Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You Kav groupies are really dug in. This will not end well for him.

You don’t have to be a “groupie” to defend someone who has been vilified with zero evidence. I can only hope you’re accused of something, decades after the allegations supposedly occurred. I wonder how you would possibly defend yourself against something that simply can’t be proven, or even substantiated. It’s innocent until proven guilty in this country, sweetie.

WHO PAID HIS SIX FIGURE DEBT?

It's funny how none of you are concerned that he won't answer that?

He most definitely SHOULD have to answer for this, as concerns could arise and speculation made regarding corruption, bribery, pay-offs, etc.

I'm not saying that's what's occurring, however if he refuses to produce an explanation of just how such a high debt was paid, he then doesn't get to take offense when speculation of such starts to come to light.

HIS PARENTS.

Anonymous wrote:He should never have been confirmed. He failed the job interview! It's ridiculous to believe half of what he said under oath. If you want to then how about his performance in the interview process? No other job would have hired him. Was he under pressure sure, so are others in interviews. No way he should have gotten the job the way the talked to the people interviewing him. Lifetime appointment? UGH... Bringing his ten year old into the discussion, shame on him! There had to be another candidate.....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Questions regarding his debts were answered in closed door hearings to the SJC. If there was anything there the Dems absolutely would have used it against him.

Yep. The liberals here are not terribly informed and cannot think critically.

We'll see if they bring it up when he is impeached. Maybe it was something that looked innocent then but now there is a trail leading to Russia (like the NRA, for example). Who knows.

There are many reasons that he is unfit and compromised without the debts.

Impeached!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!


Join us in reality. It is quite a pleasant place.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You Kav groupies are really dug in. This will not end well for him.

You don’t have to be a “groupie” to defend someone who has been vilified with zero evidence. I can only hope you’re accused of something, decades after the allegations supposedly occurred. I wonder how you would possibly defend yourself against something that simply can’t be proven, or even substantiated. It’s innocent until proven guilty in this country, sweetie.

WHO PAID HIS SIX FIGURE DEBT?

It's funny how none of you are concerned that he won't answer that?

He most definitely SHOULD have to answer for this, as concerns could arise and speculation made regarding corruption, bribery, pay-offs, etc.

I'm not saying that's what's occurring, however if he refuses to produce an explanation of just how such a high debt was paid, he then doesn't get to take offense when speculation of such starts to come to light.

HIS PARENTS.

Nope. That would have been in the financial disclosures. It wasn’t.

So who owns Bretty?

That's JUSTICE Kavanaugh to you, Skippy.
Ask Feinstein or Spartacus or Kamala or Klobuchar. All discussed in closed door hearings. They can answer your question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Questions regarding his debts were answered in closed door hearings to the SJC. If there was anything there the Dems absolutely would have used it against him.

Yep. The liberals here are not terribly informed and cannot think critically.

We'll see if they bring it up when he is impeached. Maybe it was something that looked innocent then but now there is a trail leading to Russia (like the NRA, for example). Who knows.

There are many reasons that he is unfit and compromised without the debts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Questions regarding his debts were answered in closed door hearings to the SJC. If there was anything there the Dems absolutely would have used it against him.

Yep. The liberals here are not terribly informed and cannot think critically.

Anonymous wrote:Questions regarding his debts were answered in closed door hearings to the SJC. If there was anything there the Dems absolutely would have used it against him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You Kav groupies are really dug in. This will not end well for him.

You don’t have to be a “groupie” to defend someone who has been vilified with zero evidence. I can only hope you’re accused of something, decades after the allegations supposedly occurred. I wonder how you would possibly defend yourself against something that simply can’t be proven, or even substantiated. It’s innocent until proven guilty in this country, sweetie.

WHO PAID HIS SIX FIGURE DEBT?

It's funny how none of you are concerned that he won't answer that?

He most definitely SHOULD have to answer for this, as concerns could arise and speculation made regarding corruption, bribery, pay-offs, etc.

