Susan Collins is in trouble

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LMAO at “Susan Collins can’t be bought”

https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/summary?cid=N00000491&cycle=CAREER

Huh.
https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/summary?cid=N00001669&cycle=CAREER

So? I didn’t mention him.

Your insinuation that Collins is the only politician who accepts campaign contributions is idiotic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You talk like being on the Supreme Court is a right! It’s not!

That much doubt and the senate should’ve moved on to another judge.

Of course it’s not a right. The assumption of innocence in the absence of incriminating evidence, is indeed a right, however. One person’s word against another’s - especially 35 years later - should not have been the deciding factor, as it apparently was for Democrats.

Not
In
A
Job
Interview

It’s hysterical that you keep trying to diminish that hearing to a “job interview.” The Democratic senators were clear that they would do whatever it took to make sure Kavanaugh wasn’t confirmed. And they did, to the tune of a massively orchestrated hearing in which they grilled Kavanaugh on decades old events that he denied ever happened. That was no “job interview,” and you know it. It was a witch-hunt, which thankfully backfired.

Witch hunts end in death, honey.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You talk like being on the Supreme Court is a right! It’s not!

That much doubt and the senate should’ve moved on to another judge.

"Doubt" brought to you by Dianne Feinstein. Written and staged by Christine Blasey-Ford and her lawyers.

“Staged” is your assessment. Please don’t confuse it with fact. Dr. Blasey-Ford had nothing to gain, other than death threats.

Again, you’re in the minority, according to polls.

And what, exactly, was “factual” about Ford’s testimony?
-DP

Doesn’t need to be. It was part of a picture that brought doubt about his character in the eyes of a majority of Americans.

Wow. There we have it. It doesn’t matter at all to you that Ford’s testimony may not have even been factual. All that matters to you is presenting an image to the American people that could quite possibly be built on lies. Thank you for admitting it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You talk like being on the Supreme Court is a right! It’s not!

That much doubt and the senate should’ve moved on to another judge.

Of course it’s not a right. The assumption of innocence in the absence of incriminating evidence, is indeed a right, however. One person’s word against another’s - especially 35 years later - should not have been the deciding factor, as it apparently was for Democrats.

Not
In
A
Job
Interview

It’s hysterical that you keep trying to diminish that hearing to a “job interview.” The Democratic senators were clear that they would do whatever it took to make sure Kavanaugh wasn’t confirmed. And they did, to the tune of a massively orchestrated hearing in which they grilled Kavanaugh on decades old events that he denied ever happened. That was no “job interview,” and you know it. It was a witch-hunt, which thankfully backfired.

Witch hunts end in death, honey.

Thank you for your eloquent and articulate response. It sheds so much light on where you’re coming from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You talk like being on the Supreme Court is a right! It’s not!

That much doubt and the senate should’ve moved on to another judge.

Of course it’s not a right. The assumption of innocence in the absence of incriminating evidence, is indeed a right, however. One person’s word against another’s - especially 35 years later - should not have been the deciding factor, as it apparently was for Democrats.

Not
In
A
Job
Interview

It’s hysterical that you keep trying to diminish that hearing to a “job interview.” The Democratic senators were clear that they would do whatever it took to make sure Kavanaugh wasn’t confirmed. And they did, to the tune of a massively orchestrated hearing in which they grilled Kavanaugh on decades old events that he denied ever happened. That was no “job interview,” and you know it. It was a witch-hunt, which thankfully backfired.

Witch hunts end in death, honey.

According to Merriam-Webster, a witchhunt is "the searching out and deliberate harassment of those (such as political opponents) with unpopular views." Kavanaugh's views were very unpopular with Democrats, and they were desperate and determined to prevent his being seated on the Supreme Court. They threw everything they could at him.

[Anonymous]

People often don’t get really important jobs when there are tons of other candidates and there are doubts about their character from a number of sources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You talk like being on the Supreme Court is a right! It’s not!

That much doubt and the senate should’ve moved on to another judge.

"Doubt" brought to you by Dianne Feinstein. Written and staged by Christine Blasey-Ford and her lawyers.

“Staged” is your assessment. Please don’t confuse it with fact. Dr. Blasey-Ford had nothing to gain, other than death threats.

Again, you’re in the minority, according to polls.

And what, exactly, was “factual” about Ford’s testimony?
-DP

Doesn’t need to be. It was part of a picture that brought doubt about his character in the eyes of a majority of Americans.

Wow. There we have it. It doesn’t matter at all to you that Ford’s testimony may not have even been factual. All that matters to you is presenting an image to the American people that could quite possibly be built on lies. Thank you for admitting it.

+1 The creation of doubt was their goal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You talk like being on the Supreme Court is a right! It’s not!

That much doubt and the senate should’ve moved on to another judge.

Of course it’s not a right. The assumption of innocence in the absence of incriminating evidence, is indeed a right, however. One person’s word against another’s - especially 35 years later - should not have been the deciding factor, as it apparently was for Democrats.

