Tuesday Noon ~ TheFrontPageCover

[Rudy Tirre]

TheFrontPageCover

~ Featuring ~

NYT Exposing Rosenstein's 

Insubordination to Bait Trump? 

by Thomas Gallatin

.

Kavanaugh Has Found 1982 Calendar,

Detailed Entries Help Clear His Name 

by BENJAMIN ARIE

{ westernjournal.com } ~ The last-minute attempt to derail Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation as the next Supreme Court justice has just hit a serious snag... Facing damaging but almost completely unsubstantiated claims that he acted improperly with a girl back when he was a teenager, the conservative nominee has dug into his personal archives to defend himself. Up until now, the vague accusations made by Christine Blasey  Ford had only resulted in a “he said, she said” stalemate. Liberals insisted that Blasey Ford’s story of a bad encounter at a drunken party be believed, while conservatives have pointed out that the nearly 40-year-old claim is impossible to verify. Finally, Kavanaugh has presented tangible evidence that the accusation doesn’t hold up. On Sunday, The New York Times  reported that the judge has found old calendars from the period when the unproven groping allegedly took place — and they appear to support his claim that the incident didn’t happen. “Kavanaugh has calendars from the summer of 1982 that he plans to hand over to the Senate Judiciary Committee that do not show a party consistent with the description of his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford,” explained The Times. “The calendar pages from June, July and August 1982, which were examined by The New York Times, show that Judge Kavanaugh was out of town much of the summer at the beach or away with his parents,” the newspaper continued... This is very good news.  https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/kavanaugh-1982-calendar-entries/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=CTBreaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=conservative-tribune

.

The Burning of Brett Kavanaugh

by Deanna Chadwell

{ americanthinker.com } ~ Any thinking person today is hearing alarms going off in all directions over the Kavanaugh accusations... It’s obvious that this is all dirty politics; we can see that in the timing, in the fussiness about Ford testifying, in the nasty rhetoric that swirls in poisonous clouds throughout Washington. But the problem is much deeper. In the first place, we have no clearly defined morés for sexual behavior anymore. The sexual revolution has opened a multitude of fearful doors. Our young women find themselves defenseless in compromising situations and we have no guidance to give them. We have no way to counsel them -- or our young men either -– about just where the line is. Sex is now allowed, performed, promoted. Women feel they can behave in any way they wish, wear whatever they wish, and men have to hold that line and read feminine signals with no idea of what they mean. This looseness has been trending for decades and suddenly now we’ve turned puritanical and are horrified at the very thought of sexual advances happening. We have no clear idea of what, exactly, “sexual assault” means. From the precious little detail Ford has given, we can’t tell whether she’s describing teenaged roughhousing or attempted rape. She obviously wants us to picture the latter, but if she had suffered such a violent attack, would she not have been visibly distressed at the time? Wouldn’t friends have noticed? If anything happened at all between these two people, how do we know what it was, exactly? A hand brushing across a breast? Some pushing and shoving, playful or otherwise, that got out of hand? At what point do we know that a crime occurred? “Assault” is a violent, injury-producing attack. At least it used to be. A quick check with a dictionary defines “assault” as “an unlawful threat or attempt to do bodily injury to another.“ If Kavanaugh had actually committed such an act, wouldn’t that have been noticeable to others? Wouldn’t all the details be burned into her brain? You’d think so. Secondly, we live in a time in which men, especially white men, are automatically guilty -- of most everything, and in which women are all victims –- of everyone male. It is, in part, the vague definitions of sexual faux pas that have made this possible. Almost any advance a man makes can now be interpreted as over the line because no clear line exists. I find this disturbing. I’ve been around for a long time, worked with men for decades and have never known any who were sexually threatening, so this intense enmity between the sexes is incomprehensible to me...

https://www.{/articles/2018/09/the_burning_of_brett_kavanaugh.html

.

