Tag Archives: Dianne Feinstein

Christine Ford’s letter has varying font styles and sizes

“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.

See “Christine Ford, the woman who accuses Judge Kavanaugh of sexual assault 36 years ago” and “Audio evidence of Christine Ford’s political adviser plotting in July against SCOTUS nominee Kavanaugh“.

Last Sunday, Sept. 23, Feinstein finally released Ford’s letter to Senate Majority leader and Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee Chuck Grassley (R-IA), who released the letter to the public.

Below is the letter (click image to enlarge). I painted the red arrows pointing to a change in font style and/or font size.

Some comments from readers of TruthFeed and Gateway Pundit:

  • “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

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Audio evidence of Christine Ford’s political adviser plotting in July against SCOTUS nominee Kavanaugh

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.

See “Christine Ford, the woman who accuses Judge Kavanaugh of sexual assault 36 years ago”.

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.

H/t Gateway Pundit and FOTM reader CSM

See also “Christine Ford’s letter has varying font styles and sizes

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Ageist: Rosie O’Donnell calls for senior GOP politicians to retire

From Fox News: Rosie O’Donnell took to Twitter to mock the age of prominent Republicans, calling on Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, to retire – despite lefty leaders being the same age.

“Grassley and hatch – too old – they should be done – come on – at thanksgiving we don’t let the 85 year olds carve the turkey #retire,” O’Donnell tweeted.

Hatch, the Senate president pro tempore and third in the presidential line of succession behind Vice President Mike Pence and House Speaker Paul Ryan, and Grassley are two of the GOP’s most prominent members. Many Hollywood liberals, including O’Donnell, are currently upset that many Republicans continue to support Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh amid sexual harassment allegations.

Grassley is 85, while Hatch is 84 years old. But several prominent Democrats are in the same age range. Liberal icons Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Dianne Feinstein are both 85, Maxine Waters is 80, Nancy Pelosi is 78 and Bernie Sanders is a spry 77 years old.

A 2014 Gallup poll showed the average retirement age is 62.

O’Donnell, 56, has a decades-old feud with President Trump and she has been an outspoken critic of his administration. Some of her followers were offended by her call for the older Republicans to retire.

I hate to bring this up but discriminating against someone because of their age is just as wrong as any other form of discrimination. Their behavior was the same decades ago. Approaching 70 myself, I’ll match wits with you any time you’d like,” one user wrote.

“Not cool,” another follower added. “Plenty of 85 year old people are as sharp as ever.”

Just last year, CNN published a story headlined, “The Democratic Party has an age problem,” that noted the ongoing problem with the advanced age of some liberal leaders.

“Democratic leaders across both the legislative and executive branches are generally older than leadership on the other side of the aisle,” CNN’s Ryan Struyk wrote before noting the average age of Democrats on Capitol Hill was 61, while the average Republican was 57.2 years old.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Christine Ford, the woman who accuses Judge Kavanaugh of sexual assault 36 years ago

Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court had been scheduled for a vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 12, 2018.

At the last minute, 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 an anonymously-written letter to the Justice Department which accuses Kavanaugh of unspecified “sexual misconduct” with an unnamed woman when they were both high school students. Judge Kavanaugh is 53 years old, which means the alleged sexual misconduct took place (if it did) at least 35 years ago.

Feinstein had the letter, dated July 30, in her possession for weeks. It is not explained why Feinstein withheld the letter from the Senate hearings on Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination, but disclosed the letter only after Kavanaugh had testified at the hearings, on the day when the Senate Judiciary Committee had been scheduled to vote on the nomination.

This is what we now know about Judge Kavanaugh’s accuser:

(1) Although the letter-writer had asked that her identity be kept confidential and her letter not made public, on Sept. 16 she went public. She spoke to the Washington Post, which published her story on Monday, Sept. 17, five days after Sen. Feinstein had given the letter to the Justice Department. She is Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, 51, a research psychologist at Palo Alto University in northern California.

(2) Ford said “she believes” that in 1982, in a house in Montgomery County, Maryland (the exact location and owners of which she does not know) a drunk Kavanaugh pinned her on the bed, groped her, tried to take off her clothing, and covered her mouth from screaming. Ford told The Washington Post, “I thought he might inadvertently kill me. He was trying to attack me and remove my clothing,” and that she was able to escape when Kavanaugh’s friend, Mark Judge, jumped on top of them, sending all three tumbling. She ran from the room, briefly locked herself in a bathroom and then fled the house. She told no one about the alleged assault until she brought it up in couples therapy with her husband in 2012.

