• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Report: Kavanaugh won’t commit to recusal from Trump/Mueller related matters

Oh, well that changes everything then. He definitely would have been using his White House email account to discuss illegal payments by the NRA.

From the poster who just doesn’t understand why civil war memorials could be perceived as racist.

They are shady as fuck about the docs, that doesn’t mean the evidence of corruption is in them, it means he’s lying about something in them and therefore capable of lying about anything. Would you not release docs from your job to prove you are honorable? Aren’t you part of the group that believes FBI agents are easily persuaded into risking their jobs and reputations over political opinions and cash? So judges aren’t? GTFO
 
All the Republicans are going to vote for him anyway. They should just stop the charade. They don’t care what anybody else has to say.
 
he might just be a liar under oath, too.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/sen-leahy-withheld-emails-show-195508766.html

I'm looking forward to the evidence Grassley is going to release to clear this all up lol

Honestly what the fuck is up with the Republican Party stealing shit and spying on Democrats?


The six emails in question related to a scandal from 2002 and 2003 in which a Republican Judiciary Committee staffer named Manny Miranda stole emails from the committee’s Democrats that included strategy memos about how they would question Bush’s judicial nominees.

Leahy alleged that Kavanaugh, in his role preparing those judicial nominees for their confirmation hearings, knew he had received these stolen emails from Miranda detailing the Democrats’ strategy on the nomination of Priscilla Owen to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Kavanaugh claimed in both his 2004 and 2006 confirmation hearings that if he did receive those documents, he “never knew or suspected” that they were stolen.

...

After his failure to remember whether he met with or received documents by hand from Miranda, Leahy asked Kavanaugh about another specific email. This was the first allusion to confidential emails the committee was not disclosing to the public.

“When you worked at the White House did anyone ever tell you they had a mole that provided them with secret info?” Leahy asked.

Kavanaugh said he didn’t “recall the reference to a mole.”

Leahy got more specific: “You never received an email from a Republican staff member with information claiming to come from spying?”

“I’m not going to rule anything out,” Kavanaugh said, echoing previous denials. “If I did, I wouldn’t have thought the literal meaning of that.”

“Wouldn’t that surprise you that you got an email saying that they got that from somebody spying?” Leahy pressed.

Kavanaugh, realizing that Leahy was talking about a document without revealing it, responded with his own question: “Well, is there such an email, senator?”

This led Leahy to turn to Grassley: “We’d have to ask the chairman what he has in the confidential material.”

Grassley responded angrily that all of the documents that the committee has made public from Kavanaugh’s time in the White House counsel’s office are publicly available online. Leahy replied that the email he referenced is marked “committee confidential.” Grassley, angrily yelling, declared that 80 percent of the emails the committee got from the archives are available to the public.

Leahy replied to both Kavanaugh and Grassley: “I’m concerned because there is evidence that Mr. Miranda provided you with materials that were stolen from me. And that would contradict your prior testimony. It’s also clear from public emails ... that you had reason to believe that materials were obtained inappropriately at the time.”

“Mr. Chairman, there are at least six documents that you consider committee confidential that are directly related to this, including three documents that are already public,” Leahy added. “These other six contain no personal information. No presidential-act-restricted material. There is simply no reason they won’t be made public.”

Grassley said that he would produce the documents Leahy referenced: “He’s going to get what he wants. And I think there’s five of them.”
 
I would need evidence too.

Its just that Kavanaugh and his band of Trumpster promoters are acting like they have a lot to hide about this guy. He can't afford Nationals tickets and has to charge up his credit cards, yet he has a club membership and a million dollar house, and no investments and wacky account balances.

Sounds like a fucking idiot at best, and a shady little weasel at worst.

Get fucked You unhinged loon
 
Just vote him in during the middle of the night. Who needs hearings?

No shit. That’s what Barack did so fuck it. How about some more Christmas Eve executive order
 
Last edited:
You’re not wrong, but neither am I.

Yeah. You are wrong. Several Democrats have indicated they’re likely to vote for him. Just drop the false equivalency.
 
Not as much as the the kids who will be shot up by weapons purchased legally by crazies thanks to republican reliance on the vote of the gullible.
 
I guess the donkeys are really regretting dropping the nuclear option about now.


Maybe.

I’m not a donkey, but as a former longtime Pub, I greatly regret that my erstwhile party was so unwilling to work cooperatively for any good that the donkeys finally felt compelled to pursue that option.

Also, pretty sure it was Pubs that applied it to SC nomination process.
 
Maybe.

I’m not a donkey, but as a former longtime Pub, I greatly regret that my erstwhile party was so unwilling to work cooperatively for any good that the donkeys finally felt compelled to pursue that option.

Also, pretty sure it was Pubs that applied it to SC nomination process.

Wrong
 
Not as much as the the kids who will be shot up by weapons purchased legally by crazies thanks to republican reliance on the vote of the gullible.

Why don’t you gargle marbles for clarity
 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option


In November 2013, Senate Democrats used the nuclear option to eliminate the 60-vote rule on executive branch nominations and federal judicial appointments (except for appointments to the Supreme Court). In April 2017, Senate Republicans used the nuclear option to eliminate the exception for Supreme Court nominees, after the nomination of Neil Gorsuch failed to meet the requirement of 60 votes for ending the debate.[1][2]
 
Back
Top