RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

The Kavanaugh Hearings: This is a good spoof
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 5082
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/08/18 1:28 am    ::: The Kavanaugh Hearings: This is a good spoof Reply Reply with quote

A lot of work, very clever and witty, and sadly true.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wGO2fz1KlSc" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 10748
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus. If u were in my safe space, you'd have to be f'd up


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/18/18 8:22 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

dee dee dee doo doo doo dah dah dah

get the popcorn



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 5082
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/18/18 11:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

What are the odds on:

- a public hearing
- a closed door hearing
- no hearing
- the Democrat senators boycotting whatever hearing

This politically scripted he-she-said about teen behavior 36 years ago will give more political cover for Democrat Senate candidates in red states to vote against Kavanaugh. His fate is now entirely in the hands of the Republicans -- three in particular: Flake, Murkowski and Collins.
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11183
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart), whilst on my way to Oregon!


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/18/18 11:20 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
. His fate is now entirely in the hands of the Republicans -- three in particular: Flake, Murkowski and Collins.


No Corker factor? Shocked



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners! Oregon: Go Ducks!
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 5082
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/18/18 11:38 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
. His fate is now entirely in the hands of the Republicans -- three in particular: Flake, Murkowski and Collins.


No Corker factor? Shocked


You're right, add Liddle Bob. I just forgot him.

By the way, I didn't mean to suggest that the incident was politically scripted; I believe something did happen to the woman. What's obviously been scripted is the timing, the lawyer, the polygraph, and the leaking to the Washington Post -- maybe even without the woman's full understanding or agreement.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 10748
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus. If u were in my safe space, you'd have to be f'd up


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/20/18 7:23 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

these asshole Republican Senate geezers can't die soon enough.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/20/18 7:50 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
these asshole Republican Senate geezers can't die soon enough.


They'll just find more to replace them!



_________________
neverthless she persisted
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/21/18 8:10 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm not sure if I'm more opposed to him or the Senate Judiciary Committee and the way that this has been handled. With all of the refusal to even hold hearings for Obama's nominee, the whole process is such a sham and really insulting to Americans.

Grassley is a disgrace to pretty much everything America should be.

IF BK is somehow approved, I hope that every senator that has a role in it is voted out at their next re-election.


Quote:
More Americans oppose than support the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, a new USA TODAY/Ipsos Public Affairs Poll finds, an unprecedented level of disapproval for a nominee to the nation's high court.



https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/21/poll-brett-kavanaugh-unprecedented-opposition-amid-christine-blasey-ford-assault-claim/1374835002/



_________________
neverthless she persisted
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 10748
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus. If u were in my safe space, you'd have to be f'd up


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/21/18 9:21 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ex-Ref wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
these asshole Republican Senate geezers can't die soon enough.


They'll just find more to replace them!



The unfortunate truth.

Wink



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/24/18 8:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Here's hoping that he's finally toast.

Quote:
Avenatti told reporters he has been hired by a former employee of both the State Department and the US Mint who has information of a sexual nature about Kavanaugh and his high school friend Mark Judge.

“It will relate to how they behaved at countless house parties,’’ Avenatti said.

Avenatti also told reporters the woman, whom he did not name, has multiple security clearances and will “literally risk her life’’ by coming forward. He called her “100 percent credible,’’ saying she has multiple witnesses to corroborate her story and would be willing to take a polygraph if Kavanaugh does as well.



https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/24/brett-kavanaugh-avenatti-third-accuser-emerge-48-hours/1416699002/



_________________
neverthless she persisted
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 6812



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/25/18 12:17 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Kavanaugh just "over-denied". He claimed in an interview that he was a virgin in high school, suggesting that should demonstrate that he wouldn't pull a girl into a room at a party and sexually assault her.

Someone said that if Kavanaugh was confirmed that would make 3 Supreme Court justices with sexual allegations against them. I know one is Clarence Thomas, but don't know who the other judge is.

According to the Stormy Daniels lawyer, there is another (third) person who is going to say something about both Kavanaugh and the other guy in the room - Judge - and how they behaved at parties.


Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/25/18 7:53 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
Kavanaugh just "over-denied". He claimed in an interview that he was a virgin in high school, suggesting that should demonstrate that he wouldn't pull a girl into a room at a party and sexually assault her.


