Title :
link :
WWW.MOEISSUESOFTHEDAY
.BLOGSPOT.COM
Wednesday, September 26,2018
All Gave Some~Some Gave All
*****
Poll: Congress’ Approval 19%
Hearing in Doubt? Christine Ford’s Lawyer Rips Senate Plan to Have Prosecutor Ask Questions: Not ‘Fair and Respectful’
Dr. Christine Blasey Ford‘s legal team has sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee amid continuous negotiations ahead of Thursday’s scheduled hearing.
In new letter from Dr Ford’s Attorney to the Judiciary Committee, they again object to having outside counsel ask the questions for republicans at Thursday’s hearing, and ask for the name and resume of who that person will be. This does not appear to be a done deal.
In the letter addressed to Sen. Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Ford’s legal team cites Sen. Majority Leader’s Mitch McConnell’s (R-KY) speech on the Senate floor on Monday afternoon as “flatly inconsistent” with Grassley’s promise of a “fair and credible process.”
“In our view, the hiring of an unnamed ‘experienced sex crimes prosecutor’ as Mr. Davis described in his email, is contrary to the Majority’s repeated emphasis on the need for the Senate and this Committee’s members to fulfill their constitutional obligations,” attorney Michael Bromwich wrote. “It is also inconsistent with your stated wish to avoid a ‘circus,’ as well as Dr. Blasey Ford’s repeated requests through counsel that senators conduct the questioning. This is not a criminal trial for which the involvement of an experienced sex crimes prosecutor would be appropriate.”
Ford’s team requested the identity of the sex crimes prosecutors the Committee would invite to the hearing along with their resumes.
The letter also blasts the the White House’s refusal to order an FBI investigation into Ford’s allegation.
“The hearing plan that Mr. Davis described does not appear designed to provide Dr. Blasey Ford with fair and respectful treatment,” Bromwich said.
Moe and Helen note: Blasey Ford needs a way out. She’s carried this charade as far as she can without revealing that nothing happened between her and Judge Kavanaugh. The story is a wheelbarrow full of oomgalagala. PU.
Dick Morris: Christine Blasey Ford Is the New Face of the Democrats
Alex Wong / Getty Images An activist wears a button in support of Christine Blasey Ford, who has accused Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault at a high school party about 35 years ago, during a protest Sept. 20, 2018, on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. (Photo by Alex Wong / Getty Images)
By Dick Morris
The Democrats are trapped. Christine Blasey Ford is the new face of the Party.
Pending the outcome of the approaching vote on the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, the Democrats find all their hopes pinned on her.
If she aces her hearing, they can see their way clear to November. But she probably won’t. Her recall of the events is not there. Her on-again off-again conduct leading up to the hearing is not bound to instill confidence in her.
And, she is no professional.
If she fails to hit a home run and if she leaves people scratching their heads, Kavanaugh will be confirmed and the Republicans will have shown up the Democrats as not ready for prime time.
Trump may be poised for four consecutive wins:
-
A good FEMA response to Florence
-
Release of the Bruce Ohr docs showing a DOJ/media conspiracy against Trump
-
The Rosenstein admission that he wanted to tap Trump and oust him under the 25th Amendment
-
Kavanaugh confirmation, especially after the Beasley attacks.
President Trump’s numbers dropped in early September after three or four months of relative stability.
His job approval in the RealClear Politics average fell and Republicans all over the nation saw the numbers in their own races drop in tandem.
Rising concerns over the possible overturn of Roe v. Wade, coupled with the Woodward book showing disarray in the Trump White House were likely responsible.
But, in the second and third weeks of September, he appears to have recovered. At this moment, he is about equal to his all time high.
This potential four-part victory could send him up to new heights, previously unreachable for him, just in time for the elections.
All the key Democratic incumbent senators are more or less tied. But being tied is bad news for Democratic incumbents in North Dakota, Missouri, Florida, Montana, and Indiana.
In most of these states, Dems have had vastly more TV advertising than Republicans for a much longer time period. To still be tied is not good.
