Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Kavanaugh hearing

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
    When you make things up, there's no stopping others from doing the same.

    And unless you were PRESENT 30 or 40 years ago, none of it can be refuted, so....

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2 Men Claim Christine Ford Mistook Them for Kavanaugh

    ...Republicans said in the statement, they got a "more in-depth written statement from the man interviewed twice previously, who believes he, not Judge Kavanaugh, had the encounter in question with Dr. Ford."

    ....

    Late Wednesday, they revealed that they'd conducted their first interview Monday with one man who thinks he, not Kavanaugh, had the encounter with Ford in 1982, reports Fox News. A second interview was conducted on Tuesday, they said.

    An aide to Democrats on the Judiciary Committee told NBC News that Republicans "are flailing," and "desperately trying to muddy the waters," NBC News' Peter Alexander posted on Twitter ​Wednesday.

    The aide also called the claims "shameful and the height of irresponsibility."

    Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, hit back on Twitter about the complaint, saying "some might find it exceedingly difficult to imagine Judiciary Committee Democrats expressing this complaint with straight faces."



    https://www.newsmax.com/politics/kav.../27/id/883653/


    At this moment I tend to think that Cherry boy Kavanaugh is toast. I'll keep watching and listening. You stay tuned to the American Thinker to find out what you think.

    ?


    • Originally posted by redrover View Post
      At this moment I tend to think that Cherry boy Kavanaugh is toast. I'll keep watching and listening. You stay tuned to the American Thinker to find out what you think.
      Still a little trouble with reading skills I see. Insult skills Ok, COULD be improved with better reading skills, but -shrugs- no matter

      Here's something for you from your favorite, the American Thinker..



      If this circus of false accusations against Kavanaugh has demonstrated anything, it is the complete wickedness of the Democratic Party and the mainstream media.

      https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...ired_guns.html


      ?


      • I don't like Senator Graham ... I like him now:

        ?


        • With this Kavanaugh circus, democrats have shown themselves to be evil & malevolent creatures.

          They are a scourge upon us all.

          America is tearing itself apart with self-hatred bred by the demonic media and "democrats"

          Reject them, they've exposed themselves, we no longer have any excuse !

          ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          The hearing yesterday was a shameful exercise in abuse, unspeakable abuse by Democrats, of both Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh.

          Blasey Ford did show up and testify, her two Democrat activist lawyers, Debra Katz and Michael Bromwich, by her side.

          She was not credible, but we should all feel sorry for her.

          She has traveled the world but had told the committee she was afraid to fly. So she is not an honest person.

          Her lawyers and Dianne Feinstein have abused her horribly and used her as their tool to ruin Kavanaugh.

          Democrats on the Judiciary Committee revealed their inner selves yesterday, and it was an ugly, ugly picture. Every one of them attacked, demeaned, and verbally assaulted Judge Kavanaugh. Not one of them was civil or respectful to this man, who has led a life of high achievement, service, grace, and class. Booker, Harris, Durbin, Blumenthal, et al. are thugs. They are bullies in search of power with no regard for the truth or decency.

          Ford's original letter to Feinstein is so badly written that it is hard to believe it was drafted by an educated person. Dr. Ford did not know the word "exculpatory" but has a Ph.D. Ford seemed as though she was in a dissociative state. She was reciting a studied script, blanks and all, as though she had been hypnotized. She had no reasonable explanation for why each of the witnesses she named denies ever being at such a party. She did not address the fact that one them, her girlfriend, made a statement under oath that she had never met Kavanaugh and remembered no such gathering. The Democrats in the room badgered Kavanaugh relentlessly but ignored the fact that there is still no corroborating evidence, no witnesses, no proof that the incident ever happened. There is only this sad woman's distant, incomplete, and flawed memory. The Democrats don't care. All they care about is keeping that seat vacant.

          When asked who paid for her polygraph and who was paying her lawyers, Ford said she did not know. She said she thought there were some GoFundMe pages, but she had no idea how to manage them. She said she did not know that Sen. Grassley had offered to come to California to interview her. Her head must have been in the sand. Most likely, her lawyers wanted the spectacle we saw. They have been certain they could force Kavanaugh to withdraw. They badly misjudged the man ....

