Sheldon Whitehouse Suddenly Became Mr. Due Process: here's why

Super Duper Over Achiever

There are few things more reliable in Washington than a Democrat discovering the importance of due process the moment the accused has a "D" next to his name. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse apparently decided it was time to audition for the role of America's foremost legal philosopher during an appearance with the Compromised News Network's Jake Tapper.

Asked about the implosion of Graham Platner's Maine Senate campaign, Whitehouse [who will never live in his namesake residence] suddenly spoke with the solemn wisdom of a man who had just wandered out of a constitutional law seminar. Funny how that works when you're one step above plankton. 

Platner resigned only after rape allegations from Jenny Raciot became public, despite Democrats somehow managing to overlook the rather noticeable issue of the alleged Nazi oyster farmer's SS tattoo. Apparently, for some people, that was not quite enough to raise concerns. Better late than never, we suppose.

The real tell came when Whitehouse brushed aside the first accuser, Lyndsey Fifield, who happened to be a Republican. Quite the coincidence. Fifield, who for some reason was Platner's former girlfriend, alleged emotional and domestic abuse, but those accusations apparently failed the Whitehouse Test for Credibility, which seems to involve checking voter registration before listening. Forget about Platner admitted to choking the chicken in an outhouse, the left didn't care because he was their 'man.'

Even more amusing is that birdcage liner known as The New York Times managed to produce a story that centered on Fifield while somehow glossing over additional allegations and evidence she had provided. CNN later corroborated Fifield's claims, and Politico reported what the Times somehow missed, namely that Platner had also allegedly sexually assaulted other women. It turns out there was quite a bit more to the story than progressive media gatekeepers initially cared to acknowledge.

Then came Whitehouse's favorite line. As a former prosecutor, he assured viewers that due process matters.

That's almost as believable as a box of used car salesmen.

This is the same Sheldon Whitehouse who enthusiastically joined the political demolition derby against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, complete with endless theater about "boofing," lurid insinuations, and accusations that never produced evidence sufficient to support the central claims. The media spectacle rolled on anyway, because due process apparently takes an extended vacation whenever the target is a conservative.

To this day, there remains no evidence that Christine Blasey Ford ever met Kavanaugh.

Amazing how Whitehouse's legal standards can stretch farther than a campaign promise.

The Babylon Bee is reportedly considering naming Whitehouse its 2026 "Selective Outrage Lifetime Achievement Award" winner after judges praised his remarkable ability to discover principles only when they become politically convenient.

Small standards. Small consistency. Same old Washington.

I want to thank you for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to simply check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to do so. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee if you want to support me directly. And finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.

Tweet

Alyssa Milano believes 'survivors' but only when politically expedient

One thing about leftists, you can always count on them to do the left thing, the thing that calls out their blatant hypocrisy. Alyssa Milano, a person paid handsomely for speaking words written by people a lot smarter than her, is one such hypocrite.

Milano spoke on a radio program called "Radio Andy" to "lady 'splain" as to why she has been hypocritically silent over the sexual assault allegation lodged against 2020 presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden, especially since she was all over the SCOTUS confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh. Of course, the host of the show, Andy Cohen, is also a progressive [aka socialist] and didn't actually call her out on her lack of consistency.

Milano tried to defend herself by comparing her behavior with the Harvey Weinstein case in which she claims that she waited "a long time to publicly say anything about Harvey [Weinstein] as well, because I believe that even though we should believe women, and that is an important thing, and what that statement really means is like, for so long, the go-to has been not to believe them. So really, we have to sort of societally change that mindset to believing women. But that does not mean at the expense of not giving men their due process." 

Cohen responding like a good sycophant said: “I like that.”

What is it about actors, actresses and singers who believe that they are the political and social opinion experts for the nation? Like our political leaders, they live in a protective bubble and are the least affected by world events.  

Milano wasn't done: “And investigate situations, and giving, you know, it’s gotta be, it’s gotta be, it’s gotta be fair in both directions. So I’ve been very vocal about Biden and my support for him. I’ve known him for a very long time, and I did do my due diligence because part of it was that, and the article that sort of stood out to me was that Time’s Up decided not to take the case.”

But she didn't know Kavanaugh and still attacked him and tried to destroy his reputation and destroy him professionally. She said she knew Biden for a long time so she should know how he behaves with women and young girls. 

After looking at all the evidence, Biden's accuser is more believable than Christine Blasey-Ford,  Kavanaugh's accuser. The latter couldn't even get her "closest friend" to agree with her story about Kavanaugh and everyone else also denied the event, where she alleged the misconduct took place, never happened.

In an op-ed from September 2018, Milano said:

So let me be as clear as possible: I believe Christine Blasey Ford and I demand that our Senators vote to reject Brett Kavanaugh as the next Justice on the Supreme Court. Every person who refuses to loudly and openly reject Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination is telling every generation of Americans that an alleged abuser’s career is more valuable than a survivor’s humanity. And the highest court in our land is no place for an alleged sexual offender to sit.

Several days later, Milano along with a group of anti-Kavanaugh leftists protested at the door of Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS), which she pounded. She tweeted, “I’m in D.C. because I don’t believe any man’s misogyny should take precedence [sic] over a survivor’s humanity.”

Except for Joe Biden.

Please consider following this blog, and remember, every time you click on an ad, an angel gets its wings and a dead terrorist gets his virgins.

Tweet

Another woman claims Trump raped her but only for 3 minutes

Claims Trump raped her decades ago for 3 minutes

E. Jean Carroll, an Elle magazine advice columnist, finally came out and told her "story" about how President Donald Trump allegedly raped her in the mid-1990s for three minutes, give or take. She said that she would not press charges because the publicity for her book on the subject is good enough and added that it would be "disrespectful" to illegal alien women victimized by rape by the drug cartels that covertly transport them across the border in chicken trucks or whatever wheels are available.

