FEINSTEIN: Hun, it’s time for you to retire!

[Anonymous]

Despite all the talk of a military-industrial complex, are there any generals who enriched themselves as much as petty politicians do?

[Anonymous]

These are the same posters who slobbered over the relationship between Alito and Ginsburg and lionized Feinstein for bring Chrissy Ford to the Kavanaugh hearings

Hypocrites they be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These are the same posters who slobbered over the relationship between Alito and Ginsburg and lionized Feinstein for bring Chrissy Ford to the Kavanaugh hearings

Hypocrites they be.

She was forced to disclose Ford.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are the same posters who slobbered over the relationship between Alito and Ginsburg and lionized Feinstein for bring Chrissy Ford to the Kavanaugh hearings

Hypocrites they be.

She was forced to disclose Ford.

Of. Ourselves she was. Do you think Ford was some brilliant, believable source like Watergate’s “Deep Throat” who changed the course of history?

She couldn’t even tell the truth about currently renting part of her house to interns much less re-imagining an incident from her teen years

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are the same posters who slobbered over the relationship between Alito and Ginsburg and lionized Feinstein for bring Chrissy Ford to the Kavanaugh hearings

Hypocrites they be.

She was forced to disclose Ford.

Of. Ourselves she was. Do you think Ford was some brilliant, believable source like Watergate’s “Deep Throat” who changed the course of history?

She couldn’t even tell the truth about currently renting part of her house to interns much less re-imagining an incident from her teen years

Whatever acid you are dropping must be good sh*t...you’re no LUCID in the sky with diamonds, tho.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always get the feeling that congress is political theatre and that they actually get along and are friendly to each other behind the scenes. The partisan drama is actually done to pander to their respective bases.

This. I find it refreshing to see civility from both sides of the aisle during such a contentious time. Good for them.

Np But it wasn't deserving. I'm not saying she should spit in his face but, come on! Republicans are ramming her through when they didn't even vote on Garland! Hypocrites!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are friends. What's the big deal? RBG was close friends with Justice Scalia. It is possible for people to disagree on politics yet still get along. No need to cancel anyone.

1. She's generally incompetent.

2. It's not just politics. It's basic decency. Graham is a liar and hypocrite who, along with his GOP colleagues, are putting an activist on the Court.

If she is not up to the job, she can get voted out next time. Does anyone even try to challenge her in the primaries? Graham is just fulfilling his duties as committee chair. It would be irresponsible for the Senate not to give the president's nominee a fair hearing.

Yes someone challenged her in the primaries. And tried to point out that she would be 92 years old at the end of her term. But the Democratic Party machine in California supported her and people thought she would have the seniority advantages awarded to Senator since she’s been a Senator for so long. They need to get rid of the seniority preferences which gives people an incentive to keep these dinosaurs in office long after they are effective in their office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are friends. What's the big deal? RBG was close friends with Justice Scalia. It is possible for people to disagree on politics yet still get along. No need to cancel anyone.

1. She's generally incompetent.

2. It's not just politics. It's basic decency. Graham is a liar and hypocrite who, along with his GOP colleagues, are putting an activist on the Court.

If she is not up to the job, she can get voted out next time. Does anyone even try to challenge her in the primaries? Graham is just fulfilling his duties as committee chair. It would be irresponsible for the Senate not to give the president's nominee a fair hearing.

Yes someone challenged her in the primaries. And tried to point out that she would be 92 years old at the end of her term. But the Democratic Party machine in California supported her and people thought she would have the seniority advantages awarded to Senator since she’s been a Senator for so long. They need to get rid of the seniority preferences which gives people an incentive to keep these dinosaurs in office long after they are effective in their office.

And funny enough, the establishment (Newsom, Garcetti, Harris and the like) went against the activists and organizers in the California Democratic Party. The CA Dems backed De Leon, but the politicians hit De Leon where it really mattered, the donors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These are the same posters who slobbered over the relationship between Alito and Ginsburg and lionized Feinstein for bring Chrissy Ford to the Kavanaugh hearings

Hypocrites they be.

Yep. Scalia and Ginsburg, but yes. Same hypocrisy.

[Anonymous]

Two botched Supreme Court justice confirmations later, Democrats finally wake up to the fact that 88 yo Dianne Feinstein is not capable of doing her job.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/20/senate-dems-feinstein-embattled-430414

Chuck Schumer refused to defend Sen. Dianne Feinstein over calls from progressive groups for her removal as top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, with the Senate minority leader divulging he had a “long and serious talk” recently with the California senator.

Senate Democrats are grappling with how to handle Feinstein’s future role on the panel. Liberal groups say Feinstein was far too accommodating to Republicans during last week’s confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett. And while Democrats tread carefully in public on Tuesday, refusing to criticize the 87-year-old Feinstein — the first woman to serve as ranking member on Judiciary — her loudest supporters were actually Republicans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The republicans shove a nominee down RBG’s throat before it’s even cold.
And democrats give hugs.

cause acb is very likable and relatable to most women

Are you drunk?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are friends. What's the big deal? RBG was close friends with Justice Scalia. It is possible for people to disagree on politics yet still get along. No need to cancel anyone.

1. She's generally incompetent.

2. It's not just politics. It's basic decency. Graham is a liar and hypocrite who, along with his GOP colleagues, are putting an activist on the Court.

If she is not up to the job, she can get voted out next time. Does anyone even try to challenge her in the primaries? Graham is just fulfilling his duties as committee chair. It would be irresponsible for the Senate not to give the president's nominee a fair hearing.

Yes someone challenged her in the primaries. And tried to point out that she would be 92 years old at the end of her term. But the Democratic Party machine in California supported her and people thought she would have the seniority advantages awarded to Senator since she’s been a Senator for so long. They need to get rid of the seniority preferences which gives people an incentive to keep these dinosaurs in office long after they are effective in their office.

And funny enough, the establishment (Newsom, Garcetti, Harris and the like) went against the activists and organizers in the California Democratic Party. The CA Dems backed De Leon, but the politicians hit De Leon where it really mattered, the donors.

If Harris has pointed out the obvious that people who end their terms at age 92 might have some difficulties, it would have been said that she was uppity, overly ambitious and disloyal. What was she supposed to do. Too bad the California voters didn’t have more sense.

[Anonymous]

Holy phuck Chuck is dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Holy phuck Chuck is dumb.

Does he type his posts with his dentures? Serious question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holy phuck Chuck is dumb.

Does he type his posts with his dentures? Serious question.

There's that. But I'm more flabbergasted by his lack of understanding of the 1A.

Or maybe he's just playing to his dumb base.