0
Phil1111

Brett Kavanaugh, how to get a SC Nomination

Recommended Posts

gowlerk

***WHAT THE FUCK???
Jeff Flake announces he will vote for Kavanaugh nomination
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/28/politics/jeff-flake-kavanaugh-vote-nomination/index.html:S




Flake is a white man and a conservative. And he is still deluding himself that one day he could be nominated by Republicans for POTUS.

His is also a moderate. But still, WTF.

All it takes is one election for republicans to regain common sense. To relegate trump to the dustbin of history. Where he belongs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>American Bar Association: Delay Kavanaugh until FBI investigates assault allegations

Kavanaugh yesterday:

"For 12 years, everyone who has appeared before me on the D.C. Circuit has praised my judicial temperament. That's why I have the unanimous, well-qualified rating from the American Bar Association."

Not . . . so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Follow the money:
All retiring senators like Jeff Flake have multi-million dollar lobbying offers waiting for them.
Republican lobbyists must be welcome in Republican senate offices.
Jeff Flake is preserving his welcome as a lobbyist.


-- Lawrence O'Donnell (on Twitter)
"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Conryn just said this:

========
Our colleagues across the aisle believe that the appropriate course of conduct is to drag Mr. Judge into this circus-like atmosphere and to subject his battle with alcoholism and addiction to public investigation and scrutiny and ridicule. That is cruel. That is reckless. That is indecent.
========

But dragging in a woman who was almost raped by Kavanaugh, is terrified to speak about it, and whose family has been receiving death threats? That's just fine and decent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

***And yet, the progressive left believes that it is reasonable and good for adult males to use the same restrooms as minor females.

Ponder that.



Because we believe people should be able to control themselves. I am sorry that you feel you can't control yourself when you see a woman and will have to attack her.

You should probably get help for that.

Well, there have been more Republican members of the US House & Senate caught in 'bathroom shenanigans' than trans people.

Maybe there should be a law passed about that.
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe

******And yet, the progressive left believes that it is reasonable and good for adult males to use the same restrooms as minor females.

Ponder that.




Because we believe people should be able to control themselves. I am sorry that you feel you can't control yourself when you see a woman and will have to attack her.

You should probably get help for that.

Well, there have been more Republican members of the US House & Senate caught in 'bathroom shenanigans' than trans people.

Maybe there should be a law passed about that.

Yup, fine white male evangelicals.

They are scum of the earth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryoder

WHAT THE FUCK???
Jeff Flake announces he will vote for Kavanaugh nomination
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/28/politics/jeff-flake-kavanaugh-vote-nomination/index.html:S



"Yesterday, we heard compelling testimony from Dr. Ford, as well as a persuasive response from Judge Kavanaugh. I wish that I could express the confidence that some of my colleagues have conveyed about what either did or did not happen in the early 1980s, but I left the hearing yesterday with as much doubt as certainty," Flake said.
"What I do know is that our system of justice affords a presumption of innocence to the accused, absent corroborating evidence. That is what binds us to the rule of law. While some may argue that a different standard should apply regarding the Senate's advice and consent responsibilities, I believe that the constitution's provisions of fairness and due process apply here as well."


Un-fucking-believable!:o

The SC is an office which is both the ultimate guardian of the nations laws, and in some ways the de-facto guardian of its morality as well. He is arguing that he should vote into office someone who he believes could be a serial sexual assaulter.

His responsibility here should not be to protect the nominee but to protect the nation. There can be no justification for moving forward if there is any doubt that the nominee isn't completely innocent.
Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

***And yet, the progressive left believes that it is reasonable and good for adult males to use the same restrooms as minor females.

Ponder that.



Because we believe people should be able to control themselves. I am sorry that you feel you can't control yourself when you see a woman and will have to attack her.

You should probably get help for that.
______________________________________________________

I only take a look at SC for entertainment anymore and don't post.

However a question for mods-wouldn't the above easily qualify as a blatant personal attack????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>However a question for mods-wouldn't the above easily qualify as a blatant personal attack?

It's borderline - and if I deleted all the borderline attacks I'd have to delete a lot of posts here.

The poster isn't actually suggesting that Ron can't control himself. He is expecting Ron to say "I can control myself" to which he will reply "well, then why do you need the government to tell you what bathroom to use?" It's a stupid "trick" to use in such a discussion to "win" the argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
billvon

>However a question for mods-wouldn't the above easily qualify as a blatant personal attack?

It's borderline - and if I deleted all the borderline attacks I'd have to delete a lot of posts here.

The poster isn't actually suggesting that Ron can't control himself. He is expecting Ron to say "I can control myself" to which he will reply "well, then why do you need the government to tell you what bathroom to use?" It's a stupid "trick" to use in such a discussion to "win" the argument.



