She’ll sink herself

She’ll sink herself

Clinton-Email-ScandalIf you have been wondering what kind or type of agenda the Democrats have been working on during their prestigious stay as “Congressional members” just have a slight read of what their leadership has been discussing with one of the world’s most renown reporters, MS Christiane Amanpour.

If you are like me, you’d be praying for the brilliant notion of a two-house system that can keep an eye or hear akin to the judicial system who in turn should be watching both of those two as well as the executive branch. That is precisely what separation of powers means, backed-up by the automatic job description of each other performing a system of checks and balances on the other branches of government.

Why would the Republican Party try to destroy the Democrats who are in office when if you asked any person living in the nation, the Democrat Party is destroying itself. Hum, not a lot to think about there.

Furthermore, I have no doubt at all stating that I pray, mostly since Donald Trump was elected President, I have been engaged in praying for border protection, illegal immigration protection, and that we could pledge at least two Democrats to something that our President and Commander-in-Chief has put his entire Cabinet on.

For instance, a good example of this would be the infamous, “Iran Plan.” This plan as we all well know was just a bit of paperwork performed by our previous presidential administration. It went something like “hey how about $1.4 Billion dollars cash in your hand and remember my friend Hillary, Mrs. Clinton, is still trying to mop-up some odd 83 percent of the world’s plutonium for you.”               nukeem

Recall if you will the Treaty signed in 1955 of Amity with Iran. The agreement was written with the intent of “emphasizing the friendly relations which have long prevailed between [the peoples of the United States and Iran],” the statement said. It also expressly encouraged mutually beneficial trade and positive economic and consular relations when it was enacted, which we know now is ridiculous.

Someone out there explain to me what the Democrats are doing beside fixing and muttering with the FBI, US Supreme Court, and respecting the civil rights of a person who denies everything that doesn’t have an evidence tag affixed to it.

Hillary Clinton said Tuesday that civility in America can only begin again if Democrats win back the House or Senate this fall.

“You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about,” Clinton said in an interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour. “That’s why I believe if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and or the Senate, that’s when civility can start again. But until then, the only thing that the Republicans seem to recognize, and respect is strength.”

Clinton alluded to previous controversies — like the 2000 election recount to the “swift boat” attacks against John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election to the confirmation of Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh — as evidence of what she sees as hardball tactics by Republicans.

“I remember what they did to me for 25 years — the falsehoods, the lies, which unfortunately people believe because the Republicans have put a lot of time, money, and effort in promoting them,” Clinton said. “So, when you’re dealing with an ideological party that is driven by the lust for power, that is funded by corporate interests who want a government that does its bidding, it’s — you can be civil, but you can’t overcome what they intend to do unless you win elections.”

DpI_5r4UUAA9aAzThis has been the Democratic Party platform since she’s been involved. Clinton said a top priority of a Democratic House and Senate should be to scrutinize President Donald Trump. Asked if Democrats should impeach Trump, Clinton sidestepped.

“The question about impeachment — you know, that will be left to others to decide,” Clinton said. “I want to stop the degrading of the rule of law. The delegitimizing of elections. One of their priorities should be, let’s protect our elections. Let’s make sure that we have electoral security. Let’s end the suppression of voters. So, there is a big agenda if the Democrats take over.”

Mrs. Clinton does not have a right in telling anyone about electoral security; moreover, if she would admit the sentence, “I want to stop the degrading of the rule of law,” then she would STOP scrubbing her discs, STOP destroying all of her illegal email traffic, and just one more item, she is the person who the former director of the FBI pardoned in a very illegal way.





Posted in Political Correctness

Australia using a “little” sense

Australia to Ban Migrants from Sydney or Melbourne


Perth, Australia

Australia is planning to ban new migrants from living in Sydney or Melbourne in an effort to counter surging population growth in the country’s two largest cities and alleviate pressure on schools, healthcare, roads, public transport, and housing.

Thousands of Britons, Australia’s third biggest source of new arrivals, will be affected by the change, which is likely to be introduced in the new year.

They would be “allocated” to a smaller town or city in their adopted country, where they would have to spend up to five years in an attempt also to rebalance growth towards places that are suffering population stagnation or decline.

Under the plan, presented by Alan Tudge, the population minister, the government intends to impose visa conditions on tens of thousands of migrants requiring them to settle outside the two big cities for up to five years.

