Trump has chosen his Supreme Court nominee (Brett Michael Kavanaugh)
Comments
-
@C_M_ said:
Kavanaugh IS DONE!
A second woman has sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh and an unknown third woman. Just sharing a news report. Where there is smoke, there is fire. CM
Laughable.
-
Oh, young man,
"He who laughs last laughs best. You may laugh now, thinking you have won, but you may not prevail in the end". Remember, the molested molests. CM -
@C_M_ said:
Oh, young man,
"He who laughs last laughs best. You may laugh now, thinking you have won, but you may not prevail in the end". Remember, the molested molests. CMYou mean the ones that don't exist?
-
@GaoLu said:
Ford scrubs her year books: http://cultofthe1st.blogspot.com/?m=0
Deja Vu?GaoLu, have this remove!!! CM
-
@reformed said:
Oh if we started a thread with all of the trash you support (like Ford's accusations, and abortion) we would be here for hours.
1. Hold your horses:
- The Senate committee wants to hear Ford side and scheduled her for Thursday. Don't blame me. I don't know or called her. Better yet, let the FBI investigate! Ford is not looking for a man, fame, or money. This time around, she's not "black". We're not talking about porn, but an attempted rape and murder. Ms. Ford feared for her life! Why would this successful woman come out, if she didn't have a true story to tell? Sexual misconduct is part of Kavanaugh's upbringing and lifestyle. He's known as a "functional alcoholic". Unacceptable to me.
2. As for "abortion", if you want to change the discussion, take this and start a new thread:
0504dede73305f8950717098772ce5663b9887-wm.jpg
After your answer to the pic above, think about the question below:
- Are you drawing a premature conclusion for me?
- Have I stated a position on abortion?
- Do we have tread discussing or "debating" abortion, please direct me?
See you around the forums. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
@reformed said:
Oh if we started a thread with all of the trash you support (like Ford's accusations, and abortion) we would be here for hours.
1. Hold your horses:
- The Senate committee wants to hear Ford side and scheduled her for Thursday. Don't blame me. I don't know or called her. Better yet, let the FBI investigate! Ford is not looking for a man, fame, or money. This time around, she's not "black". We're not talking about porn, but an attempted rape and murder. Ms. Ford feared for her life! Why would this successful woman come out, if she didn't have a true story to tell? Sexual misconduct is part of Kavanaugh's upbringing and lifestyle. He's known as a "functional alcoholic". Unacceptable to me.
He's known as a functonal alcoholic? According to what? There is no credibility to Ford's claims. No witnesses, no evidence, she doesn't even remember where or when this supposedly happened. She doesn't even remember how many people (or even what gender) were there.
2. As for "abortion", if you want to change the discussion, take this and start a new thread:
0504dede73305f8950717098772ce5663b9887-wm.jpg
After your answer to the pic above, think about the question below:
- Are you drawing a premature conclusion for me?
- Have I stated a position on abortion?
- Do we have tread discussing or "debating" abortion, please direct me?
See you around the forums. CM
You should be banned for the 2nd graphic you posted. Humans are not animals.
-
@reformed said:
There is no credibility to Ford's claims. No witnesses, no evidence, she doesn't even remember where or when this supposedly happened. She doesn't even remember how many people (or even what gender) were there.
You don't know this. You're blowing smoke. This is why Ms. Ford will share her story Thursday. Let the FBI investigation prove what you say is not so. Kavanaugh's teary interview on your Fox Channel rings hollow. For someone who wants a fair process, investigate. Remember the Bible's teachings, in the face of two or three witnesses, a matter is so...
You should be banned for the 2nd graphic you posted. Humans are not animals.
A grand discovery? What's your point beyond the obvious? CM
-
@C_M_ said:
@reformed said:
There is no credibility to Ford's claims. No witnesses, no evidence, she doesn't even remember where or when this supposedly happened. She doesn't even remember how many people (or even what gender) were there.
