How long til Kavanaugh falls off the front page contest

I'll take 42 days.

Ann_Tagonist said:

I'll take 42 days.

Click to expand...

I think the left probably has a new lie or two they can drop that will have Mika squirting on Morning Joke before the election.

I think the left will be hooping and hollering until the next biggest scandal. They love a good show sweetie, and so do i!

two or three days

The instant Bob Meuller indicts his next target.

You must provide a numerical value to be eligible for the impressive prize package.

There is still time to enter.

HelpImLost said:

I think the left will be hooping and hollering until the next biggest scandal.

Click to expand...

That shouldn't take long. If there's one thing we can count on from this administration . . .

Ann_Tagonist said:

You must provide a numerical value to be eligible for the impressive prize package.

Click to expand...

What's the prize? And is it illegal or dangerous?

Ann_Tagonist said:

You must provide a numerical value to be eligible for the impressive prize package.

Click to expand...

Ain't nobody would describe your package as impressive, Ken. Keep it in your pants.

Ann_Tagonist said:

You must provide a numerical value to be eligible for the impressive prize package.

Click to expand...

Kirkrapine said:

What's the prize? And is it illegal or dangerous?

Click to expand...

Rightguide said:

I think the left probably has a new lie or two they can drop that will have Mika squirting on Morning Joke before the election.

Click to expand...

Bwahahaha!!

Anybody have one day? Sorry, you're eliminated.

Is this number including this thread being bumped when he drops off page one?

16 days from the date of his confirmation. By that point the news will be centered solely on the polling for the election. Kav will be on page 2 below the fold.

SpeareChucker said:

Is this number including this thread being bumped when he drops off page one?

Click to expand...

I'll check the rules.

2 days is off the board. Still time to place your bets for the impressive prize package.

Richard_Picture said:

I think he will be on the front page whenever the Supreme Court makes a decision the left can put a spin on for attempted political advantage, it could drag on indefinitely.

Click to expand...

They could care less for the actual proceedings of tbe supreme court, much less understand the implications. They just want to whine about losing the popularity contest.

I keep racking my brains over this Kavanaugh nomination.

On one hand, my confidence is shaken re a political party that nominates someone only 2 months after such serious allegations. Of attempted rape, ffs!
A proper investigation is much more thorough and takes up to a year, and they could have nominated someone else instead.

On the other hand, presuming that Reps. are absolutely confident that Ford's allegations are false and a Democrat ploy:
Backing down would have meant cowering in front of an attempted "coup d'état by slander". (so to speak).

beew said:

I keep racking my brains over this Kavanaugh nomination.

On one hand, my confidence is shaken re a political party that nominates someone only 2 months after such serious allegations. Of attempted rape, ffs!
A proper investigation is much more thorough and takes up to a year, and they could have nominated someone else instead.

On the other hand, presuming that Reps. are absolutely confident that Ford's allegations are false and a Democrat ploy:
Backing down would have meant cowering in front of an attempted "coup d'état by slander". (so to speak).

Click to expand...

Nobody cares, goat fucker.

beew said:

I keep racking my brains over this Kavanaugh nomination.

On one hand, my confidence is shaken re a political party that nominates someone only 2 months after such serious allegations. Of attempted rape, ffs!
A proper investigation is much more thorough and takes up to a year, and they could have nominated someone else instead.

On the other hand, presuming that Reps. are absolutely confident that Ford's allegations are false and a Democrat ploy:
Backing down would have meant cowering in front of an attempted "coup d'état by slander". (so to speak).

Click to expand...

He was nominated before the allegations were made. I think you meant confirmed.

Ann_Tagonist said:

They could care less for the actual proceedings of tbe supreme court, much less understand the implications. They just want to whine about losing the popularity contest.

Click to expand...

Their major concern is the knowledge the SCOTUS is going to be less a rubber stamp and a bigger frustration for the unconstitutional notions of radical federal court judges nominated by Obama.

Looks like the other two Kavanaugh threads have moved off our front page.

beew said:

I keep racking my brains over this Kavanaugh nomination.

