Kamala Harris undresses judge Kavanaugh

[Trill Clinton]

https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1037518507423002629?s=19

[hater]

:lmao thinking hes not getting confirmed :lmao

Its a done deal. Move on

[boutons_deux]

https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1037518507423002629?s=19

Apparently KH knows the answer that K refuses to give.

I think she's looking for a K no, when she has evidence that K did discuss Mueller with that firm. K knows KH is trying to get him to perjure himself.

[InRareForm]

hahaha wow

[Spurs Homer]

This is how liars respond. A clean and truthful person would have only had two quick responses:

1) No- I did not.

2) Yes, I spoke to Attorney John Doe.

Period.

[Spurs Homer]

Ask a suspect:
Did you ever rape anyone that works for the Kasowitz law firm?
1) Absolutely not -I have never committed that crime!
2) Kavanaugh: "Well, I'd like a list of all the female employees who work there!"
lol

[Winehole23]

very weaselly

[boutons_deux]

very weaselly

He's lying about "forgetting".

Somebody at that firm told KH that K talked to them about Mueller/Russia, maybe even documented it, or recorded it.

[Reck]

:lmao thinking hes not getting confirmed :lmao

Its a done deal. Move on

Dude done got caught in a lie...under oath. :lmao

This dude yesterday: I did not recieved any stolen emails from a republican operative, no

This dude today: Gets shown proof of said email live on TV. *DRIES GULPS*

:lmao

[boutons_deux]

Dems finding some spine and spite, but it looks K is a fish in a barrel.

Of course, Repug Senators EXPECT their nominees to lie (eg Roberts) under oath to the Senate, so K may still be confirmed.

And K is repeating the same "balls and strikes" LIEs that Roberts told.

[DarrinS]

This is how liars respond. A clean and truthful person would have only had two quick responses:

1) No- I did not.

2) Yes, I spoke to Attorney John Doe.

Period.

Then why not just ask if he spoke to John Doe?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ID6EDy8YaQ4

[Winehole23]

to make him look like a liar. it worked.

[Spurs Homer]

Who is Bill Burck? (the one controlling the Kavanaugh documents, of which the Dems only get 7% out of 100%)

Here is en excerpt from an article;

Burck’s name may sound familiar because he’s a deeply entrenched player in Republican legal circles. Not only is he reportedly a longtime friend of Kavanaugh’s, he’s also more recently represented at least three current or former Trump White House officials — Don McGahn, Reince Priebus, and Steve Bannon — regarding special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation. He’s currently a co-managing partner at the law firm Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan.
Burck’s representation of McGahn has particularly raised eyebrows, since McGahn is the main Trump White House official in charge of getting Kavanaugh confirmed. It’s also prompted questions given the potential role that Kavanaugh himself could have in ruling on elements of the Mueller investigation, if he advances to the high court.
What’s more, Burck and Kavanaugh were once colleagues in the Bush White House. He was a former special counsel and deputy counsel to President George W. Bush, while Kavanaugh served as White House counsel and staff secretary for the same administration. Certain Democrats argue that his ties across all these venues make him “triply conflicted,” per the Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/whitehouse/gop-insider-caught-in-crossfire-on-kavanaugh-russia-probe/2018/09/02/0c12d3f4-aead-11e8-8b53-50116768e499_story.html?utm_term=.8180f7eb18a9).

[Spurs Homer]

Then why not just ask if he spoke to John Doe?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ID6EDy8YaQ4


That is the Republicans job - to throw him underhanded softballs.

Republicans: Tell us about that time you rescued that blonde Labrador puppy and nursed it to health over 27 hours when you were 6 years old and still made it to church on time to perform your altar boy duties?

[MultiTroll]

Lying.

Politicians bunch of immoral losers.

[djohn2oo8]

1037727906242482178

Booker called their bluff and Grassley folded

[djohn2oo8]

1037728897704620035

[boutons_deux]

Two Dem knitters giving the Repug racist white boys fits! :lol

"I Am Spartacus" (and all the slaves were crucified) Expelling Dem Senators is one way K will get confirmed.

[Spurs Homer]

1037727906242482178

Booker called their bluff and Grassley folded


Cornyn attacking Booker saying he wants Booker removed from Senate. Booker: "Bring it!"
Grassley deploying the -whataboutism - tactic every time his hearing is called a sham/shitshow!

[djohn2oo8]

1037728462943997953

[djohn2oo8]

1037731802033672193

[in2deep]

Hearing will probably will never be the same. Gone are the days when anyone would get easily confirmd. Well unless its a bioartisan pick like Bloddy Mary and the CIA

[djohn2oo8]

1037732512053821440

[spurraider21]

dont think kamala came off that great in the OP video imo

he's probably spoken about the investigation with a bunch of people, and he may or may not know what law firm each and every one of those people works for.

what if somebody asked you that question, you said no, and it turns out that i work there... basically the scenario that he's trying to avoid. unless it turns out he spoke with a partner of the firm or somethin... then yeah he's been completely evasive

[Winehole23]

Hearing will probably will never be the same. Gone are the days when anyone would get easily confirmd. Well unless its a bioartisan pick like Bloddy Mary and the CIAIt always was political. The norm where we pretended it wasn't is gone.

The political stakes couldn't be much higher -- the judiciary is a coequal branch of government. This reason above all is why the GOP will continue to support a jack wagon like Trump.

[in2deep]

:lmao Corey Booker claims hes spartacus

releases clasified emails but they are basically a nothing burger

[Spurs Homer]

dont think kamala came off that great in the OP video imo

he's probably spoken about the investigation with a bunch of people, and he may or may not know what law firm each and every one of those people works for.

what if somebody asked you that question, you said no, and it turns out that i work there... basically the scenario that he's trying to avoid. unless it turns out he spoke with a partner of the firm or somethin... then yeah he's been completely evasive

I’d almost agree -except for one thing. That law firm was connected to Trump wasn’t it? Am i mistaken that kasowitz was the same kasowitz representing Trump?

[boutons_deux]

dont think kamala came off that great in the OP video imo

he's probably spoken about the investigation with a bunch of people, and he may or may not know what law firm each and every one of those people works for.

what if somebody asked you that question, you said no, and it turns out that i work there... basically the scenario that he's trying to avoid. unless it turns out he spoke with a partner of the firm or somethin... then yeah he's been completely evasive

KH could have done better, but K did much worse.

[Spurs Homer]

Yup-same kasowitz. That is a yuuge conflict!

[boutons_deux]

Kavanaugh in leaked email: Roe can be overturned (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/6/1793706/-Kavanaugh-in-leaked-email-Roe-can-be-overturned)

The New York Times has some documents (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/06/us/politics/kavanaugh-leaked-documents.html) from Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's time as George W. Bush's staff secretary, including an email on whether abortion rights is really settled law.

That email, the Times says, is among the "committee confidential" records that Chairman Chuck Grassley has refused to allow be released publicly and prevented Senate Democrats from raising in the hearings.