"After all, the rape only lasted three minutes and it is worse for women raped by coyotes," she said, referring to cartel members driving chicken trucks hiding illegal alien women under the floor panels.

Carroll's book, "What Do We Need Men For? A Modest Proposal," goes into detail about her accusation against the president, which he strongly denies.

“I would find it disrespectful to the women who are down on the border who are being raped around the clock down there without any protection,” Carroll told MSNBC host Comrade Lawrence O'Donnell when asked why she wouldn’t press charges.

“They’re young women, they tried to come into the county. As you know, they’re here by the thousands.”

And this makes sense . . . how?

"Mine was three minutes,” the alleged rape victim claimed of the alleged encounter. “I’m a mature woman, I can handle it, I can keep going, my life has gone on, I'm a happy woman.”

“But for the women down there, around the world … it just seems disrespectful,” she stammered, “it doesn't make sense to me."

So by her logic, it would be disrespectful of her to have reported the rape that took place when it happened because she has a crystal ball and knew that illegal alien women were going to be raped by coyotes in the 21st Century. Sure, makes perfect sense . . . if you're schizophrenic.

In her book, Carroll claims Trump raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in midtown Manhattan when she was 52 years old. Trump allegedly recognized Carroll and asked her to help him pick out lingerie for another woman; the duo then headed to the dressing room, which also makes perfect sense, since it was Trump who was going to try the lingerie on. Or perhaps Carroll was while Trump watched. 

Whatever.

"As we head to the dressing rooms, I’m laughing aloud and saying in my mind: I’m gonna make him put this thing on over his pants!" she claims, adding that “[t]he moment the dressing-room door is closed, he lunges at me, pushes me against the wall, hitting my head quite badly, and puts his mouth against my lips.”

I am really doubtful this woman is telling the truth and is willing now to disrespect rape victims at the border. I still think it might just have a wee bit to do with her book and the fact that the 2020 election is just down the road apiece.

“I am so shocked I shove him back and start laughing again,” the accusation continues. “He seizes both my arms and pushes me up against the wall a second time, and, as I become aware of how large he is, he holds me against the wall with his shoulder and jams his hand under my coat dress and pulls down my tights.”

Did you see the this in your mind? Are your eyes throwing up yet?

Carroll then explains that she kept “laughing,” which she says “astonished” her as Trump tickled her fancy.

“The next moment, still wearing correct business attire, shirt, tie, suit jacket, overcoat, he opens the overcoat, unzips his pants, and, forcing his fingers around my private area, thrusts his penis halfway — or completely, I’m not certain — inside me. It turns into a colossal struggle,” she alleges. “I am wearing a pair of sturdy black patent-leather four-inch Barneys high heels, which puts my height around six-one, and I try to stomp his foot. I try to push him off with my one free hand — for some reason, I keep holding my purse with the other — and I finally get a knee up high enough to push him out and off and I turn, open the door, and run out of the dressing room.”

Her memory of the event, at least in my estimation, is too vivid, too detailed. She even remembered the color of the bodysuit Trump allegedly chose--lilac. 

If it was true, I believe Carroll wouldn't have taken note nor remembered so much detail. An article in the Scientific American by Jim Hopper, an expert in the field of trauma, agrees that gaps in memory are quite common. He made this assertion in defense of Christine Blasey Ford's spotty testimony against Brett Kavanaugh, and now in this current case his words come back to bite the left and support the President.

Trump responded to the news of the accusation in a statement released on Friday. “I’ve never met this person in my life,” he said of Carroll. “She is trying to sell a new book — that should indicate her motivation. It should be sold in the fiction section.”

“False accusations diminish the severity of real assault,” the president added. “All should condemn false accusations and any actual assault in the strongest possible terms.”



Please consider following Brain Flushings and also visit the ads on the pages. Follow me on Parler.com, my handle is @Heyrobo, or on Twitter--my handle there is: @RobHoey
Thanks






Tweet

Former Dem staffer pleads guilty to doxxing Republicans during Kavanaugh hearing

Jackson Cosko
Photo: Tennessee Star

Jackson Cosko, the former Democrat House staffer accused of posting private information of GOP senators during then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh hearings for uncorroborated sexual assault that was alleged to have taken place over 30 years ago, has pleaded guilty to his crimes.

Cosko, at that time, was a fellow in Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee’s (D-TX) office. He pleaded guilty on Friday to doxxing the senators and threatening a senate staffer with whom he previously worked after the staffer witnessed him using one of the office’s computers to post the information.

The Washington Post reports that Cosko pleaded guilty to “two counts of making public restricted personal information and one count each of computer fraud, witness tampering and obstruction of justice.” 

Jackson Pollock
Photo: Brain Pickings

Cosko, a veritable bottom-feeder, admitted to his crimes as part of a plea deal he reached with prosecutors a week earlier.

Cosko admitted in his plea agreement, according to the Post, to posting the private information of Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Mike Lee (R-UT), Rand Paul (R-KY) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). In October, Cosko contested the charges against him and faced up to 20 years in the slammer for his crimes.

In a statement to the Post, Cosko’s attorney Brian Stolarz blamed his client's actions on drugs rather than the fact that Cosko sucks.

“Mr. Cosko takes full responsibility for his actions [as if he has a choice] and is sincerely remorseful [due to the fact that he got caught.] Sadly, Mr. Cosko’s ongoing struggle with drugs contributed to a regrettable course of conduct. He is committed to rehabilitating his life, his reputation, and addressing his addiction,” Stolarz said. 

