Last night, Sept. 24, 2018, in his unfunny monologue, unfunny comedian Jimmy Kimmel threatened to cut off Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s penis if the Senate confirm his Supreme Court nomination.
Jerome Hudson of Breitbartgives us the background to Kimmel’s threat:
Kimmel launched into the Kavanaugh rancor midway through his monologue, noting a New Yorker article published over the weekend in which Deborah Ramirezalleged that as a drunken Yale University freshman, Brett Kavanaugh “exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party.” Ramirez claimed she had “significant gaps in her memories” regarding the alleged encounter. Ramirez’s college best friend also told the paper she “never heard of” the incident in question.
Jimmy Kimmel cut to a clip of Judge Kavanaugh and his wife’s Fox News interview on Monday, in which the Supreme Court nominee called allegations from Christine Blasey Ford false and explained that he was a virgin in high school and college….
Kavanaugh has reportedly produced calendars from 1982, which purportedly prove he was out of town during the time in which Ford says he attempted to grope her at a house party.
“What 17-year-old keeps calendars of his social engagements?” Kimmel asked. “No wonder he was a virgin.”
Beginning at the 6:43 mark of the video below, Kimmel says:
“So Kavanaugh gets confirmed to the Supreme Court. Okay. Well, in return, we get to cut that pesky penis of his off.”
Kimmel’s audience laugh uproariously, because threatening to castrate a man is just so falling-on-the-floor funny.
Kimmel really is in no position to be holier-than-thou when it comes to the treatment of women.
The latest: The spineless Senate Judiciary Committee has re-scheduled its vote on Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to this Friday morning, a day after Kavanaugh and his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, presumably had testified before the committee.
A successful vote Friday is not necessary to advance Kavanaugh’s nomination to the full Senate. Current Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas received no recommendation from the Judiciary Committee in 1991, but was still confirmed by the Senate. (Fox News)
“What am I supposed to do? Go ahead and ruin this guy’s life based on an accusation? I don’t know when it happened, I don’t know where it happened. And everybody named in regard to being there said it didn’t happen. I’m just being honest. Unless there’s something more, no I’m not going to ruin Judge Kavanaugh’s life over this.” –Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
When you type a letter, do you keep switching font styles and font sizes?
While I sometimes italicize or bold, I’ve never switched to a different font style or font size in the course of typing a letter. Who does that?
Christine Blasey Ford, the accuser of SCOTUS nominee U.S. Circuit Judge Brett Kavanaugh, does!
Recall that on Sept. 12, the day when the Senate Judiciary Committee had been scheduled to vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), the top Democrat on the committee whose personal driver of 20 years is a Chinese spy, blocked the vote by forwarding Ford’s “confidential” letter to the Justice Department.
In the letter, dated July 30, 2018, Ford accuses Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting then-Christine Blasey 36 years ago in 1982 (date unknown), at a high school party in some home in Montgomery County, Maryland (address unknown). According to Ford, Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed, groped her, and attempted to remove her clothes against her will.
Ford does not remember the address of the house. That is odd since, according to TruthFinder, her father, Ralph G. Blasey, had owned a home in Potomac, Montgomery County, Maryland. In 1982, Christine was 15 years old, a high school student, and would be living at home in Potomac — in the same Montgomery County where the house party was.
Since Ford’s letter became public knowledge, all four alleged eye-witnesses of the alleged sexual assault have denied any knowledge. Two of the alleged witnesses are friends of Ford: Christina King Miranda was a schoolmate; Leland Ingram Keyser, a longtime friend of Ford, denies even having been at the party. Another alleged witness, Patrick J. Smyth, also denies any knowledge of the party.
“This shit is even more edited than Barry Soetoro’s birth certificate. Look closely. Multiple fonds EVERYWHERE.”
“It appears like a fill in the blanks letter. Kavanaugh’s name was added AFTER the original draft”
“Might have been created by the Obama BC forger.”
“the name Kavanaugh is different too. In one of them the ‘a’ is right up against the ‘K’. In another, the line of the ‘u’ is taller than the others. In another, the letters are uneven. Maybe it’s just the copy but it seems like a computer or typewriter would always be the same spacing, etc. It’s been my experience that those ‘discrepancies’ occur when someone tries to change a document.”