You don't know this. You're blowing smoke. This is why Ms. Ford will share her story Thursday. Let the FBI investigation prove what you say is not so. Kavanaugh's teary interview on your Fox Channel rings hollow. For someone who wants a fair process, investigate. Remember the Bible's teachings, in the face of two or three witnesses, a matter is so...
Actually we do know this based on the evidence available. It is he said/she said.
-
@reformed said:
He's known as a functonal alcoholic? According to what? There is no credibility to Ford's claims. No witnesses, no evidence, she doesn't even remember where or when this supposedly happened. She doesn't even remember how many people (or even what gender) were there.As to your claim that Blasey Ford "doesn't even remember where or when this supposedly happened:" One day when I was in high school - in either 1974 or 1975 - there was a partial solar eclipse. I clearly remember riding down Broadway St. in Council Bluffs, Iowa, in the front passenger seat of a friend's vehicle. I also clearly remember looking briefly up at the sun - contrary to every public warning - and throughout the rest of the day and for a few days following worrying whether I would lose my sight because of that brief glance.
What I do NOT remember is the date of that eclipse (other than it was during the school year, so sometime between August and May) or the identity of the friend in whose car I rode.
So I remember riding in a car on a street with SOMEBODY on SOME DATE in ONE OF TWO YEARS of my high school years. Since I can't remember when or with whom I had that experience, or even the year it happened, and given your conclusion about Dr Ford's story due to the fact that she can't recall "where or when this supposedly happened," is it your view that I'm likely making up my story about the eclipse? If your answer is no, then why is it hard for you to believe that a victim of an experience as traumatic as a sexual assault might not remember relevant details about her or his experience?
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
He's known as a functonal alcoholic? According to what? There is no credibility to Ford's claims. No witnesses, no evidence, she doesn't even remember where or when this supposedly happened. She doesn't even remember how many people (or even what gender) were there.As to your claim that Blasey Ford "doesn't even remember where or when this supposedly happened:" One day when I was in high school - in either 1974 or 1975 - there was a partial solar eclipse. I clearly remember riding down Broadway St. in Council Bluffs, Iowa, in the front passenger seat of a friend's vehicle. I also clearly remember looking briefly up at the sun - contrary to every public warning - and throughout the rest of the day and for a few days following worrying whether I would lose my sight because of that brief glance.
What I do NOT remember is the date of that eclipse (other than it was during the school year, so sometime between August and May) or the identity of the friend in whose car I rode.
So I remember riding in a car on a street with SOMEBODY on SOME DATE in ONE OF TWO YEARS of my high school years. Since I can't remember when or with whom I had that experience, or even the year it happened, and given your conclusion about Dr Ford's story due to the fact that she can't recall "where or when this supposedly happened," is it your view that I'm likely making up my story about the eclipse? If your answer is no, then why is it hard for you to believe that a victim of an experience as traumatic as a sexual assault might not remember relevant details about her or his experience?
Because those are equivalent.... good grief.
-
@reformed said:
Because those are equivalent.... good grief.
Your claim is that you doubt Dr Ford because "she doesn't even remember where or when this supposedly happened." That's YOUR standard.
I don't "even remember (with whom) or when" my eclipse experience "supposedly happened," even though I remember other aspects of the event crystal clearly.
How are those two scenarios not comparable?
And for the second time I ask you, if you don't doubt my story about the eclipse even those I don't "even remember (with whom) or when it supposedly happened," then why is it hard for you to believe that a victim of an experience as traumatic as a sexual assault might not remember relevant details about her or his experience?
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
Because those are equivalent.... good grief.
Your claim is that you doubt Dr Ford because "she doesn't even remember where or when this supposedly happened." That's YOUR standard.
True
I don't "even remember (with whom) or when" my eclipse experience "supposedly happened," even though I remember other aspects of the event crystal clearly.
How are those two scenarios not comparable?
Because supposed sexual assault is a big deal, a major event. A partial eclipse is not even close and it would be easy to forget those details. I don't remember the major eclipse date from last year. But I do remember what day time and place I was held at gunpoint in the fifth grade.
