Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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!!!"
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!!!"
How did she own him? Did she sway a vote? Was she truthful? Did she get him to admit something?Harris owned Kavenaugh. One could easily tell Harris used to be a prosecutor.
How did she own him? Did she sway a vote? Was she truthful? Did she get him to admit something?
Guilty until proven innocent...Would love to see your proof of his innocence. I’m sure you’re well-connected with everything here lol
Guilty until proven innocent...
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.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.
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.
So you are ok with her lying as long as it gets your outcome. Got it.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?
So you are ok with her lying as long as it gets your outcome. Got it.
let's see...maybe you understand deceived, misrepresented, disguised, garbled, equivocated, phony up, embellished, slanted, and distorted.
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.”Harris owned Kavenaugh. One could easily tell Harris used to be a prosecutor.
Wait...... CNN is fake news.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.”
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.
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.
So, he won’t be nominated?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 better hope the Democrats are not wise enough to nominate Harris for President in 2020. She wound be a very formative opponent and would most likely 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.
So, he won’t be nominated?
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.
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.
Sorry...had a couple already. Confirmed?He has already been nominated.
Nothing but narrative...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
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?
Sorry...had a couple already. Confirmed?
My positions are documented as recently as a few days ago.
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.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?
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.
My positions are documented as recently as a few days ago.
I predict gains in the House.
The Senate is a no brainer.
As you know, polling trend is working against Dems.
As you know, economy is lit.
As you know, Dems can't help but look like petulant children.
As you know, all trends are currently against dems. They'll most likely lose several of the seats gained in the special elections they recently won.
Actually, it does mean exactly that.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.