Leftists Smear Woman At Kavanaugh Hearing As White Supremacist, Her Attorney Husband

[Common]

Some on the left are just lying garbage, they just make anything up for their convenience. You cant believe anything that comes out of the lefts mouth anymore.


As reported (https://www.dailywire.com/news/35427/woman-sitting-behind-brett-kavanaugh-steals-show-paul-bois) by The Daily Wire on Tuesday, leftists went full-crazy at Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing and, among other insane things, smeared a woman siting behind Kavanaugh as a white supremacist. The internet erupted with conspiracy theories that Zina Bash, a former Kavanaugh clerk, flashed a "white power" sign, apparently giving a nod and wink to her white supremacist, Kavanaugh-supporting brethren. (In reality, she randomly rested her right hand on left arm, but TRUMP!)

Leftist activist and serial fake news-spreader Amy Siskind was unsurprisingly one of the many, many hysterical leftists to take part in the shameful smearing:


https://www.dailywire.com/news/35445/after-leftists-smear-woman-kavanaugh-hearing-white-amanda-prestigiacomo

[nathanbforrest45]

The end is near. Stock up while you can. The Left Wing Democrats (and there are no others any longer) are not going to be satisfied until they are the only party allowed to speak and then only the straight party line. It may be a blessing that our WW2 veterans are becoming fewer and fewer in number. I am sure for them to see the United States become no different than the monsters they fought in Europe 75 years ago.

We are not the Jews, we will not go quietly.

[Ma60]

When facts don't work

calling names comes in second place.



I'd be embarrassed to be a Liberal Democrat today.
The party I once claimed to be a part of and proudly supported is NOT the same party, with the same name, today.

Sad but true.

[Safety]

Ah yes, thinking back a couple of years ago to a time where whenever a black person did something, they were associated with BLM....

I guess since that shoe is on the other foot now, it feels kinda tight....should've worn Nike's.

[countryboy]

Ah yes, thinking back a couple of years ago to a time where whenever a black person did something, they were associated with BLM....

I guess since that shoe is on the other foot now, it feels kinda tight....should've worn Nike's.

Examples? No? Didn't think so.

[Hoosier8]

Funny, a gal born in Mexico is now a white supremacist.

[Safety]

Examples? No? Didn't think so.

You've been here since 2012, if you don't remember the posts, that's your issue.

[DGUtley]

I think you all have to admit that this is insane. Forget the whataboutthem-isms.

[Safety]

I think you all have to admit that this is insane. Forget the whataboutthem-isms.

No, let's not forget the whataboutisms, because past actions set the precedence. If it was ok and it set well with people who didn't speak out about it then, it should be highlighted that it is hypocritical to whine about it today.

[countryboy]

You've been here since 2012, if you don't remember the posts, that's your issue.
I was gone for years. So, just like I said, you've got nothing.

[Safety]

I was gone for years. So, just like I said, you've got nothing.

Sure. Sure you were.

[countryboy]

I think you all have to admit that this is insane. Forget the whataboutthem-isms.
I honestly don't see how this can possibly help Democrats. But then again, this country did elect Obama, twice.

[countryboy]

Sure. Sure you were.
Lol, easily verifiable. Are you incapable of honest discussion?

[Safety]

Lol, easily verifiable. Are you incapable of honest discussion?

Yes, easily verifiable, kinda like you being gone but know other things that happened at the forum during your "absence".

Everything you post

[Chris]

I think you all have to admit that this is insane. Forget the whataboutthem-isms.


The whataboutisms are as imaginary as these slurs and smears going on in and around the hearing. The left has become unhinged.

[DGUtley]

No, let's not forget the whataboutisms, because past actions set the precedence. If it was ok and it set well with people who didn't speak out about it then, it should be highlighted that it is hypocritical to whine about it today.

No. I don't believe it's ok for me to do something wrong merely because you did the same wrong thing. That's just how I was raised here in farmland Ohio.

[Safety]

No. I don't believe it's ok for me to do something wrong merely because you did the same wrong thing. That's just how I was raised here in farmland Ohio.

You misunderstand, I didn't say it was "ok" because it was ignored in the past, I am saying the hypocritical bias of being outraged today has been pointed out.

[Chris]

You misunderstand, I didn't say it was "ok" because it was ignored in the past, I am saying the hypocritical bias of being outraged today has been pointed out.

What you do, Safety, is engage in whataboutism. And that by definition excuses a wrongful action by trying to point out hypocrisy.

"Whataboutism (also known as whataboutery) is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument,[1][2][3] which is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda.[4][5][6] When criticisms were leveled at the Soviet Union during the Cold War, the Soviet response would often be "What about..." followed by an event in the Western world." @ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

Even if someone was hypocritical, it doesn't excuse any wrong action.

Your whataboutery fails even to demonstrate hypocrisy.

[Safety]

What you do, Safety, is engage in whataboutism. And that by definition excuses a wrongful action by trying to point out hypocrisy.

