Brett Kavanaugh - Appoint to Supreme Court, yes or no?

[IrishGirl]

Actually, Psi, I think the irony is that if they made it about his court rulings I would be with all of you in saying he was a horrible nomination.

[IrishGirl]

joan1984 is looking for a way to repeal the 19th Amendment to combat this.

#Resist

Athos, like you were looking for a way to circumvent the 5th and 14th Amendment to combat this?

You're really bad at this.

I'll answer your question if you answer the four I directly asked you.

#Resist

1. Clearly you don't know what a rhetorical question is
2. Just because I didn't agree with you, doesn't mean I didn't answer your question.  Believe it or not, not everyone has to agree with you. 

[Athos_131]

Deflecting Shithead,

I never asked you to agree.  I asked for an answer.

#Resist

[psiberzerker]

I think the irony is that if they made it about his court rulings I would be with all of you in saying he was a horrible nomination.

His court rulings would be Politics, his crimes, and deceit go directly to his character, and disrespect for the law he's now responsible for upholding.

So, now you want to make it about his court rulings, now that it's too late?  Name 1.

In fact, you repeatedly conflated the allegations as "Rape," when he wasn't even accused of Rape, you've proven that you don't care about the charges enough to get those right, either.

Nobody cares what it would take for you to agree with us, because you wouldn't get that right either.  That's why we don't care if you disagree with us, you've demonstrated at every turn that you haven't the slightest clue what's going on about anything.  Not even what you yourself said.  Despite all the times I've said "Attempted Rape."

That's the most serious charge I've personally accused him of.  Besides Grand Perjury.

[IrishGirl]

I think the irony is that if they made it about his court rulings I would be with all of you in saying he was a horrible nomination.

His court rulings would be Politics, his crimes, and deceit go directly to his character, and disrespect for the law he's now responsible for upholding.

And that is my issue, especially sine all of you are ignoring the witnesses that the accusers named--that Ford named--refused to corroborate her accusations and you are still calling for guilt for his "crimes."

Which, by the way, you aren't attributing to his ruling on illegal searches...but on accusations that the witnesses all stated under oath had never happened.

And there-in is my issue with all of this. 

Twice now the named witnesses denied the allegations and that means that the ONLY reason you lot are still beating a dead horse is because you guys want an accusation alone to be guilt.  You don't want an investigation, you don't want a fair shake.  You simply want the power to remove by accusation like you're following some warped modern age Abigail Williams...only even then the people she accused had a trial and investigation before they were hung and crushed to death.

[Athos_131]

And that is my issue, especially sine all of you are ignoring the witnesses that the accusers named--that Ford named--refused to corroborate her accusations and you are still calling for guilt for his "crimes."

Which, by the way, you aren't attributing to his ruling on illegal searches...but on accusations that the witnesses all stated under oath had never happened.

And there-in is my issue with all of this.  

Twice now the named witnesses denied the allegations and that means that the ONLY reason you lot are still beating a dead horse is because you guys want an accusation alone to be guilt.  You don't want an investigation, you don't want a fair shake.  You simply want the power to remove by accusation like you're following some warped modern age Abigail Williams...only even then the people she accused had a trial and investigation before they were hung and crushed to death.

Go Fuck Yourself.

#Resist

[Athos_131]

How fucking stupid are you that you do not understand that the legal definition of due process is not applicable here?

#Resist

[psiberzerker]

And that is my issue, especially sine all of you are ignoring the witnesses that the accusers named--that Ford named--refused to corroborate her accusations and you are still calling for guilt for his "crimes."

And the witnesses he called, to corroborate his version of events?  What about his own room mate, and his signed afidavit attesting to his underage drinking?   The crimes I was refering to were multiple counts of Perjury, Lying Under Oath, and refusal to answer direct questions by the SJC, despite being asked multiple times.  (In a court of law, that would be Contempt of Court, and being a judge, he knows that.)

Again, the attempted rapes, and other sexual improprieties are immaterial.  He can't be charged with any of them, much less found guilty.  Any more than he can for the Underage Drinking, which he also lied about, and was also a Federal Crime, at the time.

So, we can ignore the sexually triggering stories, and just focus on the crimes that have direct bearing on this case:  He said that it was Legal to drink between the ages of 18-21, knowing that it wasn't.  He misrepresented The Law in a Judiciary Confirmation Hearing.  Just that, provable legal fact, was enough to deny him the post, and was a Felony.

Now, back to the pending question:  You brought up his rulings in the past, as if they have any legal bearing.  Name 1.  it's a moot point now, anyway.

[jbbooks]

How fucking stupid are you that you do not understand that the legal definition of due process is not applicable here?

#Resist

Yet another who will believe whatever they are told. Thank God you are not in a position (hopefully) who judges whether someone is innocent or guilty. Since when has this #Me Too movement, become #I said so there for you are guilty movement. I assume you believe Swetnick as well..... LMAO 

[Athos_131]

Yet another who will believe whatever they are told. Thank God you are not in a position (hopefully) who judges whether someone is innocent or guilty. Since when has this #Me Too movement, become #I said so there for you are guilty movement. I assume you believe Swetnick as well..... LMAO 

Go Fuck Yourself.

[psiberzerker]

Since when has this #Me Too movement, become #I said so there for you are guilty movement.