(3) At the time of the alleged incident, Kavanaugh was a student at the all-male Georgetown Preparatory School; Ford was a student at another private school, Holton-Arms.

(4) Kavanaugh strongly denies the allegations. He said in a statement: “I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.” (New York Post)

(5) Ford has no corroborating witnesses:

  • Mark Judge, the high-school buddy of Kavanaugh whom Ford claims to be in the room during the alleged assault, denies that the assault took place, says he has “no memory” of the incident and  does not want to testify. He said: “It never happened. I never saw anything like what was described” and that Ford’s accusation does match Kavanaugh’s character — “It is not who he is.” (New York Post)
  • Ford’s schoolmate Cristina King Miranda claimed she knew about the attempted rape, but quickly retracted her claim when critics questioned her account, noting it contradicted Ford’s. Miranda now admits on Twitter she has no first-hand knowledge of the assault. (The New American)
  • Patrick J. Smyth, a classmate of Kavanaugh whom Ford alleges was at the house party, denies Ford’s story in a letter to and received by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Sept. 18 (CNS News):

“I understand that I have been identified by Christine Blasey Ford as the person she remembers as ‘PJ’ who supposedly was present at the party she described in her statements to the Washington Post. … I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question, nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh.

“Personally speaking, I have known Brett Kavanaugh since high school and I know him to be a person of great integrity, a great friend, and I have never witnessed any improper conduct by Brett Kavanaugh toward women. To safeguard my own privacy and anonymity, I respectfully request that the Committee accept this statement in response to any inquiry the committee may have.”

  • On Sept. 21, 2018, a 4th person said to have been at the party denies any knowledge of the sexual assault. Leland Ingram Keyser, a longtime friend of Christine Ford, says through her attorney: “Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford.” (Breitbart)

(6) Ford gave The Washington Post the results of a polygraph examination allegedly conducted by a former FBI agent in August, which purportedly show that she’s truthful in her allegations. The agent, Jerry Hanafin, said in an interview that the results showed “no deception indicated” and that “she was being truthful.” (New York Times). However, her attorney Debra Katz refused to disclose who had paid for the examination (which costs $500 to $1,000) or provide details on how it was conducted. Experts say lie detector tests are not infallible or fool-proof. A former senior FBI agent said polygraphs would have difficulty detecting deception by sociopaths, psychopaths and committed liars lacking a conscience. (FoxNews)

(7) Sen. Feinstein gave mixed messages, saying “I believe she [Ford] is credible” and “I can’t say everything’s truthful. I don’t know.” (CNN)

(8) Before going public on Sept. 17, Ford scrubbed her internet history — deleting all her social media accounts, including her LinkedIn page, and even removed her entire high school year book. (Mike Cernovich).

(9) Ford is a leftwing activist:

  • She is an open-borders activist who has signed anti-Trump immigration letters.
  • In 2016, she posted on Facebook that Supreme Court justice Antonin “Scalia-types must be banned from the profession of law”. Like Scalia, Judge Brett Kavanaugh is a conservative and constitutionalist.

(10) Ford received five student reviews when she taught social work at California State University Fullerton. One review said “Many dislike Professor Ford due to her dark personality”; another wrote, “she is exact opposite of what she teaches”. (Rate My Professors)

(11) Ford’s recovered high school yearbook is full of accounts of wild, drunken sex parties she had attended. One passage reads: “And there were always parties to celebrate any occasion. Although these parties are no doubt unforgettable, they are only a memory lapse for most, since loss of consciousness is often an integral part of the party scene.”

(12) According to a Palo Alto University document from 2015 (see page 97), Christine Blasey, Ph.D. is a professor at Palo Alto University and a “Director of Biostatistics at Corcept Therapeutics.” As “Blasey CM,” Christine Blasey Ford, whose middle name is Margaret, co-authored 8 research papers with Corcept Therapeutics, which manufacturers and markets an RU-486 abortion pill, mifepristone. As 19888560, Blasey also appears on numerous published studies at PubMed — all funded by Corcept Therapeutics. Mike Adams of Natural News points out:

Blasey is a paid researcher for an abortion pill company with a lot to lose if Kavanaugh is confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court…. The company is aggressively seeking to expand the FDA-approved applications of its drugs. Thus, the financial future of this company could be heavily impacted by abortion remaining legal in the United States….

