Should Kavanaugh Protesters Have Been Arrested

Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) stated that the protestors which appeared at Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing “ought to be prosecuted.”

Kennedy stated, “It was all pre-packaged. It was pre-planned. It was orchestrated. You know, kind of like a meat loaf Lean Cuisine, pop it in the microwave and here it comes. It was a circus. I think it was pre-planned all the way down to the protestors standing up and screaming. ”

“And I don’t care whose side you’re on, if you try to disrupt representative democracy you ought to be prosecuted. That’s part of the problem. These protestors stand up, scream, disrupt the proceedings, they’re taken out and many times nothing ever happens to them. I don’t think that’s fair.”

  • Judy

    Yes, they should be prosecuted. They besmirched your place of business. By letting them go so far before even removing them makes me look at that place with not as much respect as before.

    • Harvey Gamel

      how could you possibly have had any respect for it previously?

    • RightWriter

      Ever hear of the First Amendment (to the US Constitution)? “Congress shall make NO LAW…abridging the FREEDOM OF SPEECH…” In other words, IT IS NOT ILLEGAL to shoot off your mouth, or even yell and scream, in ANY federal facility, most of all a Congressional (or Senate) hearing room. THAT IS THE PRICE WE PAY FOR OUR REPUBLIC, and most people think it’s a pretty good deal (would you REALLY prefer NOT TO HAVE free speech?)
      Yes, people who didn’t know what to expect of a Senate hearing probably thought it “besmirched” (lovely word!) the place of business. But ANYONE who has seen a controversial hearing before will UNDERSTAND that this is the RIGHT OF EVERY AMERICAN, and that even when we don’t like the people DOING the expressing, THE FACT THAT THEY GET TO DO IT MEANS THAT WE CAN, TOO.
      And BTW, the Capitol Police removed the noisy demonstrators as quickly as they COULD. Again, IT’S THEIR JOB to keep order — BUT NOT TO DENY ANYONE’S RIGHTS TO PROTEST. Also, every NOISY SYLLABLE the protesters or their Senate supporters UTTERED served ONLY to make JUDGE KAVANAUGH and the Republicans (who were NOT screaming) LOOK BETTER BY COMPARISON. We WON THE DAY (because Kavanaugh looked like an extremely intelligent SAINT and ALL the Republicans looked well-behaved and polite), so don’t get upset about a little “free speech.”

      • grunt1807

        Seems like you like to copy n paste?
        it’s not free speech and illegal. the punishment should be harsher than a slap on the wrist.

        • RightWriter

          Your knowledge of the Constitution is apparently somewhat lacking. The First Amendment (Bill of Rights) makes VERY clear that “CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW…RESTRICTING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS…” NO LAW. Period.

          It’s therefore NOT illegal. The “disruption” of the hearings MIGHT be considered a THIRD CLASS MISDEMEANOR (not a felony) with NO punishment except arrest (and immediate release), but that’d ONLY work if you could find a REPUBLICAN JUDGE in Washington DC, which is next-to-IMPOSSIBLE (Obama filled EVERY vacancy on the District Court for Washington DC and there haven’t been enough new ones to give Trump a chance to name some new judges — not YET, anyway) . So NO JUDGE in WASHINGTON DC would rule against the DEMOCRAT demonstrators, period. But that said, IT IS LEGAL and there IS no punishment, slap on the wrist or more.

          I don’t copy & paste — every post is original. They DO say much the SAME thing, because THE LAW IS THE LAW and if you people don’t KNOW it all I can do is TRY to hammer some of it into your skulls. Like MOST instruction, that can be repetitive. Sorry, but maybe if you’d paid attention in 7th grade Civics, you could just SKIP all my posts.

  • Irene Elizabeth Grooms

    I think that they have shone just how awful they are to do this while a hearing is going on for a Justice Of The Supreme Court To Be Heard.

    • RightWriter

      For 241 years, EVERY SINGLE CONFIRMATION HEARING, especially for a somewhat controversial judicial nominee, HAS BEEN RAUCOUS AND CONTENTIOUS. Americans LIKE to fight about this stuff, and somehow the judges or other appointees ARE HEARD — CLEARLY ENOUGH TO BE SERIOUSLY CONSIDERED AND VOTED ON. Kavanaugh WILL be confirmed. That’s clear, and there’s NO ifs, ands, or buts about it. AND HE DID NOT SEEM TO MIND THE ROUGH QUESTIONING HE WAS GETTING — every time I saw a closeup he was SMILING or even LAUGHING. (I did feel rather badly for his daughters, who were clearly upset by the way their Dad was treated, but maybe it was just that 13 and 10 were a BIT too young to take in what was going on, at least not with equanimity. On the other hand, they’ll NEVER have another chance to see their Dad in that situation.)

  • Andres Guerra-mondragon

    I have always wondered why tax money,time,effort and lives are put on the line to arrest these paid obstructionists and then are let go. Please heavily fine them and or jail time. Sorros is probably behind it all. Why is he never arrested as a subversionist at nauseam?

    • Ron C

      A Soros organization was paying the lunatics!

      • delbromm

        If they in any way broke any law, YES they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Therein lies the current problem – lawbreaking citizens/noncitizens are able to circumvent laws with NO repercussions.

      • RightWriter

        Probably not this time. I hear (from reliable sources, as they say) this gang were “volunteers” from the Young Democrats and Women Democrats of America, or whatever they call themselves now. Purely partisan, and didn’t cost Soros a dime!

        • Ron C

          One day there will be a straw, the democrats are heaping on…that will break the camels back! That will be a sad day for America.
          All because this crap is allowed by the people in authority!

    • Dan59

      For one reason, he’s not in the country.

    • RightWriter

      PLEASE take a look at the First Amendment (to the US Constitution). “Congress shall make no law….abridging the FREEDOM OF SPEECH…”
      It doesn’t say “NICE speech,” or “speech I agree with” — in fact, what would be the POINT of allowing speech with which EVERYONE would AGREE?
      The next time it MIGHT BE YOU protesting while Congress or the Senate debated something YOU don’t approve of! That’s WHY we have a First Amendment!
      Dellbromm — nobody’s “circumventing a law with NO repercussions.” But disrupting a public meeting (which, at the core, is what was happening in the Judiciary Committee’s hearing room) is a THIRD CLASS MISDEMEANOR. It NEVER gets much of a penalty, if any — PRECISELY BECAUSE it’s so often PROTECTED by the First Amendment.
      Ron C – Could have been Soros, although there’s no evidence that it was. But IT DOESN’T MATTER. Soros is protected by the Constitution and Bill of Rights same as YOU OR ME.

    • RightWriter

      BECAUSE IN THIS CASE, ANYWAY, ALL HE WAS PAYING FOR WAS FREE SPEECH — the right of the people who were there to sound off according to their OWN policy preferences. Don’t like it? Sorry, but if we don’t give it to Soros’s people WE WON’T HAVE IT, EITHER, THE NEXT TIME WE NEED TO USE IT. And sooner or later, most of us DO need (or at least WANT) it very badly!

    • RightWriter

      No, this one cannot be blamed of Soros – it’s the U.S. CONSTITUTION! The First Amendment prohibits ANY law that restricts ANYONE’S freedom of speech, meaning they can SAY whatever they WANT (or shout, or burn flags, or express themselves in some other annoying way). They CAN, however, be arrested for offenses such as disturbing the peace, breaking up a public meeting (that’s what the Capitol police nailed the protestors for), and so on. But if we put everyone who breaks up a public meeting in prison, even for a couple of days, we’d NEED THOUSANDS MORE PRISONS AND TENS OF THOUSANDS MORE COPS. YOU want to pay their salaries? I don’t!
      They’re let go after being booked and fingerprinted because disturbing the peace or breaking up a public meeting are THIRD CLASS MISDEMEANORS, not felonies. We don’t put people in JAIL for stuff like that (not only because we don’t HAVE enough JAILS) but because NOBODY WAS ACTUALLY HARMED by their misdemeanors. Sure, the hearings were held up for a few minutes, but so? They ran 12 hours instead of 11 hours and 45 minutes. Big deal!
      As for Soros, he’s never arrested because HE IS NEVER THERE. He MAY write a check to hire and/or pay some of the demonstrators (actually doubtful: they were mostly Young Democrats, from what I hear), but if Soros is smart enough NOT TO BE THERE he can’t be ARRESTED for what someone else DID.

      We HAVE a Constitution to protect ALL our rights, whether they’re the rights of people like you or me, or people like those brainless protesters. If that gives you heartburn, just remember: if someone can arrest those idiots for demonstrating against Judge Kavanaugh THIS month, a few months from now when (God help us!) the DEMS might have taken control of Congress, the SAME COPS will be able to arrest YOU, or ME, for expressing our differences with THEM. And what’d’you bet the DEMS won’t let us out of jail as fast as WE released THEM yesterday?

    • RightWriter

      Again, it is PERFECTLY LEGAL to demonstrate, even noisily or rudely. Got that?
      THE CAPITOL POLICE CANNOT LEGALLY JAIL OR FINE protesters, period.
      Soros MIGHT have been behind these demonstrations, except they’re sorta SMALL for his taste — he’d have had 10,000 protesters, not 200, and anyway he is out of the country. I’m told these people were rounded up by the Young Democrats and Democrat Women of DC. Anyway, it doesn’t matter, because the demonstrations would STILL BE LEGAL if VLADIMIR PUTIN had organized them. NO DIFFERENCE — the First Amendment APPLIES TO EVERYBODY.

  • lolastaples

    Yes, that was outrageous! They should have been immediately removed and prosecuted!

    • RightWriter

      The Constitution of the United States says that “CONGRESS shall make NO LAW restricting the FREEDOM OF SPEECH, or OF THE PRESS…” That means NO FEDERAL LAW restricting YOUR freedom of speech (verbal or in writing) — OR ANYONE ELSE’S, whether YOU like what they say or NOT. Just keep in mind, you don’t want YOUR free speech cut off because SOMEONE ELSE doesn’t like what you have to say!

      FREE SPEECH MAY BE STUPID, BUT IT IS NEVER, EVER, OUTRAGEOUS — because without it, ,we might as well ALL be living in Venezuela.

  • Patrick Feeney

    Lock em up and throw the key away!

  • Ron C

    Absolutely there should be consequences…not just the $50 fine as they pocket the other $50 that Soros gave them…when you let the lunatics take over the asylum…you end up with anarchy until the grown up put a stop to it….and that would be a sad thing because someone could be badly hurt when it get that far out of hand!

    • RightWriter

      First, they didn’t pay $50 fines — there IS no fine on third-degree MISDEMEANORS, which is what it is when you0 0 -0- 1) he’s out of the country; and 2) he usually goes for BIG demonstrations, more like 10,000 protesters instead of a couple hundred. And there wasn’t NEAR enough “violence” for anyone to get hurt. It NEVER got out of hand: protesters were shunted off to police vans, and at the Capitol Police HQ they were fingerprinted and ID’d, period. I got this from an old friend who is now (to my surprise) deputy commander of the Capitol Police unit that was in charge.

      It IS arguable that the lunatics took over the asylum, but it was a SMALL band of lunatics and they really didn’t DO much. They screamed and yelled a bit, then were moved off to the waiting vans and calmed down. Later they were released because “disrupting a public meeting” does NOT carry either a fine or imprisonment. (Think how many jails we’d need if every IDIOT who demonstrates at a public meeting — not just in Washington, but ANYWHERE — had to be LOCKED UP! We’d need 10,000 new jails and 100,000 cops and guards. MY TAXES JUST GOT CUT LAST YEAR — I SURE AS HELL DON’T WANT THEM RAISED AGAIN TO PAY FOR LOCKING UP JUVENILE DELINQUENTS!!!!

      • Ron C

        Well isn’t that rich…they got to pocket the whole $100 from Soros…But if I don’t wear a seatbelt I pay a fine…wow!

  • Joseph Nicholas Toth Jr.

    Oh yes, have them pay fines, and a little jail time too ! They wanna act like animals, then they should be treated as such.

    • RightWriter

      How many times do I have to SAY it? It’s called “FREE SPEECH” and it is GUARANTEED to ALL OF US, regardless of our politics, by the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights (“Congress shall make NO LAW…restricting the freedom of speech, or of the press…”) If WE take it away from a bunch of nutcases demonstrating in the Senate against a judicial nominee, the next time THEY are in control THEY will take away OUR freedom of speech if we demonstrate (or write a tweet, or whatever) against THEM.

      Creating a disturbance in a public meeting (a Senate hearing IS a public meeting) is a THIRD-DEGREE MISDEMEANOR, which means NO JAIL TIME and no fine unless the person is a multiple offender. Again, do YOU want to be fined (or jailed) for speaking out in favor of guns, or against abortion, or for school choice, or … name your issue!?

      And let’s face it: they were NOISY and RUDE. “Act like animals” I suppose depends on WHAT animals, and how well or badly yours behave, but if we filled our jails with a bunch of protesters, we’d have NO JAIL CELLS AVAILABLE for MURDERERS, for bank robbers, or for ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. AND YOU AND I WOULD HAVE TO PAY THE BILLS for the cops, the prison guards, and everyone else involved in any person being jailed for ANY crime. Thanks, but I LIKE MY TAX CUT and I don’t want taxes to go back UP so I can pay for DEMONSTRATORS, for heaven’s sake, who aren’t REALLY harming ANYBODY — just slowing down the progress of the hearings a little.

      ONE LAST POINT: 90% of the Americans who SAW those hearings will have had the SAME reaction as you: that those demonstrators were ‘ANIMALS” and should be put in jail. SO WE WON THE DAY — WE looked like polite, well-behaved REPUBLICANS backing a really first-rate judicial nominee; the DEMOCRATS looked — in YOUR words — “like animals.” WHO DO YOU THINK JOHN OR SUSIE AVERAGE CITIZEN WILL WANT RUNNING THINGS IN WASHINGTON?

      • Joseph Nicholas Toth Jr.

        Thank you for the well-deserved dressing down. I guess with all of this hatred for Trump everywhere you look, I just lost my senses. I have never seen so much hatred for someone who is truly trying to improve our country, too make it the best as it can be! What you have written I agree with every word of it. There has to be some kind of rules for conduct in such proceedings. You have it in the court system, you got a dress code for it etc. and of course I do support 100% freedom of speech. But I think it should carry responsibility for any actions caused by what you say and do. One example is Maxine Waters advocating potentially dangerous activities against the members of the Republican Party. I’m well over 70, and I’m never seen so much disrespect for this country by so many citizens ! I would like to know, when did all of this change? This country has help people all around the world, we saved Europe from a fascist dictator, and now these countries are about to be overthrown again. And yet they still condemn us. All I can say now, it’s a sick world we live in, and I don’t see it changing for the better any time soon. Finally I’m asking God to bless us once more .

