DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Kavanaugh Hearings Cont....

agree to disagree.

Well this has become a non-story for today. Thursday is a million years from now in terms of Trump drama. We can pick it up then.

The Senators only have to consider the evidence to make their decision on Kavanaugh.

1- Do any of the accusations hold weight?

2- The fact the Democrats stated from the beginning, before anyone was even nominated, they would do whatever it takes to stall or end the Presidents SC pick, no matter who it is.

3- Are the accusers part of that political agenda?

Really not so hard.
Then we can make him the new SC Justice.

If however, the Senate does not have enough votes to approve, we can always go to Plan-B.

Nah. McConnel warned Trump Kavenaugh would be hard to get passed. Here's why Kavenaugh was selected by Trump and why Trump would never change his mind.

Kavenaugh is the only judge whose come out on record as saying a president can't be subpoenaed, indicted or even investigated. Trump has the opportunity to help stack the judge/jury in case the investigation ever goes that far and there isn't a chance in hell he's not going to do it.

Pit, i was one of the first ones to bring that exact angle up on the board.

we're all painfully aware as to why Trump appointed kavanaugh. he isn't a pro-life judge and wasn't on the list from the heritage foundation. we know it was over the potential supreme court case with whether or not he's gonna testify.

my comments have to do with the hearing and the sexual assault allegations, nothing more.

the subpoena issue wasn't gonna stop kavanaugh from getting confirmed though.

this issue? this is what the dems needed to stonewall the confirmation process. the whole issue with his opinions on sitting presidents testifying wasn't gonna be enough to stonewall over.

No way Kavanaugh gets confirmed now. No chance.

Critics condemn New Yorker over uncorroborated Kavanaugh story: 'Lazy at best, slimy at worst'

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/...y-at-worst.html


The New Yorker's sketchy report that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh may have exposed himself to a college classmate decades ago has media critics asking if the prestigious magazine cares more about getting a story or getting it right.

The article, headlined “Senate Democrats Investigate a New Allegation of Sexual Misconduct, from the Brett Kavanaugh’s College Years,” was co-bylined by Pulitzer Prize winner Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer. It details a claim by Debbie Ramirez, who said Kavanaugh sexually harassed her during a Yale University party.

Yet, beneath the story's explosive thesis lie substantive seeds of doubt and a complete lack of corroboration that prompted howling from a chorus of media critics.



“It's worth noting that Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer could not confirm ‘with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party.’ It's also worth noting that this disclaimer was buried to the ‘10th paragraph’ of the Deborah Ramirez report. Lazy at best, slimy at worst,” Mediaite columnist Joseph Wulfsohn wrote.

National Review editor Charles C.W. Cooke penned a column calling the piece “grossly irresponsible,” which slams The New Yorker for publishing the story.

“I am struggling to remember reading a less responsible piece of ‘journalism’ in a major outlet,” Cooke wrote.“There is no scaffolding beneath this story."

Jedediah Bila wrote that she is typically a fan of Farrow but his latest report is “not good journalism.”

“New Yorker piece doesn’t even confirm that Kavanaugh was at the party, contains an admission of memory gaps by Ramirez due to intoxication, and has numerous people on the record disputing her claim. Once again, I’m awaiting facts: evidence, corroboration, possible testimony,” Bila wrote.




The story has been criticized for admitting a lawyer spent six days assessing Ramirez’s memory, failing to confirm Kavanaugh actually attended the party, burying the fact that the New Yorker couldn’t confirm the story with witnesses and relies on decades-old hearsay.

“Ronan Farrow, Jane Mayer and the New Yorker ran with a story where the accuser still, today, right now, can not say that the person she is accusing actually is the one who did what she is alleging. IS THAT NUTS,” New York Post columnist Karol Markowicz wrote in a series of tweets mocking the story.

“The New Yorker piece is a terrible piece of journalism and it really seems like Farrow and Mayer know it,” Markowicz wrote. “I can't remember the last time I was this angry about something in politics. This is disgusting.”

“I have no words for how sickened I am by how the left and the establishment media are weaponizing non-credible sexual assault claims to destroy a human being,” Daily Caller media editor Amber Athey tweeted.

