FBI Report, Cloture, And Beyond

Since the prior Kavanaugh thread is getting slow to load from lots of comments, and given this has drug on a week or two longer than I’d expected, I’m opening another thread for discussion of the Kavanaugh Nomination, and Confirmation Vote, along with the shenanigans by the Democrats in their attempted sabotage of it.

Prior thread here:


Latest events are that the FBI has turned in their report, the cloture vote is set for tomorrow, Friday, and the Democrats are having a shit-fest because the FBI said there was no evidence of any wrongdoing by Kavanaugh.

The FBI report is supposedly not going to be made public. I wonder how long it will take for someone on the Democratic Party side to leak it. /snark;

Subscribe to feed

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in News Related, Political Current Events and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

74 Responses to FBI Report, Cloture, And Beyond

  1. H.R. says:

    E.M., if there was anything in the FBI report that in the slightest way supported “Dr.” Ford’s story, it would have been leaked within 5 minutes of the Democrats receiving the report.

    Zero leaks. There was nothing to corroborate her story and nothing to implicate Judge Kavanaugh.

    Let the Democrat wailing continue. It is falling on more and more deaf ears.

  2. H.R. says:

    Oh, I’ve been reading some twitter threads dominated by women (am I allowed to use that word?) and some are Dems,and survivors of assault and they aren’t buying the smear.

    They are pissed that it has set back women who actually have been sexually assaulted.

  3. corsair red says:

    Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse now says to President Trump, ” I told you so. ”


  4. E.M.Smith says:

    The Senate has a press conference per the FBI report… and seems they have found some backbone in the back room: (25 minutes)

  5. Richard Arrett says:

    My bet is the actual witnesses will tell the press what they told the FBI, but after the confirmation on Saturday.

    15 minutes of fame and all.

    I particularly want to see the Chris Garrett information.

    I personally think it makes a great deal of sense that he had a party at his house, and he drove Ford to and from his house (after all they “went out” for a couple of months that summer). If that is correct, why did Ford leave him out of it? If that is correct, how could she not know who’s room she was pushed into? And so forth. Very suspicious (to me anyway). Inquiring minds want to follow up with Chris Garrett.

    I would also like to see the follow-up with Kyser. Was she ever at a party at Chris Garrett’s house? We already know she doesn’t remember seeing Kavanaugh at a party – but what about Ford? Did Ford disappear from a party? I would love to see those questions answered.

    We will probably find out (I bet).

  6. philjourdan says:

    Hard to leak the whole report since there is only one, and each member has to sign up to read it (do not look for any democrats to actually do so – ala nancy Pelosi).

    @corsair Red – Sasse wanted a woman because she would have been harder to hit. But Trump is saving her. Should one of the 4 left wing members die (none will retire as long as Trump is in office), he will put a woman up. She will get savaged almost as badly and I am sure some SJW Snowflake will claim she raped him (her/it?), but that will not gain traction. Kavanaugh was the best candidate simply because there is nothing there. The accusations will all be proven (not disbelieved, proven) to be false before long. They are all too shaky. But the democrats only wanted to drag it out and hope to capture the Senate. A distant hope at the outset, that looks impossible now.

    Thank you Dingy harry.

  7. philjourdan says:

    Graham interrupted her saying “Why don’t we dunk him in the water and see if he floats?”

    Best line of the day! LOL

  8. Larry Ledwick says:

    Sen Feinstein after reading the FBI report

  9. E.M.Smith says:

    Pouncer, here: https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2018/09/28/kavanaugh-statements-votes/#comment-101645

    pointed out this was after the October 1 start of a new SCOTUS term.

    C’mon. The Republicans wanted a vote before the new SCOTUS term 1 October. The Democrats wanted a vote after the election results were in, 6 November. Dragging it out into a vote in early October isn’t a failure. It’s splitting the difference. It’s the art of the deal. It’s the spirit of John McCain inspiring acts of bi-partisan compromise.

    So what implications does it have if the confirmation vote happens on the 6th? Does a one week delay really bump him off anything important?

  10. corsair red says:

    Yes, I understood that. My thought was Sasse’s public statement doesn’t help a thing. He will get no credit from the left for pandering to the #MeToo movement. Knowing that there are good choices available among female judges ( the Supremes are looking for a few good women ), and some potential for the President to name one or two, Sasse should have kept his mouth shut.

