Kavanaugh hearing
- Thread starter BIGOSUFAN
- Start date
Delay and distract is all they have.
But the wheels of parliamentary procedure roll on.
But the wheels of parliamentary procedure roll on.
Let me guess.
Democrat: Wah Wah Wah...Donald Trump...Wah Wah Wah..how are you going to vote?....Wah Wah Wah, Donald Trump...WahWahWah..you hate women and minorities....Wah Wah Wah..you should excuse yourself because Donald Trump is president and under investigation and this should be delayed for months...and so on.
Democrat: Wah Wah Wah...Donald Trump...Wah Wah Wah..how are you going to vote?....Wah Wah Wah, Donald Trump...WahWahWah..you hate women and minorities....Wah Wah Wah..you should excuse yourself because Donald Trump is president and under investigation and this should be delayed for months...and so on.
Not even close. I don't believe Kavanaugh has spoken yet. The Dem Senators are trying to get the hearing shut down. I think they are just now hearing opening statements from each of the judicial comm members. Cruz is rambling on about something.
Is the screaming woman afraid that she won't be able to kill her kid in the future?
Been listening most of the morning. It started out as Grassley not making Dems follow the rules of being recognized and like children they started running over him immediately. He then had to put an end to that attempt at niceties and tell them to stfu.
There has been lots of screaming women. One dem senator did say it was out of order when the screamer during his speech. That probably cost him some campaign money.
So the Democrats are making outlandish demands, that if the tables were turned, they themselves would never abide by?
You want to early buy out of the bet? I'll let you off with a one month exile if you opt out now.
Just trying to be a nice guy.
That would be an awesome point if it were relevant or close to the same thing.
cory booker working over meh russia
go cory go cory it’s your birthday
go cory go cory it’s your birthday
Looks like the grass roots have decided to get the 2020 re-election campaign off to a high-flying start.
“the perverse process by which this comes forward”- gottdam cory preach that russia preach it
All's fair in love and war. The MG move was chickenshit. Why should the Dems be expected to do anything different than what they are doing today.
You want to early buy out of the bet? I'll let you off with a one month exile if you opt out now.
Just trying to be a nice guy.
You must be drunk.
Give me 24 hours to consider your offer.
I’m not talking about the results. I’m talking about the asinine opening statements and demands that both sides have been guilty of. They act like the nominee is the second coming of Hitler.
Merrick Garland was not confirmed. Kind of like Robert Bork.
So Merrick Garland is on the Supreme Court? Robert Bork is on the Supreme Court? Both are on the Supreme Court? Neither are on the Supreme Court because neither got confirmed?
Garland's reason for not being confirmed were not close to the reason Bork wasn't confirmed. Only one had a hearing.
They should just pass him from committee to a vote tomorrow since the lefties don't really want to discuss him
they need every photo op they can generate
midterms are upon us and the blue waves bring all the juice of a popcorn fart
I wonder if we've crossed a bridge that we can't walk back from. Are we to a point now that we won't get supreme court justices successfully appointed unless the president and the Senate are of the same party?
Would a Dem controlled Senate ever approve a supreme court judge nominated by a Republican - and vice versa?
Would a Dem controlled Senate ever approve a supreme court judge nominated by a Republican - and vice versa?
a more confident genteel opposition party could certainly confirm a justice
it’s quite apparent with the feinstein controlled photo bomb that this bunch of hit and run dystopians are pure resisters
Are you under the impression he’s the only USSC nominee to have never gotten a hearing?
If you don't like it then work to get your team control of the Senate.
The Democrats would of done the exact same thing to a Republican nominee if the roles were reversed and you damn well know it.
If they had control of the Senate right now Kavanagh would be done before he ever got a hearing.
There have been 30 nominees to SCOTUS that ended up not being serving on the bench.
Four total had “no action” by the Senate.
The other three besides Garland were nominated in the 19th Century.
Other than presenting the facts of the case, are you advocating a course of action?
No.
@Marshal Jim Duncan seemed to be arguing that it is fairly common for a Supreme Court nominee to never get a hearing and have no action taken on a nominee. I was merely pointing out that what happened with Merrick’s nomination is exceedingly uncommon.
I like Supreme Court Justices with old names. Clarence, Ruth, that sort of stuff. Don’t need a Brett. Next thing you know, we’ll have justices named Cooper and Bayley. It’s a slippery slope.
Besides, I’m a lawyer....a hired gun....you have to tell me who is my client before I can tell you what course of action I would advocate.
I totally get that. That's why I asked because I was curious on your take and not just the facts of the case.Besides, I’m a lawyer....a hired gun....you have to tell me who is my client before I can tell you what course of action I would advocate.
I'm generally open to the more expert opinion of someone more educated on the subject than myself.
Given the context of the conversation you were having, yes...“not the only one” SUGGESTS fairly common.
In context of the conversation, it certainly doesn’t suggest “three other times in history....all the others over a 100 years ago.”
I think the Republicans should’ve have given Merrick a hearing and a vote.
I think Kavanaugh will get his hearing and vote before the mid-terms.
I understand why the Democrats are trying to keep that from happening....it’s kind of a revenge thing and political grandstanding for votes.
That doesn't really bother me that much. In this instance I believe the ends do justify the means. Yeah, if that makes me a cheerleader for my side than I accept that openly.
Too much rested on that nomination.
No. Words have meaning. "Are you under the impression that he's the only USSC nominee to have never gotten a hearing?" Means exactly what it implies: he wasn't the only one.
If I'd have ntended to say it was common I would have said so.
I'm okay with not giving him a hearing. It would have resulted in the same outcome and didn't drag his family through the mud and muck.