I thought the same thing. Just because you're a virgin until well after college, as he intimated, doesn't mean that you're innocent of sexual assault. And if what Avenatti is hinting at in the article linked in my previous post is true, well there's a level of hell waiting for him and his buddy Judge.


A local congressional race has one candidate's ad stating that the other worked for a DC lobbying firm. The second candidate comes back with "I've never lobbied a day in my life." Dude, you can work for a school and never taught. Work for a law firm and never tried a case. Work for a hospital and never treated a patient. Work for an airline and never flown a plane. Commit sexual assault and never placed your penis in another person.

How do these people make their way in to our government??



_________________
neverthless she persisted
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/25/18 7:56 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

This should be required reading for the senate judiciary committee. Not that it would make much difference in the end, but it might give them a restless night of sleep.


Quote:
Ford’s silence is the norm, not the exception, and has nothing to do with her veracity.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2018/09/25/christine-blasey-ford-silence-brett-kavanaugh-sexual-assault-survivors-column/1404670002/



_________________
neverthless she persisted
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11183
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart), whilst on my way to Oregon!


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/25/18 9:21 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ex-Ref wrote:

I thought the same thing. Just because you're a virgin until well after college, as he intimated, doesn't mean that you're innocent of sexual assault.....How do these people make their way in to our government??


Precisely. Just cuz he didn't 'succeed' with penetration in his assault, doesn't mean he didn't assault her. As disgusting as the assault is, the overriding problem here is his inability to own up to it, to take responsibility for it: LIARS DON'T MAKE GOOD JUDGES, ASSHOLE. But....as we know....LIARS do make good politicians.



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners! Oregon: Go Ducks!
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 10748
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus. If u were in my safe space, you'd have to be f'd up


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/25/18 5:46 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

how sweet it would be if 2018 Kavanaugh faced the same kind of "personal" questions the 1998 Kavanaugh, on Ken Starr's team, insisted Clinton be asked.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 18373



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/25/18 8:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
how sweet it would be if 2018 Kavanaugh faced the same kind of "personal" questions the 1998 Kavanaugh, on Ken Starr's team, insisted Clinton be asked.


Isn’t it funny, although probably not surprising, that..as it turns out..Clinton is the least shitty towards women from that era..



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 6812



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/25/18 10:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
how sweet it would be if 2018 Kavanaugh faced the same kind of "personal" questions the 1998 Kavanaugh, on Ken Starr's team, insisted Clinton be asked.


Isn’t it funny, although probably not surprising, that..as it turns out..Clinton is the least shitty towards women from that era..


1 woman accusing him of rape and 2 accusing him of sexual harassment certainly puts him at the low end of that era.


taropatch



Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 516
Location: Kau Rubbish Dump


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/26/18 12:58 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
Ex-Ref wrote:

I thought the same thing. Just because you're a virgin until well after college, as he intimated, doesn't mean that you're innocent of sexual assault.....How do these people make their way in to our government??


Precisely. Just cuz he didn't 'succeed' with penetration in his assault, doesn't mean he didn't assault her. As disgusting as the assault is, the overriding problem here is his inability to own up to it, to take responsibility for it: LIARS DON'T MAKE GOOD JUDGES, ASSHOLE. But....as we know....LIARS do make good politicians.


SMH -- That Stanford swimmer never even got his pecker out and he went to jail for sexual assault. I think Brett should have skipped that interview.


Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/26/18 11:01 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ex-Ref wrote:
Here's hoping that he's finally toast.

Quote:
Avenatti told reporters he has been hired by a former employee of both the State Department and the US Mint who has information of a sexual nature about Kavanaugh and his high school friend Mark Judge.

“It will relate to how they behaved at countless house parties,’’ Avenatti said.

Avenatti also told reporters the woman, whom he did not name, has multiple security clearances and will “literally risk her life’’ by coming forward. He called her “100 percent credible,’’ saying she has multiple witnesses to corroborate her story and would be willing to take a polygraph if Kavanaugh does as well.



https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/24/brett-kavanaugh-avenatti-third-accuser-emerge-48-hours/1416699002/




Julie Swetnick's sworn declaration. WOW!!!!!!!!!!!


http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-julie-swetnick-declaration-20180926-htmlstory.html#



_________________
neverthless she persisted
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11183
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart), whilst on my way to Oregon!


