Official Brett Kavanaugh Thread, Part 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Heitkamp is a NO

http://wday.com/

She was already done. Now she is really done.

A Yes vote might have let her keep her seat. She didn't vote politically.

She might be sunk anyway, but I think a "yes" vote would have sunk her faster than a "no" vote. Being unprincipled on top of being a Democrat is no way to win an election in North Dakota.

You do not sound like you are from North Dakota.

I'm not. Am I wrong?

Both parents from North Dakota and am in touch with my relatives there but don't visit as frequently as I did when I was younger. They take a person's name and reputation seriously there.

The women cousins I've talked to are appalled that anyone would try take a man's reputation down just on their word and no evidence. In their view, if before making the allegation Ford could not line up at least one person to say she told them about it at the time, she ruined her own reputation by bringing the allegation forward and sullying another's name.

Your relatives are correct.
-DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Heitkamp is a NO

http://wday.com/

She was already done. Now she is really done.

A Yes vote might have let her keep her seat. She didn't vote politically.

She might be sunk anyway, but I think a "yes" vote would have sunk her faster than a "no" vote. Being unprincipled on top of being a Democrat is no way to win an election in North Dakota.

You do not sound like you are from North Dakota.

I'm not. Am I wrong?

Both parents from North Dakota and am in touch with my relatives there but don't visit as frequently as I did when I was younger. They take a person's name and reputation seriously there.

The women cousins I've talked to are appalled that anyone would try take a man's reputation down just on their word and no evidence. In their view, if before making the allegation Ford could not line up at least one person to say she told them about it at the time, she ruined her own reputation by bringing the allegation forward and sullying another's name.

Why don't women in North Dakota not want another nominee, who could probably go quickly through the process and not have as many character faults?

It's not like a SC nomination is Kavanaugh or no on, yes?
Why not nomination someone from the midwest for a change?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Heitkamp is a NO

http://wday.com/

She was already done. Now she is really done.

A Yes vote might have let her keep her seat. She didn't vote politically.

She might be sunk anyway, but I think a "yes" vote would have sunk her faster than a "no" vote. Being unprincipled on top of being a Democrat is no way to win an election in North Dakota.

You do not sound like you are from North Dakota.

I'm not. Am I wrong?

Both parents from North Dakota and am in touch with my relatives there but don't visit as frequently as I did when I was younger. They take a person's name and reputation seriously there.

The women cousins I've talked to are appalled that anyone would try take a man's reputation down just on their word and no evidence. In their view, if before making the allegation Ford could not line up at least one person to say she told them about it at the time, she ruined her own reputation by bringing the allegation forward and sullying another's name.

Your relatives are correct.
-DP

agree. but in these partisan days the liberal Democrats raise up any accusers of anyone Conservative, so she looks like a hero to the full-time community activists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Business Insider has been keeping a whip count: https://www.businessinsider.com/brett-kavanaugh-senate-vote-who-will-support-vote-against-2018-7

Earlier today it had the vote at 49-48 with Murkowski, Collins and Manchin undecided. At some point in the last couple of hours, they updated it to move Flake from "yea" back into the undecided column.

Reporter got Grassley to give a whip count, after Hitkamp : he still has hope for one, and maybe two Dems. Which would be Manchin and who? Maybe Donnelly?

Plus he has not heard from 4 Rs. That’s Flake, Collins, Murkowski and... Sasse?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who defend this creep are gross. And yes, I'm consistent... When Bill Clinton lied under oath I thought it was right to impeach him. Here Bart/Brett lied multiple times and treated a coequal branch of government like s*it on his shoe. But oh well, Republicans overlook it because he's part of their tribe and because apparently sexual assault is no biggie if you're a drunk teen. Hypocrites.

+1 what do you expect from a bunch of old guys who keep giving Trump mulligans on all his moral failings. Most probably don't think sexually assaulting a women is a big deal anyways.

This. Many republican women don't care about the alledged assault, the drinking or the lying either.

My Republican evangelical friends who I know were assaulted in college (one had an abortion, as the result of a drunken date rape) are all announcing they are getting off social media for a few weeks. I bet they are. They know all their old friends know and will hopefully not say one word.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kavanaugh will be confirmed by a narrow margin. He will never be impeached and he will NEVER forget how he was treated.

Republicans have a revenge fantasy fetish. I love you baby, but you make me so *angry* sometimes. Probably masturbate as they think about all the people who are going to hell for not believing the right way.

See, you’re just confirming what people already think of liberals; your minds are never far from the gutter and *anything* that can possibly be referenced in a sexual way, should be. You people are the ones with revenge on the brain. From your Merrick Garland sob story to Trump winning in 2016, you are beside yourselves with bitterness. Taking Kavanaugh down is a sweet revenge fantasy for you. You are so clearly relishing the destruction of this man, it’s transparent and beyond disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:agree. but in these partisan days the liberal Democrats raise up any accusers of anyone Conservative, so she looks like a hero to the full-time community activists.