  11. jim2 says:

    Trump’s approval rating has hit 50% and strongly approve – strongly disapprove down to -3.


    I can only hope this momentum lasts!!

  12. H.R. says:

    E.M.: “So what implications does it have if the confirmation vote happens on the 6th? Does a one week delay really bump him off anything important?”

    It’s my understanding (not 100% sure) that if no ruling has been made, he can read the transcript of the argument and issue his opinion. If the 8 have already ruled, then he can’t change that result.

  13. jim2 says:

    I haven’t seen this here, but haven’t read everything. If it’s already posted, my apologies.
    From the article:

    Today, the United States Capitol Police arrested the Suspect who allegedly posted private, identifying information (doxing) about one or more United States Senators to the internet.

    Cosko was recently an unpaid intern for Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), according to Roll Call, which also reported …


  14. Larry Ledwick says:

    Yes it (doxxing arrest) was posted but no harm I think it was in the earlier version of this thread.

    Watching that video of Sen Feinstein she looks like a little kid that just KNOWS they are going to get a whipping when she gets home. The contents of that FBI report must have blown up her scam big time!

  15. Pouncer says:

    Cases already heard involve a “takings” issue, — does the Constitution empower the Congress to give the executive branch, via the EPA, power to “protect an endangered population of animals” by “taking away an owner’s free use of his property” — and a question about timely versus delayed justice: if an inmate lives so long in prison, on Death Row, while his appeals grind through the court system, that he becomes severely senile with dementia, should this mentally incompetent person be exempt from capital punishment?

    I can’t help but think of the Mike Mann vs Mark Steyn case, grinding through the court system. If eventually Mann seems to some to have become senile and demented and is perhaps publishing flawed work, would an elderly Steyn be allowed to make jokes about it?

  16. Pouncer says:

    Sorry, I meant to better address Our Host’s actual question.

    I do think these questions important. And the stereotype of “conservative” thinkers is that Kavenaugh would side with the rich land owners and the law and order hangmen. Keeping him out of the discussion, potentially, keeps not only his vote from the final tally but his debating skills out of the argument.

    The question of “takings” is, I think, particularly fraught. If the public or the government decides to protect an animal or a property, there is law and tradition for buying the land (property) and setting it aside as a park. Or a reservation for a protected tribe. Or a restricted range to protect the rest of the territory from the exercises of the military. The federal government can buy the property at a fair market price and just compensation. In exigent circumstances it can try eminent domain. Half-way measures to restrict this or that activity to things that don’t scare the neighbors are powers reserved to the states and then usually passed down to cities and counties. Zoning. Nobody much likes zoning restrictions, either, but the constitution, so it seems to me, is fairly clear that Congress can’t do it, though cities can. Upon such compromises are centuries-long stable federations built.

    The Kelo decision certainly gave cities broad (I think, undue) discretion to define what might comprise a “public purpose”. The question about the EPA is similar — assuming, nonce, the majority of the public likes fuzzy little critters and wants to protect them — can this or any federal agency “zone” sections or collections of private land for this, or another, public purpose? Without taking over the land outright? What happens if the creature in question is not fuzzy little and cute but creepy, slimy, toxic and wildly unpopular with majorities of all demographic groups but environmental activists and un-elected bureaucrats? And do we really want such disputes in the hands of those appointed by alternating chief executives, such that public policy flip flops every 4 or 8 years?

    Suppose the majority of the 19th century American public liked the dark-skinned agricultural workers of the cotton and tobacco plantations, and wanted to emancipate them. Should the federal government buy these workers — as property — from their contemporary owners? Does the constitution empower the federal government to impose restrictions on how such workers — as property — could be treated: fed, housed, trained, punished, etc? Or can the federal government simply declare a particular use, of a particular kind of property, illegal? The British managed to outlaw race slavery by having the government buy and free the slaves. We decided, instead, to fight the bloodiest war in our history over the question — and screwed around with the constitution afterwards trying to clean up the mess. It’s not at all clear to me it was a good decision or that we learned much from the experience.

  17. E.M.Smith says:

    OK, so I’m pretty sure the court would decide that it would just cause a lot of folks to learn how to fake senility and it rewards making cases take forever, I’m pretty sure they will decide that a sentence is a sentence and moving on… (I’m also pretty sure I don’t care if they decide to just turn it into a lifetime in prison). So that one isn’t a big problem.

