Another Ford inconsistency

According to Ford's therapist's notes Ford said she was assaulted in the mid 80s. But that wouldn't work so she now says that she was assaulted in the early 80s.

Interestingly in the statement she was polygraphed about she changed early 80s to 80s.

Interestingly while Ford was willing to share her therapists notes with the Washington Post she's not willing to share them with Congress.

Democrat leaders hate women

While Democrat leaders are constantly declaring that its Republicans who want to oppress women the truth is the exact opposite.

It's Democrats who support abortion so that women can be used as sex objects without the men who use them having to be afraid that they might have to pay child support.

It's Democrats who viciously attacked all the women who Bill Clinton harassed, assaulted, and even raped.

It's Democrats who say that women who stay at home and raise children are losers.

It's Democrats who support our hedonistic society in which men expect sex from women even though the men are unwilling to commit to the woman. Democrats endorse the idea of sex without love which goes against what most women want.

Democrats in Hollywood have admitted knowing about sexual predator Weinstein for ages and doing nothing about it.

Democrats want Roman Polanski to avoid jail time for having raped a 13 year old girl.

Democrats believe Woody Allen and reject the woman, who is effectively his step daughter, who says that he molested her when she was seven years old.

Democrats are the ones who demand that women be interested in technical jobs even though women generally speaking aren't.  Democrats are essentially demanding that women have the same job interests as men even if that's not what real women want.

But what about Democrats support for the #MeToo movement?  It's important to note that the #MeToo movement was started as a way to attack Trump.  The only reason the Democrats supported it after years of attacking all the women who have accused Democrats of horrible behavior is that they saw a way to attack Trump.

If you doubt that remember that the #FakeNews meme was similarly started by Democrats to attack the "lies" being told by Trump and the conservative media.  But given that the real liars were the large swaths of the media who are nothing more than Democrat propagandists it boomeranged on the Democrats.  Whereupon they immediately began condemning it.

The Democrats thought they could offer up Weinstein, who's star was already fading, and thereby attack Trump.  They were even willing to sacrifice Al Frankan in order to flip Jeff Sessions senate seat.  But as time went on and more and more Democrats were shown to be serial abusers of women Democrats began to realize, as they had with the #FakeNews meme, that their weapon was boomeranging on them.

But they were stuck. Even with the media support they couldn't say that some women lie about rape even though there are plenty of recent examples of just that.

But they decided to make the best of a bad situation and go all out to destroy Kavanaugh while simultaneously destroying the credibility of women.

Ford and Ramirez's claims have several things in common; they both lack details that would allow Kavanaugh to defend himself and all the people they cite as being able to support their claims deny them instead.

Ford and Ramirez are poster women for what a false claim looks like.  The fact that Ford came across as credible simply means that she's a good actress, or that she honestly believes in things that aren't true, is largely negated by her admission, under oath, that she lied to Congress and the people about her fear of flying.  If she was willing to lie about that in order to look better and to delay Kavanaugh's confirmation why wouldn't she be willing to lie about other things?

Ford, a Democrat party activist, has a huge reason to lie; if Kavanaugh makes it onto the Supreme Court the left will no longer be able to impose their will via judicial fiat and will have to use the Democratic process. Given that Democrat positions are opposed by the majority of the country, most Democrat voters don't know what Democrats really stand for because of the #FakeNews media, the reversion of the Supreme Court to its Constitutional role is an existential crisis for the Democrats.

And given the history of the accolades and benefits given to Anita Hill Ford has every reason to believe that she's going to profit mightily from her unsubstantiated and, in fact, refuted claims.

The average American watching the Democrats realize that first even Ford doesn't claim she was raped and her story is dubious at best.  But by acting as though Ford has perfect credibility Democrats are working to convince us that women can't really be trusted without the Democrats actually saying that.

Can anyone doubt that the next time some Democrat is accused of sexual assault or harassment that a lot of people will think back to Ford's sketchy claims and wonder if the woman is lying?

But that's actually a plus for Democrats since they are the party of true sexual predators.

Ford admits to being a liar

Ford has admitted that she lied to Congress and to we the people about being afraid of flying.

She could have just said she wasn't ready to testify but that would have made her look bad so instead she made up a bald faced lie that she knew would be exposed with just a little investigation given that she's flown to the East Coast to take her polygraph test.

This tells us that she's willing to lie to us and to Congress if it furthers her objectives.  Given that we know she strongly opposes Kavanaugh for political reasons it is in her interest to keep him off the Supreme Court.  Hence we have every reason to believe that she'd be willing to lie about her allegations even though she knew that the people she cited as "witnesses" all deny her claims; including a good friend of hers.

But she passed a polygraph test her supporters will say.

The poly test she took was worse than useless. Aside from the fact that the reason that courts reject polygraph results is because they're unreliable she wasn't really questioned about her account.

Even worse the person who administered the polygraph said that he assumed from the start she was telling the truth. That's a very important admission because polygraphs don't have a light that turns red when someone is lying. Rather the examiner has to compare a person's physiological responses to baseline results to decide if the person is under stress.  Note that people can be under stress even when they're not lying and some people can not be under stress when they are lying--that's why polygraphs aren't lie detectors.  Given that the assessment of whether or not a person is being truthful is highly subjective--another reason that the test is unreliable-- the fact that the person making those assessments had already decided that she wasn't lying renders any results from that test meaningless.

So no the friendly polygraph test paid for by some unknown entity, which is probably a highly biased Democrat, doesn't prove that Ford isn't lying.  But her admission that she did lie to us and Congress about her reason for not testifying expeditiously proves that she's a liar.

Another problem with her lying is that it takes advantage of and demeans people with a real psychological problem.  Can you imagine if she'd said she couldn't testify because she had cancer or MS?  Pretending to have a serious health problem that you don't have is pretty much universally considered a sign of bad character.  She could have told the truth, that she just wanted to drag the process out, but given that she chose to lie she could have said she had a cold.  Instead she lied about having a condition that afflicts many Americans and which significantly impacts their lives.

While people are saying that her testimony sounded credible the reality is that she admitted to being a cool calm collected liar under oath.  If she could convincingly tell the world she was afraid of flying she obviously has what it takes to convincingly tell the world that her story was true.

Keep in mind that if she backs off from her claims now she'd be shredded by the left but if she sticks with her claims lucrative book deals and university positions will be hers.  Hence even if she's lying it  will work out much better for her if she keeps lying than if she admits to lying.

What can the FBI investigate?

Ford has been very careful to not remember anything that would allow Kavanaugh to show that he wasn't at the alleged party. Every witness she cited has stated, under oath, that what she described didn't happen.

So what will the FBI investigate? Are they going to go house to house and ask the current residents if there was a party at the house when the parents were gone 36 years ago?  They can ask the people who have already sworn under oath if they are going to admit to perjury. But other than that there's really nothing they can investigate.

Ramirez is on record as being unsure of her claim and refusing to speak under oath. The FBI can't compel her to talk. Further as with Ford the people she cites as witnesses have all said that her story is incorrect.

Swetnick is clearly a loon but if she tells her story under oath she'll be liable for both civil and criminal prosecution for aiding and abetting gang rapes.  Given that she too has failed to provide any corroborating details, that her age is inconsistent with her story, and that her story has a multitude of internal contradictions she could never be a credible witness.