And for the second time I ask you, if you don't doubt my story about the eclipse even those I don't "even remember (with whom) or when it supposedly happened," then why is it hard for you to believe that a victim of an experience as traumatic as a sexual assault might not remember relevant details about her or his experience?
See the difference now?
-
@Bill_Coley said:
Your claim is that you doubt Dr Ford because "she doesn't even remember where or when this supposedly happened." That's YOUR standard.@reformed said:
TruePerhaps not, since as of your latest post, your critique of Dr. Blasey Ford's accusations has changed.
In its original form, your critique was that Dr. Blasey Ford "doesn't even remember where or when this supposedly happened," or "how many people (or even what gender) were there."
In its new form, your critique is not so much about the inventory of Dr. Blasey Ford's memory as it is about the severity of her alleged experience. Your revised complaint seems to be that the severity of her experience requires that she remember all relevant details, or at least the relevant details you believe she ought to remember. [Why YOU get to decide which relevant details she should be able to recall if she's telling the truth about her experience is not at all clear to me. I hope you'll explain your experience and standing in the field of sexual assault victim memories.]
You needed to revise your critique after the example of my memory of the solar eclipse because that example showed the brittleness of your original argument. Just because a person doesn't remember all the details doesn't mean his or her story is false.
So NOW you say it's the severity of the experience that requires sexual assault victims to remember. On several occasions I have encouraged you to read more broadly and deeply than you have to-date on the impact of sexual assault on its victims; this is another example of how such additional reading could bear fruit. The truth is that victims of sexual assault OFTEN have trouble remembering relevant details. Evidence for this claim is everywhere online. Start HERE for one example.
The other point to be made at this point is: If Blasey Ford is making this event up, as you seem to claim she is, then why didn't she make it ALL up? Why did she open herself up to criticism by admitting she can't remember relevant details? Why didn't she fill in the gaps of her story as needed before telling it? It seems to me that someone's testimony that he or she doesn't remember a particular detail is more likely than not a sign of honesty, not dishonesty.
How are those two scenarios not comparable?
Because supposed sexual assault is a big deal, a major event. A partial eclipse is not even close and it would be easy to forget those details. I don't remember the major eclipse date from last year. But I do remember what day time and place I was held at gunpoint in the fifth grade.
Why do you believe that Christine Blasey Ford's experience of sexual assault should have the same effect on her memory as your fifth grade experience at gunpoint has had on yours?
See the difference now?
Yes. You've changed your argument, which of course, makes a difference.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@Bill_Coley said:
Your claim is that you doubt Dr Ford because "she doesn't even remember where or when this supposedly happened." That's YOUR standard.@reformed said:
TruePerhaps not, since as of your latest post, your critique of Dr. Blasey Ford's accusations has changed.
In its original form, your critique was that Dr. Blasey Ford "doesn't even remember where or when this supposedly happened," or "how many people (or even what gender) were there."
In its new form, your critique is not so much about the inventory of Dr. Blasey Ford's memory as it is about the severity of her alleged experience. Your revised complaint seems to be that the severity of her experience requires that she remember all relevant details, or at least the relevant details you believe she ought to remember. [Why YOU get to decide which relevant details she should be able to recall if she's telling the truth about her experience is not at all clear to me. I hope you'll explain your experience and standing in the field of sexual assault victim memories.]
You needed to revise your critique after the example of my memory of the solar eclipse because that example showed the brittleness of your original argument. Just because a person doesn't remember all the details doesn't mean his or her story is false.
I didn't revise anything.
So NOW you say it's the severity of the experience that requires sexual assault victims to remember. On several occasions I have encouraged you to read more broadly and deeply than you have to-date on the impact of sexual assault on its victims; this is another example of how such additional reading could bear fruit. The truth is that victims of sexual assault OFTEN have trouble remembering relevant details. Evidence for this claim is everywhere online. Start HERE for one example.