    The property one IS a big deal. The AgendaXX folks want to drive everyone off the land and into cities. Let it be decided the Feds can zone your land a huge money loser and it will happen everywhere so fast you can’t believe it. I hope they come down on the side of “buy it or leave it alone”…

    I also hope no other significant cases get heard before he’s sworn in… like Sunday ;-)

  18. Simon Derricutt says:

    Both F24 and BBC are pushing the point that Kavanaugh is unsuitable for the job because he attacked the partisan way the Democrats treated him at his Senate hearing. If I’d been unfairly accused of a sexual attack, and it was as unbased as the character-assassination that has been mounted on Kavanaugh, then I’d have been pretty pissed-off too and would have pointed out the kangaroo-court nature of the proceedings.

    I’ve been really amazed at the way things have gone. He’s guilty until proven innocent, and after so long a time it’s very difficult to prove innocence. I couldn’t prove what I was doing 36 years ago, and have never been one to write down what I do each day. I couldn’t prove what I did last week, since there would likely be no witnesses – I live in an area of low population-density.

    During my time at university (now over 40 years ago) I did drink beer and had girlfriends, with time spent with those women out of sight of others. With the lack of written diaries, any of them could now accuse me of sexual misconduct and I couldn’t prove otherwise. It’s also possible, given the times out of sight of others, that some woman I never met could accuse me, too. There’s simply no defence against such an accusation. That’s also a problem for the (normally) women who have been attacked, of course, in that there’s normally no proof either way as to whether sex was consensual or not.

    With Dr. Ford’s story there are way too many holes, and no confirmations from the people she says are witnesses. I know it is possible for psychiatrists to give people false memories of things that never happened, and that Dr. Ford went through such a “memory recovery” process. It seems likely that she had some sort of bad sexual encounter when she was young – lots of women do, and most likely the majority which is somewhat of an indictment on our society. Certainly it’s a majority of the women I’ve known well enough to talk about such things. However, whoever caused Dr. Ford’s problems, it seems highly unlikely that it was Kavanaugh since her best friend denies ever meeting him at such a party. They moved in different circles.

    It thus seems to me that since the Democrats couldn’t find any dirt on Kavanaugh, they invented some. Dirty politics. I wonder how many of them could survive such an investigation? How many politicians of either side could withstand it? It seems likely that Kavanaugh will be confirmed, though, and he’s not going to forget the way he’s been treated. That’s likely to come back and bite.

  19. jim2 says:

    So far on CBS This Morning, all reporting is pro-protestors pieces, how inadequate the last FBI report was (ignoring the previous SIX FBI investigations and the Congressional hearing), and how bad Kavanaugh’s temperament is. Ted Cruz is now on ragging on the Dimowits, some balance at least. Now Dan Senor is talking about how this fight has united Republicans. So, now the Dimowits probably are realizing how screwed they are.

  20. p.g.sharrow says:

    In the old days hunters would slowly haze the herd toward a cliff. As the herd bunched near the cliff the hunters would all jump up scream and yell to spook the herd and cause them to turn and run off the cliff. BUT, sometimes the herd bulls up and charges! How long can these people keep up their screaming before they break and run? or try to sneak back into the bushes.
    Socialists are a small minority with a loud mouth. People are getting tired of hearing from them.
    We need to deprive these professional agitators of their access to “Eastern European” Soros, money ..pg

  21. Power Grab says:

    Re: “Watching that video of Sen Feinstein she looks like a little kid that just KNOWS they are going to get a whipping when she gets home. The contents of that FBI report must have blown up her scam big time!”

    It reminded me of HRC’s comment about how they would all hang if they don’t win (something to that effect). That was probably one of the truest things to come out of her mouth. Isn’t hanging the penalty for treason?

    Isn’t there a case before the SCOTUS about whether or not NGO’s will be declared sovereign, which (if it happened) would allow them to do pretty much anything without punishment or accountability? Since that is a huge part of today’s problems (e.g., Soros and his dealings), methinks SCOTUS should rule against it.

    You always have to wonder how the GEBs will turn such a thing to their advantage at a later date, however.

  22. jim2 says:

    PGS – Yes, Soros is the elephant in the political room. Trump needs to launch a stealth investigation into the staffer that doxed the Senators. He wasn’t paid by the member, so who the hell was paying his rent??? Also, needs to launch a stealth investigation into Soros. A bright light in that corner of the room would be very helpful. How long will our government give this asshole a free hand?

