It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ford - Kavanaugh Hearings 9-27-18

page: 149
79
<< 146  147  148    150  151  152 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Majic

Yeah, they knew Gorsuch didn't change the balance of the court, so they could concede that battle and be no worse for wear. But now, the whole country is getting a good, long, ugly look at the lengths they'll go to when their power is threatened.




posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 10:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Majic
a reply to: vor78

They let the Republicans have Gorsuch, but another seat is a bridge too far.

Hence the banzai charges.


Wait until the 3rd one - sheesh.


They'll keep the next seat occupied until they have a majority or Trump is gone.

Think weekend at Bernie's only with a SC justice.




posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: Wayfarer

I was under the impression that McConnell had already announced that there would be no nomination approved by the Senate, shortly after Scalia's death. Didn't Obama ignore that and nominate anyway?


I seem to recall the same thing, but its important to call out that its not McConnell's job to decide if there is to be a nomination or not, but to merely ascertain if the nominee is acceptable or not. The fact that McConnell did/said the aforementioned things is tacit evidence of his usurpation of constitutional powers expressly bestowed upon the president alone.

Its also equally as important to note that the majority of ATS conservative supporters believe that was a righteous and good thing (directly disobeying the constitution when its suits their own party).



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Majic
a reply to: vor78

They let the Republicans have Gorsuch, but another seat is a bridge too far.

Hence the banzai charges.

They're really gonna be crapping bricks when Ruth Bader Ginsburg dies. I daresay that nobody who has seen her talk recently thinks that day is far off.


Yeah she sounds and looks like Pope John Paul II at the end of his life.

She won't last another 7 years



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: vor78
a reply to: Majic

Yeah, they knew Gorsuch didn't change the balance of the court, so they could concede that battle and be no worse for wear. But now, the whole country is getting a good, long, ugly look at the lengths they'll go to when their power is threatened.


Nah, or you know, maybe also because Gorsuch wasn't a sex pest, and didn't have women with allegations of sexual misconduct coming out of the woodwork....



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

This nomination makes it a firm 5-4 in the Conservative direction. The Scalia replacement, Gorsuch, if anything made the courts slightly more liberal. Kavanaugh for Kennedy is not the same. It really does shift the courts.
There was plenty of discussion at the time about the Democrats keeping their powder dry for Trump's 2nd pick for that very reason.

Just because the idiot Kamala Harris spouts the 'why didn't we do this to Gorsuch' nonsense and takes everyone for fools, there is no need to do it too.



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wayfarer
.

Almost all Democrats understand the Republican's are picking this SC justice, they just don't want a potential sexual assaulter to be the one they pick for obvious reasons.



Exactly
'Potential'

We are all potentially sexual assualters..
Just because some random person accuses you doesnt mean you are.

The onus is on them to prove their allegation

Ford cannot say when, where or who was there
Those she says were there, deny it.
Fords 'polygraph' is total bunk as she was asked 2 useless questions
Fords fear of flying was total garbage too
Fords demands for the hearing show this was never intended to be a fair session

Every hour more holes in her story are coming out..

Whats dissapointing is people like you still push it like it was true
edit on 28/9/18 by Agit8dChop because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer


Its also equally as important to note that the majority of ATS conservative supporters believe that was a righteous and good thing (directly disobeying the constitution when its suits their own party).


If Democrats would've simply made that argument, you'd have a hell of a lot of conservatives taking your side on that.

Sadly, with all the BS dems have pulled over the last 2 years we are absolutely fed up. It is hard to muster sympathy when you see so much horse excrement.

That said, you're right we should've held the hearing and given the appropriate advise/consent (whether yay or nay) based on the facts, not on partisan issues. So for what its worth, you're correct. And I'm unsure what the major problem with Garland was, as I understand it he is "Bill Clinton" style democrat so there is no problem with far-left anti-Republican concerns (Republican as in Republic per Article 4 Section 4 US Constitution, not the political party)



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: Wayfarer

This nomination makes it a firm 5-4 in the Conservative direction. The Scalia replacement, Gorsuch, if anything made the courts slightly more liberal. Kavanaugh for Kennedy is not the same. It really does shift the courts.
There was plenty of discussion at the time about the Democrats keeping their powder dry for Trump's 2nd pick for that very reason.

