Injustice against the Justice

On Monday, if things go as planned, the woman who accused Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault will testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

As it stands now, the accuser’s lawyer is attempting to put conditions on the committee. Her

lawyers wrote to Grassley that “an FBI investigation of the incident should be the first step in addressing her allegations,” rather than a Senate hearing before politicians “who appear to have made up their minds.”

The attorneys, Lisa Banks and Debra Katz, asserted that her family “was forced to relocate out of their home” and that “her email has been hacked, and she has been impersonated online.”

They also criticized Grassley for proposing to put Ford at “the same table as Judge Kavanaugh in front of two dozen U.S. Senators on national television to relive this traumatic and harrowing incident.”

No matter their motivation,  perhaps to delay the confirmation process until after the next session of the Supreme Court begins, or even until after the mid-term elections, the accused and her lawyers should be careful what they demand.

Although it appears that the FBI will not conduct an investigation into these allegations, if the FBI should do so, then the first step would have to be a thorough interview with the accuser herself.

If we’ve learned nothing else from the Mueller investigation, it’s that not telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth to the FBI is a crime. Even getting dates mixed up can lead to 14 days in the slammer!

How else but by thoroughly interviewing the accuser will the FBI, or any investigative team, know where or how to begin?

So far, the accuser has not named a date, a location, a time, or even all potential eye witnesses. How could anyone investigate, even if the alleged incident had occurred last week, much less decades ago?

So first, an interview with the FBI, and then testimony before Congress, under oath. Then a careful comparison of all prior statements (to anyone–Feinstein, friends, neighbors, husband, therapist, media), what was said to the FBI, and what was said under oath to Congress.

Is this really how the accuser’s lawyers want this to play out?

Senator Grassley says that congressional staff are currently “gathering facts.” Grassley has also sent a letter to the accuser’s lawyers, pointing out the usual confirmation process and again inviting the accuser to testify, as her lawyers have said many times that she wishes to do.

In his letter, Grassley advised the accuser that she must supply a biography and the text of her planned testimony to the committee by Friday.

The committee is being very accommodating, by offering the accuser her choice of setting (public or private) and even the ability to speak without the presence of Judge Kavanaugh.

The latter seems to be an extraordinary offer, in that it’s fundamental to our justice system that a person has the right to confront his accusers.

It’s bad enough that Democrat politicians are all over the airwaves and social media, expressing their belief in the accusations and, by default, then, their belief in the guilt of Judge Kavanaugh, even though nobody has yet even seen the accuser, much less heard her story under oath.

Obviously, it’s also fundamental to our justice system that all accused persons, even Supreme Court nominees, even straight white males, are

innocent until proven guilty.

At this point, we don’t know whether the accuser will appear before the committee.

After all that Judge Kavanaugh, his family, Congress, and We the People have been put through by these last-minute allegations, the committee should consider issuing a subpoena to compel her appearance.

This bell cannot be unrung.



149 responses to “Injustice against the Justice

  1. …..
    STUFF IT …. if something happened he was not 18 YET …still a kid …REMEMBER WTP decided BLM …give them SPACE 2 CHANGE??
    REAL mom’s SHOULD .. teach Daughters ….ha’ & SONS ..of what Could happen with
    growing “BOYS” @ parties? … you play with matches? B responsible …
    DID HE? I SAY BRING IT ON .. if he was there HE WAS BUTT’ who

    • LC does have a way with words. I don’t know what I think of the man, actually, other than that if the progressives are THAT opposed, then he must represent something good for us and our way of life, even IF he was perhaps complicit in protecting Hillary under the guise of protecting the nation and national security and all that blather. I saw that BS about how he hires women with a certain look and what I thought was: Yeah. He expects them to LOOK like ladies. Whether or not they’re model thin, they are nice looking young women, wholesome. If that’s a “look” then maybe it would be good for others to emulate instead of looking like butch slobs covered with tattoos and wearing a hairstyle that Gomer Pyle’s sergeant would approve of. You know of whom I speak. The TYPE so common in the DemoncRAT party.

  2. …….W O W …. WOW ….never trust a blonde …that’s what I SAY
    O’ ..SO much CRAP 2 SEE !!! I’m SICK of the DEMOCRATS BS …24/7

  3. With Republicans ^^^ demanding Ford testify before Monday or a vote on Kavanaugh move forward, the credibility of her story is rapidly falling apart.

    • Clock is ticking. She has, like, at this moment, 1 hour and 12 minutes to send her bio and a transcript of her testimony. But I do believe that they WILL pull some stunt and give the impressions she won’t show and Grassley will call a vote and the somebody like Feinstein will escort Ford onto the floor of the Senate to object. Or something. There WILL be a stunt.

  4. logo.png
    Posted by Steve Turley ● Sep 19, 2018 2:16:28 PM
    Christine Ford’s Allegations Against Brett Kavanaugh are Falling Apart!!!

  5. ‘If he becomes nominee, I’m moving to another country’…
    Supreme fight roils already ugly political climate…
    Republicans decline to subpoena classmate, reject other demands…
    Lawyer Caught On Camera: ‘Going To Resist’…
    Wearing Socialist Power T-Shirt?
    Memory’s frailty may be playing role…
    U.S. Marshals Probe Threats Against Kavanaugh Family…
    Dems: We Already Know He’s Guilty… <<<<< ???? O' so sure?
    Float impeachment if confirmed… <<<< ha' get BIT
    Grassley adviser resigns after harassment accusation…


  6. ~ joeyusa •

    ‘We need to figure this out up front’
    Sep 21, 2018 …GET BIT!!!
    if he did??? he could have served his dues/time & it would have been SCRUBBED ….like ALL the rest of under aged “KIDS” SHE SCREWED
    the pooch ….Nothing MORE!!

  8. So the answer to the question: Can a true victim also be immoral?
    The answer is Y E S .
    Don’t expect for one second the Christine Blasey Fords, the Sandra Flukes, the Anita Hills, & their ilk ever to refrain from using their victimhood stories to immorally advance their causes and their careers.
    Even if their stories are (or were) true.
    Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

  9. Muslim Democrat Keith Ellison Is Everything Democrats Falsely Accuse Judge Kavanaugh Of Being; WHY are They Protecting Him? <<< ????

    Democrat Muslim Woman Beater Keith Ellison Says His Victim Fabricated Whole Domestic Violence Abuse Story, …. Can’t be Sure Others …..
    Won’t ‘Cook Up’ Allegations !!! …. ha' exactly


    • In WHAT UNIVERSE do they reject that bill? And what does this say about how DemoncRATS and progressives supposedly fight for WOMEN? They let it “die,” which is the same thing as saying they didn’t have the guts to even VOTE on it and go on record. It’s the typical progressive conundrum, when two “protected classes” are in direct opposition.

  10. MOTUS A.D.
    If You See Something ………. >Say Something
    Ha ha ha ha ha! Rod Rosenstein was kidding around with the guys about wearing a wire while meeting with the President in order to collect info that could set him up for removal under the 25th Amendment. Hee hee hee.
    Just kidding! It was just a joke!

  11. Senator Kamala Harris, the junior senator from California, cross-examined Kavanaugh like a prosecutor trying to break a defendant. Kavanaugh held strong, & when push came to shove, Harris showed she had nothing & gamely tried to save what dignity she had left.

    From New Jersey came the oft-angry Cory Booker. His feigned outRage was a performance worthy of Oscar consideration. Not a win, mind you, but the Oscars have a low threshold for quality acting when it comes to throwing out undeserved nominations.

    When Booker’s “I am Spartacus” moment turned into an “I am Dukakis in
    a tank” moment, his time in the sun was over, and Kavanaugh looked like a shoe-in.

