Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
REMEMBER TOBY? HE’s the autism companion dog that went missing from his home in Castleconnell in Limerick on Sunday.
Well he’s back, and looking quite pleased about it.
The Bernese Mountain Dog-Beagle cross belongs to 21-year-old Peter Meskell, and accompanies him during his day-to-day life. The dog is also trained to provide assistance with certain tasks.
He went missing on Sunday and was feared stolen but Autism Assistance Dogs Ireland say he was left at the side of the road in Castleconnell this afternoon, he has since been reunited with Peter.
Autism Assistance Dogs Ireland who launched the campaign to find Toby, and explained how there’s a waiting list of up to five years for one of the dogs, said it wished to thank the public who helped find the dog.
So if you did help at all, pat yourself on the back, we’ve got a happy ending.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Wow a heavy drinker, how scandalous.
@Mark Jones: It isnt the drinking that’s causing his problems, its lying about it – a potential supreme court judge blatantly lying in front of millions. Get it?
@Bridget O’Hanlon: Just like flying regularly despite having a fear of flying? Both sides are lying dear.
@Herbert: I have friends who have a fear of flying who have to fly. She didn’t say I never fly.
@Bridget O’Hanlon:
Added to the possibility that he may have committed the assaults but have no recollection of them.
@Mark Jones: I heard he also used to ask people to pull his finger whereupon he would fart heavily and laugh out loud not to mention his urine was suspiciously yellow and pungent.
@Herbert: my dad hates flying but loves holidays. Most people that have a fear of flying fly
@Mark Jones: in such an important roll, Yes that’s fairly scandalous. National and international laws and case law depend on this person and if a heavy drinker you’d have to wonder about the accuracy and correctness of this judgements if the person was “under the weather” from a days heavy drinking.
@Brendan Cooney: it’s scandalous that he was a heavy drinker in college?
@Seamus Mac: once again for the slow witted amongst us… This is not about his drinking.
@Herbert: #idontbelieveeitherofthem
@John Mullin: #ifihadtopicki’dcertainlybelieveheroverliarmcliarson
@Dave O Keeffe: Yes, but she lead the committee to believe she was incapable of flying.
@Richard Smyth: no she didn’t. She said she’d rather avoid it. Which is perfectly understandable as it would add further stress to an already ridiculously stressful situation.
@Mark Jones: No, a heavy drinker IN COLLEGE
…wow, that must make most Irish Coll lads ‘ risk’ takers and predatory in nature too???
@Bridget O’Hanlon: You dont know that or have you some hotline to the FBI
@Mark Jones:
Obama admitted to smoking weed and doing Cocaine Dems-”Nothing to see here”.
Kavanaugh drank beer and farted and Dems have a meltdown.
@Dave Thomas: I was responding to the comment above mine. Have a read of it & then you can apologies to me.
@Seamus Mac: apologise
@Dell: he never said he was a pioneer also
There would be a fair few resignations tendered if drinking during college days done you out of a job!
@Michael Kavanagh: blatantly lying about your past when an accusation of sexual misconduct is on the table doesn’t make for a very employable person.
@Michael Kavanagh: It’s not the past drinking that’s the issue here, it’s the fact he’s clearly lying under oath which makes a complete mockery of the justice system. As a judge, he should know full well that perjury is a bad thing.
@Ailbhe Gator: How do you know he is “clearly lying” because one random guy that saw him stagger and slur his words? That guy wasn’t under oath, how do you know the other guy isn’t lying?
Personally I do thing he was a dipso like the majority of entitled students back then but to say he is “clearly” lying based on one guy saying so is rediculous
@Michael Kavanagh: it isn’t any ordinary job, and lying about it under oath (Devil’s Triangle and Boofing) doesn’t help. Also the blatant partisanship displayed wasn’t great. It also helps if an appointee has the temperament to control the urge to rant and cry.
@Simon Carroll: Except it’s not “one random guy”, there have been multiple people that have stated he is lying. And he’s doing it under oath.
