Trump's SCOTUS

[Speaker to Animals]

once again we have another party where we can't find the date or even year, we don't know the place and the victim isnt cooperating or pointing fingers. What we have is a political hack telling stories as if they are anything credible. They are not. And if someone else comes forward that person is going to get the anal exam that everyone else has and you don't graduate yale law school without some skeleton hack in your closet. If you think pussy Democrats are going to take an impeachment vote in an election year you are out of your mind. This is primary voting posturing and fundraising fodder, they won't go to a general with this shit. Especially when they dont have the 67 votes in the Senate.

Wrong. The guy stated exactly when and where he alleged it happened. Apparently the woman remembers that somebody assaulted her with his cock but cannot remember who it was. You need one more person at the party to make the allegation and this thing blows up, pulling us right back into a witch hunt.

And that NYT article is a fucking trap. Do not make the mistake that attacking that shitty article is the same as refuting the allegations.

Not from what I see. Hack accuser, hack reporters, hack article. If they are soliciting for more witnesses they would have produced more. This seems to be the new Russia, it'll never end and they'll never get anywhere with it. They have all been proven to be hack bitch liars. Kavanaugh has been vetted over and over again not a hint of this for decades but put him on the Supreme Court and the Clinton machine goes full bore. Witch hunts don't end well for them.

Nothing about how the accuser handled himself describes a hack. He did it discretely and professionally. He did not go to the media to make a farce out of it. He tried to protect the identity of the woman. Screaming "Clinton lawyer" gets you as far as any ad hominem fallaxy: nowhere.

If he is part of a scam, it's an elaborate one.

[clubgop]

Wrong. The guy stated exactly when and where he alleged it happened. Apparently the woman remembers that somebody assaulted her with his cock but cannot remember who it was. You need one more person at the party to make the allegation and this thing blows up, pulling us right back into a witch hunt.

And that NYT article is a fucking trap. Do not make the mistake that attacking that shitty article is the same as refuting the allegations.

Not from what I see. Hack accuser, hack reporters, hack article. If they are soliciting for more witnesses they would have produced more. This seems to be the new Russia, it'll never end and they'll never get anywhere with it. They have all been proven to be hack bitch liars. Kavanaugh has been vetted over and over again not a hint of this for decades but put him on the Supreme Court and the Clinton machine goes full bore. Witch hunts don't end well for them.

Nothing about how the accuser handled himself describes a hack. He did it discretely and professionally. He did not go to the media to make a farce out of it. He tried to protect the identity of the woman. Screaming "Clinton lawyer" gets you as far as any ad hominem fallaxy: nowhere.

If he is part of a scam, it's an elaborate one.

Sounds exactly like CBF, why is this any different? So discretely and professionally that he didn't tell Chuck Grassley the chairman of the committee or any other Senate Republican. The FBI didn't follow it up or find it credible. He told Senate Democrats when they were soliciting this shit, he a hack, they are hacks. They knew about it and held it, boy they all want power, they should never get it.

[Speaker to Animals]

Not from what I see. Hack accuser, hack reporters, hack article. If they are soliciting for more witnesses they would have produced more. This seems to be the new Russia, it'll never end and they'll never get anywhere with it. They have all been proven to be hack bitch liars. Kavanaugh has been vetted over and over again not a hint of this for decades but put him on the Supreme Court and the Clinton machine goes full bore. Witch hunts don't end well for them.

Nothing about how the accuser handled himself describes a hack. He did it discretely and professionally. He did not go to the media to make a farce out of it. He tried to protect the identity of the woman. Screaming "Clinton lawyer" gets you as far as any ad hominem fallaxy: nowhere.

If he is part of a scam, it's an elaborate one.

Sounds exactly like CBF, why is this any different? So discretely and professionally that he didn't tell Chuck Grassley the chairman of the committee or any other Senate Republican. The FBI didn't follow it up or find it credible. He told Senate Democrats when they were soliciting this shit, he a hack, they are hacks. They knew about it and held it, boy they all want power, they should never get it.

You literally just replied to two posts that explained exactly how it is different.

[The Conservative]

Um we do know that this Max Stier dude is a Clinton lawyer, right? Kavanaugh is being Arkancided as we speak. We can stop another Clinton hit, we have got to do it.

So?

I have no idea what actually happened. I am just telling you the obvious truth. It only takes for one other person to accuse him of doing it who was at that party and it's over.

once again we have another party where we can't find the date or even year, we don't know the place and the victim isnt cooperating or pointing fingers. What we have is a political hack telling stories as if they are anything credible. They are not. And if someone else comes forward that person is going to get the anal exam that everyone else has and you don't graduate yale law school without some skeleton hack in your closet. If you think pussy Democrats are going to take an impeachment vote in an election year you are out of your mind. This is primary voting posturing and fundraising fodder, they won't go to a general with this shit. Especially when they dont have the 67 votes in the Senate.