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/26/18 11:18 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Holy Shit! I can see why Donald is so PROUD of Brett. Cool



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners! Oregon: Go Ducks!
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 6812



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/26/18 8:08 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

There are now two more accusations against Kavanaugh. A guy in Rhode Island says he and a friend beat up Kavanaugh and Judge on a boat in Newport, Rhode Island in August 1985, because they brought some woman back there from a bar and raped her. He says he recognized Kavanaugh from his high school yearbook photo. Kavanaugh denies ever being in Newport, Rhode Island.

And a woman in Colorado says that her daughter was friends with a woman Kavanaugh was dating and she and another person witnessed Kavanaugh forcefully throw his up against a building after they all exited a bar. This was in Washington, DC in 1998.




Last edited by tfan on 09/26/18 9:37 pm; edited 1 time in total
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/26/18 9:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I was sitting here wondering what the eight current justices think about all of the info coming out.



_________________
neverthless she persisted
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 5082
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 12:23 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ex-Ref wrote:
I was sitting here wondering what the eight current justices think about all of the info coming out.


RBG answered that very question two weeks ago even before the 11th hour smears:

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4749105/justice-ginsburg-supreme-court-confirmation-process
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 6:06 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
Ex-Ref wrote:
I was sitting here wondering what the eight current justices think about all of the info coming out.


RBG answered that very question two weeks ago even before the 11th hour smears:

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4749105/justice-ginsburg-supreme-court-confirmation-process


So she's saying that a nominee to SCOTUS should require a 90%+ vote to be confirmed. Sounds good to me. Smile

To the "11th hour smears comment," how do you know that they are smears? Were you there with BK 24/7 during the early 80's?



I should have been more specific in my statement. Are they thinking "if this scumbag is confirmed there is no way I want to be associated with him?" Maybe, "do I want to be in a 5-4 decision with this perv?" "What will people think of anyone that is in a 5-4 decision with him." "Can we go back and do the 2016 election over?" "Is there a way WE can abolish the electoral college and go with the popular vote?"

Things like that.



_________________
neverthless she persisted
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 5082
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 7:52 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ex-Ref wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
Ex-Ref wrote:
I was sitting here wondering what the eight current justices think about all of the info coming out.


RBG answered that very question two weeks ago even before the 11th hour smears:

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4749105/justice-ginsburg-supreme-court-confirmation-process


So she's saying that a nominee to SCOTUS should require a 90%+ vote to be confirmed. Sounds good to me. Smile

To the "11th hour smears comment," how do you know that they are smears? Were you there with BK 24/7 during the early 80's?



I should have been more specific in my statement. Are they thinking "if this scumbag is confirmed there is no way I want to be associated with him?" Maybe, "do I want to be in a 5-4 decision with this perv?" "What will people think of anyone that is in a 5-4 decision with him." "Can we go back and do the 2016 election over?" "Is there a way WE can abolish the electoral college and go with the popular vote?"

Things like that.



Oh, so you weren't actually asking a good faith question and looking for an informative answer. You were just asking a rhetorical question seeking another way to trash Trump and, simultaneously, to impute your preconceived opinion that Kavanaugh's reputation should be destroyed by completely uncorroborated allegations from 36 years ago. Well, that's your privilege.

Making believe your question was in good faith, RBG was saying in a reserved way that she detests the way partisan politics, including personal character assassination, have become the normative process for judicial nominations, instead of the former way of simply focusing on high quality legal experience, intellectual qualities and temperament. I'm sure every Supreme Court justice feels the same way. What she didn't say, but which is true, is that it is only the Democrats who have engaged in this sleazy, circus behavior vis-a-vis Republican nominees since 1987 -- motivated mainly by their religious cultism about Roe v. Wade. Democratic nominees have all been confirmed by Republican senators by reasonably large margins without any slanderous behavior or character attacks.

The Supreme Court by all accounts is a very cordial place as among the nine justices, and as far as I know, no one has had any difficulties in working with Clarence Thomas for 27 years, including RBG who has done so for about 25 years in many 5-4 decisions.
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11183
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart), whilst on my way to Oregon!


