Supreme Court Nominee #2

[CARIIS]

I didn't watch live coverage of testimony and have seen only excerpts covered by CNN or NBC. I have also not seen either of the high school yearbooks being referenced. Therefore, I have no way of knowing if either individual is lying about the content of their yearbooks. In the grand scheme of life, I don't place much significance on entries in someone's high school yearbook.

hi honey

not so sure about the yearbooks

pretty obnoxious and objectfing woman as thing to just violate at will

there were many references to woman are just around to eff

his gang made a flag of womans underwear and bras

code for three way ( have particpated - did not really like there was always one i was more into than the other) so there is no judgement

code words for anal (again no judgement at all) but hey lets have a dash more dignity for our SC

his behavior in the hearing room was unacceptable impulsive rude disrepsetful to some on the committee

if anyone did not know who he was and just watched the video with video with no audio quite scary

nasty out of control -- totally congruent with most reports

he has some serious issues

and hey that is a pained person we can empthize but we cant have that person deciding the law of the land for next four decades or so

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

From same link.

Funding

Media Matters has a policy of not comprehensively listing donors. In 2010, six years after the Democracy Alliance initially endorsed MMfA, financier George Soros — a founding and continuing member of the Alliance — announced that he was donating $1 million to MMfA.

Still irrelevant.

Read my full post. There is no connection. The alt-right stories have been pulled, the tweet that started the fire was corrected, and yet the rumors remain.

There is no proven tie to the alleged victims in this case. These are irrelevant, unsubstantiated conspiracy theories. Source linked in the post you responded to.

 

[fannneee]

I posted them upthread. They are in the “annotated” WaPo calendar story. Some probably aren’t sleuthable per ToS. The names he listed most frequently are already quite public, like Judge.

ETA link, calendar images and prior post:

View attachment 149086
View attachment 149085
View attachment 149087
View attachment 149088

Analysis | Kavanaugh’s 1982 calendar, annotated

Among the people named repeatedly are Mark Judge (“Judge”), a classmate of Kavanaugh’s who is now a conservative writer — and who was said to have been at the party where the alleged assault occurred. Another alleged attendee was Patrick Smyth (“PJ”), also a classmate. There are also repeated references to Chris Garrett (“Squi”), who played on the football team with Kavanaugh.
​

That calendar is obviously heavily editted. The only reason there is anything left of any use is because he missed it.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

That calendar is obviously heavily editted. The only reason there is anything left of any use is because he missed it.

Yeah, I noticed that, too.

 

[frisson]

Nancy Pelosi calls Brett Kavanaugh "hysterical," says he is unfit to serve on the Supreme Court - CBS News

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi called Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh "hysterical" and said that he was temperamentally unfit to serve on the Supreme Court. Pelosi made the comments in an interview Saturday at the Texas Tribune Festival in Austin, Texas.

"I couldn't help but think that if a woman had ever performed that way, they would say 'hysterical,'" Pelosi said about her reaction to Kavanaugh's testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday. Kavanaugh emotionally denied allegations that he had sexually assaulted Dr. Christine Blasey Ford when they were both teenagers.​

Pelosi is right imo

 

[Elley Mae]

Media Matters for America is a progressive tax-exempt, nonprofit organization, with the stated mission of "comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media". Wikipedia​

Not sure what any of that has to do with Ford, Kavanaugh, Ramirez, Judge, Swetnick or anyone else. The rumors are unfounded, irrelevant and ridiculous, imo.

Debunking 5 (More) Viral Rumors About Kavanaugh’s Accusers

Claim: Ms. Ramirez has ties to the liberal megadonor George Soros.

Verdict: False.

This week, two distinct — but equally false — rumors spread about links between Judge Kavanaugh’s accusers and George Soros, the liberal billionaire and Democratic megadonor. (Mr. Soros makes frequent appearances in internet conspiracy theories.)

The first claim was that Ms. Ramirez, who lives in Colorado, had received a fellowship in 2013 from the Open Society Foundations, a philanthropic organization started by Mr. Soros.

In fact, a different Deborah Ramirez — a law professor at Northeastern University in Boston — received a grant from the organization.

The false claim began to pick up steam on conservative social media on Monday morning. John Fund, a columnist for National Review, tweeted that the “irony of this is just too great.” Mr. Fund subsequently apologized and issued a correction on Twitter.

The accusation also quickly appeared on r/the_donald, a pro-Trump forum on Reddit, the popular message board. It then spread to several right-wing media outlets. Big League Politics, a website founded by former Breitbart employees, published a story titled “BUSTED: Kavanaugh Second Accuser Was George Soros Open Society Fellow.” The article has since been deleted, and no correction was issued.


