Senate committee to hold conformation vote for Kavanaugh Friday at 9:30 am

originally posted by: carewemust

Ford's attorney's have chosen a smaller room too. No space for a circus of screaming nutjobs.

She is a nutjob, her and her client, obviously.

I predict Blasey won't testify under oath if she shows at all.

So basically her words are worthless.....

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Grambler


ABOUT FVCKING TIME. Now let's see if the Republicans have the balls to stick to it. I would have preferred they voted yesterday

That is an interesting premises. Do you think that they do, or don't?

originally posted by: Themaskedbeast
a reply to: Greven

It isn't a presidential election year. Huge difference in the shower ope of politics.

Why does that matter?

Biden's proposal was to not cloud the nomination process with the politics of the last few months before an election.

There was never a proposal to forever block the nominee of a President.

Is it not lost on anyone else that the illiberal authoritarian left's entire playbook was exactly the same as the Russian's in the meddling of the 2016 election? Their entire aim is to create mass-scale cognitive dissonance so they can wear everyone down to the point where the rational mind will drop out of the process and the irrational would become their firebrand.

This is why identity politics must die. It quite literally works the same way on our body politic as a virus would our immune system. It has become a greater threat to our existence than even money in politics. And that is really saying something.

These people see the world exactly the same way Charles Manson did.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Greven


OK and that is exactly what the republicans did. Hillary lost and after the election they are having hearings on the WINNERS nominee. To quote your messiah obama "elections have consequences" and to quote him again " if you don't like it quit whining and win elections"

Stop with the lies.

Obama is no messiah. The 'winner' didn't take office until late January.

The intention of Biden's proposal was to hold hearings on any potential SCOTUS candidate after the election, not after the winner assumes office.

Spin it how you want! But Mark Levin has already shown the history and intentions of the Progressive left.

Watch it if you dare, which you won't, but he shows the documents of how the Democrats were and are hell bent to obstruct our judicial process.


Biden is dirty as hell and you know it!


]]]]]]]]]]]]

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Greven


So by Biden's and your own words you are ok with pushing it past an election? That is what happened. Do you really expect and opposing party to nominate his predecessors nominee?

I'm saying don't be hypocritical, and don't lie.

Let me spell this out very clearly. Biden's proposal was to delay any SCOTUS hearing until after the election.

There two months between the election and when the Congress, the one with winners from said election, assume office.

There are almost three months between the election and when next President assumes office.

Either one is plenty of time to hold hearings - that was the intention Biden proposed.

Guess what?
The Senate didn't adopt Biden's proposal, which was purely about nominations during election cycles.
McConnell claimed it as justification for his actions against Merrick Garland.
McConnell will obviously not do that here.

Don't dare pretend that the GOP has any ounce of moral fiber.

They don't give a crap about you and they don't give a crap about the Constitution, they only care about money and power.

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Greven


OK and that is exactly what the republicans did. Hillary lost and after the election they are having hearings on the WINNERS nominee. To quote your messiah obama "elections have consequences" and to quote him again " if you don't like it quit whining and win elections"

Stop with the lies.

Obama is no messiah. The 'winner' didn't take office until late January.

The intention of Biden's proposal was to hold hearings on any potential SCOTUS candidate after the election, not after the winner assumes office.

Spin it how you want! But Mark Levin has already shown the history and intentions of the Progressive left.

Watch it if you dare, which you won't, but he shows the documents of how the Democrats were and are hell bent to obstruct our judicial process.


Biden is dirty as hell and you know it!

]]]]]]]]]]]]

This ain't about Biden.

It's about McConnell's invocation of Biden's proposal to delay forever a Democrat SCOTUS nominee, which is neither following with the proposal nor the Constitution of the United States of America. It's about McConnell clearly not invoking Biden's proposal now when it's a Republican SCOTUS nominee.

They could have held a hearing and then declined the nomination.

They didn't.

Instead, they lied to you, they lied to America, and they continue to lie to day purely for power and money.

a reply to: vor78

Foouck Schumer and the Diaz Brothers , We Will Step on those Cockroaches !