  23. philjourdan says:

    @corsair red says: 5 October 2018 at 12:06 am

  24. agimarc says:

    I’ve always wondered why Trump is not treating Soros as a national entity. Granted he is not a nation, but he is sure acting like one. I expect there are things that can be done to make all his wealth disappear into a bit bucket somewhere and Soros himself into a black site. Wonder if the delay is due to rolling up his network. Cheers –

  25. cdquarles says:

    That’s where civil asset forfeiture comes in; though I am one who’d rather we not go there. Like psychiatry, it is far too easy to misuse it for nefarious purposes. Bah, I had a link to an executive order that could be used for the rogue NGO matter. I might try to find it again.

  26. Steven Fraser says:

    Simon said:
    ‘Both F24 and BBC are pushing the point that Kavanaugh is unsuitable for the job […]’

    I think they have both proven that it is the case about themselves.

  27. tom0mason says:

    Of course Ford may have been telling the truth, maybe, as she said she did pass a polygraph test. But then again we’ve all done that, well haven’t we?
    He said, she said about polygraphs …

  28. Another Ian says:

    Interesting as to who was being coached

    “Perjury, Conspiracy, Witness Tampering …”


  29. philjourdan says:

    @Tom0mason – but they refuse to release the polygraph details. For all we know, she could have been asked “Are you female?”. And as we learned, she was a professional at fooling Polygraph tests, so she knew how to get away with it. in the end, her lies and lack of corroboration, by even her best friend, is the strongest evidence she was lying all along.

  30. Larry Ledwick says:

    As I recall they only asked her two questions, which if true means they did not bother establishing a response baseline and the test is completely worthless. Nothing but a shiny bauble to dangle in front of the peons.

  31. Larry Ledwick says:

    Today’s forecast for the weekend.

  32. tom0mason says:

    The problem with polygraphs is they’re not scientific. It’s all about conning the interviewee, and the interpretation the interviewer puts on the results, even the computerized ones are about programmed bias and interpretation. The House of Representatives investigated them and tried to have them removed from testing of federal employees but failed.
    Here’s more about the lie-behind-the-lie-detector.pdf . 1MB pdf book about the pseudoscience of lie detection at —

    Click to access lie-behind-the-lie-detector.pdf

    It’s all witchcraft and doublethink.

  33. beththeserf says:

    Kangaroo Court and witchcraft hearing… Any wonder yr need more, not fewer
    constitutional lawyers in the supreme Court.

  34. Larry Ledwick says:

    Body language analysis of Sen Feinstein video clip that came out after reviewing the FBI report.

  35. llanfar says:

    Very interesting YouTube @Larry

  36. E.M.Smith says:

    The polygraph just measures your stress level. Folks who are psychotic and actually believe their lies pass in flying colors. Folks who are sociopaths / psychopaths and don’t give a damn or don’t really emote / stress over things like murder or such pass. Folks who know how to game the machine pass.

    Breathing rate is measured, we can all control our breathing.

    Blood pressure is measured -with some training you can raise / lower it ( I posted my test results prior where I ran between about 100 and 160 and back). Tighten the anal sphincter and stop breathing enough, it goes up; breath deep and rhythmic and relax your butt it drops).

    Hardest to diddle is “galvanic skin response” – are you sweating. With a bit of practice (think mantra or just high confidence ) you can choose to ‘not react’ to stress questions.

    Also note: As pointed out, a proper baseline itself requires at least 2 and preferably 4+ questions. One or two a deliberate lie. When answering that one, you must make sure your breathing, blood pressure, and stress response go up (pull up a memory of falling or hitting your thumb with a hammer and make it as real a memory as possible. Think fear.) Do a generally tightening of body muscles (quick twitch of arms and legs – fidget) If not good at this, take a small bite of the edge of your tongue… and suck in a sharp breath…

    Now your baseline includes a big response to lying and your muted responses later will not be seen as a lie or will be “ambiguous” as they are “too low”… Try to toss in some minor stress response on the truth baseline questions so your baseline truth shows some nerves, this helps in hiding any ambiguous and turning it into ‘truth’.

    During the test, repeat your inner mantra, breath regularly and mostly listen to your inner voice, only letting enough of the questioner through to know what was asked, but not pick up any emotion from them (so the stressing actions they do don’t get you nervous). Often they don’t bother with a drug screen when doing a polygraph and you can take a light tranquilizer to dampen things if needed (but a bit of practice on a machine eliminates the need…)

    Don’t ask why I know this… I’m just interested in a lot of stuff and this interested me once…

    A 2 question polygraph with no baseline is just a big fat nothing.