Is a mod calling me stupid a personal attack?

Or is it a stupid "tactic" to indicate you are displeased with a statement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
billvon

It just passed committee and is moving to a floor vote.

BUT - Jeff Flake said he would not support a floor vote until there is an FBI investigation. I have a feeling this is just theater, and will vote yes no matter what happens (or what they find out.)



My guess is that there will only be an FBI investigation if the GOP don't have the votes to confirm Kavanaugh
I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
billvon

But dragging in a woman who was almost raped by Kavanaugh, is terrified to speak about it, and whose family has been receiving death threats? That's just fine and decent.



There is no creature on Earth so weak, fragile, and delicate as a white, conservative, American male. They must be protected!
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
billvon

It just passed committee and is moving to a floor vote.

BUT - Jeff Flake said he would not support a floor vote until there is an FBI investigation. I have a feeling this is just theater, and will vote yes no matter what happens (or what they find out.)



Absolutely. He wasn't advocating this point of view until it was safe to do so.
"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So Mark Judge wrote this to the Senate committee:

"As I stated in my attorney, Barbara Ven Gelder’s September 18, 2018, letter, I did not ask to be involved in this matter nor did anyone ask me to be involved. We have told the Committee that I do not want to comment about these events publicly. As a recovering alcoholic and a cancer survivor, I have struggled with depression and anxiety. As a result, I avoid public speaking . . . I am knowingly submitting this letter under penalty of felony."

So he is traumatized by his addiction and disease, and he struggles with depression and anxiety, and as a result avoids speaking publicly - which is why he can't speak now. And it's "under penalty of felony" which sure sounds like "may I be thrown in jail if I am lying!"

Might want to prep a cell next to Manafort. From his publisher's website:

"This author is available for media and speaking engagements."

https://www.encounterbooks.com/authors/mark-g-judge/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

***>Is a mod calling me stupid a personal attack?

Nope. I am saying you are using a stupid - and dishonest - tactic.



Since you have ruled that I am not allowed to call him out for attacking my son, it will be what it will be.

Oh for Pete's sake! I never attacked your son. I do not know your son. I do not know you except for your posts here in the SC.
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>There can be no justification for moving forward if there is any doubt that
>the nominee isn't completely innocent.

The investigation won't determine if he's innocent or guilty. It's not a criminal investigation. It may, however, determine if he's been lying under oath.

So far we have:

Christine Ford, who testified that he attacked her and tried to rape her - which he denies.

Deborah Ramirez, who has claimed he put his genitals in her face - which he denies.

Julie Swetnick, who has claimed she was raped at a party that Kavanaugh was present at - which he denies.

James Roche, his roommate at Yale, who said he frequently drank heavily and became incoherently drunk regularly, and also that he became belligerent and aggressive when drunk - which he denies.

Lynne Brookes, a classmate at Yale, who claimed that he often drank to the point of blackout - which he denies. She gave an example of the day he was accepted into a fraternity, that he was too drunk to remember that night - which he denies.

Liz Swisher, a classmate at Yale, who claimed that he often drank to excess and was a "sloppy drunk" - which he denies.

At this point, it's more about all the lies than the original accusation One classmate, Swisher, said that she wouldn't have spoken up at all if he had said "yeah, it was college and sometimes I drank too much - but I never assaulted anyone." But because of how dishonest he was during his testimony, she felt she had to.

It also makes the GOP's case a lot harder. You can claim that a single woman is lying. But six people? At some point you have to accept that he's not being entirely honest about his past.

It is also worth noting that people who signed the recent letter attesting to his character are now withdrawing their support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
billvon

We have told the Committee that I do not want to comment about these events publicly.


I thought there were no events? And I thought they weren’t even there when the events weren’t happening? Now he doesn’t want to talk about how he wasn’t aware of the events when they didn’t happen?
Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jakee

***We have told the Committee that I do not want to comment about these events publicly.


I thought there were no events? And I thought they weren’t even there when the events weren’t happening? Now he doesn’t want to talk about how he wasn’t aware of the events when they didn’t happen?

Which concisely summarizes trump cult thinking.Christians across America are sending prayers for their boy Kav and death threats to the tramp, Dr. Ford.

Here’s where Kavanaugh’s sworn testimony was misleading or wrong
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/09/28/heres-where-kavanaughs-sworn-testimony-was-misleading-or-wrong/?utm_term=.5980d441fea8

Top story may let you read story for free:
https://www.google.com/search?q=kavanaugh+letter+support+penalty+purgery&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b

or:

Every time Ford and Kavanaugh answered the question — and didn't answer the question
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/9/28/17914308/kavanaugh-ford-question-dodge-hearing-chart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0