 
 
 
loki12
5  loki12    one month ago

Well, They had managed to go about 5 minutes without doing something stupid to get them in the news. baby steps. 

It's chances?  Sen. Dick Durbin on the chances Kavanaugh gets impeached......."Get Real"

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
6  Sean Treacy    one month ago

When the left loses a faithful ally like Jan Crawford....

We report tonight the real bombshell : Christine Ford’s close HS friend (who Ford says was at the party when Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her) said Ford’s story is not believable and told the FBI Ford’s allies pressured her, threatened her with a smear campaign to say otherwise   https://t.co/GQhBTXHcze

— Jan Crawford (@JanCBS)   September 17, 2019

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
7  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh    one month ago

Just a hunch but the renewed parade of faux attacks on Kavanaugh is very telling. I think RBG is about to keel and they know it.

384

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
8  Vic Eldred    one month ago

Right now the House Judiciary Committee is getting schooled by Corey Lewandowski. Ms Jackson Lee is so full of rage & hate she could barely speak!


GettyImages-77353497-1-e1514410933913.jp

 
 
 
Sparty On
8.1  Sparty On  replied to  Vic Eldred @8    one month ago

These hearings have become a goat rodeo.   Maybe they always have been.

 
 
 
Tacos!
9  Tacos!    one month ago

Golly, it's a shame Congress didn't have an opportunity to get to know this Kavanaugh guy. You know, they could have looked into his background a little bit before approving him. Oh wait . . . 

 
 
 
lib50
9.1  lib50  replied to  Tacos! @9    one month ago

They DIDN'T!  They purposefully made sure the 'investigation' was short and didn't even interview witnesses.  It was done that way so they could ram a misogynist liar through to 'stick it to the left'.  And now he is getting the scrutiny the gop made sure didn't happen back then.  By the way, did you know how many women have assaults as their first experience?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/1st-sexual-experience-rape_n_5d81db23e4b070d468c3c92a

The first sexual experience for 1 in 16 U.S. women was forced or coerced intercourse in their early teens, encounters that for some may have had lasting health repercussions, a study suggests.

The experiences amount to rape, the authors say, although they relied on a national survey that didn’t use the word in asking women about forced sex.

 
 
 
Texan1211
9.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @9.1    one month ago

Most of your post has absolutely  nothing to do with Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh will be impeached at about the same time you win the lottery and grow wings and fly.

 
 
 
Snuffy
9.1.2  Snuffy  replied to  lib50 @9.1    one month ago

How many investigations were done on Kavanaugh before any of his appointments?  Seems that none of this was found in any earlier one.

 
 
 
Texan1211
9.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  Snuffy @9.1.2    one month ago
How many investigations were done on Kavanaugh before any of his appointments?  Seems that none of this was found in any earlier one.

That is because the left hadn't made all this crap up before.

 
 
 
lib50
9.1.4  lib50  replied to  Texan1211 @9.1.1    one month ago
Most of your post has absolutely  nothing to do with Kavanaugh.

When you and others act as if this is not something many women go through (by calling victims liars and worse) and saying all kinds of stupid shit that proves they know nothing about sexual abuse and assault, its clear you all need a freaking lesson.  It all has everything to do with Kavanaugh. 

 
 
 
lib50
9.1.5  lib50  replied to  Snuffy @9.1.2    one month ago

This was not an investigation, it was a whitewash to ram him through and they specifically didn't want to know (gop).  So too freaking bad if they don't like the blowback.  It won't be going away, that I can tell you. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
9.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @9.1.4    one month ago
When you and others act as if this is not something many women go through (by calling victims liars and worse) and saying all kinds of stupid shit that proves they know nothing about sexual abuse and assault, its clear you all need a freaking lesson.  It all has everything to do with Kavanaugh.  

Doesn't have anything to do with Kavanaugh. It does have everything to do with whiny Democrats not getting their way and trying to disparage someone because he isn't liberal enough for them and they realize that he won't vote in lockstep like the liberal Justices do so often.

 
 
 
Heartland American
9.1.7  Heartland American  replied to  Texan1211 @9.1.6    one month ago

And now we know that some Kavanaugh accusers were pressuring other women to back them in additional allegations that the others never experienced and had no actual knowledge of.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.1.8  Tessylo  replied to  Heartland American @9.1.7    one month ago

And how do you know that?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
9.1.9  Sean Treacy  replied to  lib50 @9.1.5    one month ago

I don't think you know what an investigation is.

