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.

 

Heitkamp endorses state Dems' false claim that ND's hunters could lose licenses if they vote

page: 2
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2018 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Admitted

It's not a problem if it's true. There was for certain a Democrat conspiracy against him. In fact Democrats publicly said they had a 2 year plan to prevent any SCJ Trump picked from being confirmed.




posted on Nov, 3 2018 @ 06:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Admitted

It's not a problem if it's true. There was for certain a Democrat conspiracy against him. In fact Democrats publicly said they had a 2 year plan to prevent any SCJ Trump picked from being confirmed.


If true, all the more reason to vote for Heidi Heitkamp (the subject of this thread) as she voted previously for Trump's pick of Gorsuch. If true, she is not subscribing to this Democrat conspiracy.



posted on Nov, 3 2018 @ 06:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Admitted

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Admitted

It's not a problem if it's true. There was for certain a Democrat conspiracy against him. In fact Democrats publicly said they had a 2 year plan to prevent any SCJ Trump picked from being confirmed.


If true, all the more reason to vote for Heidi Heitkamp (the subject of this thread) as she voted previously for Trump's pick of Gorsuch. If true, she is not subscribing to this Democrat conspiracy.

The Conspiracy was against Kavanaugh, how did she vote for him?



posted on Nov, 3 2018 @ 08:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Admitted

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Admitted

It's not a problem if it's true. There was for certain a Democrat conspiracy against him. In fact Democrats publicly said they had a 2 year plan to prevent any SCJ Trump picked from being confirmed.


If true, all the more reason to vote for Heidi Heitkamp (the subject of this thread) as she voted previously for Trump's pick of Gorsuch. If true, she is not subscribing to this Democrat conspiracy.

The Conspiracy was against Kavanaugh, how did she vote for him?


You said a conspiracy "to prevent any SCJ Trump picked from being confirmed." She didn't vote for Kavanaugh because she didn't see him to be fit, I happen to agree with her choice. She DID vote for Gorsuch. So, if there were a Democrat conspiracy here against Trump and his nominees, she is not a part of it.

It's ok that there is a Democrat in the world that isn't 100% demon, you know?



posted on Nov, 4 2018 @ 04:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Admitted

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Admitted

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Admitted

It's not a problem if it's true. There was for certain a Democrat conspiracy against him. In fact Democrats publicly said they had a 2 year plan to prevent any SCJ Trump picked from being confirmed.


If true, all the more reason to vote for Heidi Heitkamp (the subject of this thread) as she voted previously for Trump's pick of Gorsuch. If true, she is not subscribing to this Democrat conspiracy.

The Conspiracy was against Kavanaugh, how did she vote for him?


You said a conspiracy "to prevent any SCJ Trump picked from being confirmed." She didn't vote for Kavanaugh because she didn't see him to be fit, I happen to agree with her choice. She DID vote for Gorsuch. So, if there were a Democrat conspiracy here against Trump and his nominees, she is not a part of it.

It's ok that there is a Democrat in the world that isn't 100% demon, you know?

Yes, the conspiracy started after Gorsuch. Gorsuch did not lose them control of the court. All the Democrats were on board and any excuse she gave as to why she did not vote for him is pointless. The Democrats were all saying they would not vote for Kavanaugh since day 1.


Heidi Heitkamp was ready to vote 'yes' on Kavanaugh. Then she watched him with the sound off.

www.cnn.com...
So after they both gave testimony she was going to vote yes.


I believe you but these cases can't be proved beyond a reasonable doubt so we can't proceed with the prosecution.' And when you've done that, you know for a victim, the most important thing you can say is 'I believe you' if you do, and I think it really came down to that I believed her," Heitkamp recalled.

So after they both gave testimony she was going to vote no.

I am confused. She believed Ford so she was going to vote no .. but she was going to vote yes. She can't even keep her story straight in one interview.

Question, why didn't she watch Ford with the sound off?



posted on Nov, 4 2018 @ 04:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Admitted


Even before Trump’s expected Monday announcement, Democrats have launched a three-pronged approach to defeating his nominee:

So before anyone was nominated, Democrats were already at work to defeat the choice.


