Are all Republicans Scumbags?

A place for intelligent and well-thought-out discussion involving politics and associated topics. No nonsense will be tolerated at all.
User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

RCA wrote:
Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:32 pm
Dr. Ford's situation has much more validity than just saying "he raped me".

Context is everything and in this case Dr. Ford is credible and we should avoid the he-said she-said as much as possible.
Based on WHAT???

On six (6) different occasions, the FBI had full background investigations of Brett Kavanaugh. Are you saying that the FBI is absolutely incompetent of doing their job on six different occasions?

Dr. Ford's claim is that the incident occurred at an unspecified place on an unspecified date at an unspecified time. She provided four people as witnesses that could not verify anything she alleged. And to top it all off, Dr. Ford has refused to testify under oath. Not only that, but her account is not even on the record: https://twitter.com/senjudiciary/status ... vanaugh%2F

So I ask, HOW is she credible?


User avatar
RCA
Posts: 8226
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:09 am

Post

The FBI is pretty good at what they do, I don't think they investigate unreported crimes in high school and college years.
Rogue One wrote:
Tue Sep 25, 2018 6:58 pm
Based on WHAT???
That she spoke to her therapist and husband years before coming out.

Based on the fact that she mentioned the same to WaPo when his name was being thrown around for SCOTUS

Based on the fact that Dr. Ford wants an FBI investigation (not many liars want that) and Kavanaugh wants to avoid one at all costs

Based on the fact that they were aware of Dr. Ford before her name was leaked.
  • They had 60 women's statements about Kavanaugh ready to go less than 24hrs after Dr. Ford's name was released
  • Evidence of Kavanaugh's friend looking at Ford's linkedIn page 90 minutes before her name even leaked, the same friend that worked with a PR company to spread FAKE NEWS that there was a Kavanaugh look alike at the party and that Dr. Ford was mistaken.
  • They knew all about her, they knew that this was coming.
Based on (R)s desperately trying to convince people that Kavanaugh is an alter boy even though his history is well known and speaks for its self. People who know Kavanaugh know he was a heavy drinker in high school and college. His college room mate discusses his drinking in a book, claiming he got blackout drunk on many occasions.

Based on both his schools made statements disavowing his nomination.

None of these individual things are enough to sink his nomination but they paint a very ugly picture one that leads most people to believe he shouldn't be nominated. If Kavanaugh become a SCOTUS member he will be the only candidate where most America's disagreed with his nomination. Every other SCOTUS member was vetted thoroughly and 70-90% of American's would be on board with, not Kavanaugh though.

https://www.politicususa.com/2018/09/22 ... -ever.html

"This is the first time a plurality of Americans have opposed a Supreme Court nominee since polling on the issue began several decades ago."

This is the guy that some (R)s stated it won't matter what Dr.Ford says, Kavanaugh will be in the Supreme Court. Sounds like corruption at the highest levels. Why rush? Let all the smoke clear, investigate the claims that you can investigate and let the best version of the truth come out then vote.

Stop hiding Kavanaugh's faults from the world.

User avatar
szh
Posts: 18857
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

Post

This ^^^ deserves a full double thumbs up.

I am a registered Republican voter ... have been for decades after I became a citizen (since I lean way left on social issues and lean way right on fiscal) ... and am totally disgusted with the directions my party of choice and our POTUS has taken.

Ugh. :frown:

Z

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 71061
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 S13, 92 SE-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

Interestingly, he only assaulted Democrats.

Odd, huh?

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

BOMBSHELL: Two Men Tell Judiciary Committee They Did It, Not Kavanaugh

Burgess Everett, a reporter for Politico, broke the news on Twitter. "[Senate Judiciary] Committee staff have a second interview with a man who believes he, not Judge Kavanaugh, had the encounter with Dr. Ford in the summer of 1982 that is the basis of her allegation," Everett wrote. "He described his recollection of their interaction in some detail."

User avatar
RCA
Posts: 8226
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:09 am

Post

AZhitman wrote:
Fri Sep 28, 2018 12:19 am
Interestingly, he only assaulted Democrats.
Odd, huh?
Very suspicious, further proof that we need to investigate all claims.