Interesting that Cosko could work in government and get away with his alleged addiction.

As the Daily Wire previously reported, Cosko entered the office of his former boss, Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH) in order to use a computer to publish the private information. A staffer in Hassan’s office recognized him and reported him. Cosko then sent that staffer a threatening email saying that if they told anyone he would “leak it all.”

But that wasn't him--it was the drugs talking.

“Emails signal conversations gmails. Senators children’s health information and socials,” Cosko wrote while stoned out on drugs.

Cosko reportedly had terabytes of information stolen from the senate while he was stoned, some of which was sensitive. When investigators searched his home they found cocaine, methamphetamine, and drug paraphernalia. They also found several computers, phones, tablets and senate letterhead he had taken from Hassan’s office. He had previously been dismissed by Hassan for unspecified reasons, but it's a good chance that it was for coming to work stoned and being mistaken for a socialist.

The Post reported that Cosko was “angry” for being fired from Hassan’s office last May, so he “engaged in an extraordinarily extensive data theft scheme.” He copied network drives, including sensitive information, to use in the future.

Jackson Browne
Photo: Billboard

But it wasn't like it was planned because it was really the fault of the drugs.

For admitting his guilt, Cosko will face only 46 to 57 months in prison, instead of the 20 years he was facing. Sentencing will take place on June 13. The Post reported Cosko has already served four months in jail.

Missing from the Post article is information regarding Cosko’s family connections. 

Cosko’s daddy is the CEO of the hugely successful construction company, Hathaway Dinwiddie. His father also has ties to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), whose office was contacted by Christine Blasey Ford when she made the allegations against Kavanaugh. 

It is not known whether Jackson Cosko tried to have intimate relations with Ms. Ford while on drugs, but if we wait 30 years, it's sure to come out in the wash.

Follow Brain Flushings and have a few laughs while you get a conservative viewpoint. Politics is the new NFL without the mindless kneeling and this blog will both inform you and will hopefully entertain you bigly.

Tweet

BREAKING: Christine Blasey Ford believes Joe Biden 'touched' her at a party in college

The following is satire.

Doctor Christine Blasey Ford has come forward with a blockbuster allegation:

"I believe that former Vice President Joe Biden may have touched my left breast at a pot party sponsored by Kamala Harris somewhere in California in the past. I was kind of stoned as was Kamala, but I was left with a strange feeling in my bra after I got home, and I know it was due to something untoward. Psychologically, it probably came from Joe Biden."

If this proves to be true, Biden is toast. If it turns out to be false, Ford will still get to keep the money she earned in the Brett Kavanaugh U.S. Supreme Court confirmation hearing. Either way, she can't lose and Bob O'Rourke might even win it all.

In an interview with MSNBC special needs host Chris Matthews, Ford spoke through hot liberal tears in an obviously tough situation for her.

"It's my truth that Mr. Biden was inappropriate with me, even if he doesn't agree. A lot of men are inappropriate with me. I don't what it is that attracts these men to me, but it's my curse," she said dolefully as her nose began to clog and a tiny bubble formed beneath her right nostril. "Maybe I'm just too damn pretty."

Hearing the news of Ford's allegation, President Trump tweeted:

"Finally this bag of wind is telling the truth. She didn't tell the TRUTH with BRETT KAVANAUGH and she lied like a rug. She lied. Now she finally is telling the TRUTH. Oh, and the truth shall set you free!"

When Uncle Joe Biden heard of Ford's allegation he also took to Twitter:

"Don't believe her. I haven't even met the woman and never went to a marijuana party with Kamala Harris except for that one time and C. Blasey Ford wasn't there, I think."

CNN, MSNBC, CBS and ABC have not as yet reported on this story.

Follow Brain Flushings and have a few laughs while you get a conservative viewpoint. Politics is the new NFL without the mindless kneeling and this blog will both inform you and will hopefully entertain you bigly.

Tweet

Congress members will have to foot legal bills to settle sexual harassment claims

This is legislation passed this week that should have been passed when George Washington was checking his teeth for wood termites. Members of Congress who are accused of sexual misconduct will no longer have a slush fund to cover their legal costs but will have to pay out of their own pockets.

The final version of the bill passed Thursday, according to the Huffington Post . They said it went "sailing" through the House and Senate by unanimous consent, because if it didn't those who refused to sign would have been closely scrutinized by both legislative bodies. It will be on the president's desk for his signature by week's end.

“Time is finally up for members of Congress who think that they can sexually harass and get away with it. They will no longer be able to slink away with no one knowing that they have harassed. ...They will pay back the U.S. Treasury,” Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA), one of the main sponsors of the bill told reporters on Thursday, according to Reuters.


The bill was being considered for quite a while Speier pointed out in her speech: 

“We want to thank 1,500 former staff members of Congress who wrote a letter to us who made the case all too clear, that sexual harassment in Congress was a huge problem."

You can see how slow the U.S. legislature moves when you consider that Speier and a bipartisan group of Congressional leaders began drafting the bill last year. 

When the "#MeToo" movement went viral across social media, a slew of powerful men in Hollywood, the media, and even in the Federal government, our politicians knew they had to get rid of the taxpayer-funded slush fund politicians were using to cover their legal costs. 

Both Sen. Al "Frogface" Franken (D-MN) and Rep. Blake "The Other Pajama Boy" Farenthold (R-TX) resigned their positions in Congress after past indiscretions came to light in late 2017 and early 2018.

Farenthold spent more than $84,000 in Federal slush fund money defending himself against a suit brought by a former legislative director who claimed the then-Congressman used inappropriate, sexually charged language in an interaction. Another aide also claimed Farenthold created an unsafe work environment through his sexualized language and foul exploits.


