To Charles Greassley:
To Charles Greassley:
Trump says what most people think...like usual
“two people familiar with Trump’s concerns.”
Why are these “sources” OK here but fake news everywhere else?
The talks were private.
“granted yet another extension to Ford’s legal team”
I am sure the “Democratic” Party and the RINOs appreciate it,too!
I guess the GOP-e book “Art of the Cave” wasn’t a best seller.
Can’t he call up these guys??? I mean, what is the point of being the president if you can’t call up these guy and tell them what you think they need to do. It confuses me. Other presidents have had this right to persuade.
We have a SOCTUS nominee being mocked by assholes because he was forced to admit that he was a virgin past college in order to defend himself from vile and obscene filth spewed at him from vile and obscene people.
And that same SCOTUS nominee is being threatened with having his penis cut off by some dickwad late night “comedian”.
Thanks, Chuck, you are as awesome as stepping in wet dog crap with bare feet.
“You have sat too long here for any good...”
****************
Wow. That really nails it. Apropos to most of our sitting senators.
It’s fine for DJT to criticize Grassley; it puts great pressure on the committee.
However, Grassley’s job is to get the weak-kneed Republicans on the committee to vote for Kavanaugh. He is being careful to handle the allegations and “allegator” carefully.
I’m betting she’ll back out from testifying and they will vote for Kavanaugh.
Grassley May have simply given the ‘RATS enough rope to hang themselves. A little time will tell us.
This bit of “news” presents an interesting dichotomy for all of us who have been following events.
Either the news is fake, and as Q has posted, “Trust Grassley”, or Q was in error to tell us to trust Grassley. It cannot be both.
Place your bets.
Grassley (202) 224-3744
ISSUE THE FREAKING SUBPOENA AND SEND THE US MARSHALS, FOR THE LOVE OF DOG.
Or Grassley is leading them in for the slaughter. Without him giving them rope, they wouldn’t have enough to hang themsevles.
Senators,Our system of jurisprudence has always been based on the tenet of the presumption of innocence. The accuser must meet the burden of proving the accusation is true.
As a Justice on the Supreme Court, would you have had me rule that the burden was on Dredd Scott to show why he should be an American citizen, or should that burden have been on Sandford to demonstrate why Mr. Scott should not be a citizen?
Should the burden have been on Oliver Brown to show that the separate school his daughter was forced to attend was not equal to closer white-attended schools, or should that burden have been placed on the Topeka Board of Eductation to prove that "separate but equal" schooling was necessary?
Should I rule that the burden was on Ernesto Miranda to know his full legal rights when he was arrested, or should Arizona police have to inform Mr. Miranda of his right to an attorney when they arrested him?
Should Norma McCorvey have to justify to the state why she needed an abortion? Should Fred Korematsu have to prove his loyalty to the United States? Should women have to demonstrate their competency to sit on juries? Should the Cantwell family have to prove that their public expression of religion was not a breach of the peace and a public disturbance?
In our system, the accused has a right to know the specific charges and factual evidence against him or her. It is a mockery of our judicial system to suggest that a sitting federal appellate judge, or anyone else for that matter, has to prove his innocence against vague, unspecified, and suddenly recalled allegations, when the very essence of being a judge is to balance the rights of the accused with the rights of the accuser. The burden of proof is on those who make the claims, not on those who are their targets.
Thank you.
-PJ
I said it before, I’ll say it again.
Bring up “Keith Ellison” every time “Kavanaugh” is brought up.
No shortage of articles in Minneapolis media about the 9-1-1 calls reporting domestic violence allegations. This stands in stark contrast to circa mid-1980s memories which kinda sorta might be accurate.
Pound the DEM hypocrisy until it goes away. The only way to deal with those wanting to bully is to take it patiently, giving them a chance to correct their bad behavior, and should they fail to — whack them good upside the head. Continue until they realize the nature of their ways.
Grassley lost control of the process on day 1 and hasn’t been able to catch up since. This is a study in how to be way ahead of everyone in the room if you’re the leader.
The witnesses that CBF named herself all swore the party never happened. All the woman can do is repeat the accusation and perhaps embellish it with more unsubstantiated testimony.
Grassley should have asked if they had any solid physical evidence or any witnesses that have first hand knowledge of the incident. If not, there is no need to hold up senate business for any hearing. He should cancel the hearing and hold the vote.
If any senator wants to vote no and try to justify their action to their constituents, so be it.
In other news, sun rises in east. Senate leadership has been a disaster, but what else would you expect given their record?
Confirm Kavanaugh, then release the records of the Congressional Slush Fund for Sexual Misconduct.
Who was paid, on whose behalf. Open the books to those who pay the bills.
Maybe that will give these uppity schmucks something to be concerned about.