bahmer

Carlson: For the Dems, the Kavanaugh allegation isn’t about justice, it’s ‘all about a******n’
September 18, 2018 by patriotalerts
Carlson: For the Dems, the Kavanaugh allegation isn’t about justice, it’s ‘all about a******n’
Evan El-Amin / Shutterstock.com
Even if Christine Blasey Ford was perfectly sincere in her allegation against SCOTUS nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh, the Democrats are not.


As Fox News host Tucker Carlson laid it out Monday night, “This story doesn’t have anything to do with justice.” For the Democrats, it’s all “about a******n.”

36 years ago…
Ford, now a college psychology professor in California, alleges that, while they were both high schoolers in the early 1980’s, Kavanagh attempted to sexually assault her at a house party.

The Democrats seized on the decades-old allegation with the desperation of a drowning man — it’s the only bit of dirt they’ve managed to dig up on the highly qualified and thoroughly vetted candidate.


For Democrats, Kavanaugh’s nomination process has never about anything more than pure obstructionism, fueled by an all-consuming fear that Roe v. Wade just might possibly be weakened — even though Kavanaugh has yet to say much of anything indicating a lack of support for the 1973 decision.

“The story doesn’t have anything to do with justice actually, or even with what Brett Kavanaugh might have done in high school. Underneath it all, anyone who lives in Washington can tell you, it’s all about a******n,” Carlson explained during his Fox News show, “Tucker Carlson Tonight” on Monday night.

“Does anyone really believe this story would have surfaced if Kavanaugh would have pledged allegiance to Roe v. Wade.?,” he asked.

No, it would not have.

Dems defended pro-a******n Clinton, Kennedy
Politicians who were solidly pro-a******n have gotten a pass from Democrats in the past, Carlson pointed out.

“Some of the very people suggesting Kavanaugh is a sex criminal defended Bill Clinton when he was credibly accused of rape,” Carlson said, referring to Julia Broaddrick, whose allegation of rape against Bill Clinton has never been given serious consideration by the Democrats.


“The same group practically beatified [late Massachusetts Sen.] Ted Kennedy,” Carlson went on, even after Kennedy’s scandalous and tragic Chappaquiddick car accident in which 28-year-old Mary Jo Kopechne was k**led in 1969.

It’s personal
What’s different here? Kavanaugh, as a Republican nominee, is a potential threat to the Democrats — and they can’t stand to give even an inch.

As Carlson tweeted later, “The larger lesson of the past 2 yrs is the left will not abide losing power, even temporarily. For liberals, political power is personal power. W/out it, they’re exposed & terrified. Some become vicious. They believe they’re meant to run this country, our government & our culture.”

Tucker Carlson

@TuckerCarlson
The larger lesson of the past 2 yrs is the left will not abide losing power, even temporarily. For liberals, political power is personal power. W/out it, they’re exposed & terrified. Some become vicious. They believe they’re meant to run this country, our government & our culture

And the examples are many. We saw it in fired FBI agent Peter Strzok’s impudent testimony before the Senate. We saw that in former Vice President Joe Biden, who just last week called Trump v**ers — Americans, actually — the “dregs of society.”

And we can see it in failed p**********l candidate Hillary Clinton, who, despite not holding any public office, from the very beginning of the Kavanaugh Senate hearings has been almost desperately tweeting, “#StopKavanaugh.” Ford’s allegation, however thin, is all the Democrats have right now — so expect them to milk it for all it’s worth.

archie bunker Loc: Texas

That pretty much nails it!!

bahmer

That's what I figured as well now we will see if any liberals come on here and deny deny deny.

woodguru

It's about a nominee for the SCOTUS that is unfit for any one of a dozen reasons, half of them being separate perjury subjects that there is proof of...

...he has displayed a career history of partisan support, including as a judge
...he has flip flopped on critical positions on executive power and accountability depending on who the president is
...he ruled on an a******n case that had such clear cut legal precedent that his dissent was overturned
...he has been the lone dissent on multiple rulings
...the GOP has continued to hide his document history with the Bush administration

No, this allegation isn't even close to being "all the democrats have", Kavanaugh is quite easily the most unfit nominee for the supreme court in history, McConnell told Trump not to put him up, what more should there have been for the i***t president? This is a president that will listen to nobody and has no connection with common sense realities.

