OFFICIAL: Kavanaugh Hearings Thread

[dave p]

Senate GOP’s Outside Counsel Says ‘Reasonable Prosector’ Would Not Bring Case Against Kavanaugh

Rachel Mitchell outlined her views in a 5-page memo to Republican Senators on Sunday.

Rachel Mitchell, the outside prosecutor hired by Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans to lead the questioning of Christine Blasey Ford and Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, has sent out a memo arguing that a “reasonable prosecutor” would not bring a case against Kavanaugh based on Blasey’s allegations.

More: Senate GOP's Outside Counsel Says ‘Reasonable Prosector’ Would Not Bring Case Against Kavanaugh

Rachel Mitchell's analysis

So funny. So predictable. She's also a registered Republican. Even before the FBI completes Trump's sham investigation.

Sham investigation? You wanted an FBI investigation, now you think it will be a sham. Funny, you know nothing of substance will come of this so now you want to discredit the FBI.

 

[deltex1]

BE SURE TO WATCH MARK LEVIN INTERVIEW THE GOV OF KENTUCKY MATT BEVIN.. THE GUY IS UNIQUE AND BRILLIANT!

 

[The Purge]

Julie Swetnick: ‘She’s Not Credible At All’ (Kavanaugh accuser #3)
Mitch McConnell Senate Majority Leader ^ | 9-30-18 | Mitch McConnell

‘The [Defamation] Suit Also Alleges Swetnick “Engaged In Unwelcome, Sexually Offensive Conduct” While At Webtrends And “Made False And Retaliatory Allegations That Other Co-Workers Had Engaged In Inappropriate Conduct Toward Her”’



Julie Swetnick By The Numbers
One Defamation Suit Filed Against Her Involving Sexual Harassment Allegations In Oregon

One Restraining Order Filed Against Her By Her Ex-Boyfriend In Florida

One Sexual Harassment Lawsuit, Where She Was Represented By Debra Katz’s Law Firm

Two Tax Liens Filed Against Her, Totaling Over $100,000

Three More Court Cases In Maryland That She Was A Party To



Swetnick Was Sued For Defamation By An Oregon Company And A Woman For ‘Unwelcome, Sexually Offensive Conduct’ And For ‘Ma[king] False And Retaliatory Allegations’
“Julie Swetnick, one of the women accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, faced allegations of her own misconduct during a short stint at a Portland tech company 18 years ago.” (“Julie Swetnick, A Brett Kavanaugh Accuser, Faced Misconduct Allegations At Portland Company,” The Oregonian, 9/29/2018)

Swetnick was sued for defamation in 2000 by Webtrends Corporation in Oregon and a woman named Margie Huetter who appears to have been their HR Director. (Webtrends Corporation vs. Julie Swetnick, Oregon Judicial Department, Case Number 001112165, 11/27/2000)

• “The suit also alleges Swetnick ‘engaged in unwelcome, sexually offensive conduct’ while at Webtrends and ‘made false and retaliatory allegations that other co-workers had engaged in inappropriate conduct toward her.’ The suit alleges Swetnick ‘engaged in unwelcome sexual innuendo and inappropriate conduct’ directed at two male employees during a business lunch, with Webtrends customers present. Swetnick claimed two other employees had sexually harassed her, according to the suit. Webtrends' suit said it determined Swetnick had engaged in misconduct but could not find evidence to support her allegations against her colleagues. Later, the company alleged, Swetnick took medical leave and simultaneously claimed unemployment benefits in the District of Columbia.” (“Julie Swetnick, A Brett Kavanaugh Accuser, Faced Misconduct Allegations At Portland Company,” The Oregonian, 9/29/2018)

“Company officials later determined, the suit said, that Swetnick had provided false information on her employment application. The suit alleged that she had misrepresented the length of time she worked at a previous employer and falsely claimed that she’d earned an undergraduate degree in biology and chemistry from Johns Hopkins University.” (“3rd Kavanaugh Accuser Has History Of Legal Disputes,” The Associated Press, 9/30/2018)

• “In the suit, Webtrends alleged Swetnick claimed to have graduated from Johns Hopkins University but the company said it subsequently learned the school had no record of her attendance. Webtrends said she also ‘falsely described her work experience’ at a prior employer.” (“Julie Swetnick, A Brett Kavanaugh Accuser, Faced Misconduct Allegations At Portland Company,” The Oregonian, 9/29/2018)

Swetnick’s Ex-Boyfriend Filed A Restraining Order Against Her: ‘She’s Not Credible At All. Not At All’
Swetnick’s Ex-Boyfriend: ‘I Have A Lot Of Facts, Evidence, That What She’s Saying Is Not True At All’