It "was among several an unknown person provided to The New York Times late Wednesday."

In the March 2003 email, Kavanaugh is considering drafting an opinion piece to run under the names of anti-abortion women in support of one of Bush's appeals court nominees, which is just a perfect storm of sexism.

There was a line he was debate: "it is widely accepted by legal scholars across the board that Roe v. Wade and its progeny are the settled law of the land."

"I am not sure that all legal scholars refer to Roe as the settled law of the land at the Supreme Court level," Kavanaugh wrote in the email,

"since Court can always overrule its precedent, and three current Justices on the Court would do so."

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/6/1793706/-Kavanaugh-in-leaked-email-Roe-can-be-overturned?detail=emaildkbn

K fully intends to impose his Catholic Sharia on non-Catholics, by overturning Roe, and clearly Christian Taliban warriors have lots of abortion cases ready to put to SCOTUS ASAP

[DarrinS]

I’d almost agree -except for one thing. That law firm was connected to Trump wasn’t it? Am i mistaken that kasowitz was the same kasowitz representing Trump?


Yup-same kasowitz. That is a yuuge conflict!


You cracked the case. Great detective work.

Was clearly mentioned by Harris in the OP. :lol

[boutons_deux]

Senator Mazie Hirono
(https://twitter.com/maziehirono)
✔@maziehirono
(https://twitter.com/maziehirono)
(https://twitter.com/maziehirono)Yesterday, I referred to a "Committee confidential" document

where Judge Kavanaugh questioned the validity of programs

that benefit Native Hawaiian programs, and by extension, Alaska Natives.

If you're coming after @SenBooker (https://twitter.com/SenBooker) for releasing these documents, count me in.

9:34 AM - Sep 6, 2018 (https://twitter.com/maziehirono/status/1037710716952870913)


Goddamn, the Repugs weren't expecting any Dem spine.

[Spurs Homer]

You cracked the case. Great detective work.

Was clearly mentioned by Harris in the OP. :lol

still a conflict

[SnakeBoy]

:lmao Corey Booker claims hes spartacus

releases clasified emails but they are basically a nothing burger

He's just trying to one up Kamala. I can't wait for the Democratic POTUS primary to get into full swing. It's going to be a fun shit show to watch. Should be more entertaining than 2016.

[hater]

:lmao undercover brotha risks senate banishment for a bunch of nothingburger emails :lmao :lol

Poor bastards, they are reaaaly desperate for a W :lmao

[hater]

If Demoretards fail to stop Kavanaugh arter all this shitshow :lmao

It be hilarious to watch

[Winehole23]

the votes aren't there to stop Kavanaugh.

[Reck]

:lmao Corey Booker claims hes spartacus

releases clasified emails but they are basically a nothing burger

Yeah they're only emails that were stolen that he claimed he hadn't recieved.

[hater]

:lmao :lmao :lmao

https://twitter.com/gpollowitz/status/1037723416768471040?s=21

[boutons_deux]

Repugs nominating The Best People

https://twitter.com/adamcancryn/status/1037706204636753920

[DarrinS]

1037745732965597186

Poor t-bone

[spurraider21]

cory booker grandstanding is nothing new. he's an embarrassment imho

[boutons_deux]

https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1037723994995269632

[hater]

:lmao

https://twitter.com/mikebreslin815/status/1037769478644408321?s=21

[hater]

https://twitter.com/chinewsbench/status/1037777516793155584?s=21

[CosmicCowboy]

Kavanaugh in leaked email: Roe can be overturned (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/6/1793706/-Kavanaugh-in-leaked-email-Roe-can-be-overturned)

The New York Times has some documents (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/06/us/politics/kavanaugh-leaked-documents.html) from Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's time as George W. Bush's staff secretary, including an email on whether abortion rights is really settled law.

That email, the Times says, is among the "committee confidential" records that Chairman Chuck Grassley has refused to allow be released publicly and prevented Senate Democrats from raising in the hearings.

It "was among several an unknown person provided to The New York Times late Wednesday."

In the March 2003 email, Kavanaugh is considering drafting an opinion piece to run under the names of anti-abortion women in support of one of Bush's appeals court nominees, which is just a perfect storm of sexism.

There was a line he was debate: "it is widely accepted by legal scholars across the board that Roe v. Wade and its progeny are the settled law of the land."

"I am not sure that all legal scholars refer to Roe as the settled law of the land at the Supreme Court level," Kavanaugh wrote in the email,

"since Court can always overrule its precedent, and three current Justices on the Court would do so."

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/6/1793706/-Kavanaugh-in-leaked-email-Roe-can-be-overturned?detail=emaildkbn

K fully intends to impose his Catholic Sharia on non-Catholics, by overturning Roe, and clearly Christian Taliban warriors have lots of abortion cases ready to put to SCOTUS ASAP




Your vagina is safe, Boo.

[koriwhat]

https://twitter.com/chinewsbench/status/1037777516793155584?s=21

that's the type of "dude" the left wants us all to become; a weak minded, emasculated, faux sjw loser like booker.

[RandomGuy]

Then why not just ask if he spoke to John Doe?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ID6EDy8YaQ4

Why would one of the president's lawyers talk to a potential supreme court nominee about a federal investigation of the president?

smh

No morals in your politics... at all. Anything shady is OK, as long as it benefits Republicans.

[koriwhat]

Why would one of the president's lawyers talk to a potential supreme court nominee about a federal investigation of the president?

smh

No morals in your politics... at all. Anything shady is OK, as long as it benefits Republicans.

tell us again how bernie got cucked by hrc. no morals in your politics; right?

[Nathan89]

dont think kamala came off that great in the OP video imo

he's probably spoken about the investigation with a bunch of people, and he may or may not know what law firm each and every one of those people works for.

what if somebody asked you that question, you said no, and it turns out that i work there... basically the scenario that he's trying to avoid. unless it turns out he spoke with a partner of the firm or somethin... then yeah he's been completely evasive

Really the only relevant take on the situation. He'd be an idiot to answer definitively.

[Nathan89]

:lmao

https://twitter.com/mikebreslin815/status/1037769478644408321?s=21

Optics. He wanted to look like a hero in front of those that think the "okay" sign is for white supremacy.

[leemajors]

Awesome, this dipshit thinks birth control is abortion inducing.

[Nathan89]

1037763799481294849

[DarrinS]

Lol

1037837526214565888

[boutons_deux]

The Best Losest Two-Bit Political Hack People

Kavanaugh didn't just peddle Vince Foster conspiracy theories under Starr—it was his idea to do it (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/6/1793767/-Kavanaugh-didn-t-just-peddle-Vince-Foster-conspiracy-theories-under-Starr-it-was-his-idea-to-do-it)

his biography speaks for itself.

It seems ridiculous to think that a man could catapult himself from a position as a Ken Starr investigator

to the Bush torture-supporting White House

to now being hailed by Republicans as

a supposedly neutral and unbiased legal observer

who would never ever do a partisan thing, but here we are.