          That any of this happened is the historical low point in American politics and make no mistake: this was all about politics, not Kavanaugh. If there was any doubt before, there is no longer: the American left today is malevolent.


          ....

          https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...whirlwind.html





          ?


          • Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
            I don't like Senator Graham ... I like him now:

            Same : )

            Senator Graham's "Joseph Welch moment."

            https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...tee_dems_.html


            ?


            • Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

              Same : )

              Senator Graham's "Joseph Welch moment."

              https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...tee_dems_.html

              I'm glad you finally checked in with the thinker to find out what you believed. FBI investigation is the right way to go, but then when have Republicans ever worried about doing the right thing? Vote now we'll deal with the revelations later.

              ?


              • Originally posted by redrover View Post

                I'm glad you finally checked in with the thinker to find out what you believed. FBI investigation is the right way to go, but then when have Republicans ever worried about doing the right thing? Vote now we'll deal with the revelations later.
                The FBI may NOT even care to look at him again. They've already looked at him.

                The only "later revelations" will be learning that this woman is a fraud & a liar.. even though that's been revealed already

                Liberals are playing this game of slander, only because they know that with decent people on the supreme court, they will fail at forcing their "progressive" agenda on America.

                --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                Leftists fear that a Justice Kavanaugh will honestly apply the Constitution and not participate in judicially ramming unpopular leftist policies down the throats of an unwilling American people. That is what this fight is really all about.

                Given recent events, a re-run of the character assassinations of Judge Robert H. Bork and Justice Clarence Thomas, it is time to explain to the American people, as only President Trump can, that the 2018 election is a contest between good and evil. Majority leader McConnell was restrained in calling anti-Constitution Democrats "despicable."

                Anyone who thinks the mere leveling of a scurrilous charge is proof of its truth is genuinely evil.

                Again and again, dishonest judges have lied about the Constitution (Equal Justice, pp. 197, 265-275) in order to impose unwanted leftist policies on an averse electorate. If Judge Kavanaugh does not become Justice Kavanaugh, we can all say goodbye to honest Constitutional self-government and hello to fascism. Leftists have tried every dirty trick in the book first, to prevent and second, to nullify the results of an election in which our promise-keeping president made the appointment of honest judges, committed to the Constitution, a central feature of his campaign.


                https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...ys_losers.html



                ?


                • Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                  The FBI may NOT even care to look at him again. They've already looked at him.

                  The only "later revelations" will be learning that this woman is a fraud & a liar.. even though that's been revealed already

                  Liberals are playing this game of slander, only because they know that with decent people on the supreme court, they will fail at forcing their "progressive" agenda on America.

                  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Leftists fear that a Justice Kavanaugh will honestly apply the Constitution and not participate in judicially ramming unpopular leftist policies down the throats of an unwilling American people. That is what this fight is really all about.

                  Given recent events, a re-run of the character assassinations of Judge Robert H. Bork and Justice Clarence Thomas, it is time to explain to the American people, as only President Trump can, that the 2018 election is a contest between good and evil. Majority leader McConnell was restrained in calling anti-Constitution Democrats "despicable."

                  Anyone who thinks the mere leveling of a scurrilous charge is proof of its truth is genuinely evil.

                  Again and again, dishonest judges have lied about the Constitution (Equal Justice, pp. 197, 265-275) in order to impose unwanted leftist policies on an averse electorate. If Judge Kavanaugh does not become Justice Kavanaugh, we can all say goodbye to honest Constitutional self-government and hello to fascism. Leftists have tried every dirty trick in the book first, to prevent and second, to nullify the results of an election in which our promise-keeping president made the appointment of honest judges, committed to the Constitution, a central feature of his campaign.


                  https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...ys_losers.html


                  I hope the FBI can tell us what is causing the rosacea on his left cheek. Sometimes cartoons provide the best analysis. Check this one out. https://buffalonews.com/2018/09/28/a...and-Kavanaugh/

                  ?


                  • Originally posted by redrover View Post

                    I hope the FBI can tell us what is causing the rosacea on his left cheek. Sometimes cartoons provide the best analysis. Check this one out. https://buffalonews.com/2018/09/28/a...and-Kavanaugh/
                    Well THAT definitely changes things !

