Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Kapture1]

you think Kavanaugh was your worst nightmare? Barrett is more likely to vote to overturn Roe v Wade precedent


Again, FUCK THE LEFT

[froot loops]

It's a deep state conspiracy involving Soros bucks and the ever present Delorean

[Dr. Strangelove]

far left activist who spent the weekend scrubbing het social media accounts lmao

Her life will be hell for a while. FWIW, Mark Judge, Kavanaugh's buddy and the other guy who's accused in her story, ALSO wiped his social media accounts over the weekend. So this is no admission of guilt.

[Dr. Strangelove]

It's a deep state conspiracy involving Soros bucks and the ever present Delorean

Heh, George Soros and his mysterious, infinite ability to pay off millions of people around the world to lie for him.

The CLintons have an army of hundreds of thousands that do their bidding and they are but one branch of the Soros organization.

[iam416]

The Kavanaugh Borking is appalling. Fucking appalling.

[Dr. Strangelove]

The Kavanaugh Borking is appalling. Fucking appalling.

Feinstein did the accuser no favors and handled it for maximum political effect. Jury's out on the woman till she testifies. We'll get to see how credible she is, possibly this week.

[Kapture1]

over 14,000 days could have said something. waited for 4 days before his vote to go public.

never mentioned the name Kavanaugh in therapy sessions

took a lie detector in August even tho she had no intentions of going public

who was that former FBI agent that administered the test? was it Peter Strzok lol

[iam416]

Feinstein did the accuser no favors and handled it for maximum political effect. Jury's out on the woman till she testifies. We'll get to see how credible she is, possibly this week.

Feinstein is a fucking disgrace. The jury may still be out for you, but what do you expect to change? This is over 30 years old. She told no one about it until 2012. She is the first woman to even hint at this (typically, you'd have a long line -- guys like that don't usually just stop at one -- Roy Moore). SHE didn't come forward until four days before the committee vote. Oh,and she's an ardent fucking progressive.

Kavanaugh, btw, has been GREAT in hiring female clerks and helping them advance in their career -- and they write about him with great admiration and affection.

Fucking appalling. The Rs HAVE to stand up to this bullshit.

[Ghengis Jon]

The Rs are collectively spineless cowards. They won't stand up to Trump, what makes you think they'll do anything about a mere hearing?

[crashcourse]

[Dr. Strangelove]

Feinstein is a fucking disgrace. The jury may still be out for you, but what do you expect to change? This is over 30 years old. She told no one about it until 2012. She is the first woman to even hint at this (typically, you'd have a long line -- guys like that don't usually just stop at one -- Roy Moore). SHE didn't come forward until four days before the committee vote. Oh,and she's an ardent fucking progressive.

Kavanaugh, btw, has been GREAT in hiring female clerks and helping them advance in their career -- and they write about him with great admiration and affection.

Fucking appalling. The Rs HAVE to stand up to this bullshit.

I think there's an argument to be made that even if her story was 100% true, it was 35 years ago, they were teenagers and it's not a disqualifying event. I think this woman's lawyer even said on tv this morning that they weren't taking the stance that this 'incident' is disqualifying. I'm not taking a stance either way. But she should testify before totally discounting her.

The Roy Moore accusers were certainly more credible because there were many of them and had similar stories. But even they never spoke up until 40 years had gone by.

[Dr. Strangelove]

And to clarify for myself, the Dems are playing very dirty here, but primarily Feinstein who seems to have hid this even from other members of the Committee. The jury's not out for me on THAT. Just if this woman's credible.

[iam416]

Yeah, but this is entirely he said/she said without a lick of corroborating evidence. Anywhere. So she can tell her story. Her credibility won't change an iota by testifying. What are they going to use to impeach her credibility? Kavanaugh's ardent denial? The massive time lapse? Her politics? We already know all that.

And, to be clear, it's very much about being disqualifying. That's the whole point of this ruse. If it's not disqualifying then there is zero point to her testifying or the judiciary committee delaying the vote.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Yeah, but this is entirely he said/she said without a lick of corroborating evidence. Anywhere. So she can tell her story. Her credibility won't change an iota by testifying.

And, to be clear, it's very much about being disqualifying. That's the whole point of this ruse. If it's not disqualifying then there is zero point to her testifying or the judiciary committee delaying the vote.

Procedural question: can Mitch McConnell overrule the Committee and force a confirmation vote with or without a Committee majority?

[iam416]

I'm fairly certain that the Judiciary Committee needs to report the nominee out. But,TBH, arcane Senate procedure ain't my specialty.