| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9120
Location: at a computer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mat-ty
Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 7850
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 9:46 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| boggsman1 wrote: | https://www.axios.com/brett-kavanaugh-college-roommate-believes-allegations-add8ad85-cc53-4e42-88e3-6a36398d6bb0.html
#wecandobetter
Matty, I'm talking about judges who have had a history of partisanship. Kav has that, most SCOTUS judges do not. Gorsuch, Roberts do Not.
Kav's intent with Clinton was to embarrass him, and it served ZERO purpose.
In fact , he has reversed himself twice. Back then he thought a Prez could be indicted in office, today he says NO!, I wonder why? =partisanship. |
Zero purpose???? Clinton was a pig and disgraced the office, lied under oath and has a very long list of woman who to this day stand by their stories that they were raped by Bill.
Not groping, RAPE!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17748
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 9:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| In the minds of the unhinged, groping is okay because it is not rape. I guess this is a bar most Republicans can make it over. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9120
Location: at a computer
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mat-ty wrote: | | boggsman1 wrote: | https://www.axios.com/brett-kavanaugh-college-roommate-believes-allegations-add8ad85-cc53-4e42-88e3-6a36398d6bb0.html
#wecandobetter
Matty, I'm talking about judges who have had a history of partisanship. Kav has that, most SCOTUS judges do not. Gorsuch, Roberts do Not.
Kav's intent with Clinton was to embarrass him, and it served ZERO purpose.
In fact , he has reversed himself twice. Back then he thought a Prez could be indicted in office, today he says NO!, I wonder why? =partisanship. |
Zero purpose???? Clinton was a pig and disgraced the office, lied under oath and has a very long list of woman who to this day stand by their stories that they were raped by Bill.
Not groping, RAPE!!! |
Let me explain this very slowly. The intent of releasing specific details was to embarrass, and move public opinion against the president. That was a partisan hit job, and didn't impact the legal case for the Independent Counsel. Kavanaugh is way too political to be a Supreme, the US can certainly do much better. The guy was on Fox News lying last night!!!! WTH... a SCOTUS nominee on TV during his nomination period.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mat-ty
Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 7850
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mac wrote: | | In the minds of the unhinged, groping is okay because it is not rape. I guess this is a bar most Republicans can make it over. |
No time , no place , no witnesses, 36 fucking years ago moron... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mat-ty
Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 7850
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mac wrote: | | In the minds of the unhinged, groping is okay because it is not rape. I guess this is a bar most Republicans can make it over. |
From the party who could care less about the CURRENT case of Keith Ellison...
Amazing how you scumbag liberals talk about woman and their rights but they only seem to apply to situations that hurt the right....... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mat-ty
Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 7850
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| boggsman1 wrote: | | mat-ty wrote: | | boggsman1 wrote: | https://www.axios.com/brett-kavanaugh-college-roommate-believes-allegations-add8ad85-cc53-4e42-88e3-6a36398d6bb0.html
#wecandobetter
Matty, I'm talking about judges who have had a history of partisanship. Kav has that, most SCOTUS judges do not. Gorsuch, Roberts do Not.
Kav's intent with Clinton was to embarrass him, and it served ZERO purpose.
In fact , he has reversed himself twice. Back then he thought a Prez could be indicted in office, today he says NO!, I wonder why? =partisanship. |
Zero purpose???? Clinton was a pig and disgraced the office, lied under oath and has a very long list of woman who to this day stand by their stories that they were raped by Bill.
Not groping, RAPE!!! |
Let me explain this very slowly. The intent of releasing specific details was to embarrass, and move public opinion against the president. That was a partisan hit job, and didn't impact the legal case for the Independent Counsel. Kavanaugh is way too political to be a Supreme, the US can certainly do much better. The guy was on Fox News lying last night!!!! WTH... a SCOTUS nominee on TV during his nomination period.... |
Way too political?, Then I guess that incoherent liberal twat ginsburg should resign. She has been very outspoken against Trump. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9120
Location: at a computer
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
We are screening for the future... Once in , its too late. How about Sam Alito slamming Obama, now we have Citizens United, the bane of our existence.
My fear with Kav, is we will have a slightly smarter version of Sean Hannity in the robe for 30+ years....we can certainly do better.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LHDR
Joined: 22 Jun 2007
Posts: 528
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 11:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
mat-ty, have you considered the possibility that Thomas was lying and Hill was not? As with Kav, my starting point is that the women in these cases have little reason to lie and must be brave in the first place to face the grave repercussions. The nominees, on the other hand, have every reason to lie and nothing to loose since the evidence is mostly he said she said.
Aside, I think Thomas' accusation of a "high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves. ... And it is a message, that unless you kowtow to an old order you will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree", is wrong. It was, however, a clever move to bring people over to his side. You must have a different take. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mat-ty
Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 7850
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LHDR wrote: | mat-ty, have you considered the possibility that Thomas was lying and Hill was not? As with Kav, my starting point is that the women in these cases have little reason to lie and must be brave in the first place to face the grave repercussions. The nominees, on the other hand, have every reason to lie and nothing to loose since the evidence is mostly he said she said.
Aside, I think Thomas' accusation of a "high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves. ... And it is a message, that unless you kowtow to an old order you will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree", is wrong. It was, however, a clever move to bring people over to his side. You must have a different take. |
Really because the lefty DB from Yale changed her story 6 days after the DNC scum lawyers arrived.
Why do these DBs run to the DNC and not law enforcement?. Let me guess, because theay are politically motivated |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