Greg as a Senator Jeff Flake constituent call him up and thank him on my behalf for being the only adult in the room for voting no until a proper investigation has taken place. ;)
Rogue One wrote:
Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:38 am
Politico, broke the news on Twitter. "[Senate Judiciary] Committee staff have a second interview with a man who believes he, not Judge Kavanaugh, had the encounter with Dr. Ford
Bombshell is an understatement.

I hope we get down to the bottom of the Politico bombshell as well as all other claims.

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

In other news this week.

What Does ‘Devil’s Triangle’ and ‘Boofed’ Mean? Brett Kavanaugh Challenged Over Meaning of Yearbook Entries
By Jason Le Miere On 9/27/18 at 6:18 PM

According to Kavanaugh, the line “Have You Boofed Yet?” in his yearbook entry "refers to flatulence. We were 16,” he responded when questioned as to the definition by Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse.

Urban Dictionary, however, defines “boofed” as anal sex. New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman tweeted that the Urban Dictionary definition, not Kavanaugh’s, was the one she recalled from attending high school in the 1980s.

Kavanaugh was also questioned about the appearance of the term “devil’s triangle” on his yearbook page. The Supreme Court nominee said that it was a reference to a drinking game played with his friends. The Urban Dictionary definition, however, states that it refers to sexual intercourse involving two men and one woman.

After Kavanaugh stated his own meaning, the Wikipedia entry for the “devil’s triangle” was updated to include a definition stating: “a popular drinking game enjoyed by friends of judge Brett Kavanaugh.” The addition was made from an IP address from within the House of Representatives.

https://www.newsweek.com/devils-triangl ... gh-1142748

Did Trump pick a winner or a loser?

I'll vote loser

Telcoman

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

Another entry in the Urban Dictionary says it means 'so high from meth that you see shadow people everywhere'.

Besides, you know full well words and slang change over time. When was the last time you heard someone say 'gag me with a spoon'?

Here's a short list of words that now have a completely different meaning then they had some 30 odd years ago:
Bump; Block; Catfish; Cloud; Footprint; Sandbox; Swipe; Tablet; Troll; Tweet; Viral.

Image

User avatar
Bubba1
Moderator
Posts: 18355
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:42 pm
Car: 2003 Nissan 350z
2008 Acura TSX
2008 Toyota Corolla S
2001 Toyota Avalon XLS

Post

SNL had a funny recap of the Ford/kavanaugh hearing....



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRJecfRxbr8

Hopefully Rogue can see the humor without screaming "I can see your bias! :facepalm: ." For the record Kate McKinnon deserved her emmy.

User avatar
szh
Posts: 18857
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

Post

That was a great episode of SNL for sure! :ROFL

Z

User avatar
szh
Posts: 18857
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

Post

RCA wrote:
Fri Sep 28, 2018 11:22 am
Greg as a Senator Jeff Flake constituent call him up and thank him on my behalf for being the only adult in the room for voting no until a proper investigation has taken place. ;)
Yes, indeed!

Z

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 71061
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 S13, 92 SE-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

I like to think of myself as pretty well-versed in all uses of the English language, and "boofed" has never appeared on my radar.

But Howie, since you were around before Webster put quill to parchment, we'll go with your addled and oxygen-deprived definition.

You really should have a hobby... besides tugging your pud to pictures of Justice Ginsberg.

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 71061
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 S13, 92 SE-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

RCA wrote:
Tue Sep 25, 2018 8:37 pm
The FBI is pretty good at what they do, I don't think they investigate unreported crimes in high school and college years.
We'll have to agree to disagree on the first part.

And, if your second statement is (yep) accurate, let's consider that for a moment. Why is that?

I don't have a dog in this fight, because all I care about is facts. But as a man, I've got a HUGE problem with some moron (with questionable motivations and shady backing) popping off three decades later with a character assassination that bears NO downside for her. None. She'll write a book, Howie will buy it, and even if she's full of crap, the damage is done - with no opportunity for retribution.

Put her (and her loony witnesses) on a polygraph. Now.

Until then, this is a crock of crap, a witch hunt, and a step backwards for anyone who believes in the rule of law and our Constitution.

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

AZhitman wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 9:21 pm
I like to think of myself as pretty well-versed in all uses of the English language, and "boofed" has never appeared on my radar.

But Howie, since you were around before Webster put quill to parchment, we'll go with your addled and oxygen-deprived definition.

You really should have a hobby... besides tugging your pud to pictures of Justice Ginsberg.
I've been around a long time and know bullshyt when I see it.