The other point to be made at this point is: If Blasey Ford is making this event up, as you seem to claim she is, then why didn't she make it ALL up? Why did she open herself up to criticism by admitting she can't remember relevant details? Why didn't she fill in the gaps of her story as needed before telling it? It seems to me that someone's testimony that he or she doesn't remember a particular detail is more likely than not a sign of honesty, not dishonesty.
I have no doubt some event may have happened to her. But it wasn't with who she said it was with.
How are those two scenarios not comparable?
Because supposed sexual assault is a big deal, a major event. A partial eclipse is not even close and it would be easy to forget those details. I don't remember the major eclipse date from last year. But I do remember what day time and place I was held at gunpoint in the fifth grade.
Why do you believe that Christine Blasey Ford's experience of sexual assault should have the same effect on her memory as your fifth grade experience at gunpoint has had on yours?
Because both are traumatic events. An eclipse is not.
See the difference now?
Yes. You've changed your argument, which of course, makes a difference.
Actually I didn't REVISE anything. I hold the same argument. I just clarified. You clearly grapsed for something that wasn't relevant then tried to charge that I changed my position.
-
@reformed said:
I didn't revise anything.In my view, that Blasey Ford doesn't remember what she ought to remember as a survivor of an alleged "traumatic event" is more than a mere clarification of "she doesn't even remember where or when this supposedly happened," or "how many people (or even what gender) were there."
I have no doubt some event may have happened to her. But it wasn't with who she said it was with.
So you think she's telling the truth about the existence of a "traumatic event" in her life, but she's lying or confused about the one responsible for that event? On what basis do you believe she is telling the truth about the existence of such an event?
Because both are traumatic events. An eclipse is not.
As I said in my previous post, why YOU get to decide which relevant details she should be able to recall if she's telling the truth about her experience is not at all clear to me. I hope you'll explain your experience and standing in the field of sexual assault victim memories.
And for about the fourth or fifth time, I encourage you to read more broadly and deeply than you have to-date on the effects of sexual assault on its victims.
Actually I didn't REVISE anything. I hold the same argument. I just clarified. You clearly grapsed for something that wasn't relevant then tried to charge that I changed my position.
See above.
-
Despite Christine Blasey Ford sexual assault, she kept it together much better than the supposedly cool, calm, collective Judge Kavanaugh. Was he really angry or was it a charade to distract the Senators from getting at the truth? The behavior was too over the top.
As for L. Graham, he was auditioning for the next AG job. Keep watch. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
Despite Christine Blasey Ford sexual assault, she kept it together much better than the supposedly cool, calm, collective Judge Kavanaugh. Was he really angry or was it a charade to distract the Senators from getting at the truth? The behavior was too over the top.As for L. Graham, he was auditioning for the next AG job. Keep watch. CM
The more I think about Thursday's hearing, the more I am convinced it was one of the most disgusting, offensive displays of governance I have ever witnessed.
A profoundly credible woman testified clearly, cogently, and persuasively to her experience of sexual assault. In response, Republican members of the Judiciary Committee handed over their questioning responsibilities to a prosecutor from Arizona.
Next came an angry, bitter, and deeply partisan nominee for the Supreme Court whose opening outburst hyped conspiracy theories about Democrats, the Clintons, and a "left wing conspiracy." (Note that questioning of Kavanaugh miraculously returned to the men of the male GOP side of the committee right after the hired prosecutor zeroed in on the July 1 entry on his 1982 calendar, a date that included some of the names Dr Ford provided in her story) How in the world are we supposed to believe that a nominee who spouts off baseless political allegations such as those will be objective, unbiased, and non-partisan while on the court?! In his first hearing, many times he refused to answer questions on the grounds that he was duty-bound to steer clear of partisan politics. He must have been lying.