Not
In
A
Job
Interview

It’s hysterical that you keep trying to diminish that hearing to a “job interview.” The Democratic senators were clear that they would do whatever it took to make sure Kavanaugh wasn’t confirmed. And they did, to the tune of a massively orchestrated hearing in which they grilled Kavanaugh on decades old events that he denied ever happened. That was no “job interview,” and you know it. It was a witch-hunt, which thankfully backfired.

Witch hunts end in death, honey.

According to Merriam-Webster, a witchhunt is "the searching out and deliberate harassment of those (such as political opponents) with unpopular views." Kavanaugh's views were very unpopular with Democrats, and they were desperate and determined to prevent his being seated on the Supreme Court. They threw everything they could at him.

+100
I’m glad millions saw right through their disgusting charade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People often don’t get really important jobs when there are tons of other candidates and there are doubts about their character from a number of sources.

Yet those sources kept mum for Kavanaugh's entire career but were suddenly able to pull up faded memories when a conservative was about to be placed on the Supreme Court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You talk like being on the Supreme Court is a right! It’s not!

That much doubt and the senate should’ve moved on to another judge.

"Doubt" brought to you by Dianne Feinstein. Written and staged by Christine Blasey-Ford and her lawyers.

“Staged” is your assessment. Please don’t confuse it with fact. Dr. Blasey-Ford had nothing to gain, other than death threats.

Again, you’re in the minority, according to polls.

And what, exactly, was “factual” about Ford’s testimony?
-DP

Doesn’t need to be. It was part of a picture that brought doubt about his character in the eyes of a majority of Americans.

Wow. There we have it. It doesn’t matter at all to you that Ford’s testimony may not have even been factual. All that matters to you is presenting an image to the American people that could quite possibly be built on lies. Thank you for admitting it.

+1 The creation of doubt was their goal.

It didn’t need to be “created”. It’s there. The committee presented it as per constitutional mandate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You talk like being on the Supreme Court is a right! It’s not!

That much doubt and the senate should’ve moved on to another judge.

Of course it’s not a right. The assumption of innocence in the absence of incriminating evidence, is indeed a right, however. One person’s word against another’s - especially 35 years later - should not have been the deciding factor, as it apparently was for Democrats.

Not
In
A
Job
Interview

It’s hysterical that you keep trying to diminish that hearing to a “job interview.” The Democratic senators were clear that they would do whatever it took to make sure Kavanaugh wasn’t confirmed. And they did, to the tune of a massively orchestrated hearing in which they grilled Kavanaugh on decades old events that he denied ever happened. That was no “job interview,” and you know it. It was a witch-hunt, which thankfully backfired.

Witch hunts end in death, honey.

According to Merriam-Webster, a witchhunt is "the searching out and deliberate harassment of those (such as political opponents) with unpopular views." Kavanaugh's views were very unpopular with Democrats, and they were desperate and determined to prevent his being seated on the Supreme Court. They threw everything they could at him.

So Trump is conducting a witch hunt of the Squad, huh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People often don’t get really important jobs when there are tons of other candidates and there are doubts about their character from a number of sources.

Yet those sources kept mum for Kavanaugh's entire career but were suddenly able to pull up faded memories when a conservative was about to be placed on the Supreme Court.

Right. That never happens. Victims and witnesses are never silent for decades. /s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You talk like being on the Supreme Court is a right! It’s not!

That much doubt and the senate should’ve moved on to another judge.

"Doubt" brought to you by Dianne Feinstein. Written and staged by Christine Blasey-Ford and her lawyers.

“Staged” is your assessment. Please don’t confuse it with fact. Dr. Blasey-Ford had nothing to gain, other than death threats.

Again, you’re in the minority, according to polls.

And what, exactly, was “factual” about Ford’s testimony?
-DP

Doesn’t need to be. It was part of a picture that brought doubt about his character in the eyes of a majority of Americans.

Wow. There we have it. It doesn’t matter at all to you that Ford’s testimony may not have even been factual. All that matters to you is presenting an image to the American people that could quite possibly be built on lies. Thank you for admitting it.

+1 The creation of doubt was their goal.

It didn’t need to be “created”. It’s there. The committee presented it as per constitutional mandate.

Doubt wasn't there until Democrats presented a woman with cloudy memories of over 30 years. It was all a political ploy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People often don’t get really important jobs when there are tons of other candidates and there are doubts about their character from a number of sources.

“A number of sources”? You mean ONE? The other “accusations” were walked back after it became obvious they were lies. One vague assertion that may or may not have happened over 35 years ago takes a backseat to a lifetime of good works, a stellar career, and hundreds of people vouching for one’s character.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People often don’t get really important jobs when there are tons of other candidates and there are doubts about their character from a number of sources.

Yet those sources kept mum for Kavanaugh's entire career but were suddenly able to pull up faded memories when a conservative was about to be placed on the Supreme Court.

Exactly. Nothing fishy about that.