  37. E.M.Smith says:

    @Another Ian:

    That Treehouse article lead to another one in a link. Interesting conspiracy theory but with real if circumstantial evidence:


  38. E.M.Smith says:

    My God TCT has gone deep on this fraud. I’m still just a few articles into it, but they seem to have laid out the plotters and plot nicely (if a bit speculatively at times)


    has an org chart of FBI Old Friends that look to be driving it…

    Then this comment set is interesting:


    Russell Cook says:
    October 5, 2018 at 9:30 pm

    …. FEINSTEIN: How did you decide to come forward?

    FORD: Ultimately because reporters were sitting outside my home and trying to talk to my dog through the window to calm the dog down, and a reporter appeared in my graduate classroom and I mistook her for a student, and she came up to ask me a question, and I thought she was a student and it turned out that she was a reporter. So at that point, I felt like enough was enough. People were calling my colleagues at Stanford and leaving messages on their voicemails and on their e-mail, saying that they knew my name. …..

    paul courtney says:
    October 6, 2018 at 4:24 pm

    Russell Cook: Good point. I conclude that the anonymity was calculated, right through to going public. First, two congressional staff and Ford (and WaPo?) kept tight lid on this for 6 weeks, as the nom looked certain. Think on that. Her story makes it sounds like she was forced out rather suddenly, yet she had her ducks in a row- notes from counselor from 6 yrs ago, check; polygraph done, check; top national activist attorney (or two) instead of sweaty Palo Alto divorce atty, check. Ford was not pushed out, she was rolled out. The demand for “anonymous” was scripted, and when DiFi gave the signal, the script called for going public.

    About the only thing in TCT articles that I found dodgy was the assertion the rats in the FBI / DOJ would not do this if they thought they might get caught. “Desperate times call for desperate measures” and it is quite possible they thought they might get caught, but the need was high and risk was only moderate. “Being a good soldier” and “taking one for the team” are similar mindsets.

    IMHO the FBI report that caused DiFi to cringe and nearly cry on camera was likely done by some “known trustworthy folks” Trump has in the FBI, and it showed just how much of the corruption and scheme was known (up to and including Dianne’s ChiCom Communist “driver” on staff for decades and her involvement in various escapades…). I would further speculate it laid out a few name-names that were up for arrest “later” when most useful unless they flipped… and listed some known crimes (lying to the FBI, perjury, witness tampering, etc.)

    Basically, I think the FBI “investigated the claim” by investigating how it came to be and who was driving the bus… (They already knew Kavanaugh said “No information as it never happened” so no need to interview him, and they already had Ms. Balsey Frauds testimony so mostly just needed to find where it diverged from provable facts…)

    My guess / speculation is that Trump is going to sit on it as a secret document and hold it over a few key heads when needed…

  39. E.M.Smith says:

    Susan Collins (R-Maine Senator) 44 minute speech in support of Kavanaugh. Has a lot of detail on opinions he has written and how he views the law. (Hard core right wingers will be disappointed… if the asserted positions are in fact his).


  40. Larry Ledwick says:

    Looks like they are going to confirm per Reuters:


    2 minutes ago
    BREAKING: The U.S. Senate votes to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to Supreme Court – Reuters

    Just confirmed in the live video coverage. Going through the final process 50-48

  41. E.M.Smith says:

    Yay!!! The long slog through the slime is over!!! At Last, peace and civility will break out and honesty will rule!!! ( A fella can dream, can’t he? ;-)

    Here’s a hoot: To Kill A MeTooBird (parody about 2 min.)


  42. Larry Ledwick says:

  43. Larry Ledwick says:

    Senator Susan Collins speech:

  44. corsair red says:

    ” . . . breath deep and rhythmic and relax your butt it drops). ”
    I was skimming your explanation on handling a polygraph and read that as
    breath deep and rhythmic and relax your butt: it drops. :-)

    Thank goodness Mr. Kavanaugh has been confirmed. Now I am sure that at some point soon the Good Lord will get tired of me say ” Lord, RBG is old. She looks tired. Sure would be a good thing if Amy Coney Barrett replaced her. “

  45. E.M.Smith says:

    Corsair Red:

    Should I change it to “..tt, and your blood pressure drops”? Or you like it better this way? ;-)

    FWIW, here’s the Fox News report on the confirmation 4 min with a “testimonial” from a woman prior co-worker now reporting on Fox (Dana something – good looking smart blond):


  46. E.M.Smith says:

    The CNN coverage of the vote. Of course it starts with Little Chucky Schumer telling porkies and being a slime salesman (How can you tell Chucky id lying? There is a camera nearby…) He’s done at about 7:30 and Mitch Mc. makes the Repb. closing pitch.