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 8:32 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
RBG was saying in a reserved way that she detests the way partisan politics, including personal character assassination, have become the normative process for judicial nominations, instead of the former way of simply focusing on high quality legal experience, intellectual qualities and temperament. I'm sure every Supreme Court justice feels the same way. What she didn't say, but which is true, is that it is only the Democrats who have engaged in this sleazy, circus behavior vis-a-vis Republican nominees since 1987 -- motivated mainly by their religious cultism about Roe v. Wade. Democratic nominees have all been confirmed by Republican senators by reasonably large margins without any slanderous behavior or character attacks.


Whoawhoawhoa....."THEIR religious cultism about Roe v. Wade"??? It is precisely the opposite: The (your?) Cultish Religion's Obsession about imposing THEIR will on the Law of The Land that Dem's are trying to oppose here.

"Personal Character Assassination" is precisely in order, IF and WHEN one's personal character is of less than sterling quality. Making every attempt to determine that is part of the process.

Frankly, I'm sick of the women (especially) and men who've vouched for what a fine man Brett currently is, or was. He may have turned his life around, and be all that they say he is....NOW. That doesn't mean he gets a *pass* for past behaviors....not when it's an audition for a seat on The Highest Court of The Land. If it's real and true, OWN it, buddy....make amends, DON'T be a liar about it. We don't need a LIAR on the Court.

Glenn, tell me you think Anita Hill's hearing was a "character assassination"....?



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners! Oregon: Go Ducks!
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 9:08 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
Ex-Ref wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
Ex-Ref wrote:
I was sitting here wondering what the eight current justices think about all of the info coming out.


RBG answered that very question two weeks ago even before the 11th hour smears:

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4749105/justice-ginsburg-supreme-court-confirmation-process


So she's saying that a nominee to SCOTUS should require a 90%+ vote to be confirmed. Sounds good to me. Smile

To the "11th hour smears comment," how do you know that they are smears? Were you there with BK 24/7 during the early 80's?



I should have been more specific in my statement. Are they thinking "if this scumbag is confirmed there is no way I want to be associated with him?" Maybe, "do I want to be in a 5-4 decision with this perv?" "What will people think of anyone that is in a 5-4 decision with him." "Can we go back and do the 2016 election over?" "Is there a way WE can abolish the electoral college and go with the popular vote?"

Things like that.



Oh, so you weren't actually asking a good faith question and looking for an informative answer. You were just asking a rhetorical question seeking another way to trash Trump and, simultaneously, to impute your preconceived opinion that Kavanaugh's reputation should be destroyed by completely uncorroborated allegations from 36 years ago. Well, that's your privilege.

Making believe your question was in good faith, RBG was saying in a reserved way that she detests the way partisan politics, including personal character assassination, have become the normative process for judicial nominations, instead of the former way of simply focusing on high quality legal experience, intellectual qualities and temperament. I'm sure every Supreme Court justice feels the same way. What she didn't say, but which is true, is that it is only the Democrats who have engaged in this sleazy, circus behavior vis-a-vis Republican nominees since 1987 -- motivated mainly by their religious cultism about Roe v. Wade. Democratic nominees have all been confirmed by Republican senators by reasonably large margins without any slanderous behavior or character attacks.

The Supreme Court by all accounts is a very cordial place as among the nine justices, and as far as I know, no one has had any difficulties in working with Clarence Thomas for 27 years, including RBG who has done so for about 25 years in many 5-4 decisions.



Actually, my post didn't even ask a question.

An interesting commentary:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2018/09/27/brett-kavanaugh-rape-sexual-assault-allegations-prep-school-party-column/1418692002/

I think that there's more than a pretty good chance that BK was everything that these brave women have said he was in hs and college. Now, I just think that he is a liar that desperately wants to be a SC justice.

I've been wondering what the other 8 have been thinking about the possibility of having a list on the court with them.

I coyld MAYBE get past what he alledgedly did in hs if he would have just owned it, as Howee said. (Ok, probably not, but just to try to make my point.) Now, short of a FULL FBI investigation, I think there will always be a cloud over him and any of his potential SCOTUS decisions.



_________________
neverthless she persisted
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 9:36 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Something else I've been wondering, is why I tend to believing the women and their accusations and not him.

