🌟 Exclusive 2024 Prime Day Deals! 🌟

Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁

Kavanaugh/Ford Opinon threads from Saturday, Sept 23, 2018

Will Ford Actually Make The Hearing On Thursday?

  • Yes

    Votes: 16 30.8%
  • No

    Votes: 36 69.2%

  • Total voters
    52
  • Poll closed .
Ah, the 30 years that he's been an upstanding citizen? Fact is, Winger...he was seen as a freakin' choir boy until you leftist assholes decided that you weren't going to let Trump appoint anymore Supreme Court Justices!
Huh? Since when do you oppose the McConnell Rule?

You mean the Biden Rule?
No, I meant what I said. Unlike McConnel, Biden never prevented a sitting president from replacing a Supreme Court vacancy. In fact, Biden never even proposed such bullshit.

Actually, he DID propose that, Faun and he did so WAY before Mitch McConnell did!
No, ya lying con tool, he didn’t.

Want proof? Quote him saying the Senate will not hold any confirmation hearings for the remainder of Bush’s term.....

Not to mention, McConnell said that to Obama about 4 months earlier in the year (February’s) than what Biden actually did say (June).

Do you ever stop lying, ya con tool?

Ever???


"In my view, politics has played far too large a role in the Reagan-Bush nominations to date. One can only imagine that role becoming overarching if a choice were made this year, assuming a justice announced tomorrow that he or she was stepping down.

"Should a justice resign this summer and the president move to name a successor, actions that will occur just days before the Democratic Presidential Convention and weeks before the Republican Convention meets, a process that is already in doubt in the minds of many will become distrusted by all. Senate consideration of a nominee under these circumstances is not fair to the president, to the nominee, or to the Senate itself.

"Mr. President, where the nation should be treated to a consideration of constitutional philosophy, all it will get in such circumstances is a partisan bickering and political posturing from both parties and from both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue. As a result, it is my view that if a Supreme Court Justice resigns tomorrow, or within the next several weeks, or resigns at the end of the summer, President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not — and not — name a nominee until after the November election is completed." Joe Biden speech on the floor of the US Senate on June 25, 1992.
 
What's REALLY amusing is that Joe the human gaffe machine Biden made that speech at a time when there was no Supreme Court Justice resigning! He made it because there was a rumor that one might resign and he wanted to put the HW Bush White House on notice that Democrats would fight to keep him from naming a replacement if that happened. Little did Uncle Joe know how that little speech would come back to bite him on the ass!
 
Dear MODs:

We have only about two million Kavanaugh threads.

Could we get them ALL merged into this ONE thread, just like the original 13 threads were merged?

It will be like starting the US all over, again.
 
Dear MODs:

We have only about two million Kavanaugh threads.

Could we get them ALL merged into this ONE thread, just like the original 13 threads were merged?

It will be like starting the US all over, again.


As soon as we merge, or delete, one, 2 more show up
 
Huh? Since when do you oppose the McConnell Rule?

You mean the Biden Rule?
No, I meant what I said. Unlike McConnel, Biden never prevented a sitting president from replacing a Supreme Court vacancy. In fact, Biden never even proposed such bullshit.

Actually, he DID propose that, Faun and he did so WAY before Mitch McConnell did!
No, ya lying con tool, he didn’t.

Want proof? Quote him saying the Senate will not hold any confirmation hearings for the remainder of Bush’s term.....

Not to mention, McConnell said that to Obama about 4 months earlier in the year (February’s) than what Biden actually did say (June).

Do you ever stop lying, ya con tool?

Ever???


"In my view, politics has played far too large a role in the Reagan-Bush nominations to date. One can only imagine that role becoming overarching if a choice were made this year, assuming a justice announced tomorrow that he or she was stepping down.

"Should a justice resign this summer and the president move to name a successor, actions that will occur just days before the Democratic Presidential Convention and weeks before the Republican Convention meets, a process that is already in doubt in the minds of many will become distrusted by all. Senate consideration of a nominee under these circumstances is not fair to the president, to the nominee, or to the Senate itself.

"Mr. President, where the nation should be treated to a consideration of constitutional philosophy, all it will get in such circumstances is a partisan bickering and political posturing from both parties and from both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue. As a result, it is my view that if a Supreme Court Justice resigns tomorrow, or within the next several weeks, or resigns at the end of the summer, President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not — and not — name a nominee until after the November election is completed." Joe Biden speech on the floor of the US Senate on June 25, 1992.
Lying con tool, “and not — name a nominee until after the November election is completed,” is the same as never, is it?

2s0blvo.jpg


Do you ever stop lying, ya con tool?

Ever???
 
Pee Wee Herman is a great man by that standard.
Pee Wee Herman is a great man by that standard.
Deep State Lawyers for Bill Clinton, Barak Obama, and Andrew McCabe show up & suddenly there is a 2nd Accuser....

....what a coincidence.