Perhaps you do not understand that this is a job interview for a lifetime position on the highest court in the United States.
Is Kavanaugh the best qualified candidate for this job?

I don't think so.

Kavanaugh Was Questioned by Police After Bar Fight in 1985

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/us/p ... e=Homepage

Telcoman

User avatar
Bubba1
Moderator
Posts: 18355
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:42 pm
Car: 2003 Nissan 350z
2008 Acura TSX
2008 Toyota Corolla S
2001 Toyota Avalon XLS

Post

It's a highly politicized job interview performed by highly partisan politicians interested in political gain and nothing else. That's politics and of course it sucks. . It's clearly not an investigation, especially when the committee refuses to interview anyone else besides the 2 principals. He said/she said? uh, DUH! Then an investigation was finally agreed upon but to initially include only 4 witnesses? I know Trump has since announced the FBI can interview more witnesses but they still face a tight deadline. It really is a crock of cr@p as far as investigations go. One side wants to dig deeper, the other side doesn't. If Kavanaugh was a Dem nominee the RNC would have done and has done similar.

Bill Clinton went thru similar stuff with the Ken Starr investigation. It was supposed to be about a sleazy land deal, but it ended up focusing on Clinton lying about getting blowjobs by an intern. Interestingly, Kavanaugh worked on the Starr crew.

Kavanaugh has made some decisions/opinions over the years, that should make one at least pause to question if he might not be an ideal non-partisan SC justice. (those that share his views obviously love him). Sadly, both the judiciary committee and press, seem to have focused itself on his lying about decades old boorish behavior that can no longer be prosecuted instead of his record. But before dismissing that old stuff, there is one important non-patisan point: lying to the judiciary committee and FBI is still considered a crime even if the subject is old. And should be disqualifying for a SC justice regardless of political leanings. And there are increasing numbers of witnesses ready to testify under oath that he was not the innocent beer loving choir boy he claimed to be. There also appears to be numerous lies about small things, which if taken individually, would not raise many eyebrows, if this was an job interview for a political position. But for a SC court justice appointment, add them together, and it's disturbing. I wonder if Kavanaugh had simply told the truth about his binge drinking youth and said he could not remember the alleged incident instead of flat out denying it and denying he was a jerk when drunk as a teen/young adult, that he would not be in as big a mess as he is now.

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

Bubba1 wrote:
Tue Oct 02, 2018 5:58 am
... I know Trump has since announced the FBI can interview more witnesses but they still face a tight deadline...
If the FBI can sort through 700,000 emails in a single weekend, then a week to conduct an investigation should be ample time.

Image

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

In other Trump news

Trump Engaged in Suspect Tax Schemes
as He Reaped Riches From His Father

https://www.nytimes.com/

" By age 3, Mr. Trump was earning $200,000 a year in today’s dollars from his father’s empire. He was a millionaire by age 8. By the time he was 17, his father had given him part ownership of a 52-unit apartment building. Soon after Mr. Trump graduated from college, he was receiving the equivalent of $1 million a year from his father. The money increased with the years, to more than $5 million annually in his 40s and 50s. "

No wonder Trump failed to show his tax returns

Telcoman

User avatar
Bubba1
Moderator
Posts: 18355
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:42 pm
Car: 2003 Nissan 350z
2008 Acura TSX
2008 Toyota Corolla S
2001 Toyota Avalon XLS

Post

Not exactly shocking news for those us from the NYC area in the 70's and 80's.

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

Statement to The Times from Charles J. Harder, a lawyer for President Trump

The New York Times’ allegations of fraud and tax evasion are 100% false, and highly defamatory. There was no fraud or tax evasion by anyone. The facts upon which the Times bases its false allegations are extremely inaccurate. All estate matters were handled by licensed attorneys, licensed CPAs and licensed real estate appraisers who followed all laws and rules strictly. All matters were filed with the IRS and New York taxing authorities. The returns and tax positions that the Times now attacks were examined in real time by the relevant taxing authorities. The taxing authorities requested a few minor adjustments, which were made, and then fully approved all of the tax filings. These matters have now been closed for more than a decade.

President Trump had virtually no involvement whatsoever with these matters. The affairs were handled by other Trump family members who were not experts themselves and therefore relied entirely upon the aforementioned licensed professionals to ensure full compliance with the law. Should the Times state or imply that President Trump participated in fraud, tax evasion, or any other crime, it will be exposing itself to substantial liability and damages for defamation.