Syndicated radio host Dana Loesch questioned if Farrow -- who helped launch the #MeToo movement with his reporting on disgraced Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein – was given a byline to add credibility to the report. Erick Erickson echoed Loesch, saying the piece doesn’t live up to Farrow’s pristine reputation.

“All of these New Yorker stories about Kavanaugh seem as if they're Mayer stories that Farrow was added to for credibility. Because they're not up to his standard sourcing. Hell, they're not really even sourced,” Erickson wrote.

Washington Examiner chief political correspondent Byron York sarcastically noted that the latest allegation “has it all.”

“Accuser was drunk. ’Significant gaps' in her memory, recovered recently with help of lawyer. Memories fuzzy all 'round. Some say never happened. Accuser 'never described incident until Brett's SCOTUS nomination,’” York wrote.

While many of the piece’s critics are conservative pundits, several mainstream media members have also questioned the report. “CBS This Morning” co-host Gayle King asked Mayer if she was ok knowing that Ramirez admitted that she had gaps in her memory from the night in question.

“The story is very transparent about what she does and doesn’t remember,” Mayer insisted.

The CBS morning show further pressed Mayer, and Fox News contributor Stephen Miller called the exchange “embarrassing” after co-host Norah O’Donnell tweeted a clip.

The New York Times wasn’t as comfortable as Mayer, Farrow and The New Yorker -- admitting it couldn't find anyone with firsthand knowledge of the claim.

“The Times had interviewed several dozen people over the past week in an attempt to corroborate her story, and could find no one with firsthand knowledge," the Times wrote in a story that followed the New Yorker report. "Ms. Ramirez herself contacted former Yale classmates asking if they recalled the incident and told some of them that she could not be certain Mr. Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself.”

“So it was too shaky for the New York Times, but The New Yorker went with it. Very telling,” Fox News’ Britt Hume wrote.

Pundit Steve Cortes wrote that the “sham” story “couldn't even meet the low standards” of the Times.

Despite all the criticism the story has received, Farrow and Mayer spent Monday morning defending their work with a variety of media appearances.

Same thing I did when I read The New Yorker's story too.

You have to consider the source on this but:

Kavanaugh May Face 4th Sexual-Misconduct Allegation: Report

Maryland authorities confirmed Monday that they are aware of a second accusation of sexual assault in Montgomery County against Supreme Court Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh, according to a report from The Sentinel. Authorities were extremely vague about the claims, which allegedly came from an anonymous witness and are said to concern Kavanaugh’s behavior during his senior year of high school. No complaints have been filed formally. “We are prepared to investigate if the victim wants to report to us,” Montgomery County Police Chief Thomas Manger told the paper, “and we can determine [if] it occurred in the county.” Manger told the Washington Examiner that his department does not have “any knowledge of anyone coming forward to us to report any allegations involving Judge Kavanaugh.”

If the alleged accuser does file a complaint, the Sentinel notes, it could bring the number of women accusing Kavanaugh to four: Christine Blasey Ford, Deborah Ramirez—whose allegations were revealed in another explosive New Yorker piece Sunday night—lawyer Michael Avenatti’s purported client, and the Montgomery County woman. After Ramirez’s allegations surfaced Sunday night, Kavanaugh once again denied any misconduct. “This alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. The people who knew me then know that this did not happen, and have said so,” he wrote in a statement issued by the White House cited by the Sentinel. “This is a smear, plain and simple. I look forward to testifying on Thursday about the truth, and defending my good name—and the reputation for character and integrity I have spent a lifetime building—against these last-minute allegations.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/kavanaugh-may-face-4th-sexual-misconduct-allegation-report


SUPREME COURT NOMINEE KAVANAUGH FACES MORE ALLEGATIONS

Investigators in Montgomery County confirmed Monday they’re aware of a potential second sexual assault complaint in the county against former Georgetown Prep student and Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

While investigators weren’t specific and spoke on background, they said they are looking at allegations against Kavanaugh during his senior year in high school after an anonymous witness came forward this weekend.