HuffPo reports that the bill goes further than merely limiting cash flow, reforming a grievance reporting system mired in the 1990s: 

"Under the current law, which has been in place since 1995, Capitol Hill staffers who claim they’ve been harassed or discriminated against have to undergo counseling, mandatory arbitration and a 30-day 'cooling off' period before going to court. They won’t have to do any of that anymore."

The bill doesn't accomplish everything Speier set out to do, such as castrate all white male lawmakers in the GOP who are found guilty, but she's hoping it will eventually make its way into the bill in the future when Democrats take over the House.

Also, the law isn't retroactive, like the texting tax Speier's state of California is hoping to impose on residents with cell phones.

The provisions in the bill are limited to sexual harassment claims and sexual misconduct claims only. The bill doesn't cover claims of discrimination, even if those claims are sexual in nature.

 The bill also doesn't provide representation to alleged victims free of charge. Why should it when there are people such as Christine Blasey Ford and Julie Swetnick who make uncorroborated accusations?

There's still a presumption of innocence for the accused so both parties need to start out on equal footing.

Hello fellow conservatives. At this time of year when everyone has a hand out for a hand-out, I don't. I simply want you to follow Brain Flushings and check out the ads on this page. It's free, I'm free and you're free to follow me or not. I hope you do. 

I hope you have a wonderful Christmas.

Tweet

Senate panel's FBI report finds 'no evidence' to support Kavanaugh accusers' claims

Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh is in the clear. The accusations made by multiple women of sexual misconduct found zero witnesses that could provide evidence to back their claims, a letter to Senate Republicans from the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), said Friday.

According to the report released by Grassley, the FBI interviewed more than 40 people, social media and news reports. Information provided by Kavanaugh and his accusers was also reviewed.

"Following the separate and extensive investigations by both the Committee and the FBI, there was no evidence to substantiate any of the claims of sexual assault made against Justice Kavanaugh," the report states.

Among those questioned were Mark Judge, PJ Smyth, and Leland Keyser. These individuals were claimed by accuser Christine Blasey Ford to be in the house when Kavanaugh allegedly threw her on the bed and sexually assaulted sometime in the 1980s.

Last month, Grassley requested an investigation be performed by the FBI into accuser Julie Swetnick and her attorney, the execrable Michael Avenatti, known as the porn star lawyer for representing Stormy Daniels in her allegations against President Trump. Swetnick's credibility was questioned after an ex-boyfriend revealed to Fox News that "she exaggerated everything' and even threatened to kill his unborn child after he married someone else.

The investigation could not find evidence to support either Swetnick's or Ford's claims. In fact, Swetnick made several contradictory statements about her claims during TV interviews and refused to speak with committee investigators, the letter stated.

"Indeed, the evidence appears to support the position that Julie Swetnick and Mr. Avenatti criminally conspired to make materially false statements to the Committee and obstruck the Committee's investigation," Grassley said.

Grassley also requested an investigation into Judy Munro-Leighton, who anonymously claimed Kavanaugh struck her and forced her to perform oral sex on him.

Munro-Leighton contacted the committee last month claiming she wrote an anonymous letter accusing Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, but Grassley said she later recanted authorship of the letter and admitted to not knowing Kavanaugh when questioned by the committee.

"She later admitted that she was not the author of it and merely used it as a "ploy" to "get attention" and had never met Justice Kavanaugh," the letter stated.

There was no evidence of any wrongdoing on Kavanaugh's part, but given the chance, the Democrats would try to impeach him anyway because they don't want a conservative justice screwing up their plans for a socialist nation.

Please click the "Follow" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page because it helps the economy and me.

Tweet

Blasey Ford had nothing to gain except money and fame

"You can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but you can fool liberals all of the time."--Vinny Boombots

During the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearing for SCOTUS, the Democrats who questioned Christine Blasey Ford kept saying the poor, poor woman had "nothing to gain" by accusing Kavanaugh [now Justice Kavanaugh] of fondling her during a drunken party 36 years ago when she was 15 and he was 17.

She had absolutely nothing to gain. She merely did it because it was her civic duty to come forward and attempt to ruin a man's reputation and his career.

Bull crap.

It turns out Ford will be rolling in dough and a probable book deal for putting herself out there with her accusations and not one shred of corroboration from her alleged witnesses, one of whom is her lifelong friend.

"Ford stands to gain some $1 million and counting from national crowdfunding campaigns launched by friends and other supporters, while she is said to be fielding book offers," Real Clear Investigation wrote Monday.

The potential seven-figure windfall, which she says she intends to cash in on--while still asking donors for more money--has some questioning her motivation for accusing the conservative judge after 35 years of silence, and whether it goes beyond personal or even political justice. Others worry the largesse sets a dangerous precedent: Crowdfunding, which unlike political donations is unregulated, could be routinely used in the future as a bounty for providing political dirt on opponents.

Two GoFundMe accounts have raised more than $842,000 for Ford, and the money is still coming in weeks after she testified and left the spotlight. The total does not include a third account collecting $120,000 for an academic endowment in her name.

"The costs for security, housing, transportation and other related expenses are much higher than we anticipated and they do not show signs of letting up," Ford said in a recent statement posted on the GoFundMe page of the "Help Christine Blasey Ford" campaign, which is still bringing in donations. "Funds received via this account will be used to help us pay for these mounting expenses."

Except that she's lying.

All of Ford's legal fees and polygraph examination were paid for by Democratic lawyers assigned to her by the Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. And "panel Democrats were allotted half of a $1 million committee fund for transportation, security, investigations and other expenses associated with the tumultuous confirmation process. The Senate Sergeant at Arms and Capitol Police also provided 'heightened security' for Ford."

