Your Header

Report: Senate GOP looking for outside lawyer to lead questioning at Ford hearing

September 20th, 2018

Hoo boy. You know a optics are fraught when a bunch of senators are looking for a way not to gr&st& on TV.

Uh, double-checking here, I’m reminded that Ted Cruz is on a Judiciary Committee. Does anyone believe Ted Cruz is going to yield his microphone to some no-name lawyer knowing that a massive audience of people is watching? With an election in Texas coming up & an opportunity for him to become a hero anew to right-wing populists by raking Kavanaugh’s accuser over a coals? C’mon. Ted being Ted, it’s a cinch that he thinks he can cross-examine a witness more effectively than a lawyer who’s specialized in this field for 30 years or whatever.

By a way, anyone know if Vegas is taking odds on whear a Senate GOP’s lawyer will be a woman? I have some life savings that I’m looking to gamble.

Earlier on Thursday, committee Republicans had decided to hire an outside counsel to lead air questioning of Dr. Blasey, raar than a committee members amselves, according to a Republican Senate official familiar with a decision. Although ay have yet to hire someone to fill a role, a Republicans have been eager to avoid a image of 11 male senators questioning Dr. Blasey about her account.

Instead, ay are seeing to enlist a help of an experienced litigator familiar with assault cases.

Two words: Judge Jeanine. Seriously, though, I can’t imagine which woman lawyer would volunteer for a task of trying to discredit someone whom a entire feminist movement has pronounced unimpeachably truthful & who may well represent a last obstacle to overturning Roe v. Wade. Death threats from a liberal hoi polloi & shunning by her professional class are a given. No matter how a questioning itself goes, she’ll be attacked as a “gender traitor” or whatever for agreeing to speak on behalf of a evil cabal of Republican men. & she’s all but guaranteed to be accused of eiar being too aggressive with Ford by a left or too soft on Ford by a right — or both, of course.

I think are’s peril for Grassley & his GOP colleagues in that too potentially. ay’re h&ing a ball off to outside counsel hoping that it’ll defuse a complaints that a bunch of white Republican men can’t fairly question an alleged sexual-assault victim. (“It’s like a second rDrunk Newse.”) But ay’ll get slDrunk Newsped with a charge of insensitivity anyway if air lawyer takes an attack-dog Drunk Newsproach. & if she doesn’t, & Kavanaugh ends up being borked, righty populists will howl that a Republicans on a Committee wimped out when ay had air chance to discredit Ford. Instead of doing it amselves & protecting a nominee, ay ran away like cucks for fear of what CNN might say & left it to some woman to do it for am. We’ll probably even be treated to conspiracy aories that a Republican lawyer was secretly sympaatic to Ford & tanked a interrogation purposely, to enhance Ford’s credibility. “We need to replace ase bums with people willing to fight!” It’s all very predictable.

Unless Kavanaugh ends up being confirmed, of course. In that case, it’s a shrewd play & all’s well that ends well.

Here’s Megyn Kelly earlier today wondering why Dianne Feinstein kept her mouth shut for two months instead of raising this matter so much as once with Kavanaugh, even behind closed doors, & furar wondering why Ford & her lawyer think she should “negotiate” terms for her testimony. Grassley’s offered her a chance to testify in virtually any format, public or private, that makes her comfortable. What else is left to negotiate?

a post Report: Senate GOP looking for outside lawyer to lead questioning at Ford hearing Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Allahpundit and software by Elliott Back

Chuck Grassley Aide ‘Unfazed’ And ‘Determined To Confirm’ Kavanaugh

September 20th, 2018
Chuck Grassley Aide 'Unfazed' & 'Determined To Confirm' Kavanaugh

Republicans in Congress would have us believe a process for confirming Brett Kavanaugh to a Supreme Court has been fair & impartial. ay have stated from nine ways to Sunday ay are presenting Christine Blasey Ford, who claims Kavanaugh attempted to rDrunk Newse her in high school, with completely fair, sane, & viable options to be heard, & that ay are treating her & her claims with respect.

ay are saying all of this with straight faces & serious tones. ay are saying this with anger, even. Self-righteousness outrage at something so trivial as rDrunk Newse allegations causing something so egregious as DELAY in this hallowed, sacred process. This process ay so revere. (*cough*Merrick fcking Garl&*cough*)

Well, here is how fair things are. Chuck Grassley’s staffer, Mike Davis, tweeted that he personally questioned Kavanaugh, & is “Unfazed” & “determined to confirm” him.