This would potentially bring the number to four women accusing Kavanaugh of wrongdoing and comes after Deborah Ramirez, a former Yale college student, stepped forward this weekend to accuse Kavanaugh of exposing himself to her in college, and after attorney Michael Avenatti tweeted out a message saying he represents a woman with “credible information regarding Judge Kavanaugh and Mark Judge.”

In an email to Mike Davis, the chief counsel for nominations for the Senate Judiciary Committee, Avenatti said he had evidence that at house parties in the early 1980s, Kavanaugh and his friend Judge and others plied women with alcohol and drugs, “In order to allow a ‘train’ of men to subsequently gang rape them.”

Investigators say it is unclear if Avenatti’s tweet and email is in regards to the same woman they’ve interviewed.

Judge is a writer who wrote a fictional account of his time at Georgetown Prep and was allegedly involved in the sexual assault of Professor Christine Blasey Ford, Kavanaugh’s first accuser who is set to testify this Thursday before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Kavanaugh has denied any wrongdoing. On Sunday the White House released a statement in which Kavanaugh said of the new allegations by Ramirez, “This alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. The people who knew me then know that this did not happen, and have said so. This is a smear, plain and simple. I look forward to testifying on Thursday about the truth, and defending my good name—and the reputation for character and integrity I have spent a lifetime building—against these last-minute allegations.”

President Trump refused to direct the FBI to investigate the allegations, but Montgomery County’s Prosecuting Attorney John McCarthy confirmed this weekend he would direct the Montgomery County Police Department to investigate any complaint brought against Kavanaugh, “But no complaint has been filed or forwarded to this office,” he explained.

Montgomery County Police Chief Tom Manger said, “We are prepared to investigate if the victim wants to report to us, and we can determine it occurred in the county.”

One issue police will have to determine is whether the alleged assault described by Ford occurred in Chevy Chase, Maryland or in Washington D.C. “If it is in D.C. we would not have jurisdiction,” Manger said.

Police investigators, speaking on background, said Ford’s accusations – occurring approximately 36 years ago presented other difficulties to investigators. “There is no forensic evidence, there is a question of where it occurred and when and who was around. But we will do what we can if we are called upon to do it.”

Manger agreed and said that any investigation would have to respect the victim. “Some sexual assault victims do not want police involvement. We respect that. Typically, if we are aware of a case and the victim does not want to involve us, the hospital will collect the physical evidence and turn it over to us for safekeeping in case the victim ever changes their mind about prosecution.”

Investigators we spoke with over the weekend said they were particularly interested in the semi-autobiographical books written by Judge about his time at Georgetown Prep and Kavanaugh’s involvement in some of the events described in the book.

Those events, originally thought to be exaggerated by Judge for his novels were looked at in a new light, according to investigators after comments by Dr. Ford and others.

Judge has denied being involved in the events alleged by Dr. Ford.

However, Kavanaugh’s own admissions in his senior yearbook at Prep and references to “Beach Week Ralph Club” and being the treasurer of the “Keg City Club” apparently lined up with allegations leveled by at least one other woman who knew him at that time.

Meghan McCaleb, a high school friend of Kavanaugh’s who assisted in assembling a letter of support for Kavanaugh told CNN’s Jim Sciutto “this was not an accurate portrayal” of the Supreme Court nominee in the 1980s.

“I’ve been friends with him for years and I was one of the people who gathered women together . . . 65 women . . . all said that he always was a gentleman, always respected women and nothing like that has ever happened,” she said.

https://mont.thesentinel.com/2018/09/24/supreme-court-nominee-kavanaugh-faces-more-allegations/

I have to as these guys have a Conspiracy Theory for why Trump wanted Kavanaugn and other Conspiracy Theories on why Trump didn't want Kavanaugh!

Mark Judge should be called to testify, he wrote a lot about his high school experiences purveying alcohol and women for his classmates

Where there's smoke, there's fire.

When you have a list of 21 possible nominees and you pick the only one who believes a president can't be investigated while in office, that's not a theory.