Kavanaugh's time as an underling in the blatantly and viciously partisan Ken Starr "investigation" of any and all dirt that could possibly be uncovered or invented about then-president Bill Clinton has been left a bit mysterious, by design.

Kavanaugh was tasked with investigating the very seediest of far-right conspiracy theories,

including the notion that Clinton White House counsel Vince Foster's suicide was in fact an elaborate murder staged by, no sh-t, the sitting president and his wife for some reason.

It was asinine, and deeply offensive to the family, and

it had been investigated and dismissed multiple times before Kavanaugh ever put his own hands on it.

So why did he do it?

That was the gutter of Republicandom, even back then.

The answer, as Sean Wilentz narrates in the New York Times, appears to be that

it was Brett Kavanaugh's idea, and he insisted on it.

He spent $2 million in taxpayer money and nearly three years of "investigation" on it,

and he did so, according to his own files, based on the theories of a collection of conspiracy-minded nutcases with absolutely no credibility on anything (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/opinion/why-was-kavanaugh-obsessed-with-vince-foster.html).

, Brett Kavanaugh acted as partisan hack of the worst, most rotten sort, and

led his team in torturing all involved for the sake of his cheap, odious, and completely fake “investigation.”

What a piece of trash this guy is. And Republicans made him a federal judge for doing these things.

his inquiries callously harassed a grieving family and Mr. Foster’s friends.

He was

rewarded at every step of his career for being a diehard partisan hack—and no matter how odious his acts

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/6/1793767/-Kavanaugh-didn-t-just-peddle-Vince-Foster-conspiracy-theories-under-Starr-it-was-his-idea-to-do-it

Rather than a long a distinguished judicial career to be rewarded with a SCOTUS seat, K is yet another CATHOLIC cheap-assed, smelly-assed political hack being rushed, pushed into SCOTUS robes to continue being a partisan political hack, just like Roberts, etc.

[boutons_deux]

Why Was Kavanaugh Obsessed With Vince Foster?

He needs to explain why he followed right-wing conspiracy theories about the White House aide’s suicide.

I looked into Judge Kavanaugh’s files in the Office of Independent Counsel records, housed in the National Archives.

What I discovered sheds light on how Mr. Kavanaugh made his way in his early career, and

how he flagrantly breached his role as a neutral public servant and

followed the imperatives of a political operative.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/opinion/why-was-kavanaugh-obsessed-with-vince-foster.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/opinion/why-was-kavanaugh-obsessed-with-vince-foster.html)

[AaronY]

If Demoretards fail to stop Kavanaugh arter all this shitshow :lmao

It be hilarious to watch
this is like sub-boutons level

[Trill Clinton]

https://twitter.com/KamalaHarris/status/1037763878367715328?s=19

Foot still on his neck

[DMC]

Ask a suspect:
Did you ever rape anyone that works for the Kasowitz law firm?
1) Absolutely not -I have never committed that crime!
2) Kavanaugh: "Well, I'd like a list of all the female employees who work there!"
lol
You can easily exclude everyone based on the fact you haven't raped anyone. He said he spoke with people about it. How can he exclude or include people based on their employer when he said he doesn't know who all works there? A competent questioner would ask about specific people... Did you speak with John Smith about it. Did you speak with Mark Jones about it. Her questions would have to be rephrased in a real courtroom where objections could be made.

Let me ask a different way - Did you speak with John Jones about the Bob Mueller's investigation?

"No"

This would go on for a long time. But that's how it's done. These people try to set traps and savvy people know how to avoid them. They seem to be asking general questions hoping you fall for "it's a common meaning" angles, but then they revisit with very specific allegations and quote you on your answers. Both sides do it. Not knowing that is probably why you need an alt to comment on it.

[boutons_deux]

Seth has some fun

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Earaz8ZpLHo

[Isitjustme?]

He's just trying to one up Kamala. I can't wait for the Democratic POTUS primary to get into full swing. It's going to be a fun shit show to watch. Should be more entertaining than 2016.

admit it when you saw this thread title you was wishing it was a porno and hoping to see if kavanaugh had as big of a cock as you imagined

[pgardn]

Ask a suspect:
Did you ever rape anyone that works for the Kasowitz law firm?
1) Absolutely not -I have never committed that crime!
2) Kavanaugh: "Well, I'd like a list of all the female employees who work there!"
lol

What?

If you have not raped anyone you never get to 2)
He admitted he has talked about it.

The point is, Kavs has talked to people about the Meuller investigation. Probably to quite a few people, which makes his hesitation ridiculous. Kav’s mistake. A quick definitive yes. Even, “absolutely”. Then, I have no idea what the size of that law firm is or who all belongs to it. So it is difficult as he has been asked about, and has discussed the case just like everyone else in law. Since the Meuller team is pretty tight lipped, it could easily be possible Kavs has been asked what a particular move might mean. No harm done. Ex from Kavs.. “this might mean the prosecution has this, but I don’t know” In other words,it is interesting legally, so I have been asked. But from a legal standpoint, not about “is the investigation unwarranted?”

If KH has a specific person he has talked to from that law firm in mind who has a close association with the president AND some sort of evidence that the conversation involved the investigation being a crock of needless shit... bring it out. KH keeps on that question, Comes back to it, refreshes his memory with some tidbits. Then eventually lowers the boom.

But she does not. She knows Kavs talked to someone who does work for that law firm I’d bet. But that’s it.


Maybe the board can enlighten me.
Has Kavs been asked if he believes the Mueller investigation is unwarranted?

[SnakeBoy]

admit it when you saw this thread title you was wishing it was a porno and hoping to see if kavanaugh had as big of a cock as you imagined

lol You just admitted it

[pgardn]

lol You just admitted it

So how big in his imagination of your imagination?

Dont answer or you will be imagining.

[ducks]

He will get 55 or more votes

[ducks]

Could you imagine the questions if he was replacing the drunk Ruth who sleeps on bench

[Nathan89]

1037888244241719298

[Spurs Homer]

What?

If you have not raped anyone you never get to 2)
He admitted he has talked about it.

The point is, Kavs has talked to people about the Meuller investigation. Probably to quite a few people, which makes his hesitation ridiculous. Kav’s mistake. A quick definitive yes. Even, “absolutely”. Then, I have no idea what the size of that law firm is or who all belongs to it. So it is difficult as he has been asked about, and has discussed the case just like everyone else in law. Since the Meuller team is pretty tight lipped, it could easily be possible Kavs has been asked what a particular move might mean. No harm done. Ex from Kavs.. “this might mean the prosecution has this, but I don’t know” In other words,it is interesting legally, so I have been asked. But from a legal standpoint, not about “is the investigation unwarranted?”

If KH has a specific person he has talked to from that law firm in mind who has a close association with the president AND some sort of evidence that the conversation involved the investigation being a crock of needless shit... bring it out. KH keeps on that question, Comes back to it, refreshes his memory with some tidbits. Then eventually lowers the boom.

But she does not. She knows Kavs talked to someone who does work for that law firm I’d bet. But that’s it.


