yeah you're right, we shouldn't even entertain the idea that this drunk dude was doing some drunk shit in his drunken teenage years and would downplay it in his supreme court confirmation hearing
i wasn't there in the 80s, i'm just making observations, anything is possible. i observed him at his most antagonostic when the yearbook questions were being asked, it set off a red flag. thats all, no need to pontificate about millennials not knowing about closeted gays or pretending like im defending the flight habits of the woman
I didn't say he never did drunken stupid shit.
I said the idea that Gen X boys would have advertised homosexual bullshit in the yearbook is laughable.
reading through an Intercept article from the left's point of view, this is the first i had heard of what a devil's triangle really is, didn't get much play round these parts
lol @ urbandictionary
The fact that we are talking about a 17-year old as if they are mature is astounding. I think anybody under 30 is a dink.
sure i agree but his maturity wasnt in question, it's the whitewashing of his past that the article took into question
fascinating that we'll spend pages analyzing whether or not the ford woman is actually afraid to fly and ultimately perjured herself, but a similarly questionable assertion by this dude is dismissed as "lol that shits gay who would advertise something like that"
just making observations, dont mind me, i could be wrong
These are the Democrats. Every syllable of a 36 year old yearbook of a 17 year old has a ghastly criminal meaning but text messages from grown ass adults with power from the 2016 election mean nothing.
oh ok, i thought he was insinuating that i think every syllable of a 36 year old yearbook of a 17 year old has a ghastly criminal meaning but text messages from grown ass adults with power from the 2016 election mean nothing, which i don't
oh ok, i thought he was insinuating that i think every syllable of a 36 year old yearbook of a 17 year old has a ghastly criminal meaning but text messages from grown ass adults with power from the 2016 election mean nothing, which i don't
But it's what you expressed.
Liar, Gang rapist well versed in the http://www.canadiansexacts.org
In fact he was the former liaison to that office those are the documents missing!
yeah you're right, we shouldn't even entertain the idea that this drunk dude was doing some drunk shit in his drunken teenage years and would downplay it in his supreme court confirmation hearing
i wasn't there in the 80s, i'm just making observations, anything is possible. i observed him at his most antagonostic when the yearbook questions were being asked, it set off a red flag. thats all, no need to pontificate about millennials not knowing about closeted gays or pretending like im defending the flight habits of the woman
So why is a drinking game less "drunk shit" than a sex act?
You’re talking like a crazy person. Average people are seeing that this is timed politically but the guy was probably an asshole. That means the confirmation could go either way and it would be justifiable.
What is far more important is that the guy was selected for a reason: he is on record as believing that a sitting president can’t be indicted. Trump could order a hit and be bulletproof in his philosophy.
Do you know how the Supreme court works, our constitution, impeachment, anything? Or do you just repeat every liberal talking point? Cause that is one of the dumbest things said. Like he alone thinks that and the other justices wouldn't agree otherwise. I know you lost an election and you cant deal with it but there is a process for these things and instead of wiping your ass with the Constitution you may have to read it.
Last edited by clubgop on Sun Sep 30, 2018 6:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