Unlike your deep state BS. lmao

CNN Political Analyst Publishes Dubious Report On Additional Kavanaugh Allegations
3:13 PM 09/24/2018
Amber Athey | Media and Breaking News Editor




Local police are casting doubt on a report from CNN political analyst Brian Karem that claimed investigators are looking into another sexual assault allegation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

Karem, who is the executive editor of the Sentinel newspapers, reported in the Montgomery County Sentinel on Monday that there may be a second sexual assault claim against Kavanaugh from his high school years.

“[Investigators] said they are looking at allegations against Kavanaugh during his senior year in high school after an anonymous witness came forward this weekend,” Karem reported.

The second allegation would be in addition to Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s claim that Kavanaugh groped her at a high school party more than three decades ago.

Montgomery County Police released a statement Monday afternoon saying that they have not received a request to launch a criminal investigation against Kavanaugh.

“At this time, the Montgomery County Police Department has not received a request by any alleged victim nor a victim’s attorney to initiate a police report or criminal investigation regarding Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh,” the statement said. “Typically, in a sexual assault case, the cooperation of the victim or witnesses is necessary.”


Karem did not clarify in his report which “investigators” are looking into a new claim against Kavanaugh, telling this reporter, “We never said the local police were our source. We quoted the police chief saying they would only investigate if they got a complaint – which they have not.”

An original version of the story cited Karem’s sources as “Montgomery County investigators,” furthering the perception that the story was sourced from local law enforcement. The story was later edited, without an editor’s note, to refer to the sources as “investigators in Montgomery County.”

Karem admitted that the change was to make sure “people would not think that MoCo police were our source.”




CNN did not respond to a request for comment.


https://dailycaller.com/2018/09/24/cnn-b...m_campaign=push

This is why I led my post with "You have to consider the source on this but:"... The big networks were not reporting it.

I said it before.

These allegations are just smear material. Accusers that get press, but want to stay anonymous. Accusers whose stories not only can't be corroborated, have no witnesses, and even the ACCUSERS themselves can't say WHERE, or WHEN.

And in a couple of them, they admit they don't even know IF.

Yet, the press runs with it. But, there's no media bias.

Just wrote and deleted a long post about Bill Clinton but hey, you've got the other team on the ropes now.. it's not the left's guy anymore so fire away.

‘I will not be intimidated’: Read Brett Kavanaugh’s full letter defending against latest allegations


Politics Sep 24, 2018 2:33 PM EDT

Judge Brett Kavanaugh says he will “not be intimidated into withdrawing” his nomination for the Supreme Court after allegations of sexual misconduct.

Kavanaugh and his first accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, will testify to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday. A second woman, Deborah Ramirez, has told The New Yorker that Kavanaugh exposed himself to her in college. Kavanaugh denies both allegations.

In a letter to the Judiciary panel, Kavanaugh says, “These are smears, pure and simple.” He calls the allegations “grotesque and obvious character assassination” and says they could dissuade others from entering public service.

Kavanaugh says threats of violence against his family and “the coordinated effort to destroy my good name” won’t drive him out.

Several Senate Republicans have called the allegations “smears” and urged a vote on Kavanaugh after Thursday’s hearing.


https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/i-...est-allegations

The only thing missing in this story is Gloria Allred.

Kavanaugh accusers enlist high-powered attorneys, Dem operatives

https://worldnewsen.com/kavanaugh-accusers-enlist-high-powered-lawyers-dem-operatives/


The girls accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct in highschool and school have one thing else in not unusual: they’re enlisting a rising choice of well known Democratic attorneys, donors and operatives for his or her battle towards President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court.

They come with pair of high-profile attorneys who fundraise for most sensible Democrats; the lawyer and spokeswoman for former FBI reliable Andrew McCabe; former advisers to then-Vice President Joe Biden; or even Michael Avenatti – the media-hungry legal professional for porn superstar Stormy Daniels who says he’s taking into account a Democratic run of his personal for president in 2020.

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham has raised questions in regards to the instances that resulted in accuser Christine Blasey Ford hiring two attorneys, Debra Katz and Lisa Banks, asking who’s paying their prison charges.