“Who sends a sloppy letter like that to a U.S. Senator? And she didn’t even sign it with her full legal name, just her maiden name.” (Note: Christine Ford, 51, is married to Russell Biddel Ford, 56, a senior director at Zosano Pharma(ceuticals), Fremont, CA. Her maiden name is Christine Margaret Blasey.)
“She vacationed in mid Atlantic until August 7th. It would be interesting to note if she had airplane phobia back then and drove cross country with her family.” (Note: Politico reported that Ford had refused to testify before the Senate, claiming she didn’t want to fly to Washington because she’s uncomfortable in “confined spaces”.)
Here’s a timeline, according to Christine Blasey Ford:
Some day on 1982 – Sexually assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh, 17, at a party with 4 other teenagers in a house (address unknown) somewhere in Montgomery County, MD, on an unknown date in 1982. Cannot remember who threw the party or how she got home. Claimed to have received unspecified “medical treatment regarding the assault” (date and facility unknown). Did not go to the police or told anyone about the alleged assault, not even to her parents or siblings (according to Ford’s “close friend” Kirsten Leimroth in an NPR interview).
1983: Said nothing.
1984: Said nothing.
1985: Said nothing.
1986: Said nothing.
1987: Said nothing.
1988: Said nothing.
1989: Said nothing.
1990: Said nothing.
1991: Said nothing.
1992: Said nothing.
1993: Said nothing.
1994: Said nothing.
1995: Said nothing.
1996: Said nothing.
1997: Said nothing.
1998: Said nothing.
1999: Said nothing.
2000: Said nothing.
2001: Said nothing.
2002: Said nothing.
2003: Said nothing when President George W. Bush, on July 25, nominated Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C Circuit.
2004: Said nothing, as the Senate stalled Kavanaugh’s nomination for nearly 3 years.
2005: Said nothing.
2006: Said nothing when the Senate Judiciary Committee recommended confirmation of Kavanaugh, when the Senate confirmed his nomination, and when he was sworn in by Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy.
2007: Said nothing.
2008: Said nothing.
2009: Said nothing.
2010: Said nothing.
2011: Said nothing.
2012: Talked about the alleged sexual assault in couples’ therapy, but according to the therapist’s notes, did not name Kavanaugh. Ford’s husband, Russell B. Ford, claims that his wife mentioned Kavanaugh’s last name and voiced concern that Kavanaugh might one day be nominated to the Supreme Court. (Washington Post)
2013: Described a “rape attempt” when she was in her late teens, in an individual therapy session.
2014: Said nothing.
2015: Said nothing.
2016: Said nothing.
November 8, 2016: Donald Trump was elected US President. Ford becomes an anti-Trump activist.
July 6, 2018: Notified her “local government representative to ask them how to proceed with sharing” her information of having been sexually assaulted 36 years ago.
July 9, 2018: President Trump nominated Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.
July 30, 2018: Christine Blasey Ford wrote confidential letter, with changing font styles and font sizes, accusing Kavanaugh of sexual assault 36 years ago.
H/t FOTM readers EddieBG & Big Lug
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
The company is selling a pair of Superstar Taped Sneakers for $530!
$530 for a pair of new sneakers contrived to look dirty, worn, and patched-up.
Carly Mallenbaum reports for USA Today, Sept. 20, 2018 (updated Sept. 24, 2018):
In case you wondered who would be crazy enough to pay $530 for a pair of dirty, pre-worn, taped-up sneakers, the answer is apparently plenty of people.
A check of the Nordstrom website Mondy morning revealed that the department store has sold out its current stock.
The Superstar Taped Sneaker from Italian brand Golden Goose sneakers, which are only available in whole sizes, boasted a “crumply, hold-it-all-together tape details a distressed leather sneaker in a retro low profile with a signature sidewall star and a grungy rubber cupsole.”
If you missed your chance, Golden Goose also offers plenty of other worn-looking sneakers for upwards of $500….