[H]aving Kavanaugh on the court represents a dire threat…to abortion “rights.” In turn, this represents a threat to Corcept Therapeutics, the drug company at which Christine Blasey has worked for years, helping to produce research that expands the company’s market reach and drug applications…. Blasey has a financial motivation to defeat Kavanaugh and keep him off the U.S. Supreme Court.

(13) Ford’s family members:

  • Her brother, Ralph Blasey, worked for a law firm that paid Fusion GPS. (True Pundit)
  • Ford’s parents were defendants in a foreclosure case in 1996 in Maryland in which Kavanaugh’s mother, Martha G. Kavanaugh, was the presiding district judge who ruled against Ford’s parents. (Gateway Pundit)

Rejecting Monday — the Senate’s date for a hearing on Ford’s accusations — her lawyer says Ford “would be prepared to testify next week” if senators offer “terms that are fair and which ensure her safety.” Ford claims to have received death threats.

H/t Big Lug, CSM, John Molloy, Lola, Lophatt and Vivian Lee.

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Democrats resort to secret informants against President Trump & SCOTUS nominee Judge Kavanaugh

A characteristic feature of totalitarian one-party dictatorships is the party’s use of a powerful tool against citizens — informants. The identities of the informants are secret; nor can the information they provide be verified or disputed.

The Soviet Union, East Germany, Maoist China all made use of secret informants against not just political dissidents, but any and every one. After the Berlin Wall separating West from East Germany came down in 1989, bringing to an end the communist East German regime, officers of the regime’s formidable Stasi secret police tried to destroy their files. But the files were saved by ordinary East German citizens who stormed the Stasi offices in Erfurt to protect the documents.

Beginning in 1992, the Stasi documents were made available to the general public who finally could view the hitherto-secret files on themselves. They were shocked to discover that colleagues, friends and family members had been secret informants. In total, the Stasi’s network of informants numbered one in every 90 East German citizens.

In July, the editorial board of America’s supposed premier newspaper The New York Times openly called on Democrats to go to war against President Trump by deploying mafia “Godfather” tactics. Recent events show that using secret informants is one of the tactics.

On Sept. 5, 2018, the despicable New York Times published an op/ed by an anonymous author who claims to be a senior official inside the Trump administration but part of the anti-Trump “Resistance”. The author claims not to be the only one — that “many of the senior officials” in the administration “are working diligently from within to frustrate” the President’s “agenda and his worst inclinations” in order “to preserve our democratic institutions”.

If you haven’t already read the op/ed, you can read it on Information Clearing House instead of on the click-baiting NYT.

Speculations are rife as to the identify of the anonymous author of the op/ed, the most credible and compelling of which is by former Assistant Secretary of the Reagan administration’s Treasury Department Dr. Paul Craig Roberts. A day after the publication of the NYT op/ed, Dr. Roberts posted an article on his blog stating that:

I know who wrote the anonymous “senior Trump official” op-ed in the New York Times. The New York Times wrote it.

The op-ed is an obvious forgery. As a former senior official in a presidential administration, I can state with certainty that no senior official would express disagreement anonymously. Anonymous dissent has no credibility. Moreover, the dishonor of it undermines the character of the writer. A real dissenter would use his reputation and the status of his high position to lend weight to his dissent.

The New York Times’ claim to have vetted the writer also lacks credibility, as the New York Times has consistently printed extreme accusations against Trump and against Vladimir Putin without supplying a bit of evidence. The New York Times has consistently misrepresented unsubstantiated allegations as proven fact. There is no reason whatsoever to believe the New York Times about anything.

Nine days after the publication of the NYT op/ed, it appears that this latest attempt by Demonrats to bring down President Trump has fizzled. And so Demonrats have deployed the Stasi secret-informant weapon against a new target — Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh’s nomination had been scheduled for a vote yesterday morning in the Senate Judiciary Committee. At the last minute, however, Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA), the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee whose personal driver of 20 years is a Chinese spy, threw a wrench in the schedule by forwarding an anonymously-written letter to the Justice Department which accuses Judge Kavanaugh of unspecified “sexual misconduct” with an unnamed woman when they were both high school students. Kavanaugh is 53 years old, which means the alleged sexual misconduct took place (if it did) at least 35 years ago.