All of the relevant people testified under oath. That's an investigation.

Two New York Times investigators then spent a year on the story trying to fund anything that was missed. The only thing they found out was that Ford's friends threatened her supposed witness and friend  to lie because Ford' story was not plausible, according to Ford's friend.

 
 
 
lib50
9.1.10  lib50  replied to  Sean Treacy @9.1.9    one month ago
I don't think you know what an investigation is. All of the relevant people testified under oath. That's an investigation.

Oh dear, I know what a real investigation, why don't you investigate the investigation before you say stupid stuff.  NOT all of the relevant people were even interviewed, let alone testify under oath.  That is the freaking point, Kavanaugh was rammed through without care of the baggage he carried by Moscow Mitch and his misogynist party.  Enjoy it happening backwards, he will carry this scrutiny the rest of his time because the gop didn't care enough to vet him, covering up his drunken college days was more important. 

Ford's story was not only plausible, it was common.  Which is why I posted the stats on women and sexual abuse.  Read the fucker instead of blowing it off, your dismissal of women's experiences is annoying.  Why do you think you know more than the women who experienced this kind of thing? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
9.1.11  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @9.1.10    one month ago

Kind of cute and rather amusing that you still think something will come of all this crap.

Best get used to JUSTICE Kavanaugh sitting on SCOTUS for the rest of your life.

And Ford was a horrible, horrible witness.  She didn't know key details for SUCH a traumatic event in her pathetic life. She failed.

That sometimes happens when you out-and-out lie.

 
 
 
WallyW
9.1.12  WallyW  replied to  lib50 @9.1.10    one month ago
sk091919dAPR20190918094511.jpg
 
 
 
Texan1211
9.1.13  Texan1211  replied to  WallyW @9.1.12    one month ago

LOL!

Good one!

 
 
 
lib50
9.1.14  lib50  replied to  Texan1211 @9.1.11    one month ago

She told the truth, Kavanaugh out and out lied, provable lies about passing out drunk and his behavior at parties.  You don't know squat about this topic, so I can see why your position is lock step with the pussygrabber.

 
 
 
Texan1211
9.1.15  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @9.1.14    one month ago

Good luck on the whole impeachment of Kavanaugh thingy.

You are gonna need it----and lots of credible "witnesses"!!

The yahoos paraded about thus far are sorely lacking in credibility.

Looks like just more Democratic shenanigans to me. Couldn't block his confirmation, despite a STAR witness like Ford, so now let's attack him yet once again on spurious claims.

This is a big NOTHING-BURGER!

But I do love the fact that Democrats are willing and able to make fools of themselves all over again. 

Some just are incapable of learning from their past.

 
 
 
lib50
9.1.16  lib50  replied to  Texan1211 @9.1.15    one month ago

Impeachment or not,  we won't let anybody forget his true character and treatment of women.  And once the true scope of Trump's damage to this country is uncovered, there will be some questions about the people he decided to put in positions of power. 

ps, watch the whistleblower story

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
9.1.17  Sean Treacy  replied to  lib50 @9.1.14    one month ago
She told the truth

Which time?   Which version of events that took place in which year? And the other versions were what, then? 

Given that she was caught lying about other things in her brief time in the spotlight, why would you ever think anything she was said was true? 

 
 
 
MUVA
9.1.18  MUVA  replied to  lib50 @9.1.14    one month ago

Kavanaugh didn’t lie ballsy Ford lied like a cheap rug.

 
 
 
Texan1211
9.1.19  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @9.1.16    one month ago
Impeachment or not,  we won't let anybody forget his true character and treatment of women. 

LOL! Funny, all the women who see him daily and work with him have nothing but good things to say about him. Sounds more like you are just whining because you didn't get  a super-liberal on the court to march in lockstep.

And once the true scope of Trump's damage to this country is uncovered, there will be some questions about the people he decided to put in positions of power.  

Ah, yes. The usual degeneration into yet another "I Hate Trump" screed. Typical and so worn out by now.

Of course, what else do you really have? I mean, you certainly can't attack Kavanaugh's record as a jurist, now can you?

 
 
 
Texan1211
9.1.20  Texan1211  replied to  Sean Treacy @9.1.17    one month ago
Given that she was caught lying about other things in her brief time in the spotlight, why would you ever think anything she was said was true? 

