Kreepy Kavanaugh

[Carnal_Flower]

No they don't. He's got the biggest disapproval rating of ANY SCOTUS nominee ever.

He's supremely unqualified because of his lies, partisanship, conspiracy theories, anger management issues, drinking problem and sexual assault problem. Oh, and perjury under oath.

Only to Deplorables, i.e. Republicans does that mean "highly qualified."

Gorsuck is a conservative smarmy asshole, but he conducted himself credibly in his hearings. Not so the screaming frat boy.

I disagree. Everyone agrees that Judge Kavanaugh is qualified to serve as a Supreme Court Justice. We know all we need to know. You may not agree, but for lack of a better phrase, too bad. As President Obama said, "win an election". Vote, and accept the consequences of your vote. My Senators know my position. They know that if they do not vote for Judge Kavanaugh, I will fully support their opponent in the next election.

 

[Comshaw]

I'm not a partisan. Why do you keep saying that? You're making wrong inferences. You should give that some thought. It's not good.
The nominee has been thoroughy vetted. The Democrats have an ulterior motive. They bypassed the normal procedure for dealing with an unsubstantiated claim by an anonymous party.
You know that the longer this goes on, the worse it is for the nominee. That's what the Democrats want. They clearly want to grind down Judge Kavanaugh, and you know that.
The longer this goes on, the more controversy there will be.
Their are protests at Harvard against a course Judge Kavanaugh teaches there. And these are purportedly our intellectually elite students.
He's vetted. There's no evidence. He's undoubtedly qualified. He should be approved.
I don't agree with Judge Ginsburg. I don't agree with Judge Sotomayor, I don't agree with Judge Kagan. However, they are fully qualified an belong on the Court without a doubt. I would have voted for them if I was a Senator.

The Democrats have ulterior motives? Really? And you have a hard time realizing that? Sure they do, but not any more then the Republicans. The Dems want to delay this confirmation until after the elections hoping they pick up enough seats to control the Senate and stop any confirmation that doesn't meet their liking. The Repubs on the other hand want to ram it though and assure they have a conservative judge on the court. Most people can see through both of those with their eyes closed.

For me it isn't about having a conservative or liberal judge on the court, but one with morals and and upstanding character. After watching Kavanaugh I won't trust him in my home alone much less with something as important as the supreme court.

And yes he is MINIMALLY qualified. But do you really want someone who have the minimum qualifications for this job, or someone who is outstanding in their field? I'll go with the later.

And there is no evidence AS OF YET! Much like the Mueller investigation, overt and constant complaints about it cause many to be suspicious that there might be something that needs to be covered up.


As far as your bolded statement above, this says it all:

I don't agree with Judge Ginsburg. I don't agree with Judge Sotomayor, I don't agree with Judge Kagan.

If it walks like a duck......


Comshaw

 

[KeithD]

I don't think you know what partisan means. You are in reality a partisan. Nothing wrong with that, we know where you stand. We don't have to think.

How brilliant of you to figure out I'm partisan after I've posted that nut jobs like you have increasingly made me so. And the issue is you (Hahahahaha) claiming you aren't partisan.

 

[KeithD]

The Democrats have ulterior motives? Really? And you have a hard time realizing that? Sure they do, but not any more then the Republicans. The Dems want to delay this confirmation until after the elections hoping they pick up enough seats to control the Senate and stop any confirmation that doesn't meet their liking.

Do you really think so? I think that's just the Republican line on that. Whatever the vote in November, the seats don't change until January. Even if the Republicans lose future control in the elections, they've got two months to "pound" their agenda and nominations through and they most certainly will do so.

The Democrats are fighting the Kavanaugh nomination so hard because he isn't suitable for the job and quite openly has signaled that he will be Trump's personal lackey on the Supreme Court to prop up a criminal, Russian-controlled regime. I don't think the Democrats need any other reason than that to oppose Kavanaugh.

 

[Ramone45]

Do you really think so? I think that's just the Republican line on that. Whatever the vote in November, the seats don't change until January. Even if the Republicans lose future control in the elections, they've got two months to "pound" their agenda and nominations through and they most certainly will do so.

The Democrats are fighting the Kavanaugh nomination so hard because he isn't suitable for the job and quite openly has signaled that he will be Trump's personal lackey on the Supreme Court to prop up a criminal, Russian-controlled regime. I don't think the Democrats need any other reason than that to oppose Kavanaugh.

How do you think partisan Democrats will treat Judge Barrett?

 

[Comshaw]

Do you really think so? I think that's just the Republican line on that. Whatever the vote in November, the seats don't change until January. Even if the Republicans lose future control in the elections, they've got two months to "pound" their agenda and nominations through and they most certainly will do so.

The Democrats are fighting the Kavanaugh nomination so hard because he isn't suitable for the job and quite openly has signaled that he will be Trump's personal lackey on the Supreme Court to prop up a criminal, Russian-controlled regime. I don't think the Democrats need any other reason than that to oppose Kavanaugh.