Bob Fredericks reports for the New York Post, Sept. 13, 2018, that Feinstein  said the information came from a woman who wanted to remain anonymous, and declined to detail the letter’s contents — even to fellow Democrats.

Feinstein would only say this in a statement:

I have received information from an individual concerning the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. That individual strongly requested confidentiality, declined to come forward or press the matter further, and I have honored that decision. I have, however, referred the matter to federal investigative authorities.

The information came in a letter that allegedly was first sent to the office of California Democratic Rep. Anna Eshoo, who allegedly passed it along to Feinstein during the summer. It is unclear why Feinstein waited until now to pass the letter to the Justice Department.

The anonymous woman making the claims is being represented by Debra Katz, a lawyer who works with #MeToo “survivors”. Joseph Abboud, a lawyer at Katz’s firm, said the firm declines to comment.

The White House issued a furious response, pointing the finger at Sen. Chuck Schumer in a statement:

Senator Schumer promised to ‘oppose Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination with everything I have,’ and it appears he is delivering with this 11th hour attempt to delay his confirmation.

Throughout 25 years of public service, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has thoroughly and repeatedly vetted Judge Kavanaugh, dating back to 1993, for some of the most highly sensitive roles.

Kavanaugh attended Georgetown Preparatory School, an all-boys’ Jesuit high school in Maryland. It is not known what school the anonymous letter writer attended.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley’s office said the secret-informant letter would not throw a wrench into the confirmation process:

Sen Grassley is aware of Sen Feinstein’s referral. At this time, he has not seen the letter in question, and is respecting the request for confidentiality. There’s no plan to change the [committee’s] consideration of Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination.

UPDATE #1:

Daily Wire just reported that the FBI has declined to investigate Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh over allegations sent to them by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA). Take that, Feinstein!

Update #2:

A day after Dianne “my driver is a Chinese spy” Feinstein forwarded the anonymously-authored letter to the Justice Dept., 65 women who went to high school with Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh have written a letter to Dianne Feinstein and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, testifying to Judge Kavanaugh’s character. From their collective letter (Townhall):

We are women who have known Brett Kavanaugh for more than 35 years and knew him while he attended high school between 1979 and 1983. For the entire time we have known Brett Kavanaugh, he has behaved honorably and treated women with respect. We strongly believe it is important to convey this information to the Committee at this time,” the letter states. “Brett attended Georgetown Prep, an all-boys high school in Rockville, Maryland. He was an outstanding student and athlete with a wide circle of friends. Almost all of us attended all girls high schools in the area. We knew Brett well through social events, sports, church, and various other activities. Many of us have remained close friends with him and his family over the years.

Through the more than 35 years we have known him, Brett has stood out for his friendship, character, and integrity. In particular, he has always treated women with decency and respect. That was true when he was in high school, and it has remained true to this day,” the letter continues. “The signers of this letter hold a broad range of political views. Many of us are not lawyers, but we know Brett Kavanaugh as a person. And he has always been a good person.

H/t FOTM reader EddieBG

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s personal driver of 20 years is a Chinese spy

You can’t make this stuff up.

The personal driver of Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), 85, for some 20 years was a Chinese spy.

Even worse, this happened during Feinstein’s tenure as Chair of the Senate Foreign Intelligence Committee (2009-2015).

Worse still, we only found out about this FIVE years after Feinstein retired — not fired — the driver after she was informed by the FBI that the driver is a spy for the People’s Republic of China.

Matier & Ross report for the San Francisco Chronicle (SFC), August 1, 2018, that “a local source who knew about the incident” said the FBI showed up at Feinstein’s office in Washington, D.C., about five years ago to alert the then-chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee that her driver was being investigated for possible Chinese spying.

The source said the intrigue started “years” earlier when the staffer took a trip to Asia to visit relatives and was befriended by someone who continued to stay in touch with him on subsequent visits. That someone was connected with the People’s Republic of China’s Ministry of State Security. The source insists that Feinstein’s driver “didn’t even know what was happening — that he was being recruited. He just thought it was some friend.