AFP reports that on Saturday, Sept. 22, 2018, construction began in Texas of part of President Trump’s border wall to curb illegal border-crossings into America, which he correctly identifies to be a security threat.
Aaron Hull, US Customs and Border Protection’s Chief Patrol Agent in the El Paso sector, said in a statement that the new section along the boundary between El Paso, Texas, and Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, will replace the wholly-inadequate fencing along four miles of the 2,000-mile border with Mexico. “This new wall will be far more durable and far more effective in deterring would-be illegal entrants,” he said.
The existing fencing will be replaced by an 18-foot steel post barrier which allows Border Patrol agents to see through to the other side.
The $22-million project is to be completed in about seven months.
The wall-construction in Texas follows the construction of a 20-mile stretch of replacement wall in Santa Teresa, New Mexico, which began in April.
Congress has so far approved only $1.6 billion of the $25 billion Trump had sought for the wall. As part of the $1.3 trillion omnibus spending bill passed last March, Congress earmarked only $1.6 billion for border security, a paltry $38 million of which is allowed to be used for “border barrier planning and design.”
The anonymous AFP reporter snidely writes that President Trump “initially demanded that Mexico pay for the barrier, which added to tensions between the two neighbors,” and claims — without citing any evidence — that “Many of the migrants trying to reach the United States are fleeing gang violence and poverty in Central America.”
Meanwhile, Breitbart reports that in a recent interview published Sept. 7, President Trump revealed he is mulling plans to use the military to build the wall.
He told the Daily Mail he has “two options” when it comes to building the border wall: “We have military, we have homeland security.” Of the two, Trump said he prefers Congress approve the $25 billion in spending that he’s seeking for the wall and have Department of Homeland Security (DHS) undertake the project, but that failing that, he’s “very seriously” looking at the military option.
“The possibility of diverting Pentagon funding and assets to build a border wall is a card the president is holding but has never directly acknowledged before. In August, two Defense Department officials told DailyMail that the Army Corps of Engineers could take on the task: “They build levees that hold back massive walls of water. They can build one to hold back drugs and human traffickers.”
To put it simply, nobody really knows how many illegal aliens there are in the United States because — doh! — being illegally here, they don’t report their presence.
What we have are estimates, based on imperfect, unreliable methods:
Surveys that ask respondents whether they were born outside of the United States and whether they are American citizens, such as the American Community Survey and the Current Population Survey.
Government data on legal immigrants.
Using those imperfect methods, the current, mysteriously widely-accepted estimate of the number of illegal aliens in the U.S. is 11 million.
Using a different method, however, a new study by a team of three researchers from MIT and Yale University, published on Sept. 21, 2018, in the peer-reviewed online journal Plos One, found that the number of “undocumented immigrants” in America is actually 22.1 million, twice the estimated 11 million.
That 22.1 million figure is a conservative estimate, which means the real number may actually be higher.
We employ this approach to estimate the number of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. for each year from 1990 to 2016, using the best available data and parameter values from the academic literature and government sources. Some of the information we use has been collected and made available only recently….
The mean estimate [of the number of undocumented immigrants in 2016] based on our simulation analysis is 22.1 million, essentially double the current widely accepted estimate.
The wicked say: Let us beset the just one, because he is obnoxious to us; he sets himself against our doings, reproaches us for transgressions of the law and charges us with violations of our training. Let us see whether his words be true; let us find out what will happen to him. For if the just one be the son of God, God will defend him and deliver him from the hand of his foes. With revilement and torture let us put the just one to the test that we may have proof of his gentleness and try his patience. Let us condemn him to a shameful death; for according to his own words, God will take care of him.
And they that passed by reviled him, wagging their heads, and saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross. Likewise also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said, He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him. He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God.
God is outside space and time.
And thus the incarnation, persecution, mocking, and death-by-crucifixion of Jesus, the Son of God, had been amply foretold in the Old Testament. The above passage from chapter two of the Book of Wisdom is but one example.
Here are some more:
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth.
But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.
behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.
So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver.
Psalm 22:1, 16, 18
My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?
they pierced my hands and my feet.
They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.
