The Senate Judiciary Committee announced Tuesday that it had rescheduled a vote on Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination for Friday morning.
The vote is scheduled to take place at 9:30 a.m. ET one day after Kavanaugh and sex assault accuser Christine Blasey Ford are due to testify before lawmakers. Ford has claimed that Kavanaugh tried removing her clothes during a party when they were in high school. Kavanaugh denies her accusation.
A successful vote Friday is not necessary to advance Kavanaugh’s nomination to the full Senate. Current Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas received no recommendation from the Judiciary Committee in 1991, but was still confirmed by the Senate. Conversely, Robert Bork received an unfavorable recognition from the committee in 1987, though his nomination was rejected by the full Senate.
The allegations by Ford, who went public with her claims Sept. 16, have caused cracks in what appeared to be a smooth path to confirmation for Kavanaugh. Multiple Republican senators have told Fox News that they want to hear Ford’s testimony before deciding which way to vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination.
Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, a key undecided Republican, told reporters she will be “glued to the television” during Thursday’s hearing.
However, GOP lawmakers sounded more bullish about Kavanaugh’s chances on Tuesday, with some discussing keeping the Senate in session this weekend so that they can begin the process of confirming Kavanaugh right away.
“I go into the hearings with very positive feelings about him, and I hope Thursday goes well,” Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., told reporters.
The debate took another twist Sunday night when the New Yorker magazine published claims by Deborah Ramirez, a Yale classmate of Kavanaugh who says he exposed himself to her while drunk at a college party in the 1980s. Kavanaugh has denied that allegation as well.
Fox News has learned that Judiciary Committee staffers interviewed Kavanaugh by phone about the Ramirez allegations on Tuesday. A source familiar with the call told Fox News that Republican staffers led the interview, while Democratic aides listened without asking any questions.
Stella's Place 
Will wonders never cease?
LikeLiked by 3 people
MM has been on a tear these past few days. Guess Ol’ Turtle likes winning, and has learned he may fight back with dignity. Guess even Ol’ Turtles can learn new tricks.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I hope we bloody the hell out of our enemies.
Flake is speaking.
LikeLiked by 2 people
LikeLiked by 4 people
No surprise.
LikeLiked by 2 people
LikeLiked by 3 people
Grassley hopes his colleagues agree. How droll. Of course they will not agree. That is not why Grassley’s colleagues are there.
These type people have never ever been in my life. Ever. We never even knew about these type people and this type behavior. And now the entire country cannot escape this. May Our Lord have mercy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah right, I heard some democrat say they had a mercenary coming in to question her.
Republicans screwed this up big time, they should have already held the vote and not let this crap go on.
LikeLiked by 2 people
LikeLiked by 2 people
LikeLiked by 2 people
Picture surfaces of Ford with Soros
Rameriz Senior Fellow of one of Soros organizations
Interesting…don’t you think?
…and PS
Mr Avanatti came forward today with the woman who has claimed “gang rape” and quaaludes
LikeLiked by 4 people
Yup, a well-timed 3rd accuser. She claims Kavanaugh MAY HAVE drugged her with Ludes and MAY HAVE been a part in a rape gang. Neato, well timed – keep up the drumbeat – and she can’t be sued for slander or libel as she didn’t accuse her directly but said he might have been part of a known rape gang. The Rat tort lawyers are on their toes on this one, more sizzle without the promise of steak.
Kavanaugh’s made his personal calendars from the dates in question available (see, save EVERYTHING) and they show he was grounded or nowhere near where she was assaulted. Doesn’t matter though, it keeps up the drumbeat.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Fight.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Set aside your outrage and read this with the dispassionate eyes of the law.
Julie Swetnick does not accuse Kavanaugh of raping her. It is pretty sharply written and obviously a hit job. Parsed words.
I do not believe a single word that Julie Swetnick has sworn to other than undeniable facts such as she was alive in 1982 and so was Kavanaugh.
So this Julie Swetnick has memories of multiple parties where gang rapes occurred Kavanaugh and Judge dutifully standing in line with their ticket (drunken beyond words) yet standing in line for their turn to rape a young woman. And yet Julie Swetnick continued to go to those parties? She never tried to stop it? She never thought, hmmmm likely another rape train party I’ll stay home and watch Happy Days.
This is pure bullshit.
Julie Swetnick is delusional (not about her belief that Kavanaugh that was part of a rape gang I don’t believe for a nanosecond that she believes that accusation) but in her belief that she is fighting for the betterment of the United States by trying to stop Kavanaugh from becoming a SCOTUS Justice. Sick vile people.
The democrats are unmasked as they have never been before, there is no way they can dial this back. They are guilty of defamation pure and simple. I hope each and everyone of them is destroyed they deserve nothing less than being thrown in prison for the rest of their lives.