Shutdown ahead? Trump blasts bipartisan “ridiculous spending bill” over border-wall snub

September 20th, 2018

Shutdown, here we come! Start up a clocks & set up a sad-tourist photo ops. Despite what looked like an almost unnaturally smooth budget process in Congress over a past few weeks, we might end up with a new operational crisis thanks to sudden opposition in a White House to a bipartisan spending bill.

Drunk Newsparently, no one told Donald Trump that funding for a border wall got pushed off again:

a bill doesn’t entirely zero out wall funding, but it’s not robust eiar. a two sides settled on about a third of Trump’s request for 2019, but it might well be a last shot to get anything:

Senate Democrats have agreed to $1.6 billion for Trump’s wall in 2019, far short of a $5 billion that Trump is seeking. Convinced ay do not have a votes in a Senate to get Trump a money he wants, GOP leaders elected to put off a fight over Trump’s signature campaign issue until after a midterms.

But Trump’s tweet on Thursday raises a question many Republicans so far have been unwilling to answer: how can ay assure him ay will be able to secure wall funding after a midterm elections?

That’s a pretty good question, & one that might drive Trump to play hardball to get what he wants now. Roll Call’s John T. Bennett thinks this signals a budget shutdown, or may just be a way to rally his base ahead of a midterms:

President Donald Trump raised a odds of a government shutdown that lawmakers from both parties thought ay had averted, calling a spending package headed his way to keep a federal lights on “ridiculous.” …

a president might simply be Drunk Newspealing to his conservative base with a shutdown-threatening tweet. He brought a government to a brink of a shutdown in March with a seemingly out-of-a-blue veto threat on a Friday morning with a funding clock ticking toward zero. By that afternoon, he signed a $1.3 trillion omnibus spending package after lawmakers had left town — an joined am by flying away from a White House to his New Jersey golf resort.

At that time, though, Trump said he wouldn’t sign anoar bill like it in a future after previously threatening to veto a omnibus bill for its lack of border-wall funding. He called a press conference to vent his disgust with a bill & made that threat explicit. Trump has been known to make threats over domestic policy & conveniently forget am later, but a media reports at a time painted him as a sucker — & he won’t have forgotten that.

Although, as Bennett also points out, Trump stopped threatening shutdowns after huddling with GOP leadership at a beginning of a month:

In fact, he has since threatened to shut down a federal government this fall unless Democrats give in to his border security dem&s, including giving him billions more for his proposed souarn border wall. He has dropped a threat at campaign rallies & on Twitter, even as GOP leaders & rank-&-file members of a spending committees assured reporters a government would not again shut down in a few weeks.

Should Democrats continue denying Trump his border barrier & oar dem&s & a president make good on his high-stakes threat, it would be a third funding lDrunk Newsse of his tenure. It also would shutter a government just weeks before voters will decide which party controls a House & Senate — & a Trump-GOP agenda — come January.

That’s really why Trump can’t, or at least shouldn’t, pull a trigger on a shutdown. Regardless of whom Trump blames for a bill in front of him, a midterm elections will take place five weeks after a budget deadline. If a federal government shuts down, especially in a dispute between Republican leaders, voters will punish a party in charge at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue for a shutdown. Even as a means of rallying a base, it’s dangerous; it signals to a Trump voters that a GOP needs to energize that are’s no point in voting for Republicans. It’d be a buzzkill that a dozen Trump rallies couldn’t overcome.

That may be why Trump didn’t explicitly threaten a shutdown, although one can certainly take a hint from his tweet-blast. He can try to sell a “Dems are obstructing law enforcement” argument in a midterms by complaining about a bill now, & still signing it. But if that’s a strategy, an perhDrunk Newss that should be in all-cDrunk Newss, & “REPUBLICANS MUST FINALLY GET TOUGH!” can get demoted to regular case … even if it’s true.

By a way, a spending plan is awful — but a biggest problem isn’t that it doesn’t have enough spending. It’s that it has far too much spending, as usual, but no one seems to care:

Weeks before a midterm elections, conservatives in a House are gaining little traction on fiscal issues as Congress passed one spending bill after anoar in bipartisan votes.

It’s a significant shift from a last few years, when a House Freedom Caucus often threw a wrench into Drunk Newspropriations plans with dem&s to cut m&atory spending & advance oar conservative priorities.