​

I won’t read anything that has the backing/funded of soros who funds mediamatters, founded by david brock who is a liberal consultant.

Nothing to do w/ramirez

 

[Spellbound]

Researcher Uncovers Christine Blasey Ford’s ‘Hidden’ 80’s-Era High School Social Life

Researcher Uncovers Christine Blasey Ford's 'Hidden' 80's-Era High School Social Life

Is this a legitimate source that WS accepts? It links to The Tennessee Star. what is The Tennessee Star, actually? Thank you.


https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/30/breitbart-tennessee-fake-news-560670

Visitors to its website would have had a hard time figuring that out. Though it looks like a normal newspaper site, many — if not most — Star stories lack a byline, and at the time the ad debuted the site had no masthead nor information explaining who owns or runs it. A click on the “Contact Us” tab revealed a phone number, a couple of email addresses, and a mailing address that goes to a UPS store in Franklin, Tennessee. But there was no information indicating that the Star is, in fact, a right-wing site, described by many as a “Tennessee Breitbart.”

Launched in February 2017, the Star is part of a growing trend of opaque, locally focused, ideological outlets, dressed up as traditional newspapers. From the Arizona Monitor to the Maine Examiner, sites with names and layouts designed to echo those of nonpartisan publications — and with varying levels of credibility — have emerged across the country, aimed at influencing local politics by stepping into the coverage void left by the collapsing finances of local newspapers.

The Star has successfully gained traction among the Tennessee political elite, raising questions over whether the current news climate is ripe for these type of Breitbart-like local sites to proliferate across the country.

Since being contacted by POLITICO last week, the Star has added the names of its top three editors to the “Contact Us” section of its website. The publication, it turns out, is owned and operated by Steve Gill, a conservative commentator and radio host, and Michael Patrick Leahy, a local political activist who also writes for Breitbart, though Breitbart is not itself involved in the Star. The pair write many of the stories on the site, Gill said.

More at link

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Pelosi is right imo

I think so, too. Of course any woman who behaved the way Kavanaugh did during questioning would immediately be labeled as hysterical and unfit. It’s a double standard, imo.

 

[Elley Mae]

Most notably, if the July 1 party were the event at which Ford claims she was assaulted, what about Timmy, Tom, Bernie, and Squi? They are, respectively, Kavanaugh high school friends Tim Gaudette, Tom Kane, Bernie McCarthy, and Chris Garrett. What might they know about what took place?

Is July 1, 1982 party key to Christine Ford's allegation against Brett Kavanaugh?

If the July 1 party were the event in question, the presence of Garrett would be especially noteworthy. In her testimony, Ford said she was going out with Garrett at that time in the summer of 1982. Today, she remembers him well. When Kavanaugh supporter Ed Whalen came up with a theory of mistaken identity, suggesting without evidence that Garrett, and not Kavanaugh, attacked Ford, Ford quickly said that there was no way she would mistake the two, and that she knew without doubt that Kavanaugh, not Garrett, was her attacker.

Snip

Rachel Mitchell, the prosecutor Republicans hired to question Ford, asked Ford about Garrett. Ford was willing to talk, but she refused even to say Garrett's name.

Snip

"Was this person the only common link between you and Judge Kavanaugh?" Mitchell asked.

"He's the only one that I would be able to name right now — that I would like to not name, but you know who I mean."

 

[Only4Justice]

Plus he has been open and honest about drinking beer in high school and beyond. He certainly hasn't tried to hide anything.

Jmo

I’m not too sure about that. IMO

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Is this a legitimate source that WS accepts? It links to The Tennessee Star. what is The Tennessee Star, actually? Thank you.

Baby Breitbarts to pop up across the country?

The Star has successfully gained traction among the Tennessee political elite, raising questions over whether the current news climate is ripe for these type of Breitbart-like local sites to proliferate across the country.

Since being contacted by POLITICO last week, the Star has added the names of its top three editors to the “Contact Us” section of its website. The publication, it turns out, is owned and operated by Steve Gill, a conservative commentator and radio host, and Michael Patrick Leahy, a local political activist who also writes for Breitbart, though Breitbart is not itself involved in the Star. The pair write many of the stories on the site, Gill said.

More at link

I won’t read anything that has the backing/funded of soros who funds mediamatters, founded by david brock who is a liberal consultant.

Nothing to do w/ramirez

rs/bbm

It has nothing to do with any of the victims in this case. MOO

The Soros conspiracy theories have been proven false. Linked upthread. I’ll repost downthread.

Your source on the Ford story is clearly and provably biased, also linked upthread. Spellz also clearly sources.