Maybe the board can enlighten me.
Has Kavs been asked if he believes the Mueller investigation is unwarranted?

This law firm is the same law firm of the Attorney who represents Trump.

Conflict. Period.

If Kavanaugh was speaking to these guys - it is a huge conflict. If he did not feel it was a conflict - then he could have just answered - "yes I did". He - instead - began trying to dance around the question and try to get KH to reveal a name or names (as if he had someone in mind he had in fact spoken to - but did not want to volunteer it. He was hoping KH would bail him out.)

After he went on a break or had some time to ask others in his corner - he returned and suddenly had an answer. (He probably went to his staff and made sure there was no email or other document incriminating him)

This guy is very shady and very dishonest.

[Spurs Homer]

You can easily exclude everyone based on the fact you haven't raped anyone. He said he spoke with people about it. How can he exclude or include people based on their employer when he said he doesn't know who all works there? A competent questioner would ask about specific people... Did you speak with John Smith about it. Did you speak with Mark Jones about it. Her questions would have to be rephrased in a real courtroom where objections could be made.

Let me ask a different way - Did you speak with John Jones about the Bob Mueller's investigation?

"No"

This would go on for a long time. But that's how it's done. These people try to set traps and savvy people know how to avoid them. They seem to be asking general questions hoping you fall for "it's a common meaning" angles, but then they revisit with very specific allegations and quote you on your answers. Both sides do it. Not knowing that is probably why you need an alt to comment on it.

I think KH's questions or style of questioning was influenced by Kavanaugh himself. Since the beginning of the hearing he has been dodgy at best. KH probably decided this line of questioning might reveal something. I think it did. Until she took this tack Kavanaugh had appeared more relaxed, more confident. One reason was the softballs from the (R) side and nothing challenging from the (D) side.
When KH treated him a little bit like a hostile witness on the stand - he immediately lost his cool. His face grew red and he stumbled and instead of confidently beginning his crafty answers - he paused and began to ask her to give him a name or asking her to reveal a little of "what she knows." This is exactly the way a guilty person or a lying witness acts like and she went with it to see what other cracks in his armor would be revealed.

IMO of course.

[DMC]

I think KH's questions or style of questioning was influenced by Kavanaugh himself. Since the beginning of the hearing he has been dodgy at best. KH probably decided this line of questioning might reveal something. I think it did. Until she took this tack Kavanaugh had appeared more relaxed, more confident. One reason was the softballs from the (R) side and nothing challenging from the (D) side.
When KH treated him a little bit like a hostile witness on the stand - he immediately lost his cool. His face grew red and he stumbled and instead of confidently beginning his crafty answers - he paused and began to ask her to give him a name or asking her to reveal a little of "what she knows." This is exactly the way a guilty person or a lying witness acts like and she went with it to see what other cracks in his armor would be revealed.

IMO of course.

Because he's not on trial but she treated him like he was a criminal. The natural response is to clam up, at least if you're not an idiot.

The gist of these hearings these days is a fishing trip for clickbait headlines. Everyone is trying to build their personal brand. He has nothing to lose by simply dancing around her questions, since she didn't appear to have anything specific to cite. She was fishing.

[Spurs Homer]

Because he's not on trial but she treated him like he was a criminal. The natural response is to clam up, at least if you're not an idiot.

If he was picked by Trump to be a human torpedo (as Sen. Whitehouse said) against the Mueller investigation - and it appears that is exactly what is happening - then the way she treated him was appropriate.

[DMC]

If he was picked by Trump to be a human torpedo (as Sen. Whitehouse said) against the Mueller investigation - and it appears that is exactly what is happening - then the way she treated him was appropriate.

Basically calling him a liar isn't appropriate. She was grandstanding. It's a common tactic when cameras are rolling.

[Spurs Homer]

Basically calling him a liar isn't appropriate. She was grandstanding. It's a common tactic when cameras are rolling.


He is a liar. If she was grandstanding - so was every other person there.

[RedStripe]

1037727906242482178

Booker called their bluff and Grassley folded

:lol john mon

[boutons_deux]

When Grassley/Trash decided to hide K's paper record, all decorum was off.

The Dems should beat the shit out LYING political hack K. He won't answer their key questions, so pound him hard.

[boutons_deux]

Kavanaugh Will Kill the Constitution

The legitimacy of the Supreme Court is on the line.

At a fundamental level,

the attempt to jam Brett Kavanaugh onto the Supreme Court

closely resembles the way Republicans passed a tax cut last year.

Once again we see a rushed,

nakedly partisan process,

with G.O.P. leaders withholding much of the information that’s supposed to go into congressional deliberations.

Once again the outcome is all too likely to rest on pure tribalism:

Unless some Republicans develop a very late case of conscience,

they will vote along party lines with the full knowledge that

they’re abdicating their constitutional duty to provide advice and consent.

he’s bobbing and weaving (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-hearing.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage) his way through,

refusing to answer even straightforward questions,

displaying an evasiveness utterly at odds with the probity we used to expect of Supreme Court justices.

we’re talking about the future of the Republic.

For a Kavanaugh confirmation will set us up for multiple constitutional crises.

two seats were effectively stolen.

First

Republicans refused even to give President Barack Obama’s nominee so much as a hearing;

then

they will have filled two positions with nominees chosen by a president who lost the popular vote and eked out an Electoral College win only with aid from a hostile foreign power.

every indication is that if he makes it, he and his fellow justices will abuse their power at every level.

he ... believes that presidents can’t (https://www.npr.org/2018/08/18/639653174/brett-kavanaugh-investigated-a-president-then-voiced-concerns-about-doing-just-t) be subject (https://www.npr.org/2018/08/18/639653174/brett-kavanaugh-investigated-a-president-then-voiced-concerns-about-doing-just-t) to legal investigations.

record as an appellate judge — one that places himfar to the right (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2018/09/05/its-hard-to-find-a-federal-judge-more-conservative-than-brett-kavanaugh/?utm_term=.834df43c645c) on everything from the environment, to labor rights, to discrimination.

His anti-labor views are especially extreme (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/30/opinion/trumps-supreme-betrayal.html), even for a conservative.

he looks like a right-wing apparatchik and quacks like a right-wing apparatchik, he’s almost surely a right-wingapparatchik.

Which brings us to the coming constitutional crises.

The immediate question is how the court will handle Donald Trump’s obstruction of justice, which is likely to reach epic levels very soon.

what will happen if we eventually get a Democratic Congress and president, who try to move forward with a center-left agenda?

There’s every reason to believe that a court including Kavanaugh would strike down everything elected officials tried to do.

Policy substance aside, this would destroy the court’s legitimacy, making its naked partisanship — based, again, on two stolen seats — clear to all.

if Kavanaugh is confirmed, the court will find some excuse to declare the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/06/opinion/kavanaugh-supreme-court-partisan.html

The oligarchy/Repug bloodless rolling coup d'etat continues, with the strategy to make the USA a one-party country, with Repugs as mafiya for the oligarchy ruling a rigged rentier society, as-yet unimaginable inequality and poverty, USA effectively an autocracy, with gerrymandering, voter suppression, ethnic cleansing, and polluting the judiciary from top to bottom with oligarchy's whores.