An attorney familiar with the case said, "Her lawyers said they were representing her on a pro-bono basis. Why does she need all of this money?"

Because it's how she rolls--she lied then, she's obviously lying now.


Please click the "Follow" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page because it helps the economy and me.

Tweet

FBI's Chris Wray responds with a 'flip-off' to left's complaints about Kavanaugh investigation

FBI Director Christopher Wray stood up to the Democrat's claims that the his agency's investigation of  Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh was not sufficiently thorough and perhaps even partisan.

Of course the left always makes claims attacking anyone who disagrees with their agenda. It wasn't long ago Democrats praised the FBI when they went forward in the Russian collusion investigation having to do with the 2016 presidential election.

Wray appeared before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee at a hearing. The hearing was to discuss terrorism threats [Antifa not included] and he was asked by Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) about the Kavanaugh investigation. Harris, you may recall, is an obnoxious leftist who immediately and rudely interrupted the Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) when the hearing first began. She has presidential aspirations in 2020 and for that, was a leader of the destroy Kavanaugh bloc on the committee.

Harris was San Francisco District Attorney from 2003 to 2010. She became Attorney General in 2010.

According to San Francisco Weekly reporter Matt Smith, Harris "rebuffed reporters' efforts for five years to view her office's files on Catholic clergy sex abuse under the state Public Records Act, despite statements by former San Francisco DA Terence Hallinan saying they should be released."

The files they referenced involve the San Francisco Archdiocese files on clergy sexual abuse and contain details of how the church handled the allegations internally. The charges involved: pederast, homosexuality, and pedophilia by priests going back as far as 80 years.

Apparently, Kamala Harris covered up the allegations by not releasing the truth. And she was "point" on the Kavanaugh sexual misconduct attack that was alleged to have taken place when he was 17-years-old, which was 36 years ago.

So Harris asked Director Wray if the FBI had latitude "to investigate whatever your agency thought was appropriate to figure out what happened," The Hill reported.

"Our investigation here, our supplemental update to the previous background investigation, was limited in scope and that is consistent with the standard process for such investigations going back quite a long ways," Wray responded.

"As was standard, the investigation was very specific in scope and limited in scope and that is the usual process and that my folks have assured me that the usual process was followed."

Wray explained that the investigation was termed a "supplemental background investigation." He said such investigations are very different from criminal investigations.

"Our only authority is as requested by the adjudicating (entity), in this case the White House," Wray said.

He added, "I've spoken with our background investigation specialists and they have assured me this was handled in a way consistent with their experience and the standard process."

Democrats hoped the investigation would last into the midterm elections in November and if they won the House, they would move to impeach Kavanaugh and Trump and Pence and maybe Collins, who cast the deciding vote to confirm Kavanaugh. The Democrats claimed the investigation should have unlimited time to investigate all sexual misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh starting from his high school and college years, and including "Belchy Voice" Christine Blasey Ford, who made accusations, produced witnesses, and not one of them, including a lifelong close friend, corroborated her story.

Last week, Harris attacked the FBI probe, claiming it was "not a search for the truth, this was not an investigation, this was an abdication of responsibility and duty."

Harris is full of bull crap.

Ford and Kavanaugh were not interviewed by the FBI because they were already interviewed by the Committee and if their story changed, they would have committed perjury. And the FBI is not going to waste their time going over the same story.

It's time for two things to happen: one, the Democrats need to let this go and figure out a real platform for their party; and two, Kamala Harris needs to buy a mirror and look in it.


Please click the "Subscribe" button at the top and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page because it helps the economy and me.

Tweet

Dems Warren, Gillibrand speak at rally hosted by 2 Hamas lovers

Senators Elizabeth "Fauxcahontas" Warren D-Mass., and Kirsten "Which Way Bloweth the Wind?" Gillibrand D-NY spoke Thursday at the Supreme Court rally hosted by Linda "I Love Some Hamas" Sarsour, a Sharia-loving, anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist activist, and Tamika Mallory.

Sarsour and Mallory hosted the rally to show their support for Christine Blasey Ford, the accuser of Brett Kavanaugh who was unable to produce a shred of corroboration for her claim, even by her lifelong friend, of sexual misconduct.

Both girls, Mallory and Sarsour, talked about their hatred before handing the microphone over to Fauxcahontas, who said she knows a liar when she is one, and believes Ford's testimony, in spite of all the holes in it, and because it's politically advantageous for her to say that.

"I believe Christine Blasey Ford. I am angry on behalf of my tribe, and for women who have been told to sit down and shut up one time too many [such as Juanita Brodderick, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey and Jennifer Flowers, not to mention Mary Jo Kopechne]," the fake Native American tweeted afterward.

Then Sarsour grabbed the mic. "I want to introduce to you another champion, another one of our people who works for us on the inside. Someone who understands that she works for the people of this country, who's been speaking up against sexual assault and sexual violence before there was a Brett Kavanaugh. [Before there was Sharia Law that allows husbands to beat their wives--all 4 if they have the full allowance]. Please give it up for the senator," she said as she introduced Gillibrand, whose opinions change faster than the towels in a house of ill repute.

Both Sarsour and Mallory have a history of slamming Israel and giving kudos and kisses to Nation of Islam Louis Farrakhan, an openly anti-Semite and scumcrumpet.

Mallory was strongly criticized in March for attending Farrakhan's Savior's Day address where he openly attacked "that Satanic Jew," and called Jews "the mother and father of apartheid," which is a ridiculous statement if you know anything about Israeli Jews. [If you're a wounded Hamasshole, you will be treated as any other patient in an Israeli hospital. If you're a Jew, you will be treated to a beheading in a Palestinian hospital.] Farrakhan went on to hatefully add: "when you want something in this world, the Jew holds the door."