  • Tony

    Absolutely!!!! Nail the BASTARDS and BITCHES!!

  • Douglas Miraldi

    YES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!AND 15 DAYS IN JAIL.

    • RightWriter

      UNCONSTITUTIONAL! The WORST the law can impose for making a scene in a Senate (or House) Committee hearing is a THIRD-CLASS MISDEMEANOR, like “disrupting a public meeting.” NO jail term. NO fine.

      Sorry, but that’s the LAW. And it’s NOT going to change,. because the Courts have defined “FREE SPEECH” so broadly it includes almost EVERYTHING you can think of — including, for example, BURNING THE AMERICAN FLAG. (That’s “speech”?)

      Keep in mind, though, that if WE didn’t have OUR freedom of speech, it’s absolutely GUARANTEED that the LIBERALS would clamp down on OUR speech the minute we OPENED OUR MOUTHS. It is ONLY because the First Amendment is (usually — there have been unfortunate exceptions) applied EVENLY that WE RETAIN ANY FREEDOMS AT ALL, especially for free speech. (Those college speech codes aren’t covered by the First Amendment unless they’re STATE schools, because, well, they’re NOT state schools. The First Amendment applies ONLY to public institutions — although there ARE, or should be, LAWS providing the SAME rights to people in NON-public institutions.)

  • Bill

    They should absolutely be prosecuted and should the lame congressional members that sat on their hands doing absolutely nothing about it. Arrest the first motor mouth that started the crap and DON’T let them free until they spill their guts as to WHO THE HELL orchestrated that circus. Pardon my French, but it was a pile of bullshit and even the way the demonrats sitting in the hearing should be arrested if for nothing else telling pure lies just to make it look like they were doing a job…for which they were elected. Simply MORE BULLSHIT and more proof that the demonrats can waste tax payers money on nothing.

    • Harpistjill

      YES, and the person(s) who organize this should have to pay, and be fined heavily, for the security etc. that the American taxpayer had to pay for. The participants should also be fined for the disruption! And perhaps, since Soros is most likely funding this, the participants and organizers should also have to participate in labor of some type ….picking up trash along the freeway etc.
      A little off topic, but in line with the discussion, the groups (who all happen to be liberal) should have to pay for the clean-up costs after they have had their permitted rallies. We have all seen the difference between the rallies as to how clean or not they are left! Perhaps if these groups all have to personally pay for the chaos that they create, there would be less of it!

      • RightWriter

        As to the cost of clean-up after one of those raucous hearings, it’s not THAT bad…the room has to be cleaned ANYWAY, so it’s maybe 50%
        more trash, but with a crowd like that not much real damage. And it IS — whether we like it or not — within the rights of ANY American to “FREE SPEECH,” even if someone has to pay to clean up the garbage.
        The Senate (and House) know perfectly well what’s coming when there’s a contentious hearing over a nomination or other controversial issue, and they’re ready for it. The Capitol Police (who have the only authority to make arrests on the Hill) were out in TRIPLE force, from the look of it, and they had each demonstrator OUT of the Committee room within 5 minutes of his/her outburst. The demonstrations LOOK awful (which is GREAT, because the Committee MAJORITY gets credit for being orderly and polite, while the CROWD and sometimes members of the minority look like THUGS.) So who wins? WE DO!!!!

        • Harpistjill

          The right of Free Speech is about speech, which I have no problem with. It really has nothing to do with littering!

          • RightWriter

            I might have agreed with you 20-25 years ago, before the then-not-so-conservative Supreme Court decided that FLAG-BURNING was also free speech, covered by the First Amendment. I was spitting NAILS!
            Unfortunately, SCOTUS has since included virtually every kind of communication in EXISTENCE under the “free speech” rubric, and I don’t think that’s going away. Littering IS, in fact, SPECIFICALLY covered by the Free Speech clause when it is in some (however obscure) way related to “speaking out” — not just verbal, ANY kind of communication — on just about any subject. As long as the littering is performed or conducted in CONNECTION with making one’s views known, it IS COVERED. Yeah, Ben Franklin must SPIN IN HIS GRAVE every time the subject comes up!

    • william couch

      Motor mouths,,,,,,,, AKA booker & harris.

    • RightWriter

      First, the protesters WERE arrested. What do you think all those Capitol Police were DOING there, having a picnic?
      Second, the ORDER to make the arrests CAME from the chairman of the Judiciary Committee (Chuck Grassley of Iowa) — HE was the ONLY one with the LEGAL AUTHORITY to ORDER the Capitol Police to make the arrests, and the police COULD NOT HAVE ACTED without Grassley’s order.
      The other Committee members DID NOT “SIT ON THEIR HANDS DOING NOTHING.” The LAW required them to leave the matter TO THE CHAIRMAN of the Committee (Grassley) AND DO NOTHING THEMSELVES. Do you want them to break the LAW? Isn’t the WHOLE POINT for Republicans to KEEP the law and leave the law-breaking to the Democrats?
      Third, disrupting a Senate .(or House) hearing is a THIRD-CLASS MISDEMEANOR (it’s called “FREE SPEECH”; we don’t put people in PRISON for exercising it!), and the ONLY penalty that the cops can impose is to arrest the culprits and book them. THEN THEY GO FREE. THAT IS THE LAW, and neither Grassley nor any other Senator nor the Capitol Police could have done ANYTHING to change it. SO DON’T BLAME THEM!!!! IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A VIOLATION OF A FAR MORE SERIOUS LAW IF THE SENATORS OR CAPITOL POLICE HAD, as you suggest, “NOT let them free until they spilled their guts…”
      Lastly, the protests were ORCHESTRATED by the SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE’s minority, under the authority of CHUCK SCHUMER of New York. So not only was it a “FREE SPEECH” issue (FOR WHICH THE PROTESTERS COULDN’T BE JAILED — see above — but ATTEMPTING to do more to THEM would have VIOLATED THE RIGHTS OF THE SENATORS INVOLVED.
      So your STUPID PLAN would have PUT THE WRONG PEOPLE IN PRISON — NOT the demonstrators/protesters, BUT THE LAW-ABIDING SENATORS (mostly Republicans) WHO WERE NOT INVOLVED in creating the disturbances Brilliant — NOT!!!!

    • RightWriter

      Have you EVER READ the FIRST AMENDMENT? It says “CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW…RESTRICTING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS…”
      THAT MEANS THERE IS (and CAN be) NO LAW against ANYTHING those people were doing, or saying, rude as they might have been. THEY WERE EXERCISING THEIR RIGHTS, AND WE WOULD HAVE HAD NO RIGHT TO STOP THEM — except that the Capitol Police CAN control demonstrations IN THE CAPITOL & office buildings that DISRUPT public meetings (or HEARINGS, as in this case). THAT is a THIRD-GRADE MISDEMEANOR — NO jail time, NO fine, no NO PENALTY at all except your name on a police blotter (where it’ll probably be erased next week).
      We HAVE the First Amendment so the NUTCASES can be heard, and yes, they’re annoying — BUT IT ALSO PROTECTS US, WHEN YOU OR I WANT TO BE HEARD and maybe the Dems are in control (could happen next year! ) and DON’T WANT US TO BE HEARD. But the First Amendment GIVES US THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD just as it does the nutcases who were there on Tuesday.
      And, yes, it’s arguable (in fact, I WOULD ARGUE) that past Supreme Courts have taken “free speech” too far by including flag-burning, dropping a knee, and such. But changing that NOW would be an exercise in FUTILITY — and the minute we DID it, WE’d lose power and the LIBERALS would USE IT AGAINST US. I’d rather not go to prison because WE limited the reach of the First Amendment!
      Besides, WE WON THE BATTLE! Think of an average American WATCHING those hearings — what’s going to bother him/her more — the WELL-BEHAVED, POLITE REPUBLICANS supporting Judge Kavanaugh, or the noisy, rude, obstreperous NUTCASES opposing him? WE came out looking like SAINTS, while THEY ended up looking like FIRST-CLASS JERKS. I call THAT a VICTORY!

  • barbarakelly

    Yes the should -for not acting like a civil protest. -signs -fine, but the yelling and screaming not tolerated.!!!

    • Harvey Gamel

      why? because YOU think it’s wrong? You are acting just like them…they should have been removed

      • RightWriter

        THEY WERE REMOVED, you numbskull! That’s what the Capitol Police were THERE FOR and they DID their jobs! Almost NOBODY was there to protest for more than 5 minutes, and I think the maxim um was TEN minutes (it took the cops that long to usher everyone out).

        But “Free Speech” means NOTHING if your speech CAN’T BE HEARD, which means the protesters needed TIME to say what they had to say before they were rounded up and hustled out the door. A COUPLE OF MINUTES — how did THAT interfere with your day so dramatically?

        If you’re REALLY upset about the yelling and screaming, just remember — the NEXT time YOU might be among those wanting to protest, and wanting OTHER people to HEAR your protest. Do you want YOUR free speech cut off because someone else doesn’t like it?

    • RightWriter

      Oh, come on! That barely QUALIFIED as “yelling and screaming”! They raised their voices, usually at the start of their demonstration, and then quieted down a bit once they’d gotten the attention of the Senators or witness(es). HOW DO YOU CONDUCT A SILENT DEMONSTRATION, ANYWAY — aside from a few with RELIGIOUS intent, I don’t ever think I’ve SEEN one!

      “Free speech” as the Supreme Court has over and over and OVER again defined it, includes BOTH WRITTEN and VERBAL speech, and the VOLUME of the speaker(s) is NOT subject to regulation. As demonstrations in Congressional hearings go, that was MILD — and let me tell you, I’ve sat through (NOT participated in: I’m NOT a protester) some that would have made this one look like a TEA-PARTY.

      Also, nobody had very MUCH time to yell and scream, before being hustled out of the room by a Capitol Cop (boy are those guys & gals GOOD at their jobs!). I didn’t time EVERY interruption, but I DID get the time on SOME of ’em, and most didn’t run more than FIVE MINUTES DISRUPTION. Quite a few were even shorter.

      One of the penalties (or privileges, if you -prefer) of living in a society that GUARANTEES free speech (VERY few actually DO) is the FACT that EVERYONE gets to have his/her say AND BE HEARD. Don’t like it? Well, even Britain and Canada have limits on free speech in public places, and of course there’s always VENEZUELA — they don’t tolerate ANYTHING like that! But yes, it CAN be time-consuming and noisy. So is FREEDOM.

  • grunt1807

    Put a 90 day minimum mandatory jail sentence on them and go after the organizers. Give longer sentences for those who resist, have multiple violations, and the organizers. If they are illegals or non-citizens? deport them immediately after completing their sentence.
    As long as their is no consequences this will continue to happen.

    • RightWriter

      It is called FREE SPEECH, and it is GUARANTEED to ALL of us by the FIRST AMENDMENT. Take someone ELSE’s away at YOUR PERIL, because next thing you know someone will be taking YOURS away!

      At WORST, what the demonstrators at the Kavanaugh hearings were doing was “disrupting a public meeting,” A THIRD-CLASS MISDEMEANOR that wouldn’t earn them FIVE MINUTES jail time. They MIGHT be booked by a strict judge, probably not even THAT, but they’d be OUT and headed home in half an hour.

      Yes, IF they were illegal immigrants — LEGAL immigrants have JUST as much right to protest as you or I do — but if they WERE illegal they COULD have been arrested and deported, BUT have you noticed what the Circuit Courts have been DOING to President Trump’s attempts to have ILLEGALS deported??? iT HASN’T GONE WELL AT ALL — and WON’T until we have not just ONE but TWO or THREE more SCOTUS justices. AND EVERY TIME SOMEONE BEATS A DEPORTATION ORDER (and they ALL DO), WE look like the BULLIES and THEY look like they’re being badly mistreated.

      So don’t expect miracles, or even strict attention TO THE LAW, from ANY of the federal courts UNTIL WE GET A LOT MORE DISTRICT COURT JUDGES ON BOARD.

    • RightWriter

      Read my lips: IT’S LEGAL to demonstrate in Senate or Congressional hearings — NO MATTER HOW LOUD OR RUDE YOU ARE WHEN YOU DO IT. You can’t put the demonstrators in jail for 90 days or NINETY MINUTES, although if you drag out getting them before a judge for “DISRUPTING A PUBLIC MEETING,” you MIGHT get 90 minutes out of it. And given the way the District Courts have been THROWING OUT President Trump’s attempts to DEPORT ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, it doesn’t seem likely the courts would let him deport ANYONE — even for SERIOUS crimes — who had just been a demonstrator!

      It WILL continue to happen because the FIRST AMENDMENT SAYS IT’S PERFECTLY LEGAL. One of the most important FREEDOMS of ALL Americans, legal or not, IS the right to FREE SPEECH, and this IS FREE SPEECH. Yes, “disrupting a public meeting” IS a (third-grade) misdemeanor, but THAT is NOT an offense for which you can be thrown in jail.

      Americans generally VALUE our freedom of speech, because without it, we would be DEPENDENT ON THE GOOD WILL OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE MOMENT for our right to speak out ON ANYTHING. THAT would turn us OVERNIGHT into VENEZUELA, or maybe just CUBA. Is THAT what you WANT?

      Besides, WE WON THE ENCOUNTER!!! The demonstrators looked like FOOLS, somewhere between badly behaved 6th-graders and juvenile delinquents. While the REPUBLICANS looked like WELL-BEHAVED, CIVILIZED ADULTS there to support a REALLY first-rate JUDGE. WHO DO YOU THINK LOOKED BETTER???
      We should be THANKING the idiot DEMOCRATS for making such TOTAL FOOLS of themselves, and taking our BOWS for our own behavior!

      • grunt1807

        If it’s legal then why were the protesters arrested? Not only those who protested inside but hundred more were arrested outside!
        “U.S. Capitol Police said officers arrested about 575 protesters in the Senate Hart Office building and charged them with unlawfully demonstrating.”

  • ahrcshaw

    Should there be a question? Protesting and disrupting a government process is two different things. Especially when they paid, where they were was not a public place, nor was it a proper place to protest or disrupt. What has happened to common sence and decency? Hillary et al should be reprehended for this RISITANCE, it is nothing but a bunch of poor SOCIALIST LOOSERS showing their stupidity as well as their defiance for democracy. They are doing nothing but using their rights under the Constitution to illegally destroy that same Constitution that allows for peaceful assembly, and freedom to protest. There is a time and place for both, but resistance is not part of the equation, that is why we have due process and legislation.