MAGA 2018 BELIEVE !

a reply to: norhoc

This ain't the Mud Pit, and you know you have no ground to argue given that you've resorted to personal attacks.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Greven


OK and that is exactly what the republicans did. Hillary lost and after the election they are having hearings on the WINNERS nominee. To quote your messiah obama "elections have consequences" and to quote him again " if you don't like it quit whining and win elections"

Stop with the lies.

Obama is no messiah. The 'winner' didn't take office until late January.

The intention of Biden's proposal was to hold hearings on any potential SCOTUS candidate after the election, not after the winner assumes office.

Spin it how you want! But Mark Levin has already shown the history and intentions of the Progressive left.

Watch it if you dare, which you won't, but he shows the documents of how the Democrats were and are hell bent to obstruct our judicial process.


Biden is dirty as hell and you know it!

]]]]]]]]]]]]

This ain't about Biden.

It's about McConnell's invocation of Biden's proposal to delay forever a SCOTUS nominee, which is neither following with the proposal nor the Constitution of the United States of America.

They could have held a hearing and then declined the nomination.

They didn't.

Instead, they lied to you, they lied to America, and they continue to lie to day purely for power and money.

They all lie!


I can say this though, the Progressive left has stooped to an all time low digging up emotionally unstable women to paint false accusations against a SCOTUS nominee and promote the idea that the accused is guilty until proven innocent!

Glad they are going to vote...

Doesn't matter which way it goes...


Just do it.

a reply to: Greven


You are either very naïve or being very disingenuous if you think biden's intentions were altruistic. His intentions were to hijack a nominee, it was purely a political move on his part. The playbook has not changed in almost 30 years with liberals, they accused Clarence Thomas of sexual assault and harassment, and it didn't work then and it won't work now on Kavanaugh. I am through talking to you greven.

a reply to: Greven


You didn't even watch the video! Yet you want to argue with me! Levin showed the documents from the Democrats and how they wanted to obstruct anyone who believed in the Constitution from being appointed to the SCOTUS.

Is that cool with you that Constitutionalists should be blocked from being appointed? Be honest. We already know how Progs hate our country and Constitution, so let's see if you have the stones to say it?

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Greven


You are either very naïve or being very disingenuous if you think biden's intentions were altruistic. His intentions were to hijack a nominee, it was purely a political move on his part. The playbook has not changed in almost 30 years with liberals, they accused Clarence Thomas of sexual assault and harassment, and it didn't work then and it won't work now on Kavanaugh. I am through talking to you greven.

The Senate didn't adopt his proposal as a rule, probably for that reason.

Yet, McConnell cited it as the rationale for blocking Garland.

So, which is it?

Were McConnell's intentions to hijack the nominee or not?

a reply to: seeker1963


Notice he doesn't want to answer you, he wants to keep arguing with me even though I told him I am done engaging him, he would rather argue with a wall

originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: Greven


You didn't even watch the video! Yet you want to argue with me! Levin showed the documents from the Democrats and how they wanted to obstruct anyone who believed in the Constitution from being appointed to the SCOTUS.

Is that cool with you that Constitutionalists should be blocked from being appointed? Be honest. We already know how Progs hate our country and Constitution, so let's see if you have the stones to say it?

I've seen it before.

If you want to go into believing in the Constitution, I point you to the current President who clearly is not acting per his Constitutional duties, see this from last year or you know read the news and the Constitution.

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: seeker1963


Notice he doesn't want to answer you, he wants to keep arguing with me even though I told him I am done engaging him, he would rather argue with a wall

I tend to reply in order in the thread.

I hadn't gotten to that post yet.

But go ahead, keep with the attacks. You've surrendered any high ground.

originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: Greven


You didn't even watch the video! Yet you want to argue with me! Levin showed the documents from the Democrats and how they wanted to obstruct anyone who believed in the Constitution from being appointed to the SCOTUS.

Is that cool with you that Constitutionalists should be blocked from being appointed? Be honest. We already know how Progs hate our country and Constitution, so let's see if you have the stones to say it?

I will supply commentary from a boxing point of view.

Seeker comes out swinging with a direct uppercut to the pride of Greven that sends him to the mat.

Is Greven down for the count?

a reply to: vor78


Good post it makes a hell of a lot of sense.

Lucky for us that political power just might trump vengeance.