[CosmicCowboy]

Harris was grandstanding and fishing hoping she could paint him as corrupting the Trump investigation. Instead she just looked foolish. Im pretty sure every lawyer in DC has casually discussed the case at some point. The firm in question has 200+ attorneys and attorneys move from firm to firm there like horny rabbits. He was right to ask who she was referring to specifically which exposed her bluff.

[boutons_deux]

If K talked to Trash's personal atty Kassowitz, then that's a serious conflict.

Based on K's history and being a Repug, ie, geneticall "bad faith", he doesn't give shit about laws, rules, precedent, only about increasing Repug power and screwing everybody else.

[LkrFan]

:lmao undercover brotha risks senate banishment for a bunch of nothingburger emails :lmao :lol

Poor bastards, they are reaaaly desperate for a W :lmao

:rollin :lmao :rollin

[boutons_deux]

Catholic K says birth control, contraception is abortion, like a good little papist.

[DarrinS]

1037858093386719234

[DarrinS]

1037858660595036160

[in2deep]

Lol avenati/booker 2020

dumb and dumber

[dbestpro]

This is how liars respond. A clean and truthful person would have only had two quick responses:

1) No- I did not.

2) Yes, I spoke to Attorney John Doe.

Period.

You don't spend much time in court or testifying before a committee do you?

[pgardn]

This law firm is the same law firm of the Attorney who represents Trump.

Conflict. Period.

If Kavanaugh was speaking to these guys - it is a huge conflict. If he did not feel it was a conflict - then he could have just answered - "yes I did". He - instead - began trying to dance around the question and try to get KH to reveal a name or names (as if he had someone in mind he had in fact spoken to - but did not want to volunteer it. He was hoping KH would bail him out.)

After he went on a break or had some time to ask others in his corner - he returned and suddenly had an answer. (He probably went to his staff and made sure there was no email or other document incriminating him)

This guy is very shady and very dishonest.

Since I did not see the return of his memory I can only say...

Then KH fd up. Why did she not keep at it? Why did she not say ?

“talking to ______ about this subject is a conflict of interest as ______ is in the law firm that represents Trump. And you know that. What was the subject of your conversation with _______.” And keep at it Since details are important. And “don’t tell me about your memory loss of the exact nature of the conversation because as a judge you must know how delicate this is. You must have been very careful with your discussion.” Then go into timing and he knows he is up for consideration for the SC.

If she does not come back with the above, I doubt she has close to anything solid, she is fishing.

Now since I have been enlightened, do you have a site or tube of his response after the break? I would appreciate it.
Not questioning your facts. Anyone? His response after? I have no site and little time unfortunately but am interested.

[pgardn]

Basically calling him a liar isn't appropriate. She was grandstanding. It's a common tactic when cameras are rolling.

Appropriate is no longer a word with this administration and this period of time in our history. Maybe the word makes a comeback when this WH is gone.

[dbestpro]

Because he's not on trial but she treated him like he was a criminal. The natural response is to clam up, at least if you're not an idiot.

The gist of these hearings these days is a fishing trip for clickbait headlines. Everyone is trying to build their personal brand. He has nothing to lose by simply dancing around her questions, since she didn't appear to have anything specific to cite. She was fishing.

Bingo! All the rest of it is just noise. Trying to frame it as if he is being questioned for rape is one of the more off analogies posted here. That says a lot.

[DarrinS]

Since I did not see the return of his memory I can only say...

Then KH fd up. Why did she not keep at it? Why did she not say ?

“talking to ______ about this subject is a conflict of interest as ______ is in the law firm that represents Trump. And you know that. What was the subject of your conversation with _______.” And keep at it Since details are important. And “don’t tell me about your memory loss of the exact nature of the conversation because as a judge you must know how delicate this is. You must have been very careful with your discussion.” Then go into timing and he knows he is up for consideration for the SC.

If she does not come back with the above, I doubt she has close to anything solid, she is fishing.

Now since I have been enlightened, do you have a site or tube of his response after the break? I would appreciate it.
Not questioning your facts. Anyone? His response after? I have no site and little time unfortunately but am interested.


https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=275581&page=2&p=9528794&viewfull=1#post9528794


Or, better yet


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Vtx_1f0-Ro

[pgardn]

He will get 55 or more votes

The Democrats are hoping for a bomb but know he is in basically.
Sorry Ducks, But so far this is a bad look for your team. The blue team has some very good points about this being rushed etc... When hearings for SC justices continue for other appointees you better hope your team is in office. Maybe 2 more spots are created when your team is out and the revengeful take their seats. These swings in protocol can get nasty for the entire country.

There is a balance between upheaval and reform in political systems. Orange guy is doing much more than testing boundaries.

Your orange guy and the elected dupes that follow with zealotry have bred some very intense adversity. That’s not good for the future imo.

[pgardn]

https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=275581&page=2&p=9528794&viewfull=1#post9528794

Thanks.

So There was no return on this line of questioning and CNN dude said basically what I stated.
I saw the first post in this thread and associated vid. They did not return to this again as of this time.

[Isitjustme?]

1037888244241719298

Sup bro?

Hows bernie doing

[pgardn]

https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=275581&page=2&p=9528794&viewfull=1#post9528794


Or, better yet


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Vtx_1f0-Ro

Ok now! Yes better.
Thats what I thought must exist based on the posters reply to my assessment of the first video.
Thanks.
She needs to come back again and continue this in a non question format. Ask a question but then fill it with statements about what she has been given and pronounce this as highly unethical and that he went through a vetting process of loyalty to Trump most likely. She must assume that he can’t recall things accurately. She needs to play dirtier for the blue team imo. I am assuming she has a very reliable source. She can conjecture now. These people know how to stop with real questions and interject their opinion.

[DarrinS]

Ok now! Yes better.
Thats what I thought must exist based on the posters reply to my assessment of the first video.
Thanks.
She needs to come back again and continue this in a non question format. Ask a question but then fill it with statements about what she has been given and pronounce this as highly unethical and that he went through a vetting process of loyalty to Trump most likely. She must assume that he can’t recall things accurately. She needs to play dirtier for the blue team imo. I am assuming she has a very reliable source. She can conjecture now. These people know how to stop with real questions and interject their opinion.


I think if she had something, she would've slammed him right then and there.

[101A]

Kavanaugh in leaked email: Roe can be overturned (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/6/1793706/-Kavanaugh-in-leaked-email-Roe-can-be-overturned)

The New York Times has some documents (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/06/us/politics/kavanaugh-leaked-documents.html) from Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's time as George W. Bush's staff secretary, including an email on whether abortion rights is really settled law.

That email, the Times says, is among the "committee confidential" records that Chairman Chuck Grassley has refused to allow be released publicly and prevented Senate Democrats from raising in the hearings.