    Actual vote starts at 17 minutes… with repeated serial squeeky screamers in the gallery for several minutes. Were I one the fence, the screechers would cause me to vote yes to spite them…


  47. Larry Ledwick says:

  48. corsair red says:

    If only they would melt, and flow to the sea, and stop this climate change.

  49. E.M.Smith says:

    Love that meme ;-)

    FWIW, the present generation of 20 to 30 somethings has a high level of snowflakes in it, and the spouse reports it is prevalent even into the grade schools. In about 15 years they will dominate the culture…

    Just sayin’ the Left has done a masterful job of social manipulation to create a generation of dependent brittle people who will “trigger” at the drop of a hat.

    One only hopes they run into reality soon and discover that’s not a very good way to deal with it.

  50. wyoskeptic says:

    Now that it is over and Justice Kavanaugh is all formally signed, sealed and delivered to the Supreme Court, I will say that the DemocRATS actions through out the process smelled to me like Kamikaze efforts. When you have nothing left in your bag of tricks but suicide attacks you soon have nothing left to attack with. I do not know how it will all play out, but I think the DemocRAT portion of the Democratic Party are soon going to be turning to cannibalism and/or dissolution. They have no formal foundation of honor to support them through tough times.

  51. Larry Ledwick says:

    Speaking of turning on their own:


    Alan Dershowitz
    27 minutes ago
    Kavanaugh owes an enormous debt to @MichaelAvenatti , who may have turned the tide in his favor by diluting Ford’s compelling accusation with an implausible story.

  52. jim2 says:

    I don’t get why anyone, especially Dershowitz, would characterize Ford’s story as “compelling.” More like repulsive and disgusting at best, and outright lying at worst, IMO.

  53. Larry Ledwick says:

    This I think is why the Left is freaking out right now:

    ‏Verified account
    5 hours ago
    Brett Kavanaugh will be on the Supreme Court in time to hear next week’s cases on immigration, product liability and the Armed Career Criminal Act.

  54. E.M.Smith says:


    You have to understand political speak… “Compelling” means “I don’t believe a word of it but they put on a big emotional show to an important voting block so I need a word saying vote for me”.

    Had they believed it they would be saying something more like “Her testimony convinced me”.

  55. E.M.Smith says:


    Or perhaps Soros had a bonus for success on offer… and they are realizing it, and the liability case per NGOs, means the money spigot is shutting down…

  56. Larry Ledwick says:

    Republicans and independents who support rule of law and court precedent and oppose a radicalized liberal court need to remain angry and motivated over the Kavanaugh confirmation freak show. If they get complacent and don’t show up this election cycle the Dems are determined to still take him and the conservative court down one way or another.

  57. philjourdan says:

    @Larry – the left seems bent on ensuring Trump supporters show up and vote. Their talk about “impeaching” (there are no legal bounds for that) is making the right want to ensure it does not happen.

  58. Larry Ledwick says:

    Got to love all the Meme masters who are putting out various video clips and images.

    This take on Senator Feinstein intimidating Senator Murkowski is excellent.

  59. Larry Ledwick says:

    More on President Trumps comment about the left’s tactics.

  60. Larry Ledwick says:

    Best summary I have seen on where we are in out culture war of politics:

  61. E.M.Smith says:

    I found the way Fiendstein was leaning, hand up on the wall, into Murkowski eerily similar to how dominating sexual predator men will trap women on a wall with the same posture…

  62. E.M.Smith says:

    Oh man, that Brietbart link is just GOLDEN!

    From the “losers” side / list:

    The Establishment Media
    What’s more, for at least ten days, all of the power of the media — print, online, and broadcast — was targeted at only a handful of senators. Naked, shameless, 24/7 propaganda and appeals to emotion directed at a half dozen people, and still they belly-flopped — primarily because alternative media was just as tireless in putting out the facts.

