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

[ALF]

10 hours ago, Boyst62 said:

Son, I passed a lie detector test lying my ass off with pressure beyond that which I will speak upon me.

 

Now this is one post from you that I really believe  ?

[B-Man]

The Left are still desperate to "postpone ' 

 

 

 

 

For an incident in high school

 

that Feinstein refused to address behind closed doors or during hearings

 

and the FBI won’t investigate?

 

No. Confirm him. https://twitter.com/ferventpundit/status/1041394298946838528 …

[Tiberius]

38 minutes ago, B-Man said:

The Left are still desperate to "postpone ' 

 

 

 

 

For an incident in high school

 

that Feinstein refused to address behind closed doors or during hearings

 

and the FBI won’t investigate?

 

No. Confirm him. https://twitter.com/ferventpundit/status/1041394298946838528 …

Last thing Republicans want is for other women to start coming forward 

[B-Man]

I'll say this about them, the democrats are getting very good at this. It's scorched earth politics from now on.

 

 

Every leftist media organization and celebrity is out there tweeting and dropping articles in full force.

 

It's very important to keep in mind that this has nothing to do with Trump. If you are conservative, the left will slander you in order to ruin you and maintain power for themselves. That's all it is.

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

[Koko78]

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

Last thing Republicans want is for other women to start coming forward 

 

65 of them already did... in support of Judge Kavanaugh.

 

The left's juvenile and dishonest antics are overplayed to the point that they are meaningless.

[DC Tom]

46 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

65 of them already did... in support of Judge Kavanaugh.

 

 

A veritable binder full of 'em...

1 hour ago, B-Man said:

I'll say this about them, the democrats are getting very good at this. It's scorched earth politics from now on.

 

 

Every leftist media organization and celebrity is out there tweeting and dropping articles in full force.

 

It's very important to keep in mind that this has nothing to do with Trump. If you are conservative, the left will slander you in order to ruin you and maintain power for themselves. That's all it is.

 

 

Anyone want to know why the Democrats scare me more than Republicans?  Democrats will do anything to get their way.

 

That is not an attitude I want in power.

[Buftex]

3 hours ago, B-Man said:

The Left are still desperate to "postpone ' 

 

 

 

 

For an incident in high school

 

that Feinstein refused to address behind closed doors or during hearings

 

and the FBI won’t investigate?

 

No. Confirm him. https://twitter.com/ferventpundit/status/1041394298946838528 …

Why such a rush to cram a guy through the process, when he has serious eithical issues?  What are conservatives afraid of, that they won't be able to find another scumbag who can get 65 women they know to claim he didn't attempt to rape them 35 years ago?  

Edited September 16, 2018 by Buftex

[Koko78]

7 minutes ago, Buftex said:

Why such a rush to cram a guy through the process, when he has serious eithical issues?  What are conservatives afraid of, that they won't be able to find another scumbag who can get 65 women they know to claim he didn't attempt to rape them 35 years ago?  

 

Which of the seriously fabricated ethical issues are you referring to?

[3rdnlng]

5 minutes ago, Buftex said:

Why such a rush to cram a guy through the process, when he has serious eithical issues?  What are conservatives afraid of, that they won't be able to find another scumbag who can get 65 women they know to claim he didn't attempt to rape them 35 years ago?  

I see you haven't lost your special talent for assmudgeonry. What "eithical" issues does he have? How is moving the process along for Kavanaugh any different than for Kagen, who had  never been a judge before?

[DC Tom]

15 minutes ago, Buftex said:

Why such a rush to cram a guy through the process, when he has serious eithical issues?  What are conservatives afraid of, that they won't be able to find another scumbag who can get 65 women they know to claim he didn't attempt to rape them 35 years ago?  

 

About 70 days so far...longer than or on par with Sotomayor, Ginsburg, Roberts, Breyer, Souter, Kennedy.  In fact, of sitting court justices, his confirmation is one of the longer ones.

 

The one thing this isn't, is "rushed."

[KD in CA]

21 minutes ago, Buftex said:

Why such a rush to cram a guy through the process, when he has serious eithical issues?  What are conservatives afraid of, that they won't be able to find another scumbag who can get 65 women they know to claim he didn't attempt to rape them 35 years ago?  

 

Rush to cram?  Serious ethic issues?  Come on, stop.  You know a con job when you see one.

 

Liberals have attempted this smear job bull **** on virtually every Republican USSC nominee since Reagan.  They are a disgust lot.

[B-Man]

27 minutes ago, Buftex said:

 

Why such a rush to cram a guy through the process, when he has serious eithical issues? 

 

 

 

What buffoon you are...............?

 

Your "rushed" process is at 70 days.

 

and your "serious ethical issues" is just you regurgitating the last gasp vomitus of the libs.

 

 

How Long Does the Nomination Process Take?

