Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bogus allegations that she told her shrink about in 2012.

She said she told her shrink. No evidence was provided to back this up.

Anonymous wrote:Bogus allegations that she told her shrink about in 2012.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Collins is sure to win...but thanks for the very entertaining thread!

She might win. You lose all credibility if you declare that anything is certain.

Nothing is certain but I know many folks in Maine.

They would die in laughter reading this thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:she is either incredibly naive or a liar, not brave

She thought it was a brave thing, to stand as a woman, in defense of BK.

I think she made a grave error because the man she sincerely thought was all right, was not all right.

I don't think she thought it was brave. I think she thought it was politically expedient.

She is not a stupid person, and she cannot have believed that voting yes on BK was fulfilling her promise to Maine citizens that she wouldn't confirm a justice who wants to trash Roe. That's even leaving aside the rest of it. She must just have believed she was powerful enough to withstand blowback, and that the trouble of not voting for him would be worse for her.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Collins is sure to win...but thanks for the very entertaining thread!

She might win. You lose all credibility if you declare that anything is certain.

Anonymous wrote:Collins is sure to win...but thanks for the very entertaining thread!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:she is either incredibly naive or a liar, not brave

She thought it was a brave thing, to stand as a woman, in defense of BK.

I think she made a grave error because the man she sincerely thought was all right, was not all right.

I don't think she thought it was brave. I think she thought it was politically expedient.

She is not a stupid person, and she cannot have believed that voting yes on BK was fulfilling her promise to Maine citizens that she wouldn't confirm a justice who wants to trash Roe. That's even leaving aside the rest of it. She must just have believed she was powerful enough to withstand blowback, and that the trouble of not voting for him would be worse for her.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"She walked through every step of the confirmation process. She talked about our justice system. Unfortunately, Dems no longer need evidence--only accusations to **convict** a person. And, just look at the latest disaster in the NYT. Two key things from that book--Leland Keyser stood firm even though she felt she was under great pressure from friends, and the latest "victim" refused to talk to press and told friends that she had no recollection of the event Stiers described. Pretty significant facts to be left out of a newspaper--even in an op-ed."

Nobody is talking about a conviction.

We're talking about a job interview, for the 1000th time.

So, you think false accusations should keep someone from getting a job? I disagree.

They're not proven false. They, along with everything else, point to a flawed character.

He should not have one of the most important lifelong appointments in the country.

Thank God you people did not succeed at your witch hunt.
And, you are not succeeding at your latest attempt.
Hopefully, this latest effort will push Collins over the top because decent people don't tolerate your sick game.

The decent people of Maine don’t agree. Bye Susan. It’s the new Bye Felicia.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"She walked through every step of the confirmation process. She talked about our justice system. Unfortunately, Dems no longer need evidence--only accusations to **convict** a person. And, just look at the latest disaster in the NYT. Two key things from that book--Leland Keyser stood firm even though she felt she was under great pressure from friends, and the latest "victim" refused to talk to press and told friends that she had no recollection of the event Stiers described. Pretty significant facts to be left out of a newspaper--even in an op-ed."

Nobody is talking about a conviction.

We're talking about a job interview, for the 1000th time.

So, you think false accusations should keep someone from getting a job? I disagree.

They're not proven false. They, along with everything else, point to a flawed character.

He should not have one of the most important lifelong appointments in the country.

Thank God you people did not succeed at your witch hunt.
And, you are not succeeding at your latest attempt.
Hopefully, this latest effort will push Collins over the top because decent people don't tolerate your sick game.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Collins finger-wagging speech when she voted for Kavanaugh was unnecessary and probably sealed her fate.

If you think she finger wags, have you watched Warren?

Anonymous wrote:Collins finger-wagging speech when she voted for Kavanaugh was unnecessary and probably sealed her fate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"She walked through every step of the confirmation process. She talked about our justice system. Unfortunately, Dems no longer need evidence--only accusations to **convict** a person. And, just look at the latest disaster in the NYT. Two key things from that book--Leland Keyser stood firm even though she felt she was under great pressure from friends, and the latest "victim" refused to talk to press and told friends that she had no recollection of the event Stiers described. Pretty significant facts to be left out of a newspaper--even in an op-ed."

Nobody is talking about a conviction.

We're talking about a job interview, for the 1000th time.

So, you think false accusations should keep someone from getting a job? I disagree.

They're not proven false. They, along with everything else, point to a flawed character.

He should not have one of the most important lifelong appointments in the country.

Thank God you people did not succeed at your witch hunt.
And, you are not succeeding at your latest attempt.
Hopefully, this latest effort will push Collins over the top because decent people don't tolerate your sick game.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"She walked through every step of the confirmation process. She talked about our justice system. Unfortunately, Dems no longer need evidence--only accusations to **convict** a person. And, just look at the latest disaster in the NYT. Two key things from that book--Leland Keyser stood firm even though she felt she was under great pressure from friends, and the latest "victim" refused to talk to press and told friends that she had no recollection of the event Stiers described. Pretty significant facts to be left out of a newspaper--even in an op-ed."

Nobody is talking about a conviction.

We're talking about a job interview, for the 1000th time.

So, you think false accusations should keep someone from getting a job? I disagree.

They're not proven false. They, along with everything else, point to a flawed character.

He should not have one of the most important lifelong appointments in the country.

Not as flawed as the setup by Feinstein and her cohort. I used to admire Feinstein.

Why'd she sit on the info for so long. That was pathetic.