Co-Author of Kavanaugh Hit Piece Admits

Witness Never Saw the Incident 

by Rusty

{ thepoliticalinsider.com } ~ The standard for what constitutes a printable story these days has taken a serious downturn... Jane Mayer, the co-author of the already thoroughly specious story claiming that another woman was the victim of inappropriate behavior from Supreme Court justice nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, admitted that her corroborating witness provided only a second-hand account of the story. Actually, she first claimed that “he remembers it the story clearly” before being cornered by CBS anchor John Dickerson. “Did he see it?” Dickerson asked. “No,” Mayer responded. “As I’ve said, he heard it from someone who was there.” And that right there is why multiple outlets passed on the story while a two-bit operation like the New Yorker ran with it. Numerous doubts have arisen from the latest accuser’s story. Deborah Ramirez claims that while she and Kavanaugh were both students at Yale, the future Supreme Court Justice exposed himself and by virtue caused her to touch him in a sexual manner. The proof behind Ramirez’s claim is completely non-existent...

https://thepoliticalinsider.com/second-kavanaugh-accuser-witness-never-saw-incident/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=criticalimpact&utm_campaign=TPI_Afternoon_Newsletter_9_24_2018&utm_content=4b4ea4948726422aa6473c7b9fa19141&source=CI

.

A Month of Multiculturalism in Britain: August 2018

by Soeren Kern

{ gatestoneinstitute.org } ~ August 1. In a landmark ruling, a high court judge declared that a Muslim wife could divorce her husband and claim his assets... despite the fact that they married in an Islamic ceremony called a nikah, which is not legally recognized in Britain. In a written ruling, Mr. Justice Williams, who heard the case in the family division of the high court in London, concluded that the marriage fell within the scope of the 1973 Matrimonial Causes Act because the couple had expectations similar to those of a British marriage contract. The decision came after Nasreen Akhter divorced her husband, Mohammed Shabaz Khan, who attempted to block her separation on the basis that they were not legally married according to English law and only under Sharia law. Previous cases involving nikah marriages concluded that they were legally non-existent, meaning that spouses had no redress to the courts for a division of matrimonial assets if a marriage broke down. The ruling will make it easier for women who are married under Sharia law to divorce their husbands and split their assets. The ruling also appears to enshrine two parallel justice systems — British law and Sharia law — in Britain. August 2. British teenagers are being forced to marry abroad and are therefore effectively raped and often impregnated while the Home Office "turns a blind eye" by handing visas to their husbands, according to The Times. Officials received dozens of reports last year that women wanted to block visas to the UK for men they had been made to marry in countries Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and the United Arab Emirates. In almost half of the cases, records show, the visas were approved. Yvette Cooper, chairwoman of the home affairs select committee, said that she would demand answers from the Home Office over the findings. Experts believe there are thousands of victims in Britain, but that the vast majority are too afraid to come forward. August 3. Safaa Boular, 18, of Vauxhall, London, was sentenced to life in prison, with a minimum 13-year term, for plotting a jihadi attack on British soil. Alongside her mother and sister, who were imprisoned in June, Boular was part of Britain's first all-female ISIS cell. Boular presented herself at the trial in Western clothing and declared herself deradicalized, but Judge Mark Dennis QC warned that she posed an ongoing threat: "There is insufficient evidence...to conclude at this stage that the defendant is a truly transformed individual."...  https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13015/multiculturalism-britain-august
.

Congress Is Using These Deceptive Tricks

to Drive Spending Higher

by Justin Bogie

{ dailysignal.com } ~ Congress is up to its old tricks again, trying to pass another massive spending bill that uses gimmicks and tricks to push deficit spending even higher... And it thinks it can hoodwink President Donald Trump into signing it. Next week, the House is expected to vote on a combined fiscal year 2018 continuing resolution and a fiscal year 2019 spending bill for the departments of Defense, Labor, and Health and Human Services. The “cromnibus” bill would provide over $855 billion in funding for 2019, making up two-thirds of the total discretionary budget. The Senate passed the measure on Tuesday. If the House passes the Senate version and the president signs it into law, the government will stay open past Sept. 30. But at what cost? Earlier this year, Congress busted the budget and with a whopping spending deal that ran up nearly $300 billion in new debt. This bill would continue those spending levels. Take the so-called savings from changes in mandatory programs. The bill claims nearly $8 billion in savings from such changes. This is the most commonly used gimmick to increase discretionary spending. These “savings” are included in appropriations bills as a rescission of funds, meaning that unspent money is taken back or spending is delayed until a subsequent year. Congress then uses these “savings” and puts the money toward other unrelated programs...