The very fact that all the Democrat accusers, and they're all hard core Democrats, have had to be very very light on details to avoid the chance that Kavanaugh could say something like "I couldn't have been there me and my family were on vacation that weekend" means that there is nothing for the FBI to investigate.

If a woman went to the FBI and said she'd been raped but she couldn't remember where or when but she was sure it was Obama we know the FBI would politely refer her to her local police not treat her claim seriously.

We're living in Iran

In Iran there is a functioning democracy with elections and a government that can do what the people want.  However there is also a group of mad mullah's who can override that government and insure that what the theocrats want is done and what the people want is ignored.

We have the same situation here in America.  No matter what the people want, as expressed by their votes, the Supreme Court can ignore them and impose what the judges want on the people.

For example because the rich lawyers who rule us from their lofty perches on the Supreme Court felt that abortion should be legal for any reason at any time during pregnancy they made it so even though that overturned the laws of all 50 states.

Similarly even though uber blue state California, and 50,000,000 Americans overall, had voted to keep the millennia old definition of marriage the Court in it's august wisdom redefined marriage to cater to the 2% of Americans who are gay.

We haven't been a free people since the 1960s when the Supreme Court decided that it wasn't constrained to interpreting the law as the law was intended by those who wrote and ratified it.  Instead a majority of the Court has dishonestly decided that they can determine what our laws should be and then they impose their belief on us under the guise of interpreting the "living" Constitution.

People often talk about conservative and liberal judges but that's the wrong terminology. There are only honest and dishonest judges.  Honest judges interpret the law in light of what it actually says and  what the intent of those who passed it was while dishonest judges decide what the law should be and then mash together some words to transform what the law really is into what they want it to be.

For example there is no right to privacy in the Constitution; that's something that the dishonest judges made up.  But even if there were a right to personal privacy it can't give a woman the right to kill her children.

The Democrats are doing anything to stop Kavanaugh for the same reason that the mad mullah's running Iran will do anything to stay in power; without dishonest judges on the Supreme Court to impose their agenda on the people Democrats won't be able to force the people to do what the Democrats want.

The only example of Democrats actually getting people to support their agenda was the institution of the welfare state.  Coddling criminals, legalizing pornography, legalizing abortion for any reason at any point in a pregnancy, and redefining marriage, to name a few, were all imposed on the people. Hence it's not surprising that Democrats will tell any lie in order to ensure that the Court stays dishonest.

That's why the same Democrats who told us that Bill Clinton raping a woman when he was Attorney General of Arkansas didn't matter are now telling us that an uncorroborated, refuted, account of Kavanaugh attacking, but not raping, a woman when he was 17 is enough to keep him off the Supreme Court.

But we the people need to hold the Democrats responsible for the destruction of our Republic and we need to support Kavanaugh so that the Democrats will have to convince the people of the wisdom of Democrat policy instead of just relying on the Supreme Court to force Americans to dance to the Democrats tune.

The many horrible problems with Swetnick's claims against Kavanaugh

One thing we know for sure about the latest accusation against Kavanaugh is that the accuser, Julie Swetnick, is a monstrously evil person.

That sound harsh but it’s true.  If she’s lying then she’s destroying the credibility of woman who have really been raped but if she’s telling the truth she’s admitting to knowing about multiple gang rapes of other women and saying and doing nothing to stop them.

It’s one thing to say that a woman who has been raped might not come forward out of a totally unjustified feeling of shame but it’s quite another to say that it’s ok for a woman who knows that her friends are being gang raped to do nothing; she didn’t call the police, she didn’t tell her parents, she didn’t do anything to help those rape victims at any point in time until her claims became useful to attack a good man who won’t legislate from the bench. According to her claims she ignored the gang rapes of multiple women she knew at multiple parties.  If true that makes her a gender traitor of the first order.

Interestingly she claims no first-hand knowledge of Kavanaughs participation.  She says that he spiked the punch.  Last I heard underage teenagers drinking alchohol when they weren’t supposed to is not 100% correlated with rape. She says that they must have used Quaaludes or something but if that were the case everyone who drank the punch would have been out of it; something she doesn’t mention as being the case. For her story to be true all the girls, and the guys, at the party except the target would have had to know not to drink the punch which in turn would make them all accomplices in the gang rape. That’s hard to believe.

If Kavanaugh was buying large quantities of Quaaludes wouldn’t one of the six background checks that he’s gone through have found some indication of it? After all we had lots of evidence that Obama was using drugs in high school.

Further she’s just guessing that she was drugged since from what we hear about these things when women are drugged with powerful medications they don’t often remember what happened but Swetnick says her memory is fine. She says she must have been drugged because she didn’t fight back that could be the result of too much drinking or it could just be a lie.

Finally if she actually saw Kavanaugh putting drugs in the punch why did she drink it?  Either she saw him doing it at a party that occurred before she was raped in which case she wouldn’t have drunk it at the party she was raped at or she didn’t see him do it until after the party she was raped at which means that after being gang raped by a group of guys she went back to another party held by those same guys where she saw Kavanauh put Quaaludes in the punch.

She admits she wasn’t raped or even assaulted by him but she says she saw him in a line waiting to go into a room to rape a girl.  First note that that means that Swetnick knew a girl was being raped in a room and she did absolutely nothing to stop it.  But second in most houses there aren’t large waiting areas where lines to rape women can form.  If there were more than a few people at the party, which must be the case for gang rapes to be common, then for all Swetnick knew he was just talking to someone near the line because the house was crowded.  She doesn’t say that she saw him enter the room or that the alleged victim told her that Kavanaugh had assaulted her.

Further her claims that Kavanaugh knew about the rapes depends on everyone at all these parties knowing because she’s essentially claiming that his mere presence at these parties means he must have known. But everyone at these parties knew about the gang rapes raises huge problems with Swetnick’s claims.

First if all the girls at the parties knew there were gang rapes why did they keep going to the parties?  A moral degenerate like Avenatti might think that all women like being raped but the reality is few if any teenage girls look forward to being gang raped.  If not all the girls knew how come Swetnick knew?  If Swetnick knew that other girls didn’t know why didn’t she warn them?

Second why have none of the victims or the women who knew about the rapes, and there must have been tens of women with knowledge, come forth?  All we have is Swetnick who kept silent  until after the Kavanaugh hearings were over.

Third why did Swetnick keep going to parties where she knew gang rapes were occurring?  She had to attend at least two, the one where she was raped and the one where she allegedly saw Kavanaugh in line.  Is it more credible to think that Swetnick is lying or that she is such an insane person that after attending a party where one of her friends was gang raped she went to another party involving the same people?

For Swetnick’s claims to be true a lot of women must have known that Kavanaugh was a serial gang rapist. Those women would have talked to other women, “stay away from Kavanaugh”, but instead of seeing that we’ve seen sixty five women who knew him in high school say he was a gentleman. Given the sizes of the schools involved how likely is it that the large number of women who, according to Swetnick, must have know about Kavanaughs dark side wouldn’t have mentioned it to any of those sixty five women? 

Another problem with Swetnick's account is that based on her age she'd have been in college at the time these parties supposedly occurred. A college woman showing up at teen parties would have been something people would have remembered yet the people who would have been going to these parties deny knowing Swetnick.

