That's situational, but would be considered. The election will need to make a statement. It's currently not on course to do so.
What are you prepared to undergo or consider when the Dems dont win the House? (Such a low bar, historically)
Brett Kavenaugh letter details...
- Thread starter tlwwake
- Start date
That's situational, but would be considered. The election will need to make a statement. It's currently not on course to do so.
What are you prepared to undergo or consider when the Dems dont win the House? (Such a low bar, historically)
All Kavenaugh had to do was give a straight answer. As a Senator, Harris has a right to ask a man seeking a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court any damn question she wants. If he doesn't have anything to hide, no need to stutter and get all flustered. Answer the question.
If a liberal had acted like he did when questioned by say, Trey Gowdy, you would have been the first on here applauding Gowdy and attacking the liberal.
Or maybe you can't handle having someone stand up to your bullshit.
Now, I'll ask again, will you make a bet on your original prediction that Republicans gain in the House? Maybe even raise the bet to $100 too since you were so sure of it?
1. You are not embracing your cognitive dissonance, and you are therefore not becoming a better you. Net result, you're more of a cost on others.
"Give a straight answer" you say. Did you hear him ask for clarification of scope? Are you even hearing me ask this, or are you gonna breeze right by it again? He desired to give a straight answer to the best of his recollection. You and Harris use wordsmithery (an inherently shady tactic) to frame a situation instead of attempting a meaningful dialogue.
2. Again with your mind reading. No I wouldn't have. Why? Because I understand the flaw in the question in how it was asked.
Try again.....and do better, because you're running out of runway due to wasting my time.
It was a simple question Brad. All he had to do was give a simple answer. Of if he didn't recall, that is all he had to say too. Instead, he completely fell apart because he was clearly afraid she knew something. The Senator had the man stuttering and flustered over a simple yes or no question lol.
Again, if you have nothing to hide, or if you are not simply giving answers you have been prepped to give, you can answer simple questions. You don't need scope.
If I asked you if you have ever been to a strip club, a yes or no is all that is needed. Your inability to give that simple answer reveals something about you, not the one asking the question.
This is a message board, there is no "listening" going on here.
But I'll take your refusal to answer my simple question as a no. You aren't willing to make that bet. You aren't willing to back up your original prediction because you are no longer confident in that prediction. And we all can see that, even if your cognitive dissonance won't allow you to.
Last edited:
Your a lawyer? And you say this with a straight face?
I'm sorry to inform you that you are not a mind reader and are falling on the side of confirmation bias, a very, very simple thing to both do and recognize. Strictly looking at the mechanics of the question and the answer, you're wrong. You cant read minds. And had she simply said something like "out of the DC office" or "Mr Green, Gray, or Blue or Mrs Navy or Muave" then she gets her question answered.
Hell, if she were prepared, she could have handed him a list with names and locations or had a projector put said list overhead.
It's not rocket science. This stuff isnt hard at all.
So if Democrats take control of one of the branches of Congress, does that make a statement?
I'll continue to post what I've posted since you first asked me, if the Democrats dondo win one of the branches of Congress, it is a bad election for them. They should win control of either the House or the Senate. If they don't, they seriously need to reconsider their political strategy as it relates to Trump. They need to consider what they need to do to to make their platform more acceptable to a majority of Americans. That doesn't mean they need to become more conservative. It just means they need to figure out how to get a majority of Americans to embrace their platform.
Now your turn: If Democrats take control of one of the branches of Congress, does that mean their assessment of 2016 and how to respond has been good? What if they win both branches? What does that indicate?
Speak for yourself. Plenty on here listen, myself included.
Correct, I will not bet YOU. But you are not listening well (as you've stated) as to the reasons why I won't bet YOU.
Yes, and I'm telling your right now that had Kavenaugh done that in a courtroom, he would have been perceived as hiding something. In my experience, juries like straight answers. They will buy BS from the lawyers, but they don't buy it from the witnesses.
No, this isn't hard. So let's review the record:
Senator Harris: Judge, have you ever discussed special counsel Mueller or his investigation with anyone?
Simple question. If I asked you that, what would you say? It is a simple question. Yes or no.
What does Kavanaugh do? Doesn't answer it. Starts stuttering. Gets flustered. WHY? Would you? Damn, almost all Americans have discussed it. What is so wrong in saying "Yes"? He can't do it though lol!
Next up...
Senator Harris: Have you discussed it with anyone at a certain law firm?
Kavanaugh's response to a narrowing of the scope (since you were so concerned about scope)? More stuttering. More evasiveness.
Why? Answer the question.
But he can't.
He responds, "Is there a person you talked to." lol
He is now afraid she knows something he wasn't prepped on. He is more concerned with giving the "right" answer instead of the TRUTHFUL answer. Bam.
She exposed him. Clear to see. All because he couldn't answer a simple question.
Last edited:
I dont like you or trust you. You're a shady operator. You have no track record that would compel me to trust you.
You talk at people and not with people. No I don't want to bet you....you specifically.
And I have nothing to prove, though it seems you have a micro penis and gotta fight like hell to feel good about yourself for some reason tonight.
My suggestion for you... just drink it away.
As I already posted...
He is now afraid she knows something he wasn't prepped on. He is more concerned with giving the "right" answer instead of the TRUTHFUL answer. Bam.
For the record, you're a walking, talking example of what's wrong with left. But your hubris doesnt allow you to see where you need work.
I'd suggest starting with videos of Jordan Peterson, David Rubin, and here:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...-and-your-brain?amp&__twitter_impression=true
lol, you are now reduced to penis insults? It has been a rough night for you Brad.
Again, your own words indict you:
Are you not entertained by Miss Cleo up in here? 2cents is hilarious! He/she/ze tries so hard to make his/her/zer narrative regurgitation believable. I'd feel sorry for him/her/zer if it wasn't so damn funny.
Absolutely.
Clown show...
Thinks it's been a "rough night" while not knowing HE is the entertainment!
Well, if it is obvious, then why did Brad post about listening on a message board. You just insulted your buddy Brad. Congrats.
btw, I'm still waiting on your answer regarding the potential Democratic nominees I asked you months ago. How long does it take you to research a question before you can answer it?
Or maybe you should just admit you will oppose anyone who the Democrats nominate. At least you will be honest then.
I showed you exactly what was exposed and you then resulted to the Marco Rubio play, penis insult. DIdn't work well for him and didn't work well for you either.
What was that loser behavior you were speaking of on the other thread?
But you've exposed nothing. I'm waiting for you to place a noun in a sentence. That noun would be what was exposed.
Wait, is this like collusion?