https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/09/21/congress-is-using-these-deceptive-tricks-to-drive-spending-higher/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiT1dVelpERmlNV1poWTJGaiIsInQiOiJEQTBuSm5xOE1SUTFTSlkrWkVZUlE5RHM0UkxFWHdPYWtPWEZJK1J4R0V5c091XC9CdEtJeHFFblZLZkM1ZEFrYU1VanBOZ1NTV25mRVwvWTFRd0lDZ2xGZ2ZZYVY4TFl0TjR3Y0NwcEZUTUlcL2NBdGJKdkRmamJMeVwva09idjdoS2wifQ%3D%3D

.

. 

NYT Exposing Rosenstein's Insubordination to Bait Trump? 

by Thomas Gallatin:  Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s days may be numbered. On Friday, The New York Times reported that in the spring of 2017, Rosenstein “suggested … that he secretly record President Trump” and even floated the idea of “recruiting cabinet members to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Mr. Trump from office for being unfit.” The Times claims Rosenstein was motivated to do this soon after Trump fired former FBI Director James Comey, because Trump cited Rosenstein’s memo that was critical of Comey’s handling of the liar-Hillary Clinton email  investigation as justification. Rosenstein was, the Times says, “caught off guard” and “he began telling people that he feared” Trump had used him.

             The Times article noted that no actions were ever taken to follow through on Rosenstein’s suggestions. Rosenstein, not surprisingly, has denied the story, calling it “inaccurate and factually incorrect,” adding, “I will not further comment on a story based on anonymous sources who are obviously biased against the department and are advancing their own personal agenda. But let me be clear about this: Based on my personal dealings with the president, there is no basis to invoke the 25th Amendment.”
               Interestingly, The Washington Post and NBC News countered the Times story, reporting that Rosenstein’s statements were made in jest. However, infamous former FBI lawyer Lisa Page saw it otherwise, indicating in a memo on the meeting that she took Rosenstein’s secret taping comment seriously. (Can we take Page seriously, though?) And National Review’s Andrew McCarthy, who has closely followed the entire Trump/Russia collusion saga from the beginning, called Rosenstein’s denial of the Times story a “non-denial denial,” while also noting how Rosenstein has flip-flopped in his attempts to appease the Washington establishment.
               Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) responded, “It’s not a very funny joke.” He later added, “One thing that’s clear whether you’re a Republican or dummycrats-Democrat president, you have a right to a deputy attorney general that doesn’t think you’re incompetent and doesn’t feel the need to audio tape conversations with you.”
               Trump has repeatedly expressed his frustration with Rosenstein (and even more so with Rosenstein’s boss, AG Jeff Sessions), specifically regarding his appointment of dirty cop-Robert Mueller as special counsel. This latest story now seemingly gives Trump justification to win greater Republican support should he decide to fire Rosenstein. However, the firing of Rosenstein seems to be exactly what dummycrats-Democrats are begging for, which may be the motive for the Times to publish this story.   dummycrats-Democrats and their Leftmedia allies are baiting Trump to act before the midterm elections, whichdummycrats- Democrats will use as evidence to support their long-running charge of Trump’s supposed obstruction. It would behoove Trump to wait until after the midterms before pulling the cord on Rosenstein. But reports this morning indicate that Rosenstein anticipates Trump will fire him today. Stay tuned.
               Update: As of Monday afternoon, Rosenstein will reportedly remain in the job. At least until he meets with Trump on Thursday…

~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/58438?mailing_id=3755&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.3755&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body