About 150,000 permanent migrants deemed to have skills that Australia needs are admitted each year. That includes about 17,000 Britons as well as many Chinese and Indians.

New migrants overwhelmingly choose to settle in the Melbourne and Sydney, pushing population growth to twice the estimates made a decade ago. The unplanned nature of the migrant arrivals is costing £13.5 billion in lost economic activity because of congestion and overloaded infrastructure, according to the government.

While the government has yet to spell out where it will force migrants to live, Adelaide, Perth, Darwin, and Canberra are among the likely destinations.

Although net migration now accounts for 60 percent of Australia’s population growth nationally, it accounts for 84 percent in Sydney, Australia’s largest city with 5.4 million inhabitants. Melbourne, which has 4.8 million people, and southeast Queensland, including Brisbane, with two million, are also struggling with billowing population growth.

“What we’re trying to do is get a better distribution of that [migration] growth so it can help some of those smaller states and some of the regional areas, which are crying out for more people, and take a bit of that congestion pressure off,” Mr. Tudge told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

He indicated that the government planned to enforce the policy by making it a condition of entry that migrants live and work where they are told for their first years. That could be enforced by the revocation of the visa or denying newcomers the right to apply for citizenship if they breach location restrictions.

“Nearly every visa has conditions attached to it so it wouldn’t be unusual to have a geographic attachment to a particular visa,” Mr. Tudge said.

About half the migrants admitted to Australia because of their skills are sponsored by particular employers and live where their employers are located. Mr. Tudge said that the new policy would not affect these skilled people but that it would be applied to those not tied to an employer.



Posted in Political Correctness

Rose McGowan slams the #MeToo movement:

Rose McGowan slams the #MeToo movement: ‘It’s all bull’

RoseRose McGowan, one of the most vocal advocates of the #MeToo movement, now says the revolutionary reckoning that swept through Hollywood the past year is “bull.”

McGowan, 45, helped spark the movement last fall by going on the record with sexual assault allegations against disgraced Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein. The actress said Weinstein raped her in a hotel room in 1997 and blacklisted her career.

But days after the #MeToo movement’s first anniversary, the “Scream” actress said Hollywood’s battle against sexual assault in the entertainment industry is only skin-deep.

“It’s a lie. It’s a Band-Aid lie to make them feel better,” McGowan said during an interview with The Sunday Times in the U.K. “I know these people, I know they’re lily-livered, and as long as it looks good on the surface, to them, that’s enough.”

McGowan claimed she was shunned by the #MeToo community, frequently left out of the survivors’ brunches and campaign lunches, despite being one of the most outspoken members.

“I just think they’re douchebags. They’re not champions. I just think they’re losers. I don’t like them,” she said. “How do I explain the fact that I got a GQ Man of the Year award and no women’s magazines and no women’s organizations have supported me?”

The “Charmed” alum vowed to never work in Hollywood again, adding that although she doesn’t agree with President Donald Trump’s politics, she does share something in common with his supporters.

“They hate Hollywood for being faux liberals – and they’re 100 percent right about that. It’s a bunch of faux liberals,” McGowan said. “It’s crap, and they know it is deep down, but they’re living an empty life, and to me, that’s their punishment. They get to live the lives they live.”

McGowan doubled down on past criticism of Meryl Streep, calling it “literally impossible” for the Oscar-winning actress to be completely in the dark on Weinstein’s predatory behavior.

The actress also renounced support of Hillary Clinton for the same reason.

On Twitter Wednesday, McGowan marked one year since coming forward with allegations against Weinstein on Twitter: “Today marks the anniversary of one of the hardest years of my life. It’s been a year of triggering for so many. I’m proud of us.”



Suggested reading for more value: Click here!

Posted in Political Correctness

Move on America…

Move on America…

Democrats dummysOkay, now is it time to move on with our nation? What I am referring to is this constant notion of “obstructionism.” As I see it when something doesn’t go the Democrat Party’s way, well then, let’s just get paid and not do our job. There are matters to look at here, and I mean very important matters!

Recently, I wrote a series of articles on females and their new movement, the #MeToo Movement. Now before any female gets up and stops reading, I was with you and to this day I still am. However, I still believe that ladies or women who exploit their tremendous assets to move ahead albeit for job advancement, relational activities, or otherwise should not look to this movement and start crying me too!