    • RightWriter

      1) IT WAS A PUBLIC PLACE. All Senate & House hearing rooms ARE public unless one of the “security committees” (defense, intelligence, foreign policy/foreign affairs, etc) has reserved it — but even then, they reserve a SEPARATE room for the confidential/security portion of their hearings. Unless BOTH PARTIES agree the hearing should be confidential because too much of the material to be covered should be secure, THE HEARING(S) WILL BE OPEN and subject to interruption.
      2) ALL CongressionalSenate hearings are subject to being disrupted by (part of) the public. THAT’S THE WAY CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS GO. I’ve attended HUNDREDS and they’re ALL like that unless the subject is SO BORING that NOBODY CARES.
      3) There’s NO EVIDENCE any of those demonstrators were paid. It’s possible, but Soros is the big Sugar Daddy, and he’s out of the country — also he goes for REALLY BIG hearings, with maybe 1,000 demonstrators, not little bitty demonstrations like this.
      4) i’m quick to defend democracy against “socialist losers,” but MAKING THEIR OPINIONS HEARD IN OPEN HEARINGS is NOT “DEFIANCE” for Democracy. THE LEFT HAS AS MUCH RIGHT TO MAKE THEIR OPINIONS KNOWN IN PUBLIC HEARINGS AS WE DO, and if they don’t agree with US, well, isn’t that par for the course?
      5) The Constitution says is that “Congress shall make no law…abridging…the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for redress of grievances…” (First Amendment, Bill of Rights) IT DOES NOT SAY, ANYWHERE, THAT “RESISTANCE IS NOT PART OF THE EQUATION.” In fact, were PEACEFUL resistance NOT part of the equation, there WOULD BE NO EQUATION.
      Moreover, the Supreme Court has said OVER AND OVER AGAIN that “free speech” includes ALL forms of communication, verbal or written, or by any version of compute, HOWEVER rude or unpleasant someone might find it. (This takes me back to the “flag-burning” decision (Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989)), which invalidated a bunch of state laws that forbade burning the American Flag. (NEVER MIND DUE PROCESS, and once SCOTUS had ruled, there was no room for new legislation, either!

      So now that’s “free speech,” folks — NEVER MIND that the act may not involve a SINGLE WORD of “SPEECH.” A lot of people, myself included, thought the Court had gone WAY off the deep end with THAT one.

      In any case, regardless of what you or I may think, the protesters WERE NOT “using their rights under the Constitution to illegally destroy that same Constitution…” Cute circular argument, but it won’t fly — ever again, I fear.

      • ahrcshaw

        Your right, and I knew that, I guess it is just the frustration of all this HS. Have a good day.

  • Susan Misa

    What should be done is that they are not permitted to attend these meetings and it should be closed to all individuals since they will call anything else racist if only the liberals are banned.

    • RightWriter

      WHO shouldn’t be “permitted” to attend Senate HEARINGS? SENATORS? That’d be like telling the DOCTOR he/she CAN’T EXAMINE THE PATIENT! The public? Well, THE PUBLIC IS PAYING THE BILLS, and might rightfully DEMAND the right to see what’s going on! (There are also staff, not easily identified, and others who NEED to be there. sometimes to see or hear some portion of the hearing.) I see you’ve figured out you couldn’t POSSIBLY ban just conservative Senators or just liberal ones — so WHO ARE YOU PLANNING TO ALLOW IN AND WHO, NOT?

      There IS a rule, applicable to BOTH parties, that says a Senator (or Member of the HOUSE) must be RECOGNIZED by the CHAIRMAN or WOMAN before speaking. But like everywhere, people sometimes aren’t too good about restraining themselves. And it’s NOT usually the Senators who don’t let people speak. Yes, — Kamala Harris (D-Calif) and Cory Booker (D-NJ) were unusually RUDE during the Kavanaugh hearings, and their behavior was inexcusable, but NO RULE IN THE WORLD WOULD HAVE SHUT EITHER OF THEM UP. Sometimes someone is just DETERMINED to plow ahead and BE rude! (They were both assigned — presumably by Dem leader Chuck Schumer — to try to throw something in the gears of the hearing so that it would comOgrinding to a halt. Didn’t work, obviously, and just made Harris and Booker LOOK LIKE IDIOTS (not a bad thing for US!).)

      But MOST of the talking out of turn came from demonstrators who were there for the sole purpose of kicking up as much of a FUSS as they COULD. Those were the ones who started yelling or screaming the minutes one of the Senators started asking (reasonable, in-order) questions. THEY WERE ROUNDED UP as they spoke and ESCORTED OUT OF THE HEARING ROOM by members of the Capitol Police force. (I got much of MY information from a senior officer of the Capitol Police, who happened to be a guy I’ve known since college — roughly 50 years!)

      To talk about these idiots as “paid protestors” is a bit rich. Maybe they were Young Democrats who just wanted to register their opposition to Judge Kavanaugh, and NOBODY paid them (that was my cop friend’s theory). Maybe some were paid but not others. WE DON’T KNOW. But whether they were paid or NOT, IT IS PERFECTLY LEGAL FOR THEM TO DO WHAT THEY DID (even if they WERE paid). You CAN’T ARREST AND JAIL SOMEONE FOR DOING SOMETHING LEGAL!!!! (It’s also perfectly legal to PAY someone to demonstrate if you want to do that. Again, THE FIRST AMENDMENT TRIUMPHS OVER ANY SUBSIDIARY LAW.

      • Susan Misa

        If I understand you correctly, then it would be perfectly fine if the roles were reversed? If a Democrat liberal was speaking it would be okay and fine for the Republican conservatives to protest by making a scene, having signs, yelling and screaming to drown out the liberals speakers and not stop until a cop makes them leave. After all what is good for one side to do must be good for the other side to do, right?

  • irene

    The behavior that they display is an embarrassment to our country. How can the U.S. allow these immature actions by adults, go unpunished??? Surely they KNOW better, DON’T they??? Furthermore, I agree with Judy, that to ALLOW them to go on for so long before removing them from the presence of adults making decisions that affect this country is RIDICULOUS!!! REMOVE them immediately, WHY does security wait so long ????

    • RightWriter

      That is called FREE SPEECH, and it is GUARANTEED by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the US. Sure, they know people like US will think what they said/did was awful, but meanwhile, they GOT THE ATTENTION THEY WANTED. Which is ALL they wanted.

      BTW, the Capitol Police are REQUIRED to use MINIMAL FORCE, which may mean it’ll take an extra MINUTE OR TWO to dislodge the protesters. SO WHAT? What seemed to you like such a “long time” really wasn’t more than a couple of minutes!

      And, actually, the more NOISE THEY MAKE, the better WE look — and just as YOU thought the demonstrators were acting badly, SO WILL MOST OF THE OTHER AMERICANS WATCHING ON TV or the Internet.

      So what it comes down to, is WE WIN because WE look polite & well-mannered and THEY look like BULLIES. NOT A BAD OUTCOME — FOR US!

      • irene

        Besides “free speech”, we ALSO have a RIGHT to RESPECT & DIGNITY! NOT everyone “thinks”! Most people are “followers” and those are mainly the ones that use their “right” to be bully’s! However, there are “many” LEADERS among us that can see the WHOLE PICTURE, NOT just RIGHTS that ARE more inclined to be “limitations” and NOT used for the betterment of the world.

        • RightWriter

          Sadly, the Bill of Rights makes NO DISTINCTION between people who THINK and those who DO NOT. Or between people who are “followers” or those who “LEAD” — and do we REALLY want to arrest just the LEADERS? They’re usually the WORST!

          You might want to.rewrite the law (There are a good many that I would like to rewrite, but nobody’s going to invite me to DO it!) , but AS IT IS WRITTEN it simply does NOT differentiate between people. Maybe that’s just as well, because how would YOU like it if someone with whom you agreed on NOTHING was put in charge of deciding whether YOU were one of those who should be LISTENED TO or NOT?

          And, really, WHOM DO YOU WANT TO HAVE DECIDING if YOU are a “FOLLOWER” or a “LEADER”? Someone who agrees with you on almost everything, or who shares your opinion on NOTHING AT ALL? And HOW to you propose to MAKE SURE only those who agree with YOU are included among the “LEADERS”?

          Besides, the First Amendment isn’t DESIGNED to guarantee the rights of the “LEADERS” — it was INTENDED, from DAY ONE, to APPLY TO EVERYBODY whether they seek the “betterment of the world” (BY WHOSE JUDGMENT?) or want to make it WORSE! ”If you can’t apply it to EVERYONE, ,regardless of the frequency with which they agree (or disagree) with YOU, then you should move to VENEZUELA — if you get into politics on the right side THERE, you won’t have to worry about HOW many (or few) other people share your views. Of course, it costs about $1,000 to buy a cup of coffee, but you can’t have EVERYTHING…. 🙂

          • irene

            The UNFORTUNATE problem is that we were “guided” by morals, which apparently has been replaced with “freedom of speech”!

      • grunt1807

        A paid organized disruption of a congressional hearing is not “free speech”!
        If I was to go into a courtroom and create a disturbance I would be arrested for contempt! That was not “Free Speach”, more like organized crime. Whether it makes them look bad or not it’s illegal and should face stricter punishments!
        The slap on the wrist will only embolden them to do more next time and do it better with the practice.

        • RightWriter

          You don’t KNOW it was PAID, ,or that the demonstrators were paid. A senior manager with the Capitol Police (I used to date him about an eon ago) told me they were Young Democrats and Democrat Women’s club members, who generally DONATE their time (and since they’re rarely fined, don’t have that expense either).
          BUT THE SUPREME COURT HAS SAID “FREE SPEECH” INCLUDES ANY KIND OF COMMUNICATION, WRITTEN, SENT BY COMPUTER, OR BY ANY OTHER MEANS. About 25 years ago, they even decided (in their “wisdom”) that BURNING THE AMERICAN FLAG was an expression of “free speech,” and it is NO LONGER ILLEGAL!

          What might happen to YOU if you “created a disturbance” in a courtroom (which was NOT where this hearing happened) would depend largely on (1) WHERE it happened; (2) WHAT COURT was involved (some are stricter than others and NOT ALL ARE FEDERAL); and (3) the NATURE of the disturbance (were you protesting with a group, or on your own? ). But in a Capitol Hill Hearing Room like the Senate Judiciary Committee occupied, the rule is simple: ALL SPEECH OR DEMONSTRATION IS ALLOWED, except that if the CHAIRMAN of the Committee finds it “disruptive” of the hearings, the person or persons involved CAN be removed AND CHARGED WITH A THIRD-CLASS MISDEMEANOR FOR DISRUPTING A PUBLIC MEETING. THAT, however, will get a person BOOKED, but not FINED or JAILED.

          • grunt1807

            Three doctors observed them getting paid and there is a picture, clearly of one of the protesters, being handed cash from a paper bag outside. Yes we know they were paid and if the sentences were harsher they would turn on each other.

  • Estell Newton

    They definitely should have been arrested. They think free speech is only for them and this needs to stop.

    • RightWriter

      NO, they know full well that FREE SPEECH is for THEM and ANYBODY ELSE who can get a word in edgewise. WE may not like what they were SAYING (I certainly didn’t,), but THEY WERE EXERCISING THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT (free speech) RIGHTS, nothing more. Free speech works BOTH WAYS, you know — it’s for YOU (and me) AND for the crazy left-wingers TOO. And WE DON’T ARREST PEOPLE FOR EXERCISING THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS. Try READing the Constitution, not just PRETENDING you know what it MEANS.
      How do you propose to stop the free speech rights of ONE side but NOT the other? HOW IS THAT “FREE SPEECH” if only ONE SIDE HAS IT? The leftist protesters WERE exercising their free speech rights, JUST LIKE YOU OR ME. If we DON’t HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS ON BOTH SIDES, they’re WORTHLESS, no matter WHICH side has them!

      • Estell Newton

        You missed the point. They don’t want anyone but leftist to have free speech. If they right wing had protested they would protest till the right wing were behind bars. It goes both ways. We shouldn’t have to get a word in edgewise. We should be given the same rights they have but the left doesn’t want our side heard.

  • Santiago Tello

    Communist swine! They shudve been arrested and guards placed at the entrances. The selection of a SCOTUS shud be done in a dignified setting not a in a circus sideshow atmosphere. The communists will continue their assault on trump until they start killing people in the streets. That time is not far away.

    • RightWriter

      In 241 years of our nationhood, there has NEVER been a Senate or House hearing that was “in a dignified setting.” NONE. We’re a REPUBLIC and tend to be vigorous in our views. You want “dignified settings”? TRY JAPAN! They behave BEAUTIFULLY, even down to the little kids. Of course, “FREE SPEECH ” only works if you say something NICE about your Teacher, parents, school. administrator, or maybe the EMPEROR…but you can’t have EVERYTHING. “-)

  • Kevin

    Only if you don’t believe in free speech!

    • NancyPlum

      Free speech is one thing, but totally disrupting a functioning hearing in the Senate is quite another. They can protest peacefully outside or some designated place indoors, if possible, but the disruptions are something else entirely. Too bad you can’t tell the difference.

      • Kevin

        And they got arrested for it. It’s not like driving a car into counter protesters in Charlotte. But they did also protest outside. Kavanaugh will let Trump off the hook and Trump is corrupt. But he also is white.

        • Still_Educating_the_Idiots

          Trump is White ? ? ? Damn ! I wish I’d known that — I would’ve voted for him ! !

          • Kevin

            No you just showed it by your vote!

        • RightWriter

          How is Kavanaugh, the most junior member of the Supreme Court (after he’s confirmed) going to “let Trump off the hook” — he will have NOTHING to do with the President for a LONG time to come. In fact, Presidents and SCOTUS justices hardly have ANY professional connection unless they happen to be golfing buddies, or something — and Kavanaugh is too busy with his daughters’ soccer to play golf, even with the President.
          Apart from that, Trump is NOT corrupt. And just FYI, the demonstrators are TOLD where to go by the Capitol Police, who know if or when there are likely to be over-sized crowds that are considered unsafe.

          • Kevin

            Boy that’s a pretty good excuse for letting probably the most corrupt President we’ve ever had off the hook. Especially since if it were anyone from the left the investigation or investigations would go on forever and for political purposes only. And just on his business practices alone like, not paying his taxes, not paying his contractors, dealing with the Russian oligarchs who rent out his buildings to just propping Trump up. His massive use of bankruptcy to keep his money, well there are many documented wrong doings including Trump University. Personally other than his dealings with the Russians I think it’s the tax evasion that will do him in. Just like a good MAFIA don.

      • RightWriter

        Oh, come on! They “totally disrupted” the hearings for about 2 minutes per break, never more than 3! There IS no space outdoors or in the building where people can demonstrate without disrupting dozens of offices with hundreds of workers (maybe they should have built the Dirksen building differently, but that was back in the 1950s, and they seldom HAD big demonstrations then. .
        I strongly differ with your writing the “disruptions are something else entirely” — NO, that is EXACTLY what the dsruptions or demonstrations are SUPPOSED TO BE. Brief, momentary interruptions are easily IGNORED — does EVERY MINUTE mean that much? I was listening pretty carefully, but I hardly NOTICED the 1-2-3 minute interruptions. Anyway, demosnstrations (NOT always entirely peaceful) have been PART OF OUR POLITICAL LIFE since 1774. It’s a little late to rebuild the system.

