kibitzer wrote:
I notice that people occasionally refer to handle thefts on this thread.
Remember that Rigged for Hillary was outed for that, some weeks or months back--though I seriously doubt that RFH is the only one.
Okay, carry on.
Jamin and Hardloper (JaminLoper) are two of the worst..
It was 35 years ago. It was very likely two drunk people. Why now? It's not like he's some predator in a van. Does he possess the qualifications for SCOTUS? It's not like he has a recent history of sexual misconduct.
Again, Democrats are mad they got hosed because they and Obama had no balls. Obama appointed someone. The GOP said F U. Democrats need to learn to play hard ball.
Alan
kibitzer wrote:
I notice that people occasionally refer to handle thefts on this thread.
Remember that Rigged for Hillary was outed for that, some weeks or months back--though I seriously doubt that RFH is the only one.
Okay, carry on.
Yes.
Flagpole is notorious for this.
Good morning! How are all you LRC stable geniuses doing this fine am?
Runningart2004 wrote:
It was 35 years ago. It was very likely two drunk people. Why now? It's not like he's some predator in a van. Does he possess the qualifications for SCOTUS? It's not like he has a recent history of sexual misconduct.
Again, Democrats are mad they got hosed because they and Obama had no balls. Obama appointed someone. The GOP said F U. Democrats need to learn to play hard ball.
Alan
So you assume it is true.
Then the lying and cover up is happening right now. Not 35 years ago. Right now.
You are perfectly fine with a potential Supreme Court Justice lying to the American people just to get a job.
I'm fine with your argument if he owns up to it and said he was young and stupid and apologizes.
But he is making accusations against the victim right now.
Is that the kind if judgment we want for the Supreme Court?
L L wrote:
Runningart2004 wrote:
It was 35 years ago. It was very likely two drunk people. Why now? It's not like he's some predator in a van. Does he possess the qualifications for SCOTUS? It's not like he has a recent history of sexual misconduct.
Again, Democrats are mad they got hosed because they and Obama had no balls. Obama appointed someone. The GOP said F U. Democrats need to learn to play hard ball.
Alan
So you assume it is true.
Then the lying and cover up is happening right now. Not 35 years ago. Right now.
You are perfectly fine with a potential Supreme Court Justice lying to the American people just to get a job.
I'm fine with your argument if he owns up to it and said he was young and stupid and apologizes.
But he is making accusations against the victim right now.
Is that the kind if judgment we want for the Supreme Court?
I’d like him more if he was a lot more liberal.
Flagpole wrote:
Runningart2004 is right wrote:
Nope, you voted for her.
You had no issues with her failures and lies and deny them to this day.
To not fully admit flat out that Hillary and Bill were lying crooks says a lot about you, which is why you rarely get the responses that you're looking for. Believe me, if she had been honest and not done the things she had, I would have voted for her.
Bill's sexual trysts. Hillary and the complaints on her by female interns. You don't get to say fake news when the person is right there in flesh and blood stating what she did. But...you never addressed those as it's too close to home, right? You merely want your candidate to win.
This is why you get flack and can't understand the manner of responses that you get. You do care and want it, which is why you post so frequently.
Go ahead and laugh, it won't bother me in the least.
But, I agree with your statement of "unfortunately after Trump began his term."
This thread will never be civil and you are a big reason why. You post links that you claim as gospel and anyone else's link is lies by garbage sources, but not yours. Flip it and imagine being on the other side.
Alan is a lot smarter than you think he is. I've never met him, but I'll put him at age 67...and I'm not guaranteeing it.
1) Dude, you should let Alan try to fight his own battles, because you did a horrible job.
2) When referring to "Clinton", I was clearly referring to BILL Clinton not Hillary. You must be a young blood. I lost respect for Bill Clinton a long time ago and have said so here many times.
3) Hillary Clinton has been investigated to the teeth. There were 8 different Benghazi investigations. Nothing came from any of them. If you believe she has gotten away with a crime, go hire a lawyer and go after her. Until then, you can't say she's a criminal...there is nothing legitimate out there that supports that at all. Is she flawed? Yep. I have said that a hundred times. She was just a better candidate than Trump. Not a high bar, because he is an imbecile.
4) I don't say "fake news". I don't use terms used by Trump and his dunderhead followers.