Speaking of lying, Kavanaugh clearly lied when he spoke of his past use of alcohol. When was he at his most bitter and offensive? Hard to choose one moment, but I think it could have been when he asked Sen Klobuchar whether she had ever passed out from drinking, having just heard her say that her father was still in AA at age 90+. Why the acidic reaction from Kavanaugh? I think it was because she was exploring his demon - his alcohol use. Given the testimony of others who witnessed Kavanaugh's drinking to excess, there is no doubt in my mind that he lied.
The worst part of the day for me was the apparent victory of belligerence and loud voices over reason and the search for truth. Lindsey Graham's temper tantrum disgraced his record and showcased the depths to which he and his fellow GOPers will go to change the subject (Dr Ford calling: Remember me and my assault?!). Soon we weren't talking about an alleged victim; we were talking about a political food fight. Disgusting.
The hearing should not have been about partisan politics. It should have been about a determined search for truth about an accusation of sexual assault. The fact that neither Kavanaugh nor the Committee wanted ANYTHING to do with Mark Judge's appearing under oath to take questions from the Committee and, even better, the FBI, told us everything we needed to know about their intentions. If you don't want to hear from the man allegedly in the room at the time of the assault - in part because his lawyer says he doesn't want to talk about it anymore!! - the man whom the victim places on the bed with her and her principal assailant - then you don't want the truth. You want to adjourn the hearing, take a vote, and pop the champagne cork to celebrate your latest court victory.
May God move in the nation to raise up a tide of voters - surely led by women who have seen and heard enough of the attitudes displayed at the hearing - who will wash away the scum responsible for the fact that we haven't learned a damned thing in the 27 years since Anita Hill.
-
@Bill_Coley said: "...The worst part of the day for me was the apparent victory of belligerence and loud voices over reason and the search for truth. Lindsey Graham's temper tantrum disgraced his record and showcased the depths to which he and his fellow GOPers will go to change the subject (Dr. Ford calling: Remember me and my assault?!). Soon we weren't talking about an alleged victim; we were talking about a political food fight. Disgusting...
Is not Kavanaugh's handwritten notes were to be sworn testimony? Is not all that was said must be true and anything false would be under the penalty of perjury? If so, it appears Mr. Kavanaugh lied under oath when he spurred out "conspiracy theories about Democrats, the Clintons, and a "left-wing conspiracy"'?
This man has disqualified himself. Bill Cosby was found guilty in a court of law, sentenced and jailed, and didn't behave the way Kavanaugh did, who are claiming to be innocent. The judge acted like a "low class" uneducated out-of-control lunatic. Money and privilege are still having a sweaty teary tantrum to get what they want. He debased himself, the process, embarrassed his family and set a bad example for his daughters. How are they supposed to go back to school?
To put Mr. Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court after his belligerent display is to reward bad behavior. This man's behavior would be remembered just to say or the see his name:
- K - kurt
- A - angry
- V - volatile
- A - arrogant
- N - nasty
- A - agitated
- U - umbrageous
- G - grotty
- H - horrendous
Kavanaugh would be cancer on the court! He would be the shame and disgrace of America for the next fifty years. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
Despite Christine Blasey Ford sexual assault, she kept it together much better than the supposedly cool, calm, collective Judge Kavanaugh. Was he really angry or was it a charade to distract the Senators from getting at the truth? The behavior was too over the top.She isn't the one being attacked and accused.
As for L. Graham, he was auditioning for the next AG job. Keep watch. CM
Everything Graham said was exactly right.
@Bill_Coley said:
@C_M_ said:
Despite Christine Blasey Ford sexual assault, she kept it together much better than the supposedly cool, calm, collective Judge Kavanaugh. Was he really angry or was it a charade to distract the Senators from getting at the truth? The behavior was too over the top.As for L. Graham, he was auditioning for the next AG job. Keep watch. CM
The more I think about Thursday's hearing, the more I am convinced it was one of the most disgusting, offensive displays of governance I have ever witnessed.
By the Democrats, yes. Their behavior was despicable.
A profoundly credible woman testified clearly, cogently, and persuasively to her experience of sexual assault. In response, Republican members of the Judiciary Committee handed over their questioning responsibilities to a prosecutor from Arizona.
