The Senate Judiciary Committee has just rescheduled the vote on Kavanaugh to Friday, Sep. 28, 2018 at 9:30 a.m.

Senate Judiciary Committee reschedules vote on Brett Kavanaugh for Friday morning

quote:

The Senate rules used to allow unlimited debate (a practice known as filibustering) and to end the debate, it required the votes of 3/5 of the Senate or 60 senators (known as the cloture vote).

When the debate ends, the Senate votes on the nomination.

There was no attempt to filibuster, therefore a cloture vote was not necessary.

Joe Biden commenting on value of FBI investigation at Clarence Thomas hearings.

Neera Tanden - Very senior DEM advisor

Neera tweets

Dr. Ford should testify and refuse to answer questions by anyone who is not a senator. Senators who hide behind a female attorney are cowards.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
The Senate Judiciary Committee has just rescheduled the vote on Kavanaugh to Friday, Sep. 28, 2018 at 9:30 a.m.

Senate Judiciary Committee reschedules vote on Brett Kavanaugh for Friday morning

Awesome!

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Neera Tanden - Very senior DEM advisor

Neera tweets

Dr. Ford should testify and refuse to answer questions by anyone who is not a senator. Senators who hide behind a female attorney are cowards.

So is Ford a coward too for hiding behind her attorneys? The frustration is really setting in. I wonder how many love children will show up in the next two days.....there are probably casting calls going on right now in Hollywood for Kavanaugh lookalikes.

things are moving

https://www.washingtonexaminer...augh-vote-for-friday

The Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a Friday vote on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, panel chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, announced Tuesday.

The vote on Kavanaugh had been postponed from earlier this month because of an allegation by a woman who said he tried to sexually assault her in high school. Christine Blasey Ford is scheduled to air her complaint at a Judiciary Committee hearing Thursday, and Kavanaugh will testify in his own defense.

Assuming the Judiciary Committee votes Friday, the nomination will move to the floor for a series of votes beginning as early as this weekend, and a final confirmation vote is likely Tuesday, said Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas.

Grassley has denied a request from Democrats to postpone the confirmation process so that the FBI can investigate Kavanaugh.

The vote will move forward despite a second uncorroborated allegation from college classmate Deborah Ramirez, who claimed in the New Yorker that Kavanaugh thrust his groin in her face at a drunken party their freshman year.

Republicans say lawyers for Ramirez said she will not be providing an interview about the matter to Judiciary Committee staff.

Classy



https://twitter.com/eb454/status/1044696089377497088

Our two Washington senators are flaming liberals along with being female. Murray has been ranting of how Roe v. Wade will be replaced with coat hangers.

I’ve gotten flamed regularly. However, it’s like a girly boy offering to fight.

A couple of thing astonish me. When I mentioned “innocent until proven guilty” or anything that involves due process, the yelling gets very loud and shrill. While it’s the Judiciary Committee, I’m told it’s “not a trial.” Somehow, this allows for a determination of guilt based solely on gender and accusations.

Frankly, Ford could appear Thursday, confess she made everything up and that she recanted everything. Many will simplely ignore her and find Kavanaugh guilt. As a quote from the Duke lacrosse scandal went “It doesn’t matter if they’re guilty. They need to be punished.”

The second accuser (Ramirez) is now playing a game where she will testify to the FBI but not the Judiciary Comm.

This whole plot is so obvious it is like reading a book and knowing what is on the next page.

The DEMs want things in the Senate to stop re Kavanaugh and have the FBI investigate him. That is the DEM game plan.

Of course it is. The left owns the FBI. They will still be investigating Kavanaugh while Trump is attending his second inaugural ball.

One thing the FBI does need to do is to issue a generic statement saying how they cannot investigate these matters as they have no jurisdiction over them.

quote:

Originally posted by lkdr1989:
Classy



https://twitter.com/eb454/status/1044696089377497088

Not just "Classy", but also so very apropos that her chosen 'communication' method is being conveyed with the aid of a garbage can.
__________

The Brett Kavanaugh confirmation process has exposed the Democrats for the threat to the American constitutional republic they are.