It "was among several an unknown person provided to The New York Times late Wednesday."

In the March 2003 email, Kavanaugh is considering drafting an opinion piece to run under the names of anti-abortion women in support of one of Bush's appeals court nominees, which is just a perfect storm of sexism.

There was a line he was debate: "it is widely accepted by legal scholars across the board that Roe v. Wade and its progeny are the settled law of the land."

"I am not sure that all legal scholars refer to Roe as the settled law of the land at the Supreme Court level," Kavanaugh wrote in the email,

"since Court can always overrule its precedent, and three current Justices on the Court would do so."

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/6/1793706/-Kavanaugh-in-leaked-email-Roe-can-be-overturned?detail=emaildkbn

K fully intends to impose his Catholic Sharia on non-Catholics, by overturning Roe, and clearly Christian Taliban warriors have lots of abortion cases ready to put to SCOTUS ASAP




This is news? I know a couple of days late, but isn't the Dems whole point in trying to keep K out that Roe could be overturned? Isn't that just common sense/reality? If 5 justices agree on something - it can be overturned? Don't say "all" when it isn't "all" was his point. You aren't an idiot, B. You realize this. Shill.

[boutons_deux]

You aren't an idiot, B. You realize this. Shill.

Thanks for your recognition. Asshole.

I've said that stopping K will not stop the Federalist Soc, with its complete stable of ideologue extremist, politicized so-called judges, etc, from providing an effectively infinite number of K clones.

Federally protected abortion is gone.

ACA will be killed, with no replacement, aka, intentional manslaughter.

Labor, client, patient, borrower, student, environment, etc protections will all be destroyed to the benefit, profit of the oligarchy

America is fucked and unfuckable. Asshole.

[boutons_deux]

I Wrote Some of the Stolen Memos That Brett Kavanaugh Lied to the Senate About

He should be impeached, not elevated.

After the revelations of his confirmation hearings, the better question is whether he should be impeached from the federal judiciary.
I do not raise that question lightly, but I am certain it must be raised.

Newly released emails show that while he was working to move through President George W. Bush’s judicial nominees in the early 2000s, Kavanaugh received confidential memos, letters, and talking points of Democratic staffers stolen by GOP Senate aide Manuel Miranda.

That includes research and talking points Miranda stole from the Senate server after I had written them for the Senate Judiciary Committee as the chief counsel for nominations for the minority.

Receiving those memos and letters alone is not an impeachable offense.

No, Kavanaugh should be removed because he was repeatedly asked under oath as part of his 2004 and 2006 confirmation hearings for his position on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

about whether he had received such information from Miranda (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/kavanaugh-confirmation-hearings-patrick-leahy-points-to-email-that-suggests-judge-lied-to-senate.html),

and each time he falsely denied it.

in 2004, Sen. Orrin Hatch asked him directly if he received “any documents that appeared to you to have been drafted or prepared by Democratic staff members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.” Kavanaugh responded, unequivocally, “No.”

In 2006, Sen. Ted Kennedy asked him if he had any regrets about how he treated documents he had received from Miranda that he later learned were stolen.

Kavanaugh rejected the premise of the question, restating that he never even saw one of those documents.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/judge-brett-kavanaugh-should-be-impeached-for-lying-during-his-confirmation-hearings.html (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/judge-brett-kavanaugh-should-be-impeached-for-lying-during-his-confirmation-hearings.html)

K is tiny little shit of Repug hack

[CosmicCowboy]

I Wrote Some of the Stolen Memos That Brett Kavanaugh Lied to the Senate About

He should be impeached, not elevated.

After the revelations of his confirmation hearings, the better question is whether he should be impeached from the federal judiciary.
I do not raise that question lightly, but I am certain it must be raised.

Newly released emails show that while he was working to move through President George W. Bush’s judicial nominees in the early 2000s, Kavanaugh received confidential memos, letters, and talking points of Democratic staffers stolen by GOP Senate aide Manuel Miranda.

That includes research and talking points Miranda stole from the Senate server after I had written them for the Senate Judiciary Committee as the chief counsel for nominations for the minority.

Receiving those memos and letters alone is not an impeachable offense.

No, Kavanaugh should be removed because he was repeatedly asked under oath as part of his 2004 and 2006 confirmation hearings for his position on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

about whether he had received such information from Miranda (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/kavanaugh-confirmation-hearings-patrick-leahy-points-to-email-that-suggests-judge-lied-to-senate.html),

and each time he falsely denied it.

in 2004, Sen. Orrin Hatch asked him directly if he received “any documents that appeared to you to have been drafted or prepared by Democratic staff members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.” Kavanaugh responded, unequivocally, “No.”

In 2006, Sen. Ted Kennedy asked him if he had any regrets about how he treated documents he had received from Miranda that he later learned were stolen.

Kavanaugh rejected the premise of the question, restating that he never even saw one of those documents.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/judge-brett-kavanaugh-should-be-impeached-for-lying-during-his-confirmation-hearings.html (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/judge-brett-kavanaugh-should-be-impeached-for-lying-during-his-confirmation-hearings.html)

K is tiny little shit of Repug hack




Cry big tears, Boo. Big tears.

[koriwhat]

I think if she had something, she would've slammed him right then and there.

she has not a damn thing. she keeps alluding to knowing something but she's just playing that same ol' stupid fucking game of trying to get him to spill the beans on something she has no clue about.

watching it yesterday was infuriating. not so much that the dems don't want SpecialK in that SC seat but the fact that that whole shit party acted like toddlers throwing tantrums the whole fucking time. "excuse me chairman... can i be recognized... we didn't get time to read through the doc's(that we weren't going to read anyhow)... etc..."

[lefty]

Cliff notes , ELI5 please

[Spurs Homer]

she has not a damn thing. she keeps alluding to knowing something but she's just playing that same ol' stupid fucking game of trying to get him to spill the beans on something she has no clue about.

watching it yesterday was infuriating. not so much that the dems don't want SpecialK in that SC seat but the fact that that whole shit party acted like toddlers throwing tantrums the whole fucking time. "excuse me chairman... can i be recognized... we didn't get time to read through the doc's(that we weren't going to read anyhow)... etc..."

Do you understand that this nominee will benefit the corporations and the 1% richest - and will screw the other 99%?

If you are in the 1% - congrats - I cannot blame you for supporting him.

[boutons_deux]

It looks like the Dems have screwed K with his perjury years ago denying he saw the stolen Dem info.

[Spurtacular]

to make him look like a liar. it worked.

And who in Washington do you think isn't a liar?

[ducks]

It looks like the Dems have screwed K with his perjury years ago denying he saw the stolen Dem info.
You full of shit
I
Just
Flushed
It
Down
The
Toilet

[boutons_deux]

NYT editorial board obliterates Brett Kavanaugh: ‘Perfect nominee for a president with no clear relation to the truth’
“The Republicans engage in this sort of subterfuge for an obvious reason:

While they hold unified power in Washington,

most of their agenda is hugely unpopular,” the article states.

