Awful Mayor Returns Awful Donations

South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg has returned donations from two women who defended Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh during his sham sexual harassment show trials.

South Bend Mayor and 2020 Democratic presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg has pledged to return campaign donations from two lawyers who represented Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing.

According to a Wednesday report from The Guardian, the campaign claimed to have “overlooked” the connection between the two women and Kavanaugh and took the donations by mistake.

This is a complete and utter lie. Buttigieg’s campaign knew who donated the money, and the only reason they’re refunding the cash is because some leftist SJW (in this case, some self-proclaimed “feminist” named Jodi Jacobson) screamed about it on social media. Do you really think Mayor Buttplug gives a crap where his money comes from? Spoiler alert: Thee answer is no.

Saying no one on the campaign had realized the error until reporters from The Guardian asked about the donations, a spokesperson for Buttigieg added, “[Kavanaugh] should have never been put on the Supreme Court and this campaign will not accept donations from those who played a role in making that happen. [W]e will be returning this contribution and others from this firm.”

So this jackass goes to water because Brett Kavanaugh had the temerity to defend himself in court? Wow. I don’t know about you, but I am definitely voting for a politician who believes Constitutional Rights are only afforded to people who share Mayor Pete’s political beliefs. Everyone else should be shunned, ridiculed, and deplatformed.

SCOTUS Punts On Planned Parenthood

Newly confirmed Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh heard his first cases yesterday, and if his actions are any indication, Amy Coney Barrett would have been a much better choice.

The Supreme Court declined to review three cases relating to Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood at the state level Monday, over a vigorous dissent from Justice Clarence Thomas.

The dissent was significant because it indicates that Justice Brett Kavanaugh sided with the high court’s liberal wing to deny review of a lower court decision that favored the nation’s largest abortion provider.

Thankfully, we still have rock-ribbed conservatives like Clarence Thomas sitting on the bench, and he took the liberals to task for refusing the case.

“So what explains the Court’s refusal to do its job here?,” Thomas wrote. “I suspect it has something to do with the fact that some respondents in these cases are named ‘Planned Parenthood.’”

“Some tenuous connection to a politically fraught issue does not justify abdicating our judicial duty,” Thomas added. “If anything, neutrally applying the law is all the more important when political issues are in the background.”

So, in effect, the liberals – including Roberts and Kavanaugh – are forcing citizens to pay for Planned parenthood, no matter what their religious beliefs or personal opinions are on the organization. Local talk show host Chris Stigall had an interesting theory on Kavanaugh’s actions. The left destroyed him during the confirmation hearings, and instead of fighting back, he’s now cowed.

Expect Kavanaugh to be a solid liberal vote from here on out.

Kavanaugh Accuser Comes Forward

Christine Blasey Ford, a California college professor, has come forward with her claim Judge Brett Kavanaugh assaulted her in 1982. Democrats are now demanding Kavanaugh’s nomination vote be postponed.

The writer of a confidential letter alleging Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh assaulted her at a high school party identified herself in an interview with The Washington Post published Sunday.

Christine Blasey Ford, a professor at Palo Alto University in California, says Kavanaugh and a friend accosted her at a house party in Montgomery County, Maryland, one summer in the early 1980s.

Blasey Ford is a registered Democrat, contributed to Democrat politicians, and held on to this story for nearly four decades. Those facts neither prove nor disprove her accusations, but certainly raise a few red flags. Note also: to date, no other witnesses have come forward, or backed up Blasey Ford’s claim.

I did enjoy Feinstein handing over the information to the FBI; as if they would investigate an alleged crime decades after the statute of limitations expired.

Feinstein, who has known of Ford’s allegations since July, did not raise the issue during Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing earlier this month. Nor did the matter come up during a closed session where sensitive information was discussed, according to a Judiciary Committee spokesperson.

Feinstein could have protected Blasey Ford’s identity while also notifying Senator Grassley of the accusations weeks ago. Instead, Feinstein kept the story to herself until the week before Kavanaugh’s nomination. Another red flag.

In a statement released Sunday afternoon, Sen. Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, took issue with with Feinstein’s withholding of the allegations.

“It’s disturbing that these uncorroborated allegations from more than 35 years ago, during high school, would surface on the eve of a committee vote after Democrats sat on them since July,” the Iowa Republican said, adding that “it raises a lot of questions about Democrats’ tactics and motives.”

Earlier today, Kurt Schlichter tweeted out more information about the accuser. Apparently, her parents’ home was up for foreclosure in 1996. Brett Kavanaugh’s mother was the presiding judge.

Again, none of these facts mean Blasey Ford is lying, but even a cursory examination of the evidence reveals more questions than answers. Speaking from a law enforcement perspective, this is little more than a case of he said-she said, and no district attorney would ever approve an arrest affidavit containing so few facts.

In my opinion, Grassley is right to continue with Thursday’s vote. The Democrats were going to vote against Kavanaugh, anyway.

Weekend Caption Contest

Illuminati Confirmed Caption Contest
(Source: AP)

Caption this photo in the comments section. The winners will be posted on Monday, September 17th.

Original Caption: President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, left, accompanied by White House counsel Don McGahn, right, testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Sept. 5, 2018, for the second day of his confirmation to replace retired Justice Anthony Kennedy. (Photo: Andrew Harnik/AP)

Here Come Da Judge

President Trump introduced Judge Brett Kavanaugh from the D.C. Court of Appeals as his choice to fill Justice Kennedy’s seat on the U.S. Supreme Court. Personally, I really wanted Amy Coney Barrett, but Kavanaugh appears to be more conservative than not.

After the announcement of his nomination to the Supreme Court, Judge Brett Kavanaugh stated, “A judge must be independent and must interpret the law, not make the law. A judge must interpret statutes as written, and a judge must interpret the Constitution as written, informed by history and tradition and precedent.”

While the media savvy adult babies shrieked about the nomination, Eeyore-ish Pennsylvania Senator Bob Casey stated he would not support the president’s nominee… and did so ten hours before the nominee was announced.

The Pennsylvania lawmaker’s office sent out a news release shortly after 11:30 a.m., stating that he will not be supporting Trump’s nominee for the top court, regardless of which of the four finalists it is.

“I will oppose the nomination the president will makes tonight because it represents a corrupt bargain with the far right, big corporations, and Washington special interests,” Casey said in the statement.

So, like every Democrat politician, Casey was set to oppose literally anyone the president nominates, because reasons. Ironically, I applaud this move from “The Lesser Casey,” since he is up for reelection in a state Trump carried. Hopefully, my fellow Pennsylvanians will not approve of his obstructionism.