American Spectator
Scott McKay

On Monday, Brett Kavanaugh, the distinguished federal appeals court judge nominated by President Trump to fill the open Supreme Court judgeship the confirmation of which has become perhaps the ugliest, most nakedly political horror show in American history, went with his wife to an interview with Fox News’ Martha McCallum.

“I will not be intimidated into withdrawing from this process,” Kavanaugh had said following a weekend in which one allegation against him, that he sexually assaulted a woman named Christine Blasey Ford, fell apart when all four of the witnesses she named to corroborate her accusations rebutted her claim. “The coordinated effort to destroy my good name will not drive me out. The vile threats against my family will not drive me out. The character assassination will not succeed.”

Kavanaugh was right, at least he should have been. But when the Ford allegations died, up came a New Yorker piece outlining another fish story, in which a woman named Deborah Ramirez alleged that Kavanaugh, as a freshman at Yale, had dropped his pants and displayed his 19-year-old manhood to her during a drunken debauch of a drinking party at the school’s dormitory. The New Yorker’s Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer offered the story almost apologetically; after the requisite clickbait headlines and lede, it spent the second half of its text largely admitting Ramirez’ story lacked any corroboration to speak of and even went so far as to recognize that Ramirez herself wasn’t sure Kavanaugh was the expositionist in question.

And no sooner did the Ramirez gambit meet with a tepid response even from the partisan Democrat legacy media than the “creepy porn lawyer” Michael Avenatti resurfaced. No sooner than his 15 minutes of fame coming from his rather chaotic and not-quite-dignified performance as Stormy Daniels’ ineffective legal counsel were mercifully over, Avenatti conjured himself back into the headlines with a new client who now alleges Kavanaugh was a gang-rape specialist in his youth.

Bear in mind this is a distinguished jurist who had endured no less than SIX background investigations by the FBI which uncovered none of these scurrilous allegations; if there was a pattern of sexual misbehavior by Brett Kavanaugh our premier investigative agency would surely have uncovered it. No red flags turned up — not until a bunch of partisan Democrat political operatives desperate to prevent a doctrinaire constitutionalist judge from taking Anthony Kennedy’s swing vote seat on the Supreme Court decided to pull out all the stops in pursuit of that agenda. In the face of these merciless smears Kavanaugh is forced to confess the kind of sexual truths which, in our current society, are socially disqualifying more than just embarrassing, just to discredit a characterization as a sexual predator concocted purely out of partisan political avarice.

What these people have done to Kavanaugh isn’t the usual Washington political antics — and that says much. After all, it’s still very much in the national memory what Democrats in the Senate tried to do to Clarence Thomas, and what they did to Robert Bork. In the case of Bork the Democrats, led by the serial sexual abuser Ted Kennedy, whose drunken extramarital antics included an actual body count, focused on Bork’s recognized opposition to infanticide as a primary justification for defeating his nomination — and had the numbers to do so. Lacking such numbers a few years later, the Democrats went deeper on Thomas, finding a middling university professor named Anita Hill who had worked with the judge in the federal bureaucracy to spin yarns about his supposed ribald behavior in the workplace. Thomas’s response was forceful and convincing, enough to put him on the Court and banish the Anita Hill imbroglio to partisan quarters of discussion for the next 25 years.

Which is what Kavanaugh’s Fox News interview was aimed at doing. But in the interview Kavanaugh lacked the fire of Thomas, who scalded his tormentors for the “high-tech lynching of uppity blacks” they had planned. Instead, he refuted the allegations of his sexual misdeeds by claiming he spent his high school and early college years as a virgin, a contention which was by turns believable, and tragic.

I don’t want to know Brett Kavanaugh’s sexual history. And if you do, there is something egregiously wrong with you. It’s quite obvious Kavanaugh himself is no more comfortable with the discussion of that information than any of us are, but he’s forced to bear his soul to achieve the pinnacle of his life’s work.

And this is disgusting on a scale we may never have experienced in modern American history — for which one side in our politics is responsible.

What consequences do we impose on the Democrat Party for stooping to this level? Let’s understand that this isn’t just about Brett Kavanaugh — though if it’s restricted to him the events of the past week are destructive and outrageous enough. Who will consent to running for office now? Who will stand for a federal appointment confirmable by the Senate?

Who will be willing to crawl through the mile of rancid sewer-pipe that is the American political process just to achieve a government job?

