100 Years! Kim and I Are On The Same Page!

I propose feminists seek Federal Legislation that allows women, who were sexually assaulted or believe they were, to have 100 years from the date of the alleged act to bring charges so that they do not feel aggrieved and they have sufficient time to remember what they otherwise, might have forgotten.  Their right to litigate could also be passed through to inheritors in their will should the accusing party pass away prior to 100 years..

This overhang threat of potential lawsuits would serve to remind all men a sword hangs over their "head."  This might be particularly beneficial for European women, Germans specifically, who have been assaulted by peace loving Muslims who have immigrated to their country.

Should an accused male pass away before 100 years of the alleged act his estate would still remain liable.  Should average life expectancy go beyond 100 years, Congress, which by then should be totally female, could extend the period.

Finally, any male who has engaged in such unwarranted behaviour should be assumed guilty and the burden of proof should be his and not that of the accuser. This may fly in the face of current constitutional precepts but by changing the rules of evidence it would send a clear signal that feminists now have the upper hand with respect to sexual activity. 

This new law would apply to those few remaining women who still believe marriage is a worthwhile endeavor.

A side societal benefit of such legislation should be no more males would seek nomination to The Supreme Court and we can resume what FDR once tried by packing the court and this time go forward with women.  Women are more balanced in their judgement and compassion and they are more likely to be evenhanded.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Kim and I are in accord once again. (See 1 and 1a below.)

This was sent to me by a dear friend and fellow memo reader. " this is an excellent article: the Repubs must stick together and attack with a well-coordinated plan. They must not only defend Kavanaugh but attack his critics for their abuse of their positions for nothing more than political gain.  If a few politicians lost their cushy positions because of this, it might prevent future attempts to control Supreme Court appointees. B--"
+++++++++++++++++++++
Is Mueller working through the press? (See 2 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) The GOP Can’t Win for Losing

A Kavanaugh defeat would demoralize the Republican base, not energize it.

By Kimberley Strassel

As the battle over Brett Kavanaugh rages on, pundits continue to speculate about what an unproven sexual-misconduct claim might mean for the future makeup of the Supreme Court, for subsequent nominations and for the credibility of the #MeToo movement.

In the halls of Capitol Hill, the question centers on a much more immediate and political question: the fate of the Republican Party. The overwhelming verdict—on right and left—is that if Judge Kavanaugh goes down, so too does the GOP in the upcoming midterms.

For now, the distinguished circuit-court judge is on track for confirmation. Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley has handled Christine Blasey Ford’s 36-year-old accusation with enormous accommodation, inviting her to give evidence in any manner of her choosing—a public or private hearing, in Washington or California, in person or over the phone. Her decision to join with partisan Democratic calls for an FBI investigation, and her refusal to provide testimony in any form for a Monday hearing, has troubled Republican senators who insisted she be heard.

Tennessee’s Bob Corker put the point clearly in a tweet on Monday: “Republicans extended a hand in good faith. If we don’t hear from both sides on Monday, let’s vote.” Even undecided Republican senators understand the Democratic playbook and appreciate how unjust it would be to allow a vague, uncorroborated claim to derail Judge Kavanaugh’s career and reputation—especially if his accuser won’t even put her claims in the Senate record.

But with Democrats and their media allies stopping at nothing to derail this nomination, even confident Republicans have been forced to consider the prospect of a defeat. A few GOP optimists, inside and outside the White House, are spreading the claim that a Kavanaugh loss could have a midterm upside. The argument: Candidates would light up the base by highlighting Democrats’ ambush tactics. President Trump would name a new nominee, and voters would rush to the polls to guarantee a GOP Senate and an ultimate confirmation.

And then a flock of porcine wonders will fly.

Wiser Republicans note there’s a reason Spartacus & Co. are working so hard to defeat this nomination. It’s partly because they despise Judge Kavanaugh’s philosophy and fear a fifth conservative on the high court. It’s partly because they want to spare their red-state colleagues a difficult choice before the midterms. But it is mostly because it is a fabulousissue with the Democratic base. Nothing would more energize that part of the electorate than a Kavanaugh scalp.

It would signal the “resistance” is effective and spur an avalanche of votes for liberal candidates who promise continued obstruction of Mr. Trump’s agenda. Democrats will promise that Senate control would allow them to block any replacement nominee as well and keep the seat open until Democrats take the presidency in 2020. For voters still smarting over Merrick Garland, that’s the ultimate motivator.