I truly don't think politics has anything to do with it, especially with Blasey Ford.

At first, I asked what does each have to lose by not telling the truth. A lot. By both of them. Trust. Their reputations. Personal and professional. She would surely lose her teaching gig.

Then I wondered what they had to gain. For him, a job for as long as he wants it. Even more, an opportunity to shape this nation for the next 40-50 years.

Then I got stuck. What does she have to gain?

A few minutes of noteriety? From what I've read/ heard, she tends to shy away from the spotlight.

Money? From where? I doubt tht she would do the talk show circuit. DNC/donors? Possibly, but I don't know if they have enough to make it worth her while.

I'm just not seeing why she would do it unles it were true.



_________________
neverthless she persisted
Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 49361



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 1:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wwbyRk1jkv8" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 19622



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 1:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Whatever anyone thinks of the process itself, this is over for Brett Kavanaugh, and then some. If he doesn't have the quit in him to take no for an answer, which seems to be a personal trait with him bordering on the sociopathic, the committee chair and Republican leaders should trek over to the White House and straighten out Trump's comb-over. But they are probably too stupid or afraid to do that. Because it was a huge mistake for both Trump and this committee to allow this hearing today to go forward and virtually guarantee the historic visuals of another Anita Hill moment. I don't know how they couldn't have seen this coming but they walked right into it. Anyone who thinks we have the brightest bulbs in Washington should consider the fact that today happened at all. Trump, if he had any sense at all, would withdraw this nominee by 4PM so Brett can go hit a happy hour somewhere on the way home. Put forth Amy Coney Barrett's name and coming on the heels of this circus you'd have a sure thing.



_________________
Falsehood will fly on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps slow and solemn, she has neither the vigour nor activity to overtake her enemy. - Thomas Francklin
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 4:09 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I've watched 10-15 minutes of this and this guy is a real prick!!

He keeps asking "have you?"

Note to the lawyer that is trying to get on the SC, they senators aren't the ones that need to answer questions.



_________________
neverthless she persisted
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 4:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Lindsey Graham saying that this is the "most unethical, sham since I've been in politics."

Apparently forgot what happened with Merritt Garland.



_________________
neverthless she persisted
Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 49361



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 4:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote




_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 10748
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus. If u were in my safe space, you'd have to be f'd up


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 5:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

jammerbirdi wrote:
Whatever anyone thinks of the process itself, this is over for Brett Kavanaugh, and then some. If he doesn't have the quit in him to take no for an answer, which seems to be a personal trait with him bordering on the sociopathic, the committee chair and Republican leaders should trek over to the White House and straighten out Trump's comb-over. But they are probably too stupid or afraid to do that. Because it was a huge mistake for both Trump and this committee to allow this hearing today to go forward and virtually guarantee the historic visuals of another Anita Hill moment. I don't know how they couldn't have seen this coming but they walked right into it. Anyone who thinks we have the brightest bulbs in Washington should consider the fact that today happened at all. Trump, if he had any sense at all, would withdraw this nominee by 4PM so Brett can go hit a happy hour somewhere on the way home. Put forth Amy Coney Barrett's name and coming on the heels of this circus you'd have a sure thing.



Does she hold Kavanaugh's opinions re: a sitting POTUS subpoena/investigation? If not, it's clear why TraitorTrump hasn't done what you suggest.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 5:41 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm getting tired of seeing seeing him scrunch up his nose.

It makes him look petulant.



_________________
neverthless she persisted
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 5:48 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Oh the drama!!!!!

Sen. Kennedy. 🤮



_________________
neverthless she persisted
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 10748
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus. If u were in my safe space, you'd have to be f'd up


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 5:54 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

It all boils down to this: Ford says bring on the FBI; Kavanaugh repeatedly refuses to do same.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
Genero36



Joined: 24 Apr 2005
Posts: 8974



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 7:57 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Kavanaugh is getting that seat. I'm not wasting my time thinking otherwise.

Stay strong, Ms. Ford.



_________________
I'm all for the separation of church and hate.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 10748
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus. If u were in my safe space, you'd have to be f'd up


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 8:34 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Genero36 wrote:
Kavanaugh is getting that seat. I'm not wasting my time thinking otherwise.

