Cory Booker says Kavanaugh impeachment shouldn't be off the table

[Olde Europe]

Why should impeachment be off the table ever?

Impeachment, let's not kid ourselves, is at its core a political process, and will be perceived as such, even if some similarities with legal procedures exist. As such, impeachment is open to political considerations, such as...

... will impeachment without subsequently gathering the votes to convict be seen as defeat?

... will impeachment be seen, by a significant portion of the electorate, as illegitimate, and create a back-ward oriented backlash?

... will impeachment hurt, rather than help, women in general, and the MeToo movement in particular?

... is, in short, impeachment politically stupid, and / or engender political / societal developments that stand athwart of Creating a Better Union?

If so, it should be off the table.

 

[Pete7469]

Can’t you always paint the minority party as butthurt obstructionists? You can’t honestly say that the Republicans were graceful losers during the Obama years, can you?

Obozo got plenty of nominees and policies enacted and voted on by republicrats, so bull fucking shit.

To date democrooks have obstructed Trump on everything he has tried to accomplish.

So don't spare us the "they did it too" speech.

No. He did not. He had the largest number of court vacancies unfilled...due to your obstructionism. Enough with the lies.

Again, bull fucking shit.

He got a Hispanic Klanswoman and a hobbit like creature on the court with barely a wimper of resistance from the republicrats.

Double Standard? Obama '09 Cabinet picks slid through; Trump's face hold-up

The meat puppet had no resistance until democrooks were swept out of power in every office except the POTUS over the period of 2010-2016. Republicrats didn't do, and couldn't do shit to stop your moonbat messiah for his first 2 years. That's the facts, you're the fuckin liar.


.

 

[Papageorgio]

Here's the problem and why I believe all of the women are lying.

They all came with accusations, [...]

Ridiculous, isn't it, coming with "accusations", when everybody knows, or ought to know, that accusers are shown the door, if not laughed out of the room, in case they show up without a complete investigation - witnesses, expert testimony, and forensic evidence, all kinds of corroborating evidence - to back up their accusations. That's the way it's done in the U.S. of A., at least in sexual assault cases, right?

It wasn’t a criminal case as the left has brought out over and over, it was just a job interview. Ford can still sue him and have him investigated, they raised over a million dollars to do that with.

Five of the six people she claimed were there don’t remember being there and one, her friend told us that she never met Kavanaugh.

In this country you are presumed innocent, not presumed guilty. Not sure where you are from nor do I care however you need proof, Ford has been given money to prove it, now let her prove it. Accusations are not evidence.

Nice. Informing me about what I've known from the get-go - it was a job interview - you then apply the criteria of a criminal case. And, because Kavanaugh is not in jail he must be confirmed, or so goes your argument, the shadow of multiple allegations of egregious sexual misconduct, deemed credible by many, hanging over him and the Supreme Court notwithstanding.

What is it with you guys, and not following the arguments others present to you, and seemingly not even fully understanding your own? Comes with unthinkingly re-bleating the crap dished out by the likes of Faux News, Breitbart, and InfoWars, eh?

It is called innocent until proven guilty. I don’t watch Fox, Breitbart or Infowars, I watch CNN and read CNN, so again you are wrong and seemingly not very bright. I didn’t say he must be confirmed so again you are proving to be a moron. The allegations were not credible, Ford has no one backing her story, so something is off about her story, the second person took days and days of NY Times pumping to even come up with Kavanaugh so the allegations aren’t credible at all at this point, even the Times left the story alone. If it is proven otherwise then we should impeach him, however the left and Ford won’t pursue this further because there is no proof and it wouldn’t serve a purpose, the left nuts such as yourself will use the unfounded accusations until the guy dies. I have told you over and over why your argument is a total failure yet you claim I’m not acknowledging it. I did and it is a stupid, moronic fantasy argument that is just a partisan idiots blather. My life experience has put friends and family on both ends of these accusations, some were true, some were not and I won’t jump to conclusions, it is unfair to both sides.

 

[Papageorgio]

Why should impeachment be off the table ever?

It should never be off the table for anyone, however there needs to be good solid reasons with evidence, not unproven allegations.