The answer is the one the Democrats want it to be. Namely, that no conservative will tolerate what Kavanaugh is fighting through. In the future, as National Review’s Andrew McCarthy said, our options will be restricted to polite progressives or the Democrats’ pet RINO’s, if not the hard-core socialists and cultural Marxists the Left would like to impose on us. There is a stark choice — either to go gently into this good night of American dissolution, or fight. Hard. Now.

And this is where this fall’s midterm elections come in.

Here is my interpretation of what’s happening, and my expectation of what’s coming in the next few days — this entire Kavanaugh business comes down to two numbers: 11 and 51.

It takes 11 members of the 21-member Senate Judiciary Committee to move the Kavanaugh nomination to the Senate floor, and there are 11 Republicans on the committee. Only one of those 11 — Arizona’s Jeff Flake, who has embraced the NeverTrump conceit as his personal approval ratings have descended to hellish levels — appears to be problematic for Kavanaugh’s nomination. And only three Republicans on the Senate floor are questionable Kavanaugh votes.

But Judiciary chairman Chuck Grassley has to insure he has Flake’s vote before he can move forward, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has to insure he has the Flakes, Susan Collinses, and Lisa Murkowskis before he can hold a floor vote. It’s not yet time to declare the Republican establishment weak and ineffectual on the Kavanaugh confirmation; this isn’t as easy as we’d like it to be.

However, time is running out — and this is the Republicans’ Super Bowl. They sold their voters the idea that if we gave them the House, Senate, and White House, things would finally be made right from the frightening abuses of the Obama years, and we delivered. Republican voters tolerated the poor performances of Senators like Bob Corker, John McCain, Collins, and Murkowski on the assurance that where it came to judicial appointments they would be a marked positive difference from the Democrat alternatives, and in Trump’s case we were told that whether his history was that of a conservative or not, he’d clearly present America with better judges than Hillary Clinton would.

Well, so far Trump, who couldn’t run on what a demonstrated conservative he is, has been immaculate in nominating conservatives to the federal bench. And if the Republican Senate, populated by a gaggle of swamp creatures who for decades have feasted at the expense and adulation of Republican and conservative organizations, can’t confirm Kavanaugh, well…

Let’s remember that Kavanaugh, as sterling as his reputation as a jurist might be, is the very epitome of an establishment Republican. In fact, we can say that he might be the single most salutary example of an establishment Republican in Washington — someone who, on balance, Trump conservatives can appreciate alongside the old Bush guard, and even the more sober-minded liberal (note, liberal, rather than progressive, because increasingly there’s a difference which can’t be ignored) Democrats can concede is qualified for the Supreme Court. If the GOP establishment can’t see Kavanaugh’s nomination as a hill to die on, then may everlasting shame — and electoral apocalypse — fall upon their heads.

It won’t come to that, because it can’t. This week will see Kavanaugh dragged through the Senate into the Supreme Court, whether his dignity survives intact or no. And when it happens, it will be gut-check time for the Republican voter base six weeks from the 2018 midterm elections.

It’s been said, and of course it’s true, that should Kavanaugh’s nomination fail there is zero justification for Republican voters to bother showing up to head off the much-ballyhooed “blue wave” the media is so hard at work trying to gin up in November. Those voters put Trump in the White House as a signal that the corrupt Hillary Clinton-led Washington in-crowd was unacceptable, and if the soft coup signaled by the Mueller investigation hasn’t been enough to infuriate them into reprising their 2016 efforts the Kavanaugh confirmation process should certainly do the job.

Because what the current circus — complete with Sen. Ted Cruz and his wife being assaulted in a Washington restaurant over the Kavanaugh nomination — shows is that today’s Democrats will stop at nothing to achieve political power. There is no limiting principle to those people, just as there was no limiting principle to the Left’s aims in Cuba, Nicaragua, Chile, Venezuela, or Grenada. If Kavanaugh isn’t a wake-up call dictating to America that they must be rebuked at the ballot box, we don’t want to see the next iteration and what might be necessary to preserve our society against the threat it presents.

That might not even be an electoral question. It might be something we do not wish to contemplate. It’s clear, by the actions of the other side, that they’re more than willing to transcend normal politics to have power over us — and that means every single one of our votes must be counted in November.