There is a claim by someone who says they were in a relationship with Swetnick that she threatened him and his family, including his baby, after he broke up with her.  He apparently started the process to get a restraining order on her.  That doesn't mean that she must be lying about Kavanaugh but it's a good reason to question her veracity.

Avenatti is demanding an immediate FBI investigation. Why? The FBI has no jurisdiction and the statute of limitations has run out.  If Swetnick wanted justice she’s had decades to file a police complaint. At the very least we know that it’s not the gang rapes that really bother Swetnick, because if they did she’d have gone public long ago, but the idea that a Judge who won’t impose the leftist agenda on Americans could end judicial tyranny is what bothers her.

Avenatti tells us that because Swetnick has had security clearances we should trust her. The reason people with security clearances are usually trustworthy is that they’ve gone through background investigations. But Avenatti tells us that the six very detailed background investigations Kavanaugh has gone through say nothing about Kavanaugh being trustworthy so why would the far less intense scrutiny Swetnick has gone through prove that she’s not lying?

Further the two previous accusers were at least investigated by the press. True the second accuser’s story was so flawed that even the New York Times wouldn’t publish it but at least the New Yorker tried to talk to people who could corroborate her story.  Swetnick’s claim has been launched solely on the basis of Avenatti’s reliability and honesty.

We know that Avenatti is a liar, a tax cheat, and a lawyer. We also know he owes $10,000,000 to a fellow lawyer and that he’s failed to make the tax payments he promised to which indicates he is in desperate need of money.  On top of all that Avenatti has indicated he’s going to run for President in 2020 as a Democrat.
Combining the fact that if Swetnick is not making this all up she’s someone who was complicit in multiple gang rapes with the obvious dishonesty of Avenatti and toss in the bizarrely convenient timing, Avenatti came up with this “witness” just as the stories of the first two “victims” were falling apart, and it’s clear that this is just another left wing lie.

Swetnick, the newest accuser of Kavanaugh, is a very bad person

Either she's lying and thereby discrediting women who have really been raped or because she says she attended multiple parties where she knew women were being gang raped and did nothing she's monstrously evil.

Knowing that your friends are being raped and doing nothing is not like being raped yourself and not coming forward.  Essentially if Swetnick is not lying then she's an accomplice in serial gang rapes.

Note that even if she's not lying nothing she says shows any direct evidence of Kavanaugh himself raping anyone.  Her claim is that she saw him in line but in a small house crowded with partiers his being near does not mean he was in the line. But note that what Swetnick is saying is that she new one of her friends was being gang raped in a room and she did nothing about it.  How likely is that?

It's a lie; there are no statements corroborating Ford's claims about Kavanaugh

While the #FakeNews media will probably lie about it the release of statements that Ford's lawyers say corroborate her claims do nothing of the sort.

All four of these statements say nothing more than that decades after the event Ford talked to these people about the supposed event.

First a corroboration is something that a witness provides.  Yet we know that every single witness identified by Ford, including a life long female friend, have denied her claims.  Women who have gone to prison for lying about being attacked have also talked to other people about being attacked.  Statements by others saying that a woman who is making a claim talked about making a claim have no more weight than her basic claim.

Even more importantly however all of these statements are about conversations that occurred after the possibility of Kavanaugh being on the Supreme Court was raised back in 2012.

For decades Ford never mentioned the alleged event but then all of a sudden when Kavanaugh might get on the Supreme Court Ford started talking.  That's fully consistent with Ford lying in order to keep the Supreme Court a servant of the left but very inconsistent with a real victim.

Remember Ford is a professor of psychology. As part of her training she'd been psychoanalyzed.  But she didn't mention this alleged life altering event during those sessions. Further as a psychologist it would make sense that she'd use a professional to help her get over the trauma she claims she suffered.  Yet she herself says that she never reached out for help.

Either she's a psychologist who doesn't believe in psychology or she's not being entirely honest.

When the #FakeNews media and the Democrats howl about these statements remember they are the same people who said that Juanita Broderick's claim that Bill Clinton raped her, supported by the fact that she discussed the rape with her friends not decades after the event but at the time the rape occurred, was irrelevant.

That's right; statements made by a victim at the time of the assault mean nothing to the Democrats when they involve Bill Clinton but statements made by the "victim" decades after the alleged event when the "victim" had a strong political motivation to lie do.

It's sexual predators who support abortion not faithful family men like Kavanaugh

Democrat Senator Hirono has said she believes the uncorroborated and thoroughly discredited charges against Kavanaugh because he opposes abortion.

But it's fairly obvious if you think about it that it's sexual predators like Bill Clinton who need abortion to be legal. After all men who have casual and often only quasi consensual sex need to ensure that no baby results. Hence Kavanaugh's opposition to abortion is actually evidence he's not likely to be someone who assaults women.

Time for real women to speak out

In their desperate attempt to retain an activist Supreme Court which will impose on Americans the leftist agenda Democrats can't get passed as law, ranging for abortion for any reason at any time in a pregnancy to redefining marriage and overturning the votes of 55,000,000 Americans, Democrats are setting a precedent that every wife and mother should be worried about.

If the Democrats succeed in rejecting Kavanaugh based on the belief that all that matters is that there is an accusation even if there is no supporting evidence and even if there is a lot of evidence that goes against the claim every husband and every son could have their lives ruined by one young impetuous woman lying.

We know that women lie.  We've seen the Duke Lacrosse rape accusations by a stripper that even the other stripper who was at the party said didn't happen and which were eventually shown to be false. We've seen the Rolling Stone magazine having to pay millions of dollars to a fraternity because it ran an article by a woman who falsely claimed she'd been gang raped there.  We know that the university that believe mattress girls claims had to apologize to the man she falsely accused of raping her.

These false accusations had horrible impacts on innocent people.  In one extremely odious case a young girl came home late and she didn't want to be punished so she lied about being kidnapped. She had spotted a car with a man in it and provided his license plate number. The man was arrested, lost his job and had his family leave him.  At trial six months later the girl admitted to lying.

If the Democrats succeed mothers and wives will see the men they loved destroyed even though they are completely innocent based on the mere claim by a coworker who doesn't like them or a jilted girlfriend seeking revenge.

That doesn't mean of course that many women aren't assaulted or that we should instantly assume that all women are lying but it does mean that simply assuming that women never lie and that men always do is deeply unjust.

The Democrats have a never ending supply of liars

Within a day of Ford's accusations against Kavanaugh having been fully discredited by one of her life long friends the Democrats have found another "victim".

This new victim is also contradicted by the people she said were present when Kavanaugh supposedly exposed himself to her in college.

Once again we're told that the woman was immensely traumatized but didn't think about it for decades until it became convenient to attack an honest judge.

Further she didn't think Kavanaugh was involved or that it was that bad until she spent 6 days with a Democrat attorney.  Now she says she was horrified and it was awful.

Excuse me but if you need 6 days to figure out that someone exposed themselves to you odds are you're either hallucinating or lying.

Given that the Democrats are comfortable with Antifa using violence to shut up speech they don't like  and the generally low moral standards of Democrats who think murdering babies is a great thing the reality is that there will be plenty of women who will be willing to lie through their teeth to ensure that the Left can impose all the things they can't impose through the legislative process on the people via judicial fiats.

Further it's insane that a party that told us it didn't matter that their president had been accused of rape to go bonkers about Kavanaugh supposedly exposing himself to some woman.  A very drunken woman according to the "victim".