 

[Olde Europe]

It is called innocent until proven guilty. I don’t watch Fox, Breitbart or Infowars, I watch CNN and read CNN, so again you are wrong and seemingly not very bright. I didn’t say he must be confirmed so again you are proving to be a moron. The allegations were not credible, Ford has no one backing her story, so something is off about her story, the second person took days and days of NY Times pumping to even come up with Kavanaugh so the allegations aren’t credible at all at this point, even the Times left the story alone. If it is proven otherwise then we should impeach him, however the left and Ford won’t pursue this further because there is no proof and it wouldn’t serve a purpose, the left nuts such as yourself will use the unfounded accusations until the guy dies. I have told you over and over why your argument is a total failure yet you claim I’m not acknowledging it. I did and it is a stupid, moronic fantasy argument that is just a partisan idiots blather. My life experience has put friends and family on both ends of these accusations, some were true, some were not and I won’t jump to conclusions, it is unfair to both sides.

Yeah, "he must be confirmed" is something I have not actually seen you say. Other than, whining over those who say "he should not be confirmed" based on mere accusations, and the horrible ignominy thus imposed on Kavanaugh. Sparing him the ignominy requires he be confirmed. Have a shred of decency and be open as to what you are really thinking, as you should.

Again, and for the last time now, this is not a case of "innocent until proven guilty". It is a case of several allegations, deemed relevant and credible by many, neither of which was properly investigated. It is a case of putting a man of obviously dubious character on the Supreme Court, thus damaging that institution's standing. It is, as a whole, a case of male dominance, with a gloating "Can't prove what I did? Again?" as the ultimate taunt to women everywhere, adding insult to injury.

And all that while the issue should have been to protect the Supreme Court against harm from yet another alleged sexually deviant miscreant made Justice.

 

[Obama2020]

Cory Booker says Kavanaugh impeachment shouldn't be off the table
Look everyone. They don't know how to handle the thriving economy. They cannot possibly tell you that they are going to raise the taxes, start up mass regulations on business, make sure to bend over for the world to rape us on trade deals and appease ALL of our enemies.
They cannot tell you any of that.
They are such creepy losers.

Whatever happened to fiscally responsible Republicans? Dems used to be the big time spenders lol.
Short term stimulation of the economy with market deregulation, temporary tax cuts for the poor and permanent ones for the rich reeks of GW Bush housing deregulation back in May 2002. And you all know where that led.... yeah that's right! the crash of 2008. Lack of federal oversight over the most important economy on the planet is a recipe for a repeat of massive global financial failure.


The Obama recovery was doing fine and that extra stimulation was both unnecessary and, what's that word again, oh yeah... STUPID. I'm sure your grand kids will be overjoyed with that big pile of debt... nice !!! Good luck trying to get that keyboard out of that monkey's hands at the WH.
Trump goes silent on national debt while racking up $1 trillion in 14 months
Donald Trump adds $1 trillion to national debt in 14 months
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

Thriving economy? LMAO

 

[S.J.]

Kavanaugh's wife stood accused of attempted rape? And his kids, too? When did that happen? Oh, Kavanaugh tried to hide behind his wife's skirt all the time, and now you are shoving him behind his kids for him to avoid facing responsibility for his loutish youth?

Yeah, I'm sure it wouldn't affect your family if you were accused of gang rape (with absolutely no evidence) in front of the entire world. You present a pretty weak argument there, pal.

Since you pulled these "rules set by the Democratic Party" out of your fat arse, you'll understand others might be reluctant to go anywhere near them, thank you.

You really need to do a little research before shooting off your mouth. I believe Joe Biden is a Democrat:

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Here's the problem and why I believe all of the women are lying.

They all came with accusations, [...]

Ridiculous, isn't it, coming with "accusations", when everybody knows, or ought to know, that accusers are shown the door, if not laughed out of the room, in case they show up without a complete investigation - witnesses, expert testimony, and forensic evidence, all kinds of corroborating evidence - to back up their accusations. That's the way it's done in the U.S. of A., at least in sexual assault cases, right?

It wasn’t a criminal case as the left has brought out over and over, it was just a job interview. Ford can still sue him and have him investigated, they raised over a million dollars to do that with.

Five of the six people she claimed were there don’t remember being there and one, her friend told us that she never met Kavanaugh.

In this country you are presumed innocent, not presumed guilty. Not sure where you are from nor do I care however you need proof, Ford has been given money to prove it, now let her prove it. Accusations are not evidence.

Nice. Informing me about what I've known from the get-go - it was a job interview - you then apply the criteria of a criminal case. And, because Kavanaugh is not in jail he must be confirmed, or so goes your argument, the shadow of multiple allegations of egregious sexual misconduct, deemed credible by many, hanging over him and the Supreme Court notwithstanding.