                    How DID you find such a reputable source of information ????

                    All the proof is in order now !!

                    ?


                    • Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                      Well THAT definitely changes things !

                      How DID you find such a reputable source of information ????

                      All the proof is in order now !!
                      That cartoon came from the Buffalo NY news paper. You have heard about newspapers haven't you? That's what old-timers like me used to read before we before we had the American thinker.I must tell you that MSM is coming down quite hard on Kavanaugh. I thought his performance was better than his awful interview on Fox. I thought he sounded like a complete idiot when he went off into that Hillary Clinton's revenge nonsense. Many people mentioned his lack of a judicial demeanor. Kind of the way Trump doesn't know how to be presidential. Even within all his belligerent anger Kavanaugh showed a human side that Trump doesn't have. Trump can't even fake it.

                      ?


                      • Originally posted by redrover View Post

                        That cartoon came from the Buffalo NY news paper. You have heard about newspapers haven't you? That's what old-timers like me used to read before we before we had the American thinker.
                        I delivered papers as a kid in the early eighties ...

                        ... thank heavens for the american thinker now ; )

                        Originally posted by redrover View Post
                        I must tell you that MSM is coming down quite hard on Kavanaugh. I thought his performance was better than his awful interview on Fox. I thought he sounded like a complete idiot when he went off into that Hillary Clinton's revenge nonsense. Many people mentioned his lack of a judicial demeanor. Kind of the way Trump doesn't know how to be presidential. Even within all his belligerent anger Kavanaugh showed a human side that Trump doesn't have. Trump can't even fake it.

                        Oh yes, of course . . .


                        If the nominee is eventually seated on the Supreme Court, Lowry wrote, it will be because Kavanaugh "abandoned the usual constraints and showed the nation a powerfully human reaction to the attacks on him." - see below link

                        In otherwords;

                        ...because Kavanaugh "abandoned the usual constraints and showed the nation a powerfully human reaction to the attacks on him."

                        When one is being attacked publicly with slanderous lies for political reasons, this SHOULD precipitate anger.

                        This mans kids and wife have to listen to this bile for no good reason OTHER than that democrats and the "media" are evil mental cases.

                        ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Kavanaugh...unloaded on Democrats, accusing them of hiding Ford's accusation for weeks; of working with far-left groups to keep an "evil" Trump nominee off the bench; and for presuming he is guilty of every accusation made against him, including being involved in gang-raping drugged girls as a teenager.

                        "This confirmation process has become a national disgrace," Kavanaugh, looking directly at Democrats, said in his opening remarks. "The constitution gives the Senate an important role in the confirmation process but you have replaced advise and consent with search and destroy."

                        ..talk show host Sandy Rios said she doesn't believe Ford's account and recalled that she was "sickened" that the accuser seemed to be gliding through her testimony without Republicans pushing back.

                        "But then lunch happened," Rios recalled, "and then after lunch, Brett Kavanaugh came to the mike."

                        Kimberly Ross applauded Kavanaugh for his "display of raw humanity" in front of the Senate committee. She wrote:

                        I applaud Judge Kavanaughs emotional, fiery tone because as my human equal, he has every right to be heard when others accuse him of wrongdoing. That other, lesser men have stolen the innocence and safety of millions of females through sexual domination does not make him their accomplice. He is allowed to be angry at injustice whether directed at women or at himself.


                        Ross compared her own praise for Kavanaugh to Democrats and liberals who called his statement and arguing with Democrats "snippy," "derision and rage on display," and an example of "white privilege."

                        "Brett Kavanaugh may have saved his Supreme Court confirmation," wrote National Review editor Rich Lowry, "with one of the most memorable statements in modern congressional history."

                        If the nominee is eventually seated on the Supreme Court, Lowry wrote, it will be because Kavanaugh "abandoned the usual constraints and showed the nation a powerfully human reaction to the attacks on him."


                        https://www.onenewsnow.com/politics-...own-nomination


                        ================================================== ==========================================

                        Guess who had something to say about it ???