Wouldn’t it be sweet if the Kavanaugh calendar was a ploy 😎.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is the portion of the letter I meant to post.
Carefully crafted words to make it look like Julie Swetnick is accusing Kavanaugh of raping her.
I hope Flake chokes on his own tongue.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Excuse my ignorance of the law, but how does a person swear “under penalty of perjury” via a piece of paper and not in front of an official who swears her in? What is sworn in front of her lawyer would seem to me to be worthless. I don’t see a notary or any other official stamp indicating who this declaration was sworn to.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Sworn affidavit made under oath or affirmation of a person authorized to make a legal document.
Now is it really a sworn affidavit? It has been presented to the Senate Judiciary Committee so if it is not in fact what it is represented as I imagine that someone would have said that it is a fake affidavit.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So you witness gang rape multiple times and never do a thing to help the girls or call the police. Yeah right.
The thing is they can swear under oath anything, there is no way to prove or disprove any of this crap.
LikeLiked by 3 people
There may not be a way to prove that she is lying but there may be a way to prove beyond a reasonable doubt malice and mendacity. Kavanaugh has scores of people who are willing to defend him and step forward to say this is all a pack of lies.
then we have have the “reasonable man” test Julie Swetnick’s claim of going to multi rape parties with foreknowledge of what was likely to happen does not pass the reasonable man test. Even if she was a teenager.
There is no corroborating evidence presented in the affidavit just the assurance of having folks who will back her outrageous, ludicrous and malicious libelous statements.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I remember reading an article about a really bad STD outbreak in one small area. It was caused by a party like this. So where are the medical records?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Just another rat.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s all bs, but legally they could never prove she was lying and even if you could pansy Republicans would never do it. So they know they can show up and tell whatever bs they want to spout and will never be held legally accountable.
I’m disgusted with the whole thing. I always taught my boys they had to be careful about the girls they chose to hang out with and to always have witnesses because girls lie.
I guess now that doesn’t matter some hag can come back 40 years later and claim you did something to them even if you never met them.
I’m sorry I don’t care if you were raped or assaulted if you wait thirty something years and now have no evidence it should be looked at as bullshit.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Why does she keep going to these parties once she has seen what’s going on?
Jeff Kuhner has an interview posted with one of her family members who said she had drug and mental stability issues. He is sending it to many media putlets & it is up on his site.
LikeLiked by 4 people
I just saw l something about that on Facebook.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Drug and mental problems?
That makes sense.
Ok, let’s check out more of Julie Swetnick‘s “train rape” claims from “around 1982.” Swetnick can’t be sure of the date but said those HIGH SCHOOL parties happened “around” 1982. That would be a big problem for Swetnick then, as she graduated high school 1980. That would mean she was either 19 or 20 years old while attending those “train rape” parties she claims Brett Kavanaugh was at with drugs and alcohol. Swetnick even admits to going back to more of those type of parties after Kavanaugh.
https://www.pacificpundit.com/2018/09/26/swetnick-was-a-college-student-at-those-high-school-rape-train-parties/
Also the photo that Avenatti is using of Julie Swetnick is about as bad lawyering as you can get. A cheerful, full faced smiling woman claiming rape and witness to multiple train rape scenes.
Filthy human beings.
Creepy demonic people.
LikeLiked by 1 person
My CORRECTION – it was someone who knew her and her family and the families grew up together, NOT a direct family member.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Still a valid possession to investigate.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Family Friend” of Julie Swetnick Details Her “Issues”
posted by Kuhner Report – Sep 26, 2018
https://wrko.iheart.com/featured/the-kuhner-report/content/2018-09-26-family-friend-of-julie-swetnick-details-her-issues/
LikeLiked by 2 people
Her ex is coming out saying she’s nuts and filed a restraining order against her.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/26/ex-boyfriend-filed-restraining-order-against-kavanaugh-accuser-845348
LikeLiked by 2 people
Reached late Wednesday, Avenatti said he knew nothing of a restraining order and called the line of inquiry irrelevant.
“Complete nonsense. No truth to this at all. Her ex-boyfriend fraudulently used her resume to apply for and obtain jobs and was caught by her,” said Avenatti. “Why are you all attacking a sexual assault victim? Would that be appropriate in a court of law?”
—————————————————————————————————————-
Appropriate in a court of law……hahaha that’s rich coming from an idiot attorney who doesn’t know in a court of law you’re presumed innocent and the state/accuser must provide evidence to prove you’re guilty.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Which democrat was it that said several years ago that you could drag a 100 dollar bill through a trailer park?