There are so many issues with this guy. They won’t release 1000′s of papers relating to his past work, that should have been the first disqualifier., There has NEVER been a Supreme Court Justice appointed without scrutiny of their past work.
He’s been caught out more than once lying under oath even before these allegations were made.
“In his earlier hearings, he lied about his judicial philosophy, and he lied about his days as a Republican operative, both in and out of the White House. On Monday, he lied to Martha McCallum of Fox News. On Thursday, he lied about his entire adolescence and his college days.
He lied even when he didn’t have to lie. He lied in preposterous ways easily disproven by common sense. (The “Devil’s Triangle”? “Renate Alumnius”?) ”
You would ask WHY are they so desperate to get THIS guy on the Court, there are many other qualified people. Could it be because he’s stated he doesn’t think a sitting President can be subpoenaed?
@Tricia G: u do realise more documents have been provided for his appointment than all other scotus appointments to date
@Simon Carroll: it is an offense to lie to the FBI
@Vote4Pedro: You mean the dumping of 100′s of 1000′s the day before the Confirmation hearing, a deliberate attempt to swamp everyone with paper.
And they still with-held 100,000.
And you know that the reason there is more than any previous nominee is because “emails”. We live in a different time.
The issue is they’re still hiding docs from his time with the Bush Whitehouse.
Come on man, can’t you be in the slightest bit honest when trying to prove your point. Deliberately excluding pertinent facts doesn’t “win” you the debate, it makes it look like you know you’re wrong but you’re going to try and muddy the waters anyway.
@Vote4Pedro: and in terms of a percent of his total work how much has been provided?
@Dell: yet they are both employed despite both lying about their pasts with alleged sexual misconduct on the table
@Simon Carroll: if you watched his testimony then you’d easily conclude he was lying. deflecting, oversensitive and overtly defensive. his carry on was totally over the top. at a minimum, he’s completely unfit for the job which is what this is ultimately about.
@John Mullin: I hadn’t realised this had come up before in his other employments?
@Bruce van der Gutschmitzer: I never said he was or wasn’t lying, I said I believe he was getting blackout drunk, what I said was basically no one here can say he is or isn’t lying because no one here was at the parties or events that he was at, so like everyone says he is “clearly” lying is pure speculation not fact.
@Tricia G: Just like ford lied about not being able to fly? Oh wait no , she just said she had a fear of flying implying that she can’t fly and has to drive across the country.
He never said he does not drink, he said he was fond of booze, very fond, so how did he lie?
@Dave O Keeffe: It’s also an offence to lie to local law enforcement, whats your point? Did the FBI interview him or was that the senate hearing you’re thinkin of?
@Simon Carroll: that ehen under oath or talking to the FBI you are liable if you lie so both have given testimony for which they would be punished if found not to be telling the truth. I thought it was pretty obvious
@Simon Carroll: She never, as no point, said she couldn’t fly.
She clearly stated, multiple times, under oath, that she is afraid to fly.
They are two different things, and if you weren’t grasping at straws to find something, anything that she might be lying about you’d recognise that.
@Dell: I doubt it came up in either of their pasts but according to half of the commentators here, they feel that they “know” he is lying about not sexually assaulting her & the other half feel that they“know” she is lying when accusing him but he must be lying about how much he drinks and she must be lying about flying. My point is that nobody knows for sure and people are basing their opinions on what they feel is believable “evidence”. People will believe what they want to believe usually by relating with one of the two characters involved. I would have considered myself fairly neutral at first until I realized the personal witch hunt that was instigated against him based on zero evidence outside of her testimony. Innocent until proven guilty & if he is then may he get what he deserves
@Bruce van der Gutschmitzer: I watched both of their testimonies and I felt it was easy to conclude that both were coached into what to say, they were both lying about certain aspects, exaggerating or underplaying something, emotionally vulnerable at times while admirably strong and resilient at other times. It’s quite possible that he is lying about how much he drank and doesn’t remember specifics about any party he was at 36years ago and that while she may have been sexually abused, she doesn’t remember the exact details either about what she drank or who was there. I might sound cynical but this is played out by political parties for their own benefit and these individuals are unimportant to them in the grand scheme of things. Both women AND men lie about things when they have to..