Because Mallory attended the event with Farrakhan, a regional Planned Parenthood organization serving the Northwest U.S. and Hawaii announced they were parting ways with her for their April luncheon in 2016, where she was scheduled to be the keynote speaker.

Maybe her referring to Farrakhan as "honorable" added to their decision.

But Mallory is in interesting company: Keith Ellison is a Farrakhan ear licker as are: Barack Obama, Maxine Waters, Barbara Lee, Andre Carson, Danny Davis, Gregory Meeks, and Al Green--all Democrats.

Sarsour also has a long history of being anti-Semitic and anti-Israel [which really is the same thing]. She gave a speech in 2015 at a Nation of Islam event which was very critical of Israel and has discounted anti-Semitism, trying to normalize it by saying that "while anti-Semitism is something that impacts Jewish Americans, it's different than anti-black racism or Islamophobia because it's not systemic."

Except that it is. There are almost double the number of anti-Semitic incidents recorded in the U.S. yearly than Islamic attacks or attacks on blacks by other groups. As Ben Shapiro says, facts don't care about your feelings, and they sure as hell don't care about Linda Sarsour's.

In June of this year, the Justice Delegation and the Center for Constitutional Rights hosted an event where Sarsour said, "Palestine is the global social justice cause of our generation" and that there is an "apartheid happening in Palestine, funded by our taxpayer's money."

Mallory was also there and said that the state of Israel "takes the lives of people who were there first."

She needs to read the Old Testament and a little history. The "country" of Palestine is a made up land of make believe. No such country existed in history, but they would have the world believe otherwise.

Last year, Sarsour called for a "jihad" or holy war, against the Trump administration speaking at the annual Islamic Society of North America convention in Chicago. ISNA, as they're called, is an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, a terrorist organization.

Congratulations, Senators Warren and Gillibrand. You have hitched your wagon to flaming hate mongers. Antifa must be very proud of you both.


Click the "Follow Posts" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page because it helps the economy and me.


Tweet

Ex's letter may cause name change to Christine Blasey Fraud

The veracity of Christine Blasey Ford has come into question after an ex-boyfriend reportedly wrote a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee that contradicted her testimony last Thursday about her knowledge and experience with polygraphs. It caused Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) to raise some doubts about her truthfulness.

The man [whose name was redacted] was in a relationship with Blasey Ford from 1992 to 1998. The letter in question was obtained by Fox News and it stated that he once saw Ford help assuage the anxiety of a friend preparing to take a polygraph by "explaining in detail what to expect" and how they work.

At the Brett Kavanaugh hearing last Thursday, Arizona sex-crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell asked Ford if she had ever spoken to anyone other than her lawyers about "how to take a polygraph." Ford's reply: "Never."

The anonymous man also said that throughout the endurance of their relationship with Ford, she never mentioned Brett Kavanaugh or her experience as a sexual assault victim.

Grassley asked Ford's lawyers in a letter for the results of her polygraph saying the ex-boyfriend's claim "raises specific concerns about the reliability of [Ford's] polygraph examination-results."

Democrats are showing themselves to be upset that poor little Dr. Ford may not be as honest as she tries to appear. In spite of all the sexual misconduct events that have been alleged to have taken place with members of their party [Cory Booker being one of the members alleged to have been abusive to a former female partner], they have displayed indignation with the very idea of not believing Ford's story.

After being totally open to hearing it, and being respectful to Ford, the left portrays the situation as "guilty until proved innocent."


Click the "Follow Posts" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page because it helps the economy and me.

Tweet

Ford is incredibly uncredible--here's why

I believe Christine Blasey Ford knows that she's lying, as in not telling the truth about her allegation that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her 36 years ago.

Ford doesn't remember exactly when and where, and the people she alleged who were supposedly at the pool party all deny being there and her close friend that was supposedly with her at the party said [under penalty of a felony] says she doesn't know Brett Kavanaugh.

She also said she doesn't travel by plane but that was untrue.

She also said that she was not told the committee would accommodate her in a place "of [your] convenience."

I believe Republican senators and the conservative media [such as Fox News] are claiming to believe that she, at least, believes her story while defending Kavanaugh, while actually believing she is lying. However, I suspect the reason they're saying they believe that she believes it is their fear of the MeToo movement.

So what else do we know about "Dr." Ford?

One thing we know is that prior to appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, she deleted her social media.

BUT . . . more importantly, it appears that her Bio Page from Stanford WAS ALTERED just 10 days before the hearing according to Jim Hoft in the Gateway Pundit.

At the hearing, Ford identified herself as a "Research Psychologist" at the Stanford School of Medicine. But after searching the Department of Consumer Affairs License Bureau, there were no results found for Christine Ford or even deviations of her name.

There are no state records showing Ford as a licensed psychologist, but her Stanford Bio Page describing her as a "Research Psychologist" that in 2015:

Was changed on September 28, 2018 to appear thus:

It looks like Ford's got a lot of 'splainin' to do. If not her, then her lawyer(s).

This is definitely a mark against her credibility. According to Gateway Pundit, Ford's Stanford bio page was REVISED SEVEN TIMES before she gave her testimony to the committee, and her original page where she gave her title as "Research Psychologist" has since been removed.

So why should I believe Ford, who has exactly zero corroborating data to support her claim, as well as her longstanding friend who refutes it, over Brett Kavanaugh who produced evidence to corroborate his statement that he did not engage in any  inappropriate activity Ford alleges?

They say in court that if you're caught lying in one instance, the jury can take it to mean that you're lying altogether.


Click the "Follow Posts" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page.


