Kavanaugh Confirmation

[RavinDave]

The chicks that were into psychology in high school and college were the craziest of the lot. Usually a good time though.

That would of been the late 60s and early 70s for me. My recollections of those times are quite hazy and a little purplish too.

 

[SLICKYINC]

Outstanding. Need to show these idiots there are reprocussions for making outrageous baseless false claims. This has to be idiot accuser 4 that was immediately dismissed. Fry him.

Hopefully the next one is creepy porn lawyers client.

 

[1972 Grad]

Read what I said... (in a judiciary hearing)

So? It had already been done by RB Ginsburg as a sitting Justice. She had to apologize.

 

[volinbham]

That is the first time we have had a nominee in a judiciary hearing invoking the resentment of a political party. It was more in line with what a politician would say; rather than a judge.

No hearing has been like this - no nominee has been attacked like this - no nominee has been accused of the things he was. I'm willing to cut him some slack on being a little pizzed.

The unanimous highest rating from ABA assures me this isn't a political hack parading as a judge. The circumstances are completely unusual.

 

[NorthDallas40]

How is it obvious? I don't see how anything can be concluded based on what's been said so far. Most of the comments posted here are done through the typical partisan lens which include standard party resentments. The one really disappointing thing, regardless of how this turns out, is that the Supreme Court will now be infected with openly partisan justices whose rulings will be made from what they see as their party affiliations. I can't believe Kavanaugh invoked the 2016 election in his defense. That was a crass display.

Read what I said... (in a judiciary hearing)

You didn’t just refer to the hearing you leveled it against the seated justices also.

And Ginsburg already did it anyway

 

[1972 Grad]

Hopefully the next one is creepy porn lawyers client.

There may be some hard lessons learned from this.

 

[BowlBrother85]

So? It had already been done by RB Ginsburg as a sitting Justice. She had to apologize.

Yeah, I don't think that should have done it. I'm not defending her.

 

[Orange_Crush]

There is no evidence that Ford's motivation for her allegations was made through a political agenda. She was not the one discussing politics, he was.

He obviously thought this thing was partisan. Graham fed that perception. It's the Democrats dragging him through this, naming him an evil rapist, and lauding her as a hero.

Whether you started it, you drummed it up, poured gas on him and three sparklers at him.

You deny that?

 

[Orangeslice13]

The response that means you have no response. That's okay.

The response is because you’re a joke
And it’s funny

 

[volinbham]

Hopefully the next one is creepy porn lawyers client.

interesting that the only news about her and him since the "reveal" has been negative and damaging to her credibility. The WH did Avenatti a favor by excluding his client from the FBI inquiry.

 

[Orangeslice13]

The response that means you have no response. That's okay.

And straw man ^^^^^

 

[volbeast33]

How is it obvious? I don't see how anything can be concluded based on what's been said so far. Most of the comments posted here are done through the typical partisan lens which include standard party resentments. The one really disappointing thing, regardless of how this turns out, is that the Supreme Court will now be infected with openly partisan justices whose rulings will be made from what they see as their party affiliations. I can't believe Kavanaugh invoked the 2016 election in his defense. That was a crass display.

There should be no investigation..... it is a 36 year old complaint in which no one was raped and barely reaches the level that it may be considered an assault..... she can’t remember where it was.... how she arrived or got home from the party....none of the people she claimed were there remember a party.... this is Just a ridiculous waste of resources.

 

[NorthDallas40]

It's not a trial, it's a job interview. The conclusion may very well properly be that there is enough reasonable doubt to remove him from consideration.

You idiots keep trying to sell that narrative to lower the standard of proof. And we’re still not buying it.

 

[SLICKYINC]

There may be some hard lessons learned from this.

I want an investigation into the Dems for the way this was handled and why DiFi refered Katz the resistance lawyer to Ford. This whole thing is shady as hell.

 

[RavinDave]

There is no evidence that Ford's motivation for her allegations was made through a political agenda. She was not the one discussing politics, he was.

Perhaps Ford's motivations ARE as pure as the driven snow... which is quite a stretch considering she's an academic in California. But regardless of her motives, wittingly or not she has become a pawn of the political Left and been used in a no-holds-barred attempt to destroy this man's reputation in order to deny him that seat on the court.

 

[SLICKYINC]

interesting that the only news about her and him since the "reveal" has been negative and damaging to her credibility. The WH did Avenatti a favor by excluding his client from the FBI inquiry.

I’m pretty sure I heard that the FBI has made inquiries into that allegation too. I could be wrong though.

 

[luthervol]

You idiots keep trying to sell that narrative to lower the standard of proof. And we’re still not buying it.

There is no standard of proof. It's on the individual senator to decide.

 

[luthervol]

And straw man ^^^^^

lollollollollol

 

[BowlBrother85]

He obviously thought this thing was partisan. Graham fed that perception. It's the Democrats dragging him through this, naming him an evil rapist, and lauding her as a hero.

Whether you started it, you drummed it up, poured gas on him and three sparklers at him.

You deny that?

Nothing you have said speaks to her credibility or suggests that she has a politically motivated agenda. I'm talking about Ford, not Feinstein or any other Democrat.

 

[luthervol]

Nothing you have said speaks to her credibility or suggests that she has a politically motivated agenda. I'm talking about Ford, not Feinstein or any other Democrat.

You're going to tangle their narrative.

 

[Orangeslice13]

lollollollollol

You spelled it wrong.

 

[NorthDallas40]

There is no standard of proof. It's on the individual senator to decide.

It’s on the individual senator to maintain a standard of proof. You moonbats have your 49 idiots with no standards though true.

 

[1972 Grad]

Nothing you have said speaks to her credibility or suggests that she has a politically motivated agenda. I'm talking about Ford, not Feinstein or any other Democrat.

Ford is either really stupid, really smart and acting, or really crazy.

 

[NorthDallas40]

lollollollollol

Touchdown touchdown touchdown touchdown touchdown? Weird reply...

 

[Orange_Crush]

You idiots keep trying to sell that narrative to lower the standard of proof. And we’re still not buying it.

He's trying to create an excused for his partisan hackery. We know many things about him. That he's a partisan hack. That his morals are as fluid as they need to be. And that he overuses the words rational and reasonable while having no ability to be either.

Just call him Led Zeppelin and let him ramble on.