There wasn't a shred of credibility to her. No evidence whatsoever. And what is wrong with letting a professional in these matters handle the questions? That's responsible.
Next came an angry, bitter, and deeply partisan nominee for the Supreme Court whose opening outburst hyped conspiracy theories about Democrats, the Clintons, and a "left wing conspiracy." (Note that questioning of Kavanaugh miraculously returned to the men of the male GOP side of the committee right after the hired prosecutor zeroed in on the July 1 entry on his 1982 calendar, a date that included some of the names Dr Ford provided in her story) How in the world are we supposed to believe that a nominee who spouts off baseless political allegations such as those will be objective, unbiased, and non-partisan while on the court?! In his first hearing, many times he refused to answer questions on the grounds that he was duty-bound to steer clear of partisan politics. He must have been lying.
Baseless political accusations? How about baseless criminal allegations against him? For the record, he won't be personally attacked in the court. There's a difference.
Speaking of lying, Kavanaugh clearly lied when he spoke of his past use of alcohol. When was he at his most bitter and offensive? Hard to choose one moment, but I think it could have been when he asked Sen Klobuchar whether she had ever passed out from drinking, having just heard her say that her father was still in AA at age 90+. Why the acidic reaction from Kavanaugh? I think it was because she was exploring his demon - his alcohol use. Given the testimony of others who witnessed Kavanaugh's drinking to excess, there is no doubt in my mind that he lied.
Because she was acusing him of being an alcoholic and STILL having a problem with alcohol. He had already answered the question and she kept coming back with the same crap. Good grief.
The worst part of the day for me was the apparent victory of belligerence and loud voices over reason and the search for truth. Lindsey Graham's temper tantrum disgraced his record and showcased the depths to which he and his fellow GOPers will go to change the subject (Dr Ford calling: Remember me and my assault?!). Soon we weren't talking about an alleged victim; we were talking about a political food fight. Disgusting.
Lindsey Graham was a hero yesterday for saying what should have been said from the start.
The hearing should not have been about partisan politics. It should have been about a determined search for truth about an accusation of sexual assault. The fact that neither Kavanaugh nor the Committee wanted ANYTHING to do with Mark Judge's appearing under oath to take questions from the Committee and, even better, the FBI, told us everything we needed to know about their intentions. If you don't want to hear from the man allegedly in the room at the time of the assault - in part because his lawyer says he doesn't want to talk about it anymore!! - the man whom the victim places on the bed with her and her principal assailant - then you don't want the truth. You want to adjourn the hearing, take a vote, and pop the champagne cork to celebrate your latest court victory.
Judge provided sworn testimony.
May God move in the nation to raise up a tide of voters - surely led by women who have seen and heard enough of the attitudes displayed at the hearing - who will wash away the scum responsible for the fact that we haven't learned a damned thing in the 27 years since Anita Hill.
God has put the right voters here now to make sure people who think like you and @C_M_ aren't in charge. THANK YOU GOD!
@C_M_ said:
@Bill_Coley said: "...The worst part of the day for me was the apparent victory of belligerence and loud voices over reason and the search for truth. Lindsey Graham's temper tantrum disgraced his record and showcased the depths to which he and his fellow GOPers will go to change the subject (Dr. Ford calling: Remember me and my assault?!). Soon we weren't talking about an alleged victim; we were talking about a political food fight. Disgusting...
Is not Kavanaugh's handwritten notes were to be sworn testimony? Is not all that was said must be true and anything false would be under the penalty of perjury? If so, it appears Mr. Kavanaugh lied under oath when he spurred out "conspiracy theories about Democrats, the Clintons, and a "left-wing conspiracy"'?
This man has disqualified himself. Bill Cosby was found guilty in a court of law, sentenced and jailed, and didn't behave the way Kavanaugh did, who are claiming to be innocent. The judge acted like a "low class" uneducated out-of-control lunatic. Money and privilege are still having a sweaty teary tantrum to get what they want. He debased himself, the process, embarrassed his family and set a bad example for his daughters. How are they supposed to go back to school?