What is it with you guys, and not following the arguments others present to you, and seemingly not even fully understanding your own? Comes with unthinkingly re-bleating the crap dished out by the likes of Faux News, Breitbart, and InfoWars, eh?

Maybe what you need to do is look up the word “credible.” Because none of these so-called witnesses had any credibility whatsoever.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Here's the problem and why I believe all of the women are lying.

They all came with accusations, [...]

Ridiculous, isn't it, coming with "accusations", when everybody knows, or ought to know, that accusers are shown the door, if not laughed out of the room, in case they show up without a complete investigation - witnesses, expert testimony, and forensic evidence, all kinds of corroborating evidence - to back up their accusations. That's the way it's done in the U.S. of A., at least in sexual assault cases, right?

Just about any case where a crime was alleged to happen. If I told the cops you were the one that robbed the bank last week, and they couldn't find any money, any gun, the bag the bank gave you to take the money when they searched your house, and were at work all day, would you want to face charges of bank robbery?

As is your habit, you wouldn't follow, and seemingly not understand, my argument, and provide nothing but non-pertinent, non-responsive whataboutery as a "reply" (being generous here).

I figured such a response.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[task0778]

I have never seen a job interview where the applicant was accused of drugging and gang raping young women over a couple of years, exposing himself to somebody, or attempted rape at a party while drunk. Anybody who says this was a job interview is full of crap, this was a full-out, no holds barred, unscrupulous personal attack on somebody's character. You don't have that in a freakin' job interview.

 

[iceberg]

It is called innocent until proven guilty. I don’t watch Fox, Breitbart or Infowars, I watch CNN and read CNN, so again you are wrong and seemingly not very bright. I didn’t say he must be confirmed so again you are proving to be a moron. The allegations were not credible, Ford has no one backing her story, so something is off about her story, the second person took days and days of NY Times pumping to even come up with Kavanaugh so the allegations aren’t credible at all at this point, even the Times left the story alone. If it is proven otherwise then we should impeach him, however the left and Ford won’t pursue this further because there is no proof and it wouldn’t serve a purpose, the left nuts such as yourself will use the unfounded accusations until the guy dies. I have told you over and over why your argument is a total failure yet you claim I’m not acknowledging it. I did and it is a stupid, moronic fantasy argument that is just a partisan idiots blather. My life experience has put friends and family on both ends of these accusations, some were true, some were not and I won’t jump to conclusions, it is unfair to both sides.

Yeah, "he must be confirmed" is something I have not actually seen you say. Other than, whining over those who say "he should not be confirmed" based on mere accusations, and the horrible ignominy thus imposed on Kavanaugh. Sparing him the ignominy requires he be confirmed. Have a shred of decency and be open as to what you are really thinking, as you should.

Again, and for the last time now, this is not a case of "innocent until proven guilty". It is a case of several allegations, deemed relevant and credible by many, neither of which was properly investigated. It is a case of putting a man of obviously dubious character on the Supreme Court, thus damaging that institution's standing. It is, as a whole, a case of male dominance, with a gloating "Can't prove what I did? Again?" as the ultimate taunt to women everywhere, adding insult to injury.

And all that while the issue should have been to protect the Supreme Court against harm from yet another alleged sexually deviant miscreant made Justice.

yes it is a case of that and your desire to bash someone does not supercede the constitution.

Due Process Clause - Wikipedia

Clause 39 of Magna Carta provided:
No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.[2]

he has a right to this role as appointed by the president and the left was trying to remove him from this w/o due process with an allegation of guilt from 35+ years ago. so i would argue that if you're going to attack him in order to prevent him from obtaining a job he was appointed to "by law" then yes, due process applies and you can't force someone to prove they're NOT guilty of any accusation you pull out and go AH-HA!!!

then, let's say you're as stubborn as you seem and continue with this thought process that this is NOT around due process or even a legal proceeding - then the left needs to shut up about "lying under oath" because according to the left TODAY (as always subject to change with their ever changing moods) wouldn't apply because this is *not* a legal proceeding.

so either way you wish to go about it - i'm not going to ignore the fact you're trying to gain both sides for 1 side and eliminate any opposition by trying to say this isn't what it really is. now. today. until you need it to be something else cause you "just thought of something" clever.

then again so far the risk of you thinking of something clever is pretty remote.

