With advocates like this, who needs enemies?

At it again...all for you.

by Angela K. Durden
The Most Brilliant Woman in the World

Citizen Journalist.  Novelist. Author of other stuff. 

Business writer.  Songwriter.  Protecting creator's copyrights. 

I'm going on record here, now, as I live and breathe, to say that if I had to choose between Benjamin Wittes and Brett Kavanaugh to walk down a dark street with in the middle of the night in Chicago in 1929 just as the Valentine's Day massacre was breaking out, it would not be Wittes.

It is clear that Wittes is not a fighter.

We know this because he, a bigwig in Harvard's law circles, wrote in The Atlantic's article "Kavanaugh Bears the Burden of Proof — The question isn’t whether he can win confirmation — it’s whether he can defend against the charge he faces in a manner that is both persuasive and honorable."

That's right. Ben wants Brett to withdraw his nomination because why? Because while Ben does not believe Brett did anything like what he is being accused of, he believes Brett should realize the woman's accusations have merit and he should just go somewhere else and quietly say, "I'm innocent."

Could we rightly say that Benjamin Wittes has a pussy-hat yellow streak up his spine and that he obviously hates the Constitution? 

I believe we can.  

Wittes does not understand Evil. Evil knows no rules and does not respect rule of law. Wittes recommending caving to Evil as the way to protect a process designed to protect the accused is beyond stupid.

Mr. Wittes, "guilty until proven innocent" is not the order of the day and is not how our court system is supposed to operate. If you do not understand that, then you should just quit the profession now because you would not be a good advocate for an innocent person or the rule of law.

SUPPORT YOUR CITIZEN JOURNALIST.

VISIT Consolidated Author Page

AND BUY A BOOK!

The Winds of War

At it again...all for you.

by Angela K. Durden
The Most Brilliant Woman in the World

Citizen Journalist.  Novelist. Author of other stuff. 

Business writer.  Songwriter.  Protecting creator's copyrights. 

There's a war going on right under your nose. Most do not see it even as the winds of war take their lawn furniture and blow it into the next county.

This war is age-old and has rightly been said to be between Good and Evil. 

But as all wars do, this one has an ebb and flow. A quieter time of backroom planning and a louder time of furious deployment of those plans.

Turn on your radios or televisions or login to online news portals or read headlines in newspapers, you'll see the same thing in almost all instances: The latest deployment of a war room plan.

Yes, I'm speaking of the scurrilous, defaming attack on Judge Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump's latest nominee for a seat on the Supreme Court of the United States. Lest you say, "All victims should be heard!", let me say to you, "You are right! But please don't let someone claim victimhood if it isn't true."

I'm a victim of long-term sexual assault by my stepfather with my mother's blessing. I know of the desire to speak up and say something yet the emotional or psychological need to hold it in. I know of the finally speaking up and not being believed. Called a liar.

I had proof but could not use it. Christine Blasey Ford offers at-best hazy memories, is being begged for more proof and can't provide it, and is willing to use those to destroy. I never made up my abuse and would never claim it if it hadn't happened. I always remembered and the patterns and times of it were clear. Yet I know women who have publicly claimed abuse at the hands of a man but privately told me they did it to get an advantage from an employer.

False allegations of rape are not new and everyone of them should be denounced when found out, not supported and celebrated on the off chance it might be true. False allegations of abuse do not help the cause of real victims. Those who offer them up are obvious haters.

The question then is this: Why did Christine Blasey Ford do this? I've got a simple answer: She just wanted to be a heroine for a cause she feels strongly about. After all, her reasoning goes, isn't all fair in love and war?

Poor thing, though, does not realize she was simply a false flag kicked over the traces by P-HWPCLDRSFC's* goal-meeting committee. The goal is to form a one-world government and have all those designated as politically incorrect cook and clean for them while they live in luxury behind secure walls. 

Helping out in this is FLOTSAM.**

Funny thing, though. All of a sudden Ford is not feeling so confident in offering proof of claim and FLOTSAM and other operatives are back-peddling.

Kavanaugh will be confirmed. But just like Clarence Thomas, accused by Anita Hill in a "high-tech lynching", Ford's accusations will follow Kavanaugh, and when he dies, FLOTSAM will lead with this:

"Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh passed away today. He was accused of sexual assault by a heroine of the women's movement, Christine Blasey Ford. He tried to overcome the dark days of his youth by devoting himself to good works and we thank him for those things, but he was a bad, bad man and, frankly, we don't know how anybody ever liked him."

Mark my words.

You may want to read this, too.

* P-HWPCDLRSFC is Pussy-Hat Wearing Politically Correct Democrat Liberal RINO Socialist Fascist Commies

** FLOTSAM means For Liberal Opinion That is Serious and Actually Matters

SUPPORT YOUR CITIZEN JOURNALIST.

VISIT Consolidated Author Page

AND BUY A BOOK!

Liberal-loaded courts: The new rulers.

by Angela K. Durden 


The oligarchy has only grown more despotic as the courts filled with Democratic Progressive Socialists. This is why the the courts must contain members who balance out the DPS; true Conservatives and — please, oh please — plenty of Libertarians. 

Matthew Trewhella

Quote from this article here by Matthew Trewhella: 

"Wholly opposite of this view of ‘judicial supremacy’ was the view held by America’s founders. They viewed the judiciary as being the weakest branch of the government. ...America has replaced a monarchy with an oligarchy."

Partial reinstatement of travel ban. Court to hear case in Fall.

by Angela K. Durden 

Click the link below to see the video of Mark Sherman, AP Supreme Court Writer, and read the entire story from Newsday.com. According to Newsday.com, Trump's ban on visitors from Yemen, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Iran, and Libya can be enforced if they lack a "credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States." Also, taking effect on a limited basis is a 120-day ban of refugees.

Further good news for those dedicated to protecting and defending the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, three Supreme Court conservative justices (Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch) said they would already have let the full ban take place, that the government is likely to succeed on the merits of their case, and to interfere with their job will cause irreparable harm.

Specifically, Thomas said preserving national security outweighs hardship to those denied entry.

Big double-damn yay. 

(No SCOTUS justice said that. That's all me.)