"Whataboutism (also known as whataboutery) is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument,[1][2][3] which is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda.[4][5][6] When criticisms were leveled at the Soviet Union during the Cold War, the Soviet response would often be "What about..." followed by an event in the Western world." @ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

Even if someone was hypocritical, it doesn't excuse any wrong action.

Your whataboutery fails even to demonstrate hypocrisy.

That's nice, Chris. Did you have anything else to say today or was that the highlight of your morning? You see, I don't give two shits about what you say or opine on, because you are one of the biggest hypocrites to grace tPF. You constantly berate and chastise members for doing exactly what you do on a daily basis. You throw out latin phrases about fallacies and ad homs, while engaging in the same fallacies and ad homs in addition to thanking posts that do the same, so spare me your pearl clutching and hand wringing.

In case that was not clear, pound sand.

[nathanbforrest45]

No. I don't believe it's ok for me to do something wrong merely because you did the same wrong thing. That's just how I was raised here in farmland Ohio.

I think the left does believe Two Wrongs Make a Right

[Hoosier8]

That's nice, Chris. Did you have anything else to say today or was that the highlight of your morning? You see, I don't give two $#@!s about what you say or opine on, because you are one of the biggest hypocrites to grace tPF. You constantly berate and chastise members for doing exactly what you do on a daily basis. You throw out latin phrases about fallacies and ad homs, while engaging in the same fallacies and ad homs in addition to thanking posts that do the same, so spare me your pearl clutching and hand wringing.

In case that was not clear, pound sand.
He says while doing exactly what he claims others do.

[Safety]

I think the left does believe Two Wrongs Make a Right

Got your browser fixed?

[nathanbforrest45]

No, let's not forget the whataboutisms, because past actions set the precedence. If it was ok and it set well with people who didn't speak out about it then, it should be highlighted that it is hypocritical to whine about it today.


Since we can always find some past action regardless of how far in the past that corresponds with current practice that is offensive does that mean we can never point out bad behavior?

[Safety]

He says while doing exactly what he claims others do.

You are too ignorant to understand the difference in accusing others of engaging in fallacies and pointing out people that accuse others of engaging in fallacies, aren't you?

[Hoosier8]

The bad behavior here is the left targeting a Polish/Jewish American accusing her of being a Nazi.

[Hoosier8]

You are too ignorant to understand the difference in accusing others of engaging in fallacies and pointing out people that accuse others of engaging in fallacies, aren't you?
Thanks for proving my point.

[Safety]

Since we can always find some past action regardless of how far in the past that corresponds with current practice that is offensive does that mean we can never point out bad behavior?

I'm sure some can always find something in their past that is offensive, others maybe not so much. My point deals with glass houses and those that like to throw rocks.

[Safety]

Thanks for proving my point.

That you are ignorant, no problem.

[Chris]

That's nice, Chris. Did you have anything else to say today or was that the highlight of your morning? You see, I don't give two shits about what you say or opine on, because you are one of the biggest hypocrites to grace tPF. You constantly berate and chastise members for doing exactly what you do on a daily basis. You throw out latin phrases about fallacies and ad homs, while engaging in the same fallacies and ad homs in addition to thanking posts that do the same, so spare me your pearl clutching and hand wringing.

In case that was not clear, pound sand.


Well, if you "don't give two shits about what you say or opine on" then why are you contradicting yourself and responding to me?


I'll add that once again your use of idiomatic expression is odd.

[Safety]

Well, if you "don't give two shits about what you say or opine on" then why are you contradicting yourself and responding to me?


I'll add that once again your use of idiomatic expression is odd.

I don't respond for your benefit, wait, you thought I was responding to you because I cared? :rofl:

[nathanbforrest45]

I'm sure some can always find something in their past that is offensive, others maybe not so much. My point deals with glass houses and those that like to throw rocks.
No, your point deals with justifying any bad behavior on the basis someone else did the same thing earlier.

You are able to give a wink and a nod to the most egregious actions by simply accusing others of similar actions in the past. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or when. You really can't see that.

[nathanbforrest45]

I don't respond for your benefit, wait, you thought I was responding to you because I cared? :rofl:

You do care, that is the reason you jump on anyone who has any difference of your opinion.

Its also the reason you cannot enter any discussion without hijacking the thread

[Chris]

I don't respond for your benefit, wait, you thought I was responding to you because I cared? :rofl:

I didn't say you responded for my benefit--please don't twist words again. I said, plain as day: "Well, if you "don't give two shits about what you say or opine on" then why are you contradicting yourself and responding to me? " You did in fact respond to me and you are again. You do care: All you care about is yourself.

[Safety]

No, your point deals with justifying any bad behavior on the basis someone else did the same thing earlier.

You are able to give a wink and a nod to the most egregious actions by simply accusing others of similar actions in the past. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or when. You really can't see that.

Your entire premise involves treating any discussion outside of your set guidelines as justification. That is a false narrative that is used to elicit responses that favor your position. When someone says "look how they unjustly smeared this woman because she's white" and I say "yea, been there done that whenever someone was smeared because they were black" is not justifying the smear of the woman, but pointing out that smears suck, but not just when it happens to someone you identify with.

