Brett Kavenaugh letter details...
- Thread starter tlwwake
- Start date
This "letter" is nothing more than last ditch Democrat desperation. They failed in all of their gotcha attempts during the hearings, including Kamala Harris lying and "I AM SPARTACUS!!!"
Harris owned Kavenaugh. One could easily tell Harris used to be a prosecutor.
Would love to see your proof of his innocence. I’m sure you’re well-connected with everything here lol
How did she own him? Did she sway a vote? Was she truthful? Did she get him to admit something?
Of course she didn’t sway a vote lol...we’ve already established the lengths to which republicans have gone to defend anything trump wants.
The bigger question is: was HE truthful? Considering, I don’t know...it’s HIS United States Supreme Court Confirmation hearing?
Guilty until proven innocent...
So it’s you I should’ve been asking for the proof lol...too afraid to reveal your sources???
And your source for knowing his guilt is? I'm not defending it one way or the other, but you've obviously painted him guilty already because he is the opposite of what you like.
I present to you the next Supreme Court Justice of the United States...
Look at these two idiots...
Look at these two idiots...
The slime that brought this forward are never interested in these claims after a nominee is either confirmed or rejected.
They also loved Bill Clinton.
They also loved Bill Clinton.
Your boy Medic painted him innocent, so I replied in sarcasm lol.
He may well be completely innocent, but to immediately cast it aside as BS - like a lot of sexual assault claims are nowadays (Ailes, O’Reilly, Matt Lauer, etc.) - is just pushing a team narrative.
What if it’s true? Do you understand how slimy it is to immediately defend slime in the case of said slime being exposed?
More TDS in full effect lol
So you are ok with her lying as long as it gets your outcome. Got it.
I don't understand the Kavenaugh thing. There is a a list of like 50+ judges that the Federalist Society keeps, all of whom would vote exactly the same way Brett will. So why the insistence on Brett? Is he the cleanest guy they have?
Question: where was this letter/accuser in 2003 through 2006 when he was going thru hearings for the DC Court of Appeals. It's not like this is the first time he has ever been in the spotlight or been questioned about his past.
let's see...maybe you understand deceived, misrepresented, disguised, garbled, equivocated, phony up, embellished, slanted, and distorted.
she is one hell of a liar.
she is one hell of a liar.
Bold take. Even CNN analysts said that Harris’s questioning was “interesting” and “appeared to be ready to be lining up the gut punch ... and then nothing.”
My view. She thought she knew something or someone told her something. But she didn’t have any evidence of it so she decided to try to make him look bad. Nothing you would ever do in court of law but attempt to smear him on tv. And my view - it backfired.
Saw that exchange. She appeared mentally challenged.
Ask an open ended question like that who's answer could literally span thousands of names at over a period of time... yeah, he tried to get her to narrow the scope of the question in order to answer her to the best of his ability, but she just kept playing her game.
It looked like she was playing a game, and she doesn't seem very bright when given the opportunity to frame an informative exchange.
Anyone who is or has been a prosecutor, or anyone who observes well-skilled prosecutors on a daily basis knew exactly what she was doing and how effective she was. And I believe any fair-minded person (not someone pre-programmed to defend Kavenaugh at all costs) would agree.
The gut punch was the manner in which Kavenaugh responded. When she had him stuttering with an inability to answer a simple question, she exposed him. That is just one example of how her questioning was very effective.
Trump (assuming he is the Republican nominee in 2020) better hope the Democrats are not wise enough to nominate Harris for President in 2020. She wound be a very formidable opponent and would wipe the floor with him in the debates. The powers that be on the right clearly recognize this, hence their increase attacks against her recently in the right-wing media.
Last edited:
This is the current state of Supreme Court Justice conformation hearings. A anonymous letter from an alledged incident which occurred when the judge was a teenager with absolutely zero collaboration. Sad to me what the process has become and the lengths partisanship causes elected officials to go in attempts to smear people for political gain.
You're quite the framer.
This fair-minded person observed the scope of her question was problematic at best. He gave her an opportunity to qualify her question so as to provide her the information she sought.
No new information was extracted due to the very nature of her question ansld insistence to maintain the "framing" she was seeking.... just as you are here.
If she were a prosecutor, she would have failed in her responsibility.
No, this is what someone on the right who consistently feels the need to defend Trump's every move would claim to have observed.
Again, the increase attacks on Harris by right-wing sources (and Trump supporters) after the hearing illustrate how effective she was and the political threat they perceive her to be.
I don't expect you to agree Brad. You can't. btw, you still predicting a big win for Trump and Republicans this November?
Nothing but narrative...
Oops!
http://thehill.com/homenews/media/406023-wapost-fact-checker-gives-harris-four-pinocchios
You're conflating a number of things and ultimately making no sense. My positions are documented as recently as a few days ago.
No problem, I'm about to start haha!
As for the confirmation, barring a major scandal, the confirmation outcome has not been in doubt for some time now. There is very little any Democrat on the committee could or can do to stop it right now.
However, that doesn't mean Harris wasn't effective with questioning.
So has your position now changed? No longer predicting a big win for Trump and Republicans in November?
I am certainly not a Trumper. But you have your far left wing goggles too firmly applied. Not only did she fail, she made herself look bad. And foolish. And then to compound the failure she tweeted a heavily edited snippet of a Kavanaugh response about abortion. The WaPo even said that was disingenuous.
Think about this ... two liberal media outlets called BS on her for two sepaparye incidents.
I disagree. I believe she was very effective. We will just have to agree to disagree.
btw, I'm not "far-left." If I was far-left, I'd probably be less likely to praise Harris too since she receives her fair share of criticism from them.
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article167825757.html
In case you forgot...
Still your position?
Similar threads