Stay strong, Ms. Ford.


Agreed. Collins and Murkowski are as worthless as the rest of them.

ETA: one has to wonder what Trump has on Miss Lindsey. The whole world knows he's gay...must be something involving underage pages or some such.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 18373



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 8:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

jammerbirdi wrote:
Whatever anyone thinks of the process itself, this is over for Brett Kavanaugh, and then some. If he doesn't have the quit in him to take no for an answer, which seems to be a personal trait with him bordering on the sociopathic, the committee chair and Republican leaders should trek over to the White House and straighten out Trump's comb-over. But they are probably too stupid or afraid to do that. Because it was a huge mistake for both Trump and this committee to allow this hearing today to go forward and virtually guarantee the historic visuals of another Anita Hill moment. I don't know how they couldn't have seen this coming but they walked right into it. Anyone who thinks we have the brightest bulbs in Washington should consider the fact that today happened at all. Trump, if he had any sense at all, would withdraw this nominee by 4PM so Brett can go hit a happy hour somewhere on the way home. Put forth Amy Coney Barrett's name and coming on the heels of this circus you'd have a sure thing.


I don't understand their mindset.

There HAS to be a conservative justice out there that isn't a complete scumbag or at the very least, not a serial rapist.

They'll vote on party lines too, when it comes to it. (Because it is all about the sitting President being indicted question.) I don't understand.



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 18373



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 8:49 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
Genero36 wrote:
Kavanaugh is getting that seat. I'm not wasting my time thinking otherwise.

Stay strong, Ms. Ford.


Agreed. Collins and Murkowski are as worthless as the rest of them.

ETA: one has to wonder what Trump has on Miss Lindsey. The whole world knows he's gay...must be something involving underage pages or some such.


It's amazing to me that there aren't a few Republicans that want to go down as heroes. (Other than Mueller.)



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 6812



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 9:29 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:

ETA: one has to wonder what Trump has on Miss Lindsey. The whole world knows he's gay...must be something involving underage pages or some such.


I never had an impression of Lindsey Graham being gay, but did wonder about him when I read he was 60 and never married - and running for president. Whether gay or not, I think a 60 year old lifelong bachelor would have a very hard time being elected president. Early on it is no issue, but at some point people would expect a wife and kids to enter the picture to some extent.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11183
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart), whilst on my way to Oregon!


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 9:35 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:

ETA: one has to wonder what Trump has on Miss Lindsey. The whole world knows he's gay...must be something involving underage pages or some such.


I never had an impression of Lindsey Graham being gay, but did wonder about him when I read he was 60 and never married. Whether gay or not, I think a 60 year old lifelong bachelor would have a very hard time being elected president. Early on it is no issue, but at some point people would expect a wife and kids to enter the picture to some extent.


Oh, darlin'....yer Gaydar is not functioning properly. Lindsey is queerer than a $3 bill. (....and Jon Stewart sez so, too! Cool Talk about petulant: Lindsey's little snit re: "I voted for Sotomeyer and Kagan..." Really? As you should have: they weren't sexual assault perps. THAT doesn't give Brett a pass.



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners! Oregon: Go Ducks!
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/27/18 10:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I just heard on TV that the republicans can only afford to lose on senator's vote for confirmation.

That would make it a 50-49 vote. I was wondering why that wasn't enough. I was thinking a majority of the vote. (Government class was a LONG time ago!!!!!!)

Turns out that BK needs to get 51% of the votes cast. So if one republican doesn't cast a vote tomorrow....

And since 50-49 isn't a tie, Pence doesn't get a vote.

Would anyone abstain? Collins? Murkowski? Flake?

Better for their political future to abstain or vote no?

Never mind. I thought I had heard that it was 51-49. Just found out that it's 52-48.



_________________
neverthless she persisted
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 19622



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/28/18 1:09 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I take back my previous comment. I made it after seeing Dr. Ford but before seeing Kavanaugh's appearance for myself in its entirety. I had anticipated, as had been predicted, that he would stick to safe denial talking points as per his previous statements of the last week. I think the fire and emotion he brought was very convincing and politically well played. As good as she was, I think he won the day and he'll be ending up on the SCOTUS. I also would not characterize this guy as a sociopath or his response to these charges as sociopathic.