Buckle in, because you’ll most likely be hearing about the Supreme Court nomination process for at least two or three months. Here’s how long it took other justices, from the date of their nomination to the date the Senate confirmed them:

• Elena Kagan: 87 days (May 10, 2010, to Aug. 5, 2010)
• Sonia Sotomayor: 66 days (June 1, 2009, to Aug. 6, 2009)
• Samuel A. Alito Jr.: 82 days (Nov. 10, 2005, to Jan. 31, 2006)
• John G. Roberts Jr.: 62 days (July 29, 2005, to Sept. 29, 2005)
• Stephen Breyer: 73 days (May 17, 1994, to July 29, 1994)
• Ruth Bader Ginsburg: 50 days (June 14, 1993, to August 3, 1993)
• Clarence Thomas: 99 days (July 8, 1991, to Oct. 15, 1991)
• David H. Souter: 69 days (July 25, 1990, to Oct. 2, 1990)
• Anthony M. Kennedy: 65 days (Nov. 30, 1987, to Feb 3, 1988)

• Antonin Scalia: 85 days (June 24, 1986, to Sept. 17, 1986)

 

https://www.nytimes.com/live/supreme-court-justice-antonin-scalia-dies-at-79/how-long-does-the-nomination-process-take/

 

 

Edited September 16, 2018 by B-Man

[Tiberius]

Jeff Flake says we need to wait ❤️ 

[outsidethebox]

49 minutes ago, Buftex said:

Why such a rush to cram a guy through the process, when he has serious eithical issues?  What are conservatives afraid of, that they won't be able to find another scumbag who can get 65 women they know to claim he didn't attempt to rape them 35 years ago?  

You're an idiot. Make shite up and declare it a ethical issues. Show proof of these issues!!!

Back your bullshite up with facts!

16 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Jeff Flake says we need to wait ❤️ 

The only flake I know is you.

[Koko78]

30 minutes ago, KD in CA said:

Rush to cram?  Serious ethic issues?  Come on, stop.  You know a con job when you see one.

 

Eh, he's a liberal. He's either in on it or (far more likely) too stupid to know he's being conned.

[Buffalo_Gal]

48 minutes ago, Buftex said:

Why such a rush to cram a guy through the process, when he has serious eithical issues?  What are conservatives afraid of, that they won't be able to find another scumbag who can get 65 women they know to claim he didn't attempt to rape them 35 years ago?  

"Serious ethical issues!?"  No, that would be the Democrats trying to smear and destroy a man who is - from all accounts - good and decent because "politics" and "get Trump". The fact that the letter is some California professor who gets it to DiFi (who is having a tough time getting re-elected because her own party wants her out), who holds it until AFTER this man has had his life examined back to kindergarten is further evidence that the Senate Democrats aren't just playing dirty, they are playing in the sewer.  Absolutely disgusting. 

Judge Kavannah is going to be confirmed, and he will be confirmed with Democratic votes. 

[B-Man]

Sen. Graham said this:

I agree with the concerns expressed in the Judiciary Committee’s statement about the substance and process regarding the allegations in this latest claim against Judge Kavanaugh.

 

However, if Ms. Ford wishes to provide information to the Committee, I would gladly listen to what she has to say and compare that against all the other information we have received about Judge Kavanaugh.

 

If the Committee is to hear from Ms. Ford, it should be done immediately so the process can continue as scheduled.

 

Graham’s statement is shrewd and on point. He’s opening the door to Ford to speak her piece, while insisting that her claim not become a vehicle for delay. As I argued here, avoiding delay is crucial.

 

Graham doesn’t say whether, if Ford provides information to the committee, she would be subject to examination. I assume she would be. Otherwise, what’s the point? Hasn’t she already said all she thinks she needs to say?

 

 

Chairman Charles Grassley statement (Partial)

 

Judge Kavanaugh’s background has been thoroughly vetted by the FBI on six different occasions throughout his decades of public service, and no such allegation ever surfaced.

 

Furthermore Judge Kavanaugh and others alleged to have been involved have unequivocally denied these claims from their high school days. The Committee has received letter after letter from those who’ve known judge Kavanaugh personally and professionally, including 65 women who’ve known him since high school, speaking to his impeccable character and respect for others, especially women.

 

 

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/09/sens-grassley-and-graham-on-the-kavanaugh-nomination-now.php

 

[Buffalo_Gal]

Oh she seems tots legit:
 

 

 

 

and one more, because why not?
 

 

[Tiberius]

1 hour ago, B-Man said:

 

 

What buffoon you are...............?

 

Your "rushed" process is at 70 days.

 

and your "serious ethical issues" is just you regurgitating the last gasp vomitus of the libs.

 

 

How Long Does the Nomination Process Take?

Buckle in, because you’ll most likely be hearing about the Supreme Court nomination process for at least two or three months. Here’s how long it took other justices, from the date of their nomination to the date the Senate confirmed them:

• Elena Kagan: 87 days (May 10, 2010, to Aug. 5, 2010)
• Sonia Sotomayor: 66 days (June 1, 2009, to Aug. 6, 2009)
• Samuel A. Alito Jr.: 82 days (Nov. 10, 2005, to Jan. 31, 2006)
• John G. Roberts Jr.: 62 days (July 29, 2005, to Sept. 29, 2005)
• Stephen Breyer: 73 days (May 17, 1994, to July 29, 1994)
• Ruth Bader Ginsburg: 50 days (June 14, 1993, to August 3, 1993)
• Clarence Thomas: 99 days (July 8, 1991, to Oct. 15, 1991)
• David H. Souter: 69 days (July 25, 1990, to Oct. 2, 1990)
• Anthony M. Kennedy: 65 days (Nov. 30, 1987, to Feb 3, 1988)

• Antonin Scalia: 85 days (June 24, 1986, to Sept. 17, 1986)

 

https://www.nytimes.com/live/supreme-court-justice-antonin-scalia-dies-at-79/how-long-does-the-nomination-process-take/

 

 

How long has Marrick Garland been waiting? 

[Koko78]

4 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

How long has Marrick Garland been waiting? 

 

Let me consult with the guy who invented the Biden rule, and get back to you.