“So they hide as much of it as possible out of a fear that if more of it came to light,

they will pay at the polls.

Come November, voters can make that fear come true.”

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/09/nyt-editorial-board-obliterates-brett-kavanaugh-perfect-nominee-president-no-clear-relation-truth/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

[Chris]

Murdering babies is big business. People like Kamala Harris are under marching orders to obstruct obstruct obstruct.

[boutons_deux]

https://images.dailykos.com/images/584882/story_image/kavanaughdems915.png?1536043907

[koriwhat]

Do you understand that this nominee will benefit the corporations and the 1% richest - and will screw the other 99%?

If you are in the 1% - congrats - I cannot blame you for supporting him.

you do realize it's been the same since the inception of corporate capitalism. what's new?

yall wanted the same hacks, clintons, in office but now want change in the SC? lmao!

[boutons_deux]

3,000 coat hangers sent to Susan Collins in campaign to get her to vote 'no' on Kavanaugh (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/8/1794331/-3-000-coat-hangers-sent-to-Susan-Collins-in-campaign-to-get-her-to-vote-no-on-Kavanaugh)

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1794331

[Spurs Homer]

3,000 coat hangers sent to Susan Collins in campaign to get her to vote 'no' on Kavanaugh (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/8/1794331/-3-000-coat-hangers-sent-to-Susan-Collins-in-campaign-to-get-her-to-vote-no-on-Kavanaugh)

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1794331



Collins will vote to confirm. I hope her constituents make her pay.

[Winehole23]

And who in Washington do you think isn't a liar?I'm not surprised your cheap nihilism has caused you to to back another liar

[Winehole23]

"truth and falsity are unstable social constructs."

lol postmodernist conservatives

[monosylab1k]

And who in Washington do you think isn't a liar?

Do you think Trump is a liar?

[Bill_Brasky]

Let's not forget that the Republicans stole this nomination from Obama. Fuck them, they don't get to bitch now if the Dems cock block this.

[boutons_deux]

Let's not forget that the Republicans stole this nomination from Obama. Fuck them, they don't get to bitch now if the Dems cock block this.

If K gets blocked, there will be a clone, perhaps with less of a perjury / political hack paper trail, but will vote 100% with the oligarchy anyway.

I really doubt the Dems have the spine and votes to block K. I would not be surprised if he makes it.

[pgardn]

Do you think Trump is a liar?

He is taking the easy way out. Always.

Everyone on this earth, who has the ability to discern what an attempt to deceive is, has lied. Everyone.
There is no difference, we all do it, so he avoids the issue entirely. They all lie, cheat and steal... Everyone is bad.

No need to judge individuals on their integrity, It’s impossible. Spurter cannot Tell a reliable person from a habitual deceiver. So he stays inside refusing to interact with other people successfully. Shut the door.

[FrostKing]

Trump stole the nomination from Obama?

< Serena style meltdown >

[Winehole23]

Trump stole the nomination from Obama?

< Serena style meltdown >I think he meant the 2000 presidential election.

[cool cat]

https://twitter.com/tobellewiththis/status/1038219363264942080

[ducks]

Let's not forget that the Republicans stole this nomination from Obama. Fuck them, they don't get to bitch now if the Dems cock block this.

Kennedy retired republicans did not block former president with Kennedy replacement

They blocked the one that died but it was in election year with president
People spoke and wanted trump to pick replacement

[SnakeBoy]

3,000 coat hangers sent to Susan Collins in campaign to get her to vote 'no' on Kavanaugh (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/8/1794331/-3-000-coat-hangers-sent-to-Susan-Collins-in-campaign-to-get-her-to-vote-no-on-Kavanaugh)

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1794331


I wish they would have let me know they were going to do this. My wife has more than that piled up in her closet.

[koriwhat]

harris is a joke with her fake fucking smile too. she smiles through her own ignorance as she tries to sound smart and witty. fuck that bitch who does nothing for her constituents.

she can't sleep her way into the white house like she did the hill. fucking whore.

[Spurtacular]

I'm not surprised your cheap nihilism has caused you to to back another liar

I never said I backed anyone. I'm not surprised that you've made a worthless argument again.

[Spurtacular]

Do you think Trump is a liar?

Do you think Obama is a liar?

[monosylab1k]

Do you think Obama is a liar?

Yes.

Do you think Trump is a liar?

[Spurtacular]

Yes.

Do you think Trump is a liar?

Not so much.

What has he lied about?

[Pavlov]

Not so much.

What has he lied about?https://media2.giphy.com/media/xT1R9SJjC0x5WXzI9a/giphy.gif

[monosylab1k]

Not so much.

What has he lied about?

:lmao Trump slurper.

[Spurtacular]

:cry

:lmao You can't even name something.
:lmao Perma-triggered.
:lmao Today's slob

[koriwhat]

:lmao You can't even name something.
:lmao Perma-triggered.
:lmao Today's slob

don't worry about that obese loser who's drowning himself in sugar and carbs. fuck shortround.

[monosylab1k]

:lmao You can't even name something.
:lmao Perma-triggered.
:lmao Today's slob

:lmao Trump slurper

[monosylab1k]

don't worry about that obese loser who's drowning himself in sugar and carbs. fuck shortround.

:lmao skinny crackhead.

[Spurtacular]

:cry

[koriwhat]

:lmao skinny crackhead.

... who's never seen crack or has even ever known a crackhead.

yeah bruh, you got me.

bet you've seen mickeyd's, whataburger, high cholesterol, clogged arteries, etc though.

[monosylab1k]

https://static.fjcdn.com/gifs/Dog+bone+lick_846c2a_4266157.gif

[monosylab1k]

... :crywho's never seen crack :cry or has even ever known a crackhead.:cry

:cryyeah bruh, you got me.:cry



Make some more fat jokes :lmao

[koriwhat]

Make some more fat jokes :lmao

it's not joking when it's your reality kim.

[monosylab1k]

:cry it's not joking :cry when it's your reality kim.:cry

Make some more fat jokes :lmao

[Winehole23]

I never said I backed anyone. I'm not surprised that you've made a worthless argument again.oh, you're not rooting for judge Kavanaugh?

[pgardn]

:lmao You can't even name something.
:lmao Perma-triggered.
:lmao Today's slob

Before he was even done with the Republican primaries he said he had no idea who David Duke was. Problem is he had written a whole opinion about him for a magazine which was published. That was the first time I realized he lied even about insignificant stuff.

So you want to continue?

[Fabbs]

Make some more fat jokes :lmao
mono is so fat his blood type is Ragu.

[monosylab1k]

mono is so fat his blood type is Ragu.

2/10, but par for the course for you.

[Isitjustme?]

2/10, but par for the course for you.

He took the rocky road blood type joke and removed the humor part lol

Also he thinks youre italian apparently

[Spurtacular]

Before he was even done with the Republican primaries he said he had no idea who David Duke was. Problem is he had written a whole opinion about him for a magazine which was published. That was the first time I realized he lied even about insignificant stuff.