The only Democrat takeaway looking good now is in Nevada where incumbent GOP Senator Heller is in a tie.
Dems are still ahead in Arizona, but not likely to stay there given the revelations that their candidate advocated going easy on adult men who see underage prostitutes. There is no real danger of GOP losses in the other takeaway races — Tennessee and Texas.
In the House, the generic Democratic advantage, having been as high as ten points is now back to six and, should Trump pull off some of these wins, might go lower.
My bet is still a GOP win in 2018 and the Kavanaugh imbroglio makes it just that much more likely.
The Stream
Christine Blasey Ford: Abortion Profiteer.
Supporters of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s vague and unsubstantiated charges, based on hazy memories, against SCOTUS pick Brett Kavanaugh have their mantras. One of them is “Women don’t lie!”
We should answer: “Ever heard of Asia Argento? How about Tawana Brawley? Those white Southern women who sent innocent black men to the gallows under Jim Crow?” The reply, of course, will be … crickets.
Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »
Their next, slightly subtler slogan is, “Why would she lie?” In other words, why turn her life upside down, and be subject to the same of kind of appalling death threats to which the Kavanaugh family now is subject?
Dr. Christine Blasey Ford profited directly from abortion.
One sane answer is: To control a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court. Candidates for office routinely lie to get a whole lot less. Zealots on single issues, such as abortion, sometimes kill people. What makes us sure that Ford isn’t such a zealot, maybe a real rape victim recruited to blame the wrong guy, for the Cause?
Anyway, he deserves it, as a privileged white male who might, just might, endanger “women’s reproductive health care access”? (That is, abortion on demand through all nine months of pregnancy.)
Follow the Money
But here’s an even more direct reason why Ford might be fingering the wrong guy for what happened to her: She has profited from abortion. That’s right. As Natural News has reported, Ford,
works for a pharmaceutical company that manufacturers an abortion pill drug, whose profits could be strongly impacted by future Supreme Court decisions on abortion rights.
Corcept Therapeutics (Corcept.com) manufacturers and markets an abortion pill drug called mifepristone, and Christine Blasey Ford is a co-author of at least eight published scientific papers produced by the pharmaceutical giant to promote its pills. You can see Blasey’s name listed on several publications at this Corcept.com web page detailing their research papers.
Corcept Therapeutics, Inc., a $166 billion market cap company (stock symbol CORT) reportedly has current annual sales of $216 million. The company offers just one drug, mifepristone, which is widely known as an “abortion pill” or RU-486.
The controversial site Gateway Pundit first broke this story. It seems to have all its facts straight. And it leaves out a key one: Ford actually worked as “director of biostatistics for Corcept Therapeutics in Menlo Park,” according to the San Francisco Chronicle. (H/T Tiger Droppings.)
Okay, so the one person with a remotely plausible story attacking Kavanaugh, whose story Democrats saved as a Hail Mary pass, turns out to have profited directly from an abortion drug. Imagine if an anti-gun SCOTUS appointee were just about to be confirmed. Then some right-wing woman came out with vague, unproveable charges? Then we learned that the accuser had worked for a company that made AR-15s. How much credence would the media give her? More crickets.
If anyone has the standing to question Ford in detail as to why she didn’t report the alleged assault for more than three decades, it’s Juanita Broaddrick.
Juanita Broaddrick Should Question Ford in the Senate
The Republicans should stand firm on their right to bring in outside counsel to question Dr. Ford. They’re smart to consider bright women lawyers, such as former Senator Kelly Ayotte. We don’t want this to just a bunch of guys questioning a woman’s attempted rape story, however shaky. But there’s one more person who should be there, even if it’s only to pose a question or two.
I mean Juanita Broaddrick, the Arkansas nurse who made far more credible, evidenced, timely rape charges against Bill Clinton. Who got waved off, mocked, and ignored by Clinton-sniffing media. And threatened by Hillary. As Broaddrick herself points out:
I had first hand knowledge, along with 5 witnesses - 8 YEARS later in 1999. YOU @SenFeinstein refused to read the evidence in my record. You are such a hypocrite!