I think we're about this >< far away from needing a new U.S. constitution, one that better protects this process and also our election systems. Because we're seriously shredding any last semblance of integrity our government processes still have. And by integrity I don't mean moral integrity I mean functional integrity. Like you might worry about the integrity of a patched tire. This is badly badly broken shit here and it's the process by which we appoint supreme court justices. Just look at what happened to Merrick Garland, Obama's pick. The people need a system that anticipates everything we saw then and now and self-protects from things that we haven't even seen yet.



_________________
Falsehood will fly on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps slow and solemn, she has neither the vigour nor activity to overtake her enemy. - Thomas Francklin
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/28/18 6:54 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ex-Ref wrote:
I just heard on TV that the republicans can only afford to lose on senator's vote for confirmation.

That would make it a 50-49 vote. I was wondering why that wasn't enough. I was thinking a majority of the vote. (Government class was a LONG time ago!!!!!!)

Turns out that BK needs to get 51% of the votes cast. So if one republican doesn't cast a vote tomorrow....

And since 50-49 isn't a tie, Pence doesn't get a vote.

Would anyone abstain? Collins? Murkowski? Flake?

Better for their political future to abstain or vote no?

Never mind. I thought I had heard that it was 51-49. Just found out that it's 52-48.




OK whet the hell is the make up of the US Senate?


I just heard on tv that there are 51 republican senators. I looked it up last night and that's where I got the 52.

I'm going back to 51.



_________________
neverthless she persisted
PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 14425
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/28/18 7:34 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ex-Ref wrote:
Ex-Ref wrote:
I just heard on TV that the republicans can only afford to lose on senator's vote for confirmation.

That would make it a 50-49 vote. I was wondering why that wasn't enough. I was thinking a majority of the vote. (Government class was a LONG time ago!!!!!!)

Turns out that BK needs to get 51% of the votes cast. So if one republican doesn't cast a vote tomorrow....

And since 50-49 isn't a tie, Pence doesn't get a vote.

Would anyone abstain? Collins? Murkowski? Flake?

Better for their political future to abstain or vote no?

Never mind. I thought I had heard that it was 51-49. Just found out that it's 52-48.




OK whet the hell is the make up of the US Senate?


I just heard on tv that there are 51 republican senators. I looked it up last night and that's where I got the 52.

I'm going back to 51.


It's 51-49.

Technically its 51-47, as Angus King and Bernie Sanders call themselves independents but caucus with Democrats. It might kind of be 50-47, as Lisa Murkowski was last elected as an independent (she lost the Republican primary) but I think she went right back to calling herself a Republican.


Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/28/18 8:30 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Flake is reportedly going to vote to confirm according to CNN.

Wow you have to watch the women that have him cornered in an elevator. Live on CNN now.

He's a cold, heartless SOB if he doesn't vote no today and call for an FBI investigation after that!

Well, hopefully the citizens of the USA were watching (or will see) that joke of a vote to subpoena Mark Judge and will remember on election days going forward. Hopefully this is the end of the asshole Grassley and his buddies who fully support the white male privilege bro-code.



_________________
neverthless she persisted


Last edited by Ex-Ref on 09/28/18 8:53 am; edited 1 time in total
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11183
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart), whilst on my way to Oregon!


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/28/18 8:52 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ex-Ref wrote:
Flake is reportedly going to vote to confirm according to CNN.

Wow you have to watch the women that have him cornered in an elevator. Live on CNN now.

He's a cold, heartless SOB if he doesn't vote no today and call for an FBI investigation after that!


I can't for the life of me comprehend why even HE refuses to break rank with the Republicans....he's been one to demonstrate some balls, given he's not going for re-election. I really had some faith in him.



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners! Oregon: Go Ducks!
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 4948



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/28/18 9:12 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

At least five democrat senators walked out of the meeting. I'm kind of surprised that Corey Booker wasn't one of them.


Quote:
Sens. Richard Blumenthal, Kamala Harris, Sheldon Whitehouse and Mazie Hirono left the room as Chairman Chuck Grassley was giving an opening statement. Sen. Patrick Leahy left a bit later.


https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/kavanaugh-senate-committee-vote/index.html



_________________
neverthless she persisted
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin