TH3WH17ERABB17 -Q- Questions. White House Insider's postings -PART- -12-

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Did Mutkowski have any seats in the gallery behind Kavanaugh, like Feinstein had one where Milano sat?

a reply to: crankyoldman

If the dems wanna play the non confirmation game, repubs win by attrition.

2282

!!mG7VJxZNCI
27 Sep 2018 - 10:01:20 PM
Supreme Court Justice(s) to receive FULL TIME security detail(s) - (pending).
Q

Something odd with the Blasey Ford testimony today that may fit in somewhere:

Ford letting out that there was a health issue with Keyser today was really odd....she alluded to it being a mental health too.

And why did Keyser text Ford that she was sorry? Sounds like the entire conversation was done via text by the way she speaks about her.

I have a feeling Ford and Keyser are not as close as Ford thinks they are....possibly even knows Ford is lying and that is the reason she isnt doing anything other than saying she doesnt remember Kav at all.

I mean Keyser could have made her statement and it be true AND she could know exactly the party Ford was talking about and know it was someone else. She never stated that she had never been to a party like that with just Ford.

Her statement:

"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,"

So that actually leaves it open for her to know what happened and who it was....just clears her of saying it was Kav...possible Ford said what she did today to setup a "mental health" argument if Keyser comes out with truth or is called under oath.

Source: PDF

The Great Awakening?

I mentioned earlier that Scalia saw the Constitution as it was intended: Governs the actors involved in government (the public sector) and NOT everyone else (the private sector = you and me).

Kavanaugh is a Scalia fan. So besides the military tribunal issue, what might have triggered the snowflakes?

Kavanaugh: 3 Scalia Dissents Will Become Law of Land

1: A future Supreme Court will find that core executive powers being exercised by unelected officials is a threat to liberty, based on Scalia's dissent in Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654 (1988), Kavanaugh predicted. Morrison held that the independent counsel provisions in the 1978 Ethics in Government Act didn't violate the U.S. Constitution's separation of powers principles.

The act—which allowed appointment of independent counsel to investigate government officials—wasn't a wolf in sheep's clothing, Scalia said. Rather, “this wolf comes as a wolf,” he said. The act allowed the attorney general to remove independent counsel for “good cause,” Scalia said.

2: Kavanaugh also predicted that a future court will prohibit the military detention of U.S. citizens as enemy combatants, based on Scalia's dissent in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (2004).

3: Scalia's rejection of “Auer deference”—in which agencies' interpretations of their own regulations receive judicial deference—will also become the law of the land, Kavanaugh predicted.

2 is huge. The government went to court under shrub and zero to defend the right to imprison anyone they wanted at anytime because the wanted the right to do it... because terrorism, terrorism something blah blah blah. This mattered to them but is beyond Unconstitutional, it goes against the Magna Carta and common sense.

3. All but eliminates SES and a whole cast of horrific "do it because I said to do it" systems we have from the Fed to the locals.

If Scalia needed to die we can see why the hate for BK.

In light of today's events, lets look at Scalia own DiFi on the matter of public law vs. private law. Might be different in China I don't know...

Scalia Owns DiFi

Lots of confirmed yes vote commitments tonight.

Brett's gonna get sixty votes.

I first knew the Democrats were actually in a state of total defeat after the election, at the organized protests in NYC. Someone posted a pic of 100s and 100s of AntiTrump signs sitting around unused, assembled all-ready...but there were no takers.

Nothing has changed in almost 2 years.

I agree with people who suspect Trump is in no way counting on Kavanaugh. "Q" knows well in advance the Dem's trump card; a baseless sex allegation. It's a sublime combo of poetic justice and irony that there is another candidate waiting who is "proofed" against such a predictable attack. Art of War...let the enemy exhaust itself on a non-critical target.

I guess the general hysteria and the proceedings themselves will have the (un)intended of affecting the midterm election's middle-of-the-road voters, who are likely repulsed by it all.

We're gonna get a lot of mileage out of this picture.

originally posted by: Aallanon
a reply to: crankyoldman

Feinstein looks rail thin

It's probably from all the flying she does.

originally posted by: dashen
Fascinating.
One of my burner phones which has no SIM card or phone number or service just received an Amber Alert.
I imagine the presidential emergency alert system would also send out to any device whether connected or not as well?

Was the wireless on?

a reply to: TomLawless

link?

twitter.com...

Wow. 35 mil. For only the one case! There are plenty more where this one came from.

Not just in this denomination either...

originally posted by: TomLawless
Lots of confirmed yes vote commitments tonight.

Brett's gonna get sixty votes.

Is he going to get through the judicial committee in the morning?

a reply to: crankyoldman

Excellent Cranky. Thank you for the clarifications.

Q

Errrrg why would they need this???

...Q..., please point us in the direction to get clarity on what the Supremes will be doing that would require this. They do not need this for rulings on interstate commerce (unless it's human trafficking) or matters of EPA regs on disposal of used toilet paper.

What are they going to be asked to do that will require security detail.

Cranky rant over.

originally posted by: crankyoldman

originally posted by: tiredoflooking
Wowzers.

BK shakes the world with this statement.

Dems are going to be awfully sorry if he gets in.

And he should.

TOL, agree. He said everything that one would want to say in the right way. The room was his, he owned it.

Difi's question was hopeless and the dark halo around her was very obvious.

Looks like the dems went all in, when he's voted in, then D5, as he will never vote with them on a single thing ever, including keeping them out of military tribunals.

Is it just me? Or does Lindsey seem to have just a touch of Stockholm Syndrome, since his handler/owner, bit the big one?

a reply to: crankyoldman

Cranky check out this twitter thread that another user linked to earlier. This might give some idea.

twitter.com...

a reply to: tiredoflooking
Jehovah's Witnesses don't treasure things "of this world". Handing over $35 million shouldn't mean much at all to the leadership.