 

[Claudette]

It is called innocent until proven guilty. I don’t watch Fox, Breitbart or Infowars, I watch CNN and read CNN, so again you are wrong and seemingly not very bright. I didn’t say he must be confirmed so again you are proving to be a moron. The allegations were not credible, Ford has no one backing her story, so something is off about her story, the second person took days and days of NY Times pumping to even come up with Kavanaugh so the allegations aren’t credible at all at this point, even the Times left the story alone. If it is proven otherwise then we should impeach him, however the left and Ford won’t pursue this further because there is no proof and it wouldn’t serve a purpose, the left nuts such as yourself will use the unfounded accusations until the guy dies. I have told you over and over why your argument is a total failure yet you claim I’m not acknowledging it. I did and it is a stupid, moronic fantasy argument that is just a partisan idiots blather. My life experience has put friends and family on both ends of these accusations, some were true, some were not and I won’t jump to conclusions, it is unfair to both sides.

Yeah, "he must be confirmed" is something I have not actually seen you say. Other than, whining over those who say "he should not be confirmed" based on mere accusations, and the horrible ignominy thus imposed on Kavanaugh. Sparing him the ignominy requires he be confirmed. Have a shred of decency and be open as to what you are really thinking, as you should.

Again, and for the last time now, this is not a case of "innocent until proven guilty". It is a case of several allegations, deemed relevant and credible by many, neither of which was properly investigated. It is a case of putting a man of obviously dubious character on the Supreme Court, thus damaging that institution's standing. It is, as a whole, a case of male dominance, with a gloating "Can't prove what I did? Again?" as the ultimate taunt to women everywhere, adding insult to injury.

And all that while the issue should have been to protect the Supreme Court against harm from yet another alleged sexually deviant miscreant made Justice.

Excuse me while I stand over here and LMFAO.

You call a supposed sexual happening from 36 years ago credible?? She had no witnesses. No proof and the two people she said were there said they were never at that party.

If it had happened, and that a big fat if, then she should have reported it them. Not 36 years later. Back then it would have been investigated right then an there.

You honestly think anyone with a working brain cell would call her credible??

You sure are one ignorant son of a bitch.

 

[Obama2020]

It is called innocent until proven guilty. I don’t watch Fox, Breitbart or Infowars, I watch CNN and read CNN, so again you are wrong and seemingly not very bright. I didn’t say he must be confirmed so again you are proving to be a moron. The allegations were not credible, Ford has no one backing her story, so something is off about her story, the second person took days and days of NY Times pumping to even come up with Kavanaugh so the allegations aren’t credible at all at this point, even the Times left the story alone. If it is proven otherwise then we should impeach him, however the left and Ford won’t pursue this further because there is no proof and it wouldn’t serve a purpose, the left nuts such as yourself will use the unfounded accusations until the guy dies. I have told you over and over why your argument is a total failure yet you claim I’m not acknowledging it. I did and it is a stupid, moronic fantasy argument that is just a partisan idiots blather. My life experience has put friends and family on both ends of these accusations, some were true, some were not and I won’t jump to conclusions, it is unfair to both sides.

The hearings were basically a farce/circus fully managed by the party in power and the White House. McConnell was laughing all the way to the SC bank.

Put yourself in the shoes of Ford's friends during the FBI's supplemental investigation (extra background check lol) and think about the consequences of corroborating Ford's testimony? Remember that this was 35 years ago, this is not YOUR cause and you live in a highly divided political atmosphere. Think about the following factors:

• You do not want your face in the news.
• There is a potential of losing employment.
• You still have kids at school that may face unwanted adversity.
• Death threats...nasty phone calls...
• Have to move because of protesters in front of your property.
• You get the 'in your face' Ford treatment plus the embarrassment of extra Trump tweets demeaning you.
• The investigation is not a court case.
• What's more fun than unwanted national attention in a gun-happy country

Ford made her case and obviously was certain that no one in their right mind would support her claims. Her only hope was to expose a character flaw of Kavanaugh which heavily impacted her life. It may have had a therapeutic effect... who knows.

The only viable framework for allegations like these are courts of law where a case can be built.... and these things take months, if not years!

Some positives out of all this? At least we now know what Devil's triangle and boofing mean lol

 

[Olde Europe]

Kavanaugh's wife stood accused of attempted rape? And his kids, too? When did that happen? Oh, Kavanaugh tried to hide behind his wife's skirt all the time, and now you are shoving him behind his kids for him to avoid facing responsibility for his loutish youth?

Yeah, I'm sure it wouldn't affect your family if you were accused of gang rape (with absolutely no evidence) in front of the entire world. You present a pretty weak argument there, pal.