                        Can we guess ?

                        The evil woman who orchestrated this whole nasty fraud, that's who !

                        Can you imagine what she would say ? ... it's not hard really, she had some statement ready no matter WHAT was said OR the demeanor in which it was said.

                        So, here we go. The queen of the damned speaks....

                        -------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                        During a speech before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Friday, Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) stated that Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh was not someone who reflected an impartial temperament, or the fairness and even-handedness one would see in a judge. This was someone who was aggressive and belligerent.

                        ...Candidly, in the 25 years on this committee, I have never seen a nominee for any position behave in that manner. Judge Kavanaugh used as much political rhetoric as my Republican colleagues, and whats more, he went on the attack.

                        This was someone who was aggressive and belligerent. I have never seen someone who wants to be elevated to the highest court in our country behave in that manner.


                        https://www.breitbart.com/video/2018...d-belligerent/

                        ================================================== ==========================================

                        I'll bet you haven't dianne.

                        No nominee has EVER endured such evil slander and hate FOR NO GOOD REASON ......... other than dishonest, manipulative people like you

                        ?


                        • Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                          I delivered papers as a kid in the early eighties ...

                          ... thank heavens for the american thinker now ; )




                          Oh yes, of course . . .


                          If the nominee is eventually seated on the Supreme Court, Lowry wrote, it will be because Kavanaugh "abandoned the usual constraints and showed the nation a powerfully human reaction to the attacks on him." - see below link

                          In otherwords;

                          ...because Kavanaugh "abandoned the usual constraints and showed the nation a powerfully human reaction to the attacks on him."

                          When one is being attacked publicly with slanderous lies for political reasons, this SHOULD precipitate anger.

                          This mans kids and wife have to listen to this bile for no good reason OTHER than that democrats and the "media" are evil mental cases.

                          ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          Kavanaugh...unloaded on Democrats, accusing them of hiding Ford's accusation for weeks; of working with far-left groups to keep an "evil" Trump nominee off the bench; and for presuming he is guilty of every accusation made against him, including being involved in gang-raping drugged girls as a teenager.

                          "This confirmation process has become a national disgrace," Kavanaugh, looking directly at Democrats, said in his opening remarks. "The constitution gives the Senate an important role in the confirmation process but you have replaced advise and consent with search and destroy."

                          ..talk show host Sandy Rios said she doesn't believe Ford's account and recalled that she was "sickened" that the accuser seemed to be gliding through her testimony without Republicans pushing back.

                          "But then lunch happened," Rios recalled, "and then after lunch, Brett Kavanaugh came to the mike."

                          Kimberly Ross applauded Kavanaugh for his "display of raw humanity" in front of the Senate committee. She wrote:

                          I applaud Judge Kavanaughs emotional, fiery tone because as my human equal, he has every right to be heard when others accuse him of wrongdoing. That other, lesser men have stolen the innocence and safety of millions of females through sexual domination does not make him their accomplice. He is allowed to be angry at injustice whether directed at women or at himself.


                          Ross compared her own praise for Kavanaugh to Democrats and liberals who called his statement and arguing with Democrats "snippy," "derision and rage on display," and an example of "white privilege."

                          "Brett Kavanaugh may have saved his Supreme Court confirmation," wrote National Review editor Rich Lowry, "with one of the most memorable statements in modern congressional history."

                          If the nominee is eventually seated on the Supreme Court, Lowry wrote, it will be because Kavanaugh "abandoned the usual constraints and showed the nation a powerfully human reaction to the attacks on him."


                          https://www.onenewsnow.com/politics-...own-nomination


                          ================================================== ==========================================

                          Guess who had something to say about it ???

                          Can we guess ?

                          The evil woman who orchestrated this whole nasty fraud, that's who !

                          Can you imagine what she would say ? ... it's not hard really, she had some statement ready no matter WHAT was said OR the demeanor in which it was said.

                          So, here we go. The queen of the damned speaks....

                          -------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                          During a speech before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Friday, Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) stated that Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh was not someone who reflected an impartial temperament, or the fairness and even-handedness one would see in a judge. This was someone who was aggressive and belligerent.