Besides driving Feinstein around when she was in California, the unnamed staffer also served as gofer in her San Francisco office and as a liaison to the Asian American community, even attending Chinese Consulate functions for the senator.

According to SFC‘s source, the FBI interviewed the driver and concluded he hadn’t revealed anything of substance, after which Feinstein “forced him to retire, and that was the end of it. None of her staff ever knew what was going on. They just kept it quiet.

According to Politico, the driver had provided political intelligence — but nothing classified — to his handlers. A former U.S. intelligence official said the driver was “run” by officials in the Chinese Consulate in San Francisco.

Jeff Harp, a former FBI agent and security analyst for San Francisco’s CBS affiliate, KPIX 5, said he is not surprised:

“Think about Diane Feinstein and what she had access to. One, she had access to the Chinese community here in San Francisco; great amount of political influence. Two, correct me if I’m wrong, Dianne Feinstein still has very close ties to the intelligence committees there in Washington, D.C. They also have an interest in the economy here. How to get political influence here. What’s being developed in Silicon Valley that has dual-use technology. All of that is tied to the Bay Area.”

This is not the only time when Dianne Feinstein is implicated in spying.

Bre Payton of The Federalist reminds us that:

In her capacity as a ranking member on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Feinstein unilaterally released testimony from Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson to the public earlier this year, violating committee precedent. When she released these records, she failed to disclose that one of her former staffers, Daniel Jones, had hired Fusion GPS and ex-British spy Christopher Steele to dig up dirt on Donald Trump after the 2016 election.

Jones, who runs a private investigative outfit called Penn Quarter Group, told the FBI last year that he was being bankrolled by 7 to 10 wealthy donors who are primarily from New York and California to look into whether Trump’s campaign colluded with Russian officials to steal the 2016 election from Hillary Clinton. These donors gave him $50 million he used to hire Fusion GPS, which contracted with Steele to compile the now-infamous dossier riddled with salacious and unverified claims.

The dossier, which was also funded by Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic Party, was used as evidence in the FBI’s warrant to secretly surveil Trump campaign associate Carter Page for more than a year.

What remains unknown are the following:

  1. What is the driver/spy’s name?
  2. Why is his name not disclosed to the American people?
  3. Has he been arrested and prosecuted by the Department of Justice?

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Demorats propose ban on assault weapons

molon labe
Maybe demorats should start by having their precious federal government enforce current laws. Oh wait, we know how much they really care about following the law
From NY Post: Nearly two dozen Democratic senators, including Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, introduced a bill on Wednesday to ban the sale of military-style assault weapons and bump stock devices like the one used in the Las Vegas massacre, saying it “will begin removing the weapons of war on our streets.”
“We’re introducing an updated assault weapons ban for one reason: so that after every mass shooting with a military-style assault weapon, the American people will know that a tool to reduce these massacres is sitting in the Senate, ready for a debate and a vote,” said a statement released by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif).
The legislation calls for a ban on the “sale, manufacture, transfer and importation of 205 military-style assault weapons by name,” but allows owners to keep their existing weapons.
The measure also proposes to ban “bump-fire stocks and other devices that allow semi-automatic weapons to fire at fully automatic rates.”
The madman who opened fire on an open-air concert in Las Vegas last month outfitted his weapons with a bump-fire stock that allowed him to turn his semi-automatic rifles into rapid-fire weapons and spray thousands of rounds in the span of about 10 minutes. He killed 58 people and wounded hundreds more in the deadliest mass shooting in US history.
Five weeks later, a deranged Air Force veteran opened fire on a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, using an AR-15-style assault rifle. He emptied 15 magazines and killed 26 congregants.
Democrats called on their Republican counterparts to begin a discussion on gun violence after the killings, but GOP lawmakers and President Trump responded it was “too soon” after the tragedy and would be “disrespectful to the dead.”
Trump initially said the church shooting “isn’t a gun situation” it is “a mental health problem” then rejected calls for stepped up background checks.
Asked about “extreme vetting” for gun buyers while on an overseas trip this week in South Korea, he said: “If you did what you’re suggesting, there would have been no difference three days ago and you might not have had that very brave person who happens to have a gun or a rifle in his trunk.”
The Democrats’ legislation also calls for a ban of assault weapons that take a “detachable ammunition magazine and has a pistol grip, a forward grip, a barrel shroud, a threaded barrel or a folding or telescoping stock.”
It says 2,200 types of guns used for “hunting, household defense or recreational purposes” will be exempted.
This bill won’t stop every mass shooting, but it will begin removing these weapons of war from our streets,” the statement reads. “Yes, it will be a long process to reduce the massive supply of these assault weapons in our country, but we’ve got to start somewhere.”
Feinstein and the Democrats introduced a bill in 2013 with similar provisions after the killings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in December 2012 but it was defeated in the Senate by a 60-40 vote.
DCG