Jesus, I love You with my whole heart, my whole soul, my whole mind, and with all my strength.
May the peace and love of Jesus Christ our Lord be with you!
Ricki L. Seidman, 63, is a longtime Democrat Party cadre and a former Clinton administration official (Assistant to the President; Deputy Communications Director). She also actively worked against the Supreme Court nominations of Robert Bork (1987) and Clarence Thomas (1990), and prepped Anita Hill before she testified before the Senate, claiming she had been sexually harassed by Thomas. Seidman was instrumental in getting the Anita Hill story made into a HBO television series.
On June 27, 2018, Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his resignation, effective July 31, 2018.
On July 9, 2018, President Trump nominated U.S. Circuit Judge Brett Kavanaugh, 53, to the Supreme Court.
From September 4 to 7, 2018, the Senate conducted hearings on Kavanaugh’s nomination.
On September 12, 2018, the day that the Senate Judiciary Committee was scheduled to vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), the top Democrat on the committee whose personal driver of 20 years is a Chinese spy, blocked the vote by forwarding to the Justice Department an anonymously-written letter, dated July 30, which accuses Kavanaugh of “sexual misconduct” with an unnamed woman when they were both high school students 36 years ago.
Four days later on Sept. 16, the author of the letter went public and identified herself as Christine Blasey Ford, 51, a research psychologist at Palo Alto University in northern California.
On Sept. 20, 2018,The Hill reported that Christine Ford had hired Ricki Seidman to be her political adviser to help her navigate a potential hearing in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Seidman confirmed her role in an interview with Politico.
Now, an audio has surfaced of political operative Ricki Seidman plotting a strategy to defeat Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination. The audio was recorded sometime in July 2018.
The audio begins with a female voice asking Seidman “what are the best tools that Progressives have to challenge” the Kavanaugh nomination.
Seidman responded by acknowledging that given the Republican majority in the Senate, it is not “extremely likely” that the Democrats can defeat Kavanaugh’s nomination (beg. 0:34 mark):
“So, I will say at the outset that while I think that looking at the numbers in the Senate it’s not extremely likely that the nominee [Kavanaugh] can be defeated, I would absolutely withhold judgment as the process goes on, and I think that I would not reach any conclusion about the outcome in advance.”
Seidman then touts her experience of having worked “on one side or another” of Supreme Court nominations since William Rehnquist, which is hard to believe because the Senate confirmed Rehnquist’s nomination in December 1971 when Seidman was 16-17 years old.
Seidman continues (2:01 mark):
“I think that the way in which ultimately the Kavanaugh nomination needs to be approached is understanding what that standard is and the fact that Kavanaugh doesn’t meet the definition. I worry a little bit about, um, I think in this initial period, my sense is that everyone still scurrying to figure this out, and in terms of the groups that care about the issues, Justice Kennedy’s [resignation] announcement was a surprise and caught most — not everyone — people flat-footed, and the [Trump] administration knows this and that is partly why there’s a rush to nominate someone so quickly. I actually think that Kavanaugh was likely already chosen at the point that Kennedy would resign and that there was a nice show of considering people, for the White House’s political reasons.
But I do think that over the coming days and weeks, there will be a strategy that will emerge, and I think it’s possible that that strategy might ultimately defeat the nominee [Kavanaugh]….”
Then Seidman points out that Kavanaugh’s problem is the absence of women among his endorsers (5:30 mark):
“Of the 34 people who were the endorsers [of Kavanaugh] put out by the White House…none of them were women. Not a single one of them were women.And I don’t think it’s an accident that Kavanaugh spent so much time in his remarks talking about women because that is a clear problem with his record.”
Seidman acknowledges that only two Republicans would likely vote against Kavanaugh — Senators Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski. Seidman calls that “something that we have to get beyond” (7:50 mark).
Sure enough, a “strategy” did emerge “over the coming days and weeks” after Seidman said those words — a “strategy” that targets what Seidman had identified as Kavanaugh’s biggest problem, the lack of women among his endorsers.
And the strategy was to have a woman suddenly come forth, 36 years later, accusing Judge Kavanaugh of attempted rape.