    Desperation causes people to act in ways counter to their original thinking. The greater the desperation, the lower the bar of integrity sinks. That brings us back to DiFi. <<<<<<<<< sad the gang is SICK SICK SICK
    Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

    • I was thinking of camel face last night, while lying awake with insomnia. I couldn’t get it out of my mind how TOTALLY DISRESPECTFUL she was to the man. I suspect it was because he was a man, white, Christian, conservative, etc. She was outright RUDE. She, as a senator, no doubt demands and expects respect from anybody who deals with her, especially any of the other people in government, in the Senate, in the House, and most especially from the white male conservatives. HOW DARE SHE be SO RUDE to Judge Kavanaugh? She treated him as if he were a perp.

      What is very notable is what that other disgusting, disrespectful Congresswoman, Hirono, DID ask Kavanaugh: Whether he had ever sexually harassed or mistreated anyone since he passed the “legal age.” THAT MEANS TO ME that she KNEW even back during that hearing, that he was going to be accused (or maybe had already been behind the scenes) of this incident when he was a minor. I even remember her making that specification and at the time thought it was really weird. Why eliminate his years before he was of legal age? It was odd and stood out.

      For some reason, they didn’t want the question asked of him at the time of the hearing. She must have wanted to ask him about sexual abuse (innuendo, you know) but to ask him if he EVER did it, that would mean that if/when Ford’s allegation came to light, the committee could have just said, “asked and answered.”

    • I suspect that the reason Feinstein won’t hand over the original letter is that there’s something in it that she knows (she almost admitted as much) is NOT TRUE. I wonder if in that letter Ford also named Gorsuch? He went to the same school as Kavanaugh and there was a rumor, sort of squelched, that she also accused him. Now what if it wasn’t at an earlier time, like when Gorsuch went through hearings, but was in this same recent letter? That would be something! Anyway, maybe Feinstein knows of an earlier allegation or maybe it’s in that letter, but for some reason she won’t hand it over. There’s a law that makes it criminal to knowingly use false statements in something like a committee hearing. That would apply to either Ford or Feinstein. Punishable by 5 years in prison! If something Ford said in the letter is knowingly false, if Feinstein knows it’s false, maybe that’s why she won’t pass over the original letter. The letter we’ve seen names neither PJ nor Leland, and yet it’s said that she accused both of them of being present at the party. Both deny it. Be that as it may, the letter I read had no place in it where those redactions would fit. So what IS the letter that’s in the media? Why would only a REDACTED version be given to the FBI and then passed to the WH (that’s what the media says happened)? Why wouldn’t they give the freaking FBI the full letter detailing her allegations? I hope somebody on the committee besides Feinstein has the full letter and quizzes Ford about it.

    • My gut feeling is that Feinstein didn’t question Kavanaugh because she KNEW it was bogus. She knew all along, but Ford also contacted the media and when Grassley set the vote, then the MEDIA pushed the story. They got the leaked letter (maybe from Ford or maybe from a sympathetic Feinstein staffer. It doesn’t matter.) The word was out and then Feinstein had no choice but to either go along (hoping that something “good” in her opinion might result) because her alternative would be to out Ford for whatever there was in that letter that made Feinstein hesitate to believe it. She’s hoping it will all work out by stopping Kavanaugh and she’s hoping she can skate out of this mess SHE’S now in.

    • What a joke. She’s demonstrated courage? NOBODY’S EVEN SEEN HER YET and she hasn’t testified to ANYTHING yet, much less under oath. We shall see Thursday whether she actually shows up and delivers the goods they hope she delivers. I’m thinking it’s not going to be easy for her, especially now that the other 4 people have all disputed her allegations, even her “long-time friend” Leland.

      • Oh, yeah. You notice that “protect Christine” crap? That, imho, foreshadows the excuse for not showing up or not showing up on time or giving a statement via her lawyers or maybe even, we could always hope, withdrawing the charges. Already her lawyers claim that she WILL appear, although they’re still concerned about her safety. NOW, if the government can protect President Trump, as much as the left hates him, then why can’t they protect this woman whom nobody has even yet seen?