“Julie Swetnick … had a restraining order filed against her years later in Miami by her former boyfriend. A Miami-Dade County court docket shows a petition for injunction against Swetnick was filed March 1, 2001, by her former boyfriend, Richard Vinneccy, who told POLITICO Wednesday the two had dated for four years before they broke up.” (“Ex-boyfriend Filed Restraining Order Against Third Kavanaugh Accuser,” Politico, 9/26/2018)

• “According to Vinneccy, Swetnick threatened him after they broke up and even after he got married to his current wife and had a child. ‘Right after I broke up with her, she was threatening my family, threatening my wife and threatening to do harm to my baby at that time,’ Vinneccy said in a telephone interview with POLITICO. ‘I know a lot about her.’ ‘She’s not credible at all,’ he said. ‘Not at all.’” (“Ex-boyfriend Filed Restraining Order Against Third Kavanaugh Accuser,” Politico, 9/26/2018)

• “Vinneccy, 63, is a registered Democrat, according to Miami-Dade County voting records.” (“Ex-boyfriend Filed Restraining Order Against Third Kavanaugh Accuser,” Politico, 9/26/2018)

“Vinneccy made clear that he did not believe her story. ‘I have a lot of facts, evidence, that what she’s saying is not true at all,’ he said. ‘I would rather speak to my attorney first before saying more.’” (“Ex-boyfriend Filed Restraining Order Against Third Kavanaugh Accuser,” Politico, 9/26/2018)



Swetnick Filed A Personal Injury Lawsuit In Maryland Against The Washington Metro (WMATA) Claiming ‘She Lost More Than $420,000 In Earnings After She Hurt Her Nose In A Fall On A Train In 1992.’
“Swetnick was on the other side of a civil case in 1994, as a plaintiff, when she filed a personal injury lawsuit in Maryland against the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. She claimed she lost more than $420,000 in earnings after she hurt her nose in a fall on a train in 1992. Swetnick, who described herself in court records as a model and actor, claimed she had “numerous modeling commitments” with several companies at the time of the accident but missed out them because of her injuries.” (“3rd Kavanaugh Accuser Has History Of Legal Disputes,” The Associated Press, 9/30/2018)

• “To support her claim for lost wages, Swetnick named ‘Konam Studios’ as one of the companies promising to employ her. A court filing identified Nam Ko, a representative of ‘Kunam Studios,’ as a possible plaintiff’s witness for her case. Ko, however, told AP on Friday that he was just a friend of Swetnick’s and that he had never owned a company with a name spelled either way and had never agreed to pay her money for any work before she injured her nose. He said he first met Swetnick at a bar more than a year after her alleged accident. (“3rd Kavanaugh Accuser Has History Of Legal Disputes,” The Associated Press, 9/30/2018)

• “‘I didn’t have any money back then. I (was) broke as can be,’ Ko said. Ko said he has a hazy memory of Swetnick asking to use him as a ‘character reference’ but doesn’t recall hearing about her lawsuit. ‘I thought it was for a job application,’ he said.” (“3rd Kavanaugh Accuser Has History Of Legal Disputes,” The Associated Press, 9/30/2018)

Swetnick Filed A Sexual-Harassment Complaint A Decade Ago In Which She Was Represented By Debra Katz’s Law Firm
“Roughly a decade ago, Ms. Swetnick was involved in a dispute with her former employer, New York Life Insurance Co., over a sexual-harassment complaint she filed, according to people familiar with the matter. Representing her in the complaint was the firm run by Debra Katz, the lawyer currently representing Dr. Ford.” (“Third Woman, Julie Swetnick, Makes Allegations Against Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/26/2018)

• “The company ultimately reached a financial settlement with Ms. Swetnick, the people said. A spokesman for New York Life confirmed that Ms. Swetnick worked there as an agent for less than two years, from 2006 to 2008.” (“Third Woman, Julie Swetnick, Makes Allegations Against Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/26/2018)

Swetnick Had Two Tax Liens Filed Against Her For A Total of Over $100,000
THE WASHINGTON POST: “Swetnick has repeatedly encountered trouble paying her taxes over the last decade.” (“Who Is Julie Swetnick, The Third Kavanaugh Accuser?,” The Washington Post, 9/26/2018)

• “In 2015, the state of Maryland filed an interstate lien against her property in the District. The bill included over $32,000 in unpaid taxes from 2008, and another $27,000 in interest on the seven-year-old debt. Court records reflect the full amount due of nearly $63,000 was satisfied 15 months later, in December 2016. It is not clear from court records if the bill was paid or if the lien was released because of a decision that the bill was unwarranted.” (“Who Is Julie Swetnick, The Third Kavanaugh Accuser?,” The Washington Post, 9/26/2018)

