Kavanaugh Confirmation

#10,926
#10,926
Anybody want to hear me playing the world smallest violin for your butthurt over partisan politics? Need I mention the allegations against the nominee. And still yet he will probably be confirmed by partisan politics, accusers be damned to have a voice and speak out.
 
#10,928
#10,928
Mick said:
Anybody want to hear me playing the world smallest violin for your butthurt over partisan politics? Need I mention the allegations against the nominee. And still yet he will probably be confirmed by partisan politics, accusers be damned to have a voice and speak out.
Click to expand...
Well, it would be nice if the accusers brought some proof or corroboration along with them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T-TownVol, NorthDallas40 and tumscalcium
#10,930
#10,930
Mick said:
Anybody want to hear me playing the world smallest violin for your butthurt over partisan politics? Need I mention the allegations against the nominee. And still yet he will probably be confirmed by partisan politics, accusers be damned to have a voice and speak out.
Click to expand...

She was given her voice and allowed to speak. To suggest otherwise is an ignorant argument. The problem is that no proof exists and that none of her witnesses could support her testimony. Are you suggesting the accusation alone should be enough to disqualify Kavanaugh? If so, will you be okay with any future Dem nominee being dismissed over an unproven accusation? I know EL likes to make the "this is a job interview" argument, but even in a job interview, should a man be presumed guilty?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol and NorthDallas40
#10,931
#10,931
Mick said:
Anybody want to hear me playing the world smallest violin for your butthurt over partisan politics? Need I mention the allegations against the nominee. And still yet he will probably be confirmed by partisan politics, accusers be damned to have a voice and speak out.
Click to expand...

Are you this ignorant or are you trolling again?
 
#10,932
#10,932
Mick said:
Anybody want to hear me playing the world smallest violin for your butthurt over partisan politics? Need I mention the allegations against the nominee. And still yet he will probably be confirmed by partisan politics, accusers be damned to have a voice and speak out.
Click to expand...
Serious question. You're promoting a culture where we operate on presumption of guilt? I'm not saying she was or wasn't sexually assaulted. But I am saying that no evidence whatsoever has been presented against him, unless you consider unsubstantiated allegations to be evidence.

No "gotcha", and no debate. I'm just personally interested in your answer so I can make personal assessments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#10,934
#10,934
BK had 6 fbi investigations to get where he is today. Yet the Dims screech about another. Sounds to me the Dims question how the fbi investigates people with their actions asking for another.
 
#10,935
#10,935
1972 Grad said:
Imagine the precedent that would be set by denying an office based on an unsubstantiated allegation. Especially one like this with no date, time, place, and 4 others named having no memory of it. Anybody could be blocked from any position. This is scary stuff in this can of worms.
Click to expand...

'Tis true. I've posted that to e.l. a couple of times. He, luther, mick... I'm trying to gauge if they really feel this presumption of guilt is the status quo they really want, or if this is just more "ends justifies the means", Machiavellian partisan protection they're deluding themselves with.

They try to soften the principle by trying to remind us that this is nothing more than a job interview, which is a misnomer to the point of lies. But even at that, I'd invite themselves to a social experiment to test the internal consistency of their supposed support of this type of presumption of guilt.

You guys discuss among yourselves who will be the sacrificial lamb. One of you send me your personal information. Doxx yourself. A month before your next job interview, let me know. I will have someone accuse you of attempted rape in a very public fashion. She will call your current and potential employer. And we will see if you still believe in presumption of guilt.

When you're ready, I will give you my contact info so we can get this set up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, 1972 Grad, Obsessed and 2 others
#10,936
#10,936
Orange_Crush said:
'Tis true. I've posted that to e.l. a couple of times. He, luther, mick... I'm trying to gauge if they really feel this presumption of guilt is the status quo they really want, or if this is just more "ends justifies the means", Machiavellian partisan protection they're deluding themselves with.

They try to soften the principle by trying to remind us that this is nothing more than a job interview, which is a misnomer to the point of lies. But even at that, I'd invite themselves to a social experiment to test the internal consistency of their supposed support of this type of presumption of guilt.

You guys discuss among yourselves who will be the sacrificial lamb. One of you send me your personal information. Doxx yourself. A month before your next job interview, let me know. I will have someone accuse you of attempted rape in a very public fashion. She will call your current and potential employer. And we will see if you still believe in presumption of guilt.

When you're ready, I will give you my contact info so we can get this set up.
Click to expand...

I imagine they would demand an investigation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mick
#10,937
#10,937
Mick said:
And still yet he will probably be confirmed by partisan politics, accusers be damned to have a voice and speak out.
Click to expand...

The accuser come forward and was given a platform in front of the entire country to tell her story. It included multiple people including her friend who couldn't even vouch that this party ever happened, much less that she was told (which is still not proof) that K assaulted her friend at that time. She was handled very delicately by the right(and that may not be strong enough) during the hearing. And built as some sort of hero and known victim (by the Ds) before K was asked the first question.

So that idea is proven horse$#!+.
 
#10,941
#10,941
Holy Cow what’s this?! It’s almost like common sense is coming into play on the whole Yale legacy BS. And several in this thread state they’re against Kavanaugh but agree this is BS.

An Asha Rangappa shows up in the thread and was apparently dean of admissions at YLS and states this whole line is BS

 
#10,943
#10,943
Weezer said:
Seriously Mick, you have problems. Partisanship does not excuse bad behavior. People like you, who denounce the behavior of one party while supporting the same behavior in your party, you are what is wrong with this country. Wrong is wrong no matter who's doing it.
Click to expand...
Where is the call for righting the wrong?
 
#10,948
#10,948
luthervol said:
Where is the call for righting the wrong?
Click to expand...
How do you recommend we do that? Have the wronged perform more immoral and unethical acts? Bring Obama back to make a pick?

Sometimes adults just have to move on. If they are adults that care about right and wrong, they actually move on with the attitude that they will outshine their enemies when given a chance. If they really, really care about morality and ethics, they are willing to endure wrongs for the opportunity to put their values above sacrifice.

Or they could be like you and call everyone else evil while pleading for the excuse to be just as evil.
 
#10,950
#10,950
luthervol said:
That is carefully worded to avoid saying that they get preferential treatment.
Click to expand...
🤣🤣🤣 a former dean of admissions of YLS whom I quoted one post later stated this dog won’t hunt. She isn’t a Kavanaugh supporter. But she’s a solid “nope!” here

Womp womp.

Edit: no you quoted the former dean and still made your dumbass inference. 🤣🤣🤣
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top