It's time to end this farce.

If these charges were credible they would have come up prior to or during the hearings. That they've waited to the last minute shows that the Democrats know that given time these stories will be debunked; after all Ford's story was debunked within a week.

Grassley should call out the Democrats for the liars they are and just hold the vote.  If the squishy Republicans don't support that we can just give up hope because no matter who Trump nominates the Left will find people who will lie about them.

And nominating a woman won't help. Look how the much more civilized Democrats went after Judge Thomas even though he was Black. Democrat politicians will eschew nothing if it will get them power.

Should I say that Judge Ginsberg assaulted me?

As Christine Blasey Ford's story falls apart leftists are moving the goal posts again.

All four of the people, including a left wing long time female friend of Fords, who Ford says were at the party have said no such party ever occurred.  Unlike Ford all of them have provided sworn testimony under penalty of criminal sanctions.

That combined with Ford's changing story--four boys attacking her became four boys at the party which became 3 boys and a girl other than Ford at the party-- and lack of details--the alleged attack occurred somewhere in a very large geographic area at sometime over a span of more than a year-- pretty much destroys any credibility that Christine Blasey Ford had.

But the left is trying to salvage this mess by creating two new talking points.

The first, pushed by a female Democrat Senator Hirono from Hawaii, is that any man who opposes abortion should be assumed to be a sexual attacker until proven otherwise.  Essentially she's making the amazingly fascist and sexist claim that we should believe any woman accuses a man whose politics Hirono doesn't agree with.

Given that it took multiple credible accusations of sexual offenses before Democrats were willing to hold people who supported abortion to task, such as Weinstein, at fault it's clear that this is nothing more than the typical Democrat belief in one set of rules for Democrats and another for their political opponents.

The second point is that the mere existence of an accusation no matter how unsupported it is should disqualify someone from being on the Supreme Court.  This is even more amazing given that the same leftists who are pushing this still think that Bill Clinton is an ok guy even though he has been credibly accused of rape.  Given that at this very moment the same Democrats who are espousing this insanity are dutifully ignoring the credible claims against DNC vice chairman Keith Ellison it's clear this is a very dishonest attempt to defeat Kavanaugh.

However if we accept the second concept as the left wants us to it would mean that if I accused Judge Ginsburg of sexually assaulting me at some time and place that I can't remember she should immediately step down from the Court even if all the people I said were aware of the event said I was lying.

Unlike leftists I'm not going to lie to hurt my political opponents but this example shows how absurd the second concept is. The Left only supports it in the Kavanaugh case and will immediately jettison it when the accused is a Democrat. In fact they have already refused to do what they say should be done in the case of Keith Ellison.

More evidence of Ford's dishonesty

For the entire history of modern law the accuser speaks first and the accused speaks second.

That's because having the accused speak first makes no sense unless you presume that the accused is guilty.  After all if the accused is not guilty what can they say before the accuser makes their accusations?

Now in the case of Kavanaugh people may think that he can respond to what Ford has already said. The problem is that what Ford has said to date is not under oath and we don't know what new things she might say when testifying under oath.

In any case there is no basis for letting the accuser make her claims without the accused being able to refute them; for Ford to demand otherwise is dishonest.

The demands for security are similarly absurd.  Republican Congressman Steve Scalise was nearly killed by a Bernie supporter yet Steve shows up in Congress every day.  There is absolutely no honest reason that Ford could think that she wouldn't be safe in the Capitol.

Then there's the claims that she's not ready to testify. She was ready to anonymously smear Kavanaugh months ago so how can she not be ready to testify now?

Finally when a woman is really raped she has to confront her rapist in court.  But apparently Ford thinks she's above that and that the ideas of innocent until proven guilty and due process only apply to leftists.

Leftist's view themselves as gods

A key feature of a god is that they can convert their will into reality.  While this is most profoundly expressed in the one True God Jesus Christ it can be seen in other deities.

We see the left claiming that same ability on multiple issues.

For example we're told that because Christine Blasey Ford says that she was raped she was raped.  There is no need for corroboration and men who contradict her are by definition wrong.

Another example are the transgendered.  The Left tells us that if a man says he's a woman he is a woman.  The man's will actually alters his biologically defined identity.

Given that leftists constantly proclaim that they know more than the rest of us and that they should have the power to run every aspect of our lives the left's tendency to confuse themselves with gods is not entirely surprising.

Attempted Rape? Probably not.

The media is acting as though it's a given that if Christine Blasey Ford isn't mistaken or lying that Kavanaugh was trying to rape her but that's far from clear based on what Christine Blasey Ford has said.

What rapist have you heard of that when the intended victim breaks free for a moment but is still just a foot or two away doesn't pursue her? According to Christine Blasey Ford she got off the bed and fled to the bathroom. She makes no mention of Kavanaugh pursuing her.

On the other hand if her attacker, assuming there was one, was a drunk 17 year old who thought she was interested in him and who approached her far too aggressively his not pursuing her makes sense; it finally got through his drunken brain that she wasn't interested.

His trying to stop her screaming could have been nothing more than panic; he thought she was interested and he didn't want to be embarrassed by having his stupid advance called out.

This doesn't prove that the alleged--have you noticed that the same media who calls criminals caught in the act "alleged perpetrators" is acting as though Kavanaugh has been convicted in a court of law?--attack wasn't an attempted rape but it points out that Christine Blasey Ford's claim that it was an attempted rape is based solely on her perception not on facts like his pulling off his pants after he'd ripped off her clothes.

She may be right but then she says she was traumatized so her judgement may not have been the best.

Of course even if it was just a drunken pass rather than attempted rape it's not a good thing but given that the Democrats are perfectly comfortable with Democrat Senator Corey Booker having admitted to grabbing a woman without her permission,Democrat Senator Sherrod Brown being physically violent with his wife, or Democrat Senator Tom Carper who admits to giving his wife a black eye it's unclear on what basis they're going to use a drunken, never repeated, pass decades ago to say that Kavanaugh is unfit.

The continual stalling by Christine Blasey Ford indicates that she doesn't think she is credible. She's had over a month to prepare but she's still claiming she's such a wilting flower that she can't testify; though she had no problem condemning Kavanaugh in the WaPo.

All Christine Blasey Ford's is doing is discrediting women who have really been raped.

Even the Democrats don't believe that Christine Blasey Ford is credible

We know for certain that Democrats believe that the charges against Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey Ford aren’t credible.  Because if Democrats thought the charges were credible they would have sprung them on him on the first day of the hearings in order to make Trump look like a fool. But even if the charges aren’t credible it will take time to debunk them; hence revealing them after the hearings are over buys more time.

We know for certain that Ford is not a good person.  Because good people don’t anonymously, but publicly, accuse other people of things like rape. If she was sincere in trying to prevent someone who she honestly thought had assaulted her from being on the Supreme Court without making her claims public then she should have either told Kavanaugh in private to give him a chance to withdraw, or told the Republicans so that they would tell Kavanaugh to withdraw. Instead she intentionally hurt him and his family by making claims that it would be impossible for him to refute.

We know for certain that Ford is a far left anti-Trump person. That’s why her social media were all removedbefore she announced who she was.  We know she gave money to leftist politicians.