I agree he should not be placed on the supreme court and the Dems are fighting it for that reason, BUT it isn't the only reason. Anyone who can look at this situation with a clear eye can tell one of reasons is also to delay the confirmation as long as possible it hopes of getting their pick on the court.

It's politics and that's what politicians do.


Comshaw

 

[Ramone45]

The Democrats have ulterior motives? Really? And you have a hard time realizing that? Sure they do, but not any more then the Republicans. The Dems want to delay this confirmation until after the elections hoping they pick up enough seats to control the Senate and stop any confirmation that doesn't meet their liking. The Repubs on the other hand want to ram it though and assure they have a conservative judge on the court. Most people can see through both of those with their eyes closed.

For me it isn't about having a conservative or liberal judge on the court, but one with morals and and upstanding character. After watching Kavanaugh I won't trust him in my home alone much less with something as important as the supreme court.

And yes he is MINIMALLY qualified. But do you really want someone who have the minimum qualifications for this job, or someone who is outstanding in their field? I'll go with the later.

And there is no evidence AS OF YET! Much like the Mueller investigation, overt and constant complaints about it cause many to be suspicious that there might be something that needs to be covered up.


As far as your bolded statement above, this says it all:



If it walks like a duck......


Comshaw

Context? Keep going... At least pretend to be fair.

 

[KeithD]

How do you think partisan Democrats will treat Judge Barrett?

Beats me. Is she a lying, mean drunk who is openly, rabidly partisan in politics, who has stonewalled a woman with a legal right to have an abortion and floated opinions that a sitting president can't be indicted for crimes just to signal his availability to be the personal rent-boy of the "Grab Em by the Pussy" president? If so, I imagine the Democrats will fight the nomination. If Trump nominates any of the numerous conservative judges who have been recommended to him rather than someone signaling they will save his personal ass from his personal venality, then, like Gorsuch, there probably will be some posturing but, like Gorsuch, the judge will be confirmed--and, like Gorsuch, even with some Democratic votes.


How do you think the Republicans treated Merrick Garland?

 

[KeithD]

I agree he should not be placed on the supreme court and the Dems are fighting it for that reason, BUT it isn't the only reason. Anyone who can look at this situation with a clear eye can tell one of reasons is also to delay the confirmation as long as possible it hopes of getting their pick on the court.

It's politics and that's what politicians do.


Comshaw

But do you really think that a nomination can be delayed until January? I don't. I think this is a false argument--and that it's the Republicans who are floating it for distraction/deflection. I think any number of candidates on the list Trump was given, albeit very conservative, could be installed before January, regardless of anything that happens in the November elections. It's the particular judge(s) that is(are) the sticking point. It's the people Trump puts forward simply to protect Trump personally.

 

[phrodeau]

How does one play the Devil’s Triangle drinking game? Asking for a friend.

 

[KeithD]

How does one play the Devil’s Triangle drinking game? Asking for a friend.

And what qualifies nine high school football team members to be a "Renata Aluminus"? Do they qualify together, in one train?

 

[Ramone45]

Beats me. Is she a lying, mean drunk who is openly, rabidly partisan in politics, who has stonewalled a woman with a legal right to have an abortion and floated opinions that a sitting president can't be indicted for crimes just to signal his availability to be the personal rent-boy of the "Grab Em by the Pussy" president? If so, I imagine the Democrats will fight the nomination. If Trump nominates any of the numerous conservative judges who have been recommended to him rather than someone signaling they will save his personal ass from his personal venality, then, like Gorsuch, there probably will be some posturing but, like Gorsuch, the judge will be confirmed--and, like Gorsuch, even with some Democratic votes.


How do you think the Republicans treated Merrick Garland?

They didn't personally destroy him.
It was bad timing. I agree with former Vice President Biden that the process should be delayed until after the campaign. I do not believe needed to be delayed until the new administration took office. From what I know about Judge Garland, he met the qualifications certainly to serve on the Supreme Court.

 

[Aglaopheme]

How does one play the Devil’s Triangle drinking game? Asking for a friend.

Someone has been having a bit of fun over that the urban dictionary.

Boofing
The act of smirkingly perjuring oneself before the United States Senate Judiciary Committee.
Dude, Kavvy just told them a Devil's Triangle is a drinking game. Classic boofing!!
by downtownjohnson September 28, 2018

Devil’s Triangledrugs
A drinking game in which players consume the alcohol of their choice whenever Brett Kavanaugh perjures himself
Let’s play Devil’s Triangle this weekend!
#brett kavanaugh#drinking game#perjury#justice
by acedecade September 28, 2018

 

[KeithD]

They didn't personally destroy him.
It was bad timing. I agree with former Vice President Biden that the process should be delayed until after the campaign. I do not believe needed to be delayed until the new administration took office. From what I know about Judge Garland, he met the qualifications certainly to serve on the Supreme Court.

