Democrats’ Desperate Play

I want you to think back for a minute to when Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was getting confirmed. Do you remember that? He got almost all the way through the confirmation process, and then, out of nowhere, there is this lady named Anita Hill who had claimed that he had sex with her, did lewd stuff with pubic hair and Coke cans. Do you remember that? There was no evidence, but it’s where “We have to investigate it because of the ‘seriousness of the charge'” came from.

It didn’t work then, but that doesn’t mean that the Democrats aren’t going to try it out today.

Diane Feinstein, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and is up for re-election in a state where her own party decided not to endorse her in the primary, decided she had to do SOMETHING to get this confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh at least slowed down until the elections in November. So she said that there was a woman at Stanford University that came to her and said she wanted to stay anonymous, and didn’t want this to be investigated further, but Di Fi decided that the seriousness of the charge was so great that she HAD to come forward and give the information to the FBI to investigate.

That information was that while in HIGH SCHOOL, Brett Kavanaugh made sexual advances to this woman. He may have even groped her. Wow. And the FBI missed that when they vetted him?

Look, there is only one reason for this to come to light now. First of all, Feinstein knew of this in July. Why did she wait until now to have it foisted on us? Because it was their ace in the hole. Democrats can’t vote for Kavanaugh while this is out there, and it may be enough to sway Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski into wanting to wait. IF the Dems’ were to win the Senate in the November elections, then they could delay this confirmation indefinitely and tell Donald Trump to choose someone else. THAT is the reason this is being used now.

The Republicans need to band together and stick to their guns…ALL of them. And they need to confirm Kavanaugh. They guy answered 30 hours of questions during his hearing, another 1,200 plus questions the Democrats sent him afterwards, he’s met with 65 Senators (including Feinstein), and not even the FBI rectal exam has found anything in his past to stop this from going forward. It’s a desperate move by a desperate party.

And it should weigh in on the election. If a party is this desperate to get it’s own way, they’re going to be desperate enough once in power to force anything they want through Congress and the White House. They’ll stop at nothing to feed their power trip.

When I look at the Democrat candidates around the country, I have to laugh. They aren’t politicians. They are Saul Alinsky wannabes, and a bunch of people that have been living in their parent’s basement (I’m looking at YOU Kyrsten Sinema!). It’s absolutely laughable to think these people are capable of governing anything. Hell, they couldn’t even put on a neighborhood show in their parent’s basement!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Democrats’ Desperate Play

  1. I would have been disappointed if the Dem’s hadn’t come out with some ridiculous, last minute, accusation. One thing you have to give the Dem’s credit for, is that they stick together!
    I seem to remember how they all stuck together when Hillary Clinton was to become the Secretary of State. Hillary was in the Senate when the Senate voted to raise the salary of the Secretary of State (then Condoleessa Rice) and according to the Constitution (emolument clause) Hillary wouldn’t be allowed to serve as Secretary of State until her normal term in the Senate was over. She still had over a year left in her Senate term. Of course the Dem’s rallied and voted to reduce the salary of the Secretary of State so that Hillary could legally serve. I would argue that that’s still a violation because the Constitution didn’t list any exceptions to the emolument clause, and if you’re true to statutory interpretation, you can’t just read something into the Constitution that’s not there! Besides…I’m sure Bill Clinton’s speaking fees and donations to the Clinton Foundation substantially increased, which was still a way that outsiders could influence decisions made by Hillary as Secretary of State!
    Politics is a dirty, dirty game and the term “swamp” is still too good. People who look UP to politicians are looking in the wrong direction! We all know where the true deplorable’s can be found!

    For GOD and Country!

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Well Cactus, I sort of agree with you on this except for that Anita Hill thing. Was she supposed to save the Coke can just in case or the porn movie Long Dong silver? She told the truth and Slappy slipped by onto the Court.

    As Brett Kavanaugh, I have been busy lately pissing people off to post this on a previous Kavaugh post. During the hearings instead of asking stupid questions like what kind of sharpie do you use (I think the Mormons are starting to inbreed), I would ask questions like:

    1. Do you describe yourself as a libertarian?
    2. Have you read the works of F.A. Hayek, James Buchanan (not the dead gay president the other one)?
    3. Which economic thoughts would you say you subscribe to, economic liberty, University of Virginia political economy, University of Chicago monetary policy, Constitutional economy?
    Have you ever attended lectures at the Institute for Humane Studies, Mercatus Center, Thomas Jefferson Center for Political Economy and Socia Philosophy,The Mont Pererin Society, Center for the Study of Public Choice? If so, what were the topics discussed and how have they influenced your thinking.?
    4. Can libertarians learn anything from the writings of Vladimir Lenin and if so, what use would they be?
    5. Have you ever attended lectures at the Heritage Foundation, American enterprise Institute, the Reson foundation, Cato Institute, Institute for Contemporary Studies, Club for Growth, Americans for Prosperity? If so, what were the topics and how have they influenced your thinking?
    6. Do agree with the thinking of Colgate Whitehead Darden, Jr. inn relation to Civil Rights law?

    that’s just the start, but it would give us greater depth of his thinking than the usual questions.

    This ought to keep Earl of the streets for awhile trying to figure the point to all of this.

    Have fun storming the castle Earl.

    Hey President Faust, drip, drip, drip.
    ,

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Actually Snark, those are a LOT better questions than either Kamala Harris or Cory Booker asked (or Ted Cruz for that matter!). You oughta consider running for the Senate! I’d vote for you far ahead of Kyrsten Sinema!!!

      Like

  3. You are just too nice to me, but then you realize I would end up calling everyone idiots and morons because they do not agree with me. Since I am not a lawyer but have practiced without a license in six States and working on number seven (Arizona) I could not be on the committee, but I do not see that stopping me.

    Travel safe my man.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s