Since you pulled these "rules set by the Democratic Party" out of your fat arse, you'll understand others might be reluctant to go anywhere near them, thank you.

You really need to do a little research before shooting off your mouth. I believe Joe Biden is a Democrat:

Let's review your statement: "Kavanaugh isn't the one who got bloodied up, stupid, it was his FAMILY. His wife and kids." So, his "wife and kids" were "bloodied up", not Kavanaugh himself. And now you are retreating behind some unknown effect on Kavanaugh's family.

Yeah, I know what Biden suggested (push the nomination of hypothetical Supreme Court nominee until after the election - not after the new Congress is seated - so as to keep it out of the hot campaign season of September and October, which wasn't the case with Garland), and I also know it was never a "Democratic" rule, and thus what you alleged was a moldy lie most of your ilk have long abandoned after the fist dozen times it's been pointed out to them.

 

[S.J.]

It is called innocent until proven guilty. I don’t watch Fox, Breitbart or Infowars, I watch CNN and read CNN, so again you are wrong and seemingly not very bright. I didn’t say he must be confirmed so again you are proving to be a moron. The allegations were not credible, Ford has no one backing her story, so something is off about her story, the second person took days and days of NY Times pumping to even come up with Kavanaugh so the allegations aren’t credible at all at this point, even the Times left the story alone. If it is proven otherwise then we should impeach him, however the left and Ford won’t pursue this further because there is no proof and it wouldn’t serve a purpose, the left nuts such as yourself will use the unfounded accusations until the guy dies. I have told you over and over why your argument is a total failure yet you claim I’m not acknowledging it. I did and it is a stupid, moronic fantasy argument that is just a partisan idiots blather. My life experience has put friends and family on both ends of these accusations, some were true, some were not and I won’t jump to conclusions, it is unfair to both sides.

Yeah, "he must be confirmed" is something I have not actually seen you say. Other than, whining over those who say "he should not be confirmed" based on mere accusations, and the horrible ignominy thus imposed on Kavanaugh. Sparing him the ignominy requires he be confirmed. Have a shred of decency and be open as to what you are really thinking, as you should.

Again, and for the last time now, this is not a case of "innocent until proven guilty". It is a case of several allegations, deemed relevant and credible by many, neither of which was properly investigated. It is a case of putting a man of obviously dubious character on the Supreme Court, thus damaging that institution's standing. It is, as a whole, a case of male dominance, with a gloating "Can't prove what I did? Again?" as the ultimate taunt to women everywhere, adding insult to injury.

And all that while the issue should have been to protect the Supreme Court against harm from yet another alleged sexually deviant miscreant made Justice.

Excuse me while I stand over here and LMFAO.

You call a supposed sexual happening from 36 years ago credible?? She had no witnesses. No proof and the two people she said were there said they were never at that party.

If it had happened, and that a big fat if, then she should have reported it them. Not 36 years later. Back then it would have been investigated right then an there.

You honestly think anyone with a working brain cell would call her credible??

You sure are one ignorant son of a bitch.

She remembers every detail of the "attack", yet doesn't even know whose house it was (none of the people she said were there), how she got there, how she got home, what day of the week it was, what month it was, what year it was.....Sounds like a dream to me. Maybe she should see a psychiatrist.

 

[Claudette]

It is called innocent until proven guilty. I don’t watch Fox, Breitbart or Infowars, I watch CNN and read CNN, so again you are wrong and seemingly not very bright. I didn’t say he must be confirmed so again you are proving to be a moron. The allegations were not credible, Ford has no one backing her story, so something is off about her story, the second person took days and days of NY Times pumping to even come up with Kavanaugh so the allegations aren’t credible at all at this point, even the Times left the story alone. If it is proven otherwise then we should impeach him, however the left and Ford won’t pursue this further because there is no proof and it wouldn’t serve a purpose, the left nuts such as yourself will use the unfounded accusations until the guy dies. I have told you over and over why your argument is a total failure yet you claim I’m not acknowledging it. I did and it is a stupid, moronic fantasy argument that is just a partisan idiots blather. My life experience has put friends and family on both ends of these accusations, some were true, some were not and I won’t jump to conclusions, it is unfair to both sides.

The hearings were basically a farce/circus fully managed by the party in power and the White House. McConnell was laughing all the way to the SC bank.