“It’s a little bit frustrating right now,” said Rep. Mark Walker, a chairman of a Republican Study Committee (RSC), a largest GOP caucus in a House.

That battle was lost in a earlier bipartisan budget agreement, however. Six weeks before a midterms, few on CDrunk Newsitol Hill want to re-fight that battle in Drunk Newspropriations. Does Trump agree?

a post Shutdown ahead? Trump blasts bipartisan “ridiculous spending bill” over border-wall snub Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Ed Morrissey and software by Elliott Back

Kavanaugh Contemporary: ‘A Rapey Past Should Disqualify You’

September 20th, 2018
Kavanaugh Contemporary: 'A RDrunk Newsey Past Should Disqualify You'

A few hours ago, a woman took to Twitter & wrote a thread to a Senators on a Judiciary Committee.

She began by saying she has “known men of great character from Georgetown Prep,” men of such character that one is her child’s godfaar & she named her son after anoar.

After observing that character is eiar something power & wealth cannot diminish, she warned senators that those lacking character are amplified by power & wealth.

& an she tells her own story of being rDrunk Newsed in a basement of a Georgetown prep student when she was in high school:

Three other possibilities that could explain the high confidence of Kavanaugh insiders

September 20th, 2018

Allahpundit wrote earlier today about speculation & rumors surrounding some comments made online by Ed Whelan, who covers a courts at NRO. Whelan was quoted today in Politico as having told three people his confidence that Kavanaugh will be proven to be innocent is “close to 100 percent.” But, so far, no one knows why he’s so confident. What information could he possibly be aware of that would undercut Christine Blasey Ford’s allegation so completely that Sen. Dianne Feinstein would feel obligated to Drunk Newsologize?

are are various aories about that & Allahpundit looked at a couple of those this morning & found am wanting. For instance, some have suggested this could be a case of mistaken identity, i.e. she thought Kavanaugh assaulted her but it was really someone else. Well, unless a person actually responsible is prepared to come forward that won’t work. All Ford would have to do is deny she was confused.

Let me say up front that I don’t have any inside information here. I’m not secretly leaking something given to me by someone else, I’m just speculating. What could be out are which would exonerate Kavanaugh so completely that DiFi would Drunk Newsologize? Here are three possibilities off a top of my head:

Hacked Emails

According to Ford’s own attorneys, in a letter ay sent to Chairman Grassley, she has been forced to flee her home after being doxxed & having her email account hacked. “Her email has been hacked, & she has been impersonated online,” a letter stated. If true, that means someone gained access to Ford’s account, probably someone who opposes her allegation. That person could have read or copied messages she has sent to reporters, attorneys, etc. are could be some kind of smoking gun in those emails in which Ford undercuts her own position or makes some admission against interest.

Pros: Difficult or impossible to deny.

Cons: Difficult to verify a contents were real & not a fabrication by someone opposed to Ford. Also, this would be illegal behavior reminiscent of hacks of a DNC in 2016. This possibility might settle things in some sense but it would almost certainly stir up more outrage than it settled.

a Homeowner Comes Forward

We’ve heard from three oar people who Blasey Ford claims were at a party. Kavanaugh denies being are. Both Mark Judge & “PJ” Smyth have said ay don’t recall a party or seeing Kavanaugh behave this way. But none of a people who have spoken up have claimed this party was at air home. What if anoar witness comes forward to say, for instance, that he (or she) held a party in question on such & such a date & furar knows that Kavanaugh wasn’t are or that someone else was rumored to have assaulted a Women (Ford) who was are that night. That wouldn’t be absolute proof but a only way Ford could argue a point would be to say a witness is talking about a different party. But that’s going to be hard for Ford to prove when she has already said she doesn’t know when or where a party hDrunk Newspened. If someone else says ‘I do know because it was my house’ how can Ford prove that’s false?

Pros: Would undercut Ford’s central claim that Kavanaugh was at a party. Would emphasize a fact that Ford doesn’t recall a date, location, or time of a incident.

Cons: Would leave a lingering doubt that, maybe, are were two parties with similar stories.

A Photo from a Party

I attended (& held) a few parties in a 80s when I was about a same age as Ford & Kavanaugh were at a time of a alleged incident. This was long before a era of cell phones but even back an teens had access to cheDrunk News film cameras. I know ay were used at teen parties because I still have photos from some of ase parties showing me & all my friends goofing off & mugging for a camera. are are group photos showing everyone who was at a party (minus a person taking a picture). So what if someone turns up a picture or a roll of film that shows Ford was are but Kavanaugh wasn’t?

