Jump to content

President Donald J. Trump's Supreme Court Associate Justice Kavanaugh


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, LABillzFan said:

 

It's stunning to me that you engage in conversation here so adamantly, and still have no idea what in the holy hell you're talking about beyond repeating the same stupid stuff that stupid people post on Twitter.

 

Any thinking person knows what McConnell did with Garland. They know how it did it (constitutionally). And they even know it was Joe Biden who paved that path.

 

Read more, post less. It will do you some good.

Please, enlighten me as to what the process entailed. I don't have time to read through this all, and prefer to troll instead...

39 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

Greatest meltdown ever.

 

 

Jerry Saltz? Is that real?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can withhold their support/money. It didn't work in 2010, but I doubt Mitch would be inclined to help her the next time as he did in 2010.

Party Chairman Tuckerman Babcock said the committee may issue a statement or withdraw its support for Murkowski. In the case of the latter, the committee would encourage officials to find a replacement and ask Murkowski not to run as a Republican for reelection.

 

Alaska GOP weighs reprimanding Murkowski over Kavanaugh vote

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LSHMEAB said:

 

Texas should indeed have more representation from the Senate than a state like Rhode Island.

 

 

Most people believe that the senate is a representative body for the people, probably due to the fact that senators are directly elected by residents of that particular state. The fact is that the senate's function is to represent each state, with all members having equal representation within the senate body. Senators were originally appointed by state legislatures, but the states ultimately failed to appoint them in a timely fashion, the internal politics of the states being the blame most of the time. Eventually the 17th amendment changed that, taking the appointment of senators away from the state legislatures and instead allowing the citizens do so through elections. It's the fact that we directly vote for our senators now that gives the impression that senators represent the people directly, but that's not the case. That's the purpose of the house of representatives, and it's exactly why representation in the house is based on population.

 

3 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

At this point it's probably in everyone's best interests to force California out of the country and to remove all military bases and technology, and personnel, and allow California to purchase all Federal land within the state from the government.

 

 

 

Be sure to let me know if you ever run for public office. :beer:

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Azalin said:

 

Most people believe that the senate is a representative body for the people, probably due to the fact that senators are directly elected by residents of that particular state. The fact is that the senate's function is to represent each state, with all members having equal representation within the senate body. Senators were originally appointed by state legislatures, but the states ultimately failed to appoint them in a timely fashion, the internal politics of the states being the blame most of the time. Eventually the 17th amendment changed that, taking the appointment of senators away from the state legislatures and instead allowing the citizens do so through elections. It's the fact that we directly vote for our senators now that gives the impression that senators represent the people directly, but that's not the case. That's the purpose of the house of representatives, and it's exactly why representation in the house is based on population.

 

 

Be sure to let me know if you ever run for public office. :beer:

 

The poster already knows all this. He/she is just an !@#$. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, LSHMEAB said:

I'm genuinely here to learn what makes you people tick. I know very few conservatives IRL and the twitter right is intellectually vapid. If you'll note, the overwhelming majority of my posts are responses. 

I like your presence here. You make the discussion more interesting.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Rob's House said:

I like your presence here. You make the discussion more interesting.

Appreciate it. I've always felt like people can vehemently disagree about issues and not let it become personal. I think what gets in the way of quality discourse is intellectual dishonesty to suit a narrative. I've seen the right do it in the past and I've seen the left abandon the presumption of innocence to appease Metooer's.

 

Quite sure I'll express an opinion that you'll piss on in the future, but such is life. 

 

At the end of the day, we're all (presumably) Bills fans so we already have shared trauma. That has to count for something.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, B-Man said:

NOT SATIRE: In His First Day On The Job, Kavanaugh Hired As Many Black Law Clerks As RBG Has In Her Entire Tenure.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh has hired a black law clerk for his new chambers at the U.S. Supreme Court, matching Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s record of African-American clerkship hiring during her tenure on the nation’s highest judicial tribunal.

 

With his first clerkship hires, Kavanaugh also set a gender composition record, an apparent attempt to buck the high court’s hiring patterns, which tend to favor white, male graduates of elite law schools.

 

Since joining the high court in 1993, Ginsburg has hired over 100 law clerks, just one of whom is black.

 

Where are the protestors?

 

 

See, it's just facts like these that piss off the leftists when they come to light (the facts, not the 'leftists).  And, as we see on a daily basis, a pissed off leftist can spread some interesting stories in the MSM.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, keepthefaith said:

 

Listening to Murkowski the other day it seemed clear that she forgot that she represents the people of Alaska and likely did not vote their will but rather her own conscience. 

 

...

 

No.  No she does not represent the people of Alaska.

 

That's not how our government works.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

Stay away from that punch bowl at the office parties, ladies. 

 

7 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

One thing is she has NEVER produced the psychologist's notes to anyone.  this was the nail in the coffin of her case.  she had spoken of it before the nomonation and it was documented.  She didn't turn them over the Washington Post.  She didn't turn them over to Senator Fienstien.  She didn't turn them over to congress.

 

As Judge Judy would say, "if you can't produce it, it doesn't exist."

 

I wanted to believer her, but I find this disturbing.  If it proved her case, why not share it?  She is the accuser after all.

 

It didn’t prove her case. It actually hurt it because she blamed the therapist for writing down the wrong sexes of the people at the party and she never mentioned Kavanaugh‘s name to her.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...