• “Similarly, the IRS in 2016 assessed Swetnick a bill of over $40,000 in unpaid taxes from 2014. The federal government filed a lien on her property for the amount in 2017. The debt was listed as satisfied and lien was released in March of this year.”(“Who Is Julie Swetnick, The Third Kavanaugh Accuser?,” The Washington Post, 9/26/2018)

Swetnick Has Been Involved In Three OTHER Court Cases In Maryland
Suburban Hospital, Inc, in Bethesda, MD, named Swetnick as a defendant in a civil case in 2005 over an amount of $1788. The complaint was dismissed by the Montgomery County District Court. (Montgomery County District Court – Civil System, Case Number 060100238082005, 11/18/2005)

2 cases against a couple in 1993 (one for each person) whom she accused of repeated abusive telephone calls that were not prosecuted. (Montgomery County District Court – Criminal System, Case Number 00703394D6,7/01/1993; Montgomery County District Court – Criminal System, Case Number 00703393D5, 7/01/1993)



###
SENATE REPUBLICAN COMMUNICATIONS CENTER


The Socialist/DemonRATS are truly insane to use her as an accuser against Judge Kavanaugh.

Note her prior use of Debra Katz’s Law Firm in a suit she filled against her then

 

[The Purge]

Senator Hatch Sends Letter to FBI Director About ‘Deeply Troubling’ Behavior from Ford’s Attorneys
WJ ^ | 2018-10-01 21:00 | Jack Davis

Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch, who has accused Democrats of doing everything they can imagine to stall Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s elevation to the Supreme Court, has sent the FBI a letter demanding to know if the bureau encounters more stall tactics during its upcoming probe of the allegations against Kavanaugh.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Not proven - means innocent until proven guilty, and not the other way around.

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal construct. It has nothing to do with the Senate confirmation hearings.

Does the Senate usually follow the laws of our land or not ?

"Innocent until proven guilty" is not a law.

Just common sense. Something you don’t have.

LOLOL

Well I certainly have better sense than to accuse someone of being a Holocaust denier after they argued as many as 6 million Jews were killed in it.

You do that now. Kav has an impeccable record too. But in HS you were a Nazi and a denier. I don't have any proof but in your world I don't need any.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Not proven - means innocent until proven guilty, and not the other way around.

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal construct. It has nothing to do with the Senate confirmation hearings.

I agree. But the collateral damage is that he can no longer coach his little girls basketball games. That’s cold given lack of evidence. Don’t care about SC that’s political. Ruining his poor kids childhood is unforgivable given the lack of evidence. Fuck politics. The kids’ lives were destroyed.

Like I asked, since when do rightards give a shit about someone's reputation?

So when you were 17 you denied the Holocaust? Why?

LOLOL

Oh, look.... you changed your idiocy. You went from claiming I am a Holocaust denier to claiming I was one at 17. Why'd you change your claims?

I didn’t change it. I just Didn’t specify it. Sucks to be you as the burden of proof is on you. You a rat faced c u next Tuesday.

Of course you changed it. You said, I AM "a Holocaust denier." Now you say I WAS one at 17. So what changed?

You can't even comprehend tense. You have no chance at common sense.

Well you call Kav a rapist? He is not and was never accused. So past and present and truth seem to be irrelevant to you and yours. Once a denier always a denier? Right?

 

[The Purge]

Ex-Trump aide: If FBI can investigate Clinton emails in days, it can investigate Kavanaugh in a week

Former Trump campaign adviser Michael Caputo said the FBI should have no problem investigating the sexual assault claims against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh in one week.

President Trump asked the FBI to investigate the claims leveled against Kavanaugh after Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee agreed to a one-week investigation on Friday.

Caputo said Sunday on CNN that one week should be plenty of time to investigate the sexual misconduct claims brought forward by Christine Blasey Ford and two other women.

“We all know the FBI looked at 650,000 of Hillary Clinton’s emails in just 24 to 36 hours so it’ll just take a week,” Caputo said.

(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...

It could only take hours. Then watch the Rats’ primal scream.

Hugely entertaining.

 

[Faun]

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal construct. It has nothing to do with the Senate confirmation hearings.

Does the Senate usually follow the laws of our land or not ?

"Innocent until proven guilty" is not a law.

Just common sense. Something you don’t have.

LOLOL

Well I certainly have better sense than to accuse someone of being a Holocaust denier after they argued as many as 6 million Jews were killed in it.