  12. I’m just resting my eyes.

    • They had better believe it. If they CAVE on this or ALLOW his nomination to be derailed, then there WILL be hell to pay. If they don’t know this, then they’d better wise up FAST. All we can do is hope they have an ace in the hole. They REALLY DO SEEM intent on getting her there and under oath and in the spotlight (although it’s not been said for sure she’ll testify publicly, has it)? IF they have that ace in the hole, then they need her, at this point, to be there when they lay it down. Otherwise, it will be just their word and whatever it is, they’ll have to hope the media report it. I’ve been watching the front page of Yahoo! all day long and so far they haven’t reported, much less spotlighted, the bombshell that ALL FOUR of the others supposedly present DENY her allegation. Are the Republicans NOT looking at polls or even just reading the comments on these news articles about Ford. The comments are running majority AGAINST her story.

    • About that comment about “falsifying documents.” I do wonder, particularly because it’s reported that she did NOT write to Feinstein, but to that Eschoo woman. Now, if the letter wasn’t TO Feinstein, then why is the so-called text of the letter, as published in the fake news media, addressed specifically TO Feinstein?




    (….# missing the PHOTO of collie-ish dog SMOKING puffing away..)




    Kimberley Strassel clears up some discrepancies we noticed, too. She reveals that it was the WaPo that somehow knew the names Ford proferred as witnesses: PJ and Leland (usually a man’s name, huh, but in this case a female and WaPo reporter knew that). However, even though the therapist said 4 BOYS present and Ford said oh, the therapist was confused, there were 4 BOYS at the party but only two in the room–even though they KNEW this wasn’t true because Ford also said “Leland” was there, they didn’t report three boys and two girls, they reported 4 boys (to match therapist notes and first Ford story), and didn’t mention Leland. I don’t know what to make of this. Implication is that WaPo was helping her narrative along. Imho, she invented the other girl because she was making it up as she went along. People were saying, why would a girl go alone to a house with four boys who are two years older than herself, so she threw in Leland maybe hoping her long-time friend, her life-long friend, would back her up? What blows me away is that the friend, Leland, is, believe it or not, the ex-wife of Bob Beckel. Yes, that long-time DemoncRAT apologist who’s been on FOX News for years, hyping for Obama, Clinton, any DemoncRAT around. So she is, one would assume, a rabid DemoncRAT and maybe someone who also wouldn’t want Kavanaugh on the SCOTUS? But hand it to her, she did NOT lie to help her “long-time friend” or her Party, at the expense of fairness to a decent man and the good of the country and the WILL of the PEOPLE who, like it or not, elected Trump to make SCOTUS appointments. However, I did read elsewhere that AFTER telling the Judiciary Committee that she doesn’t remember the party and NEVER met Kavanaugh, she inexplicably was quoted in a media interview saying that she BELIEVES Ford! How is THAT possible?


    They should just keep his defense close to their chests. WHAT is gained by revealing this publicly? Kavanaugh has calendars pointing out when his family wasn’t even home that summer. All she’ll do is change the date she claims the incident happened. It’s not as if she gave a date in the first place. WHO leaked this? If he gave over the calendar and if there’s a resistance member anywhere on Grassley’s staff or anywhere else in the Judiciary Committee staff, then that person can and probably will leak the evidence to Ford’s people and she can adjust accordingly. It’s not as if she’s ALREADY GONE ON RECORD, UNDER OATH. No wonder they want HIM to testify first.

    • I just finished reading the article. YEP. It was LEAKED to the NY Times, allegedly by somebody working FOR Kavanaugh’s confirmation. So they “help” him by giving her a heads up so that she can suddenly remember, oh, wait! I was wrong. It was the summer of ’83, not ’82. Wait for it.

  16. September 19, 2018 Ms. Debra S. Katz Ms. Lisa J. Banks Katz ……Proxy Highlight

    4 days ago … Ms. Debra S. Katz. Ms. Lisa J. Banks. Katz, Marshall & Banks, LLP
    … That is why I have invited Dr. Ford to tell her story to the Senate and, if she …

  17. It really doesn’t matter who you “BE-lieve” .. (as they BLOW us the BS.)
    …. “belief” is not Truth.
    We can’t convict anyone without some proof,
    impartial witness, physical evidence, etc.