I'm not saying that's what's occurring, however if he refuses to produce an explanation of just how such a high debt was paid, he then doesn't get to take offense when speculation of such starts to come to light.

HIS PARENTS.

Nope. That would have been in the financial disclosures. It wasn’t.

So who owns Bretty?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You Kav groupies are really dug in. This will not end well for him.

You don’t have to be a “groupie” to defend someone who has been vilified with zero evidence. I can only hope you’re accused of something, decades after the allegations supposedly occurred. I wonder how you would possibly defend yourself against something that simply can’t be proven, or even substantiated. It’s innocent until proven guilty in this country, sweetie.

WHO PAID HIS SIX FIGURE DEBT?

It's funny how none of you are concerned that he won't answer that?

He most definitely SHOULD have to answer for this, as concerns could arise and speculation made regarding corruption, bribery, pay-offs, etc.

I'm not saying that's what's occurring, however if he refuses to produce an explanation of just how such a high debt was paid, he then doesn't get to take offense when speculation of such starts to come to light.

HIS PARENTS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You Kav groupies are really dug in. This will not end well for him.

You don’t have to be a “groupie” to defend someone who has been vilified with zero evidence. I can only hope you’re accused of something, decades after the allegations supposedly occurred. I wonder how you would possibly defend yourself against something that simply can’t be proven, or even substantiated. It’s innocent until proven guilty in this country, sweetie.

WHO PAID HIS SIX FIGURE DEBT?

It's funny how none of you are concerned that he won't answer that?

He most definitely SHOULD have to answer for this, as concerns could arise and speculation made regarding corruption, bribery, pay-offs, etc.

I'm not saying that's what's occurring, however if he refuses to produce an explanation of just how such a high debt was paid, he then doesn't get to take offense when speculation of such starts to come to light.

HIS PARENTS.

I want to know who paid the debt (and not from an internet board) but I also think that his behavior was 100% unacceptable. He should never have been confirmed. With a NORMAL president, he would not have even been nominated, because he is clearly easily compromised.

Oh, FFS. Just because the left found some people to come out and lob false allegations at him doesn't make him compromised.
He is not compromised in the least.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You Kav groupies are really dug in. This will not end well for him.

You don’t have to be a “groupie” to defend someone who has been vilified with zero evidence. I can only hope you’re accused of something, decades after the allegations supposedly occurred. I wonder how you would possibly defend yourself against something that simply can’t be proven, or even substantiated. It’s innocent until proven guilty in this country, sweetie.

WHO PAID HIS SIX FIGURE DEBT?

It's funny how none of you are concerned that he won't answer that?

He most definitely SHOULD have to answer for this, as concerns could arise and speculation made regarding corruption, bribery, pay-offs, etc.

I'm not saying that's what's occurring, however if he refuses to produce an explanation of just how such a high debt was paid, he then doesn't get to take offense when speculation of such starts to come to light.

HIS PARENTS.

I want to know who paid the debt (and not from an internet board) but I also think that his behavior was 100% unacceptable. He should never have been confirmed. With a NORMAL president, he would not have even been nominated, because he is clearly easily compromised.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You Kav groupies are really dug in. This will not end well for him.

You don’t have to be a “groupie” to defend someone who has been vilified with zero evidence. I can only hope you’re accused of something, decades after the allegations supposedly occurred. I wonder how you would possibly defend yourself against something that simply can’t be proven, or even substantiated. It’s innocent until proven guilty in this country, sweetie.

WHO PAID HIS SIX FIGURE DEBT?

It's funny how none of you are concerned that he won't answer that?

He most definitely SHOULD have to answer for this, as concerns could arise and speculation made regarding corruption, bribery, pay-offs, etc.

I'm not saying that's what's occurring, however if he refuses to produce an explanation of just how such a high debt was paid, he then doesn't get to take offense when speculation of such starts to come to light.

HIS PARENTS.

I want to know who paid the debt (and not from an internet board) but I also think that his behavior was 100% unacceptable. He should never have been confirmed. With a NORMAL president, he would not have even been nominated, because he is clearly easily compromised.