    • Art Barr

      If it’s paid for, it’s not free

      • Kevin

        Are you saying they got paid? Show me! No right wing or white nationalist websites that just “SAY IT”. I want proof.

        • Art Barr

          Gee we want to know who “Un Named sources are? We want to know what proof there is that #45 worked with the Russians to beat Hillary, we want to know about Hillary”s emails, we want to know about the “Deep State” and you have only one thing to be worried about. Your lucky.

          • Kevin

            Yes to all! But the deep state takes money and we all know which party receives most the money. And it ain’t the Democrats. Go Bernie!

          • Kevin

            I’ll remember that when I hear about the 40 murders Clinton SUPPOSEDLY did. Or the payments that’s Bernie SUPPOSEDLY did to disrupt Trump rallies. (The police disproved all of that) Or Obama is a gay muslim or the birther movement or …. well you get the idea. Since when do you right wing hearsayest have any aversion to making up stuff putting on the internet knowing that it is an out and out lie. You and your ilk want a philandering draft dodging non-income tax paying liar because it’s ends justify the means politics. Moreover based on the hearings you tell me and show me what Kavanaugh stands for. And again they got arrested for the disruption if they were right wing and the Dems were doing the questioning you’d be proud of it!

      • Kevin

        A lesson you haven’t learned yet and as long as your guy gets elected that’s fine with you . Just deny and imply!

        • Art Barr

          I believe in free speech. I am amused and worried about staged fiction which is defended as free speech. Honest discussion and disagreement if fine. I hear very little and that is a threat to the Republic. Next time pick a better candidate.

          • Kevin

            What staged fiction? And as far as a threat to the Republic goes it’s already here. Your candidate didn’t win the popular vote so America didn’t get what it wanted. Get rid of the electoral college where voting for the President is concerned or disallow gerrymandering and the Republican fascist would never win another Presidency. You have no idea just on Kavanaugh’s statement regarding the President and how, as Cheney put it, the President is above the law. Cheney put it, the unitarian President. By the way we’ll see how Kavanaugh’s statement changes when the President is a Democrat. And it will happen unless as the Republicans believe, if you control the courts you can control the vote. All you moral good Americans. Yean!

          • RightWriter

            Hey, ass*ole, MOST TRUMP VOTERS — if possibly not most of those who voted for Hillary Clinton — are SMART ENOUGH TO KNOW that after a presidential election takes place, it is THE ELECTORAL VOTE THAT MATTERS, not the popular vote. Sorry you didn’t KNOW that, but I guess Hillary’s pals were keeping it a SECRET.

          • Kevin

            Again you show just how foul mouthed and brain dead you are. If a majority of the people didn’t get what they voted for how does that represent what America wants? Make the Presidential election a popularity vote and not dependent on the electoral college. For the Senate and the Congress then allow for the electoral college to determine representation. What’s happening now especially is just plain wrong!

          • RightWriter

            Oh, boy, are YOU confused. The electoral college doesn’t protect REPUBLICANS, you moron, it protects SMALL STATES including those that vote heavily DEMOCRAT. Nobody’s going to “get rid of” it, because TOO MANY (SMALL POPULATION) STATES WANT TO KEEP IT. As for gerrymandering, one man’s gerrymander is another’s cleverly drawn map. SAME THING. And there IS no way to draw Congressional district lines so they conform to all the courts’ CONTRADICTORY guidelines about what rules every district MUST meet, even if it’s IMPOSSIBLE to meet them all at the same time. The COURTS, not the political parties, got us INTO this gerrymander mess, and they’re TOO STUBBORN TO GET US OUT. So people like you go on grousing about gerrymanders, when all the states have done is try to FOLLOW ALL THE COURT’S STUPID, CONTRADICTORY RULES.

          • Kevin

            Oh yes it does! The gerrymandering for the win by the right wing allows for it. But the SMALL STATES protections is rendered moot when gerrymandering is done to the degree it has been done. Plus a conservative Supreme Court allows for it because without it the Republicans wouldn’t win another election. And they know it. Plus if a majority of the people of this country vote Democrat but the Republicans keep getting elected how does that represent what the people want? Kavanaugh is an ideology not a Constitutionalist and I’ve watched the non-answers or just out and out evasiveness to asked questions. He is good for the white nationalist, the rich and the ultra-rich but for this country???? We’ll see!

          • Kevin

            Free speech doesn’t mean free slander. And back at ya.”I am amused and worried about staged fiction which is defended as free speech”. T. Boone Pickens must be your hero. Just see Lee Atwater & Karl Rove.

    • scot_belle

      The First Amendment is…….PEACEFUL PROTESTS.
      —–
      U.S. Constitution, QUOTE:
      “1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, OR THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
      —–
      This (D) …’dog n pony show’ is definitely NOT peaceful and ……….is deliberately disruptive!!

      BTW…(D) = DEMOCRAT

      • Kevin

        And they got arrested for it! Again it’s not anywhere comparable to plowing your car into counter protesters. But in reality the only time or times I have been threatened have been on sites like these where “The Whole Truth and nothing but the Truth” is very subjective and positionally determined. And a preponderance of the violence (political) is produced by rhetoric from right and alt-right websites. Just see Dylann Roof a boy that followed a lot of the websites you probably read. Most important, from a one and one basis the left can’t hold a candle to the violence produced by the right. So that “dog n pony show” statement is very applicable to the right.

        • RightWriter

          WHO plowed their car into “counter protesters”?
          And BTW, if you don’t like this site, what the HELL are you DOING here?

          • Kevin

            What do you mean by that question? Are you trying to tell me that that which was filmed never happened? And the “what the HELL are you DOING here” statement???? Is free speech only what you want to read or listen too and anyone that questions your style of free speech should lose it? Please explain. Use GOOGLE once and awhile also.

          • Kevin

            Also I forgot to mention. See Charlottesville: Race and Terror on YouTube. It will give you a chance to deny it ever happened.

          • Carl Stidsen

            I like to read this site because how else can I see how far into Crazyland the GOP has drifted ?

  • Robert Kahlcke

    Absolutely. They received cash to violate the law, if you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.

    • RightWriter

      Where did you get THAT information? A senior Capitol Police officer (whom I’ve known forever) told me there WAS NO EVIDENCE anyone had paid them to “violate the law.” it’s not impossible to believe that a bunch of spoiled college kids and women in their 20s-to-40s could come up with $20 each, and actually they probably didn’t get fined THAT much (third-class misdemeanors like “disrupting a public meeting” usually don’t carry ANY fine at ALL.) NOT ALL LEFT-WINGERS have to be PAID off — some BELIEVE in what they’re doing, as STUPID as that may be! 🙂

      • Robert Kahlcke

        There are photographs available and a statement, do the research before you run your mouth.

  • Jim Oehl

    I believe they should be arrested since many were paid to be there.They weren’t there with legitimate concerns, they were there to create chaos and division!

    • rivahmitch

      It’s not the motive which counts (hate crime, perhaps?) but the actions which should be prosecuted.

      • RightWriter

        The “actions” CANNOT be prosecuted because they come under the heading of “FREE SPEECH” which is GUARANTEED by the First Amendment to the Constitution! Can’t you folks get it into your HEADS that “free speech” does NOT mean “polite speech.” It means YOU CAN SAY WHATEVER YOU WANT, apart from libel or slander against SPECIFIC individuals, and there are VERY few restrictions. GOT THAT????
        Don’t complain TOO loudly, because the NEXT time it might be YOU who need to avail yourself of YOUR free speech rights. (If the Dems win the next election, they’ll SLAP YOU IN PRISON without a THOUGHT, and the First Amendment is the ONLY thing that will have the power to GET YOU OUT.

        • grunt1807

          If not a crime then how were they arrested?

          • RightWriter

            They were arrested for breaking a RULE of the Senate, which says that the public may not “DISRUPT PUBLIC HEARINGS” — and the Kavanaugh hearing WAS a public hearing. But it’s a THIRD CLASS MISDEMEANOR, carrying NO jail time, NO fine, and nothing else but MAYBE (if the cop is in a bad mood) getting your name on the Capitol Police blotter (which I believe is destroyed weekly, anyway).

            The POINT is that demonstrations on the Hill have to be handled very carefully, because ALMOST EVERYONE DEMONSTRATING HAS THE RIGHT TO DO SO UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT (which supercedes ALL other rules or laws.) So the cops have to be careful making arrests, there are no fines or punishment unless someone actually KILLS another person, and basically, ANYTHING SHORT OF MURDER IS OK. The arrests are just for show, and to get individual protesters OUT of the HEARING ROOM until they calm down a bit. The Founding Fathers never IMAGINED that Americans would behave SO BADLY in their almost-HOLY Capitol. 🙁

    • Harvey Gamel

      you don’t get to decide what is legitimate.

      • Jeannie

        it an opinion, idiot

        • Harvey Gamel

          “legitimate” is not an opinion, dolt…

          • RightWriter

            Sure, “legitimate” IS an opinion — when an INDIVIDUAL is expressing it! It only becomes a rule or a LAW if someone in AUTHORITY has the right & opportunity to clamp down on the public debate and end it. AND THAT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
            Remember, the Constitution (& Bill of Rights) protects EVERYBODY’;S right to free speech, not just YOURS or not just MINE. If we don’t ALL have it, it means NOTHING, because after just one more election or court ruling the BAD GUYS can take YOUR free speech rights AWAY from you. And THERE LIES CUBA, or maybe VENEZUELA.

          • Harvey Gamel

            utter, complete pshyco-babble….

          • RightWriter

            The U.S. Constitution is psychobabble? I don’t THINK so, and if it IS, we’re ALL in big trouble because without the Constitution George Soros would have HIS minions making our laws and we’d be LIVING in a virtual Venezuela. . Or WORSE — maybe the Union of Soviet States of Amerika (spelling “error” intentional).

            If I misunderstood what you were calling psychobabble, I apologize.

          • Harvey Gamel

            gotta be the radiation…

    • RightWriter

      The First Amendment to the US Constitution says, “Congress shall make NO LAW…abridging the FREEDOM OF SPEECH…” It does NOT say “except when they’re PAID to sound off!” Sure, they were there to create “chaos and division,” because THAT’S WHAT DEMONSTRATORS DO. (And by doing so in a particularly offensive way, THEY MAKE THE ORDERLY PEOPLE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ISSUE LOOK REALLY GOOD!)
      We WON that confrontation, folks. Judge Kavanaugh came across as a VERY intelligent, VERY well-organized, and VERY POLITE judge. The Republicans on the Committee ALL behaved themselves admirably. AND THE DEMS AND THEIR PROTESTER-FRIENDS DID NOT. Who do you think looked BETTER to Mr. or Ms. Average American watching the hearings on TV at home?

    • RightWriter

      The Bill of Rights says NOTHING about people demonstrating for or against some law have to be representing themselves, not George Soros or some other eminence grise.
      Besides, there is NO evidence that Soros or any of his minions were behind this rather small-scale, pathetic demonstration — Soros would have sent in 1,000 protesters instead of 200 or so, and beside, he’s out of the country. A senior Capitol Police officer (guy I used to date!) told me this crowd were mostly ordered up by the Young Democrats and Democrat Women’s Clubs.
      Sure, they were “there to create chaos and division” — THAT’S WHAT PROTESTERS DO. What did you think, that they sit there like well-behaved high school sophomores on a class trip? THAT’S THE PURPOSE OF DEMONSTRATING. But whether it’s polite or NOT, IT IS LEGAL. (it MIGHT be a third-class misdemeanor to “disrupt a public meeting” (which the hearing WAS), but you’d need to find a REPUBLICAN JUDGE — NONEXISTENT in the District of Columbia — to pursue THAT line of prosecution, and it might not fly anyway. After all, the Supreme Court 25 years ago decided that FLAG-BURNING was FREE SPEECH, so they’re not likely to disallow demonstrations. (Which, to be fair, took up maybe 30-40 minutes TOTAL time, HURT (physically: i DID feel badly for Kavanaugh’s preteen daughters) NOBODY, and added less than an HOUR to the total length of the hearings.)

      BTW, how do YOU know “many were paid to be there”? You think in the 90% Democrat District of Columbia you couldn’t just WALK DOWN THE STREET and corral 100 or so potential protesters without offering ANY of them a DIME? You obviously DO NOT live inside the beltway! If they WERE Young Democrats, they probably got COLLEGE CREDIT for protesting, never mind money; the Dem Women would have done it FOR FREE as long as it didn’t conflict with a PRO-CHOICE demonstration (their FIRST love).

  • Cliff Stewart

    “THIS” is one of the BIGGEST problems in America today and it is causing a huge rift in the American way of life that the communist and the “New World Order” THUGS are counting on. And “THIS” problem is that the civilized part of American society is being “protected” (more or LESS) by COWARDS who are afraid to bring a halt to the CORRUPTION in America and the CLOWN interference by all the liberal left LUNATICS, who will continue this kind of IDIOCY as long as they aren’t put in their place and made to wake up to reality. These liberal LUNATICS are nothing more than a mob of temper-tantrum, fit-pitching, high-chair toddlers who have managed to “scream-n-cry” and throw their pacifiers continuously on the floor ALL THEIR MISERABLE TEMPER-FILLED LIVES. They’re PATHETIC, and even “they” know it, but will not change as long as they are being babied and pacified by those on the right who are too busy being COWARDS. A new American slogan should ring out, “Prosecute Those Punks!!!”.

    • RightWriter

      I’m sorry, but WHAT is the “biggest problem in America today”??? You say “THIS”, but you don’t identify it!
      I don’t like the New World Order, either, although I may not define it the way you do — but I have NO IDEA what idea is such a HUGE problem? And WHO on the right is being a coward — I’m QUITE sure it’s NOT ME!

  • Carl Stidsen

    How DARE Americans exercise their Constitutionally guaranteed right of Free Speech in the era of Emperor Kim Jung Trump !! Who do they think they are ? American Citizens ?? With RIGHTS ? HAH ! While all true Trumpers and apparently some of the GOP Congress can read and digest 42,000 pages of legal testimony in 11 hours , the other 80% of the Country are not so gifted. Yes , OF COURSE we should simply take Trump’s word for endorsing Kavenaugh – after all – has Trump EVER lied to us ? Has Trump EVER blown a smoke screen of misinformation to get his way ? Has Trump EVER violated the Constitution and/or disgraced the Office of the Presidency in ANY way? Have the Republicans EVER obstructed a Supreme Court Justice Nomination by such Tactics before ? Shirley, you jest ! (look up the context ). . Hail Trump ! Hail Victory ! Sieg Heil ! Note : be sure to use the new Trump Salute – the straight right arm (open palm down) or the clenched Fist. Both work for Dictatorships around the World. .