5) My issue with Trump is not because he beat the candidate I voted for (halfheartedly voted for too by the way...she was just better than Trump). My issue is that he is a criminal and all the other things I mention in point 7 below...a list that is not exhaustive either.
6) I rarely post links, so what are you talking about? I also never have said anything that anyone else has said is gospel. Do you know how to read? How is your comprehension? Not everyone is good at that. Maybe you are a numbers person. Maybe you are good with shapes. Words are not your thing.
7) Why would I have to imagine being on the other side? So, imagine or flat out supporting an amoral, unethical person? Sorry...I would never do that. The other side (Trump and his supporters) is just flat wrong. Trump is a serial liar, a criminal, a racist, incompetent, and he has tons of people around him who have been charged with felonies and many others being investigated. He will go down and then be seen by history as the most corrupt politician in the US ever.
8) I never questioned Alan's intelligence. He hasn't shown me that he is all that intelligent, but I didn't question it. I said simply that his opinion on this particular issue is wrong...because it is. He has been right about other things. He's not right here.
Good gracious. You remain nd me so much of Trump.
Btw, that’s NOT a compliment.
L L wrote:
Runningart2004 wrote:
It was 35 years ago. It was very likely two drunk people. Why now? It's not like he's some predator in a van. Does he possess the qualifications for SCOTUS? It's not like he has a recent history of sexual misconduct.
Again, Democrats are mad they got hosed because they and Obama had no balls. Obama appointed someone. The GOP said F U. Democrats need to learn to play hard ball.
Alan
So you assume it is true.
Then the lying and cover up is happening right now. Not 35 years ago. Right now.
You are perfectly fine with a potential Supreme Court Justice lying to the American people just to get a job.
I'm fine with your argument if he owns up to it and said he was young and stupid and apologizes.
But he is making accusations against the victim right now.
Is that the kind if judgment we want for the Supreme Court?
Is there proof that he actually did do it? Genuinely asking since I've been out of the loop on this one.
Racket wrote:
L L wrote:
So you assume it is true.
Then the lying and cover up is happening right now. Not 35 years ago. Right now.
You are perfectly fine with a potential Supreme Court Justice lying to the American people just to get a job.
I'm fine with your argument if he owns up to it and said he was young and stupid and apologizes.
But he is making accusations against the victim right now.
Is that the kind if judgment we want for the Supreme Court?
Is there proof that he actually did do it? Genuinely asking since I've been out of the loop on this one.
That’s the exact question we need answers to before proceeding with a conformation vote. Is there proof? I don’t think anyone knows for sure but partisan hacks from both sides will try and argue for their “side” before we know the facts.
Additional hearing need to be held to look into these allegations. My understanding is the accuser has now said she is willing to testify and is available on or after the following dates: 11/17/18, 11/28/18, 12/5/18.
All reasonable, fair minded people will agree that she should testify in front of Congress—on one of her available dates.
Trump lite wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
1) Dude, you should let Alan try to fight his own battles, because you did a horrible job.
2) When referring to "Clinton", I was clearly referring to BILL Clinton not Hillary. You must be a young blood. I lost respect for Bill Clinton a long time ago and have said so here many times.
3) Hillary Clinton has been investigated to the teeth. There were 8 different Benghazi investigations. Nothing came from any of them. If you believe she has gotten away with a crime, go hire a lawyer and go after her. Until then, you can't say she's a criminal...there is nothing legitimate out there that supports that at all. Is she flawed? Yep. I have said that a hundred times. She was just a better candidate than Trump. Not a high bar, because he is an imbecile.
4) I don't say "fake news". I don't use terms used by Trump and his dunderhead followers.
5) My issue with Trump is not because he beat the candidate I voted for (halfheartedly voted for too by the way...she was just better than Trump). My issue is that he is a criminal and all the other things I mention in point 7 below...a list that is not exhaustive either.
6) I rarely post links, so what are you talking about? I also never have said anything that anyone else has said is gospel. Do you know how to read? How is your comprehension? Not everyone is good at that. Maybe you are a numbers person. Maybe you are good with shapes. Words are not your thing.
7) Why would I have to imagine being on the other side? So, imagine or flat out supporting an amoral, unethical person? Sorry...I would never do that. The other side (Trump and his supporters) is just flat wrong. Trump is a serial liar, a criminal, a racist, incompetent, and he has tons of people around him who have been charged with felonies and many others being investigated. He will go down and then be seen by history as the most corrupt politician in the US ever.