Again, I think you all are overthinking this. This is to get a book author sales he otherwise would never of had, and if it means taking down a judge in the process, so be if.

[clubgop]

So?

I have no idea what actually happened. I am just telling you the obvious truth. It only takes for one other person to accuse him of doing it who was at that party and it's over.

once again we have another party where we can't find the date or even year, we don't know the place and the victim isnt cooperating or pointing fingers. What we have is a political hack telling stories as if they are anything credible. They are not. And if someone else comes forward that person is going to get the anal exam that everyone else has and you don't graduate yale law school without some skeleton hack in your closet. If you think pussy Democrats are going to take an impeachment vote in an election year you are out of your mind. This is primary voting posturing and fundraising fodder, they won't go to a general with this shit. Especially when they dont have the 67 votes in the Senate.

Again, I think you all are overthinking this. This is to get a book author sales he otherwise would never of had, and if it means taking down a judge in the process, so be if.

Oh I know that. If StA thinks tweddle bitch and twiddle fuck are capable of some subterfuge when they havent demonstrated that capability any other time.

[clubgop]

Nothing about how the accuser handled himself describes a hack. He did it discretely and professionally. He did not go to the media to make a farce out of it. He tried to protect the identity of the woman. Screaming "Clinton lawyer" gets you as far as any ad hominem fallaxy: nowhere.

If he is part of a scam, it's an elaborate one.

Sounds exactly like CBF, why is this any different? So discretely and professionally that he didn't tell Chuck Grassley the chairman of the committee or any other Senate Republican. The FBI didn't follow it up or find it credible. He told Senate Democrats when they were soliciting this shit, he a hack, they are hacks. They knew about it and held it, boy they all want power, they should never get it.

You literally just replied to two posts that explained exactly how it is different.

No you didn't. CBF did the same shit and when it came time to do the most damage to Kavanaugh or in this case sell a book someone else leaked it. Someone else went to the media to make a farce of it. They both "tried" to keep identities secret for as long as possible so as not too expose themselves. The only thing that is different is the gentalia of the one pointing fingers. Sorry but this story doesn't sound any more believable with a Male narrator.

[StCapps]

So?

I have no idea what actually happened. I am just telling you the obvious truth. It only takes for one other person to accuse him of doing it who was at that party and it's over.

once again we have another party where we can't find the date or even year, we don't know the place and the victim isnt cooperating or pointing fingers. What we have is a political hack telling stories as if they are anything credible. They are not. And if someone else comes forward that person is going to get the anal exam that everyone else has and you don't graduate yale law school without some skeleton hack in your closet. If you think pussy Democrats are going to take an impeachment vote in an election year you are out of your mind. This is primary voting posturing and fundraising fodder, they won't go to a general with this shit. Especially when they dont have the 67 votes in the Senate.

Wrong. The guy stated exactly when and where he alleged it happened. Apparently the woman remembers that somebody assaulted her with his cock but cannot remember who it was. You need one more person at the party to make the allegation and this thing blows up, pulling us right back into a witch hunt.

And that NYT article is a fucking trap. Do not make the mistake that attacking that shitty article is the same as refuting the allegations.

The guy stated that a buddy of Kavanaugh committed the assault, and it was a separate incident, with a different victim, who denies the allegation. It is not a trap, it's the Democrats overreaching, again. Ramirez named her cherry picked supposed witnesses, and none of them corroborated the story.

I love how you think the Democrats got smart all of a sudden, hilarious. Having no evidence and making spurious allegations anyway is the trap, and it's Democrats falling for it this time, not Republicans.

Democrats choosing to double down on it is not a sign of diabolical plan, but of them being completely incompetent and prone to counter-productive foolishness. Kavanaugh Derangement Syndrome is a helluva disease, and Democrats are riddled with it, that's what is happening here, you are completely overthinking this.

[Fife]

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1175526364734050304

[Fife]

Clarence Thomas Opens Up About Finding God in 'One of the Darkest Periods of My Life'

"Unlike the tumultuous world around me, the church building provided a place of peace, a sanctuary from the turmoils of my life. Within those walls, with God’s help and grace, I was able to elevate my thoughts beyond my circumstances and self-absorption, and set my mind on things that are above, not on things that are on earth, as Saint Paul wrote in the letter to the Colossians," he said, quoting Colossians 3:2.

[PartyOf5]

RGB back in the hospital.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50534140

US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 86, has been admitted to hospital suffering chills and a fever, the court said in a statement.