SSDD from the despicable POS Democrats...
and soon you freeking repubs can bash a 3rd
Sounds like the Democrats are finding more fake accusers for Kavanaugh so they out-number the number of real Ellison accusers...

:p
What have I been predicting would happen?
Do you Believe Kavanaugh's Rape Accuser?

Rush Limbaugh predicted Wed, hour 1 I believe, that Fords story would unravel and another would appear to replace her.
Because that is Rush's pre emptive spin, as he knows as well as anyone that sexual predators are predators for life.


And when you find someone who can actually prove that about Kavanaugh get back to us.....Ford and Ramirez are either lying or completely nuts......neither one can remember anything about what happened.....

Ramirez...

Allegations From New Kavanaugh Accuser Were So Dicey That Multiple News Orgs — Including The NY Times — Passed On The Story

The Times had interviewed several dozen people over the past week in an attempt to corroborate her story, and could find no one with firsthand knowledge. Ms. Ramirez herself contacted former Yale classmates asking if they recalled the incident and told some of them that she could not be certain Mr. Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself."

So the Times passed, as did the others, according to reports.

NBC, The New York Times and The Washington Post passed on Ronan Farrow's Kavanaugh accuser story because reporters felt uneasy about the facts.

Think about that: NBC, The New York Times and The Washington Post all passed on a story that could've made Trump/Kavanugh look bad.

— Tim Young (@TimRunsHisMouth) September 24, 2018
Journalist Yashar Ali also said on Twitter:

"The Ramirez accusation has been floating around several news outlets in the past week, including NBC, NYer, New York Times, & the Washington Post per five sources. Some reporters felt uneasy with it, but it apparently passed the rigorous fact-checking standards of the NYer."
 
It's not past the statute of limitations.

Kavanaugh is not running for office.
Anything else you feel the need to get wrong?
 
Pee Wee Herman is a great man by that standard.
Pee Wee Herman is a great man by that standard.
Deep State Lawyers for Bill Clinton, Barak Obama, and Andrew McCabe show up & suddenly there is a 2nd Accuser....

....what a coincidence.

SSDD from the despicable POS Democrats...
and soon you freeking repubs can bash a 3rd
Sounds like the Democrats are finding more fake accusers for Kavanaugh so they out-number the number of real Ellison accusers...

:p
What have I been predicting would happen?
Do you Believe Kavanaugh's Rape Accuser?

Rush Limbaugh predicted Wed, hour 1 I believe, that Fords story would unravel and another would appear to replace her.
Because that is Rush's pre emptive spin, as he knows as well as anyone that sexual predators are predators for life.

Or perhaps he knew the story was a placeholder story that would unravel. THAT is what he predicted. Did those aliens you believe in tell you he was a "sexual predator"?
 
they want to get a female not from the senate to question her & dr ford welcomes the senate. whyare they afraid to do it themselves?

Do you have a problem with a woman asking her questions? Will it make the answer any different? Why is she afraid to answer questions from a woman?

lol... she's not.... a female senator on the judiciary certainly can. but chicken shit male (R)s can't man up & do it themselves. & you apparently are defending chickenshits. SHE isn't afraid to face the men who own their questions. your retort fails miserably.
 
because it's the written questions from the senators. if they own the words - they should speak them.

Some of the Senators on the Judiciary Committee are women, do their words mean anything different? If the questions are written, how would you know who wrote them? Is it okay if a man asks a question a woman asked him to ask?

because none of the female senators are the ones that will be asking.

How do you know none of the women on the Senate Judiciary Committee will ask her questions? How do you know they won't ask a man on the Judiciary Committee to ask Dr. Ford a question? How do you know that any woman anywhere, cannot have a question asked of Dr. Ford by someone on the Committee, during her testimony in front of the Judiciary Committee?

Which goes back to, why is she afraid to answer questions from any woman during her testimony?
I think we all know that the goal is optics. They want to portray the republican senators as mean old white men gaining up on a poor victimized woman who was sexually assaulted. And she should be believed because of her say-so alone.

they can't 'gang up' on her if she WANTS them to question her & what better way to prove that they aren't by them speaking with their own tongues to her in the senate?
 
And you remind me of every uneducated slob i meet on the internet, who thinks that everyone else is as stupid and gullible as he is.
Being a liberal / Democrat already puts you almost automatically in the 'Jonathon Gruber' category of Liberal voters, which, unfortunately for you, means anything coming from you has to be parroted because according to Gruber snowflakes / liberals are too stupid to think for themselves:




View attachment 218241
You're a freak, and you give Republicans and conservatives a bad name.
 
Trump should have picked a black women for Supreme Court. But...because this is a good heterosexual white family....the college professoriate....lunatic left...which coalesce into the Democratic Party...must attack. Anyone who thinks a smear campaign is acceptable,have No Honor and No Integrity. This is racist attack on a white family. Oh I’m sorry liberals don’t care about the truth. It is possible for whites to be psychologically deranged that they hate their own race. Just ask Antifa suburban white trash.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top