Go back
Taking bets...

Taking bets...

Debates

Clock
3 edits


Candace Owens
@RealCandaceO
·
15h
Amy Coney Barrett:

-She’s a woman, so they can’t hire their usual fake sexual assault victims.
-She has two black children, so they can’t smear her as a racist.

Taking early bets as to what the Democrats will cook up to try to stop
ACB...”

Clock
1 edit

@mott-the-hoople said
She’s a woman, so they can’t hire their usual fake sexual assault victims.
Seems there are no male Republicans who haven't been accused of sexual assault. Note Merrick Garland has no such charges, unlike Kavanaugh or Thomas.

Clock

@vivify said
Seems there are no male Republicans who haven't been accused of sexual assault. Note Merrick Garland has no such charges, unlike Kavanaugh or Thomas.
but Garland did not have a hearing, where such matters are vetted and explored. That is why there were no ‘such charges”. So your statement is not fact. Maybe he had such an indiscretion, maybe not.

Clock
1 edit

@vivify said
Seems there are no male Republicans who haven't been accused of sexual assault. Note Merrick Garland has no such charges, unlike Kavanaugh or Thomas.
I hear by “accuse” you of sexual assault.

Join the crowd...see how easy it is?

Clock

@mott-the-hoople said
I hear by “accuse” you of sexual assault.

Join the crowd...see how easy it is?
Thomas and Kavanaugh's accusers gave testimony evidence for their claims; so much so that Kavanaugh ended up lying under oath about he knows.

Clock

@averagejoe1 said
but Garland did not have a hearing, where such matters are vetted and explored. That is why there were no ‘such charges”. So your statement is not fact. Maybe he had such an indiscretion, maybe not.
Stephen Breyer, Democrat, had a hearing; no sexual assault charges for him either.

Clock

@vivify said
Stephen Breyer, Democrat, had a hearing; no sexual assault charges for him either.
you are ON it!!

Clock

@vivify said
Thomas and Kavanaugh's accusers gave testimony evidence for their claims; so much so that Kavanaugh ended up lying under oath about he knows.
that in untrue

Clock

@mott-the-hoople said

Candace Owens
@RealCandaceO
·
15h
Amy Coney Barrett:

-She’s a woman, so they can’t hire their usual fake sexual assault victims.
-She has two black children, so they can’t smear her as a racist.

Taking early bets as to what the Democrats will cook up to try to stop
ACB...”
I imagine her extremist judicial philosophy (for which she has left an extensive paper trail) and her limited judicial experience will be the main focus.

Kamala Harris will get some nice face time doing what she does best.

Clock

@averagejoe1 said
but Garland did not have a hearing, where such matters are vetted and explored. That is why there were no ‘such charges”. So your statement is not fact. Maybe he had such an indiscretion, maybe not.
Garland had a hearing in December 1995 for his appointment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, a post he was confirmed by a 76-23 vote by a Senate with a Republican majority. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland#:~:text=On%20September%206%2C%201995%2C%20President,longtime%20mentor%20Abner%20J.%20Mikva.&text=Garland's%20confirmation%20vote%20came%20to,Senate%20on%20March%2019%2C%201997.

Clock

@no1marauder said
I imagine her extremist judicial philosophy (for which she has left an extensive paper trail) and her limited judicial experience will be the main focus.

Kamala Harris will get some nice face time doing what she does best.
Good point. And a reasonable point, in that they naturally need to see what kind of a judge she is, that she has what it takes. E g, if they find she ruled in a racist fashion, then by all means do not confirm her. If her paper trail is in line with the tenets of the Constitution, then by all means, confirm her. That is their job. I hope they do it unlike the attempted lynching of Kavanaugh.

Above, someone says Kavanaugh lied under oath, as if that is a fact. If it were a fact, then he would not be confirmed. So the statement above has no business in this thread.

Clock
1 edit

@averagejoe1 said
but Garland did not have a hearing, where such matters are vetted and explored. That is why there were no ‘such charges”. So your statement is not fact. Maybe he had such an indiscretion, maybe not.
Why didn’t Garland have a hearing in 2016 ?? Hmmm ??

Clock

@mghrn55 said
Why didn’t Garland have a hearing ?? Hmmm ??
because the voters had entrusted that power to the republicans

Clock

@mott-the-hoople said
that in untrue
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/brett-kavanaugh-lied-brazenly-repeatedly-under-oath-any-law-student-ncna916031

Brett Kavanaugh lied brazenly and repeatedly under oath.

Clock

@mott-the-hoople said
because the voters had entrusted that power to the republicans
Remember those words in 2021.

A Democratic Senate confirmed Reagan's pick Anthony Kennedy in February 1988 by a 97-0 vote.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.