When your word salad gets away from you. What?

[Anonymous]

Grassley is an old coot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On Murkowski being uncertain about the FBI report this morning: https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1047904053794144256.

She also reportedly skipped the GOP briefing on the report earlier today in favor of reading itself. Per twitter, Flake, Collins and Murkowski went into the SCIF together to read the report for themselves (it was read to the senators earlier).

It's time for them to form their own political party. What shall we call it?

Devil's Triangle party

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Heitkamp is a NO

http://wday.com/

She was already done. Now she is really done.

A Yes vote might have let her keep her seat. She didn't vote politically.

She might be sunk anyway, but I think a "yes" vote would have sunk her faster than a "no" vote. Being unprincipled on top of being a Democrat is no way to win an election in North Dakota.

You do not sound like you are from North Dakota.

I'm not. Am I wrong?

Both parents from North Dakota and am in touch with my relatives there but don't visit as frequently as I did when I was younger. They take a person's name and reputation seriously there.

The women cousins I've talked to are appalled that anyone would try take a man's reputation down just on their word and no evidence. In their view, if before making the allegation Ford could not line up at least one person to say she told them about it at the time, she ruined her own reputation by bringing the allegation forward and sullying another's name.

Why don't women in North Dakota not want another nominee, who could probably go quickly through the process and not have as many character faults?

It's not like a SC nomination is Kavanaugh or no on, yes?
Why not nomination someone from the midwest for a change?

They don't care one way or another about Kavanaugh. They just dislike seeing someone succeed in taking another person's reputation down with no real evidence. That is not prairie justice.

[Anonymous]

Grassley and the GOP should have put up a better nominee!

[Anonymous]

Kavanaugh is a done deal. Sasse, Flake, Murk and Collins are a yes. Manchin and Heitkamp will tag along. Minimum 53 yes votes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think if BK gets through women need to take action. We need a war on conservative men who support this PoS and the bigger PoS Trump.

I’m ready to take action!
Voting Republican - straight ticket.

Exactly. Democrat ploy has backfired on them. They need a good housecleaning to bring back some honesty.

Lol a repub waxing poetic about honesty.

+ a billion

Why is it that the Republicans are always lying?? The Dems push back with the truth and the GOP makes stuff up, lead by the role model they have in the Fat Orange Liar.

Democrats are clear about what they know and don’t know, but the Trumpettes just make stuff up.

Bahahahahahahaha! That you actually believe this is so pathetic. Case in point, this forum. Democrats have been spewing outright lies about Kavanaugh since these allegations became public. Domestic abuse? Definitely! Would-be murderer? You know it! You have put out so much garbage in the form of breathless rumor and innuendo, it’s astonishing you haven’t been called out on it.

Before you go lecturing others on their honesty, you should take a good hard look in the mirror. It won’t be pretty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Business Insider has been keeping a whip count: https://www.businessinsider.com/brett-kavanaugh-senate-vote-who-will-support-vote-against-2018-7

Earlier today it had the vote at 49-48 with Murkowski, Collins and Manchin undecided. At some point in the last couple of hours, they updated it to move Flake from "yea" back into the undecided column.

Reporter got Grassley to give a whip count, after Hitkamp : he still has hope for one, and maybe two Dems. Which would be Manchin and who? Maybe Donnelly?

Plus he has not heard from 4 Rs. That’s Flake, Collins, Murkowski and... Sasse?

Donnelly already announced he is voting NO.



The only one from Democrats who is still on fence is Manchin - but I am betting he is a "NO". Today a protester confronted him about why he is voting yes on Kav and his response was "how do you know how I am voting?" Which is a good hint I think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Heitkamp is a NO

http://wday.com/

She was already done. Now she is really done.

A Yes vote might have let her keep her seat. She didn't vote politically.

She might be sunk anyway, but I think a "yes" vote would have sunk her faster than a "no" vote. Being unprincipled on top of being a Democrat is no way to win an election in North Dakota.

You do not sound like you are from North Dakota.

I'm not. Am I wrong?

Both parents from North Dakota and am in touch with my relatives there but don't visit as frequently as I did when I was younger. They take a person's name and reputation seriously there.

The women cousins I've talked to are appalled that anyone would try take a man's reputation down just on their word and no evidence. In their view, if before making the allegation Ford could not line up at least one person to say she told them about it at the time, she ruined her own reputation by bringing the allegation forward and sullying another's name.

Why don't women in North Dakota not want another nominee, who could probably go quickly through the process and not have as many character faults?

It's not like a SC nomination is Kavanaugh or no on, yes?
Why not nomination someone from the midwest for a change?

They don't care one way or another about Kavanaugh. They just dislike seeing someone succeed in taking another person's reputation down with no real evidence. That is not prairie justice.

Over here in Minnesota - also part of the prairie - the people I’m talking to didn’t like his little display of histrionics which made him look guilty as all get out.