“Nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.”He misrepresented his drinking habits
-1 Corinthians 6:10
Chris we discussed this in Bible study, you shouldn’t support a dishonest drunkard just because he “triggers the libs”.
The results are striking. Seventy-four percent of Republicans believe Judge Kavanaugh while 73 percent of Democrats believe Ford. Meanwhile, Independents are evenly split, with 33 percent backing Ford while 32 percent back Judge Kavanaugh.
In other words, it’s a wash. And, for Democrats, that is an absolute nightmare.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/dems...kavanaugh-hand
Former FBI - Frank Figluzzi - just said that his FBI people have confirmed that the White House has handcuffed the FBI in this sham investigation.
Says the president is telling the country that the FBI has "free reign" -
while simultaneously giving orders that only 4 witnesses can be interviewed and basically conduct a sham job to keep from the truth.
I knew when Trump suddenly said the victim was credible and suddenly saying he felt good about this investigation and that he trusts the FBI to do anything they want.
I knew right then they were lies.
Of course - Repugs ok - with the president blatantly lying to the country and covering up another investigation.
Ma nigatime to pull a hater in here, tbh, called it!
so Homer, are you outraged that Feinstein won't be investigated for leaking Fords letter?
Fords attorneys won't be investigated and disbarred for lying to her about Senate Committee willing to fly out to Palo Alto to interview her? Thus avoiding the attention show.
The agreement was a limited scope
That is what the donkeys wanted
Snowflakes moving goalposts? Color me shocked
Has ANYTHING Ford said been corroborated yet?
Not at all - because all of that is garbage and irrelevant.
1) Feinstein had to keep the victims anonymity - so she said nothing. Someone that Ford spoke to - friends or whoever - also knew about the allegation. Ford testified - that SHE- HERSELF - told the Washington Post about the allegations - because there were already reporters at her house and her job - so she bit the bullet and revealed herself.
2) This is consistent with right wing nut jobs like you - who always disregard the crime and attack the people who reported the crime. If someone broke into your house and murdered your family - you would immediately attack the neighbor that called the police and the police detectives who tried to find the murderer - would also be attacked by you because you would be absolutely outraged that the police didn't cross a - T - or dot an - i - in their police report.
Are you outraged that the GOP planned and ins uted a cover up from the beginning?
Hiding 93% of all of Kavanaugh's public records. Avoiding an FBI investigation. Hiding the accomplice to a crime in a beach hideaway and allowing him to escape with just a signed letter from his attorney and refusing to testify in person.
Disregarding the other two victims and not allowing them to present their case.
The Fraudulent president saying a week ago that the FBI - does not do "that sort of thing" - only to be forced to admit they do. Now he is handcuffing the FBI in conducting a proper investigation.
Why do you support cover ups?
Why is the truth - the ONE THING - that right wing nut jobs like you - avoid?
Yawn.
Feinstein had to keep the victims anon, but then it became okay to reveal 5 days before the job appointment?
Ya no political motivation there.
As to Ford, her innocent bumpkin act goes South when her contacting WaPo gets delved into. "I'm not sure how these GoFundMe things work tee hee."
Lastly strawman, I'm not on either political side.
Let us be clear and blunt;Yawn.
Feinstein had to keep the victims anon, but then it became okay to reveal 5 days before the job appointment?
Ya no political motivation there.
As to Ford, her innocent bumpkin act goes South when her contacting WaPo gets delved into. "I'm not sure how these GoFundMe things work tee hee."
Lastly strawman, I'm not on either political side.
Americans should worry about and hate - crimes & corruption.
If obama or any dem was in ofc and there was a crime - i would never whine about or attack a leaker - i would shine a light on the crime/corruption.
I liked bill clinton- but when he was busted - petty or not - political hit job or not - i said - too bad - he lied - he got caught - too in bad - he deserves it.
(ironic that kavanaugh played a part in this so karma is a innit?)
More bluntness? Ok
I applaud leakers. Leak every crime and expose all corrupt people - party be damned.
Someone else who semenshields for Trump non-stop, but won’t admit to being a Republican.
Virtually all politicians are either scuz or controlled by scuz.
slob with the usual lazy inaccuracies.
Someone else who semenshields for Trump non-stop, but won’t admit to being a Republican.
See my posts on Trump University.
Between donuts.
Bill Clinton is a rapist, if the worst of his accusers is true, which I have come to believe. He deserves to be in jail, and probably would be if he was still an active predator.
Between the lying under oath, the rampant partisanship, and bizarre temperament, his is patently unfit to be on SCOTUS.He didn't "misreprensented" anything. He outright lied about being a drunk under oath.
I can't imagine a less judicial performance than to angrily give voice to some bizarre partisan conspiracy theory in your confirmation hearing.
I’m not wading through all of your alt accounts to find crap about Trump U. Post it yourself. Otherwise, every other post shows your clear semenshielding of Trump/Republicans at every chance.slob with the usual lazy inaccuracies.
See my posts on Trump University.
Between donuts.
bok bok bok bok Ba-Gawk!
'slob rolls over on the couch.
negatively corroborated
Mitc summarized her report for the committee.
"In the legal context, here is my bottom line: A 'he said, she said' case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that," she wrote. "Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard."
https://www-m.cnn.com/2018/09/30/pol...9%26page%3D156
• In 2004, Kavanaugh said he was not involved in the handling of the controversial nomination of federal Judge William Pryor. That was a lie. E-mails later showed that he was involved.
Kavanaugh was asked if he was involved with a scheme to steal Democratic staff e-mails related to judicial confirmations. He lied about it. E-mails showed that he was involved.
• In 2006, Kavanaugh was asked if he was involved in the controversial nomination of federal Judge Charles Pickering. He lied about that too and said he was not.
• In 2006, Kavanaugh was asked about his role in the nomination of William Haynes, the Pentagon general counsel involved in creating the Bush administration’s interrogation policies. He lied about that.
• He said the term “devil’s triangle” in his yearbook entry referred to a drinking game. Google it. It doesn’t.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