Sen Dianne Feinstein ✔@SenFeinstein
In 1991, the FBI reopened a background investigation. Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas were interviewed. Every day more people came forward claiming firsthand knowledge of the events. It’s time for the FBI to do the same today. Why are Republicans resisting an investigation?
In 1991, the FBI reopened a background investigation. Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas were interviewed. Every day more people came forward claiming firsthand knowledge of the events. It’s time for the FBI to do the same today. Why are Republicans resisting an investigation?
If anyone has the standing to question Ford in detail as to why she didn’t report the alleged assault for more than three decades, it’s Broaddrick. If the Republicans aren’t ready to play such hardball, they’re irresponsible fools, keen to lose.
Which of course is an open question.
Medical Malpractice Death 500 Times Gun Accident Fatalities
Accidents with firearms are a problem. No one debates that. Even one is far too many, and the fact that a number of these accidents prove fatal only increases the importance of finding ways to stop these accidents.
However, anti-gunners would have you believe that accidents with firearms are common. Why else would some demand gun safety training before being able to purchase a gun?
The thing is, there’s something that kills people at a rate of around 500 to one that the anti-gunners never seem to consider.
A Johns Hopkins University study covering eight years of data found there are at least 250,000 malpractice deaths in the U.S. annually. CNBC reports the Johns Hopkins University study presents malpractice deaths on the low end, since other studies show malpractice deaths exceeding 400,000 a year.
On the other hand, accidental gun deaths hover around 500 a year.
For example, the Los Angeles Times reports there were 489 accidental gun deaths in 2015, making medical malpractice deaths over 500 times higher than deaths resulting from accidental firearm discharges.
The number of overall gun deaths in 2015—accidental, homicides, and suicides—was approximately 36,000, two-thirds of which were suicides. So 250,000 malpractice deaths is nearly seven times higher than gun deaths, even when counting intentional gun deaths.
Awkward.
Now, there are some important differences worth noting.
First, there are remarkably few “accidents” with guns. Most so-called accidental shootings are instances of negligence. Someone didn’t follow the basic rules of safety, and someone died as a result.
On the other hand, medical malpractice deaths may be accidents. A slip with a scalpel, for example, can happen with even the most skilled physician only to see the patient just as dead. To be sure, quite a few of those deaths are due to incompetent physicians as well–based on my conversations with my doctor and med school friends, I’m more shocked that it doesn’t happen more often–but it’s impossible to tell from here how many are true accidents and how many are the result of the doctor being a functional moron.
For the families of the deceased, it doesn’t matter, though. I get that too.
However, the important takeaway is, firearm accidents are exceedingly rare events in the grand scheme of things, and medical malpractice deaths–something we know is far more common–are generally ignored by the public at large. With that in mind, why are we acting like firearm accidents are this great public health crisis?
They’re not.
Now, that’s not to say they shouldn’t be addressed. They should. Even one is too many.
It’s not an epidemic that we need new legislation to try and stem the tide, either. Of course, it was never really about gun safety. It’s about creating a world where roadblocks to purchasing firearms are accepted. Once people accept some, it’s easier to push through others. We all know this to be true.
But if they want to curb deaths, maybe some of these people should look into how they can help curb medical malpractice deaths. You know, just to shake things up.
On the other hand, accidental gun deaths hover around 500 a year.
For example, the Los Angeles Times reports there were 489 accidental gun deaths in 2015, making medical malpractice deaths over 500 times higher than deaths resulting from accidental firearm discharges.
The number of overall gun deaths in 2015—accidental, homicides, and suicides—was approximately 36,000, two-thirds of which were suicides. So 250,000 malpractice deaths is nearly seven times higher than gun deaths, even when counting intentional gun deaths.
Awkward.
Now, there are some important differences worth noting.
First, there are remarkably few “accidents” with guns. Most so-called accidental shootings are instances of negligence. Someone didn’t follow the basic rules of safety, and someone died as a result.