    The establishment media vastly out-funds and out-mans alternative media, but we can still kick their candy asses because truth and decency are on our side.

    The industry with a whole lot more #MeToo perps than stars is now so universally despised, their thoughtless rants and snobbish peacocking actually do more to help Trump’s cause than any super PAC ever could. We now welcome their unhinged ravings, their mean-spiritedness, their willingness to spoil every good time by strutting in with a soapbox. Which brings me to…

    Doesn’t pull any punches yet hits on all the reasons even a staunch Middle_of_the_Road Libertarian like me was appalled at what the Democratic Party was doing. Lying for effect, character assassination of a good man, cheating, tossing Ford under the bus (or recruiting her for effect – one or the other), etc. etc. It was just all so Slime Merchant all the time and not one broke ranks to say “Why are we doing this crap? It looks terrible.”

    I have been pushed, against my initial desires, into being a strongly Pro Trump voter. Not because I’m a Republican. I’ve been an independent for many decades and voted for Obama in the primaries as an ABC voter – “Anybody But Clinton!”. Again an ABC Voter for Trump (as the Clinton Crime Cartel was painfully obviously raking in the $Millions in bribe-O and “pay for play” and leaving a trail of dead bodies in its wake; per the news…) I was again shoved smartly away by the Democrats. (Believe it or not, I also voted for Bernie in the primary. Had the Democrats run Bernie instead of “fixing it” for The Hillary to steal the primary, they would not be facing Trump now. Thank you Democrats…)

    I had simply looked at the “Business as usual” case and realized either ‘party regular’ from either the Dimocrats or the Republicrims was just going to continue to plunder and push the loss of liberties. I wanted anyone who said they would break the system. Bernie The Socialist (where the inevitable backlash after a single term would be enough…) or Trump The Bull to break up their carefully crafted China Shop. Turns out there were a lot of folks “like me”. Tired of being played by both sides looking to break up the game…

    What’s happened now, IMHO, is that LOTS of folks have seen the game and “how she is played” and are pissed at the Con Job. Then the Democrats doubled down on the con even as the play by play cameras showed them palming cards and marking the deck… and having a few Mob of Friends break some metaphoric legs…

    Once you have seen the “Troll Behind The Curtain” you can not unsee him. Soros money flowing like water. Democratic “leadership” instructing others in how to lie and manipulate for effect. On and on.

    At this point, anyone who votes the Democratic ticket must either be a flaming idiot who has no clue, is a recluse who lives only in Marxist Echo Chambers, or is bought and paid for. I can’t see many other choices. Ignorant, inside the hall of mirrors, or part of the game… The rest of us have been Red Pilled and there is no going back.

  63. Jeff says:

    Interesting how President Trump is very careful to call the Democrats the “Democrat Party”. For they are anything BUT Democratic…

    (The party of crime, the party of the KKK, etc.).

  64. philjourdan says:

    I also voted for Obama – as an ABC (did not vote for him or McCain in the general). But in 2016, I voted in the republican primary (we can only vote in one or the other) for Ted Cruz (my first pick). I never expected Trump to do much (primarily because both sides would be against him), so have been very pleased with what he has done. And like you, any thoughts of NOT being a full Trump supporter were sabotaged by the democrats.

    Trump may not have been my first choice, but he was and is the best choice.

  65. Power Grab says:

    @ EM re: “I found the way Fiendstein was leaning, hand up on the wall, into Murkowski eerily similar to how dominating sexual predator men will trap women on a wall with the same posture…”

    My thoughts exactly!

  66. Snowleopard says:

    So lately we get to choose between major demons and lesser demons, and pat ourselves on the back when our choice is confirmed as the lesser demon. Voting for a non demon (when that rare chance presents) is considered wasted because it appears so few join in that effort that the effect is to help the major demon’s chances.

    Is Trump better than Clinton? Yes, but one could also say that Cancer is better than Ebola or airborne plague. They are all agents of destruction. One is just a bit more subtle.

  67. philjourdan says:

    Trump is the best. Not because he is the nicest Not because he has the best ideas. Not because he is the smartest. He is the best because of 2 things.

    #1 – He knows how to get things done
    #2 – He keeps his promises. He has the highest rate of compliance to campaign promises of any president in the past 100+ years.

    So you can hate him. Lots of people do. You can call him names, and hold your nose. But the truth is you hate him because of his honesty or his effectiveness.