    • kate777

      You can just keep spouting misinformation all you wish but you seem not to question the Democrats actions for 8 years as well as the misbehavior during the Hearings. Just in case it got by you, the Democrats had 4 months to look over the released documents, and the Committee were given additional documents during the meeting which a Democrat Senator attempted to push off as one’s he ‘stole’ but in fact was released to him the evening before. You apparently have either not been told or have closed your eyes and ears to the accomplishments President Trump has made in his 18 months of being in Office; Jobs, Businesses are booming, manufactures coming back/reopening, Fair Trade with Other Nations, just to name a few. But it is all Lost On You as You have been so Propagandized you don’t search for the Truth, You just Allow Others to Think for You. Why do you hate President Trump, what harm has he done to you…strange.

      • Still_Educating_the_Idiots

        He’s not as naive & innocent as you make him out to be. He knows EXACTLY what he’s doing, & he FULLY INTENDS the actions that he performs. He’s a Marxist $KVMBAG through-&-through. End of Story. ( He “Shirley” is ! LOL )

        • kate777

          Yep, I certainly agree as are many who make really derogatory, stupid comments as to President Trump.

      • Carl Stidsen

        Yes – I’m familiar about his accomplishments. He has broken trade agreements , antagonized long term Security Partners, marginalized anyone who isn’t a White Christian, embarrassed the United States, apologized for Racists, cut health care for Seniors, Ballooned our National Debt beyond Obama’s wildest excesses, and cozied up to two-bit dictators around the World, He has also surrounded himself with people , many of whom are being indicted or investigated for criminal actions. Oh yeah – Captain Bonespurs is a man to emulate….BTW – It took Obama eight years to clean up the mess left by Bush and to get the economy moving again. For which, El Supremo took Credit.

        • kate777

          Obama did nothing, Nothing, Nothing to help the Economy. Obama did nothing, Nothing, Nothing to help Veterans of old wars as well as new wars. He did nothing for the Native Americans. I mention the two as he made trips to Phoenix, Arizona a couple of times, he visited the Navajo Reservation; he did Nothing to improve either State. His showing up was suppose to be enough, but he failed as a Stateman, he failed at Healthcare, he failed at Jobs, Businesses, Corporations, he failed because he did not nor does want to see America succeed. No sir, you are still deaf and dumb and you will continue to bee so Because You Don’t Want America to Succeed. Socialism has no place in America.

          • Carl Stidsen

            Kate: Wrong – I desperately want America to KEEP succeeding . That is why I am against the current President as the WRONG person to implement the positive aspects and programs of the Republican Party and get rid of the idiotic and divisive policies that have split this Country. As a 50 YEAR GOP Voter (which ended in 2016 when I was forced to vote for Hillary as the lesser of two Evils) unless the GOP Congress gets a spine and ejects that Fool, I will have no choice but to vote Democratic again. Thanks a Lot ! I have been an historical follower of Presidents and have lived through US Presidents since Truman. I have seen good Presidents and bad . And DJT is by far the worst President – even exceeding the venality and ignorance of the Harding, Grant and Jackson Administrations. The GOP has placed a flea brain (who is in debt to Russia) to occupy the most complex Office in the World and he and his vermin are destroying BOTH the Country and the GOP as a Party. As such , he is a danger to the future of Democracy and this Country. ANY of the 2016 GOP Presidential Candidates could have done a better job than your thuggish Hero. I agree that Socialism has no place in America. So why does your Hero keep pushing everyone who is not a true Trumper (i.e. 80% of the Country) toward the Democratic Party by his stupid, ill-considered and dangerously short-sighted stunts ?

          • RightWriter

            Very well said! 🙂

          • Carl Stidsen

            I’m NEITHER an Idiot or a Retard ! I DIDN’T vote for Trump ! What’s your excuse ?

    • scot_belle

      The First Amendment is…….PEACEFUL PROTESTS.
      —–
      U.S. Constitution, QUOTE:
      “1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, OR THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
      —–
      This (D) …’dog n pony show’ is definitely NOT peaceful and ……….is deliberately disruptive!!

      BTW…(D) = DEMOCRAT

    • Would it be OK if I converted a few of your comments on this thread into a stand-alone article for publication on my website?

      There is no fee, I’m simply trying to add more content diversity for Writer Beat and liked what you wrote. I’ll be sure to give you complete credit as the author. You can learn more about the site by checking out my Disqus profile (my email and the website addresjs are in the upper left hand corner) or just reply “sure” and I’ll handle the rest.

    • RightWriter

      Calm down, you idiot — you’ll have a seizure! Or maybe you’re HAVING one. You sound like you need MEDICAL ATTENTION RIGHT AWAY.
      Do you have ANY idea what you’re talking about ,or are you just blathering?
      If YOU and YOUR friends can’t digest 42,000 pages of legal testimony in 11 hours y ou should GET YOUR STAFFS TO HELP YOU. There are probably a few young hotshots around there who CAN do it, and since YOUR staffs and OUR staffs are THE SAME SIZE there’s NO EXCUSE for not being able to accomplish WHAT WE DID in roughly the same length of time. What are you, RETARDED?
      Are you telling us you don’t think Justice (to be) Kavanaugh is all he’s cracked up to be? Well, why is a left-liberal Harvard scholar like Alan Dershowitz. long-time Democrat, who just WROTE A BOOK called “The Case AGAINST Impeaching Trump” to refjute EVERY stupid comment YOU just made! Dershowitz has been a leading Constitutional lawyer at Harvard for YEARS, and his switch from left-liberal to pro-Trump is startling, if not amazing. But then, YOU wouldn’t get that — NOT ENOUGH BRAINS.

  • Frederic Charles Hilnbrand

    Of course these jackasses should be prosecuted! Of course they think that nothing should happen because they THINK they are special. WRONG JACKASSES!!

    • RightWriter

      There”S ZERO evidence (according to the Capitol Police) that ANYONE was PAID to do ANYTHING in the Kavanaugh hearings, but even THAT wouldn’t necessarily have merited treatment as criminals. The LEGAL (Constitutional) understanding of “FREE SPEECH” today is SO broad that it’s almost impossible to find ANYTHING it doesn’t include (did you know BURNING THE AMERICAN FLAG is “free speech”?) So I’m afraid this time they got the RIGHT JACKASSES!
      And according to a senior Capitol Police officer who was in charge of the “roundup” this week, there IS no evidence that ANYONE paid for the demonstrators to do their thing. The cops had the impression that were DC College Demcorats and Women’s Democrat Club members, and they were self-financed. Soros is out of the country , and besides — he likes BIG demonstrations, not a couple of hundred protesters.

  • Steve W

    Yes, their protests were paid and coordinated in order to be disruptive. More like Anarchy Lite than legitimate protest. Acceptance is approval and unless we want more of this type of “discourse” there should be consequence. Court appearances, fines ($250-$500 range) and a couple of days in jail so they have a chance to consider their actions. It is not like there are no proper ways to protest.

    • GoldenGirl2u

      Read some of the women dressed up like cartoon characters were identified as Antifa Protesters. You know they are paid, was a picture circulating showing a guy paying a girl, he had an envelope of money. These people don’t care about the facts just getting the money. Disruptors just like the Dems. Vote them all out of office in Nov.

    • RightWriter

      Read my lips: “disrupting a public meeting” is a THIRD-CLASS MISDEMEANOR, NOT a felony! You DON’T go to jail; you MAY pay a (small) fine, maybe not, mostly depends on the judge (so, considering how scarce conservative federal judges are, WE would pay a fine, liberals would NOT).

      ALL demonstrations are “designed to be disruptive.” That’s the WHOLE IDEA — for the protesters to see how much they can GET AWAY with. When their target is a federal hearing, they’ll get away with a LOT, because no federal district judge wants to be told his case is in the crapper because he didn’t allow sufficiently broad “freedom of speech,” and “freedom of speech” gets BROADER almost every DAY. (Since about 1985 it has inlcuded — wait for it! — THE RIGHT TO BURN UP AN AMERICAN FLAG.)

      The POINT is, our “free speech” rights have been expanded to the degree that almost EVERY conceivable action comes under the “free speech” rubric. So demonstrators and/or protesters can do pretty much ANYTHING and NOBODY, no court, not police force, no Senator or Congressman, can TOUCH them. The best we can say about the Kavanaugh hearings demonstrations is that they DID NOT turn violent and Judge Kavanaugh had the grace to take it ALL with a sense of humor. (I do feel badly for his daughters, who were a bit too young to understand why everyone was screaming at their father!)

  • william couch

    To the fullest extent of the “LAW”!!!

    • RightWriter

      Unfortunately, while distasteful, THAT’S NOT ILLEGAL. There’s NO LAW, and NO SENATE (or HOUSE) rule that says one person or group CANNOT PAY SOMEONE ELSE to attend or even demonstrate at a hearing. In fact, bigshot lawyers and business-people do what amounts to the same thing all the time — to avoid the necessity, at maybe $500 per hour, of standing outside the hearing chamber THEMSELVES, they HIRE A COLLEGE KID as a “slug” to do it FOR THEM. The kid stands on line until the door opens, or if the boss knows him/her,, even until a seat inside becomes available, and then the lawyer or business-person takes the seat. Saves the client maybe $2000, while it earns the student maybe $300 or so! Perfectly legal, and I know college students who actually GOT GOOD JOBS by getting to know a lawyer or business-person he/she encountered on the “slug line.”

      • william couch

        Unfortunately I know people that work there.. They were charged with trespassing.. These that I know are pages and other gov. employee’s..

        • RightWriter

          I don’t see how what you’re saying differs from what I said, except you suggested they were charged with trespassing. What I heard from my friend (a senior officer on the Capitol Police force, and HE said “disturbing a public meeting.” I don’t think that difference makes much…well, difference. Both are third-class misdemeanors that won’t put anyone in Jail for five minutes, or charge them a fine, either.

          • william couch

            If you’ve made up your mind about this then “WHY” are you bothering me!! You don’t know who I know or where they work in the system!!

  • Carl Mac

    YES this is a disrespectful to this country and it’s people these idiots should face fines and jail time and find out who is paying them to do this …. photo evidence is available was on the internet.

    • RightWriter

      It doesn’t MATTER if you have photographic evidence, the FIRST AMENDMENT allows ANYONE to demonstrate about ANYTHING. It’s NOT illegal. It’s at WORST a THIRD DEGREE MISDEMEANOR for which there IS NO CRIMINAL PENALTY.
      Yes, it’s disrespectful, but fines and jail terms would be ILLEGAL, and it doesn’t MATTER who is paying their bills. . The SUPREME COURT has said ANY kind of demonstration, however noisy or rude, IS AN EXERCISE OF FREE SPEECH. Period. END OF STORY.

      • rivahmitch

        Sorry, but that one (“demonstration”)went a bit too far. The Constitution secured the right to free speech. However, it was the robed tyrants who decided that “speech” could be construed to include actions. As Jefferson warned the Constitution may be “construed out of existence by the courts”. I believe in “FREE SPEECH” but it means just that.

        • RightWriter

          Well, I WISH you were right, but I’ve been following the Supreme Court and its decisions since the 1970s and it was IN THAT DECADE that SCOTUS (absurdly, if you ask ME, but then, nobody did) DECIDED THAT EVEN “BURNING THE FLAG” WAS “FREE SPEECH” covered by the First Amendment. I’d like to go back to the days when SPEECH MEANT SPEECH, but even “stare decisis” won’t get us there. I doubt even Justice-to-be Kavanaugh and TWO MORE CONSERVATIVE JUSTICES wouldn’t be able to do it, either.

          So, much as your analysis might be reasonable (and I think it is), we are NOT going to see the day again when “free speech” had to be in WORDS on a piece of paper. If burning a FLAG is free speech, so is almost ANYTHING else using language!

          BTW, I wouldn’t use Jefferson as an authority: he never SERVED on the Supreme Court (or in any other judicial position). SOMEONE would call you out on that! 🙂

          • rivahmitch

            “wor
            ds on a piece of paper” sounds more like “freedom of the press” than “freedom of speech”. WRTJefferson, I’d rather depend on his , Madisons and Washington’s words and insights for reality than those of the robed tyrants. As to some “calling me out”, I personally don’t give a fat flying rats ass.

  • Vince

    YES

  • Elizabeth Linton

    I agree…..they had no respect for decorum, or for the lawful assembly. I would LOVE to know for sure WHO paid them, and WHERE the money came from!?? I have my suspicions, but I don’t want to speculate publicly!

    • Harvey Gamel

      what difference does it make? first ammendment applies to all

      • GoldenGirl2u

        I am sick of people hiding behind the first amendment, you do not have the right to go into any building and obstruct or destroy property. These proceedings are a joke, they should be stopped when you have Senators out right lying and putting on a show just for the cameras. They have become part of the problem and need to be called up at the very least for ethic violations.

        • RightWriter

          You may not have the right to do it in “any building,” but the U.S. Capitol IS NOT “ANY BUILDING.” In the Capitol (and adjacent office buildings) you DO HAVE THE RIGHT to attend open public hearings and DEMONSTRATE YOUR APPROVAL OR DISPLEASURE with what’s going on or being said. That is called “FREE SPEECH” and it is GUARANTEED TO EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US BY THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION. Period.

          As to destruction of property, I went through the room AFTER the hearing and I didn’t see ANY property that had been “destroyed.” Some rude magic marker “illustrations,” to be sure, but they washed right off. And especially at the Capitol & office buildings, “FREE SPEECH” is broadly interpreted — because if it isn’t, some judge will come down HARD on the Senator(s) or Congressmen/women whose interpretation was too narrow. Pretty much ANYTHING GOES nowadays, since about 25 years ago the Supreme Court decided (in its dubious wisdom, if you ask ME) that BURNING THE AMERICAN FLAG qualified as “free speech.” (That’s destruction of property, too, come to think of it!)

          As far as truth-telling (by the Senators!) goes, THEY are responsible for their own statements, and they’re NOT required to be truthful. In fact, ONLY THE WITNESS — in this case Judge Kavanaugh — was EVER put under oath! For the members of the Committee, the “truth” is what they SAY (or PRETEND) it is, and if some of them re ly

      • RightWriter

        TRUE — and I’m so glad someone other than ME said it! 🙂

    • RightWriter

      A contact of mine high up in the management of the Capitol Police said he was pretty sure most of them were recruited by the Young Democrats and Democrat Women of DC…let that speak for itself. There IS no reason to think it was Soros (as many have suggested), — first, the whole thing was WAY too small-bore for Soros; HE’d have had 10,000 demonstrators protesting, not 100. Second, he’s out of the country. But I don’t deny it’s possible he was involved, or at least wrote a check.
      Anyway, it doesn’t really matter because WHAT THEY WERE DOING, WHILE DISTASTEFUL, WAS PERFECTLY LEGAL. At WORST, the noisiest of the protesters might have been guilty of a THIRD-CLASS MISDEMEANOR for disrupting a public meeting — which pulls NO FINE and NO PRISON TIME.