Tweet

Joyless Behar hates her white skin

Joy Behar said on Friday that the reason Senate Republicans want to push Kavanaugh's vote for confirmation to the Supreme Court without an FBI investigation is the GOP's way of retaining their "white power."

Behar, a co-host of the 'special needs education' TV programming known as "The View," made her racist, self-loathing statement [she is a Caucasian female] as a reaction to Thursdays Senate Judiciary Committee hearing to confirm Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

Kavanaugh is accused of sexual misconduct by Christine Blasey Ford who cited people who she alleged witness the crime, that was said to have happened 36 years go, but all of those she mentioned have refuted her story while Kavanaugh was able to show corroborating evidence that he was never at the so-called party Ford mentions in the allegation.

"The people on the Republican side, it looks to me," Behar began, "do not want to investigate this any further. They just want to hold on to their power. They know that this country is getting darker. White Europeans are now 61 percent of the population . . . In 2045 it will be 49 percent."

[Gee, that never occurred to me. I don't count people by their skin color like liberals tend to do. I'm not even married to a white woman and I happen to be white.]

The low-information host was referencing stats from a 2014 study from the Brookings Institute.

"So it's almost like they're worried that, 'Oh white people are going to lose all their power.' So they don't care if she's lying or he's lying. They just want to hold onto their power."

What power? Aren't there laws to ensure that skin color is not a determining factor in outcome--except for liberal institutions that make a preference for people of color. Harvard University apparently favors blacks over others and have even made it more difficult for Asians to be accepted as they require a higher score than blacks.

And facts do not make me a white supremacist, because I am not and never have been. But I am sick and tired of liberals attacking "old white men." That's racist and ageist all rolled up into one form of racism.

There is a guarantee of opportunity in this country, not a guarantee of outcome. Not everyone in the adult world gets a trophy. It's the liberal way of thinking and it's immoral because it attacks the concept of hard work and various natural abilities.

Behar went on to claim that the U.S. would soon look like South Africa; an apartheid nation, "where ten percent of white people were running the country."

Ironically, the 115th Congress elected in 2016 is the most diverse in U.S. history.

The U.S. will never look like South Africa.

On Friday, President Trump ordered the FBI to conduct a limited "supplemental" background investigation into the unsubstantiated allegations made by Dr. Ford, after the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to endorse Kavanaugh in a 11-10 party-line vote. The inquiry is not to last more than one week.

Click the "Follow Posts" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page.


Tweet

BREAKING: Mark Judge will cooperate with FBI

An attorney for Brett Kavanaugh's high school chum, Mark Judge, told CNBC that Judge will cooperate with the FBI and "will answer any and all questions posed to him" by that agency regarding the alleged sexual assault by Kavanaugh against Christine Blasey Ford when they were both high school students.

It's horribly ironic for Kavanaugh that all of his alleged victims are staunch Democrats, and may even have ties to George Soros. It's also weird that all of these alleged assaults have never been repeated over the years and after six FBI investigations after the alleged Ford situation.

The offer of cooperation comes after several Democratic senators, and Jeff Flake [but I practically repeat myself] asked for yet another delay in order for the FBI to investigate the case.

But one must be skeptical. If the FBI couldn't find anything on the Russia probe after two years, what can we expect them to find in a week in a case that's over 36 years old? Unless, perhaps, like James Comey, they make stuff up.

"If the FBI or any law enforcement agency requests Mr. Judge's cooperation, he will answer any and all questions posed to him," Judge's lawyer, Barbara Van Gelder said in an email to CNBC.

CNBC, a scummy leftist outlet, reported that Judge is a recovering alcoholic who admitted to abusing alcohol in high school. They went on to add that he has no memory of the described incident, alluding to the fact that his memory of said allegation may have been impaired. [Hopefully his grades will tell a different story.]

Ford, a research psychologist, is clueless on how to contact her own Congress person and didn't know who paid for her polygraph test, nor how to access a GoFundMe website.

This has been the worst display of political maneuvering of the U.S. Senate in modern times. I am thinking about taking a one week hiatus from political news and just blog about more normal craziness.


Click the "Follow Posts" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page.


Tweet

Kavanaugh hearing: here we go again as Ford's testimony may circle the bowl

The lawyer for Christine Blasey Ford, the accuser of Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, appears to be getting cold feet in her Jimmy Choo pumps, putting Thursday's highly anticipated hearing in jeopardy.

The demands Ford's lawyers are making since Ford went public seem to change more frequently than the sheets in a Tijuana brothel [but I wouldn't actually know about that].

The latest message, sent to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley late Monday was obtained by Fox News. Ford's lawyer took issue "with apparent plans for an outside counsel to ask questions," a procedure spelled out in the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution:

". . . the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury. . . and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, to be confronted with the witnesses against him . . . and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense."

The lawyer's message also addressed volatile comments made by Mitch McConnell (R-KY), accusing the Democrats' smear campaign of a "smear campaign."

"We are finding it difficult to reconcile your letter and [staff member Mike Davis'] note with the Majority Leader's speech this afternoon on the Senate floor. As Dr. Blasey Ford has been clear since her experience was first made public, she came forward because she believes it is her civic duty to tell the truth about the sexual assault she experienced," wrote Ford's  cis gender attorney Michael Bromwich.

"You said in your letter that you intend to provide a 'fair and credible' process--Yet earlier today, the Majority Leader dismissed Dr. Ford's experience as a 'smear campaign,' claiming mistakenly that the witnesses' statements to the Committee constitute 'a complete lack of evidence,' implying that there has been a thorough investigation," Bromwich wrote, oblivious to the fact that two things can be true simultaneously: that there will be a fair and credible process, and that it is a smear campaign.