So you want to continue?

Source it, son. I know you have your own problems with the truth. And none of that matters to me; the media was trying to paint Trump as a white supremacist and he was basically telling them to fuck off.

[Spurtacular]

oh, you're not rooting for judge Kavanaugh?

I can't say I strongly "root" for him. But he is better than the jokes of judges that Obama put in place.

[Winehole23]

a qualified yes is a yes. so long as the liar is on your side, everything's good.

[boutons_deux]

Ex-Senate researcher walks MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow through evidence that Brett Kavanaugh repeatedly lied under oath

MSNBC host Rachel Maddow read through Graves detailed story in Slate (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/judge-brett-kavanaugh-should-be-impeached-for-lying-during-his-confirmation-hearings.html?wpsrc=sh_all_dt_tw_ru), revealing that when Kavanaugh was asked by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) to answer whether he lied under oath, he knowingly lied about it again.

She went so far as to say that one email included the subject line “spying,” which she called a pretty definitive clue.

“Even if Kavanaugh could claim that he didn’t have any hint at the time he received the emails that these documents were of suspect provenance—which I personally find implausible—there is no reasonable way for him to assert honestly that he had no idea what they were after the revelation of the theft,” Graves continued.

“Any reasonable person would have realized they had been stolen, and certainly, someone as smart as Kavanaugh would have too.”
Instead,

he lied, and he’s about to become a Supreme Court Justice.

“And so one of the memos I know personally contains page after page, paragraph after paragraph of my research,

the research I prepared for Sen. Patrick Leahy, research on the most intense fight we were having about the nomination which involved the legal precedents,

the historical precedents for the memos that the Senate Democrats have requested,” Graves continued.

She said that

Miranda then handed everything over to Kavanaugh.

“And so I am convinced by that and some of the other documents provided that

Brett Kavanaugh lied repeatedly under oath to the United States Senate about these matters,”

she said.

“Also for the integrity :lol of the United States Senate itself.” :lol

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/09/ex-senate-research-walks-msnbcs-rachel-maddow-evidence-brett-kavanaugh-repeatedly-lied-oath/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

[Spurs Homer]

Ex-Senate researcher walks MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow through evidence that Brett Kavanaugh repeatedly lied under oath

MSNBC host Rachel Maddow read through Graves detailed story in Slate (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/judge-brett-kavanaugh-should-be-impeached-for-lying-during-his-confirmation-hearings.html?wpsrc=sh_all_dt_tw_ru), revealing that when Kavanaugh was asked by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) to answer whether he lied under oath, he knowingly lied about it again.

She went so far as to say that one email included the subject line “spying,” which she called a pretty definitive clue.

“Even if Kavanaugh could claim that he didn’t have any hint at the time he received the emails that these documents were of suspect provenance—which I personally find implausible—there is no reasonable way for him to assert honestly that he had no idea what they were after the revelation of the theft,” Graves continued.

“Any reasonable person would have realized they had been stolen, and certainly, someone as smart as Kavanaugh would have too.”
Instead,

he lied, and he’s about to become a Supreme Court Justice.

“And so one of the memos I know personally contains page after page, paragraph after paragraph of my research,

the research I prepared for Sen. Patrick Leahy, research on the most intense fight we were having about the nomination which involved the legal precedents,

the historical precedents for the memos that the Senate Democrats have requested,” Graves continued.

She said that

Miranda then handed everything over to Kavanaugh.

“And so I am convinced by that and some of the other documents provided that

Brett Kavanaugh lied repeatedly under oath to the United States Senate about these matters,”

she said.

“Also for the integrity :lol of the United States Senate itself.” :lol

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/09/ex-senate-research-walks-msnbcs-rachel-maddow-evidence-brett-kavanaugh-repeatedly-lied-oath/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29




There is now 4-5 confirmed lies under oath.
You know what this means, right?

Confirmation on schedule for Thursday!

Amerikkka.

[boutons_deux]

https://images.dailykos.com/images/587415/story_image/kavanaughhonesty915.png?1536650951

[boutons_deux]

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a military lawyer, dismisses Mueller convictions: Lying to the FBI is not a ‘big event’

defended President Donald Trump by saying that lying to the FBI is not a “big event.”

the South Carolina senator also said that he was

“disappointed” that the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails had been closed. :lol

“You got to look at the substance of what people pled to,” the military lawyer opined.

“Some people pled to lying to the FBI like [George Papadopoulos] got two weeks in jail.” :lol

“I don’t see that as a big event,” Graham added.

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/09/sen-lindsey-graham-military-lawyer-dismisses-mueller-convictions-lying-fbi-not-big-event/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

false eqivalence

campaign "coffee boy" lying is same a SCOTUS candidate lying multiple times

[boutons_deux]

Kavanaugh Misrepresented His Own Opinions to Senate Judiciary Committee

If a nominee cannot even honestly describe his own opinions in sworn testimony, and

instead misrepresents or distorts them to help win confirmation,

how can he be trusted with a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land?

In at least half a dozen cases,

Kavanaugh misrepresented or distorted his own opinions on the DC Circuit,

either in testimony (https://www.c-span.org/video/?449706-1/supreme-court-nominee-brett-kavanaugh-confirmation-hearing-day-3-part-1) or in written responses to Committee questions

both before (https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Brett%20M.%20Kavanaugh%20SJQ%20(PUBLIC).pdf) and after (https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Kavanaugh%20Responses%20to%20Questions%20for%20the %20Record.pdf) the hearing.

What Americans want most in a Supreme Court justice is someone with an open mind who is honest and can be trusted.

Senators, including (https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2018/09/13/ej-dionne-maine-leads/) those who have not yet decided how to vote on the nomination, have expressed similar views.

But if a nominee cannot even honestly describe his own opinions in sworn testimony,

and instead misrepresents or distorts them to help win confirmation,

how can he be trusted with a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land?

It is clear Brett Kavanaugh cannot.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/09/16/kavanaugh-misrepresented-his-own-opinions-senate-judiciary-committee?cd-origin=rss

[Spurs Homer]

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a military lawyer, dismisses Mueller convictions: Lying to the FBI is not a ‘big event’

defended President Donald Trump by saying that lying to the FBI is not a “big event.”

the South Carolina senator also said that he was

“disappointed” that the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails had been closed. :lol

“You got to look at the substance of what people pled to,” the military lawyer opined.

“Some people pled to lying to the FBI like [George Papadopoulos] got two weeks in jail.” :lol

“I don’t see that as a big event,” Graham added.

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/09/sen-lindsey-graham-military-lawyer-dismisses-mueller-convictions-lying-fbi-not-big-event/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

false eqivalence

campaign "coffee boy" lying is same a SCOTUS candidate lying multiple times







Maybe this is why Graham is suddenly a big Trump cultist;

https://investigaterussia.org/media/2018-09-11/russian-money-behind-grahams-growing-defense-trump