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 71061
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 S13, 92 SE-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

Speaking of mental illness... Grandma Howie (aka Mother Jones) switches from sexual assault allegations to tax questions faster than his Metamucil dissolves in warm water. :)

BTW, no one here is arguing that BK is the best candidate for the job. I know that's hard for you to comprehend, since you see only red and blue, but some of us don't play in either of those sandboxes full of mouthbreathers.

The only reason you have such a hardon for this case is political. Period. Otherwise, you'd see the terrible double standard that the Left has adopted: Any woman who alleges abuse is to be IMMEDIATELY believed, without question. Unless she's Paula Jones or Monica Lewinsky. Then she's a whore.

p.s. You wouldn't know bullshyt if you had your head up a steer's arse. You're an insipid political fanboi.

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 71061
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 S13, 92 SE-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

So, if there was fraud, why isn't the IRS handling it? Why didn't your boyfriend Brobama's administration handle it?

I'll tell you why: Because no laws were broken. Some of us are smart enough to take full advantage of the tax laws, because we know how to read and understand them. You probably go bend over a desk at H&R Block. :)

User avatar
RCA
Posts: 8226
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:09 am

Post

AZhitman wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 9:28 pm
RCA wrote:
Tue Sep 25, 2018 8:37 pm
The FBI is pretty good at what they do, I don't think they investigate unreported crimes in high school and college years.
We'll have to agree to disagree on the first part.

And, if your second statement is (yep) accurate, let's consider that for a moment. Why is that?

I don't have a dog in this fight, because all I care about is facts. But as a man, I've got a HUGE problem with some moron (with questionable motivations and shady backing) popping off three decades later with a character assassination that bears NO downside for her. None. She'll write a book, Howie will buy it, and even if she's full of crap, the damage is done - with no opportunity for retribution.

Put her (and her loony witnesses) on a polygraph. Now.

Until then, this is a crock of crap, a witch hunt, and a step backwards for anyone who believes in the rule of law and our Constitution.
From what I read the FBI background checks go back 10 years so they might miss HS and Uni.
Could be wrong though, you might have better insite than I.

You don't have a dog in this fight...
- some moron
- character assassination
- NO downside for her
- Put her (and her loony witnesses) on a polygraph. Now.

Seems pretty neutral to me :gotme
  • a) The real issue at hand is that Republican's played the game of "we don't need to care unless we don't have votes". This is why so much public pressure exists. If they cared about the majority of American's opinions instead of just their minority base and Super-PACs it would have been a no brainier to look into the claims. They won't do the decent thing because they didn't think they needed to. So more and more push back was needed for the right thing to be done and this is why it looks like a "character assassination". What if instead of scheduling a Thomas-Anitta Hill style he-said she-said hearing with a vote the next day Republicans took the claims seriously and did the right thing immediately. People would have more trust in Republican's control of the SCOTUS confirmation process and their would be less need for public criticism of Kavanaugh.
    Why would Kavanaugh not have asked for a real investigation to clear up this mess immediately and not some non-sense partisan he-said she-said hearing?
  • b) There is obviously down side for her, maybe one can argue less for her but I hope you were being hyperbolic. He currently sits as the 2nd highest judge in the country he won't be wondering where is next meal will come from. As for his reputation, look above at bullet a) for my take.
  • c) Wouldn't someone with "no dog in this fight" want all involved to take a polygraph?
    I would like Kavanaugh to take a poly about those words in his year book and his drinking because regardless of the claimed assault he definitely lied about those other two.
    Didn't Dr. Ford already do a polygraph? Also Kavanaugh's key witness has a memory and drinking problem why is Ford lying and Kavanaugh telling the truth?
    IDK it seems like you might have a dog in the fight.
AZhitman wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 9:28 pm
Until then, this is a crock of crap, a witch hunt, and a step backwards for anyone who believes in the rule of law and our Constitution.
Also this isn't about the rule of law, even if most evidence points to Kavanaugh committing sexual assault he won't be arrested for it.

It was originally about a simple question and now it's three:
Should someone be allowed on the SCOTUS if they...
  • raped or attempted rape
  • lied to cover up those allegations
  • have levels of partisanship equal to politicians
If raping someone and being arrested for it keeps you from being a judge in the first place, why would it be OK to not get caught in become a SCOTUS member?