We know for certain that the holes in Ford’s “memories” are optimally designed to make her accusation uncheckable.  The lack of a specific date means that it’s impossible for Kavanaugh to show that he wasn’t at the event in question for example. If Ford specified a date then Kavanaugh could show that he was out of town or that he was at some other event. But without a date Kavanaugh can’t do that since it’s impossible to show that he was never near a house where no parents were present.

We know for certain that Ford has a basis for a personal vendetta against Kavanaugh since his mother ruled against Ford’s parents in a court case.  As an aside ask yourself how likely it is that Kavanaugh would assault Ford and then years later her parents would happen to draw his mom as a judge in their case?  On the other hand the fact that Kavanaugh's mother ruled against her parents gives Ford a motive to lie.

We know for certain that lie detector tests are not reliable especially when they’re administered by people who are paid by the person being tested.  That’s why lie detector results aren’t admissible in court; essentially polygraphs are useful for scaring the person into telling the truth but not useful for actually finding out what the truth is. But if the polygrapher is being paid by Ford he’s hardly likely to be eager to show that Ford is a liar.

We know for certain that the two men who Ford has accused have both categorically denied that anything remotely like what Ford claims to have happened ever happened. This is not a case of “he said she said” but “he said, he said, she said”.  This smacks of the Sharia law concept that a woman’s testimony isn’t as significant as a man’s though in this circumstance the left has reversed the concept.  Essentially what we’re being told is that no matter how many men say that Ford is wrong it doesn’t matter because Ford would never lie because she’s a woman.  But we know that women lie about sexual assault. 

We know for sure that the third person that Ford has identified, who she says was not involved in any wrong doing, also denies her claims. This is very significant because according to her he has no reason to lie because she says he didn't do anything wrong.

We know for certain that Ford mentioned this “horrible” event to no one for decades.  She says she didn’t mention it to her mom because she didn’t want her mom to know that she’d been at a party where kids were drinking—proving by the way that she is willing to lie if it advances what she perceives as her best interests.  But what about her friends or cousins or anyone her own age?  Why was she silent about what she is now claiming was a life altering event?

We know for certain that her therapist’s notes contradict her story.  She says that the therapist got it wrong but what’s more likely that a dispassionate observer whose career depends on accurate notes wrote down something significantly wrong or that Ford needs to desperately change the narrative to attack a judge whose judicial philosophy she hates? What the left is saying is that any evidence that goes against Ford’s narrative is by definition incorrect. Talk about a sweet deal.  Too bad the left doesn’t extend that belief to Trump’s comments on collusion.

It’s quite likely that Ford had a good motivation to make up the story.  Think about it she and her husband were in couples counselling when it first came up. Nothing wrong with that but it means that they were having fairly serious problems in their relationship. If those problems involved her having difficulty relating to men which sounds better; she has difficulty relating to men because she has a problem or because four rich boys who became powerful men in Washington tried to rape her?  The fact that she described the boys as going to a prestigious school and having become important is somewhat odd; does it matter if the person who assaulted you became important or is it true that all rapists are horrible scum no matter how they end up in life?  Unless of course the story is made up and by claiming to have been assaulted by “important” people it made her look more important.

How do Ford’s accusations look in the context of recent history?

She’s made an unsubstantiated claim of a drunken 17 year old doing something that 65 other women who knew him at the time said was completely out of character for him and which he has never done again.  Given that Ford doesn’t claim that she was raped—since she lacks the ability to read minds her saying that Kavanaugh attempted to rape her is just supposition-- or that she was physically harmed, that while the event was “traumatic” it wasn’t traumatic enough for her to talk to anyone about for decades is this grounds for saying that Kavanaugh is unfit to be on the Supreme Court?

Before answering that remember that Obama admitted to extensive illegal drug use in high school and we were told it didn’t matter by the same people who are condemning Kavanaugh.

Remember that Teddy Kennedy as an adult murdered a woman and engaged in sexual harassment on a regular basis but the same folk who are condemning Kavanaugh said it wasn’t relevant.

Remember that Bill Clinton was credibly accused of successful rape and multiple cases of sexual harassment and the #FakeNews media who are attacking Kavanaugh didn’t find that thnat disqualified him from being President.

We need to end the double standard.  We can’t have every conservative presumed guilty until proven innocent on a nearly impossible to meet set of criteria while every leftist can literally get by with murder.

You can read more of Tom's rants at his blog, Conversations about the obvious, and feel free to follow him on Twitter.

't

The Media believe classification exists to protect Democrats

Since at least the 1960's the #FakeNews media have eagerly published highly classified documents that hurt the national security and probably cost American lives.

From the Pentagon papers to the revealing of highly successful counter terrorism programs the left wing media has rejoiced over giving our enemies highly classified and very useful, to them, information.

Yet now when Trump wants to declassify a document that the American people really need to see the media is hoping mad.

We know that the Obama administration weaponized the US Intelligence Community to spy on the Trump campaign. They did so by lying to a FISA court that the FBI had verified the information that Steele, paid by Hillary, dug up based on unnamed second and third hand Russian sources.

Every bit of the FISA application we've seen to date demonstrates the malign intent of the Obama administration.  But the #FakeNews media and the Democrats keep saying that the redacted portions show damning evidence that proves Obama was justified.

So now that Trump is saying let's let the people see and let them decided the #FakeNews media is all upset.  They know that the truth will show what liars they and the deep state have been.

What this tells us is that the #FakeNews media has no problem hurting US security, and possibly contributing to the deaths of Americans, so long as it means headlines for them and a bigger paycheck but that they are totally opposed to revealing anything that might hurt Democrat politicians.

Now it's 3 to one that Ford is lying about Kavanaugh

A third person identified by Christine Blasey Ford  as being able to support her claim that Judge Kavanaugh attacked her has gone public and said that her story isn't true.

He has no recollection of any such event occurring.

We now have 3 witnesses identified by Christine Blasey Ford  who say her story is untrue.  More importantly this third person was not accused, at least currently, as having participated in any illegal or morally repugnant actions so he has no reason to lie.

That combined with the fact that Christine Blasey Ford is unwilling to go under oath and tell Congress what she claims happened pretty much nails down the case that even she doesn't believe that she's credible.  Given our current slander and libel laws even if Christine Blasey Ford is lying through her teeth she faces no risk of punishment unless she lies under oath hence her reluctance to testify under oath speaks volumes about her honesty.

It's easy to understand why some people, mostly women, tend to believe that a woman wouldn't lie about a sexual assault.  Too often all we have is he said she said and to simply declare that that's a standoff means that real predators can walk free.

But we know that women do lie; especially in high profile cases. Some examples include the stripper who accused the Duke Lacrosse players, the woman who told Rolling Stone that a fraternity had raped her, and Nikki Yovino. Does this mean that most women lie?  Of course not but it means that we can't simply assume that women never lie.  Especially when it's in their self interest to do so.  Women have lied because they didn't want their boyfriend to find out they'd cheated on him for example.  In this case given the well established far left political beliefs of Christine Blasey Ford it's clear that she could well be motivated by an honest desire to save the country from what she perceives as unimaginable evil.

In this case we have 3 hes, one of whom has absolutely no reason to lie, and one she whose story has lots of problems; for example I can remember exactly where I was involved in a fender bender when I was in High School but she can't remember the house she was assaulted in.

Further unlike all the other #MeToo cases there is no history of Kavanaugh being accused of this sort of activity; on the contrary everyone who has known or worked with him say's that such actions are completely inconsistent with who Kavanaugh is.

