Louis Gossett Jr
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2012
- Messages
- 12,711
- Reaction score
- 6,525
Your life actions and thoughts probably do a good enough job painting you as despicable but the more formal term is deplorable.
Ongoing US GOP Debacle Thread: Seditious Republicans march toward authoritarianism
- Thread starter WFFaithful
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
TurtLocker
New member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2017
- Messages
- 42
- Reaction score
- 3
If you are seriously still on this yearbook thing I would say you are delusional and so desperate for some reason to not have a conservative majority on the Supreme Court that you would find fault with Kavanaugh regardless of his integrity or actions. If he ends up being brought up on perjury charges relating to his yearbook and doesn’t get the nomination I will eat my hat, it’s never in a million years going to happen. Even congressional democrats know that. This entire debacle has been nothing but a failed stall tactic, and a morally reprehensible one at that.
TurtLocker
New member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2017
- Messages
- 42
- Reaction score
- 3
Dude probably, why bother arguing with me when the fact that I disagree with you makes me a terrible human being. Just bail and call me names, it’s way easier.
On the other thread I have shown specific lies that Kavanaugh has told in EACH of his Senate confirmation hearings. Apparently no amount of lies is disqualifying to being on the Supreme Court to you.
Nothing like his abject rant during his opening statement against the Clintons, fictitious donors who and LW conspiracies has ever happened in at least the past 75 years (I'd bet ever) of Supreme Court hearings. He acted like a twelve year old on the playground not a person interviewing for a lifetime job on the Supreme Court.
Hammer meet Nail
These kids have no access to logic and reason
TurtLocker
New member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2017
- Messages
- 42
- Reaction score
- 3
It’s almost as if accusing a nominee of heinous sex crimes with absolutely no evidence, then forcing him to defend himself is a rather rare occurrence. They threw the witch in the river and she floated, so now they want to burn her at the stake. If Kavanaugh hadn’t had the impassioned response that he did the dems would’ve said his lack of emotion was a sure sign of his guilt. His testimony saved his nomination, pure and simple.
What a total load of crap. He yelled at and tried to question senators. He asked a sitting US Senator if she had a drinking problem. Try that in your next job interview.
You intentionally neglected the fact that has committed perjury in EVERY Senate hearing. Maybe you think committing crimes is a prerequisite to being on the Supreme Court. Maybe we should hire a serial killer to run the FBI or a bank robber to run the FDIC.
I thought it was awesome that he called them out for being the scum they truly are
Highland Deac
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2012
- Messages
- 6,821
- Reaction score
- 722
BKF briefly returned as "SwissChalet" or something similar, so it wouldn't surprise me.
Newenglanddeac
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 1, 2011
- Messages
- 13,135
- Reaction score
- 390
So Blasley Ford is lying?
Highland Deac
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2012
- Messages
- 6,821
- Reaction score
- 722
Lindsey Graham was on ABC's This Week this morning, and he just came right out and said that he believes that Ford was "mistaken" in her accusations, and that she has "problems." I think every liberal knew that right-wingers, even the leaders of the GOP, would finally get there - they've mostly stopped saying they believe her story (probably doesn't play well with the base), and now they're just saying it was a case of mistaken identity or that she's got "problems" - the classic blaming-the-victim strategy that has worked so well before. I'm wondering how long it will be before we get to the slut-shaming part of the treatment.
ETA: I was rather amused when George Stephanopoulos asked Lindsey about Kavanaugh's blatantly partisan rant, and asked him if he that was a proper line for a supposedly non-partisan judge to take. Graham visibly flinched, then smiled, and more or less said that of course he's a partisan, but they're going to put him on the Court anyway and the Democrats are just going to have to live with it. What a great guy. I wonder if the contract Graham signed with Beelzebub giving him his soul when he dies is sitting in his office desk in DC.
Last edited:
Newenglanddeac
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 1, 2011
- Messages
- 13,135
- Reaction score
- 390
Oh I know. And where is the evidence that this is a case of mistaken identify? Ed Whelan?
Republicans are the most intellectually dishonest group of people I have ever encountered. I am ashamed to have ever worked for any of them at this point.
TurtLocker
New member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2017
- Messages
- 42
- Reaction score
- 3
I can’t say she’s lying, I wasn’t there, but she’s provided absolutely no evidence aside from her testimony, so no, I don’t believe that’s adequate for me to say that a well respected judge is a sex criminal. The democrats knew this accusation wouldn’t stand up to scrutiny, they put it forward and put her through this anyway because they thought they could stall the nomination until after the midterms. You have to be supremely biased to think that one woman’s testimony with no contemporaneous witnesses to even say such a party occurred is enough to destroy a man’s life. There is zero evidence he committed perjury, there is zero evidence to suggest he committed sexual assault. At this point all the dems are left with is criticizing how he defended himself from a blatantly partisan witch hunt, much like Clarence Thomas had to do.
Since you didn't go to the other thread, I'll bring your evidence that not only have he lied in this round of hearings, but Kavanaugh has lied in EVERY Senate nomination hearing he has participated in over the past fourteen years:
"He absolutely lied about not seeing the stolen Dem memos while working in the WH. There is a paper trail.
He lied about people (including Judge and Ford's friend Leland) denying the events happened. They each said they didn't remember. Kavanaugh knew what they said and flat out lied.
His Renate stories are clearly lies.
He lied about his belief in the efficacy of polygraphs. Here's what has said in the very recent past, "“As the Government notes,” he wrote in a 2016 decision, “law enforcement agencies use polygraphs to test the credibility of witnesses and criminal defendants. Those agencies also use polygraphs to ‘screen applicants for security clearances so that they may be deemed suitable for work in critical law enforcement, defense, and intelligence collection roles.’”