Just because the idiot Kamala Harris spouts the 'why didn't we do this to Gorsuch' nonsense and takes everyone for fools, there is no need to do it too.


Because it was already a forgone conclusion. Kennedy's timing of retirement sealed the fate of the SC's balance of power, nothing was going to change that. The best the Democrats were hoping for was that Kavanaugh was passed over for another equally conservative judge that didn't happen to be a potential rapist. Republican's hold all the keys/power and could wait till the 11th hour to vote if they wanted, so the idea that this was some grand cohesive strategy to stop a nomination belies the lack of ability for the Democrats to actually affect that change. Surely you don't think McConnell was going to hold up the vote because Democrats were outraged do you?



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agit8dChop

originally posted by: Wayfarer
.

Almost all Democrats understand the Republican's are picking this SC justice, they just don't want a potential sexual assaulter to be the one they pick for obvious reasons.



Exactly
'Potential'

We are all potentially sexual assualters..
Just because some random person accuses you doesnt mean you are.

The onus is on them to prove their allegation

Ford cannot say when, where or who was there
Those she says were there, deny it.
Fords 'polygraph' is total bunk as she was asked 2 useless questions
Fords fear of flying was total garbage too
Fords demands for the hearing show this was never intended to be a fair session

Every hour more holes in her story are coming out..

Whats dissapointing is people like you still push it like it was true


Why did Kavanaugh answer that he hadn't seen Ford's testimony earlier that afternoon when he was in fact watching it on a TV in the next building over? Why lie about something like that? Its utterly inconsequential to lie about. If he lies summarily about seemingly meaningless things what are the implications about the rest of his testimony to the contrary of Dr. Ford?



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: vor78
a reply to: Majic

Yeah, they knew Gorsuch didn't change the balance of the court, so they could concede that battle and be no worse for wear. But now, the whole country is getting a good, long, ugly look at the lengths they'll go to when their power is threatened.


Nah, or you know, maybe also because Gorsuch wasn't a sex pest, and didn't have women with allegations of sexual misconduct coming out of the woodwork....


I'll even give you a go to liberal source for the reality of the Gorsuch confirmation: from January 2017.


Washington (CNN)Senate Democrats are weighing whether to avoid an all-out war to block President Donald Trump's upcoming Supreme Court pick, instead considering delaying that battle for a future nomination that could shift the ideological balance of the court, sources say.

Democrats privately discussed their tactics during a closed-door retreat in West Virginia last week. And a number of Democrats are trying to persuade liberal firebrands to essentially let Republicans confirm Trump's pick after a vigorous confirmation process -- since Trump is likely to name a conservative to replace the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia.

Trump's second Supreme Court pick could be the real drama

The reason for the tactic: Republicans are considering gutting the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees if Democrats stay largely united and block Trump's first pick. By employing the so-called "nuclear option," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell could move to reduce the threshold for clearing a filibuster from 60 votes to 51 votes. That would mean Democrats could lose leverage in the next Supreme Court fight if Trump were to replace a more liberal justice, since the GOP now has 52 seats in the Senate.


Even then the democrats couldn't resist - forcing Republicans to remove the 60 vote rule for SCOTUS confirmations. That has come back to bite them ROYALLY in the ass.

edition.cnn.com...

People like Kamala Harris, who knew damn well the strategy then and now, lie through their teeth about their motives and assume you are as dumb as rocks.

edit on 28/9/2018 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 10:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: vor78
a reply to: Majic

Yeah, they knew Gorsuch didn't change the balance of the court, so they could concede that battle and be no worse for wear. But now, the whole country is getting a good, long, ugly look at the lengths they'll go to when their power is threatened.


Nah, or you know, maybe also because Gorsuch wasn't a sex pest, and didn't have women with allegations of sexual misconduct coming out of the woodwork....


Problem is, those allegations are proving to have more holes than a block of Swiss cheese, and in the meantime, the Dems have their nasty fingerprints all over the mishandling of the situation.