8) I never questioned Alan's intelligence. He hasn't shown me that he is all that intelligent, but I didn't question it. I said simply that his opinion on this particular issue is wrong...because it is. He has been right about other things. He's not right here.
Good gracious. You remain nd me so much of Trump.
Btw, that’s NOT a compliment.
Oh and Flagpole, what definition of intelligence are we using? I am vastly more intelligent than you on some topics, likewise you are vastly more intelligent than me on some topics. Stop while you're ahead. A person's opinion can't be right or wrong, it's their opinion.
At this point Kavanaugh is stuck. He lied because we all would lie. If you say otherwise you are a liar..:) Now he either retreats and apologies for something he did as an idiot 18 year old or he continues as is.
What's to happen in the next 35-40 years when we have a SCOTUS appointee who has to battle it out over some sausage pic he sent to a 16 or 17 yr old as an 18yr old.
Are we all going to judged by what we did as an 18 yr old drunk or high AF? Stop being so obtuse and self-righteous.
Again....if this was 2019 instead of 2018 there would be no big theatrical condemnation.
It's....all....politics.....
Alan
We’re Ben & Ed and we steal handles! wrote:
That’s the exact question we need answers to before proceeding with a conformation vote. Is there proof? I don’t think anyone knows for sure but partisan hacks from both sides will try and argue for their “side” before we know the facts.
Additional hearing need to be held to look into these allegations. My understanding is the accuser has now said she is willing to testify and is available on or after the following dates: 11/17/18, 11/28/18, 12/5/18.
All reasonable, fair minded people will agree that she should testify in front of Congress—on one of her available dates.
Thanks, excellent summary! I think it's unlikely the allegation will get very far unless multiple witnesses can corroborate it but we'll see what happens. Politically speaking, it gives the democrats a bit of an upper hand as an investigation would likely push the nomination vote past midterms, and there's no doubt a Supreme court nomination would push a few extra voters to the polls (although maybe that would backfire by energizing a waning Trump base).
Runningart2004 wrote:
Trump lite wrote:
Good gracious. You remain nd me so much of Trump.
Btw, that’s NOT a compliment.
Oh and Flagpole, what definition of intelligence are we using? I am vastly more intelligent than you on some topics, likewise you are vastly more intelligent than me on some topics. Stop while you're ahead. A person's opinion can't be right or wrong, it's their opinion.
At this point Kavanaugh is stuck. He lied because we all would lie. If you say otherwise you are a liar..:) Now he either retreats and apologies for something he did as an idiot 18 year old or he continues as is.
What's to happen in the next 35-40 years when we have a SCOTUS appointee who has to battle it out over some sausage pic he sent to a 16 or 17 yr old as an 18yr old.
Are we all going to judged by what we did as an 18 yr old drunk or high AF? Stop being so obtuse and self-righteous.
Again....if this was 2019 instead of 2018 there would be no big theatrical condemnation.
It's....all....politics.....
Alan
Alan, you have been the voice of reason on this thread. Don’t let the partisan hacks on either side get to you.
Runningart2004 wrote:
What's to happen in the next 35-40 years when we have a SCOTUS appointee who has to battle it out over some sausage pic he sent to a 16 or 17 yr old as an 18yr old.
Are we all going to judged by what we did as an 18 yr old drunk or high AF? Stop being so obtuse and self-righteous.
Alan
Just wait a few more years when presidential candidates will have had Facebook during their high school and college careers.
Runningart2004 wrote:
Democrats need to stop.
Runningart2004 wrote:
Democrats need to learn to play hard ball.
At least one of us is confused on this point.
Racket wrote:
Is there proof that he actually did do it? Genuinely asking since I've been out of the loop on this one.
My response was to Alan who believed that he did do it.
Runningart2004 wrote:
At this point Kavanaugh is stuck. He lied because we all would lie. If you say otherwise you are a liar..:) Now he either retreats and apologies for something he did as an idiot 18 year old or he continues as is.
Alan
So we are at a point that not only do we accept that it's OK for politicians to lie, but also Supreme Court nominees.
Maybe we all (or most) would lie about an accusation that made us look bad and couldn't be proven true, but we all aren't Supreme Court nominees about to accept a lifetime appointment.