Unless some startling new evidence is produce or if Christine Blasey Ford changes her mind and is willing to testify under oath there is absolutely no reason to believe her claims.

Leftist come out with their hatred of God.

At the Emmy's last night people who thank Jesus, who make up about 72% of Americans, were mocked.

Let that sink in.  Can you imagine the left wing pseudo intellectuals mocking Muslims that way?

Of course not.

But if there is one thing that unites the Left it's the desire for a sexually hedonistic society where people can be objectified and used as sex objects.  That's why the left is so supportive of the mass murder of the unborn and the massively promiscuous, and decidedly unhealthy, actively gay lifestyle.

And what stands against societies acceptance of that hell?  Christianity.

Hence the spoiled and overpaid Hollywood elites feel compelled to attack their greatest enemy; Jesus.

They're so rich that they don't care if they lose money because the ratings of the self congratulatory shows go down.  They want to destroy Jesus's hold on the hearts of people so that they can replace His teaching that we must love our neighbor with their teaching that we should use our neighbor.

They are not good people who just see different solutions to complex issues; say how we help the poor. Rather the leftist elites are evil people who view people as things to be used or killed if that's what makes life best for the elites.

In their rejection of God they want to make themselves god.  They think that they can define morality and even change their very nature by pretending that men can become women.

It's all about the power.  They are proud people who refuse to bow to their Creator and who want to pursue their warped ideas no matter what the cost to themselves and others.

It's possible to not believe in God while not mocking those who do. After all unless an atheists is so proud that he thinks he's infallible he has to admit that he might be wrong and the Christian might be right. Further if the atheist is a good person he knows he should tolerate the beliefs of others just as he wants his beliefs to be tolerated.

That the people at the Emmys last night felt mocking those who disagree with them on serious issues is funny tells us what sort of people they are.

Didn't Ford betray other women by being silent about Kavanaugh?

If Ford really believes that Kavanaugh tried to rape her isn't her decades long silence a sign that she doesn't care about other women?

We now know that no one else has ever accused Kavanaugh of such a thing but she didn't know that during the decades she kept silent.

Women who don't report assaults until they see a chance to torpedo someone whose politics they don't like are betraying their sisters.

This is an awkward part of the #MeToo movement. We're told we should applaud women who speak up only after others have done so. But silence makes the victims complicit in future crimes.

What we need to do is declare as a society that any woman who says no, or is afraid of physical harm,  no matter what she did before she said no is a guiltless victim if the man doesn't stop.  No woman should ever feel guilty about being raped anymore than she should feel guilty if someone steals her car at gunpoint.

No matter how much a woman has "led on" a man if she says no and he doesn't stop it's all his fault.  Men aren't animals; we can stop if we want to.

Lie Detectors don't; Christine Basey Ford passing one means nothing

It's an urban legend that lie detectors can actually tell if people are lying.  All a lie detector does is monitor certain types of biological activity and see if they change when people answer questions.

Lie detectors are so unreliable that they're not allowed in trials and that the infamous spy Aldrich Ames managed to pass several.

What lie detectors are useful for is getting people to talk.  Fearing being "caught" by the machine they will say things they would otherwise lie about.

However for that to work the person administering the exam has to want to catch the person being tested in a lie.

Something that doesn't happen in a friendly polygraph test.  Christine Basey Ford's lawyer arranged to have her client polygraphed.  Hence the person running the test had every incentive to not find that Christine Basey Ford was lying and no incentive to find that she was lying.

Given that Christine Basey Ford's lawyer, left wing radical Debra Katz, has said that she doesn't have to corroborate her claims it's clear that Katz is not interested in the truth only in ensuring that the Supreme Court stays leftist and activist.

So saying that Christine Basey Ford passed a poly is no more significant than Debra Katz saying that she believes that Christine Basey Ford is telling the truth.

Democrats declare Christine Blasey Ford's claim isn't credible

What? You're saying to yourself that Democrats are in fact saying that Christine Blasey Ford's claim is credible.

But remember actions speak louder than words.

Can you imagine the impact if the first words out of the first Democrat to speak at Kavanaugh's hearing were "Why did you try and rape a woman when you were in High School?"?

Corey Booker wouldn't be a laughing stock for his "Spartacus" moment if he'd revealed that Kavanaugh had been accused of attempted rape rather than revealing emails that showed that Kavanaugh objected to race based security screenings.

There is absolutely no reason for Democrats to have not unleashed Christine Blasey Ford's charge if they believed that it would survive scrutiny.

On the other hand if the Democrats knew that her claim wouldn't stand up to scrutiny then waiting until the hearings are done makes perfect sense. All they're doing is trying to run out the clock so that they can hopefully win the Senate and then demand a Ruth Bader Ginsburg clone for the Supreme Court.

It's obvious then that the Democrats know that Christine Blasey Ford's claim won't stand up.

Which makes sense based on what we've learned in just one day:

Her therapist's notes contradict key details of her claim.
Her parents had a court case ruled against them by Kavanaugh's mother.
She's a hard core leftist based on her actions and her political contributions.
She felt the need to delete her social media accounts probably because they'd show her bias.

If the Democrats had revealed her claim when the hearing started we'd have had enough time to dig even deeper into her claims and, in all likelihood, found even more damaging information.

The bottom line is that there is no chance that if the Democrats believed Christine Blasey Ford's claim would hold up that they wouldn't have revealed it far sooner.  Hence it's obvious that even Democrats don't believe her.

[UPDATE] The claim that student reviews of her showed she was a leftist has been shown to be false; the comments were about another professor.  That was removed from the post.

Democrats are lying weasels; the attack on Kavanaugh proves it

Democrats have known for months about some random college professor, who is a Democrat, claiming that 35 years ago Kavanaugh and one of his friends attacked her.

Yet they said nothing.  Clearly they didn't believe the accusation and held it back as a trick to delay Kavanaugh's confirmation.

The woman has finally stepped forward, but the fact she leveled the accusation anonymously, tells us a lot about her character.

Her story has problems. Kavanaugh and the other boy who supposedly participated deny any such events.

The first time she mentioned the event to anyone else was decades later in couples counseling where she, according to her therapist, said there were 4 attackers.  She now says that the therapist was mistaken there were only two.

She knows for sure who the attackers were but she doesn't know much else about the party where this supposedly happened.

She somehow managed to escape from two very strong young boys.

She says that they tried to remove her clothes but failed.

She says they were drunk.

So in spite of the long history of Democrats lying about everything to achieve political power we're now supposed to believe this woman who appeared out of no where, didn't turn up in any background investigation, said nothing about the alleged events until decades later and then did so in a manner that at best confused her therapist.

If the Democrats think she's telling the truth then they concealed a #MeToo event for months. Why would they do that?

The only reasonable explanation is that they know the charges are bogus but it will take time for her claims to be debunked.  If the Democrats had brought this up months ago the claims would have been debunked by now.

It's time for us to tell the Democrats to stop lying.

Google; fond of tyrants

The left wing nuts who are in the majority at Google love tyranny.

We know that because they're building a search engine for China which will abide by all the tyrannical censorship rules the Chinese government imposes. For example it's absolutely verboten for people in China to find out about how the Chinese tyrants used tanks to run over dissidents in Tiananmen Square.