The big loser here is the US justice system, a bloody charade. The same Democrats who defended and protected Bill are now calling fir the head of Kavanaugh, and the same Republicans who are defending Kavanaugh are the same who called for the head of Clinton. The stench of hypocrisy off of all of them is staggering and the world looks aghast at their judicial system.
@Paul Fahey: the judicial system doesn’t need Kavanaugh, so it hasn’t lost anything yet.
@Dave Bruen: really, it has lost the last shred of credibility it may have had. This is an absolute partisan charade where the rule of law and the rules of evidence are thrown aside in favor of political point scoring. Shameful insult to justice.
@Paul Fahey: it lost that when he blamed the Clintons and anyone else he could think of during his rant…
@Paul Fahey: you mean Kavanaugh’s questionable testimony under oath
@Paul Fahey: Well said Paul. The two party system in the US is killing the country and decency. They both seem intent on destroying the constitution in their own clever ways. The hypocrisy from both sides is astounding and shameful. I can’t help but notice that the justice system is now being targeted and replaced by a witch hunt spearheaded by allegations. What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty? This should have been fought in the courts and not in front of the senate committee, inviting a media charade.
@Daniel Donovan: I’m with you up until the last bit. The allegation needed to be investigated before he could be confirmed. Nothing to hide = nothing to fear. He must be sick to death of the senate. It took three years to get him on the circuit courts!
‘blatant mischaracterisation’
Jaysus would ya ever FFFFFF&CK OFF !
@Joseph Caulfield: please Joe, take your own advise and just go away.
@Joseph Caulfield:
Would you have been happier if he’d not minced his words and just said “bare-faced lie”?
@Joseph Caulfield: why do you even take a side in the joke that is US politics? How utterly pathetic
The democrats lost the election. There are consequences to that. One of which is the fact that the President gets to pick Supreme Court justices. We still have yet to hear who the democrats are going to run to win back the White House.
@KerryBlueMike: The Republicans stopped Obama filling one of the seats because they said a POTUS with only a year left in his term had no right to fill a seat. Trump filled that seat and it was a pretty smooth confirmation.Theres 2 or 3 judges who were considered with the same politics and beliefs as Kavanaugh that could have similarly smooth confirmations. This is not about getting the most qualified judge into the seat any more because whatever you think about the politics of it,thats not Kavanaugh,not now anyway.Its about winning now and whatever BS people claim that winning will represent,it will do far more harm than good for the country and the courts reputation.
@KerryBlueMike: and if the Trump administration nominates complete boof heads like Kavanaugh then Congress – democrat and republican has a right to vote against him
@KerryBlueMike: the Democrats have a right to question the credentials of the judge that is nominated,how did you not know about this ? And why are you so concerned about who the Democrats are going to run to win back the White House ? Their first concern will be to win back the houses…
@KerryBlueMike: any one else on the list given to Trump would have been confirmed by now.
So we have definitively established he is of Irish stock.
Caught out on so many easily catchable lies during this process,right down to the calendar he produced to show he never drank during the week stating he was drinking during the week,and with the people his accuser claimed were present on the night she was assaulted.If you go to a job interview with McDonald’s and get caught out on numerous lies you don’t get the job,but lying is not an issue any more for Republicans(as long as you’re a fellow Republican of course).Not surprising though,a poll conducted on Friday found 54% of Republicans think he should be confirmed even if it’s proved he committed this crime.Remember Obama got hammered for a week on Fox news for saluting with a cup in his hand while getting off a plane? Now sexual assault is acceptable.
I have not seen any evidence that a sexual assault was carried out, quite the opposite in fact. That allegation was refused by four people. What more is required? Will we now accept allegations against anyone without solid evidence. Ruining family lives with unproven allegations, interesting world its going to be. Amazing that Dr Ford was not asked about her drinking history as well.