Republican voters? Oh yes, the base is furious over the Democratic treatment of Judge Kavanaugh. They are angry over the theatrical and uncivil hearings. They are riled up over this late and dirty Democratic hit, the releasing of an accuser’s letter months after it was first obtained.

But listen to those base voters on Twitter , on radio, in public forums. They are prepared to release most of their rage over any Kavanaugh defeat on the Republican Party. One of their abiding complaints is that GOP politicians too easily succumb to liberal tactics. It is among the most-cited reasons they voted for Mr. Trump—that (for better or worse) he doesn’t back down. And while some are tolerant of a process that allows this accuser to speak, what the base mostly sees is an old, unsubstantiated, unprovable claim, and a partisan smear designed to deny a duly elected president his Supreme Court pick.

These voters handed Republicans control of the White House and Congress in large part to oversee these Supreme Court fights. Republicans have 51 votes, a sterling candidate, and no excuses. Good luck to any GOP candidate who turns around and promises a new nominee after a Kavanaugh fail. Why would or should voters believe Republicans would get it done the next time? Especially given that Democrats know they can repeat the ambush exercise. Among the reasons base Republicans lag Democrats in enthusiasm for this election is bitterness that the GOP failed in core promises to repeal ObamaCare and to restrain spending. A blown Supreme Court nominee would make matters far worse.

A newly minted Justice Kavanaugh is a crucial part of any winning 2018 message. His confirmation would be proof Republicans are willing to fight for and fulfill promises. It won’t guarantee that they’ll win the midterms and retain their majorities. But it will guard against the drubbing they’d receive from their own voters if they bow now to Chuck Schumer’s underhanded tactics.

1a) In what may be the least-surprising news of the week, activists from the Women’s March, Housing Works, and the Center for Popular Democracy admitted that they paid cash to protesters to disrupt the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings. Thanks to reporters from the Daily Caller, who obtained the call-in code for a conference call the groups were holding this week, we now know that these protests – which the media covered as if they were grassroots in nature – were actually bought and paid for by George Soros and other top Democrat Party donors.

While the groups preferred that activists bring their own cash to Capitol Hill to pay their post-and-forfeit fees – which resolve their misdemeanor charges on the spot when they are inevitably arrested and led out of the building – they said they would be happy to provide protesters with the money if it was necessary.

From the Daily Caller:

Protesters only need a government-issued ID and “your cash for the post-and-forfeit,” CPD national field organizer Darius Gordon said on the call.

The left-wing organizations would provide cash for the post-and-forfeits to protesters who didn’t show up with their own money, Gordon and another organizer, Housing Works national advocacy coordinator Paul Davis, both said on Monday’s call.

“If you do not have access to your cash we will certainly be able to arrange to get it to you before the action,” Davis said, noting that they had done so at previous anti-Kavanaugh protests.

Women’s March co-president Bob Bland, who also helped lead Monday’s call, praised protesters for putting “our bodies on the line again and again and again.”

The activists plan to “shut down” Kavanaugh’s confirmation proceedings on Monday, Davis said. “Just because they’ve delayed something doesn’t mean we’re done. It’s actually going to get very very ugly.”

Disrupting the hearings were constantly described throughout the call as acts of “civil disobedience” by organizers.

This is reprehensible and a distortion of our democracy. It’s bad enough to believe there are pro-abortion individuals out there so lacking in ethics that they would try to disrupt one of the most important public hearings of the year, but it’s even worse to realize that this is all a charade being paid for and organized by cash-happy socialists who want to keep the Planned Parenthood train a-rolling. Like we said, we’re not even slightly surprised by this revelation, but it is even more disappointing than we originally thought.

We do just have one more question, though: How much cash did these groups set aside for Christine Blasey Ford?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

2) Is Mueller Working With the Press?

by True Daily Staff

Robert Mueller’s office has been exposed for being full of leaks to the Press. The Daily Caller reports:

Hundreds of pages of emails and text messages released from the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) special counsel’s office through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request show an ongoing relationship between Robert Mueller’s team and the press, according to an investigation by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

The documents, released in September, span months of communication and include messages from reporters ranging from a variety of outlets, including The DCNF, The Washington Post and Buzz Feed.

While the vast majority of correspondences between Mueller’s spokesman Peter Carr and a variety of journalists ends with a “no comment,” the messages expose Mueller’s team was willing to meet with a number of reporters in private meetings and over the phone.

Coordinating such meetings cuts against the narrative that the special counsel has been hesitant to give information to the press, instead opting to give information only through public announcements and statements.

Would this explain why President Trump has called the investigation a witch hunt?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++