  • Dodie1990

    Who lets all that garbage in in the first place? The hearings were televised, but should not be a spectator event. A sad commentary n how far our country has fallen. Can you imagine what would have happened if Republicans had carried on this way when Obama was in charge?

    • RightWriter

      Senate and House hearings are ALWAYS open to the public unless they deal with sensitive/classified material. ALWAYS. That’s part of being a REPUBLIC. We try not to KEEP secrets from the American people if we can avoid it.

      I agree that with TV (thank you, C-Span!) doing gavel-to-gavel coverage, opening the hearing room(s) may be unnecessary, but the assumption (I’m told) is that not everyone HAS C-Span, and even Fox News doesn’t telecast ALL of it. I think that may be out-of-date thinking, from the days when maybe there were only TWO C-Span channels, but then I just checked an alternative to the carrier I use now and discovered THEY don’t carry C-Span3. So who knows.

      Anyway, even back in ancient times when there was only ONE C-Span (BEFORE the SENATE joined the 20th century), if they had to go to live House coverage they taped the hearings and showed them at 3 AM or something equally convenient. 🙁

      But apart from duplicating C-Span, there IS a sensible reason for having TV coverage of whatever hearing(s) is/are considered important: persons with a special interest in the outcome of those hearings station employees, usually interns, at the hearing room to observe (often the interaction of committee members gives a clue to how they’re going to vote) and the intern reports back to his/her boss to give them a first-hand report. Not a BIG deal, they could certainly learn to get along without such reports, but they’ve HAD them now since the early 1980s and I think everyone (on all sides) is used to the procedure by now.

      BTW, Republicans DID carry on this way when Obama was in office — though it’s true that Republicans tend to be a BIT BETTER-MANNERED than the Democrats.
      Also, in the cases of Sotomayor and Kagen (Obama’s only two Supreme Court appointments), to be truthful, we were somewhat relieved that Obama hadn’t picked WORSE candidates for SCOTUS, and many of us (me included, but I’m a staffer, not a Senator) thought we were coming out in better shape than we’d expected, so we didn’t scream too loudly. SOME OF THE YOUNG REPUBLICANS and FEDERALIST SOCIETY people DID scream, loudly, though! 🙂

  • Jmanjo

    They should be locked up and from their behavior checked for mental disorders!

    • RightWriter

      Oh, good, you ARE heading to turn the USA into VENEZUELA, or mahybe Communist CHINA. OUR government DOES NOT SUBJECT US TO MENTAL EXAMINATIONS because we SAY something with which they disagree!! NOT YET, anyway.

      Those demonstrators were almost all STUDENTS, members of the Young Democrats (which has a BIG chapter in Washington) or the Democrat Women’s Club. THEY DISAGREE WITH YOUR VIEWS (and MINE), but they are NOT INSANE and suggesting that they ARE violates EVERY SINGLE PRINCIPLE IN OUR BILL OF RIGHTS. I thought conservatives were supposed to be BELIEVERS IN THE CONSTITUTION! Guess NOT!

  • Teresa Nazareth

    Not only arrested, they should be jailed and fined $5000/- each, they will only learn when it hurts their pockets. When attending such hearings there should be absolute respect and silence, not behave like fishmongers selling sardines

    • RightWriter

      THE CONSTITUTION (Bill of Rights, Article !) SAYS THEY CAN DO WHAT THEY DID. There is NO LAW under which they can be jailed or fined. Most of them WERE arrested, and probably charged with a CLASS THREE MISDEMEANOR (that’s what “disrupting a public meeting” IS: no fine, no prison, just your name on a police blotter). The reason is simple — IT’S CONSTITUTIONAL, THEREFORE LEGAL, THEREFORE NOT SUBJECT TO PUNISHMENT. Period.

      In 241 Years of nationhood, I doubt we have EVER had a Senate or Congressional hearing in which there was “ABSOLUTE RESPECT AND SILENCE” — EVER! (I’ve sat through DOZENS, maybe HUNDREDS of ’em!) And frankly, I don’t see why there SHOULD be. We’re a REPUBLIC, not a MONARCHY: if people can’t tolerate a little disrespect, they SHOULDN’T RUN FOR or accept appointment to POLITICAL OFFICE (including the Supreme Court). You want “absolute respect and silence”? I think the JAPANESE are pretty good at THAT — of course, THEY have an EMPEROR and a CROWN PRINCE, not ELECTED SENATORS or appointed Judges.

      I have the DISTINCT impression from WATCHING Judge (soon-to-be-Justice) Kavanaugh that HE would agree with ME: He certainly didn’t seem bothered by all the crap (HE SEEMED AMUSED BY IT!) although I DID feel badly for his DAUGHTERS (maybe 13 and 10 was a bit too young for such hearings, although of course it would have been the girls’ last chance, EVER, to see their Daddy in action!)

      But keep in mind, in this day and age even the QUEEN OF ENGLAND doesn’t get “absolute respect and silence” when SHE makes a speech. Depending on the surroundings, she may even be BOOED! This ain’t the 19th century, and the Queen’s name isn’t VICTORIA. 🙁

  • Dennis Anderson

    Anything to slow down the way things are supposed to work. They show up in the clown car and pile out spouting their retoric that this is unjust when they knew it was planned and perfectly legal. You`re right Bill money is no object when they can use ours. It was seen these people were paid off for the extra shouting that they did. Wienstein orcrastrated the action like a band leader as it turned into yelling from every corner of the room. Yes this has got to stop its not JR High.If it were the other way around they would have insisted on jail time.

    • Still_Educating_the_Idiots

      Actually, when it comes to the orchestrating of this entire thing, look to Chuckles Schumer, and there you will find the Primum Mobile of it all.

    • RightWriter

      Well, the hearings took about THIRTY MINUTES longer than they were SCHEDULED to take, so the protesters DIDN’T “slow down the way things are supposed to work” — at least not very much. And the protests seem to have been organized by the Young Democrats and Democrat Women’s Clubs in DC. In ANY event, they were LEGAL under the FIRST AMENDMENT, there is NO getting around THAT.
      Protesters ALWAYS want to make as much noise and fuss as they CAN, because the more they do to get attention, the more likely they are to make the news. BUT WHAT THEY IGNORE IS THAT THEIR ANTICS MAKE THEM LOOK BAD — STUPID AND ILL-BEHAVED — while the REPUBLICANS came out looking like SAINTS. They didn’t SAY or DO ANYTHING against the rules.
      NOW WHO DO YOU THINK MR. or MS. AMERICA out there, watching on TV or the Internet, LOOKED BETTER? Who do you think Mr. or Ms. America will APPRECIATE for acting like serious adult human beings, and who do you think they will SCORN for acting like SEVENTH GRADERS? And do you REALLY think if Mr. or Ms. America aren’t already firmly in the camp of one candidate or another, they’ll GO OUT AND VOTE FOR THE IDIOTS WHO ACTED LIKE CHILDREN — OR LIKE THE WELL-BEHAVED JUDGE and his supporters on the Committee? WE WON THAT CONTEST, folks, and we shouldn’t WORRY about how much fuss the other team made!

  • Pat Dailey

    I believe their mommys and their daddys should be forced to come and pick them up and give them the spanking they should have received when they were two. Mommy can then pick up after them and take them home to their basement bedroom. I have never seen a better argument
    for compulsory military service!

    • Still_Educating_the_Idiots

      The problem is, for most of these idiots, the parents are proud of them, because they are the 60’s & 70’s morons who originally sent college campuses into chaos. These parents are PROUD of them, and of themselves, for successfully raising them to be the little Marxist darlings that they now are..

      • RightWriter

        Good point!

    • RightWriter

      Well, most of them looked to be WAY beyond the age for Mommy or Daddy to come and pay their fines or give them spankings (we also have laws against physical brutality, and in some states against even SPANKINGS!) The First Amendment does NOT say “polite speech” — and it includes ALL speech.
      I agree with you that their behavior MIGHT be a good reason for compulsory military service, EXCEPT that most of those demonstrators were TOO OLD FOR MILITARY SERVICE, TOO. : -(
      And do we REALLY want such a bunch of DISOBEDIENT JERKS in our armed forces? Do you think they’d ever FIGHT when ordered to do so? I have my doubts!

  • Dan59

    There should be no outside audience allowed in these hearings. It would be enough coverage having it on C-Span without letting these abusive individuals in to disrupt the proceedings. These people should absolutely be arrested and tried for trying to take the rest of the citizens rights away by using illegally organized protests in the gallery.

    • RightWriter

      The C-Span only idea has been discussed, but even today some people don’t have cable or whatever, and don’t GET C-Span (my system is about to lose C-Span3, which is AS BAD as not having it, since all the re-runs of hearings like the Kavanaugh hearing ARE ON C-SPAN3 I’m chewing NAILS!)
      However, Congressional/Senate hearings have been OPEN, except when the subject matter requires high security, since the TRUMAN ADMINISTRATION — and on RADIO before THAT! There is strong resistance to taking this away from the public, who, after all, PAY THE SALARIES of the people involved in the hearings. It’s OUR Senate (or Congress), after all: WHY THE HELL SHOULDN’T THE PEOPLE BE ABLE TO SEE IT?
      Back 30 years ago, anyone who wanted to used to be able to drop by the office of ANY Senator or Congressperson (theoretically, it had to be YOUR member, but nobody ever checked), pick up a pass, and go sit in the gallery and watch. No more: just too many people and not enough seats in the galleries. So THAT contact with one’s Senator or Congressperson is gone. NOW take away the chance to see him/her in action at a hearing? Again, WE (the public) are the bosses — NOT the Senators or Congress-people. HOW DARE THEY take away OUR opportunity to see what they’re doing?
      So, while your idea may have merit (and one day may be the only feasible option), there ARE roadblocks. And having both WORKED for members of the Senate & House and tried to tell tourists how to see what they wanted to see, I can see both sides of the argument. Until the WHOLE WORLD has all 3 C-Span channels (or all 4 channels, since by then there’ll be one for SCOTUS, too), I’ll go with letting the public in wherever possible.
      Also, I think “abusive individuals” is a LITTLE strong. Nobody got beat up, and the “disruptions” were somewhere between 2 and 5 minutes long. C’mon! By my watch, the hearings lasted just about THIRTY MINUTES longer than the Committee’s TENTATIVE schedule predicted. Is THAT such a BIG DEAL?
      There’s ALSO the fact that MOST OF THEM WERE CITIZENS, TOO. So if they were “taking away” the rest of citizens’ rights, they were doling so only to replace someone else’s with THEIR OWN. AND the protests in the gallery were NOT “illegally organized,” for the SIMPLE reason that there’s NO RULE about how protests in the galleries shall or shall not be organized. NONE.
      HOW MUCH DID YOU MISS, ANYWAY? I was watching on TV at home, and I saw a few BRIEF interruptions by noisy demonstrators, but all together probably not more than 15 minutes’ worth. The Capitol Police did their job and the protesters were ushered OUT of the gallery very efficiently. So WHAT is the big deal?

  • Robert Morrow

    again just follow the money. Just who paid the money to these traitors to sell out their Country? Arrest, trial and jail is the correct answer. Face it, this bribery money payout is on video for one and all to see that the Left slime is doing it best to destroy what we all hold dear.

    • RightWriter

      We don’t KNOW who paid them, IF ANYONE DID. It is ENTIRELY possible (and the senior Capitol Police officer on the site thinks so) that they SELF-FINANCED, since it wouldn’t be very expensive. Soros, the “usual suspect,” may NOT be guilty this time: first, he likes BIG demonstrations, and this BARELY involved 200 people (Soros would have gone for 10,000 demonstators, not 200!), and also he’s out of the country (he COULD, of course, have had someone else do the dirty work, but again, we don’t know. IF there IS a video with a “money payout” (that isn’t just some guy giving $100 to his son/daughter) that might give us a clue, but I haven’t seen anything like that.

  • klsparrow

    Hell yes as a felony fined and given at least a year in jail. There is no laws are constitutional right to interrupt a Senate hearing. If this had been conservatives doing this that is what would have happen. The reason it keep happening is there are no penalties for their actions

    • RightWriter

      You’re mistaken. While there’s no law specifically saying you can interrupt a Senate hearing, Senate (and House) hearings ARE COVERED by the First Amendment free speech clause. What the law DOES say is that interruptions to a Senate or House hearing are governed exactly the way any other interruptions to a LEGAL event would BE — EXCEPT that (as the First Amendment says) “CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW…”
      This is actually GENEROUS to the possible demonstrators, because it gives THEM the right to make their protests heard whenever they like, without going through the song-and-dance of waiting until the hearing is over, or interrupted, or adjourns for lunch. Congress took VERY literally the First Amendment’s “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech….” In other words, the First Amendment’s prohibition is ABSOLUTE.
      You’ve got the last sentence backwards: There’s no penalty for the actions of people claiming First Amendment protection because the County/State/Federal govts DO NOT WANT TO OVERRIDE that First Amendment admonition: “Congress shall make NO LAW ABRIDGING…” If it had been conservatives trying to enforce the law, I bet would have come out EXACTLY the same way — EXCEPT that Republicans wouldn’t have challenged the law in the first place!

      • klsparrow

        What you are saying is that if you claim 1st amendment protection you can do what ever you want. You can disrupt, destroy, burn down because there is a 1st amendment protection. 1st says “free speech” and it includes the right to disrupt are destroy. Your free speech right end when they start infringing on my free speech rights. the Speech in the 1st does not mean that you have blanket protection to do what ever you want and claim Free speech. ]

        While freedom of speech is a fundamental right, it is not absolute, and therefore subject to restrictions. … The rights of free speech and assembly, while fundamental in our democratic society, still do not mean that everyone with opinions or beliefs to express may address a group at any public place and at any time.” There is case after case where the SCOTUS has ruled on this.

        Which types of speech are not protected by the First Amendment?

        Obscenity,Fighting words,Defamation (including libel and slander), Child pornography,
        Perjury, Blackmail, Incitement to imminent lawless action, True threats,Solicitations to commit crimes. Some lawyers have added treason to the list.

        This concerns schools and students but it would apply to others. In a landmark case about free speech rights, the U.S. Supreme Court said that public schools shouldn’t prohibit students from expressing their opinions unless it would create a “substantial disruption” at school or violate other students’ rights. (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969). There have been various cases using Tinker. The following are some of the limits to speech. Like I said this applies to student but it would also apply to other people causing a disruption.

        When Is Disruption Substantial?

        interfere with class work or other school activities
        cause any disorder on campus, or
        intrude on the lives of other students.