    And other than those who also hate him, no one else cares why you hate him (and I would wager that the fellow haters do not care why you hate him either, they just want you to hate him as misery loves company).

  68. Snowleopard says:

    I voted for Trump, like most commenters here..
    Your points #s 1 & 2 are apparently correct, though for me that is not saying much.

    I don’t hate Trump, and I’m not disappointed, as he has exceeded my low expectations. I don’t like him either though. He is very far from what I would like to see. (I worked for the Ron Paul campaign in 1988, when he ran as a Libertarian. No one, including him, has interested me politically very much since then)

    I’ve a difficult time understanding the Trump haters. Emotional reactors programmable by media is my best guess. Hate is somewhere I don’t go, especially with politicians, as it denotes an emotional attachment and inhibits discernment. Schrub, O’Bomber, and Killery each caused increasing levels of disgust, but not hate.

  69. E.M.Smith says:


    Interesting… I was for Ron Paul then too…

    As a Libertarian I’m off axis from the Dem-Reps line. It’s choice of which way you want your liberties stolen, IMHO.

    So I hold my nose and vote for the least offensive.

    Then along came Trump. The oscillation between Dem and Rep was just acting as a ratchet slowly eroding from both sides. Trump promised, basically, to break the old boys (and now gals) network and work for the people. That’s basically why I voted for him.

    Had it been Sanders vs Bush instead, I’d likely have voted Sanders as he would have broken it too (not intending too, but his policies would have ended in a crisis and change to the Established Order).

    Per the Trump Haters:

    I’ve covered that under the posting about how a Color Revolution is run. It’s in the playbook. Claim the elected official is “illegitimate”. Drum up protests and riots in the street. When the reaction comes (think Proud Boys) shout how you are the victim – after provoking the fight. Hound the leader from office over their being evil and oppressive of the protesters. Then put your own folks in office and lock down power. (in a nut shell).

    Same pattern as was run in Ukraine and other countries.

    So you MUST create the hate to get to the next steps.


    One quote from a wiki:

    Such movements have had a measure of success, as for example in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia’s Bulldozer Revolution (2000), in Georgia’s Rose Revolution (2003), and in Ukraine’s Orange Revolution (2004). In most but not all cases, massive street protests followed disputed elections, or requests for fair elections, and led to the resignation or overthrow of leaders considered by their opponents to be authoritarian. Some events have been called “colour revolutions” but are different from the above cases in certain basic characteristics. Examples include Lebanon’s Cedar Revolution (2005); and Kuwait’s Blue Revolution (2005).

    From this quoted in the article:

    Click to access 198-Methods.pdf

    The Methods of Nonviolent Protest and Persuasion

    Formal Statements
    1. Public speeches
    2. Letters of opposition or support
    3. Declarations by organizations and institutions
    4. Signed public statements
    5. Declarations of indictment and intention

    6. Group or mass petitions
    Pressures on Individuals
    31. “Haunting ” officials
    32. Taunting officials

    So you can see things like harassing Administration officials in restaurants is 31 & 32 “by the book” and that the noise about indictments is all #5.

    Basically once you know it’s “by the book” you can quickly see who’s playing it that way by just finding their actions on the list.

    The banning of Conservative voices from Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, …

    Action by Owners and Management
    81. Traders’ boycott
    82. Refusal to let or sell property
    83. Lockout

    That would be 81 through 83…

    PayPal cutting off Alex Jones?

    Action by Holders of Financial Resources

    86. Withdrawal of bank deposits
    87. Refusal to pay fees, dues, and assessments
    88. Refusal to pay debts or interest
    89. Severance of funds and credit

    I’d make it #89 (by extension from credit to credit processing).

    From another similar article linked in my write up:

    As mentioned above, the first criteria for color revolution to occur is the incumbent leader of the regime must be very unpopular and face the so-called lame-duck syndrome. The lame-duck syndrome, according to Hale, refers to the elite defection related to their expectation about the future. There will be an elite defection from the incumbent president’s team when elites believe the incumbent may leave the office. The key factors inducing the lame-duck syndrome include presidential term limits and public opinion.

    Thus all the effort to drum up hatred of Trump and make sure the perception of “public opinion” is that Trump is bad and going to be hobbled (made a lame duck in effect) and / or indicted just after the mid-terms.

    It really is all just “by the book”. Nothing personal, or real, need be involved…

Comments are closed.