Please follow and like us:
0
 

California sheriffs oppose Gavin Newsom’s gun control initiative

There’s still some common sense in California.

Gun grabber Newsom

Gun grabber Newsom


California sheriffs announced Monday that they are opposing Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom’s gun-control measure aimed for the fall ballot, arguing it would not prevent criminals from obtaining guns and ammunition via the black market or theft, according to the Sacramento Bee.
Instead, the proposal would place additional restrictions on law-abiding people who want to buy ammunition for recreational use, retain guns and magazines that are currently legal or pass down historical or family heirlooms, the California State Sheriffs’ Association wrote in a letter to Newsom’s campaign.
“Effectively, this measure will create a new class of criminals out of those that already comply with common sense practices that now exist,” wrote President Martin Ryan, Amador County sheriff and PAC Chair Gregory J. Ahern, Alameda County sheriff . “The focus of efforts to reduce gun violence in this state should be on those responsible for that violence, not those that have no intent to do harm.”
The sheriffs note that they remain supportive of domestic violence restraining orders, existing background checks and waiting periods to purchase firearms.
But their position on the measure could add institutional heft to a coalition led by gun-rights groups. The chief critic to date had been the California Rifle & Pistol Association, whose Coalition for Civil Liberties considers the planned measure the biggest threat to gun rights in California in more than three decades.
Newsom’s proposal, which must collect 366,000 signatures to qualify for the November ballot, would require most people to pass background checks to buy ammunition, sales of which must be made through licensed vendors and reported to the Department of Justice.
While California has some of the nation’s most restrictive firearms policies, including a 1999 ban on assault weapons, it would expand that prohibition to high-capacity magazines grandfathered in by the law. If it passes, the owners would need to sell them to a licensed dealer, transfer them out of the state or turn them in to law enforcement to be disposed of.
molon labe
Newsom is working with the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, and their bid is backed by U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the mayors of San Francisco, Oakland and San Jose and others.
DCG

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Feinstein's Assault Weapons Ban goes down in defeat

ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN WON’T BE IN DEMS‘ GUN BILL

I Love it when a plan comes together.    ~ Steve~ —————-


feinstein

ugly_dogs_01
BY ALAN FRAM
ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP)Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has decided that a proposed assault weapons ban won’t be part of a gun control bill the Senate plans to debate next month, the sponsor of the ban said Tuesday, a decision that means the ban stands little chance of survival.
Instead, Sen. Dianne Feinstein said she will be able to offer her ban on the military-style firearms as an amendment. Feinstein is all but certain to need 60 votes from the 100-member Senate to prevail, but she faces solid Republican opposition and likely defections from some moderate Democrats.
“I very much regret it,” Feinstein, D-Calif., told reporters of Reid’s decision. “I tried my best.”
Asked about the decision, Reid, D-Nev., said he wanted to bring a gun bill to the full Senate that would have enough support to overcome any GOP attempts to prevent debate from even starting.
He said that “using the most optimistic numbers,” there were less than 40 votes for Feinstein’s ban. That is far less than the 60 votes needed to begin considering legislation, and an indication that Reid feared that including the assault weapons ban in the main guns bill would risk getting the votes needed to begin debate.
“I’m not going to try to put something on the floor that won’t succeed. I want something that will succeed. I think the worst of all worlds would be to bring to something to the floor and it dies there,” Reid said.
Feinstein, an author of the 1994 assault weapons ban that expired after a decade, said that Reid told her of the decision on Monday.
There are 53 Democrats in the Senate, plus two independents who usually vote with them.
An assault-type weapon was used in the December massacre at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., that revived gun control as a top issue in Washington. Banning those firearms was among the proposals President Barack Obama made in January in response to those slayings.
The assault weapons ban was the most controversial of the major proposals to restrict guns that have been advanced by Obama and Senate Democrats. Because of that, it had been expected that the assault weapons measure would be left out of the initial package the Senate considers, with Democrats hoping the Senate could therefore amass the strongest possible vote for the overall legislation.
Having a separate vote on assault weapons might free moderate Democratic senators facing re-election next year in Republican-leaning states to vote against the assault weapons measure, but then support the remaining overall package of gun curbs.
Gun control supporters consider a strong Senate vote important because the Republican-run House has shown little enthusiasm for most of Obama’s proposals.
Feinstein said Reid told her there will be two votes.
One would be on her assault weapons ban, which also includes a ban on ammunition magazines that carry more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The second would just be on prohibiting the high-capacity magazine clips.
Many Democrats think the ban on large-capacity magazines has a better chance of getting 60 votes than the assault weapons ban.
The Senate Judiciary Committee has approved four gun control measures this month, including Feinstein’s barring assault weapons and high capacity magazines. The others would expand required federal background checks for firearms buyers, increase federal penalties for illegal gun trafficking and boost school safety money.
© 2013 THE ASSOCIATED PRESS.
 H/T Drudge
 