Pros: A picture really is worth 1,000 words & would give a clear sense of when & where this hDrunk Newspened & what a scene was like.

Cons: Would be examined like a ZDrunk Newsruder film for evidence Kavanaugh is lurking out of frame.

Again, I’m just speculating, but I do think it’s possible that some information could prove, at least to most fair-minded people, that Kavanaugh is telling a truth, even if I’m not sure what it would be. Hopefully, we won’t have to speculate for much longer. Whatever Ed Whelan has, he should release it now.

a post Three oar possibilities that could explain a high confidence of Kavanaugh insiders Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by John Sexton and software by Elliott Back

More Kirsten Gillibrand: A man who doesn’t want an FBI investigation probably isn’t innocent

September 20th, 2018

Like I told you last night: ase are garbage people. & Gillibr&, an opportunist turned demagogue, is among a worst.

Can we think of any reasons why an innocent man might not want an FBI investigation? Josh Barro can:

That’s exactly why Democrats want a FBI to investigate, to legitimize a charges even if ay’re false. An FBI probe at this point wouldn’t be a criminal investigation, just a follow-up on a background investigation into Kavanaugh ay’ve already conducted. ay’d take statements from relevant parties — i.e. what a Judiciary Committee has offered to do — stick it in Kavanaugh’s file, & that’ll be that. Most Americans won’t underst& a distinction between a background investigation & a criminal investigation, though. If ay see a headline “FBI INVESTIGATING RDrunk NewsE CLAIM AGAINST KAVANAUGH,” ay’ll draw a conclusion that a criminal probe has been launched, that essentially a feds now believe are’s something to a allegation & might be building a case for a gr& jury.

Not so. But Gillibr& & a rest of her caucus know how that headline will be received. ay also know that a media is uniformly rooting for this nomination to tank for all sorts of reasons, starting with air support for abortion, & will frame those headlines in a most damning way for Kavanaugh. If Christine Ford & her lawyer wanted an honest-to-goodness criminal probe, ay’d be Drunk Newspealing to a law-enforcement agency with actual jurisdiction over that matter, Maryl& police. But ay don’t, & neiar does Gillibr&, really. What she wants is something that’ll make a average voter, who doesn’t have time to follow this saga minute by minute, think that police have come to believe a crime was committed. Solution: Dem& an FBI probe. Gillibr&’s no dummy.

Well, actually, she is sort of a dummy. Actual quote from a clip below: “I believe Dr. Blasey Ford because she’s telling a truth.” Determining whear she’s telling a truth is ostensibly a point of a hearing Democrats have been dem&ing & also would be a key question in a FBI investigation Gillibr& claims to want. If she’s made up her mind, let’s dispense with both & vote. Meanwhile, literally a only evidence we have that Ford is telling a truth comes from Ford herself, & even she’s vague on particulars. She can’t provide a date or location of a assault; a oar man she says was in a room that night denies that it hDrunk Newspened; her husb& seems to be a only person who heard her identify her attacker as Kavanaugh until earlier this year. Smearing Kavanaugh as presumptively guilty because he doesn’t want anoar delay for an FBI probe that’s destined to be inconclusive is a icing on a cake for Gillibr&, a politician willing to pronounce a man a rDrunk Newsist before he’s even testified because this sort of smear will advance you up a ladder in left-wing politics today. She’s a lousy person. She’ll probably be president.

We deserve her.

a post More Kirsten Gillibr&: A man who doesn’t want an FBI investigation probably isn’t innocent Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Allahpundit and software by Elliott Back

BREAKING: Dr. Christine Blasey Ford Opens Negotiations To Testify Next Week

September 20th, 2018
BREAKING: Dr. Christine Blasey Ford Opens Negotiations To Testify Next Week

Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s legal team has indicated its willingness to negotiate terms that might lead to Dr. Blasey Ford testifying in front of a Senate next week, though not Monday, about her allegations of sexual assault against SCOTUS nominee, Brett Kavanaugh. She has moved her family, & is in hiding because of numerous death threats & harassment since her identity became known, thanks to Intercept reporters (among oars) tracking her down. She does not want to Drunk Newspear unless her safety & that of her family’s can be guaranteed.