Link

Liberals are easily offended. Article is below, the link takes you to the cartoon. Bald1 will soon post the cruel, offensive editorial cartoon.

https://www.washingtontimes.co...rtoon-mocking-chris/

Indianapolis Star apologizes for cartoon mocking Christine Blasey Ford's list of demands

By Jessica Chasmar - The Washington Times - Tuesday, September 25, 2018
The Indianapolis Star responded to backlash Monday by apologizing for an editorial cartoon that mocked Brett Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford.

Ms. Ford, who has accused Judge Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her 36 years ago, has tentatively agreed to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday as senators and her lawyers continue to iron out the details. She initially put forth a list of conditions to the committee that she wanted met to “ensure her safety,” including that Judge Kavanaugh, who has strongly denied her claim, testify before her and not be present in the room during her testimony.

In The Indianapolis Star’s print edition Sunday, a drawing by staff cartoonist Gary Varvel depicted Ms. Ford testifying before the committee and demanding roses and M&Ms.

“Here are my demands,” she says in the cartoon. “No questions from lawyers, dim the lights, I want roses, sparkling water, a bowl of green M&Ms.”

Readers blasted the newspaper for mocking alleged victims of sexual assault, prompting a retraction by editor Ronnie Ramos.

“Our editorial pages, which include columns and cartoons, strive to present diverse opinions across the political spectrum,” Mr. Ramos wrote. “In Sunday’s paper, for example, Varvel’s work ran next to another syndicated cartoon that presented an opposing view.

“But the Indy Star also has a responsibility to promote a civil discourse and to present diverse viewpoints in a way that does not demean or appear to belittle anyone who says they are the victim of a sexual assault,” he continued. “Our readers deserved better in this case. The cartoon did not meet our high standards.”

Mr. Ramos’s statement included a quote from Mr. Varvel, who said the cartoon was not an attack on Ms. Ford.

“My cartoon was focused only on Ford’s demands, not on whether she was telling the truth,” the cartoonist said. “This is a point I should have made clearer in my cartoon. As a husband and father of a daughter and granddaughters, I take sexual harassment very seriously.”


Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC.

As requested.

It was the GREEN M&M s that pushed it over the line.

quote:

Originally posted by RichardC:
It was the GREEN M&M s that pushed it over the line.

Green M&Ms for the Green Weenie Witch!

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

quote:

8. When the debate ends, the Senate votes on the nomination. A simple majority of the Senators present and voting is required for the judicial nominee to be confirmed. If there is a tie, the Vice President who also presides over the Senate casts the deciding vote.

Link

No quorum requirement? That makes sense, but that option was a little more nuclear than I realized.

A number of people have pointed out that Grassley's letter to Feinstein includes this about the previous 6 FBI investigations into Kavanaugh:

The FBI's investigations covered his time at Yale and uncovered nothing remotely similar to the misconduct alleged by Ms. Ramirez.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


diff topic:

High powered lawyer Michael Bromwich is reportedly representing Ford for free.

https://thehill.com/homenews/s...ord-working-for-free

Attorney Michael Bromwich, one of the high-powered lawyers representing the woman accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault, is working for her for free, the Washington Examiner reported.

Bromwich over the weekend joined forces with the two other lawyers representing Christine Blasey Ford.

He told Bloomberg that he resigned from the law firm Robbins, Russell, Englert, Orseck, Untereiner & Sauber because some colleagues opposed his decision to represent Ford.

Melissa Schwartz, a strategic communications consultant also on Ford's team, told the Examiner in an email that she and Bromwich are not being paid.

"We are both working pro bono,” said Schwartz, who is chief operating officer at the Bromwich Group consulting firm.

Bromwich, a former federal prosecutor, led fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe's legal team, at one point raising around $570,000 for McCabe's legal fees, the Examiner noted.

Ford's two other lawyers, Debra Katz and Lisa Banks, did not respond to the Examiner's questions about whether they are paid.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

what's that old saying ? Follow the money

Yeah, they're paid. They may be working "pro bono" for the client, but rest assured there is a money angle - whether it is Soros or GoFund me.

They are lawyers after all... $$$$$....