  18. Now Drudge is reporting that The New Yorker’s Ronan Farrow will break a story about ANOTHER WOMAN accusing Kavanaugh. Yet another “Never Trumper” and another whose friends say she never said anything about this to them. It’s not out yet. Just a rumor, but par for the course. OF COURSE there will be more bogus accusations. It will be endless. As one falls apart, as Ford’s seems to be doing, then another will jump up.

    Had they HELD THE VOTE ON THURSDAY, as promised, none of this would be happening. They fell for the ruse. They allowed Ford to play them like a fiddle. NOW more bogus claims will come forth. And the Republicans are once again snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Can they do anything more to depress the Republican vote in November? I, for one, am beginning to wonder WHY I BOTHER to vote, when it’s as if the DemoncRATS won, anyway.

    Where’s the WALL? Where are our SCOTUS picks? For those two reasons Trump is president. WHY are they throwing the win away and destroying out Republic instead of letting the president MAKE US GREAT AGAIN?

  19. Footage of Kavanaugh AccuSer’s Lawyer -at ‘Resist TruMp’ Rally..ha’

    POPCORN: It Turns Out Christine Blasey Ford’s Letter Wasn’t Sent to Dianne Feinstein After All!

    Liberal Legal Scholar Alan Dershowitz Damns Ford’s “Outrageous” Demands: ‘Every Civil Libertarian Should Be Outraged…It’s Insane’
    LOOMERED AGAIN! Watch Keith Ellison Runs Away From Loomer and Crowd of Domestic Abuse Survivors

    WSJ’s Kimberley Strassel Catches Leftist Rag Washington Post Red-Handed Withholding Female Witness Because Testimony Wouldn’t FIT Democrat Narrative to Smear Judge Kavanaugh With a 36-Year-Old False Allegation

    It’s an Invasion: Agents Apprehend 2,000 Migrants in 3 Days at Single Border Crossing

    Hillary’s Entire “Hit List” Just Went Public. You’ll Never Guess Who’s #1
    Ads by Revcontent

    Ford Crashes: All Four Witnesses ‘Against’ Kavanaugh

    Have No Knowledge of Supposed Incident !!!! “PARTY – GIRL ????

    • Another drunken woman with poor memory, but after a lot of soul searching with the help of DemoncRATS, another person who supposedly studied psychology remembers:

      “The allegation was also conveyed to Democratic senators by a civil-rights lawyer. For Ramirez, the sudden attention has been unwelcome, and prompted difficult choices. She was at first hesitant to speak publicly, partly because her memories contained gaps because she had been drinking at the time of the alleged incident. In her initial conversations with The New Yorker, she was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the alleged incident with certainty. After six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, Ramirez said that she felt confident enough of her recollections to say that she remembers Kavanaugh had exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party, thrust his penis in her face, and caused her to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away. Ramirez is now calling for the F.B.I. to investigate Kavanaugh’s role in the incident. “I would think an F.B.I. investigation would be warranted,” she said. …”

      Or was it, as Drudge first reported, a dildo? This is beyond insane. I told you that because people say you’d have to have a pattern of behavior, that they will come up with a pattern, by hook or by crook or by simple lying by Never Trumper insane, by-any-means-necessary social justice warriors. In addition, would this make him of “legal age” such that they can now say he also perjured himself when he told Hirono that he never sexually abused any woman? No longer a problem with him being a “juvenile.” So pat. So convenient. SO FULL OF BS. Grassley fell for this ploy hook, line, and sinker. He gave her the “6 days” to reshape her recollections and, like Ford, she wants the FBI to confirm her shaky, drunken reconstructed if not wholly invented “memories.”