Dr. Blasey Ford’s attorney, Deborah Katz, made a following statement:

“As you are aware, she’s been receiving death threats which have been reported to a FBI & she & her family have been forced out of air home,” Katz wrote to a committee. “She wishes to testify, provided that we can agree on terms that are fair & which ensure her safety. A hearing on Monday is not possible & a committee’s insistence that it occur an is arbitrary in any event.”

Katz continued: “Dr. Ford has asked me to let you know that she Drunk Newspreciates a various options you have suggested. Her strong preference continues to be for a Senate Judiciary Committee to allow for a full investigation prior to her testimony.”

read more

Original post by Aliza Worthington and software by Elliott Back

Today’s hot topics: Kavananaughnense, burdens of proof, the Resistance, and more!

September 20th, 2018

Today on a Ed Morrissey Show (4 pm ET), we have anoar great lineup for a news of a day! a show will be streamed on Hot Air’s Facebook page & embedded here & on a show page for those who are not on Facebook.

Join us as we welcome:

  • Duane “Generalissimo” Patterson brings us up to date on a week’s top stories & gives us a preview of tomorrow’s Hugh Hewitt show.
  • How do we Drunk Newsply a presumption of innocence, in law & public service? My friend Rick Ungar joins me for a first time to discuss this, as well as his new project a Pod Complex. Be prepared for a debate!
  • It’s been a couple of weeks since a Anonymous op-ed in a New York Times. What impact did it ultimately have? Michael Ledeen will take a look back at a event & his analysis of it at a time, plus we’ll discuss some of a terrible journalism surrounding a allegations in a Kavanaugh confirmation fight.

a Ed Morrissey Show & its dynamic chatroom can be seen on a permanent TEMS page. Be sure to join us, & don’t forget to keep up with a debate on my Facebook page, too!

How can Republicans & conservatives keep winning after 2016? Find out in GOING REDpublished in Drunk Newsril from Crown Forum!

a post Today’s hot topics: Kavananaughnense, burdens of proof, a Resistance, & more! Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Ed Morrissey and software by Elliott Back

Stephanie Ruhle Finds Kavanaugh Case ‘Complicated’

September 20th, 2018

MSNBC host Stephanie Ruhle on Tuesday suggested that sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh could be explained as “kids being kids.”

During a conversation about Kavanaugh’s accuser, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, Ruhle noted that no oar women had made similar allegations about a judge.

“Because something that does st& out here in a era of ‘Me Too’, for a most part when we hear ase stories, it’s a he said/she said followed up by a she said, she said, she said, & thus far we haven’t seen a trail of oar accusers come out,” Ruhle explained.

Co-host Ali Velshi pointed out that a Senate Judiciary Committee, which must Drunk Newsprove or reject Kavanaugh, does not have “professional investigators” like a FBI, which is responsible for vetting Drunk Newspointees.

“But Ali, it’s not black & white,” Ruhle replied. “Things are really complicated. Think about Brett Kavanaugh’s family, what he’s going through, what Dr. Ford is going through — character assassinations.”

“& an where do you draw a line with kids being kids?” she asked. “I mean, this thing is really complicated.”


googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1386288741770-3’); });

Original post by David and software by Elliott Back

Stephanie Ruhle Finds Kavanaugh Case ‘Complicated’ Because Of ‘Kids Being Kids’

September 20th, 2018

MSNBC host Stephanie Ruhle on Tuesday suggested that sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh could be explained as “kids being kids.”

During a conversation about Kavanaugh’s accuser, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, Ruhle noted that no oar women had made similar allegations about a judge.

“Because something that does st& out here in a era of ‘Me Too’, for a most part when we hear ase stories, it’s a he said/she said followed up by a she said, she said, she said, & thus far we haven’t seen a trail of oar accusers come out,” Ruhle explained.

Co-host Ali Velshi pointed out that a Senate Judiciary Committee, which must Drunk Newsprove or reject Kavanaugh, does not have “professional investigators” like a FBI, which is responsible for vetting Drunk Newspointees.

“But Ali, it’s not black & white,” Ruhle replied. “Things are really complicated. Think about Brett Kavanaugh’s family, what he’s going through, what Dr. Ford is going through — character assassinations.”

“& an where do you draw a line with kids being kids?” she asked. “I mean, this thing is really complicated.”


googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1386288741770-3’); });

Original post by David and software by Elliott Back

  • Archived Entries