        Were other students so upset that they couldn’t concentrate or visited school counselors in droves?

        Were classes cancelled or interrupted?

        Did administrators and/or teachers have to take considerable time
        away from their regular duties in order to deal with the fallout?

  • Lori

    Take their pictures, especially the fat ass caught on camera taking the money, and the guy handing it to her, give us their names and addresses, and post it all viral .they must be proud of what they did so lets see who they are, after all, conservatives and deplorables and real Americans ,stand out, stand up, wear MAGA hats and tee shirt s ,bumper stickers and so on ,right up front, Just goes to show ,if Civil War ever does break out like the Dems are trying to start, we already know they’ll (the most of them)turn tail and run, and we’ll have to run them to the ground).Good thing most of the folks that stand with us are already trained for that. I realize the left probably is training somewhere too,if someone only cared to look into it,probably training kids since most of them hide under masks.

    • RightWriter

      WHAT THEY ARE DOING IS LEGAL, EVEN TO THE “PAY OFF” — whether you want to ADMIT it or NOT. The Constitution (First Amendment) says “CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW…ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS…” NONE. Not “no mean law.” Not “no anti liberal law.” NO LAW. PERIOD.

      It is really pointless (even if true, which seems unlikely) to suggest the Dems are getting ready to start another Civil War. You seem to forget that the vast bulk of our military might — which is NOT hand-held weapons but modern armaments — would NOT be in your hands, and whlle I might admire your spirit, I don’t think you can run people with nuclear weapons “to the ground.” Maybe I’m wrong. But is a Second Civil War what you REALLY want?

  • scot_belle

    YES. The First Amendment is…….PEACEFUL PROTESTS.
    This (D) …’dog n pony show’ is definitely NOT peaceful and
    ……….is deliberately disruptive!!

    • RightWriter

      NO, that’s NOT TRUE. The Supreme Court (and lower courts) have ruled that protests NEED NOT BE PEACEFUL, although if anyone is KILLED or badly injured, it becomes another matter.
      First Amendment protests need NOT EVEN INCLUDE SPEECH — it’s been 25 years since the Supreme Court ruled that FLAG-BURNING is PROTECTED SPEECH (even if nobody SAYS A WORD) under the First Amendment!
      Basically, ANY speech or WRITTEN material qualifies as “speech” according to SCOTUS. And verbal protests like those of the demonstrators during the Kavanaugh hearings very DEFINITELY qualify — in fact, protests like THOSE have been PROTECTED “SPEECH” as long as this country has HAD a Constitution!
      Besides, don’t you realize that every time those nutcases raised their fists or screamed into the sound system, they made THEMSELVES look like TOTAL FOOLS and made Justice-to-be Kavanaugh and ALL the Republicans look like POLITE, WELL-MANNERED ladies and gentlemen… Who would YOU prefer to have as (A) a neighbor; (b) a fellow soccer player with neighborhood kids; (c) an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States????

  • Brabado

    Chuck Schumer and Criminal Hillary Clinton LIBERAL CORUPT MOB should have been arrestred, charged and thrown in Jail for actively promoting ANARQUISM and Criminal Acts.
    America should not be surprised if the Ugly Anarquist Circus presented at the Judicial Hearings, is just a Trail Run, or a Distraction for much worst things to come… After watching the Confirmation Hearings, did not realized that Liberal Democrats on that Committee could be so utterly repugnant and disrespectful…
    Specially, the “Minion-on-Steroid’s Cory Booker” who for a brief moment really thought he was, “man enough”, to compare himself with Spartacus… Imbeciles like Booker has no moral or ethic liminations, reasons why they become Liberal DemoRats.
    Very disappointed Chmn. Grassley look so “helplessly weak, in a daze and disoriented” during the Liberal Organized Schumer-Thugs Circus…. Perhaps Grassley should move on!
    UNLESS someone gets a BIG PAIR OF BRASS BALLS, THIS LIBERAL PROMOTED ANARQUISM WILL GROW TILL PEOPLE RESORT TO STREET VIOLENCE…
    May God protect America from Corrupt-Crooket Liberal Anarquist Losers…
    PS: Why is Criminal Hillary Clinton NOT IN JAIL, yet??? What happened to Pres. Trump promise??
    Semper fi

    • RightWriter

      First, Judiciary Chairman Grassley did EXACTLY what he was SUPPOSED to do, and it worked BEAUTIFULLY. He COULDN’T SHOOT DOWN the liberal Dems, because as Chairman that would have been a violation of the rules (everything in the- Senate, and for that matter the House, HAS to be done according to the rules, some of which-have been around for 100 years or more. It’s frustrating as all get-out, but there’d have to be a 100% Republican committee (realistically not possible as long as there’s even ONE Democrat in the Senate) , the rules can’t be changed. But what Grassley DID was bring Justice-to-be Kavanaugh through his hearings with a minimum of fuss and feathers, AND with a superb public image that got through to Americans ALL OVER the country. We might have HAD to let the Dems have their moment(s) in the spotlight, but if Mr. and Mrs. UNINVOLVED AMERICANS saw those hearings, THEY came away with a) the impression that this young guy, Brett Kavanaugh, is BRILLIANT and VERY even-tempered, even to the point of being AMUSED by some of the opposition’s antics. And b) their SECOND impression was that most (or ALL) of the DEMOCRATS on that committee are IDIOTS who shouldn’t be put in charge of ANYTHING, ever. What BETTER could have come out of those hearings????

  • Perfick

    RADICAL LIBS ARE MENTALLY ILL!

  • Alexander Horvat

    Funny how the extreme left in the media cover for this planned chaos in Congress. Did anyone note what appeared to be a total lack of police or officials in attendance to prevent these civil disturbances? They yelled for several minutes each time. The fact that they are paid agents of chaos is yet another reason why they should be prosecuted. Why is no one investigating that? Let’s get to draining this swamp of its collectively ignorant vermin.

    • RightWriter

      NO, there WAS A DOUBLE CONTINGENT OF CAPITOL POLICE ON THE SCENE from the first MINUTE of the hearings on Tusday ALL THROUGH THE WEEK. Some were in plain clothes, so perhaps you didn’t identify them. I know because the commander of the unit is an old friend, and I talked to him on Tuesday and again on Friday.
      It SEEMED like the demonstrators were yelling for “several minutes each time,” but Capitol Police who actually TIMED them have records showing they used up no more than 2 minutes in most of the interruptions, NEVER more than 3 plus a few seconds.
      The other reason “nobody is investigating” having them prosecuted is VERY ismple, the FIRST AMENDMENT REQUIRES that “CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW … ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS…” NO LAW. NONE. Since there is NO WAY anyone could be prosecuted for “civil disturbances,” why “investigate” what you can’t prosecute? It is also NOT clear that they were “paid agents” of ANYONE except THEMSELVES; There are rumors Soros paid them off, but HE is out of the country, and anyway he likes BIGGER crowds — he’d have gone for 1,000 demonstrators, not 200.
      Draining the swamp is a great idea, but it’s important to be sure it IS the swamp, and NOT A CREEK ON SOMEONE’S BACK LAWN.

  • L/Cpl

    Yes these “LEFT WING” IDIOT George Soros paid protesters need to be locked up along with the even dumber ANTIFA violent protestors. Then they need to be sent to Venezuela or N. Korea to live life there to see and feel what SOCIALISM & COMUNISM is really like !

    • RightWriter

      I’m still not sure George Soros was behind payment for these particular demonstrators. A highly placed Capitol police officer told me HE was pretty sure these protesters were either Young Democrats or Democrat Women’s Club members, not Soros types. However.
      Whatever one may think of the protesters (and I agree with your comments), WHAT THEY WERE DOING WAS LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT (“Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press….” You can’t arrest — MUCH LESS EXPEL — PEOPLE WHO HAVE DONE NOTHING ILLEGAL. If they WANT to go to Venezuela or North Korea, fine, but if they’re American citizens WE CAN’T EXPEL THEM UNLESS THEY COMMIT A CRIME — which hasn’t happened, YET.

  • bob

    Since this is a hearing on government property, the chairman ( Grassley ) should set the rules.If he wants to close the hearings to the public he should do so. None of those in the audience will be voting on the candidate so what is their purpose there. If he decides to have the public attend & he knows there are going to be disruptions,double the Capital police in the hearing & post a notice that any outbursts will be subject to $ 1,000 fines AND 30 days in jail. Then if someone does disrupt the hearing, get them out immediately & arrest them. Piss on just getting them out & NOT arresting & prosecuting them.

    • RightWriter

      Grassley DOES set the rules WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF THE RULES OF THE WHOLE SENATE. Hearings are customarily OPEN unless there is a national-security-related reason to close them (in which case they’re moved over to another building with a soundproof room). He CAN’T override the Senate Rules, though — no committee Chairman can do THAT. That means HE CANNOT CLOSE THE HEARINGS without the 100% CONSENT OF ALL THE DEMOCRATS, which he wouldn’t be able to get (they’d say no just on principle). The Senate has ITS OWN rules, and they’re a bit convoluted — almost nobody except maybe 20 Senators really understands them!

      There are, however, LOTS of reasons a person might want to watch the hearings IN PERSON apart from being a Senator who could vote on Kavanaugh’s confirmation. I went to the hearing on Tuesday with NO excuse except I enjoy listening to the back-and-forth involved in that kind of hearing. I’m NOT a prospective judge, or Senator, or even a LAWYER! 🙂

      Also, lawyers often attend because they want to see if they can get a line on the nominee’s feelings about some case that is important to THEM. And clerks for just about everyone on the Court will attend because the more they can learn about a likely new colleague, the better. Lots of other reasons for interest.

      Confirmation hearings for judges/justices and Cabinet officers/sub-officers are almost ALWAYS open to the public. (The exception may be hearings for directors of sensitive agencies, like the CIA, DNI, or NSA). But there is a strong bias in favor of OPEN hearings, if only because THE PUBLIC — TAXPAYERS ALL — ARE PAYING FOR THESE PEOPLE, THEIR SALARIES (in the Senate or as appointees) AND EXPENSES, and the PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT (or who) THEY’RE PAYING FOR.

      Just FYI: The Capitol Police WERE there in TWICE their usual numbers on Tuesday and Wednesday. Thursday, when Kavanaugh was finished and it was just people from other organizations going on record for or against his nomination, they went back to the usual numbers (approximately, anyway). Grassley, however, had nothing to do with THAT; the chief of the Capitol Police would have had an attendance estimate and used it to figure out how many officers he needed. There was NO shortage of Capitol Cops, there was just a more obstreperous bunch of demonstrators than usual. BUT THE HEARING RAN JUST ONE HALF HOUR LONGER THAN ANTICIPATED, suggesting they handled the extra crowd and extra NOISE pretty efficiently!

  • Harvey Gamel

    no, they should not have been arrested. But they sure as hell should have been removed, and arrested if they resisted..

    • Harvey Gamel

      after reading the other comments, the commenters are no better than the protesters. You all are just as willing to silence them as they are to silence you. This is the result of the elite’s agenda to keep all of us at each other’s throats so we don’t go after theirs. They promote Civil War to avoid Revolution…

      • RightWriter

        I’m not sure who “you” are, because your comment is addressed to YOURSELF, but I can ASSURE YOU that I AM NOT “as welling to silence them as they are to silence me” — OR affected by anyone’s agenda to keep us at each other’s throats. That’s utter NONSENSE. But without knowing who you’re talking to or about, I can’t comment further.

    • RightWriter

      Assuming you’re talking about protesters being removed from the Kavanaugh hearings, they WERE removed. Later in the day, a few got back in — there’s no way to efficiently keep track of all the comings and goings of the audience — but I don’t believe there were ANY RE-ARRESTS,. suggesting their one brush with the law calmed them down a little.

  • 1775concord

    Absolutely.

  • omen11

    For get about it…….Have you seen any Demo-rats prosecuted recently? Of course not, but you have seen a few trumpites prosecuted. There is enough evidence on the whole Obama administration including Obama himself to all be sent to prison and unless this happens it will continue. When Trump is gone they will come out in force to finish the job Obama started but didn’t quite finish due to the unexpected loss of Hillary to the Presidency. This whole mess is in part caused by the hierarchy of the Republican Party (McConnell, Ryan, Flake, McCain and others not backing the greatest President Donald Trump. We must see to it that the mid terms bring in staunch Trump people or trump himself will be in trouble. This country was and is on the precipice of a great collapse and only a man like trump could and has temporarily stopped it. When and if we falter the rest of the world will follow.

    • RightWriter

      You have a good point: there seems to be a LOT more prosecution of Republicans for minor transgressions than there ever is for Democrats on similar charges. Part of the problem (a BIG part) is that during his EIGHT YEARS in office, Obama STACKED the Justice Department AT THE LEVEL OF WORKING, MID LEVEL LAWYERS, with people who were loyal TO HIM, and not necessarily to JUSTICE. Those are almost ALL CAREER appointees in positions which, at least in theory, they could hold for LIFE (getting rid of a career federal employee is next to impossible; they have protections layered on so thick they’re virtually untouchable).

      Trump has been doing a really SUPERB job of replacing as many of the Obama gang of attorneys as possible, but it’s so hard to get them OUT THE DOOR that it’s slow going bringing someone else IN. And to be fair, Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions has proved to be ABSOLUTELY USELESS. He might as well NOT BE THERE = in fact, I’d suggest he’s NOT really there AT ALL. So it is VERY slow going, but until we’re in better shape at the “working attorneys” level at Justice, we won’t get MANY more prosecutions of Obama holdovers, but still some Republicans may get caught in the revolving door. It’s shameful, but there really ISN’T any quick fix available. 🙁

      • omen11

        If these people are not brought to justice, they will eventually succeed in turning this country into a Socialist/Communist state. This evil must be restrained because it’s spreading like cancer.

  • Mystic

    Why the hell were they not charged?

    • RightWriter

      BECAUSE THEY DIDN’T BREAK ANY LAW. The FIRST AMENDMENT GUARANTEES that “CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW…ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS…” In other words, being noisy, even obstreperous, in a Congressional or Senate hearing is NOT ILLEGAL, in fact it is PROTECTED BEHAVIOR.

      Demonstrating in public Congressional (or Senate) hearings is a TIME-HONORED TRADITION that has probably been going on since the American Republic was FOUNDED. I’ve been to HUNDREDS of hearings, and I have NEVER been to one that was entirely orderly. Doesn’t HAPPEN. NOBODY is ever charged unless they do something genuinely VIOLENT, not just yelling or making asses of themselves.

      They weren’t charged because the ONLY offense with which they COULD have been charged was a CLASS THREE MISDEMEANOR, specifically “disrupting a hearing”. There would have been NO JAIL TIME, NO FINE, NO IMPRISONMENT, nothing. They’d have been OUT ON THE STREET AGAIN in an HOUR, maybe LESS.