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Dianne "gun-ban" Feinstein wants you to know she's not a 6th grader

Yesterday, during a committee hearing in the U.S. Senate on gun control legislation, newly elected Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and long-time Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) engaged in a heated exchange over the constitutionality of her proposed bill, Assault Weapons Ban of 2013, to ban “assault weapons” that include more than 150 rifles, shotguns, and handguns.
By far the most ambitious of and just like the gun-control bills introduced across the United States in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre, Feinstein’s bill exempts government officials (including Congress, of course), law enforcement and retired law enforcement personnel.
At yesterday’s hearing, Sen. Cruz questioned the constitutionality of new gun laws: “It seems to me that all of us should begin, as our foundational document, with the Constitution. And the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Cruz went on to expound on the phrase “the right of the people,” its origins and its prolific use by the Founding Fathers in a number of Constitutional provisions, including the First and Fourth Amendments.
To that, Feinstein huffily replied: “I’m not a sixth grader.” Blah. Blah. Blah.

Like another Democrat senator, Chucky Schumer, Feinstein carries a concealed weapon and is also protected by armed police escorts, although she has plenty of moolah to hire her own body guards. One of the 10 wealthiest members of Congress, Feinstein reported a net worth of between $46 million and $108.1 million in 2010, according to financial disclosures.
Feinstein’s investment-banker husband Richard Blum was on the Board of Directors of Current TV and had facilitated the $500 million sale of Al Gore’s failing TV network to Al Jazeera.
The Hollywood Reporter reports that according to a lawsuit filed by John Terenzio, who claims it was his idea to sell to Al Jazeera but he was cut out of the lucrative deal, Gore at first was reluctant to sell to Al Jazeera but was persuaded by Blum. Feinstein’s husband pushed for the sale because “he and other Current investors were concerned about the prospect of losing their shirts in the financially troubled Current.”
As the spouse of a powerful senior U.S. senator, some of Blum’s lucrative business dealings have been questioned for potential conflicts-of-interest. From Wikipedia:

Blum’s wife, Senator Dianne Feinstein, has received scrutiny due to her husband’s government contracts and extensive business dealings with China and her past votes on trade issues with the country. Blum has denied any wrongdoing, however Critics have argued that business contracts with the US government awarded to a company (Perini) controlled by Blum may raise a potential conflict-of-interest issue with the voting and policy activities of his wife. URS Corp, which Blum had a substantial stake in, bought EG&G, a leading provider of technical services and management to the U.S. military, from The Carlyle Group in 2002; EG&G subsequently won a $600m defense contract.

In 2009 it was reported that Blum’s wife Sen. Dianne Feinstein introduced legislation to provide $25 billion in taxpayer money to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp, a government agency that had recently awarded her husband’s real estate firm, CB Richard Ellis, what the Washington Times called “a lucrative contract to sell foreclosed properties at compensation rates higher than the industry norms.”

Hey, Dianne Feinstein.
At age 79, you are most certainly not a sixth-grader. But I doubt there’s even ONE sixth-grader in all of America who’s as hypocritical as you!
H/t FOTM’s CSM
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0