If Kavanaugh is personally destroyed, he did it himself, with the help of his Republican buddies. First, by doing what he did himself and by being a congenital liar about it. And second, by stonewalling an investigation and not hopping on the "investigate it" wagon from the get go, where the investigation would be private, he'd be shown the results, and he'd have the option to see that he was going to be--legitimately--pulled apart in open hearings. Then, like many a withdrawn candidate before him, he could just sit tight in the nice little plum job he'd already lied himself into, with nothing happening to him in public because the Republicans insisted on going to the wall over it.

He and the congressional Republicans have brought this on themselves with their arrogance and total lack of scruples.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Apparently, there is no need for the FBI to interview Dr Ford?

 

[Carnal_Flower]

I'm beginning to think the FBI is uncovering evidence of lies. First Flake now Trump is saying If he lied under oath, he's toast. I don't think they'd be saying that if they weren't getting some bad feedback from the FBI.

 

[von_Bismarck]

I'm beginning to think the FBI is uncovering evidence of lies. First Flake now Trump is saying If he lied under oath, he's toast. I don't think they'd be saying that if they weren't getting some bad feedback from the FBI.

And Lindsey Graham made some statement to the effect that if Kavanaugh isn't confirmed, Trump ought to renominate him. Hmm.

 

[Ramone45]

If Kavanaugh is personally destroyed, he did it himself, with the help of his Republican buddies. First, by doing what he did himself and by being a congenital liar about it. And second, by stonewalling an investigation and not hopping on the "investigate it" wagon from the get go, where the investigation would be private, he'd be shown the results, and he'd have the option to see that he was going to be--legitimately--pulled apart in open hearings. Then, like many a withdrawn candidate before him, he could just sit tight in the nice little plum job he'd already lied himself into, with nothing happening to him in public because the Republicans insisted on going to the wall over it.

He and the congressional Republicans have brought this on themselves with their arrogance and total lack of scruples.

"by doing what he did himself" To what are you referring?

 

[Carnal_Flower]

According to the Unhinged Frat Boy, the glasses are placed in a triangle (get it? Devil's Triangle?), and it's played like quarters.

--Brett Kavanaugh sworn testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, 9/27/18*

*After all, how could a virgin know about threesomes???

How does one play the Devil’s Triangle drinking game? Asking for a friend.

 

[KeithD]

And Lindsey Graham made some statement to the effect that if Kavanaugh isn't confirmed, Trump ought to renominate him. Hmm.

Bernie Sanders was told that for the first time, live, in a CNN interview. He was speechless, as well he should be.

 

[KeithD]

"by doing what he did himself" To what are you referring?

Oh, shit, don't be stupid. By having been a bad boy then and, the kicker that is what eventually gets them all, by lying about it NOW.


You are a total loss at arguing your venial position, you know? Are you a Boxlicker alt?

 

[HisArpy]

I agree he should not be placed on the supreme court and the Dems are fighting it for that reason, BUT it isn't the only reason. Anyone who can look at this situation with a clear eye can tell one of reasons is also to delay the confirmation as long as possible it hopes of getting their pick on the court.

It's politics and that's what politicians do.


Comshaw

I thought this was revealing. It goes along with what we were talking about earlier...

Why the Kavanaugh debacle may be hurting Democrat chances in the Senate

It seems to me that politicians, being politicians, would be better skilled at recognizing a sinking ship than what we are seeing displayed in this particular confirmation.

 

[phrodeau]

https://slate.com/culture/2018/10/devils-triangle-rules-brett-kavanaugh-drinking-game.html

The only area of human endeavor where you can’t find anyone using the phrase “Devil’s Triangle” (until a few days ago) seems to be drinking games. It is not listed in any edition of the definitive reference book on the subject, The Complete Book of Drinking Games, published in 1984 by “Chugger Downs” and “E.Z. Buz,” both of whom presumably make appearances in Kavanaugh’s calendar. Narrowing the scope won’t help: you won’t find it in any version of The Complete Book of Beer Drinking Games (And Other Important Stuff) by Andy Griscom and Scott Johnston either. All record of the well-known and universally beloved drinking game “Devil’s Triangle” has vanished into thin air, as cleanly as if it had sailed into the diabolic geographical area enclosed by a three-sided shape with vertices at Miami, San Juan, and Bermuda, or disappeared in a puff of gay panic after accidentally making eye contact with another man during a threesome.

 

[Ramone45]

Oh, shit, don't be stupid. By having been a bad boy then and, the kicker that is what eventually gets them all, by lying about it NOW.


You are a total loss at arguing your venial position, you know? Are you a Boxlicker alt?

I know of no evidence that he assaulted Dr. Ford 36 years ago. Her testimony was not enough to change my mind. I found her little girl voice to be disingenuous.

 

[HisArpy]

Apparently, there is no need for the FBI to interview Dr Ford?

Dr. Ford's testimony is already on record. There is no need for her to continually be asked to repeat it. Nor is there any reason to justify increasing her anxiety and stress levels over what she feels was a traumatic event in her life.

This torturing of Dr. Ford for political purposes should stop. We've heard her story. It's time to let her heal as best she can.