To put Mr. Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court after his belligerent display is to reward bad behavior. This man's behavior would be remembered just to say or the see his name:
- K - kurt
- A - angry
- V - volatile
- A - arrogant
- N - nasty
- A - agitated
- U - umbrageous
- G - grotty
- H - horrendous
Kavanaugh would be cancer on the court! He would be the shame and disgrace of America for the next fifty years. CM
No more a cancer than the political activists who are on the court. (Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsberg)
-
We have almost come full circle to put Mr. Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court. After the hearings, a short delay, and a sham FBI investigation, the fix is in, to put him on the Court regardless of the limited FBI findings. The greatest shame is that Ms. Ford nor Mr. Kavanaugh have been interviewed by the FBI. Why is not Kavanaugh demanding interviews to clear his name? His name is still dirty and his behavior has been sealed in people's mind.
Kavanaugh and the Republicans what a shameful display to rape America to satisfy money, power and privileged of the established to appease the ever-shrinking group of "angry white men".
"When a man tells you about himself believe him". The US People ignored Trump's boast of assaulting women with impunity. In 2016, he won the election and became President. The false prosperity is the present outcome along with all the political shenanigans hanging over America like a slow-moving black cloud. Kavanaugh like Trump, said openly, what he thinks, what he's going to do and while some of past deals/behaviors (appalling) made known to all. To the chagrin of many, he will go on the court anyhow.
He will serve on the Court for the next 30-35 years and every decision will bear what he swore under oath:- The JC is a "circus"!
- "What goes around comes around"!
- The hearing is a "joke".
- The failed victory of the Clinton 2016 campaign is out to get him.
God must do what men fail to do. Stay tuned. CM
-
C_M_ Some awareness just dawned on me - are you an angry white woman? Maybe you would rather not say. I’d respect that.
-
@C_M_ said:
We have almost come full circle to put Mr. Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court. After the hearings, a short delay, and a sham FBI investigation, the fix is in, to put him on the Court regardless of the limited FBI findings. The greatest shame is that Ms. Ford nor Mr. Kavanaugh have been interviewed by the FBI. Why is not Kavanaugh demanding interviews to clear his name? His name is still dirty and his behavior has been sealed in people's mind.How is the FBI investigation a sham? He has had 7 background checks and passed with flying colors each time. Why do they need to be interviewed by the FBI? They already have sworn testimony for the FBI to review. If the FBI thought they needed to be interviewed they would have done so. There is no hard evidence to suggest they were off limits. His name has already been cleared and objective people know that. You are not objective in this matter.
Kavanaugh and the Republicans what a shameful display to rape America to satisfy money, power and privileged of the established to appease the ever-shrinking group of "angry white men".
Excuse me?
"When a man tells you about himself believe him". The US People ignored Trump's boast of assaulting women with impunity. In 2016, he won the election and became President. The false prosperity is the present outcome along with all the political shenanigans hanging over America like a slow-moving black cloud. Kavanaugh like Trump, said openly, what he thinks, what he's going to do and while some of past deals/behaviors (appalling) made known to all. To the chagrin of many, he will go on the court anyhow.
He will serve on the Court for the next 30-35 years and every decision will bear what he swore under oath:- The JC is a "circus"!
Thanks to the Democrats, yes.
- "What goes around comes around"!
If this is true, and I believe it is, the Democrats should be worried!
- The hearing is a "joke".
Thanks to the Democrats.
- The failed victory of the Clinton 2016 campaign is out to get him.
Yes, liberals are out to get him. They have even said as much.
God must do what men fail to do. Stay tuned. CM
He did. That is why Trump is in office and Kavanaugh will be on the Supreme Court.
-
Trump is an amazing success. His approval rating is 51%. His approval index is -1, crushing Obama's at this time with a -11.
Let's start Thanksgiving early.