IMO that is what all of this is a bunch of crazy left women who want to be a bigger player in their psycho group and a bonus have people donate them money and probably looking at their book deal in the future.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That was Clinton’s buddy, James Carville.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you, I honestly couldn’t remember who said it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
From Sara Carter’s Website….
Report: New York Times Hid Multiple Key Facts in Kavanaugh Yearbook Hit
By Staff Writer
September 25, 2018 | 3:18 PM EDT
https://saraacarter.com/report-new-york-times-hid-multiple-key-facts-in-kavanaugh-yearbook-hit/
LikeLiked by 2 people
Bill Cassidy (R) Louisiana is making the point, thank you Good God, saying that
Julie Swetnick claiming that she went to 10 plus parties where gang rapes occurred and never did anything about it and returned to party after party.
Cassidy stated firmly that it doesn’t make sense.
Cassidy is right.
Cassidy saying the Senate Judiciary must go ahead with the vote.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Kavanaugh Responds:
“This is ridiculous and from the Twilight Zone. I don’t know who this is and this never happened.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
PHONE AUDIO: CNN Producer Cold-Calling Brett Kavanaugh’s Yale Classmates
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/phone-audio-cnn-producer-cold-calling-brett-kavanaughs-yale-classmates/
LikeLiked by 3 people
Yep, I called the number, his mailbox is full.
Vile people.
LikeLiked by 3 people
We Are Living Nineteen Eighty-Four
Victor Davis Hanson
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/kavanaugh-nomination-battle-like-orwells-1984/
We Are Living Nineteen Eighty-Four
By Victor Davis Hanson
September 25, 2018 6:30 AM
Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh listens at his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill, September 4, 2018. (Joshua Roberts/Reuters)
Truth, due process, evidence, rights of the accused: All are swept aside in pursuit of the progressive agenda.
George Orwell’s 1949 dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four is no longer fiction. We are living it right now.
Google techies planned to massage Internet searches to emphasize correct thinking. A member of the so-called deep state, in an anonymous op-ed, brags that its “resistance” is undermining an elected president. The FBI, CIA, DOJ, and NSC were all weaponized in 2016 to ensure that the proper president would be elected — the choice adjudicated by properly progressive ideology. Wearing a wire is now redefined as simply flipping on an iPhone and recording your boss, boy- or girlfriend, or co-workers.
But never has the reality that we are living in a surreal age been clearer than during the strange cycles of Christine Blasey Ford’s accusations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
In Orwell’s world of 1984 Oceania, there is no longer a sense of due process, free inquiry, rules of evidence and cross examination, much less a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Instead, regimented ideology — the supremacy of state power to control all aspects of one’s life to enforce a fossilized idea of mandated quality — warps everything from the use of language to private life…
LikeLiked by 2 people
Lindsey Grahm defending Kavanaugh.
LikeLiked by 1 person
According to Wikipedia (yeah I know) Kavanaugh was one of the ones on the Starr report that wanted Clinton’s impeachment. Canada Free Press has an article & photo about how Kavanaugh was being forward as a Bush Supreme Court nominee in 2012 – gee, soon after Ford remembers.
And oh yeah – what about Cory Booker’s written article saying he groped women. Why wasn’t he forced off committee, and according to dems, out of Senate? And Bernie Sander’s article saying how women fantasize about wanting rape?
LikeLiked by 3 people
OK, in 1882 she would be 20 years old. She was at a party witnessing minors getting drugged and raped? And she swears to it? Doesn’t this make her an accomplice? Lock her and her filthy lawyer up!
LikeLiked by 2 people
10 parties! She went back for more! Maybe she was supplying the drugs and alcohol.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is how all of this rubbish ends.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was just saying to my brother last night that this #metoo crap was going to start filtering down to regular folks. Now this, a 13 year old boy falsely accused yet treated like a criminal by school. Whether it’s your husband, brother, son, grandson, etc. they could do no more than look at a nut the wrong way now and be accused because it’s a “thing” now.
https://www.dangerous.com/49605/boy-13-arrested-cuffed-and-dragged-from-school-over-metoo-allegations/
LikeLiked by 1 person
From Facebook:
Breaking911
26 mins ·
JUST IN: Ex-boyfriend filed restraining order against third Kavanaugh accuser: “She was threatening my family, threatening my wife and threatening to do harm to my baby,” Richard Vinneccy said. “I know a lot about her. She’s not credible at all. Not at all.” – Politico
LikeLiked by 2 people
Sorry, I didn’t scroll down and see you had already posted it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
No problem – you posted the Politico link.
LikeLiked by 2 people
This is like a circus.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/09/senate-judiciary-committee-interviewing-2-men-who-believe-they-had-encounter-with-christine-ford-not-brett-kavanaugh/
LikeLiked by 1 person