Unlike the nomination of Neil M. Gorsuch last year to replace the reliably conservative Antonin Scalia, Trump’s newest nominee will replace Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who was a swing vote on many of the most divisive social issues, including the 1992 reaffirmation of the landmark abortion ruling Roe vs. Wade.

That makes this confirmation “more consequential than Gorsuch,” USC political science professor Jeb Barnes said. “It’s not just who you appoint, but who you replace.

www.latimes.com...

Because this time they lost the court.


Senate Democrats—especially if they win a majority in November’s elections—to keep the court seat vacant until after the 2020 election.

“I think we’ve had those kinds of vacancies before, and we certainly had over a one-year vacancy with Merrick Garland,” said Hirono. “So the world does not come to an end because we don’t fill all of the nominees.”

www.washingtonexaminer.com...

So give us who we want or you don't get anyone. And when we are in power we get who we want again.



posted on Nov, 4 2018 @ 07:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Admitted

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Admitted

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Admitted

It's not a problem if it's true. There was for certain a Democrat conspiracy against him. In fact Democrats publicly said they had a 2 year plan to prevent any SCJ Trump picked from being confirmed.


If true, all the more reason to vote for Heidi Heitkamp (the subject of this thread) as she voted previously for Trump's pick of Gorsuch. If true, she is not subscribing to this Democrat conspiracy.

The Conspiracy was against Kavanaugh, how did she vote for him?


You said a conspiracy "to prevent any SCJ Trump picked from being confirmed." She didn't vote for Kavanaugh because she didn't see him to be fit, I happen to agree with her choice. She DID vote for Gorsuch. So, if there were a Democrat conspiracy here against Trump and his nominees, she is not a part of it.

It's ok that there is a Democrat in the world that isn't 100% demon, you know?

Yes, the conspiracy started after Gorsuch. Gorsuch did not lose them control of the court. All the Democrats were on board and any excuse she gave as to why she did not vote for him is pointless. The Democrats were all saying they would not vote for Kavanaugh since day 1.


Heidi Heitkamp was ready to vote 'yes' on Kavanaugh. Then she watched him with the sound off.

www.cnn.com...
So after they both gave testimony she was going to vote yes.


I believe you but these cases can't be proved beyond a reasonable doubt so we can't proceed with the prosecution.' And when you've done that, you know for a victim, the most important thing you can say is 'I believe you' if you do, and I think it really came down to that I believed her," Heitkamp recalled.

So after they both gave testimony she was going to vote no.

I am confused. She believed Ford so she was going to vote no .. but she was going to vote yes. She can't even keep her story straight in one interview.

Question, why didn't she watch Ford with the sound off?


She believed something happened to Ford. Who perpetrated that is anyone's guess (the hearing was ridiculous). I don't know what really happened to Ford, Heitkamp doesn't know, hell - Ford probably doesn't know. The person of interest was the one being interviewed for a job, she focused her attention on Kavanaugh and if he is fit for that job. He showed himself not to be and that's that. The rest of the nonsense can go in the trash bin.



posted on Nov, 4 2018 @ 11:30 AM
link   
When they ban all guns you will not need a hunting licenses in nearby states.

Half of the people that want to ban guns are anti hunting groups not groups that want to protect people.



posted on Nov, 4 2018 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Admitted

Except she said after the hearing she was going to vote Yes.



posted on Nov, 4 2018 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Admitted

Except she said after the hearing she was going to vote Yes.


No. She thought she would vote yes BEFORE Ford came forward, before the hearing. From your CNN link:



Having been just one of three Democratic senators to vote to confirm President Donald Trump's first Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, Heitkamp had already instructed her staff to begin drafting a statement explaining why she thought Kavanaugh deserved her vote as well. Then Christine Blasey Ford came forward and accused Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her when they were both in high school.



posted on Nov, 4 2018 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Admitted

Actually according to the link she said she was voting yes until she rewatched Kavanaugh with the sound off later on.

Then she said she was voting no after hearing Ford.

Those are 2 conflicting stories and can't both be true.







 
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join