“They are the people who want to sink Kavanaugh and get Trump,” Graham stated ultimate week of Katz and Banks on Fox News’ “The Story with Martha MacCallum.”

Katz and Banks’ shut ties to the Democratic Party had been highlighted ultimate week after it used to be printed, amid negotiations with Republicans over whether or not Ford would testify, that they had been scheduled to headline a fundraiser for Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin’s marketing campaign. After Fox News and different retailers bought a call for participation, Katz and Banks dropped out of the fundraiser.

Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin (left) and lawyers Debra Katz (heart) and Lisa Banks (proper).

(Official photograph/kmblegal.com )

According to donor information, Katz has donated generously through the years to Democrats, together with Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, John Kerry, the Democratic National Committee and others. Banks, too, has donated to a large number of Democratic reasons, together with Obama, Clinton and Baldwin.

Katz has attended anti-Trump rallies, telling ABC News ultimate yr, “We are going to resist. We will not be silenced.”

Over the weekend, Ford’s prison staff grew with the addition of lawyer Michael Bromwich, who represents fired FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe, who has sparred with Trump over the FBI’s dealing with of the Hillary Clinton and Russia investigations.

“I’m honored to be joining Debra Katz and Lisa Banks in representing Dr. Ford,” Bromwich tweeted.

Joining Bromwich at the effort are Melissa Schwartz, who works for Bromwich and has served as a McCabe spokesman, and Kendra Barkoff Lamy, a former press secretary to Biden. Democratic operative Ricki Seidman — who additionally labored for Biden and the overdue Sen. Ted Kennedy and used to be fascinated by accuser Anita Hill’s testimony all the way through Clarence Thomas’ Supreme Court affirmation – could also be advising Ford, in keeping with Politico.

“We are proud to be new members of Team Ford,” Schwartz tweeted.

Ford has accused of Kavanaugh of forcing himself on her all the way through a celebration within the 1980s prior to having the ability to break out.

In a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley launched Monday, Ford stated it used to be a “difficult” resolution to return ahead together with her allegation however she felt it used to be her “civic duty.” Ford stated she to begin with sought after to divulge the allegations “in a confidential manner,” however she’s now prepared to testify.

“My original intent was first and foremost to be a helpful citizen – in a confidential way that would minimize collateral damage to all families and friends involved,” Ford stated.

A 2d accuser, Deborah Ramirez, stepped ahead in a Sunday tale revealed through The New Yorker claiming Kavanaugh, whilst in faculty, uncovered himself all the way through a drunken celebration at a Yale dormitory.

The Colorado Sun reported that Ramirez positioned her lawyers with the assistance of Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet.

Meanwhile, Avenatti — well-known for representing Stormy Daniels, who claims she had a previous sexual come across with Trump – tweeted Sunday he quickly intends to expose different accusations towards Kavanaugh from any other lady.

Kavanaugh has denied all of the allegations, calling them “a smear, plain and simple.”

“I represent a woman with credible information regarding Judge Kavanaugh and Mark Judge,” Avenatti tweeted. “We will be demanding the opportunity to present testimony to the committee and will likewise be demanding that Judge and others be subpoenaed to testify. The nomination must be withdrawn.”

Avenatti additional alleged that he had wisdom Kavanaugh and highschool buddy Mark Judge centered girls with medication and alcohol with the intention to “allow a ‘train’ of men to subsequently gang rape them.”

He didn’t state the supply of his proof and didn’t identify any alleged sufferers.

Avenatti, who used to be in large part unknown prior to representing Daniels, has been giving speeches to Democrats in Iowa and New Hampshire, teasing a imaginable presidential run towards Trump.

Pinned on the most sensible of his Twitter profile – which he’s the usage of to advertise the brand new allegations – is his platform of the place he stands on “20 key issues” forward of a imaginable White House bid.

Ben Shapiro: Kavanaugh allegations are business as usual for Democrats -- They have a long history of smears

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/09/2...ory-smears.html


It’s pretty obvious, at this point, that the Democratic attempts to smear Brett Kavanaugh are just that: a smear attempt. It’s an election ploy, an attempt to rev up the base.