  • James Ruddy

    Those who paid them to do it should be the ones you prosecute.

    • cowboy541

      James – I feel that both should be prosecuted, the protester and the ones that paid them (all the way up to Soros if it was from his shell foundations). The fines start doubling with each level going up the pay line.

    • RightWriter

      WE DON’T EVEN KNOW IF SOMEONE DID PAY THEM! It COULD have been self-financed — it doesn’t cost much for someone living in or near Washington DC to take a bus (or Metro) up to the Capitol and be sure to arrive early enough to get a seat in the hearing room for big Judiciary hearings (or whatever). AND THEY PROBABLY DIDN’T HAVE TO PAY A RED NICKEL ON THEIR “ARREST” because the offense was a THIRD-CLASS MISDEMEANOR, and there’s rarely a fine.

      Besides which, PROTESTING AT A CONGRESSIONAL/SENATORIAL HEARING IS NOT ILLEGAL and nobody could LEGALLY have STOPPED THEM. The Capitol Police could only remove them for “DISTURBING A HEARING”, a VERY minor offense.

      • James Ruddy

        First, they weren’t protestors, they were paid to disrupt the hearings by the democratic senators. People saw them being paid and Schumer admitted to setting the disruption up during a conference call with other dem senators before the hearings. Senate hearings are not the proper venue to protest, even if that was their intent, which is wasn’t.

  • william bailey

    Let them know in “ADVANCE” that any disturbance from protesters will automatically be reprimanded by 3 days in jail with MS-13 gang members , I guarantee they will be peaceful and behave themselves like everybody else that doesn’t need to be told how to behave ! there is a place and time and way to protest , and it isn’t in a courtroom or hearing room !

    • RightWriter

      If someone gave them TEN MINUTES “advance” notice, the protesters would have a LAWYER at the site with a WRIT forbidding the Capitol Police or anyone else from denying the protesters the right to be HEARD – on the (admittedly logical) grounds that if their speech CAN’T BE HEARS, it’s not really FREE SPEECH. You “guarantee”(based on WHAT? Your deep-seated understanding of the Constitution (NOT!) that they’d be peaceful and behave themselves, and I GUARANTEE TO YOU that their LAWYER(S) wouldn’t let the hearing committee get away with it!
      The FACT is that there is NO LAW or RULE that would prohibit “outbursts” like the ones at the Kavanaugh hearings from taking place IN A SENATE OR CONGRESSIONAL HEARING ROOM. In a COURTROOM, it’s different — a strict JUDGE CAN close down ALL unnecessary talk. But NOT in a Congressional or Senate HEARING ROOM. TWO DIFFERENT UNIVERSES.

  • Chuck Cottom

    YES and prosecuted in FEDERAL COURT

    • RightWriter

      Take a look at the First Amendment — YOU MIGHT LEARN SOMETHING. It says: “CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW…ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS…” In other words, being noisy, even obstreperous, in a Congressional or Senate hearing is NOT ILLEGAL, in fact it is PROTECTED BEHAVIOR. And it is PARTICULARLY beyond the law to consider prosecuting someone for such behavior in a FEDERAL court, because the phrase “CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW…” REFERS EXPLICITLY TO FEDERAL COURTS.
      The FACT is that those demonstrators did NOTHING wrong (under the law; their behavior WAS atrocious, but atrocious behavior IS NOT ILLEGAL). You can’t prosecute them for NOT breaking the law — even YOU should understand THAT.

  • Jeannie

    Yes they should and they should be prosecuted. Not fined, because soros would pay that. Give them a couple of days in jail or a month community service. Something to hold them RESPONSIBLE for others, who can’t do it themselves, are paying them to do their dirty work

    • RightWriter

      They’re guilty — IF AT ALL — ONLY OF A CLASS-THREE MISDEMEANOR — FOR WHICH NOBODY IS EVER JAILED. EVER. It’s like JAYWALKING. What are you going to prosecute them FOR? And they’d probably beat the misdemeanor charge with a halfway decent lawyer. WE DON’T PUT PEOPLE IN JAIL FOR JAYWALKING or “DISRUPTING” A PUBLIC MEETING — we don’t HAVE enough jails to hold all the people who’d have to be jailed if we did! And I, for one, DO NOT want to PAY for the salaries and benefits of hundreds of additional police or prison guards! I just got a tax cut LAST YEAR, I do NOT want to give it back so YOU can put a bunch of jerk-demonstrators in PRISON because YOU have a hard on about keeping hearing rooms orderly.
      THERE HAS PROBABLY NEVER BEEN AN ENTIRELY ORDERLY SENATE OR CONGRESSIONAL HEARING HELD ANYWHERE IN THIS COUNTRY SINCE OUR FOUNDING. What on EARTH makes you think it can — or even SHOULD — happen NOW?

  • Rabbit

    yes they should be. It is about time something happens to these people to see that yes there are consequences when you act like a$$ clowns. As for the democratic senators on this panel, AMERICA PAY ATTENTION AND WAKE UP. this is exactly why we must make sure that the dems do not regain control of either body of government. Your party made a farce out of this panel. how is Blumenthal even still in congress? A proven Liar asking a proven man of justice questions? That’s f”ed up, PERIOD!!!!! Booker and Harris have no business in Congress, it is not to be made into a farce show for your gain? They have Democrats have become promoters for Socialism that can not be allowed to attack our government. It just doesn’t work Bernie, never has never will

    • RightWriter

      THEY WEREN’T BREAKING ANY LAW — SO FOR WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO ARREST THEM? At worst, they MIGHT have been kicked out for “disrupting the hearing,” but ONLY AFTER they’d DISRUPTED IT, NOT BEFORE. And nobody gets ARRESTED for a class three MISDEMEANOR, which is what “disrupting” WOULD HAVE BEEN! We don’t have enough JAILS to house all the people who commit misdemeanors!

      • Rabbit

        Well in light of what has surfaced with the left wing DOJ Comey probably Obama and Clinton you must have sweat on your eyebroughs Lets see Booker and Harris were sworn in Correct? Misrepresentation of the facts by a federal official is against the law last time I checked, but your right you left wingers are so used to violating that that this must feel common place for you Your party just spent 2 years of taxpayers dollars looking for collusion and guess where they found it, smack dab smothering your own party. That groups is so tainted with corruption lying stealing the only good democrat is a out of office democrat

    • RightWriter

      I can’t STAND Kamala Harris or Cory Booker,, but when you say they “HAVE NO BUSINESS IN CONGRESS,” you are overlooking the VOTES of the CITIZENS OF THEIR STATES — WHO ELECTED THEM TO THE SENATE. Do I wish the elections had come out differently? YES! Does it mean they “have no business”in the Senate? NO, because THEY WON THEIR ELECTIONS.

      As for Blumenthal, I can’t stand him, either. I assume the “lie” to which you refer is his whopper claiming to have served in Vietnam when he never even got overseas? But he’s still in Congress because THE PEOPLE OF CONNECTICUT, in their dubious wisdom, REELECTED HIM in 2016. Unfortunately there is NO rule against electing someone who has told a whopper to the voters, or to anyone else, for that matter, and Connecticut has become a one-party state (almost impossible for a Democrat to LOSE). So Blumenthal is THERE until 2022, barring an act of God or some misbehavior so gross that the Senate expels him.

      I agree completely about making sure the Dems don’t win again, this year or (as far as I’m concerned) EVER.

  • mike

    They should not have been allowed into the in the hearing in the first place ! It is more than obvious that their only intent was to disrupt. Yes they all should have been arrested and given the maximum sentence !

    • RightWriter

      The hearing was open to the public on a first-come, first-seated basis. By 7 AM the line had over 100 people in it, so trying to play games with people’s position on line would have been … hazardous. AND CONFIRMATION HEARINGS ARE ALMOST ALWAYS OPEN (except for the DCI and DNI) And anyway, the Capitol Police FOLLOW THE RULES; first come, first seated.

      As for knowing whose “intent was to disrupt” or not, that’s easy AFTER they’ve done the disrupting. BEFORE they DO anything, they look just like anyone else on the line.
      Besides, THE HEARING WAS OPEN, not just to “friendly” people,, but TO ANYONE WHO GOT IN IN TIME TO GET A SEAT. There were probably 50 other people on that line whose appearance was indistinguishable from one of the protesters. You CAN’T just change the rules in mid-stream like that!

  • Wendy

    Yes prosecute them and fine and jail time. Sadly though, they take pride in their actions, and are getting paid for it. But who is letting them in in the first place?

    • RightWriter

      They’re members of THE PUBLIC, who are admitted to non-sensitive sessions of the Senate or House committees as long as seats are available. IT’S THE LAW. The hearings are OPEN, so anyone who is on line when the doors open has a pretty good chance of getting a seat.
      The First Amendment to the Constitution says that “CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW…abridging the Freedom of Speech, or of the press…” THAT MEANS NO FEDERAL OFFICIAL can prohibit anyone from coming into a public meeting of the Senate or House as long as a seat is available (or waiting on line until a seat BECOMES available!) And since they are NOT DOING ANYTHING ILLEGAL, they CANNOT be prosecuted or fined or put in jail. Sometimes they MAY be kicked out for violating a SENATE or HOUSE RULE against “disrupting a public meeting”, but even THAT is risky because any demonstrator with a lawyer can get invited right back in!
      It IS possible some of the demonstrators are being paid, although the Capitol Police officer in charge said HIS impression was that they were mostly College Young Democrats or Women’s Democrat club members, not being paid for by anyone. It’s certainly no economic HARDSHIP when they just have to take a subway or bus trip and then walk across the Capitol lawn. BUT IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE — WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN DOING IS MOSTLY LEGAL EVEN IF SOMEONE ELSE IS PAYING FOR IT. I say “mostly” because SOME — the noisiest — MIGHT be booted for “disrupting a hearing,” but if the demonstrator has a lawyer, THAT probably won’t stick and he or she will be RIGHT BACK IN AN HOUR OR TWO.
      Anyway, PAID OR NOT, what they’re doing is LEGAL (and CONSTITUTIONAL). And really, is it SO awful? A few minutes — usually LESS THAN FIVE — interruption now and then? NOBODY got hurt. The hearing was delayed only about THIRTY MINUTES (TOTAL) OVER TWO DAYS (based on comparing the original, intended schedule with the actual hours at which the hearings started and ended). I mean, REALLY!

      AND it gave US — conservatives — a BIG victory that we haven’t even bothered to chalk up! Say you’re Mr. or Ms. Average sitting out in your living room somewhere NOT in Washington DC. You don’t know a LOT about Kavanaugh (or most of the Senators), but you want to see what you think of the future justice. So you plug into C-Span and pay attention.
      WHAT DO YOU LEARN? First, Brett Kavanaugh is BRILLIANT. He seems to have a grip on the contents of EVERY SUPREME COURT DECISION SINCE ROUGHLY 1970. (and that’s a LOT of decisions). Second, he seems like a REALLY nice guy. He smiles a lot, even LAUGHS (sometimes you don’t get the joke, but HE and apparently a lot of the Senators, DO). He lets those annoying leftist senators run on and on and on until THEY exhaust THEMSELVES. And in the middle of all the hearing confusion, he pays attention to his pre-teenaged daughters, who are a bit upset by the grilling that Daddy is getting. AND you hear about his coaching his kids’ soccer (or is it basketball?) team, feeding the homeless, etc., etc. You’re wondering how he works out the 30-HOUR DAY it must take to DO all that, but you think he sounds like a pretty good guy. Meanwhile, those dipsh*ts who are asking all those loaded AND RUDE questions LOOK AND SOUND LIKE EVERYONE YOU’VE EVER…well, HATED. So WHOSE SIDE ARE YOU ON when the hearings are over? Guess!

  • Hugh Tjardon

    They should have been “Antifa-ed”.

  • Trish

    Hell yes , they should been removed IMMEDIATELY & arrested . That is the way it is supposed to work with responsible adults. These people broke the law . What they did was illegal . They are the entitled generation .

    • RightWriter

      It’s NOT the way it’s supposed to work (even) with responsible adults in a Senate or House hearing. They DID NOT BREAK THE LAW — they only ignored what YOU apparently THINK is the law. But it’s NOT.

      The FIRST AMENDMENT allows EVERYONE to behave pretty much as BADLY as they like (short of murdering someone!). “Congress SHALL MAKE NO LAW…abridging the FREEDOM OF SPEECH, or of the press…” The right to FREE SPEECH belongs TO THE PEOPLE, not to demonstrators and — surprise!!! — NOT TO THE WELL-BEHAVED PERSON JUST WATCHING THE HEARINGS and trying to ignore the trouble-makers.

      The problem is that the First Amendment has been interpreted by SCOTUS and lower courts over and over to go MUCH further than any SANE founder (and our founders WERE sane) EVER intended. They kept adding onto the scope of the amendment, and it grew and grew and grew. For instance, would you BELIEVE that the FREE SPEECH clause of the First Amendment (quoted in 2nd paragraph) makes it UNCONSTITUTIONAL to PROHIBIT BURNING AN AMERICAN FLAG? Well, it does. Now tell me how THAT is “SPEECH”! (Expression, sure! But “expression” and “speech” are NOT the same thing!) Anyway, we have this MUCH-EXPANDED First Amendment free speech clause, and now we can’t kill the monster.

  • Patttie Prince

    I totally agree with Senator Kennedy! I think people who are of age should act like it when they are in public not turn an important meeting into a playground. I think there needs to be laws with teeth that will bite you in the a** if you act like a child in public you need to have your a** hauled in and charged.
    If it can be charged that it was party oriented. the persons form the party need to be charged as well…
    God Bless the USA!!!!

    • RightWriter

      I agree with Sen. Kennedy’s “Guide to Appropriate Behavior for Congressional Hearings,” too, but I do have to point out that roughing up judicial and Cabinet nominees is not only nothing NEW, but is as old as the Republic. I have sat through confirmation hearings for probably 30 Cabinet members and even more judicial appointees, and I don’t remember a SINGLE ONE that wasn’t at least SOMEWHAT contentious — even when the judge/justice went on to be confirmed with 98 votes.

      Sen Kennedy is wrong about one thing: WE CANNOT HAVE LAWS WITH TEETH TO BITE THOSE WHO ACT LIKE CHILDREN. They have a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to act like children, and WE have NO CHOICE but to LET THEM DO IT. And you CAN’T be charged with ANYTHING for behaving like a twit in a congressional hearing. I’d remain you ALL (Kennedy included) that the FIRST AMENDMENT to the Constitution says “CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…” “Congress shall make NO LAW, huh?” That means NO LAW that says “you have to behave a certain way,” or even “please sit down and shut up!”

      Sorry, but that First Amendment is a bitch. It’s like a STRICT TEACHER or even a strict mother — controlling our behavior at every turn. 🙁