Some people in Google have objected but the fact that Google even started such a program shows how far they've strayed from their original, now expunged, motto "Don't be evil."

Hence we can see that the moaning and gnashing of teeth from Google leadership about Trump is all a lie.  They don't object to Trump because he's a "demagogue", after all they like tyrants, they object to Trump because Trump is for freedom and the rule of law.

Like all leftists the majority at Google hate democracy and feel that they are superior to us "deplorables" and that because they're superior they should be able to run our lives; for our own good of course.

They know best how much soda we should drink and how we should behave and as such they have a moral obligation to force us to conform to their beliefs.

They hate conservatives and Trump precisely because leftists hate freedom and the rights of individuals to run their own lives.  While they condemn laws preventing the murder of the unborn because it's, according to them, an impermissible act of government intervention they have no problem with the same government telling American's how much soda they can drink.

It's time to reign in Google, Facebook, et al by declaring that if they censor their content for any reason other than the post is criminal, calls for killing whites or blacks for example, then they are publishers and as publishers they can be sued by private citizens who are libeled by comments Google allows to stay online.

John Kerry; a traitor then and a traitor now

Back during the Vietnam war John Kerry was a traitor. He came back from the war and lied about atrocities committed by American soldiers.  He basically did everything he could to help the US lose the war in Vietnam and as such he was complicit with the mass persecution the Communists instituted in South Vietnam.

Today John Kerry is once again being a traitor.  He's working with the fascist, oppressive, terrorist regime in Iran to help them thwart Trump's attempts to keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons and to end Iran's support for terrorism.

But Kerry apparently agrees with Obama that Iran--a country that sponsors terrorism and persecutes non-Muslims-- is great while Israel, where Muslims can freely worship, is the enemy.  That's why Kerry was fine with giving billions of dollars to Iran even though he admitted that some of it would go to terrorism.  In fact we know know that most of it went to terrorism.

It's in America's interests that a regressive gay and woman hating terrorist sponsoring regime like the one ruling Iran not be in a position to threaten the rest of the Middle East.  But to John Kerry Iran is the good guy.

As an American Kerry is entitled to his opinion no matter how stupid or dishonest it is. What he's not entitled to do is go over and help the Iranian regime continue its murderous policies.

It's not much different than if Herbert Hoovers secretary of state had gone over to Germany in 1937 and helped Hitler.

Yet the #FakeNews media will laud Kerry because they too share the left's hatred of America.

Proof that the left doesn't understand science.

A Washington Post editorial blames Trump for the hurricane hitting the east coast.

To be precise they say "Yet when it comes to extreme weather, Mr. Trump is complicit. ".

The dictionary defines complicit to mean:

helping to commit a crime or do wrong in some way

Given that even the warmists who blame everything on global warming...err climate change acknowledge that nothing done since Trump took office could have changed CO2 levels in any significant way the WaPo claim is proof of either their dishonesty or their scientific ignorance.

What makes it even worse is that Trump's unleashing of the US energy sector--which Obama unsuccessfully tried to crush-- has resulted in US CO2 emissions going down.

In fact the graph you can find here shows that in 2017 the US lead the world in reducing CO2 emissions.

Hence if CO2 actually caused more extreme weather, which it doesn't to the degree that the warmists claim, Trump should be the poster boy for reducing hurricanes.

But if increasing CO2 is driving hurricanes then they must be stealth hurricanes that the National Hurricane Center hasn't heard about.

This plot shows the total number of hurricanes making landfall on the US.  Note that current levels, when the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is much higher than in the past, are lower than when CO2 levels were lower.

This plot shows major hurricane landfalls.  Once again the low CO2 past was much worse.

In both cases the 2011-2020 data were generated by taking the 2011-2017 data and multiplying by 10/7.

See http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/E23.html and https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pastdec.shtml for the data.

Feinstein probably lies to stay in the Senate

Democrat Senator from CA Feinstein has claimed that she has turned over a letter from a woman who claims that Kavanaugh did something wrong in High School.

The woman refuses to come forward.

Feinstein refuses to say what the woman's claim is.

Either Feinstein sat on this during the hearings or the woman magically appeared right after the liberal Republican Senator said she'd vote for Kavanaugh.

This is the sort of Big Lie that will be totally destroyed in a week but the point is that right now the highly biased FBI is a position to say and do anything just like they did after Trump was elected.

Fortunately the Republicans are standing up to this nonsense and the vote on Kavanaugh will proceed as planned.

But it's a sad example of how the Left works today; they can't convince people their policies are good so they need a tyrannical Supreme Court to impose their policies on the people.

Take abortion.  The vast majority of Americans oppose the current laws which allow abortions for any reason at any time.

Instead the people support abortions only in the first trimester and/or for cases of rape, incest, or threat to the life of the mother.

But the leftists use the traitorous judges on the Supreme Court to impose their will, keeping abortion legal for any reason at any time, on the people.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article192859954.html#storylink=cpy

The Left's Matrix

All leftist policies are bad for the majority of Americans.  Hence the only way to get Americans to adopt leftist policies are to lie about them and to impose them through dishonest judges.

The #FakeNews media works hard to create an alternate reality based on fake facts, a Matrix, for the average American. In that alternate, bizzaro, world lies are truth and leftist policies make sense.

An example of this is the big lie that Kavanaugh said that all birth control pills really caused abortions.  This was a very obvious intentional lie since Democrat Senator Kamala Harris deliberately edited Kavanaugh's comments to hide the fact that Kavanaugh was saying that a group involved in a case before him, not he himself, had said that birth control can often cause abortions.

Hillary has just retweeted that false claim.  It may be that she knew it was a lie and didn't care or it may be because in the leftist #FakeNews Matrix she didn't hear the truth.

Interestingly it's in fact true that many types of birth control pills actually kill an unborn child as opposed to stopping conception.  This has increased over time.  Originally the Pill was designed to prevent conception and the chances of it killing an already conceived daughter were low.  But it turned out that the chemical that prevented conception dramatically increased the risk of life threatening health problems for women.  To protect the adult women drug companies changed the formulation so that there was less of the chemical that prevented conception and more of the chemical that killed an unborn child.  As a result many forms of oral contraception have become more likely to be killing the unborn than preventing conception.

This whole story is an example of the lies that the #FakeNews media spread in order to convince people that the views of the left aren't horrible.

We can fight this Matrix by telling everyone we know the truth.

Google made illegal in kind campaign contributions to Hillary

A leaked email from a senior Google executive showed that Google pushed a get out the vote campaign for Hispanics only in 2016 election because Google thought that Hispanics would vote almost entirely for Hillary.  The email expresses shock that 29% of Hispanics voted for Trump.

Given that it's clear from the email that the intent was to help Hillary, not just get more people to vote, this is a clear violation of campaign financing laws.

If Google gets away with this while Dinesh D'Souza was convicted of a felony for a much less egregious offense we'll know that even under Trump the rule of law is still defunct when it comes to leftists like Hillary and leftist companies like Google.

What 9/11 tells us about the Left

In the immediate aftermath of the worst terrorist attack on America even leftists acted as though they were patriotic.

But before long the mask fell off and we saw how the left views America.

First we were told by the left that Islam was a religion of peace even though if one surveys the world one finds Muslims behind pretty much every aggressive or oppressive conflict ranging from terrorism to the oppression of Christians in Muslim majority countries.

Conservatives declare that Islam is a religion of war based on the Quran and the history of Islamic expansion through military force not voluntary conversion.  Conservatives however also recognize that not all Muslims, especially those living in the US, are violent.

When the left gained power in the person of Barrack Obama the Global War on Terror was rebranded as "Overseas contingency operations" and terrorist attacks were called "workplace violence".

Essentially the left wants to defend Islam no matter what.  Given that the vast majority of Americans are Christians and that Obama, and the left in general, constantly attack Christians and the First Amendment while simultaneously defending radical Islam it's fair to say that the left is inherently anti-American.

Can you imagine how the US would have responded to 9/11 if the left had been in power?  Iran is the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world today.  The ruling Iranian tyrants call for the annihilation of Israel and the US on a regular basis.  Yet Obama gave Iran billions of dollars, greenlit their development of nuclear weapons--just asking them to wait until he was out of office--, and worked hard to make Iran the power that controlled the Middle East.

Hence it's reasonable to assume that if the left had been running America in 2001 there would have been no liberation of Afghanistan, no destruction of the terrorist camps run by al Qaida, and no clear message to the world that attacks on America will result in unbearable consequences.  Rather our leftist leaders would have been apologizing to the world for 9/11 because it was caused by what the left perceives as the "sins" of America.

We know that's what the left would have done because they weren't shy about saying that it was America's support for Israel that caused 9/11.  That's right the left blames the US support for the only functional democracy in the Middle East for 9/11. Leftists say that 9/11 is not the fault of radical Islam or the terrorists who killed 3000 Americans just as in the eyes of the left rapists and murders aren't at fault; it's society which is to blame for forcing criminals to commit crimes.

The bias for Islam by the left is bizarre in that Islam in that Islam calls for the killing of gays and the subjugation of women.  Given that the left is supposedly pro-gay and pro-women it doesn't make sense.

But when we look at what the left wants versus what it says we can see that the left hates both gays and women.  When gays were dying left and right due to AIDS conservatives called for gays to abandon their massively promiscuous lifestyle but the left told gays to keep being promiscuous. Why?  Because the left supports gays not because they care about gays but because the left wants society to become massively promiscuous.  If one loves gays one has to condemn their unhealthy lifestyle just as if one loves smokers one has to try to get them to stop smoking.

As to women the left supports abortion, which has significant negative physical and psychological impacts on women, and contraception, which has women taking potent and carcinogenic chemicals, because they enable men to objectify women and use them as objects without fear of long term consequences.  The men who really love women marry them and stick with them for life.  The left is about hook ups and the casual exploitation of women.  That's why the #MeTo movement, which was initially launched to attack Trump, has mainly caught leftists.

This isn't surprising. The left also says that it supports Blacks while ignoring the mass shootings of Blacks in Democrat run cities.  If thousands of whites were shot each year in Chicago you can be sure that the leftists running the city would be doing more than trying to keep honest citizens from having guns.

Seeing how the left has responded to 9/11 is like an x-ray showing what the left actually supports versus what they say they support.

More proof of FBI/DOJ corruption

We now know that senior government officials had an actual plan to leak information to the press that was designed to hurt Trump.

Senior government leaders texted each other about leaks about Carter Page which triggered #FakeNews articles that suggested a connection between Trump and Russia.

Here's a quote from one of the texts; " I want to talk to you about media leak strategy with DOJ "

If there was any question that the FBI/DOJ has been weaponized by Obama to protect Hillary and attack Trump there isn't any more.

Most people in the FBI/DOJ are probably honest but it's clear that many senior leaders are dishonest and working hard to undermine the 2016 election.

The left's rejection of civilized norms

Can you imagine if someone had suggested that the solution to Obama was John Wilkes Booth?

The media would crucify whomever said that and preach to us endlessly how monstrous all conservatives were.

Yet recently a famous Broadway actress asked where Booth was in the context of President Trump.

Was she serious?  I would have said no five years ago but given the insanity on the Left these days and their supposed belief that Trump is literally a monster I no longer can be sure.

It's easy for people to go to extremes when they think doing so will fix a great wrong.

We all think that the German officers who tried to assassinate Hitler were engaged in a noble, albeit sadly unsuccessful, endeavor.

Given that the #FakeNews media is constantly bombarding reason resistant leftists with more and more hyperbolic lies about Trump is it surprising that many on the left think that extraordinary means are in fact ok?

It would appear that there's a good chance that the left is now seriously toying with the idea of accepting calls for the assassination of Trump.  We know the left is comfortable, in general, with the idea of Antifa using violence to silence speech they don't like-- just like their Nazi Brown Shirt predecessors-- so the leap to assassination is not as long as it used to be for them.

This is in fact an existential threat to America. If one political party decides that it can use violence to impose its will on the people then the only outcomes are civil war or the elimination of a free America.

If society, read the #FakeNews media, don't speak out against violence in support of their cause it's quite likely that the voices of violence will increase and America will be placed in a very dangerous situation.

But even if the actress wasn't being serious joking about killing a public figure shows an amazing lack of common decency.  A common precursor to violence is the dehumanization of the future victim.  Before the concentration camps the Nazi's waged a propaganda war to convince Germans that Jews were less than human and unworthy of life.  Saying that it's ok to kill Trump, but not kill Obama, is a brick in the wall of the dehumanization of Trump and by association his "deplorable" supporters.

Conservatives loath the policies of the left but no one in the the conservative movement is calling for violence against them.

If the left continues on its current trajectory America will be at risk of serious violence started by the left but finished by the right.  That's something that no one wants.

We all need to condemn the left's drift towards violence and away from the ballot box if we are to preserve America.

How all illegals vote

In America today all illegals effectively vote.

The census used to define how many seats each state gets in the House of Representatives is based on the total number of people--citizens, non-citizens, and illegals-- in the state.

That way welfare magnets like California get extra seats in the House because the illegals who flock there are counted the same as US citizens.

What this does is dilute the vote of people in states with few illegals because it takes more citizens to get a House seat in those states than is required in a state where there are lots of illegals.

Right now each seat in the House represents about 700K people.  One source says that there are around 2,500,000 illegals in California today.  That means that California is getting 3 extra seats in the House.

It's time to stop counting illegals for the purpose of representation.

A cancer of lies

We are currently living in a reincarnation of the Soviet Union with respect to the major news media.

The New York Times has declared that the media should not be objective but should do whatever it takes to ensure that Trump is defeated.

The Washington Post, LA Times, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN etc all are all to eager to lie about Trump, the state of America, and leftists to advance the leftist agenda.

It's a bizarre and unique situation. Historically dictatorships have turned the media into state controlled propaganda machines to extol and protect the state.

In America today the #FakeNews media have turned themselves into lying propagandists with the hope of establishing a tyranny where elections only count if the people the media like win.

America is suffering from a cancer of lies that is destroying out country.  The a large portion of the media has metastasized from being a source of information to a source of lies designed to transfer power from the people to the DC elites.

The only way to fight this cancer is to make sure that our friends, family, and co-workers know the truth.  Given the truth most Americans will vote the way that preserves their freedoms and their rights.  But if all they have are the lies of the #FakeNews media they could vote in a way that will enable the Left to destroy our freedoms.

It falls to us, average Americans, to fight this cancer by the painful but necessary "chemotherapy" of spreading the truth.