There is no doubt he lied. No honest person is that squeaky clean. Dr. Ford was willing to put holes in her testimony with "I don't remembers" but Kavanaugh didn't even allow for an ounce of doubt which comes off as dishonest or at best misleading. Also he never drank so much he didn't remember things but in the year book "George Town vs. Louisville - Who Won That Game Anyway?" and the same about a Orioles-Red Sox game. Also who calls a drinking game after a threesome? I can't wait until until people hear about the unfortunately named card game his buds played called forced penetration. All just awful coincidences I tell you! :rolleyes:

Kavanaugh's partisanship is off the charts, blaming the need for an investigation on Soros and Clinton is next level alt-right conspiracy non-sense. I'm surprised he didn't call anyone a snowflake. Turns out Kavanaugh isn't a neutral arbiter of the law but instead of Republican insider through and through.

Super disappointed in his lack of candor and so are others...

More Than 500 Law Professors Condemn Kavanaugh For ‘Lack Of Judicial Temperament’
  • "As you know, under two statutes governing bias and recusal, judges must step aside if they are at risk of being perceived as or of being unfair. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 144, 455. As this Congress has put it, a judge or j
    ustice “shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” 28 USC § 455.
    These statutes are part of a myriad of legal commitments to the impartiality of the judiciary, which is the cornerstone of the courts."

    https://www.scribd.com/document/3899861 ... from_embed
Judge Bret Kavanaugh doesn't even agree with Bret Kavanaugh


AZhitman wrote:
Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:27 pm
Otherwise, you'd see the terrible double standard that the Left has adopted: Any woman who alleges abuse is to be IMMEDIATELY believed, without question. Unless she's Paula Jones or Monica Lewinsky. Then she's a whore.
Maybe in your experience talking with people that is the case but in my circle no one thinks that's true. It may be you using hyperbole again but it's more nuanced than just black and white 0 to 100. What she brings to the table is more substantial than Kavanaugh's calendar and stern promises that he didn't do it. So what I want is a genuine investigation, this is what the whole freaking thing was about. Not because a double standard but because there was enough smoke to check whether the house was on fire.
AZhitman wrote:
Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:27 pm
BTW, no one here is arguing that BK is the best candidate for the job.
This is what makes the whole thing more sinister.

Why Kavanaugh? There are more conservative judges without sketchy pasts, shoot there is always Merrick Garland, a moderate judge that in 2016 Republican Senator Orrin Hatch once said:
  • "The President told me several times he’s going to name a moderate [to fill the court vacancy], but I don’t believe him, [Obama] could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man, but he probably won’t do that because this appointment is about the election. So I’m pretty sure he’ll name someone the [liberal Democratic base] wants."
But no, it must be Kavanaugh. Maybe it's because Kavanaugh wrote about how sitting Presidents should be above the law. Yikes. I feel like no matter what team you root for, having an untouchable President with the hyper partisanship currently in congress is like 3rd world developing nation military coup scary. I don't recognize my country anymore. All those ideals they taught you about in school don't exist anymore, or maybe it never did and we were lied to. This experiment is a house of cards and every year the facade chips away more and more.
Rogue One wrote:
Tue Oct 02, 2018 3:19 pm
If the FBI can sort through 700,000 emails in a single weekend, then a week to conduct an investigation should be ample time.

https://i.imgur.com/ilkXPzc.jpg
Using a computer to automate scanning through emails is different than finding people and interviewing them.

How do you find NYT and WaPo to be untrustworthy and yet hang your hat on a blog called regularguy.com? I tried looking and couldn't find any sources that claim what Dr. Ford is being treated for. Could you help me out? I could just have bad google-foo.

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

Witness Told FBI That Ford's 'Allies' Pressured Her To Change Story, Report Says

Leland Keyser told investigators that Ford's friend, former FBI agent Monica McLean, had urged her to alter the original statement that she gave about not remembering any such party and not knowing Kavanaugh, The Wall Street Journal reported.
Sen. Grassley laying into Ford's attorneys and calling out their obvious games and BS.
Image
Image

Normally I like playing Devil's Advocate, but if you need to hear from someone with "a dog in this fight", that would be me. Just like the judge, I was falsely accused of a crime, moreover I was arrested, handcuffed, charged and spent 4 hours in a holding cell while they tried to determine what to do with me. So you should understand why I feel compelled to speak my mind on this issue.