“The Government has satisfactorily explained how polygraph examinations serve law enforcement purposes,” he summarized."
He's also lied in each of his previous three confirmation hearings: https://www.prochoiceamerica.org/201...es-under-oath/
"Examples of Kavanaugh’s false and misleading statements, under oath, include:
Kavanaugh lied under oath to Sen. Kennedy in 2004 about his work on the Pryor nomination: During Kavanaugh’s 2004 confirmation hearing, Sen. Ted Kennedy asked him about his work in the Bush White House on the judicial nomination of anti-abortion, anti-LGBTQ judge William Pryor. Kavanaugh responded, “I am familiar generally with Mr. Pryor, but that was not one that I worked on personally.” Yet newly released emails show that statement to be unambiguously false—Kavanaugh was involved in selecting Pryor, interviewing him, and working to confirm him.
Kavanaugh lied under oath to Sen. Leahy in 2006 about his work on warrantless wiretapping: During his 2006 confirmation hearing, Kavanaugh told Sen. Leahy that he was not involved in the President Bush’s “warrantless wiretapping program” and did not know of its existence until the program was publicly reported by the New York Times in 2005. Yet the Times reported that in anow-public 2001 email Kavanaugh wrote to John Yoo, who was then a Justice Department lawyer, Kavanaugh asked about the Fourth Amendment implications of “random/constant surveillance of phone and email conversations of non-citizens who are in the United States when the purpose of the surveillance is to prevent terrorist/criminal violence.”
Kavanaugh lied under oath to Sen. Durbin in 2006 about his involvement in policies regarding the detention of combatants: During his 2006 confirmation hearing, Kavanaugh told Sen. Durbin, “I was not involved and am not involved in the questions about the rules governing detention of combatants.” There are now at least three recorded examples of Kavanaugh participating in discussions of Bush administration detainee policy.Kavanaugh lied under oath to multiple Senators in multiple hearings about receiving and using emails and memos stolen from Democratic senators: During his 2004 and 2006 confirmation hearings, Kavanaugh answered more than 100 questions about Democratic emails and communications stolen by Republican Judiciary Committee staffer Manuel Miranda. For example, Sen. Hatch asked, “Did Mr. Miranda ever share, reference, or provide you with information that you believed or were led to believe was obtained or derived from Democratic files?” Kavanaugh answered, “No.” Newly released emails show Kavanaugh did receive such information and should have known that it was improperly obtained.Kavanaugh lied under oath about his involvement in the nomination of controversial nominee Charles Pickering:
During his 2006 confirmation hearing, Kavanaugh downplayed his role in the nomination of Charles Pickering, but newly released emails deeply undercut those assertions.Kavanaugh may have lied under oath about his connection to disgraced Judge Alex Kozinkski. Kavanaugh clerked for Judge Alex Kozinski, who faced several allegations of sexual misconduct by former law clerks. There was, allegedly, an email list called the “Easy Rider Gag List” where Kozinski sent sexual and explicit jokes. Kavanaugh was asked “Has Judge Kozinski ever made comments about sexual matters to you either in jest or otherwise? And Kavanaugh said “I do not remember any such comments.” However, a former clerk says “having clerked in his chambers I do not know how it would be possible to forget something as pervasive as Kozinski’s famously sexual sense of humor or his gag list.”Kavanaugh misled the committee under oath about his desire overturn Roe v. Wade, criminalize abortion and punish women. An email hidden by Republicans and revealed by the New York Times showed that Brett Kavanaugh has been hiding his true beliefs and would vote to end Roe v. Wade. The 2003 email includes rock solid evidence that everything Brett Kavanaugh said in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee about “settled law” and precedent was nothing but a show to mislead the Senate and American people.
Kavanaugh lied under oath about disclosing grand jury information in the Ken Starr investigation. In questions for the record, Kavanaugh denied sharing “information learned through grand jury proceedings” in the Kenneth Starr investigation. However, according to a memo from the National Archives, Kavanaugh told Hickman Ewing, a colleague and deputy independent counsel in the Starr investigation, to illegally call a journalist about matters before a grand jury."
I'm sure there are other lies he has told under oath to the Senate over the years.
This doesn't even address his clear bias against LW groups he openly chastised during his opening statement.
This guy shouldn't be allowed to go to Supreme Court softball game much less be a Justice."
How many times is it OK for someone to commit perjury and be approved for the Supreme Court in your world?
PhDeac
PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 155,058
- Reaction score
- 22,068
Ongoing US GOP Debacle Thread: Embracing Trumpism
George Zimmerman said Trayvon Martin attacked him. That was considered more than enough evidence for Republicans to justify killing him.
Why is Blasey Ford saying Kavanaugh attacked her not evidence?
I don’t remember Republicans scrutinizing the liberal women who claimed Harvey Weinstein sexually harassed him. Seems like Republicans are being partisan. Democrats are being consistent.
George Zimmerman said Trayvon Martin attacked him. That was considered more than enough evidence for Republicans to justify killing him.
Why is Blasey Ford saying Kavanaugh attacked her not evidence?
I don’t remember Republicans scrutinizing the liberal women who claimed Harvey Weinstein sexually harassed him. Seems like Republicans are being partisan. Democrats are being consistent.
It depends on what the definition of is is.
Why didn’t the republicans call any of them as witnesses? They could have asked them what they remember and don’t remember on record. Oh well, missed opportunity...put him in the court!
WFFaithful
Well-known member
The six sentence sworn letter was good enough.