On the other hand, medical malpractice deaths may be accidents. A slip with a scalpel, for example, can happen with even the most skilled physician only to see the patient just as dead. To be sure, quite a few of those deaths are due to incompetent physicians as well–based on my conversations with my doctor and med school friends, I’m more shocked that it doesn’t happen more often–but it’s impossible to tell from here how many are true accidents and how many are the result of the doctor being a functional moron.
For the families of the deceased, it doesn’t matter, though. I get that too.
However, the important takeaway is, firearm accidents are exceedingly rare events in the grand scheme of things, and medical malpractice deaths–something we know is far more common–are generally ignored by the public at large. With that in mind, why are we acting like firearm accidents are this great public health crisis?
They’re not.
Now, that’s not to say they shouldn’t be addressed. They should. Even one is too many.
It’s not an epidemic that we need new legislation to try and stem the tide, either. Of course, it was never really about gun safety. It’s about creating a world where roadblocks to purchasing firearms are accepted. Once people accept some, it’s easier to push through others. We all know this to be true.
But if they want to curb deaths, maybe some of these people should look into how they can help curb medical malpractice deaths. You know, just to shake things up.
MEET NOEL FRANCISCO, THE ROCK-RIBBED CONSERVATIVE WHO WOULD REPLACE ROD ROSENSTEIN
Benny Johnson
Were Rod Rosenstein to resign as deputy attorney general, the Department of Justice’s rules of succession dictate that Solicitor General Noel Francisco would assume his post, pending President Donald Trump appointing someone outside the rules of succession.
Francisco is currently the third-highest ranking official in the Department of Justice and would take over supervision of the Robert Mueller-run special counsel investigation, which has been ongoing since May 2017. Francisco would hypothetically have the authority to fire Mueller and end the investigation, were he to assume the new position.
Francisco is currently the third-highest ranking official in the Department of Justice and would take over supervision of the Robert Mueller-run special counsel investigation, which has been ongoing since May 2017. Francisco would hypothetically have the authority to fire Mueller and end the investigation, were he to assume the new position.
Francisco has rock-ribbed conservative credentials. He is a veteran clerk of late Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia and worked for the George W. Bush legal team during the Florida recount and the Bush White House as associate counsel to President Bush. Francisco worked for the Department of Justice in the Bush administration before moving back to private practice, where he argued multiple cases before the Supreme Court.
Interestingly, Francisco is no fan of special counsels and is a firm advocate for the president’s constitutional power to shape the bureaucracy around him. He rebuked the vast investigative authority of “career prosecutors” looking into presidential administrations and has argued before the Supreme Court that the president has the authority to directly hire-and-fire every federal official who are behaving in a “subordinate” manner.
Francisco wrote, “The Constitution gives the president what the framers saw as the traditional means of ensuring accountability: the power to oversee executive officers through removal. The president is accordingly authorized under our constitutional system to remove all principal officers, as well as all ‘inferior officers’ he has appointed.”
Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images
When pressed as to whether it would be appropriate for the Department of Justice to appoint a special counsel to investigate the Bush administration, Francisco said, “I don’t think it would be appropriate.”
He continued, saying, “My own personal belief is that when you hand these issues off to the career prosecutors in the public integrity sections in the U.S. attorneys’ offices in the Department of Justice, those attorneys are generally better able to assess whether a case should be pursued.”
Francisco believes the Constitution empowers the president to directly hire-and-fire each and every official who has power via the executive branch. Appearing before the Supreme Court in February of this year during a case regarding administrative law judges at the Securities and Exchange Commission, Francisco argued, “The president’s constitutional responsibility to faithfully execute the laws requires adequate authority to remove subordinate officers.”
The solicitor general continued, “The framers understood the close connection between the president’s ability to discharge his responsibilities as head of the executive branch and his control over its personnel. … The president’s ability to execute the law is thus inextricably linked to his authority to hold his subordinates accountable for their conduct.”
Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images
Francisco has also publicly rebuked former FBI Director James Comey for refusing to prosecute Hillary Clinton for her misuse of government email and classified information. The op-ed accuses Comey of treating Clinton with “kid gloves” and cow-towing to powerful “political interests” in the controversial 2016 case.
Francisco has also come out on the record supporting some of the more more controversial policies of the administration, including Trump’s travel ban.
Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz recently raised the prospect of Noel Francisco being on the Supreme Court, were the Kavanaugh nomination to fall through.
“Number one, U.S. Solicitor General Noel Francisco — he just argued and won the travel ban case in front of the Supreme Court — would make a phenomenal justice,” Cruz said.
Al Gore says Trump controls… WHAT!? (yes, he’s serious!)
by Frank Holmes, reporter
Al Gore says Trump controls… WHAT!? (yes, he’s serious!)
by Frank Holmes, reporter
Former Vice President Al Gore is back in the spotlight — and this time, it’s to bash President Donald Trump and demand that he be tossed out of office over wild accusations.
The former vice president threw himself into the Democrats’ fevered impeachment debate, saying that the Trump administration “should be terminated early for ethical reasons” — because Trump is causing natural disasters.
That’s right. Gore recently blamed Hurricane Florence and a handful of other disastrous storms worldwide on Trump personally.
“This experiment with Trumpism is not going well,” Gore told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell last week.
“You know, in science and medicine some experiments are terminated early for ethical reasons,” Gore went on.
The Democrats are currently trying to quiet down messages that they will impeach Trump if they win the majority in Congress during this November’s midterms – but Gore, who knows a thing or two about impeachment, let the secret slip.
Gore, who’s been known to exaggerate, compared Trump-era America to the kingdom of the Antichrist.
“Every night on the television news is like a nature hike through the book of Revelation,” he said
That’s a line he uses over and over again – including the last time he told Trump he should quit.
Last month, an interviewer asked if Gore had any advice for the president.
“My only message would be: Resign,” Gore said before giggling. “I don’t mean to be flippant about it.”
“They’ve made the EPA the CPA – the Coal Production Agency!” said Gore, defending the left-wing environmental regulations have been bankrupting the U.S. coal industry.
But there may be another, secret reason Gore is so hot under the collar: Trump met with Al Gore – then totally ignored the vice president and his badgering advice.
Gore owned up to the fact that he met with Trump after the 2016 election, where he tried, and failed, to convince Trump to break his campaign promises about the environment.
Trump campaigned on breaking our dependence on foreign oil by revving up U.S. production and reviving the U.S. coal industry – but Gore wanted him to put the screws to his voters once he was in office.
He told HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher” that the president’s daughter, Ivanka, invited Gore to meet the president-elect in Trump Towers in December 2016.
“I thought, actually, there was a chance he might come to his senses,” Gore said last year.
The “conversation continued after he went into the White House,” Gore said.
But Trump ignored Gore’s pestering and kept his word to the voters – and it helped the U.S. pull off a massive economic revival.
Trump pulled out of the Paris Climate agreement, cut radical Green regulations, and watched U.S. oil and coal start roaring back to life.
That’s made America great again — and it has left Gore steaming mad.
Frank Holmes is a reporter for The Horn News. He is a veteran journalist and an outspoken conservative that talks about the news that was in his weekly article, “On The Holmes Front.”
G’ day…Ciao…
Helen and Moe Lauzier
Thus Article
That's an article
This time, hopefully can give benefits to all of you. well, see you in posting other articles.
You are now reading the article with the link address https://capitalstories.blogspot.com/2018/09/www_25.html
Related Posts :
Sanjay and Craig | Spot the Pickle | Nickelodeon UK
Nickelodeon Australia And New Zealand To Premiere "Rufus 2" On Friday 5th May 2017
Alvinnn!!! et les Chipmunks | Les inventions de Simon | NICKELODEON JUNIOR FRANCE- Y Is For Dr Yes and Other Oriental Get Smart Characters: A To Z Challenge 2017
- New FT Blog: 'Fairy Tale Footnotes'
0 Response to " "
Post a Comment