      Doesn’t this remind you of how all the stories about Barry morphed, and morphed and morphed to fit everything that was brought up on the Web? Look how pat this story is. It has a time, location, details about his name, about him pulling up his pants! I’m surprised the woman admits she was so shit-faced she was on the floor and didn’t know what she was seeing. Oh, but she NOW remembers, after rehashing it with DemoncRATS for 6 days, that it was Brett Kavanaugh! Of course, all the people who knew him best say it never happened. But never mind. They will CHOOSE to believe the drunken people who claim it did happen. Pertinent: Right after Kavanaugh’s nomination, a group of (DemonCRAT progressive?) former Yale students began an email discussion. Yes, we can guess–about how to SMEAR HIM with “recollections” of drunken parties at Yale. Now we know why the delay.

      “In one e-mail that Krasberg received in September, the classmate who recalled hearing about the incident with Ramirez alluded to it and wrote that it “would qualify as a sexual assault,” he speculated, “if it’s true.”

      One of the male classmates who Ramirez said egged on Kavanaugh denied any memory of the party. “I don’t think Brett would flash himself to Debbie, or anyone, for that matter,” he said. Asked why he thought Ramirez was making the allegation, he responded, “I have no idea.” The other male classmate Ramirez said was involved in the incident commented, “I have zero recollection.”

      In a statement, two of those male classmates who Ramirez alleged were involved the incident, the wife of a third male student she said was involved, and three other classmates, Dino Ewing, Louisa Garry, and Dan Murphy, disputed Ramirez’s account of events: “We were the people closest to Brett Kavanaugh during his first year at Yale. He was a roommate to some of us, and we spent a great deal of time with him, including in the dorm where this incident allegedly took place. Some of us were also friends with Debbie Ramirez during and after her time at Yale. We can say with confidence that if the incident Debbie alleges ever occurred, we would have seen or heard about it—and we did not. The behavior she describes would be completely out of character for Brett. In addition, some of us knew Debbie long after Yale, and she never described this incident until Brett’s Supreme Court nomination was pending. Editors from the New Yorker contacted some of us because we are the people who would know the truth, and we told them that we never saw or heard about this.” …”

      Well, nobody cares what the people who knew him best say. All that matters is what they can get Never Trump DemoncRAT SJW’s to say, so they can smear and smear and smear and, they hope, wear him down like they try to wear down the POTUS with similar tactics. Do they care if they destroy his family? NOPE! They HOPE to upset his wife and kids. Know why? Then maybe he’ll capitulate and withdraw. They DO NOT CARE WHOM THEY HURT OR WHAT HARM IS DONE TO A WHITE MALE’S FAMILY, SO LONG AS THEY KEEP CONSERVATIVES FROM POWER.


    Check it out! OMG, this IS just like what we went through with Barry. Now that DiFi has a NEW girl to testify against Kavanaugh (a good, Catholic girl, albeit another drunk), she releases the text of the letter. It has two different fonts, as if somebody else’s name was replaced with Kavanaugh’s. Gorsuch’s? You can’t make this stuff up.

  21. Isn’t it funny? IF it’s true that Kavanaugh was a lush in high school and college and that, being drunk, he did things that he wouldn’t ordinarily do sober and so that DISQUALIFIES HIM, suddenly, from his job–wouldn’t the same hold true for Ms. Ford and Ms. Ramirez? Both admit to being drunk. Ford’s school was famous for drinking parties, promiscuity (picking up strange guys, especially younger ones), and general mayhem, all while underage. Ramirez admits to playing drinking games and getting so shit-faced that she didn’t even know what she was seeing or whose ding-a-ling (if not plastic) she was looking at. In any case, what do they do for a living? Can these women who were so irresponsible in high school and college be trusted in the positions they currently hold? If men’s character disqualifies them from certain positions, then why not women’s? Should Ford be teaching children? I don’t remember what Ramirez does now, but shouldn’t her boss consider what all this new information implies? Nobody held her down and poured the liquor down her throat. Doesn’t her participating in wild drinking games indicate something? I’m just asking. I mean, after all, these women probably purport to be feminists even though they seem to want everybody to treat them like delicate flowers who need protection and almost as if they’re CHILDREN.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s