Whether Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford is telling the truth or getting her story wrong, it’s obvious that Democrats are engaged in politicking. And they’re not even trying to hide it anymore.

That’s the promise Democrats are making: either elect them to stop Kavanaugh from being appointed, or elect them to impeach Kavanaugh. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., – you remember him, this is the guy who said that Kavanaugh’s hearing was a “sham” – explaining to CNN’s Jake Tapper on Thursday that Democrats will move to get rid of Kavanaugh if they take the Senate:

There are supposedly other boys, there is a whole investigative process that can and should take place. And, you know what, this is such bad practice that even if they were to ram this guy through, as soon as Democrats get gavels we're going to want to get to the bottom of this.

So this is never-ending. Democrats are just going to use the election as a referendum on the Supreme Court.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass, is fundraising off of the Ford accusations. How crazy is that?!

She sent out an email explaining, “This is outrageous. Brett Kavanaugh was already disqualified to serve on the Supreme Court." -- Of course, we don't know how.

"But now we’re learning new information about a sexual assault allegation.” This her email says, “Donate now.”

Do you know who Ford is using to advise her? Democratic operative Ricki Seidman. You may not have heard of Seidman. But she worked as Joe Biden’s communications director in 2008.

She also worked for President Obama to push Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court and she also worked for the Clinton White House.

More importantly, she also worked for Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts. And, according to Politico, was also involved with Anita Hill’s decision to testify against Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas.

And that’s where this all began. Democrats have a long, inglorious history of trotting out unverified and unverifiable allegations to fight against conservatives or Constitutional originalists.

In 1991, Democrats decided to sandbag Clarence Thomas, President George H.W. Bush’s nominee for the Supreme Court.

Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee sought out Anita Hill, a former staffer for Thomas at the Department of Education and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Two days after Thomas’ hearings began, Senator Joe Biden – you remember that guy! – he told the committee of allegations that Thomas had sexually harassed her.

He also said Hill insisted her name be kept anonymous (sound familiar) and that Thomas be kept in the dark about the accusations.

Just days after Thomas’ hearings closed, Hill gave a statement allowing the FBI to investigate the claims against Thomas.

The FBI determined that the allegations were unfounded. Thomas’ nomination was sent to the full Senate.

Weeks later, NPR reported on the FBI report, which leaked, and Hill testified, again, Congress. Thomas denied the allegations:

I have been wracking my brain and eating my insides out, trying to think of what I could have said or done to Anita Hill to lead her to allege that I was interested in her in more than a professional way.

Thomas wasn’t wrong. There was simply no evidence of the allegations other than Anita Hill’s allegations.

Anita Hill, by her own admission, followed Thomas from the Department of Education to the EEOC, even though she had Schedule-A attorney job protection.

She spoke with him on the phone multiple times according to phone logs after leaving the EEOC, but said she didn’t.

She asked him for a job recommendation. She also told Senators that she had been told by aides to Democratic Senators that if she came forward, Thomas might withdraw his nomination without the process going forward.

When Thomas was confirmed, the vast majority of Americans thought Thomas was more believable than Hill.

Thomas was confirmed by a Democratic Senate. Now, however, HBO makes movies about Anita Hill’s supposed bravery. And political guru Chelsea Handler says Clarence Thomas is a sexual abuser, tweeting this:

One known sexual predator on the Supreme Court isn't enough for Republicans. They want two. The president bragging about sexual assault isn't an issue for them either. They have no regard for women. No regards for their daughters or wives.

Truth be told, Thomas wasn’t the first Republican-nominated prospective justice to be destroyed on the basis of false accusations.

Robert Bork was labeled a racist and a sexist without evidence by Democrats including Teddy Kennedy and again Joe Biden. Kennedy said this:

Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunchcounters, rogue police could break down citizens doors in midnight raids and school children could not be taught about evolution.

Slanderous, disgusting, evidence-free allegations that took down Robert Bork.

Now, fast forward to 2012. We remember this one. Former Massachusetts Republican Governor Mitt Romney is running a tight, competitive race with incumbent Democrat President Barack Obama.

So Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., simply slanders him by stating on the floor of the Senate that Romney hadn’t paid his taxes:

So, the word's out that he hasn't paid any taxes for 10 years. Let him prove that he has paid taxes. Because he hasn't.

Let him prove it! It's not Reid's job to prove that he didn't pay taxes. It's Romney's job to prove that he did pay taxes. You have to prove that you obeyed the law.

Reid then released a statement explaining, “As I said before, I was told by an extremely credible source that Romney has not paid taxes for ten years.”

(And I was told my an extremely credible source that Harry Reid likes to murder puppies in his backyard!)

How did Reid respond to the fact that it turns out Romney did pay his taxes and that he was an abject liar? Here's what he told CNN's Dana Bash on CNN on March 31, 2015:

Dana Bash: So, no regrets, about Mitt Romney, about the Koch brothers? Because some people have even called it McCarthy-ite.

Harry Reid: Well, they can call it whatever they want. Romney didn't win, did he?

That’s all that matters to Democrats. Not the truth. Not decency. Winning.

Only if Susan Collins and Murkowski vote no, and that's far from a given.

Otherwise? The calculus for the GOP is still heavily in favor of (to use a term McConnell used for some reason) plowing through and confirming Kavanaugh. The current feelings in polls is that the House will go to the Dems in November. That's of course not a given, but it does mean sentiment is there for the house and senate to change. They have to "plow" through and get this done, even if it means ignoring any information that may cast a doubt on Brett's character.

Well said!

Yeah, if this were done in a more credible way we might already be on to the next nominee. But here we are...

Not to mention the fact that there's so much doubt about the accusations to begin with.

So are you saying that if the accusations would have come out before the hearings, say right after Trump announced him as the pick that they would have been believed? GMAB

No time is a good time, that's just an excuse the right wants to use to put a potential sex offender on the court. No low.

Like swish said, professionals bring things up like this as soon as possible.

You don't have a low either boy. You'd rather see an innocent man condemned before he's been investigated or tried merely to save a seat for a dem no matter what government position it is.

Only good argument against this guy I've seen SO FAR is the one Pit brings up.

Not saying it's going to happen, but I wouldn't be surprised if the 'blue wave' either doesn't happen or turns out to be more of a ripple after this.

'boy'? wtf? lol

The saddest part is that I don't really care about the dems either, I just want a checks and balance system that works in place for the orange fool in the White House.

I dislike many if not most of these dems.

I've told you in the past I don't like you. You're a condescending individual that I think thinks far to highly of himself.

You all were so 'humble' and 'wanted to understand the other side' for like three weeks, then you all got sticks up your ass again.

Got no reason to think you'd be any different in person than you are on here.

I'm not, I'm much worse. But You would like me, I guarantee that. I'm so full of myself I just fill the room. lol

You're out of shape too?

Bro, I'm in perfect shape for a old fat guy that smokes with heart issues. PERFECT SHAPE!

Gotta quit smoking man, I don't bring up a lot of personal stuff on here (cause I come here to forget other stuff) but my mom ended up with COPD and passed away last month.

I have that bro. A litany of things from smoking almost my whole life. I quit for a year and a half, then started again like a damn fool. Trying to quit again now, but Trump... lol

You can't let him be the cause of your death dude!

I was joking Ted. Smoking is worse than heroin to me. It's my kryptonite. Started sneaking cigs when I was 8, smoked daily at 12 at about a pack a week. That year and a half was the only time I didn't smoke since then! I vaped to do that.

I'm trying not to vape, but the smoking habit is a demon. Everytime I put them down the world makes me crazy. Not an excuse, just how it is. I know what I need to do, but I can't get past needing the fix.

I know purple is for rookies but sometimes it would be helpful. I'm trying to do this keto diet. Lost about 10lbs in a week but the whole thing with my mother (and working two jobs) just messes it up. Doing the classic yo-yo thing with the weight now.

Got a buddy that has lost over 50 lbs on that diet. It works for some people. He's 58 and says he's never felt better.