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

Wayfarer, the problem is everyone is a potential sex assault perpetrator. And no one is immune from accusations - true or false. That is why we must always demand evidence (in a criminal trial)

The sex-crimes prosecutor said there would not be enough to charge Kavanaugh or even sign a probable cause affidavit to apply for a search warrant based on the proceedings yesterday. Her witnesses failing to back up her story didn't help, the democrat political timing didn't help, and Kavanaugh's credible and steadfast denials were very convincing.

It is only fair to say he is not a "sex pest" as you put it, until proven otherwise. Else, what protects you (or me, or the next man/woman) from false and/or vindictive allegations?

It is sad dems are still focused on the sex bull#. Why is the left absolutely obsessed with sex? It is very strange. The key takeaway is the 1860-like state our country is in. We're hanging on by a thread here, and democrats keep on tugging.

edit on 9/28/2018 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Agit8dChop

originally posted by: Wayfarer
.

Almost all Democrats understand the Republican's are picking this SC justice, they just don't want a potential sexual assaulter to be the one they pick for obvious reasons.



Exactly
'Potential'

We are all potentially sexual assualters..
Just because some random person accuses you doesnt mean you are.

The onus is on them to prove their allegation

Ford cannot say when, where or who was there
Those she says were there, deny it.
Fords 'polygraph' is total bunk as she was asked 2 useless questions
Fords fear of flying was total garbage too
Fords demands for the hearing show this was never intended to be a fair session

Every hour more holes in her story are coming out..

Whats dissapointing is people like you still push it like it was true


Why did Kavanaugh answer that he hadn't seen Ford's testimony earlier that afternoon when he was in fact watching it on a TV in the next building over? Why lie about something like that? Its utterly inconsequential to lie about. If he lies summarily about seemingly meaningless things what are the implications about the rest of his testimony to the contrary of Dr. Ford?


The tv stations had caneras out the front of his house watching him leave and watching his car pull into the building while she was testifying...

Did he catch a few minutes while waiting? Maybe... but live footage shows diferently.

And you completely ignored the crux of my post.



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wayfarer
Nah, or you know, maybe also because Gorsuch wasn't a sex pest, and didn't have women with allegations of sexual misconduct coming out of the woodwork....

Indeed, such allegations don't seem to have materialized until the attack machine was turned on.

Meanwhile, claims that Senator McConnell somehow decided whether Merrick Garland would be nominated are false, because Merrick Garland was, in fact, nominated. You may want to correct your recollection.

As an aside, it really doesn't take much effort at all to look this stuff up in the Internet age.

Just sayin'



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 11:02 AM
link   
Wayfarer...

I state you sexually assaulted my sister in 2002 in a house in florida

Lets get the fbi invovled.
Lets plaster my accusation all over the tv
I dont know when
I dont know where
But i believe it 100% true..

Now prove you are innocent.

See how easy it is to create bs
edit on 28/9/18 by Agit8dChop because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

No, that's not how things played out - see above
www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 28/9/2018 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 11:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Majic

originally posted by: Wayfarer
Nah, or you know, maybe also because Gorsuch wasn't a sex pest, and didn't have women with allegations of sexual misconduct coming out of the woodwork....

Indeed, such allegations don't seem to have materialized until the attack machine was turned on.

Meanwhile, claims that Senator McConnell somehow decided whether Merrick Garland would be nominated are false, because Merrick Garland was, in fact, nominated. You may want to correct your recollection.

As an aside, it really doesn't take much effort at all to look this stuff up in the Internet age.

Just sayin'


Garland was nominated and McConnell refused to do his constitutionally assigned job of voting on him (which is the same thing as usurping the power of SC assignments).



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 11:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Wayfarer



It is sad dems are still focused on the sex bull#. Why is the left absolutely obsessed with sex? It is very strange. The key takeaway is the 1860-like state our country is in. We're hanging on by a thread here, and democrats keep on tugging.


C'mon, the Lewinski scandal is far removed enough from your memory to let you fill it solely with the idea that Democrats are the party of sex-crazed obsession?



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 11:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

Not quite right - almost.
Sequence of events was..
- Scalia dies all of a sudden, suffocating himself with his own pillow.
- McConnell says that no nominee will be brought to the floor
- Obama nominated someone anyway - which he is entitled to do.
- McConnell didn't bring it to the floor, like he said - which he is entitled to do.







 
79
<< 146  147  148    150  151  152 >>

log in

join