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

The truth will out. Pelosi explains the 'Wrap-Up Smear' to destroy someone. Is she talking about what the Democrats are doing to Trump concerning Russia? And what they did to Justice Kavanaugh?


User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post


User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

Image

Telcoman

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 71061
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 S13, 92 SE-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

^ More juvenile idiocy from our very own diapered dingbat. Howie, this section of the site would flounder without your ignorant and incessant foolishness, and for that I thank you. :)

I was wondering if I could ask you a question. See, we've heard for so long, by butthurt sore losers, that 45 is a real racist-type guy. I guess I'm having a hard time understanding, then, why 22 percent of all Foreign Service Officer hires were African-American in 2017, an increase of 9.6 percent from the previous fiscal year (which ended on Sept. 30, 2016, the last full year of Brobama’s tenure).

Oh, but wait, there's more. See, 11.4 percent of FSO hires were Hispanic, an increase of 8.8 percent from the previous year, and female hires also increased to 47.7 percent up from 43.9 percent.

Can you help me understand why your fantasy date, BHO, couldn't be bothered to consider diversity, but your current President can?

It's OK if you don't know. You can go back to posting useless cartoons, made by losers who eat their crayons when they're done, or you can try to engage in useful, productive discussion. I suspect you'll do as you always do and go back to screaming at the sky or throwing around allegations you can't support.

Your beloved party is screwed in 2020. I was right before, I'm right now, and I'll be right in the future. :)

Sweet dreams, Slowpoke.

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

FEC Records Indicate Hillary Campaign Illegally Laundered $84 Million
Over a 13-month period, FEC records show some 30 separate occasions when the HVF transferred contributions totaling more than $10 million to the DNC without any corresponding record of the receipt or disbursement from the state parties, thus illegally leap-frogging the state Democratic parties.

According to Politico, “[w]hile state party officials were made aware that Clinton’s campaign would control the movement of the funds between participating committees, one operative who has relationships with multiple state parties said that some of their officials have complained that they weren’t notified of the transfers into and out of their accounts until after the fact.”

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 71061
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 S13, 92 SE-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

RCA wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:32 pm
Maybe in your experience talking with people that is the case but in my circle no one thinks that's true. It may be you using hyperbole again but it's more nuanced than just black and white 0 to 100. What she brings to the table is more substantial than Kavanaugh's calendar and stern promises that he didn't do it. So what I want is a genuine investigation, this is what the whole freaking thing was about. Not because a double standard but because there was enough smoke to check whether the house was on fire.
Are we at all concerned about Mr. Booker's behavior?

After all, what his [gay liberal] accuser brings to the table is more substantial than Booker's stern [lol] promises that he didn't do it.

Or do we only conduct witch hunts when they're politically expedient?

Let's agree that a genuine investigation is warranted. Let's also agree that if an accuser is found to have been dishonest, criminal sanctions shall apply. That keeps political pawns from crawling out of the woodwork and 'falling on their sword' [apologies to Mr. Booker] for 10 minutes of fame or a book deal.

I think we can also agree that BK's nomination could easily have been defeated legitimately. His decisionmaking record gave me plenty of pause.
But, since the left wants to play fast and loose with schoolyard bullying and take the easy way out, they're gonna reap what they sow.

Investigate Booker, and demand that he step down during said investigation. Seems only fair.

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

Another registered republican scumbag

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/who-i ... li=BBnb7Kz

"Sayoc, a 56-year-old registered Republican, lives in Aventura, Fla., near the facility from where many of the packages were mailed, authorities said. In a criminal complaint, authorities said they lifted a fingerprint that matched Sayoc from the device sent to Maxine Waters and matched a DNA sample to Sayoc from two of the devices."

"Next to the pro-Trump stickers plastered all over the white van authorities believe belongs to Cesar Sayoc are the names and photos of dozens of prominent Democrats and media figures — former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, former first lady Michelle Obama, former attorneys general Eric Holder and Loretta E. Lynch and filmmaker Michael Moore. There is also a sticker declaring: “CNN Sucks.”

Perhaps the time is near to notify the FBI of every vehicle with a Trump sticker?

Image

Telcoman


Return to “Politics Etc.”