Bromwich is clearly worried by an email from Davis that suggested an outside counsel would [defending Kavanaugh] would question Ford, as is the usual judicial procedure.

But maybe, this is the grand Democrat plan--to find excuses for Ford not to testify on Thursday.

"This hearing plan that Mr. Davis described does not appear designed to provide Dr. Blasey Ford with fair and respectful treatment," Bromwich wrote.

But what about fair and respectful treatment to Kavanaugh? He has already been labeled as a sexual predator without a hearing, before hearing from him, and before hearing from Ford as well.

This may turn out to be a black eye for the MeToo movement because anyone with eyes, ears and a brain know it's a delay tactic. Plan A is Blasey Ford, Plan B is Ramirez [who has made a similar claim but was drunk and isn't sure it was Kavanaugh] and now the clown, Michael "Porn Pro" Avenatti with Plan C.

Kavanaugh has denied Ford's allegation totally as well as Ramirez's who said he exposed himself to her while at Yale, but as mentioned, she isn't certain it was definitely him.

In a Fox News interview, Kavanaugh admitted that he was a virgin in high school and college which gave Avenatti the idea that because of this statement, he had to be lying. Perhaps Avenatti lost his virginity as an alter boy or in grammar school, but there are plenty of people who believe in virginity until marriage. Avenatti doesn't understand that concept because he's an idiot.

"I want a fair process where I can defend my integrity, and I know I'm telling the truth," Kavanaugh said. "I know my lifelong record and I'm not going to let false accusations drive me out of this process. I have faith in G_d and I have faith in the fairness of the American people."

But not all Democrats are real American people.


Click the "Follow Posts" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page.



Tweet

WOW: Kavanaugh has evidence to support his claim

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is reported to have calendars going back to 1982, the year he is alleged to have committed a sexual assault on Christine Blasey Ford when he was 17 and she was 15. She claims they were at a party and he got on top of her and tried to remove her one-piece swimsuit. He totally denies the claim and even states he was not at the alleged party.

The calendars reportedly show that Judge Kavanaugh was frequently out of town with his parents and, even when he was home, he was very busy with multiple planned sports activities that he participated in, The New York Times reports.

Although Ford doesn't remember when the party happened, [she and her classmates at her private school were often intoxicated at parties] she believes it took place in the summer of 1982. If this was an actual lawsuit, it would have been laughed out of court, but since it's the left attacking the right, it is to be taken seriously, so seriously that the FBI should be involved, in spite of it not being a federal case, nor within the purview of the agency.

The calendars depict "his basketball games, movie outings, football workouts and college interviews," and several parties that "include names of friends other than those identified by Dr. Blasey."

Kavanaugh's lawyers [whom Blasey Ford didn't want to allow him to use] reportedly plan to argue to the Senate Judiciary Committee that the calendars do not corroborate Ford's story of what happened based on the fact that he wasn't usually in town that summer and when he was, he focused on sports and academics as he prepared for college.

Thus far, all four people who Ford said were at the party, have said that they either don't remember the party or have denied it.

Kristin Gillibrand (Dummy--NY) said that if Kavanaugh was innocent, he should want the FBI to investigate him. She, on the other hand, did not ask for the FBI to investigate her in spite of her close association with Harvey Weinstein and Bill Clinton. In fact, neither did Hillary Clinton.


Click the "Follow Posts" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page.



Tweet

Long-time friend of Blasey Ford has a different take on the 'party'

Leland Ingham Keyser, a long-time friend of Christine Blasey Ford, the accuser of sexual misconduct by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, reached out to the Senate Judiciary Committee Saturday.

Ford claims Kavanaugh pushed her onto a bed and pinned her when he was drunk at a pool party. When she tried to scream for help, he covered her mouth and attempted to undress her. This alleged incident took place in perhaps 1982, or maybe '81 or '83. Anyway, they were both in high school--he was maybe 17 and she was possibly 15 or so.

But the friend of Ford's has denied she was at the party where the alleged assault allegedly occurred.

The Senate Judiciary Committee reached out to Leland Ingham Keyser.

Keyser's lawyer, Howard Walsh, responded to the committee late Saturday with a written statement:

"Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford."

Keyser isn't just some woman who Blasey Ford knew in passing when they were in high school, they are lifelong friends, according to Walsh. Keyser is the third person to deny suggestions that they were at the alleged party. Mark Judge and Patrick J. Smyth have also issued statements denying Ford's recollection of the alleged party.

Smyth said in a statement: "Personally speaking, I have known Brett Kavanaugh since high school and I know him to be a person of great integrity, a great friends, and I have never witnessed any improper conduct by Brett Kavanaugh towards women."

Ford is a California psychology professor. She has said she's willing to testify to the Judiciary Committee on Thursday but said she is afraid to fly to Washington, D.C. and must drive from California, which is why she asked for a delay until Thursday rather than the originally scheduled day on Monday. Ironically, she was not afraid to fly to Hawaii a few years ago to intern there.

The details of Ford's testifying are being negotiated with her attorneys.

One request was to have Kavanaugh go first as a witness, which is insane, since he has nothing to defend until he is told what is being alleged.

Another request is to not have Kavanaugh in the room when Ford testifies and that he must be denied the right to an attorney to represent him. Only Republican senators on the committee can represent him in order to solidify the Democratic base for the November midterm elections.

If he chooses to do so, Kavanaugh can use a kangaroo to represent him to keep in line with the judicial procedures Ford hopes to employ.

Kavanaugh has denied the accusation under oath. "I have never done anything like what the accuser describes. To her or to anyone," he said.

And after all this fuss, I believe he's innocent. Prove me wrong, Ford.


Click the "Follow Posts" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page.


Tweet