                          ...Candidly, in the 25 years on this committee, I have never seen a nominee for any position behave in that manner. Judge Kavanaugh used as much political rhetoric as my Republican colleagues, and whats more, he went on the attack.

                          This was someone who was aggressive and belligerent. I have never seen someone who wants to be elevated to the highest court in our country behave in that manner.


                          https://www.breitbart.com/video/2018...d-belligerent/

                          ================================================== ==========================================

                          I'll bet you haven't dianne.

                          No nominee has EVER endured such evil slander and hate FOR NO GOOD REASON ......... other than dishonest, manipulative people like you
                          I realize you have no problems about your hero's telling lies. He's either very stupid or a craven liar. Even a dummy like me who started drinking when I was 20 knew I was under age. Did party boy really think we wouldn't check on his claim about drinking legally his senior year?http://time.com/5409564/brett-kavana...-age-Maryland/

                          ?


                          • Originally posted by redrover View Post

                            I realize you have no problems about your hero's telling lies. He's either very stupid or a craven liar. ......
                            That's very entertaining coming from someone who agrees with and supports the likes of hilary clinton, barack obama, bill clinton, nancy pelosi, dianne fienstein......

                            Given the kind of folks you agree with & support, it's no surprise that you're blind to this...

                            There is real wrong done when we allow this.

                            These kinds of manipulations lead us only to evil.

                            Are we now going to believe every "accuser" when a person is nominated to the supreme court ???

                            Every person that "comes forward" with a 20, 30 or 40 year old allegation of ... what ?

                            What do you think ????????????

                            Some kind of "sexual impropriety"

                            This was first tested out on Roy Moore.

                            It worked marvelously !

                            Will we now let this become a standard tactic in our politics and society ?

                            Consider this becoming a standard practice in America !

                            ..... destroying those we don't want to succeed.

                            Easy enough to do.

                            Find someone of the opposite sex that knew, even just lived near, the person we want to destroy.... the rest is history....great way to easily screw someones life up !!!

                            ... Best of all, it can be used against ANYONE !!!

                            Democrat

                            Republican

                            Christian

                            Muslim

                            Jew

                            Independant

                            Atheist


                            ... it doesn't matter.

                            Nasty fools like shoemer and finkstein had better consider the new chapter of American history they are penning the beginnings of....

                            The people of America will soon, either ask them to keep writing this evil chapter

                            Or tell them to knock it off & go home



                            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            It assumed facts not in evidence, namely that every allegation against Kavanaugh is true.

                            This week, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, was eating at a restaurant with his wife, Heidi Cruz, when he was suddenly accosted by a group of "anti-racism activists." These activists grilled Sen. Cruz on whether he believed the three-decade-old sexual abuse allegations against Judge Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump's pick to replace former Justice Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court.

                            "Do you believe survivors, sir?" one of the protesters asked. The group then began chanting, "We believe survivors!" in increasingly vociferous tones.

                            Eventually, Cruz and his wife were forced to leave the restaurant.

                            The question was, of course, improperly formed.

                            It assumed facts not in evidence, namely that every allegation against Kavanaugh is true.

                            By labeling all of those making claims "survivors," the protesters simply asserted the conclusion of a case they had yet to make. The question isn't whether one ought to believe "survivors" -- of course one should. The question is whether everyone who alleges sexual abuse is, in fact, a survivor of sexual abuse.

                            And the answer, clearly, is no.


                            {examples}

                            Jackie, a woman who alleged being gang raped at a University of Virginia frat house in the pages of Rolling Stone, leading to a national uproar, was lying. When Emma "Mattress Girl" Sulkowicz was a fourth-year Columbia University student, she alleged that she had been raped by a foreign Columbia student. She was lying. Crystal Mangum alleged that she had been gang raped by members of the Duke lacrosse team. She was lying.

                            In order for us to determine whom to believe, we must come up with a standard for belief. "Believe all women" just won't cut it, because not all women should be believed. Neither will "innocent until proven guilty," because the court of public opinion isn't a criminal trial.

                            ..the answer lies somewhere in between: We should examine the merits of the allegations, the credibility of the accuser, the corroborating evidence. If we fail to do that, we're not actually engaged in fact-finding -- we're engaged in confirmation bias.