You have also admitted as much in past posts in this thread, that you know the writers clearly aren’t considered mainstream.

 

[Elley Mae]

rs/bbm

It has nothing to do with any of the victims in this case. MOO

The Soros conspiracy theories have been proven false. Linked upthread. I’ll repost downthread.

Your source on the Ford story is clearly and provably biased, also linked upthread. Spellz also clearly sources.

You have also admitted as much in past posts in this thread, that you know the writers clearly aren’t considered mainstream.

No need. I look at all links first before I read, I don’t read anything that is left or leans left.

The word progressive = socialism.

 

[Spellbound]

“We have her yearbooks,” the anonymous staffer said. “She will not make a good witness.”

Christine Blasey Ford's Senate Judiciary Committee to reference Yearbooks | National Review

In one of the yearbooks, girls wrote about hiring male strippers for sweet sixteen parties and ruining “heirloom Persian rugs” with vomit.

“The tenth grade taught us how to party,” girls wrote in another section. “Loss of consciousness is often an integral part of the party scene.”

Elley Mae, are you using sites that are considered mainstream media (MSM) , allowed at WS? I honestly don't know. This is what I fiund about the site you linked here. I don;t know whether to trust them:
Right Bias - Media Bias/Fact Check
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See Also: [see linked page]

Overall, we rate the National Review Right Biased based on story selection that always favors the right and Mixed for factual reporting due to misleading claims and occasional use of poor sources.

 

[Hope4More]

Personally, I wish Avenatti & Pelosi & Lindsay Graham & Chuck Shumer & Kamala Harris & Corey Booker & every other elected official, state, local, & federal, and every partisan & ideological organization, on both sides, and every publication, online or in print, would either focus solely on the evidence & what's at stake for the SC's legitimacy, rather than partisan & ideological wrangling & warfare, or, if that's not possible, that they shut the heck up and allow the rest of us to reach our own conclusions about this nomination, based on facts & evidence & discussion amongst ourselves.

The Pelosi's & Grassley's of the US will not be the ones most affected, if affected at all, by the Supreme Court rulings in our near future- on the Affordable Care Act, on labor unions, gay rights, a sustainable environment, the right to vote, have an abortion, not be shot dead because of one's skin color.

It's supposed to be OUR Supreme Court, in OUR democracy, defending OUR rights.

 

[Jax49]

Americans said, 41 to 30 percent, that they believed Ford was telling the truth; they were split, 35 percent to 38 percent on whether Kavanaugh was similarly honest. (Those who reported having personally watched at least some of the hearings ― a majority of the country ― said, 52 to 36, that they believed Blasey. They were split 44 to 46 on whether they believed Kavanaugh.)

Fewer Believe Brett Kavanaugh Than His Accuser, Poll Finds | HuffPost

 

[Hope4More]

No need. I look at all links first before I read, I don’t read anything that is left or leans left.

The word progressive = socialism.

Please don't go there.

 

[Only4Justice]

T

Seriously? So females are not allowed a life. NO prom, no birthday parties, no socializing, no movies... How about teaching young men not to attack females?

Common sense right here. Thanks Frisson.

 

[Elley Mae]

Elley Mae, are you using sites that are considered mainstream media (MSM) , allowed at WS? I honestly don't know. This is what I fiund about the site you linked here. I don;t know whether to trust them:
Right Bias - Media Bias/Fact Check
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See Also: [see linked page]

Overall, we rate the National Review Right Biased based on story selection that always favors the right and Mixed for factual reporting due to misleading claims and occasional use of poor sources.

NR has been linked many time.
Because it’s right leaning makes it not allowed?

 

[CARIIS]

Christine Blasey Ford's friend is not refuting Ford's allegation, will cooperate with FBI, lawyer says

Christine Blasey Ford's friend is not refuting allegation, will cooperate with FBI, lawyer says - CNNPolitics

 

[Spellbound]

Not privy. Post #136 post #138

The Tennessee Star - Media Bias/Fact Check
The Tennessee Star presents news with a right wing bias through story selection that usually favors the right. All articles are properly sourced and generally use credible mainstream sources. There is some use of loaded words within news stories, but not excessive. Editorially, The Tennessee Star has a far right bias with frequent use of strong emotional loaded words that favor the right and denigrate the left. We could not find any instances of failed fact checks for this source. Overall, we rate The Tennessee Star Right biased and High for factual news reporting.
More than 63% rate it as extremely right- biased

National Review - Media Bias/Fact Check
Overall, we rate the National Review Right Biased based on story selection that always favors the right and Mixed for factual reporting due to misleading claims and occasional use of poor sources.
More than 38% rate it as extremely right-biased