Some positions have higher standards of ethics.
"Now he either retreats and apologies for something he did as an idiot 18 year old or he continues as is. "
Which path do you think he should go?
Racket wrote:
I think it's unlikely the allegation will get very far unless multiple witnesses can corroborate it but we'll see what happens. Politically speaking, it gives the democrats a bit of an upper hand as an investigation would likely push the nomination vote past midterms, and there's no doubt a Supreme court nomination would push a few extra voters to the polls (although maybe that would backfire by energizing a waning Trump base).
Yes, at the end of the day this discussion is about politics.
If the Republicans ram this vote through without hearing this woman out, it will energize the women's movement even more heading into this election.
But they may be willing to sacrifice this election in exchange for having Kavanaugh in to go with Gorsuch and their tax cuts.
Runningart2004 wrote:
It was 35 years ago. It was very likely two drunk people. Why now? It's not like he's some predator in a van. Does he possess the qualifications for SCOTUS? It's not like he has a recent history of sexual misconduct.
Again, Democrats are mad they got hosed because they and Obama had no balls. Obama appointed someone. The GOP said F U. Democrats need to learn to play hard ball.
Alan
Someone who has attempted rape should NEVER be put on the SCOTUS.
It really is that simple.
Trump lite wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
1) Dude, you should let Alan try to fight his own battles, because you did a horrible job.
2) When referring to "Clinton", I was clearly referring to BILL Clinton not Hillary. You must be a young blood. I lost respect for Bill Clinton a long time ago and have said so here many times.
3) Hillary Clinton has been investigated to the teeth. There were 8 different Benghazi investigations. Nothing came from any of them. If you believe she has gotten away with a crime, go hire a lawyer and go after her. Until then, you can't say she's a criminal...there is nothing legitimate out there that supports that at all. Is she flawed? Yep. I have said that a hundred times. She was just a better candidate than Trump. Not a high bar, because he is an imbecile.
4) I don't say "fake news". I don't use terms used by Trump and his dunderhead followers.
5) My issue with Trump is not because he beat the candidate I voted for (halfheartedly voted for too by the way...she was just better than Trump). My issue is that he is a criminal and all the other things I mention in point 7 below...a list that is not exhaustive either.
6) I rarely post links, so what are you talking about? I also never have said anything that anyone else has said is gospel. Do you know how to read? How is your comprehension? Not everyone is good at that. Maybe you are a numbers person. Maybe you are good with shapes. Words are not your thing.
7) Why would I have to imagine being on the other side? So, imagine or flat out supporting an amoral, unethical person? Sorry...I would never do that. The other side (Trump and his supporters) is just flat wrong. Trump is a serial liar, a criminal, a racist, incompetent, and he has tons of people around him who have been charged with felonies and many others being investigated. He will go down and then be seen by history as the most corrupt politician in the US ever.
8) I never questioned Alan's intelligence. He hasn't shown me that he is all that intelligent, but I didn't question it. I said simply that his opinion on this particular issue is wrong...because it is. He has been right about other things. He's not right here.
Good gracious. You remain nd me so much of Trump.
Btw, that’s NOT a compliment.
How is that possible? Trump is incapable of typing 140 characters without at least 2 cringe-worthy errors.
Runningart2004 wrote:
Trump lite wrote:
Good gracious. You remain nd me so much of Trump.
Btw, that’s NOT a compliment.
Oh and Flagpole, what definition of intelligence are we using? I am vastly more intelligent than you on some topics, likewise you are vastly more intelligent than me on some topics. Stop while you're ahead. A person's opinion can't be right or wrong, it's their opinion.
At this point Kavanaugh is stuck. He lied because we all would lie. If you say otherwise you are a liar..:) Now he either retreats and apologies for something he did as an idiot 18 year old or he continues as is.
What's to happen in the next 35-40 years when we have a SCOTUS appointee who has to battle it out over some sausage pic he sent to a 16 or 17 yr old as an 18yr old.
Are we all going to judged by what we did as an 18 yr old drunk or high AF? Stop being so obtuse and self-righteous.
Again....if this was 2019 instead of 2018 there would be no big theatrical condemnation.
It's....all....politics.....
Alan
Sorry but attempted rape is not a "sausage pic".