@Heidi3: The Republican controlled committee looked at an allegation which has now been sent to the FBI to review within the period of one week. It’s likely the committee decided to look at this one allegation as public concern mounted and other accusations came to light; and sure you can say the Dems orchestrated the process. But a week is hardly much to ask for an lifetime appointment to the US Supreme Court.
For sure Dr Ford could be mistaken in identifying one of her attackers – she saw Mark Judge a few weeks after the event so her identification of him is firmer – and maybe she even has an exaggerated memory of the intensity and intent of the incident. But we should know more in a few days when the FBI comes back. Just relax – have a few bottles of beer or a few kegs if you are of Kavanaugh calibre.
@Heidi3: And there is the deliberate mischaracterisation of words again.
No, it was not refuted by 4 people. They said they didn’t remember the gathering which is perfectly logical. Not that it didn’t happen.
Can you remember all the wee meet ups you would have had 30 years later (when nothing major happened to you).
And one said whilst they can’t remember the gathering they believe her over him.
@Martello Mulligan: It’s highly unlikely she mistook him. She knew him, he wasn’t a stranger.
It all comes down to one thing and one thing only. Remember what Kavanaugh said to Lindsey Graham during the initial confirmation hearings about military law applying to US citizens who helped foreign states to try to subvert or overthrow the US government.
Lindsey asked that question for a reason because he knows what’s coming. They all know what’s coming.
Funny how we never heard about this Executive order in the MSM.
I reckon there’s a few people very worried about the release of the FISA documents.
Judging by his performance when he gave his testimony, all his own words , as an interview for the job of Supreme Court Judge he failed miserably.
The people of America were given the chance to see at first hand the person who may be appointed still to sit in the highest court in the land . As regards to the allegations made against them , a court of law is the place to declare him guilty or not guilty.
I dont get this article – the sitting I saw – he clearly said he liked beer – a lot – and didn’t give an answer to the question if he had blackouts while at these parties.
Doesn’t excuse any alleged behaviour – just commenting on the fact This article reads like he said he never got very drunk – which is untrue.
@Anthony Clark: he did say he never drank midweek in summer and brought along a little calendar that made a liar of him on that front though.
He was a boofer for sure
There was a lawsuit brought against Julie Swetnick 18 years ago by a company she briefly worked for at the time called WebTrends Corporation.
“Shortly after becoming employed with WebTrends, a co-worker reported to WebTrends’ human resources department that Swetnick had engaged in unwelcome, sexually offensive conduct. Rather than accept responsibility for her actions, Swetnick made false and retaliatory allegations that other co-workers had engaged in inappropriate conduct toward her.”
The complaint also says Swetnick provided false information on her employment application, including the claim she graduated from Johns Hopkins University, when the company said the university has no record of her attendance. She is also accused of falsely characterizing her past work experience.
They must have been best of friends.
Did you know that he was also a frequently masturbated like other college students
@Kenneth Clohessy: The issue wouldn’t be that he masturbated, but if he LIED about it.
Amazing that so many people try to make this about the drinking and not about the fact he’s up for one of THE most powerful jobs in the US, a lifetime appointment no less, and people are so quick to ignore the myriad of reasons why he’s not the right person.
And I’m not even referring to partisanship which he has made dramatically clear!
@Kenneth Clohessy: so that’s what boofing means…
nOt da drinkin, it da LYING !!! it da ASSAULTS!!!. Unsound character Next candidate pleese. (fer highest lifetime office USA)
If he had said, yes I drank, yes I got drunk, yes I partied and maybe passed out as college students sometimes do but I didn’t sexually assault anyone, I might have believed him. I don’t believe him now. Is it a witch hunt or political maneuver? It has the hallmarks of it but his arrogance will be the undoing of him. He lied under oath, a bloody judge no less, for no good reason and made a absolute ass of himself.
have your say