You do that now. Kav has an impeccable record too. But in HS you were a Nazi and a denier. I don't have any proof but in your world I don't need any.

So when do you answer the question.... why did you change your story? Why did you shift from claiming I am a Holocaust denier to I was one once? And where did Ford change her story?

 

[The Purge]

Report: Flake wasn’t pressured, he masterminded the Kavanaugh delay
Legalinsurrection.com



The "Flake-led rebellion" had "been building for nearly two weeks"

According to a report published by Politico, Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ) chose to appear pressured when, in fact, he masterminded the latest Kavanaugh delay. His subsequent media statements about his motivations and his media appearances in light of this report suggest Flake's true motivations are far less pure than he would have us believe.

Flake's focus on optics, on his raw ambition (for 2020?), and on the kind of "swamp creature" political maneuvering surrounding this planned reversal paints for the American people a hideous and disturbing portrait of the Arizona senator.


On Friday, Flake told the Atlantic that he insisted on the seventh FBI investigation into Judge Brett Kavanaugh because he was trying to save two institutions, the Senate and the Supreme Court. During this interview, he also explained that he was deeply moved by Chris Coons' pleas and decided that it was up to him, Jeff Flake, to "bring a little unity," to stop our country "coming apart on this." A move that apparently brought Coons near tears.

To follow up on his preening media tour, Flake showed up on 60 Minutes with Coons in tow. CBS is revealing parts of this interview leading up to its Sunday night airing.

How did the Senate Judiciary Committee arrive at its last-minute compromise to continue the Supreme Court confirmation process of Judge Brett Kavanaugh? Senators Jeff Flake and Chris Coons tell the inside story tomorrow on 60 Minutes. pic.twitter.com/aewV9v91m1

-- 60 Minutes (60minutes) September 29, 2018



CBS News reports:

In an interview with "60 Minutes" correspondent Scott Pelley airing Sunday, Sens. Jeff Flake, R-Arizona, and Chris Coons, D-Delaware, discussed what they thought of Kavanaugh's emotional testimony. Both senators were instrumental in delaying a floor vote on Kavanaugh's nomination for one week while the FBI conducts an investigation into claims against him.

. . . . Coons said Kavanaugh's reaction to questions posed by Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Amy Klobuchar about his drinking and behavior in high school "went over a line."

"He was clearly belligerent, aggressive, angry. And I thought there was a tough dynamic there. As I watched him, part of me thought, 'This is a man who believes that he did nothing wrong, and he's completely unjustly accused. And he's being railroaded. And he's furious about it,'" said Coons.

Coons added that Kavanaugh's more "partisan" responses made him question his fitness for the bench.

"There were some lines that he delivered that were sharper, more partisan, more, 'This is the Clintons paying me back. This is a Democratic smear campaign,' that I was surprised, struck to hear from a judicial nominee," Coons said. "I'm not at all surprised to hear that from other colleagues in the committee or on television. But I was really struck that I thought his anger got the best of him. And he made a partisan argument that would've been best left to be made for his advocates and defenders on the committee."

Flake said he "didn't like" Kavanaugh's "mention of the Clintons and whatnot," but added, "I had to put myself in that spot. I think you give a little leeway there."

Watch:



Flake's positioning of himself as some sort of unifying force whose sole mission is to save the Senate and SCOTUS because he is driven by patriotic desires for national unity is unraveling, however.

The plot to further stall the Kavanaugh nomination was hatched Thursday night in Senator Susan Collins' (R-ME) office. Also allegedly in attendance were Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Joe Manchin (D-WV). The four put their heads together and realized that as only Flake serves on the Judiciary Committee, they couldn't pull off their devious plot without the assistance of another Senator serving on the committee.

They somehow landed on Senator Chris Coons (D-DE), and as noted above, Flake has been putting him to good use as a political prop and general useful idiot.

Politico reports:



In Susan Collins' third-floor office in the Capitol, she and her Republican colleagues Jeff Flake of Arizona and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska -- joined by Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virginia -- agreed they had the power to make or break Kavanaugh. And without settling on precise details, they decided to use their leverage to insist on a process that would allow them to reach a comfort level with Kavanaugh's confirmation process and seek more information, rather than to kill his Supreme Court nomination outright, according to two people familiar with the meeting,

What resulted on Friday afternoon threw Washington into chaos and guaranteed another week of uncertainty and suspense surrounding Kavanaugh's confirmation. Just hours after Flake endorsed Kavanaugh and seemed to put him on a path to the high court, the Arizonan said he first wanted a week-long FBI investigation into Christine Blasey Ford's allegation that the judge assaulted her. It was a victory for Democrats who'd been demanding such a probe, to no avail, and promises to define the retiring Flake's legacy as someone who refused to let Kavanaugh get a vote while under a cloud of doubt.