Put yourself in the shoes of Ford's friends during the FBI's supplemental investigation (extra background check lol) and think about the consequences of corroborating Ford's testimony? Remember that this was 35 years ago, this is not YOUR cause and you live in a highly divided political atmosphere. Think about the following factors:

• You do not want your face in the news.
• There is a potential of losing employment.
• You still have kids at school that may face unwanted adversity.
• Death threats...nasty phone calls...
• Have to move because of protesters in front of your property.
• You get the 'in your face' Ford treatment plus the embarrassment of extra Trump tweets demeaning you.
• The investigation is not a court case.
• What's more fun than unwanted national attention in a gun-happy country

Ford made her case and obviously was certain that no one in their right mind would support her claims. Her only hope was to expose a character flaw of Kavanaugh which heavily impacted her life. It may have had a therapeutic effect... who knows.

The only viable framework for allegations like these are courts of law where a case can be built.... and these things take months, if not years!

Some positives out of all this? At least we now know what Devil's triangle and boofing mean lol

Boy are you dreaming.

Ford wasn't credible at all.

This supposed sexual assault took place 36 years ago. Anyone with a working brain cell would have reported it then. Not 36 years later. She had no proof and no witnesses. The two she provided said they were never at that party.

Oh and she wasn't going to report it at all but DiFi sure had no problem outing her.

Which party foes DiFi represent??

So which party was in charge of the circus??

The Dems.

 

[Obama2020]

I have never seen a job interview where the applicant was accused of drugging and gang raping young women over a couple of years, exposing himself to somebody, or attempted rape at a party while drunk. Anybody who says this was a job interview is full of crap, this was a full-out, no holds barred, unscrupulous personal attack on somebody's character. You don't have that in a freakin' job interview.

Usually that stuff is cleared by an investigation followed by a court case. Addressing these allegations of illegality and indecency during a confirmation hearing is unheard of and should be a disqualifying/delaying factor. Notice that Kavanaugh didn't sue Ford for defamation ...wouldn't be surprised if Trump pushes for it.

 

[Olde Europe]

yes it is a case of that and your desire to bash someone does not supercede the constitution.

Due Process Clause - Wikipedia

Clause 39 of Magna Carta provided:
No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.[2]

he has a right to this role as appointed by the president and the left was trying to remove him from this w/o due process with an allegation of guilt from 35+ years ago. so i would argue that if you're going to attack him in order to prevent him from obtaining a job he was appointed to "by law" then yes, due process applies and you can't force someone to prove they're NOT guilty of any accusation you pull out and go AH-HA!!!

then, let's say you're as stubborn as you seem and continue with this thought process that this is NOT around due process or even a legal proceeding - then the left needs to shut up about "lying under oath" because according to the left TODAY (as always subject to change with their ever changing moods) wouldn't apply because this is *not* a legal proceeding.

so either way you wish to go about it - i'm not going to ignore the fact you're trying to gain both sides for 1 side and eliminate any opposition by trying to say this isn't what it really is. now. today. until you need it to be something else cause you "just thought of something" clever.

then again so far the risk of you thinking of something clever is pretty remote.

I repeat: JOB INTERVIEW. Does it sink in now?

And no, even while white and male, he still isn't entitled to "his" Supreme Court seat, and isn't deprived of anything if his confirmation falls through. Once you're done hyperventilating, it should occur to you that it takes a supremely over-entitled brat on the Kavanaugh scale of over-entitlement to go all-out jerk against those who question your overly bloated sense of entitlement. But then, maybe not.

 

[easyt65]

Kavanaugh was raked over the coals and Booker is calling for his Impeachment over an unsubstantiated accusation....while Booker has already ADMITTED to sexually assaulting a woman in college and is acting like he is above the laws and rules he is trying to apply to Kavanaugh.

If he wants someone to be ousted, Senate Majority Leader McConnell aught to oblige him by booting his ass out of the Senate.

 

[Obama2020]

Boy are you dreaming.
Ford wasn't credible at all.
This supposed sexual assault took place 36 years ago. Anyone with a working brain cell would have reported it then. Not 36 years later. She had no proof and no witnesses. The two she provided said they were never at that party.
Oh and she wasn't going to report it at all but DiFi sure had no problem outing her.
Which party foes DiFi represent??
So which party was in charge of the circus??
The Dems.

Ford wasn't credible at all..... LOL yeah right
I guess you're in disagreement with the orange guy... Mr T. for intimates. .... your guru with the strange hairdu.


So which party was in charge of the circus??
The party in power... you should know that