                            To date, three allegations have been made against Kavanaugh. The first, by a woman named Christine Blasey Ford..

                            She says she was at a party with Kavanaugh and his friend, Mark Judge, and that the two of them forced her into a room, where Kavanaugh pressed himself on her, tried to remove her clothes and stifled her screams. But Ford has been less than forthcoming about testifying; has provided no date, time or location of the alleged abuse; and hasn't provided any corroborative evidence. All the witnesses she has cited have denied knowledge of the case.

                            Then there's Deborah Ramirez, who claims that in college, Kavanaugh thrust his penis in her face at a drunken dormitory party. She told her story to The New Yorker at the behest of Senate Democrats. She freely admitted, as The New Yorker wrote, that "her memories contained gaps because she had been drinking at the time of the alleged incident," and explained that she spent six days "carefully assessing" her memories. No witnesses of the event have come forward. Again, this was at a party.

                            Finally, there's Julie Swetnick. She came forward via Stormy Daniels' attorney, Michael Avenatti, and claimed that when she and Kavanaugh were in high school, they both went to parties in Maryland during which boys formed "gang rape" lines and spiked the punch with Qualuudes. Swetnick graduated high school three years before Kavanaugh. The story seems incredible on its face.

                            So, no, it wouldn't be fair to condemn Kavanaugh based on this evidence. Not all accusers are automatically survivors. It's our job to determine whether each individual accusation merits belief. And if the answer is no, that isn't an indicator of sexism. Sometimes it's an indicator than an allegation just doesn't have enough support.


                            https://www.onenewsnow.com/perspecti...e-all-accusers

                            ?


                            • Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
                              I don't like Senator Graham ... I like him now:

                              I'm feeling similar!

                              ?


                              • Kavanaugh is a good man. Every single person who has come across Kavanaugh in his entire life has said so with not ONE negative thing to say about him personally and extremely positive things to say about him, his character, and the respectful way he's treated women from childhood to present day.

                                ONE woman, ONE! Who no one knows. Who can't even prove she's ever met Kavanaugh. Without ONE person supporting her integrity from her youth or present day. Not ONE ounce of physical evidence to support her claim. No circumstantial evidence either. Nothing presented that could even put Ford and Kavanaugh in the same place at the same time ever. Not ONE person she knows is vaguely familiar with even a minuscule detail of her claim. We haven't even got a person saying "one time at a party I remember her looking upset". NOTHING! No one saying, "I remember a change in her after one summer". Not even an unsubstantiated piece of BS to make her claim appear to not be completely made up or simply a bad dream.

                                All evidence exists only in her mind, yet we've got morons who don't even know her concluding she's truthful base on, well, NOTHING!

                                All evidence about Kavanaugh exits in public, with testimony from hundreds, from women, to clerks, to a supreme court justice. Every person who know's him personally corroborates his claims of behaving with integrity. EVERYONE!

                                I don't know if this Ford person was in an incident of attempted rape. I don't know if this woman has a false memory of who it was, as most of her memory is foggy. I don't know if it happened and she's intentionally accusing Kavanaugh for political reasons. She may be believable by using the real incident to describe it, but simply inserted Kavanaugh's name. If she said it was another person who went to a near by school, her story would be the same.

                                What I do know from weighing the evidence, circumstantial, physical, testimonies of hundreds of other people, is that the scale weighs Kavanugh as a good man, and declares no likelihood that he would have done such a thing, he is being falsely accused, and politically targeted. That's what ALL they evidence says. And anyone with the ability to calculate that has a half an ounce of dignity, would conclude the same.

                                Shame on anyone who condemn's an innocent person. Shame on everyone who does not support the method designed to prevent innocent people from hateful gang mentality. Shame on you all who want to start lynching people based on unsubstantiated claims and opinions as was done, for example, to black people and "witches". I call you such people uncivilized, hateful, nimble-minded, unscrupulous human beings airing the worst of human nature and the evils of mankind. You people are the enemy of humanity. Shame on you!

                                I pray for Kavanaugh and for America.

                                ?

                                Working...
                                X