. . . . But the Flake-led rebellion, however long it lasts, had been building for nearly two weeks.

Though Murkowski, Collins and Manchin all endorsed the FBI investigation on Friday, Flake needed another partner to pull off his move because none of them serves on the Judiciary Committee. So Flake, who's been mocked for writing a book blasting the Trump presidency only to vote for his agenda, teamed up with a Democrat.

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) has spent his eight-year Senate career making earnest attempts to build relationships with Republicans, at times to liberals' annoyance. He and Flake have taken trips around the world together as part of their duties. And on Friday afternoon, with a Supreme Court seat on the line, it all paid off.

Coons, who appears to be a hapless victim of Flake's skullduggery, was then blindsided by Flake's announcement that he was insisting on a further delay and investigation.

Politico continues:

Coons and Flake vacated the Judiciary Committee shortly before the panel was expected to vote to advance Kavanaugh, a seemingly innocuous moment that left onlookers increasingly bewildered as more senators joined them in the back room. They returned minutes later with a deal that forced GOP leaders to bow to the minority's demand for an FBI probe, delaying the confirmation for as much as a week.

"I did not expect him to do this today," Coons said of Flake, speaking for nearly everyone in official Washington.

Flake's plot doesn't stop there; it includes signalling to Senate Republicans that his intentions are not to bring down Kavanaugh. It's unclear how true that is, but Politico continues:

In fact, Flake was playing a longer game. He said his statement supporting Kavanaugh was a signal to Republicans that he wasn't joining the Democratic resistance and would show he wasn't out to bring Kavanaugh's nomination down.

"I hoped that would help provide leverage," Flake recounted. But he needed some Democrats to endorse the FBI investigation, if not Kavanaugh's nomination, to get fellow Republicans to agree.

Flake wanted to demonstrate "that the process is fair, at least, even if [Democrats are] not going to vote for" Kavanaugh, he added.

Flake wouldn't say whether the protesters played a role in his decision. But he acknowledged he was in the middle of a "remarkable" moment and ticked off his "interactions with a lot of people, on the phone, email, text, walking around the Capitol, you name it."

. . . . In his speech, little-noticed at the time, Coons suggested that someone with a "partisan agenda" might have leaked to the media Ford's letter alleging the assault -- harmonizing with what Republicans had been saying for days. Coons' speech also repeated his request for an FBI investigation.

It was exactly what Flake was looking for.

Not long afterward, Coons and Flake repaired to a committee anteroom to hash out an agreement: Democrats would endorse a one-week FBI investigation into Kavanaugh, and Flake would use his leverage in the narrowly divided Senate and threaten to vote "no" on the floor if Republicans refused to go along.

Read the rest.

There is a somewhat disturbing revelation in the remaining Politico report.

Collins asked that Kavanaugh's friend Mark Judge, whom Ford alleges was in the room during the alleged assault, sign a letter and send it to the committee rather than let his lawyer do it, according to two Republican senators. The letter was turned around in a matter of hours. And Murkowski had endorsed an FBI investigation days before, only to change her tune after meeting for more than a half-hour privately with McConnell.

We covered this letter which was submitted, the letter states, "under penalty of felony."

Meanwhile, Flake--again with Coons in tow--was proclaimed a "hero" at Saturday's Global Citizens Festival.

Flake playing the part of obstructionist Juan McCain...

 

[Faun]

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal construct. It has nothing to do with the Senate confirmation hearings.

I agree. But the collateral damage is that he can no longer coach his little girls basketball games. That’s cold given lack of evidence. Don’t care about SC that’s political. Ruining his poor kids childhood is unforgivable given the lack of evidence. Fuck politics. The kids’ lives were destroyed.

Like I asked, since when do rightards give a shit about someone's reputation?

So when you were 17 you denied the Holocaust? Why?

LOLOL

Oh, look.... you changed your idiocy. You went from claiming I am a Holocaust denier to claiming I was one at 17. Why'd you change your claims?

I didn’t change it. I just Didn’t specify it. Sucks to be you as the burden of proof is on you. You a rat faced c u next Tuesday.

Of course you changed it. You said, I AM "a Holocaust denier." Now you say I WAS one at 17. So what changed?

You can't even comprehend tense. You have no chance at common sense.

Well you call Kav a rapist? He is not and was never accused. So past and present and truth seem to be irrelevant to you and yours. Once a denier always a denier? Right?