It hasn't yet.  This is still the talking point of the #ShutYourWhoreMouth movement.  

Also, it's ThereFore.  Not "So There, for..."



#DoYouEvenHashtag?

[IrishGirl]

How fucking stupid are you that you do not understand that the legal definition of due process is not applicable here?

#Resist

Yet another who will believe whatever they are told. Thank God you are not in a position (hopefully) who judges whether someone is innocent or guilty. Since when has this #Me Too movement, become #I said so there for you are guilty movement. I assume you believe Swetnick as well..... LMAO 

I can agree there.  That is literally the soul reason why I have an issue with the opposition to the appointment. 

If they had gone with his track record, I would 100% agree with them, but instead they argued that accusation=guilt and I can't get behind that no matter who it is being accused. 

[Athos_131]

I oppose rapists and people who lie to Congress.

#Resist

[jbbooks]

Yet another who will believe whatever they are told. Thank God you are not in a position (hopefully) who judges whether someone is innocent or guilty. Since when has this #Me Too movement, become #I said so there for you are guilty movement. I assume you believe Swetnick as well..... LMAO 

Go Fuck Yourself.

Such an intelligent thoughtful reply....LMAO

[Athos_131]

Yet another who will believe whatever they are told. Thank God you are not in a position (hopefully) who judges whether someone is innocent or guilty. Since when has this #Me Too movement, become #I said so there for you are guilty movement. I assume you believe Swetnick as well..... LMAO 

Go Fuck Yourself.

Such an intelligent thoughtful reply....LMAO

You clearly support rapists, so making any sort of argument with a horrible person such as yourself is a waste of my time.

#Resist

[jbbooks]

Yet another who will believe whatever they are told. Thank God you are not in a position (hopefully) who judges whether someone is innocent or guilty. Since when has this #Me Too movement, become #I said so there for you are guilty movement. I assume you believe Swetnick as well..... LMAO 

Go Fuck Yourself.

Such an intelligent thoughtful reply....LMAO

You clearly support rapists, so making any sort of argument with a horrible person such as yourself is a waste of my time.

#Resist

What I support is FACTS AND PROOF. Where was all this anger when Clinton was accused of far worse. Oh that's right THOSE women were lying. !!! As for being a waste of your time. Please continue to blindly believe whatever fits your reasoning maybe one day you will be able to think for yourself and not have someone telling you what you should think or believe. If we truly live in a country where #She said there fore you are guilty until you prove otherwise, such as the case in New York of Nikki Yovino, then what's next ? 

[psiberzerker]

What I support is FACTS AND PROOF. Where was all this anger when Clinton was accused of far worse.

Clinton was not accused of Attempted Rape.  So, this is politically motivated.  The accusations against a former president are not FACTS AND PROOF! of anything in that hearing.  So, support your claim with something more substantial than capslock.

The facts, and proof you presented were more Allegations.  I suppose those count as facts, and proof when it's a Clinton, and not a Kavanaugh, then?

[IrishGirl]

What I support is FACTS AND PROOF. Where was all this anger when Clinton was accused of far worse.

Clinton was not accused of Attempted Rape. 

Actually he was, Juanita Broaddrick among others accused him. 

But, of course, when you really don't know what you're talking about and still comment you are bound to frequently make mistakes.

[Jed_]

I oppose rapists and people who lie to Congress.

#Resist

As far as the later, there was ample evidence in front of our eyes as he spoke.  He’s an unapologetic liar and obvious GOP hack.

As far as the former, things looked and sounded pretty damning, but there was never enough evidence to convict.  OK, a bunch more people could have been interviewed that showed he lied about his drinking or that she is a credible person.  And then what?

What bothers me most about you, is you hijack sexual assault for partisan reasons without any detectable real empathy?

I oppose rapists

And?  Do you have any thoughts about victims, or are all your emotions centered on your partisan targets?

Yes, yes, I know.  I should go fuck myself.

[psiberzerker]

But, of course, when you really don't know what you're talking about and still comment you are bound to frequently make mistakes.

Truer words were never spoken.  <That's me agreeing with you.)  Actually, he was accused of Rape, and Kidnapping, in that case.  Not Attempted Rape.  Your one chance to conflate Attempted Rape to Rape, and you missed it. 

So now, this supporting the Allegation, and caring if he actually did it, or not.  Is it because she worked with the Mentally Handicapt that you can empathise with the (Alleged) victim, because I said it, and you can catch me in an error, or because he wasn't appointed by Donald "Grab them by the Pussy" Trump?  We have him on tape, that was undenyably him, telling a member of the press How to commit Sexual Assault.  And yet, no "Witch Hunt."  He still gained power, because of women like you, who will support him and anything he touches, as if it's covered in Gold.

It's far worse when a liberal does it.  Not a conservative, family man, and member of the Morality party.  If Obama were accused, would you hesitate to lynch him?

It shouldn't matter who the accused is.  The facts, and burden of proof should be just as great for the Elephant as the Donkey.  You're right, I mispoke.  However, you revealed that this is Political.  That you rush to protect men, at all cost, based soley on their political affiliation.

You support sexual assault allegations when they're convenient.  Deny them when they're credible, and the accused refuses to defend himself.  No wonder you were never believed.