On one hand, my confidence is shaken re a political party that nominates someone only 2 months after such serious allegations. Of attempted rape, ffs!
A proper investigation is much more thorough and takes up to a year, and they could have nominated someone else instead.

On the other hand, presuming that Reps. are absolutely confident that Ford's allegations are false and a Democrat ploy:
Backing down would have meant cowering in front of an attempted "coup d'état by slander". (so to speak).

Click to expand...

You're missing a lot of the nuances.

Kav was nominated and his background check begun. His SIXTH background check. Anyone who's undergone a background check from the FBI knows that they talk to EVERYONE you've ever known. 6 times they did this and nothing showed up.

So they handed in their report and the judiciary committee hearings began and turned into a clown show. Farticus even showed up. Then, when the hearings had concluded and there wasn't any real reason for the D's to vote no, an "anonymous" accuser with a 36 year old claim appeared just in the nick of time.

Imagine that.

The judiciary committee bent over backwards to get her to tell her story. She did. She didn't remember much. Her witnesses didn't remember anything. So, once again there wasn't really any reason to vote no.

They had to have a reason. So they made one up and started howling at the moon. That didn't work so they started tossing all kinds of ridiculous reasons out. You know there's a maxim out there which says that whenever the claims/defenses start to have a shifting basis, the given reasons are pretextual and can be disregarded with impunity. The current claim of unfitness seems to shift in a rotating narrative - rape, lies, temperament, angry drunk, rape, and repeat endlessly.

ALL of that happened at the END of the hearing process. It was done. It was over. The guy should have sailed through with ease. He actually did if you think about it, but then the changing accusations started.

And now you want to talk about how they "should have" pulled him back after everything had been checked and rechecked and checked again? So that the FBI could do it again for the EIGHTH time?

Because someone made an accusation NO ONE had ever heard of before and the accuser had nothing to support her claims? Why? If there was nothing there to begin with, what would be the point of EVEN MORE investigation?

At some point you have to draw the line and just say enough already. The hearings aren't about endlessly digging to find something/anything bad to say about the nominee. They're about exploring the suitability of the candidate based on what's known.

What we knew about Kavanaugh at the end of the hearings and after Ford gave testimony is that, other than the unsubstantiated claims by Ford, there is NOTHING in Kavanaugh's background which disqualifies him. Nothing.

And you naively want him to be withdrawn?

From there, name someone you would have preferred (OTHER THAN Garland) to take Kavanaugh's place. Someone the D's wouldn't have objected to and who the R's wanted on the Court. Name 1 person. Try it without googling who is on the "list" of potential nominees.

Go on. Try.

And then ask yourself how long that person would take to get confirmed after the D's takes the Senate as they believed they would.

Here's someone: Alan Dershowitz. He teaches law at Harvard. He's a life long D and believes in liberalism. Very well known and competent. On the flip side, he wrote a book about how the D's are making a mistake in trying to impeach Trump. He believes in the rule of law and believes that following the law is paramount even when the law goes against what you believe and what to accomplish.

He has no chance at surviving the shit storm from the Judiciary committee were he the nominee.

Dershowitz is middle of the road and consistent in his views regarding the Constitution and the law. The left hates him, even his neighbors hate him. He gets death threats too. And all of that started after his book "The case against impeaching Trump" came out.

So, nominate someone you think is more consistently middle of the road and strictly adheres to his sense of right and wrong more than Dershowitz. Go on. We'll wait while you try to find someone the D's won't try to humiliate and threaten.

The clusterfuck you saw over the past month wasn't about Kavanaugh. He was only the vehicle the D's used to try to slow the process down until after the mid-term election where they thought they'd get a Senate majority. Once that happened, they'd live up to their already announced plan to obstruct and hold the seat open until after the 2020 elections where they hoped to get a D President to replace Trump.

And, in your desire to be pacifistic you're going to go along with them. They lie, cheat, lie some more, twist words and events out of recognition, abuse those who don't want to be abused, and then make up more lies after that, and you think HELPING THEM continue to do that will make the infighting stop?

Naive is the only word that fits.

3 days and holding. There is a possible winner.