Your idiocy grows by the post.

Where did I call Kavanaugh a “rapist”.....

 

[jc456]

the poster that you responded to just confirmed that the entire Kavanaugh fiasco is about abortion. I do not understand why abortion at will is the most important issue on the democrat platform. Why is killing unborn humans the top issue with dems and libs? can anyone tell me?

No the Republican party made abortion their agenda not Democrats. You have killed the Republican party with it. If any GOP candidate tells you they can do something about Roe V Wade--they're lying through their teeth for your money and support. They promised you SCOTUS nominees that would overturn Roe v Wade--and they gave you Gorsuch & Kavanaugh.
Gorsuch to Feinstein: Abortion ruling is 'precedent'

Mitt Romney lost in 2012 because of the continual campaigning on abortion, that then went to who is not going to pay for birth control pills, to what is "legal" legitimate rape questions that were blasted on FOX NEWS--specifically the Mike Huckabee show.
The GOP's woman problem goes beyond Trump

Then in 2016, 86% of Evangelicals in this country threw their support to a man that has probably paid for a few abortions hiimself.

After listening to this:


The hypocrisy is fascinating. In one fatal swoop you have burned down the Republican "family value's" platform, completely obliterated the credibility of Evangelical church's all across this country and started a war with women all at the same time.

Well welcome to it: Click this link to redirect to another thread on this board.
Blue wave coming this November 2018

nice copy/paste of cartoons, but wrong on all counts. Even if Roe were reversed by the SC that would just kick it back to the individual states. That is the real fear of the libs and dems, that the people could actually decide for themselves in each state.

But tell me, why is abortion the most important issue to dems and libs? With all the other problems in the world and the country, why is abortion the end all issue with you? Why are you obsessed with killing unborn children? But to take that obsession to its logical end, why not allow infanticide up to 2 years of age? If the kid becomes an inconvenience or a burden, why not let the mother just kill him or her? Seriously, what is different about a month before birth and two years after?

Apparently Roe v Wade is more important to Republicans--because they're the ones who have continually campaigned on it over the last 4 election cycles-- (midterms included)

The U.S. Supreme court is not ever going to overrule Roe v Wade moron. In Neil Gorsuch's comments where he stated that Roe v Wade has been challenged enough over the years,and is now Precedent in the Constitution, he is talking about Republican legislators and Governors who have written state abortion laws that have been continually overruled by Federal District courts.
Gorsuch to Feinstein: Abortion ruling is 'precedent'

Mike Pense is a great example. He signed an abortion law into effect (with a prayer--btw) which was immediately overturned by a Federal District court. They're all overturned.
Pence signs new abortion restrictions into law with a prayer

Then the Federal District court overruled 2 of Mike Pense's abortion bills..
Indiana abortion law signed by Mike Pence ruled unconstitutional - CNNPolitics
Federal court upholds ruling blocking Indiana ultrasound abortion law

Republicans not learning a dam thing from Mitt Romney's loss in 2012--where women ran by double digits into Barack Obama's colume--lined their platfrom again with knuckle dragging neanderthals--that were capable of sending women running to the opposition in one single sentence. They were Ted Cruz, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, Scott Walker, Rand Paul, & Bobby Jindhal--(who's only desire is to control women, and interfere in their decisions.) All of them campaigning on abortion.

The very first question out of the very First 2016 Republican primary debate held by FOX NEWS was about ABORTION.
The GOP's woman problem goes beyond Trump
Gender Gap in 2012 Vote Is Largest in Gallup's History

So don't give me your bullshit that Democrats are the ones that make an issue over Roe v Wade.

Now you own it.
The 2nd annual womans march held on January 20, 2018.

More Than 4,000 Women Say They Want to Run for Office Since Trump's Election


1st Woman's march held the day after Trump was inaugurated. January 20, 2017

For more pictures go to this link on this board, and scroll through the many pages, you may find your home state there.
Woman's march pictures

Now not all of these women have had abortions, many may be pro-life, but you can be dam certain that they're sick and tired of Republican party treating them as though their 2nd class citizens, while insulting their intelligence & integrity by continually campaigning on Roe V Wade, and treating like they're nothing more than baby factories-( over something they never could do anythiing about anyway.)

If Republicans want to fall on the sword over Brett Kavanaugh--let em-- Kavanaugh & Gorsuch both ran the Democrat gaunlet back in 2006 as G.W. Bush nominee's and Democrats could have easily rejected them as Federal District court judges, as they had done with so many of G.W.'s nominee's--but these two passed through that gaunlet with flying colors. Anthony Scalia's or abortion activist judges they're NOT.

A sleeping giant has awoken.

The biggest, dumbest mistake this wacko country has ever made, is to kill little developing human beings in the womb before they ever had a chance to see the light of day.

It's a sin, and it is frowned upon by any civilized human beings who are elated that their mom's didn't abort their sad imperfect aces. If women as a majority thank that it's ok to abort children in non-emergency situations, then this nation needs to do some kind of study on the female brain, because something is bad wrong in their thinking if they think it's no big deal to disgard your child like a piece of trash.

Along with this protecting of life in the womb, comes the responsibility of having a civilization that practices being responsible, ethical, and moral enough to a degree, that out of control birth rates don't become an issue (i.e. we aren't animals). What happened ? People only have to research back to see where it all goes wrong, who was involved, and where we are today.

I don't think anyone goes for abortion on demand. I also don't believe that abortion is used for a common birth control measure--when women are paying out of pocket $1200 to $1700 for an abortion. Let's face it, birth control contraceptives are much cheaper. All of the women that abortion activists claim that have abortions each year, they have yet to find one that will testify that taxpayer dollars paid for hers.

The Republican party has painted themselves into a corner by campaigning on this U.S. Supreme court decision, that was decided 45 years ago. It was a right leaning court that gave us Roe v Wade, and it's been considered a right leaning court ever since.

So what I want you to consider is this:
1. Is the Republican party going to tell a woman that she needs to die in order to give birth, who may already have 2 kids at home that she needs to raise, along with a Husband that may object to that?
2. Is the Republilcan party going to tell the parents of a young girl who has been repeatedly raped by a relative that she needs to risk her life in child birth to give birth?
3. Is the Republican party going to tell a woman who has been beaten up and raped that she is required to carry a rape baby to full term when she is just trying to put her own life together, whom may also have a family with a husband that would object to that?

Republicans have beat this horse to death to no end in site. They have started a war with women over it, and the payback is coming this November.
Blue wave coming this November 2018

The irony is while the bible thumpers have pounded abortion home with their GOP candidates in tow, they have elected the most vile, vulgar, indecent man in the history of this nation. 86% of Evangelicals cast a vote for Donald Trump, who has probably paid for a few abortions of his own making.

The hypocrisy is astounding.

For more on this, redirect to this post on this thread by clicking this link
OFFICIAL: Kavanaugh Hearings Thread

So what I want you to consider is this:

I don't think anyone goes for abortion on demand

I do.

 

[jc456]

Diane Feinstein should have recused herself from the hearings. she provided the lawyer services to the witness. And that is illegal btw!!!

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Does the Senate usually follow the laws of our land or not ?

"Innocent until proven guilty" is not a law.

Just common sense. Something you don’t have.

LOLOL

Well I certainly have better sense than to accuse someone of being a Holocaust denier after they argued as many as 6 million Jews were killed in it.

You do that now. Kav has an impeccable record too. But in HS you were a Nazi and a denier. I don't have any proof but in your world I don't need any.

So when do you answer the question.... why did you change your story? Why did you shift from claiming I am a Holocaust denier to I was one once? And where did Ford change her story?

To show you how it is impossible to prove a negative. You can prove you're not a denier now but you cannot prove if you were one when you were 17. Ford said there were two people and then four and her testimony does not match the notes from her therapist. That is where. She also has a strong memory of what heppened 36 yrs ago but not seven weeks ago when she talked to the reporter about her poly.

You're asking Kav to prove a negative. That is insanity. The burden of proof is on the accuser. This could also have been handled quietly so as not to impact his kids. Feinstein could have shared that letter with the FBI, who could have done a background check. She chose not to because she is an irresponible and awful human being.

You cannot see that because you are a Leftit troll.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I agree. But the collateral damage is that he can no longer coach his little girls basketball games. That’s cold given lack of evidence. Don’t care about SC that’s political. Ruining his poor kids childhood is unforgivable given the lack of evidence. Fuck politics. The kids’ lives were destroyed.

Like I asked, since when do rightards give a shit about someone's reputation?

So when you were 17 you denied the Holocaust? Why?

LOLOL

Oh, look.... you changed your idiocy. You went from claiming I am a Holocaust denier to claiming I was one at 17. Why'd you change your claims?

I didn’t change it. I just Didn’t specify it. Sucks to be you as the burden of proof is on you. You a rat faced c u next Tuesday.

Of course you changed it. You said, I AM "a Holocaust denier." Now you say I WAS one at 17. So what changed?

You can't even comprehend tense. You have no chance at common sense.

Well you call Kav a rapist? He is not and was never accused. So past and present and truth seem to be irrelevant to you and yours. Once a denier always a denier? Right?

Your idiocy grows by the post.

Where did I call Kavanaugh a “rapist”.....

What did you call him? All you Leftists sound the same to me.

 

[jc456]

"Innocent until proven guilty" is not a law.

Just common sense. Something you don’t have.

LOLOL

Well I certainly have better sense than to accuse someone of being a Holocaust denier after they argued as many as 6 million Jews were killed in it.

You do that now. Kav has an impeccable record too. But in HS you were a Nazi and a denier. I don't have any proof but in your world I don't need any.

So when do you answer the question.... why did you change your story? Why did you shift from claiming I am a Holocaust denier to I was one once? And where did Ford change her story?

To show you how it is impossible to prove a negative. You can prove you're not a denier now but you cannot prove if you were one when you were 17. Ford said there were two people and then four and her testimony does not match the notes from her therapist. That is where. She also has a strong memory of what heppened 36 yrs ago but not seven weeks ago when she talked to the reporter about her poly.

You're asking Kav to prove a negative. That is insanity. The burden of proof is on the accuser. This could also have been handled quietly so as not to impact his kids. Feinstein could have shared that letter with the FBI, who could have done a background check. She chose not to because she is an irresponible and awful human being.

You cannot see that because you are a Leftit troll.

The burden of proof is on the accuser.

^^^^ this^^^^

 

[jc456]

Like I asked, since when do rightards give a shit about someone's reputation?

LOLOL

Oh, look.... you changed your idiocy. You went from claiming I am a Holocaust denier to claiming I was one at 17. Why'd you change your claims?

I didn’t change it. I just Didn’t specify it. Sucks to be you as the burden of proof is on you. You a rat faced c u next Tuesday.

Of course you changed it. You said, I AM "a Holocaust denier." Now you say I WAS one at 17. So what changed?

You can't even comprehend tense. You have no chance at common sense.

Well you call Kav a rapist? He is not and was never accused. So past and present and truth seem to be irrelevant to you and yours. Once a denier always a denier? Right?

Your idiocy grows by the post.

Where did I call Kavanaugh a “rapist”.....

What did you call him? All you Leftists sound the same to me.

they are connected at the imbecilic cord.

 

[Darkwind]

 

[Doc7505]

Penn Law prof. Amy Wax on Brett Kavanaugh allegations: ‘It’s too late, Ms. Ford’​

Penn Law prof. Amy Wax on Brett Kavanaugh allegations: ‘It’s too late, Ms. Ford’
By Madeleine Ngo
Penn Law professor Amy Wax, notorious for making controversial comments that have attracted national attention, has weighed in on the sexual misconduct allegations levied against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
In an online video entitled "Affirmative Action, Kavanaugh, and #MeToo," Wax characterized Christine Blasey Ford's allegations of sexual assault against the conservative judge as "stale" and "not fair."
Wax said she is unsure if Kavanaugh will be confirmed, but she hopes Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will tell senators "we need to balance off the pros and the cons, and on balance, this man is good for us and he's good for America, and we need to vote for him.”

~~~~~~
Amy Wax is a brave woman, the Progressive Marxist Socialist Left aka DSA will attack her for enabling rapist Kavanaugh. You wait and watch.

 

[The Purge]

Diane Feinstein should have recused herself from the hearings. she provided the lawyer services to the witness. And that is illegal btw!!!

 

[The Purge]

Just common sense. Something you don’t have.

LOLOL

Well I certainly have better sense than to accuse someone of being a Holocaust denier after they argued as many as 6 million Jews were killed in it.

You do that now. Kav has an impeccable record too. But in HS you were a Nazi and a denier. I don't have any proof but in your world I don't need any.

So when do you answer the question.... why did you change your story? Why did you shift from claiming I am a Holocaust denier to I was one once? And where did Ford change her story?

To show you how it is impossible to prove a negative. You can prove you're not a denier now but you cannot prove if you were one when you were 17. Ford said there were two people and then four and her testimony does not match the notes from her therapist. That is where. She also has a strong memory of what heppened 36 yrs ago but not seven weeks ago when she talked to the reporter about her poly.

You're asking Kav to prove a negative. That is insanity. The burden of proof is on the accuser. This could also have been handled quietly so as not to impact his kids. Feinstein could have shared that letter with the FBI, who could have done a background check. She chose not to because she is an irresponible and awful human being.

You cannot see that because you are a Leftit troll.

The burden of proof is on the accuser.

^^^^ this^^^^