Basically, what I mean is that the “Movement” should be used for the number one category that was explained to me as sexual assault. I believe then, as I do now, that any male that uses his strength and prowess – hell, even his wealth or prosperity – to inflict pain, harm, conflict, or any sexual maneuver without the consent of a woman as long as there is due process, should be made to suffer in any and all ways that will work given the nature of the man (explanation follows).

Mind you, if a woman is in a position by way of common sense, decency, or otherwise, that allows a man to use his strength and/or his position in any industry may indeed assume consequences that she did not want.

hanging-cage-420x279I will speak for the men of Hollyweird on a limited basis insofar as I have been in both sectors or assisted in representing those who have fallen for the oldest trick in the book. I believe that a woman being considered for a part in a film, play, or anything that will bring her prominence should be above board with even contact and conduct. Take for example, Mr. Weinstein, who either himself, his brother, or his great-grandpa, grandpa, father, or mother owns a considerable amount of the studios and their affiliates, including the best films, television, or even Broadway, any woman under the influence of this kind of man should be using extra caution.

Time for the curveball. What happens when a woman deliberately uses a “date rape” drug on a man, yet, still the man does not desire her in any sexual way. Then for no reason whatsoever, the male comes home from work and finds an eviction notice on his door? Then in the relaxing atmosphere of the hot tub, this female wears only a robe and when she decides to go into the easing water, removes her robe, and in her splendid regalia starts screaming rape while she hurls herself on to the male! The police are called on 9-1-1, incidentally by the male and she starts crying and lying and more lying.

Later in the evening, the police show up at the male’s door threatening with a warrant! As the male identifies himself as indeed the person who made the call and had been sitting and waiting for the police to show up then, there were some embarrassed officers! The man explained he’d hired a motion picture cameraman who had filmed the entire event. Furthermore, the male explained that there was no reason for him to be evicted. This soon panned out to be true – because the woman used an accounting error to make the male look as though he forwent his lease. Once corrected, the precise same night, the police refused to take the woman into custody!

This example is as much possible and probable as Dr. J. Blasey Ford’s claim against Brett Kavanaugh with the exception that she did not possess any direct form of evidence – no police report from 1982, she did absolutely nothing with regards to her situation which for the life of me became her largest significant problem. To be as open as possible, one would think (in the teenage mindset) that this person may have provided a way to enact sexual activity. She certainly would have carried a brand, because she did not do anything before, during, or especially after the event.

This story is to illustrate that matters happen all the time. Sometimes the police make arrests when they are supposed to. And at other times they do not. This is not an article on law enforcement protocol. It is, however, an article to bring into view that everything that happens – criminally – needs appropriate due diligence in the form of due process rights.


Posted in Political Correctness

Let me Hear you say T-R-U-M-P

Let me Hear you say T-R-U-M-P

trump and KenyeJust having a short yet sincere look at our news this Wednesday, October 3, 2018, I still admit that there is a lot of people that simply do not get the message. President Trump says, “Let’s Make America Great Again,” then stating after the applause he says, “What we have here is not only is America great again but based on the economic and foreign policy numbers, we all are seeing America becoming greater that great. [Crowd erupts into loud applauds then quickly quiets down.]

So, what happened in the news (world) today? First and foremost, I did not know that a sitting President could nullify an existing treaty. And maybe President Trump didn’t nullify anything, but what I’m writing about is the changes to treaties made during the 1950s.                                                                                                                      mass_hysteria

At the State Department Wednesday, Pompeo said the U.S. will terminate the 1955 Treaty of Amity with Iran. This hit the news in the paper late today. The agreement was written with the intent of “emphasizing the friendly relations which have long prevailed between [the peoples of the United States and Iran],” the statement said. It also expressly encouraged mutually beneficial trade and positive economic and consular relations when it was enacted, which we know now is ridiculous.

The accord survived revolutions in Iran and widespread turmoil, including the hostage-taking of over 50 Americans for more than 400 days in the 1970s.

The decision to end the 63-year old accord was, according to Pompeo’s announcement,” frankly …39 years overdue.” Furthermore, the recent decision by the Trump administration to withdraw the U.S. from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action – also known as the Iran nuclear deal – and the increase in U.S. sanctions against Iran that followed, brought a new level of tension the U.S.-Iran relationship.

As far as sanctions are concerned, U.S. withdrawal from the 1955 agreement comes the same day that the United Nations International Court of Justice unanimously ruled that the U.S. must lift sanctions on humanitarian goods to Iran. The sanctions on those goods were enforced shortly after President Donald Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Iran nuclear deal.

GettyImages-103527954_1According to the International Court of Justice Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf, the White House’s sanction on those goods may cause “serious detrimental impact on the health and lives of individuals on the territory of Iran.”

Pompeo called the international court’s ruling a “meritless case” on Wednesday and one that made a “useful point for us to demonstrate the absolute absurdity of the Treaty of Amity between the U.S. and the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

“Iran has attempted to interfere with the sovereign rights of the United States to take lawful actions as necessary to protect our national security,” Pompeo said. “Iran is abusing the International Court of Justice for political and propaganda purposes.”

The same with just a little language different is going on with North Korea. Recently a letter from Iran Tehran advised Kim to enter Tuesday’s negotiations with an “awareness” of the American habit of “quitting treaties and violating their commitments.” Monday’s comments from Iranian Foreign Ministry representative Bahram Ghasemi also professed “great pessimism” about Trump’s ability to reach and maintain a mutually beneficial denuclearization agreement.

Later during the same news that I was watching the was a female Democratic analyst who was stating that Democrats would be going to the mid-term polls just to show their distrust and hatred for President Trump. Therefore, I would like to ask, what is it precisely that she and other’s don’t like what our President is doing.


Other articles that may come of interest can be found:

US Terminates 1955 Treaty With Iran After UN Court Ruling

Iran warns North Korea the U.S. has a habit of ‘quitting treaties and violating their commitments’


Posted in Political Correctness

Is this the Time we let go the Standards for acceptable behavior?

th (14)Julie Swetnick, one of the women who has publicly accused Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, has “an extensive history of involvement in legal disputes,” the Associated Press reported. What are the allegations?

One lawsuit alleges that 18 years ago, while she worked at the Portland tech company Webtrends, Swetnik “engaged in unwelcome, sexually offensive conduct” and “made false and retaliatory allegations that other co-workers had engaged in inappropriate conduct toward her,” the Oregonian reported. Webtrends also alleged that she falsified her college and work history on her job application, according to reports.

The Associated Press reported it reviewed court records that show Swetnick was involved in at least six legal cases over the past 25 years. In one example, Swetnick filed a personal injury suit against the Washington, D.C. transit authority in 1994.

Swetnick’s personal injury lawsuit against the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority in Maryland claimed she “lost more than $420,000 in earnings after she hurt her nose in a fall on a train in 1992,” the report states.

In court records, Swetnick described herself as a model and actor. She also said she had “numerous modeling commitments” with several companies she couldn’t do because of the accident, the report states.

Swetnick’s lawsuit against the transit agency was dismissed in 1997, following a settlement, the Associated Press reported.

Swetnick’s attorney Michael Avenatti, told the Associated Press the previous court cases are not relevant do not reduce the credibility of her claims against Kavanaugh. He said the suit by the ex-employee, for example, was dismissed “almost immediately.”

“In the suit, Webtrends alleged Swetnick threatened legal action against the company over her own harassment claims,” The Oregonian reported. “The lawsuit claimed that act defamed the business and sought at least $150,000 on behalf of an employee that Swetnick had allegedly made false statements about.”

Avenatti told the news outlet he “fully vetted” Swetnick before helping her go public with her claims against Kavanaugh.                                                                                        th (15)

He released a sworn statement by Swetnick that alleges she saw Kavanaugh “consistently engage in excessive drinking and inappropriate contact of a sexual nature with women in the early 1980s.”

The statement also says Swetnick was sexually assaulted at a party attended by some of Kavanaugh’s acquaintances. She did not accuse Kavanaugh of assaulted her in the statement, which was given to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Anything else?

In court records, Swetnick described herself as a model and actor. She also said she had “numerous modeling commitments” with several companies she couldn’t do because of the accident, the report states.

Swetnick’s lawsuit against the transit agency was dismissed in 1997, following a settlement, the Associated Press reported.

Avenatti is a strong critic of President Donald Trump and represents Stormy Daniels, an adult film actress who claims to have had an affair with the president before he took office.

“In the suit, Webtrends alleged Swetnick threatened legal action against the company over her own harassment claims,” The Oregonian reported. “The lawsuit claimed that act defamed the business and sought at least $150,000 on behalf of an employee that Swetnick had allegedly made false statements about.”

Avenatti told the news outlet he “fully vetted” Swetnick before helping her go public with her claims against Kavanaugh.

Supreme-Court-building-2-SCHe released a sworn statement by Swetnick that alleges she saw Kavanaugh “consistently engage in excessive drinking and inappropriate contact of a sexual nature with women in the early 1980s.”

The statement also says Swetnick was sexually assaulted at a party attended by some of Kavanaugh’s acquaintances. She did not accuse Kavanaugh of assaulted her in the statement, which was given to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Anything else? For years I have been writing about “The Acceptable Bar of Human Behavioral Standards.” In this article, much information is rendered to show it seems when the “Bar” through a submissive society gets lowered.

In all of your actions about town, in the community, at work or at play is the “Bar” (also a label for honor, ethics, standards, morals, and conduct) being raised, kept level, or lowered? Please feel free at any time to comment on where you think or where you’ve witnessed activity that suggests some kind of change.


Posted in Political Correctness



the-goooo21Time to get the real message here folks. This entire nomination vetting process as conducted by the Senate Judiciary Committee has had nothing to do with whether or not Christine Blasey Ford had been sexually assaulted thirty-six years ago or whatever.

Furthermore, as to whether or not Judge Brett Kavanaugh had anything to do with this alleged “crime” is more so off the point. The players and or planners of this tale are of a much higher highbrow standard than all of us.

This entire fiasco is taking seed on you and me. So many of us are taught from early ages that the US is a country made of laws. And not particularly wanting to skip-over any of the highlights of what it is that I am referring too just a few to allow you to understand me: Benghazi, felonious FISA Court means to spy on us as citizens; moreover, the FISA Court warrants touch upon National Security, launching nuclear weapons, ad nausea. Basically, the manipulation of who sits on the US Supreme Court.

My reference to “made of laws” means precisely what it says. This issue has gotten so out-of-control with regard to laws – it has become the POLITICAL hacking and screaming for all time. I just wonder when Fox News is going to interview someone in the know. I am going to suggest ME.                                                                         4362 BILL OF RIGHTS-2.png

Let’s have a look at the “rule of law.” First, for the sanctity of being humane, we should all ask ourselves is it proper to imprison needlessly or for an extended period before their trial (VIII Amendment). When we presume a person to be innocent until convicted of a crime, are we not demeaning them as well as incarcerating them, and curtailing them of their liberty until such time that they are found innocent or guilty?

This means to me that a person is presumed innocent of a crime before by someone’s word that leads to the opposite happening? We are presumed innocent of a crime until there is reasonable evidence to suggest we may have been involved. It can and does, in this case, get worse. Written within the same law deals with cruel and unusual punishment. Albeit, that the parameters of cruelty and unusual punishment fluctuates from time to time (or Congress to Congress) some of the provisions of this law change from time to time.

In summation, this basically means the first a person MUST be CHARGED with a criminal activity, and that the person involved must be assured that they are INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, until something is stated by those involved with this action (Democrats Dianne Feinstein, Mr. Whitehouse, and the rest of the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee in so far as I do not believe that Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s rights had been undignified in fact, all of his Eighth Amendment rights were violated.

All together Brett Kavanaugh has been investigated by the FBI six times. Why did the Democratic members of the SJC lead off with suggesting the seventh investigation? Simply because it is the Democrats who do not want Brett Kavanaugh confirmed. Reasonably, which I know is beyond Democrat Party morals, Democrats are lobbying for more time to lobby yet the bottom of the swamp they have created.

The heck with Justice Sotomayor, or Justice Elena Kagan who are the two latest Justices to join the court, yet I ask has anyone dissented at their nomination? It is only US (public sentiment), the extremely wealthy, or those who want to break the laws of the USA who are pushing for this monstrosity.

feinsteinOnce a woman contacted another woman and without evidence of any kind stated, the thirty-six years ago she was the victim of sexual assault. No charges have ever been filed. Furthermore, no evidence whatsoever has been filed. What we have learned is that a woman who allegedly has a fear of flying, except if it’s for holiday to exotic places, has a very unstable memory, so much in fact that she can’t remember who shoved her into a bedroom, couldn’t remember if she passed notes to her attorney, who I would love to add cannot be advised by a constituents Senator, but this woman was. In fact, Senator Dianne Feinstein has broken more laws than is currently acceptable. Her husband (crime of conspiracy) bought all of the unused United States Postal Service offices in the USA, she also picked up an illegal immigrant and used her Senatorial prowess to get this person a path to citizenship, including college tuition at state rate prizes, need I go on? How about the Chinese chauffeur?




Other great articles to read: So, Democrats: What are you hiding from the FBI?

Republicans’ prosecutor says Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, has a weak case


Posted in Political Correctness

Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed a bill

California Gov. Jerry Brown vetoes California bill-to-bar

california-counties-mapGov. Jerry Brown vetoed a bill Thursday that would have ensured undocumented immigrants would not face civil arrest when going to court on another matter. Sen. Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gardens (Los Angeles County), would have prevented civil arrests of any kind as long as a person was at the court for a legal proceeding. The bill would not have applied to criminal arrests at a courthouse.

I wanted to do a significant article on immigration prior to the weekend. My first reason is basically to see how this pans out for the number of illegals that will flock to California, the state with the most glamorous and lenient immigration laws in our country. Secondly, was in the matter of where and who authored the original legislation. I believe that Bell Gardens is also one of the cities, or very close to the cities where the entire realm of executives that assist in running the city got caught stealing government funds.

harrisPersonally, it was this kind of leadership that got me to change my living accommodations; however, I do return to So. California only for business. Running around in the entire state and allow me to remind anyone that California is a huge state, third to Alaska and Texas, is quite an adventure with street signs in 4 to 5 different languages with the highest Asian population of every state. Furthermore, the illegal Mexican population is in the millions of children, adults, and mothers and fathers.feinstein

Then again let’s really look at some of the more discreet (illegal) immigrant difficulties experienced there. Sanctuary cities are a constant problem. The majority of criminal activities occur in these cities. Maybe it is the feeling by some that their sentencing won’t be too bad because they are almost invited to live there. Real estate foreclosures remain a problem. If memory serves here in 2008, California was found to have the most amount of unqualified borrowers on the lists, approximately 8 million immigrants.

GettyImages-632708222-588a63cd5f9b5874ee23b9e9The number of drunk driving cases remain a joke there insofar as there are so many and repeat offenders are on a first name basis with judges and Department of Corrections personnel. Heck, in Kate Steinle’s case ICE said it turned Lopez-Sanchez over to San Francisco authorities on March 26 for an outstanding drug warrant. The agency requested an immigration detainer, but Horne said San Francisco officials believe that violates Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Lopez-Sanchez who was the perpetrator had 7 arrest warrants against him and had been deported some say as many as 8 times. After picking up a loaded pistol, he aimed and shot Kate in the head. And for those who wonder, walked out of the courtroom acquitted.

Please, puleez, those who live in central California; some of your representatives in Congress – causing the most disgraced behavior in US history are; Senator Dianne Feinstein, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Senator Kamala Harris, whew, one would think that is enough!


Posted in Political Correctness

Ask Me About Fake Movements, Fake Protests, Fake Media, or False Accusations

Ask Me About Fake Movements, Fake Protests, Fake Media, or False Accusations

th (12)

Jones’s left, Kavanagh right

It would be very interesting for me to actually see what the ratings or how much of the viewing audience happened to watch the portion of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s process of vetting a potential new Justice of the Supreme Court today.

Today was the one to watch, yep, after all, that has been said and alleged, today – FINALLY – rubber hit the road. Ford has accused Kavanaugh of pinning her to a bed during a house party in Maryland in the early 1980s, attempting to remove her clothes and putting his hand over her mouth when she tried to scream. At the time of the alleged incident, Ford was 15 and Kavanaugh was 17, she said, adding that Kavanaugh was drunk.

Although, and at times it was difficult to maintain polite composure as this “girl became a woman” told of the details of her story, it was not long before one could easily see through her story.

Therefore, as a pure unadulterated 14 to 18 senators listened to this story, and for the Democrats (hereinafter referred to as “obstructionists”) giving Dr. Ford, the accuser in this story, all the sympathetic praise for her “portrait in pain” the show was clearly sickening.

It was a sunshiny day that early summer in posh Bethesda, in 1982, as Christine Blasey Ford was finishing up diving practice at the community posh Country Club when, as she finished she just popped some clothes on over her on- piece bathing suit, hurriedly, to get a fresh start on some pre-arranged school’s out for summer! She was attending the first of Alice Cooper’s, “No more teacher’s, no more rules, no more books or dirty rules.” Oh, oh, oh, oh, the school’s out for summer!”

th (13)

Judge Kavanaugh

Interestingly she claims that there were 4 girls and 2 boys at this party, and she is a girl was shoved into a spare bedroom? Okay, I’m objecting straight away…” you mean someone asked you to go upstairs?” Who? “You don’t remember.” Let’s see here, out of the 3 girls one’s on record as saying it didn’t happen?” Too many holes in this one, people. Kids being home for the first of those lofty “va-ca’s.”

It turned out for me to be a pure obstructionist ploy to dirty up a judge’s confirmation. As Senator Lindsey Graham stated, “This was the worst concocted scam ever launched at someone for a hearing and that he disavowed many of the Dem Senator’s from being his friends.”

Actually, for me, it was a real lesson on to what, or to who will these old fart’s continue with their assault on the governments work. Most of them were far too old, all of them were too dumb to be considered note-takers.



Posted in Political Correctness

Justice as served in the USA…

Brett-Kavanaugh-with-his-family_2018_07_11_Chip-SomodevillaAs Brett Kavanaugh’s historic hearing approaches, parties on both sides are still clashing on whether new allegations will also be discussed during the hearing. But the Senate Judiciary chairman confirmed Tuesday that the committee has hired an outside counsel to question Kavanaugh and the woman who accused him of sexual assault.

Although the sticking points don’t seem to be a roadblock that will force a delay of the hearing, there is fierce negotiating going on between lawyers for Christine Blasey Ford, who has accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault in the 1980s when they were both teenagers, and the Republican staff on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Although Ford had agreed to the hearings, the issue had remained a sticking point, and two of her attorneys contacted the committee Monday night asking for details about who the outside counsel might be.

More than a century ago, the Supreme Court described a principle that it called “undoubted, axiomatic and elementary.” It is, the Court said, “unquestioned in the textbooks” and can be traced all the way back to ancient Greece and Rome. This fundamental principle — the presumption of innocence — may be one of the casualties of the campaign against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

The cynics — or, perhaps more precisely, the realists — believed that the Democrats were playing for time in the hopes of finding another accusation against Brett Kavanaugh. The cynics were right.                                                                yale

The New Yorker stooped to publish a shoddy story alleging that Kavanaugh exposed himself to a woman while he was at Yale. The alleged incident occurred at a drunken party when both were in their freshman year. What’s extraordinary is that the woman making the charge, a fellow Yale student named Deborah Ramirez, admits that she hesitated to come forward because there were such large gaps in her memory. Like who the correct person likely was?

As the magazine puts it: “In her initial conversations with The New Yorker, she was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the alleged incident with certainty.” She only decided to talk, it says, “after six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney.” Or in other words, until she got the rules of the “con-game.”

Even after her new-found certainty — which happens to accord with her political interest as a Democrat — her story still contains gaps. She was drunk and didn’t directly see that it was Kavanaugh who put his penis in front of her face when she was on the floor. She says she heard someone yell out that it was Kavanaugh who had done this, and she saw him make a motion afterward that was consistent with pulling up his pants. So even she is making the charge as a matter of hearsay and interpretation.

The only other corroboration is an unidentified classmate who tells the magazine that he heard of the incident afterward — in other words, more hearsay.

Otherwise, the authors write, “The New Yorker has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party,” a rather important lacuna if you are publishing a story that will contribute to an effort to destroy a man’s reputation. (Where’s William Shawn when you need him?) Two male students identified by Ramirez as being present at the party said they had no recollection of any such incident.

The New Yorker story comes on the heels of another blow to the credibility of Christine Blasey Ford’s account. She has identified four other people who were present at the high-school party where Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her as a teenager. All have denied it, now including Leland Keyser, who is a long-time friend of Ford’s and a Democrat. She told the Judiciary Committee through her lawyer, “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.”

Clearly, the opposition to Kavanaugh hopes that the two stories — with perhaps more on the way — will support each other despite their inherent weakness. If Democrats take down Kavanaugh on the basis of these charges, they will have achieved the miraculous by stopping a Supreme Court nominee with two unproven and probably unprovable charges, in a smashing victory for garbage-pail politics.


Posted in Political Correctness