The same with the social conservative outrage over BLM, because it says "black lives matter" doesn't mean white lives do not, although that is the narrative you must push in order to garner as much support for your agenda as you possibly can.

[Safety]

I didn't say you responded for my benefit--please don't twist words again. I said, plain as day: "Well, if you "don't give two shits about what you say or opine on" then why are you contradicting yourself and responding to me? " You did in fact respond to me and you are again. You do care: All you care about is yourself.

Can you find another squirrel to focus on, thanks.

[Safety]

You do care, that is the reason you jump on anyone who has any difference of your opinion.

Its also the reason you cannot enter any discussion without hijacking the thread

That's another issue you should work on, accusing anything that doesn't go along with your ideology as "hijacking". If you don't like my responses, then ignore me, I even mention that in my sig.

[Hoosier8]

That's another issue you should work on, accusing anything that doesn't go along with your ideology as "hijacking". If you don't like my responses, then ignore me, I even mention that in my sig.
If you don't like what I post, ignore me.

Take your own advice.

[Chris]

Can you find another squirrel to focus on, thanks.

I wouldn't call you a squirrel.

https://s8.postimg.cc/j2qd2bkn9/giphy.gif

[nathanbforrest45]

That's another issue you should work on, accusing anything that doesn't go along with your ideology as "hijacking". If you don't like my responses, then ignore me, I even mention that in my sig.


Hijacking is a very specific action. Its taking the topic of a thread and changing it into something that is different, you are a master at that. Generally it all about race to you and regardless of the topic it will eventually devolve to discussing the racial aspects of the thread.

If, as you say, your responses are to point out that smearing sucks you are doing a piss poor job of getting that idea across because you come across as justifying smearing of a white woman because someone did it to a black woman in the past. You should work on clarity of thought, it might make you more credible.

[MMC]

No, That Woman Behind Kavanaugh Was Not Doing A White Power Hand Signal And She's Not A Racist.....


So, do Democrats really like having bomb explode in their faces because they’re getting worse. The Left’s resistance movement against the Supreme Court nomination of the highly qualified, and soon-to-be associate justice, Brett Kavanaugh has been lackluster. It wasn’t until this weekend that Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) executed a blitz in the opening moments of today’s confirmation hearing. Yet, while Democrats interrupted the proceedings 63 times to put forward a trash motion to delay until they can read all these documents…only to circle back and declare what we already know: they’re not supporting his nomination. It’s all an effort to keep this nomination fight off until after the midterms, where Democrats think their position on the Hill will be better. But before we even get to all of that, we need to talk about this piece of idiocy that occurred. Apparently, another reason to derail the Kavanaugh nomination is because the woman sitting behind Judge Kavanagh at today’s hearings was supposedly giving a white power sign.


Oh, here we go. You can hear it now. It’s the outrage engine revving up. The woman’s name is Zina Gelman Bash. She’s also pictured with Kavanaugh in the featured photo above. She’s wearing the black dress. She’s supposedly throwing an A-Okay sign, which seen as a white power sign among whacko lefty circles. Just so we’re clear. That’s fake news. The anti-Defamation League (https://www.adl.org/blog/no-the-ok-gesture-is-not-a-hate-symbol) said the sign is not one that espouses or promotes white power. Also, she’s a White House lawyer, her mother is Mexican-American, and her grandparents barely escaped the Nazi death camps. This is what happens when you’re liberal, stupid, and go off half-cocked on social media. You end up getting smashed in the face with the rake you just stepped on. …...snip~



Here is who started it and was left with the egg all over her face.


Zina Bash, Trump White House Advisor and #Kavanaugh (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Kavanaugh?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) assistant does racist 'white power' symbol live on TV during #Kavanaugh (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Kavanaugh?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) hearing. She's been smirking and making faces since the start of the hearing. Racist government, racist judge. #StopKavanaugh (https://twitter.com/hashtag/StopKavanaugh?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) https://t.co/J6RXoqdZPs
— Eva Golinger (@evagolinger) September 4, 2018 (https://twitter.com/evagolinger/status/1037033883412443138?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)


https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2018/09/04/no-that-woman-behind-kavanaugh-was-not-doing-a-white-power-hand-signal-and-shes-n2515798

[Captdon]

Ah yes, thinking back a couple of years ago to a time where whenever a black person did something, they were associated with BLM....

I guess since that shoe is on the other foot now, it feels kinda tight....should've worn Nike's.

Agree. Whataboutthetimethattherightsaid

[Captdon]

Well, if you "don't give two $#@!s about what you say or opine on" then why are you contradicting yourself and responding to me?


I'll add that once again your use of idiomatic expression is odd.

Oh, he cares. He gets all offensive as his defense. He doesn't realize what a joke he has become. He tries to be snarky but he isn't smart enough to do that so he tries to bullshit his way through.

[Chris]

Oh, he cares. He gets all offensive as his defense. He doesn't realize what a joke he has become. He tries to be snarky but he isn't smart enough to do that so he tries to bullshit his way through.

It used to work when liberals ruled the roost, er, nest, in the case of squirrels.