Obama dropped nominees like hot rocks at the hint of negative findings. Trump is too stupid to see a dozen and not simply say he better drop him and put one of the others up.

This is dem's fault, I know, but the supreme court should take 2/3rds majority, and nominees should be required to be scored in a centrist rating in terms of judicial history and decisions. Any hint of partisanship should be cause for disqualification, including once seated. SC justices are not supposed to have any political affiliations, something the conservative court seems to have forgotten.

bahmer

CNN reported all of that to you little sheeple how amazing.

Liberty Tree

You got most of the ELFNJ talking points down but may have missed a few. Go back to Mother Jones for more instructions.

archie bunker Loc: Texas

Funny!! When all matters Constitutional are in question, you scream at the sky about it! Now, you're offered a Constitutionalist for SCOTUS, and you scream at the sky!

Another funny thing to me is that I keep asking you where he went against the LAW on his horrible a******n decision.
All I need is the number of the bill that was passed by both houses of Congress, and signed into LAW by a President, so I can read it, and decide for myself if his decision was correct, and legal.
Why do you keep avoiding this? You have the information, and I can't find it.
All I'm asking for is a little help, so I can make an informed decision.

Liberty Tree

Do not hold your breath waiting for it from him.

bahmer

Yup no law was created it was mearly a decision on one case and should have affected just this one case. Creating laws is done by the house of representatives not by the supreme court.

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973),[1] is a landmark decision issued in 1973 by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of the constitutionality of laws that criminalized or restricted access to a******ns. The Court ruled 7–2 that a right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an a******n, but that this right must be balanced against the state's interests in regulating a******ns: protecting women's health and protecting the potentiality of human life.[2] Arguing that these state interests became stronger over the course of a pregnancy, the Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of a******n to the third trimester of pregnancy.

Later, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992),[3] the Court rejected Roe's trimester framework while affirming its central holding that a woman has a right to a******n until fetal viability.[4] The Roe decision defined "viable" as "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid."[5] Justices in Casey acknowledged that viability may occur at 23 or 24 weeks, or sometimes even earlier, in light of medical advances.[6]

In disallowing many state and federal restrictions on a******n in the United States,[7][8] Roe v. Wade prompted a national debate that continues today about issues including whether, and to what extent, a******n should be legal, who should decide the legality of a******n, what methods the Supreme Court should use in constitutional adjudication, and what the role should be of religious and moral views in the political sphere. Roe v. Wade reshaped national politics, dividing much of the United States into pro-life and pro-choice camps, while activating grassroots movements on both sides.

Even woodguru should know this.

archie bunker Loc: Texas

Third time I've asked. I can't find it.

badbobby Loc: texas

and you guys wonder why I laugh at politics
our politicians are all alike
they lust for personal or party power
they care nothing of our country

archie bunker Loc: Texas

Basic civics.

old marine Loc: America home of the brave

My question is why should an underage teen in a bathing suit be doing with FOUR GROWN boys and drinking beer.

Maybe she's mad because he DIDN'T respond to her advances and the other three did.

Anyway the statue of limitations has long ran out.

woodguru

I was following the case of the 17 year old who was raped and wanted an a******n. Texas ate up the clock for weeks making her jump through hoops proving her mental state as to whether she was of sound mind to make such a decision. She was further blocked once courts said she could proceed (with a constitutionally legal a******n). It was taken up by the circuit court Kananaugh sat on. As a judge he had few things to look at, had she met the court's requirements (she had), was this legal according to the law and constitution (it was). Rather than overturn the lower court which is what he apparently would have liked to do, he imposed another round of guardianship where it was to be their decision, counseling, and mental state to be adjudicated once again, thereby eating up a few weeks of the few weeks she had left before 20 months when it couldn't be legally done.

His decision was quickly overturned, proving he had disregarded the constitution and the law.

We do not need judges on the supreme court that can't adhere to simple laws without bringing their own beliefs and ideals into the picture. Nor is it acceptable to have a judge that lies in confirmation hearings when he knows that the t***h jeopardizes his appointment, this is why questions are asked is to determine fitness.

archie bunker Loc: Texas

Which law? And where does the Constitution mention a******n?