Some are willing to believe anything---as long as it is bad and somehow connected to Trump.

 
 
 
Ronin2
11  Ronin2    one month ago

Would anyone on the left care to explain why these women didn't out against Kavanaugh sooner?

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Brett-Kavanaugh

Following Bush’s inauguration as president, Kavanaugh worked in the White House as associate counsel (2001–03), as senior associate counsel (2003), and finally as assistant to the president and staff secretary (2003–06).

Chance #1 for them to come out against Kavanaugh. Doubtful his career would have gotten off the ground if they had.

Bush twice nominated Kavanaugh to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit—in 2003 and 2005—but the nominations were never voted upon by the Republican-controlled Senate . In January 2006 Bush again nominated Kavanaugh to the D.C. Circuit, and he was finally confirmed in May. Because the D.C. Circuit has jurisdiction over many federal administrative agencies, it plays a larger role than other appellate courts in adjudicating federal regulations.

Multiple chances here. It was in the news, they knew that Bush wanted him on a very prestigious/powerful court; but not a murmur from any of these women.

While serving on the D.C. Circuit, he also taught part-time at Yale Law School, the Georgetown University Law Center, and Harvard Law School, where he was first hired by Elena Kagan , then dean of the school and subsequently an associate justice of the Supreme Court.

Just thought I would throw that little tidbit in there. Seems Kagan must not have done a good background check on Kavanaugh. Where is the leftist lynch mob coming for her?

No, the shit show didn't start until Kavanaugh was nominated for the Supreme Court. Having power within the White House, being a Circuit Court judge, and even teaching aspiring future lawyers just wasn't important for them to come forward.

The women are about as credible as their timing. They lack important information such as where, when, and most importantly witnesses. They all also seem to be staunchly Democrats (What a shock!)  Kavanaugh must have an internal liberal radar.

If I were in the Senate I wouldn't have voted for Kavanaugh to be on the Supreme Court; but it would have been for a valid reason. Kavanaugh was the one that came up for the legal defense of water boarding and enhanced interrogation techniques. That is not someone I want serving on the Supreme Court.  But I would never side with the left shit show, and their smear campaign for impeachment.

Instead of concentrating on impeaching Trump and Kavanaugh; maybe take a hard look at the Democratic candidates riding in the insane exploding clown car running ever further left.

Start with Joe Biden. His "misspeaks" (to put it mildly) rival anything the hated Bush Jr or Trump have uttered. His creepy hands and personal boundary issues would be fresh meat for the left if he had an R behind his name. The media would ride him into the ground; he would never get out of the starting gate.

Next Cory Booker. Has been accused of sexual assault by a liberal gay man. Oh the hypocrisy saying Kavanaugh is unfit to serve only on baseless accusations.

https://canadafreepress.com/article/senator-cory-booker-accused-of-sexual-assault-by-gay-man

Of course Booker has already admitted to forcefully groping a female high school friend against her will.  Of course he says "he learned from the experience, and it changed him and his views on women"

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/in-1992-cory-booker-admitted-to-groping-a-high-school-classmate-and-issued-a-call-for-sexual-respect/

Follow up with Bernie Sanders. Accused of misusing campaign funds. Of course the entire left is in epileptic shock over Trump. 

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/01/bernie-sanders-family-money

Elizabeth Warren (aka the fake native american). If the left had any standards she wouldn't even be in the Senate. Just put an R behind her name and see what would happen.

Needless to say there is a lot of work for the left to do; but they can't seem to get past Trump and Kavanaugh.

The Democrats have already lost my vote. Sorry, whichever candidate comes rolling last out of the insane exploding clown car will have to be the biggest sellout in history to the radical base. McCain lost my vote for selling out to win the nomination from the hard right. I see no reason to change that policy. 

Maybe there are some independents that haven't made up their minds. Of course nothing can be done until the clown car is greatly thinned out; the explosive device removed; and the steering fixed to be it much closer to the center line.

 
 
 
It Is ME
11.1  seeder  It Is ME  replied to  Ronin2 @11    one month ago
Would anyone on the left care to explain why these women didn't out against Kavanaugh sooner?

They weren't for lying..... Before they were told they should be !

Seems to be the "Liberal" way !

 
 
 
Heartland American
11.1.1  Heartland American  replied to  It Is ME @11.1    one month ago

The secular progressive way!

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Tacos!
FLYNAVY1


27 visitors