No way Kavanaigh is getting confirmed without an FBI investigation.

The ONLY alleged witness refute her claims. The FBI is going to interview them and hear the same thing. What "new witnesses"?

 

Nobody specifically referred to him as evil to my knowledge. The temperament thing is very real and important to consider. "They" are not destroying his life. This too will pass if he makes it to the court. I think that they should rule against him for the reasons given. There
are other qualified conservative judges without the baggage.

 

Again, background checks do not constitute a thorough investigation. A time limit? I think that a time limit may be called for to satisfy you and others, yes. But longer than a week and an unlimited investigation. I support a centrist judge for the post, and not a liberal or conservative.

 

OH, he will.

 

Her demeanor alone was not faked and leads me to believe to believe her.

 

That doesn't mean that she is not credible. Many women can't remember the circumstances due to the trauma.

 

We don't know what new witnesses and that is why they are new, yes? The only witness may be covering his ass and will get away with it since there are only him and Kavanaugh.

 

You brought up democrats and agreements and not abiding by them.
Just like your party and tRUMP. It's related.

 

Wrong. Cory "I'm Spartacus" Booker did, and worse.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news...ng-kavanaugh-nomination-is-complicit-in-evil/

""I’m here to call on folk to understand that in the moral moment there is no, there is no neutral,"You are either complicit in the evil, you are either contributing to the wrong or you are fighting against it.”
​

So not only did this subhuman sewer rat call Judge Kavanaugh evil, but he stated if you support him, you are evil too.

Again, as to the temperament thing, it's complete BS. Utter nonsense for the intellectually vacant to rally around.

There is zero correlation between the despicable actions Judge Kavanaugh has had to endure at the hands of the scum on the JC, and what his duties would entail on the SC.

 

At least you're honest enough to admit you want it to take so long that it plays into the strategy the New Democratic Party has created.

In fact, I appreciate you being honest enough to admit you're not interested in anything but seeing Judge Kavanaugh eliminated by any means necessary.

Obviously I find that disgusting, but, you are certainly entitled to wish for whatever you want.

 

I have no party and your need to deflect noted.

 

Good. Then you won't troll anymore?

 

Kavanaugh is, and has been expose to legal jeopardy, perjury, since day 1. He has always had the option of refusing to answer questions, invoking his 5th amendment rights. It's always been a Salem witch trial, but a trial just the same in the practical sense.

 

What a silly fallacy of false equivalency: we are not a theocracy, K is not a witch, etc.

In a committee hearing if a witness refuses to answer or does take the 5th, the Senators have every right to take those actions or lack of them into consideration.

 

Red herring...stories do not have to be "completely changed" to get new information. And if judge made errors and corrects them...no, that is not a felony.

And this is someone confusing their own wishful thinking for fact.

 

Obviously, you don't know what you are talking about and certainly don't know anything about me.

 

False. You keep saying this, and it is still false. He has no such right in these hearings.

False. He does not have that right in these hearings or in this process.

False again, as this is n9t a criminal trial. And passing him over merely out of suspicion without definitive proof of guilt violates nobody's rights and is perfectly acceptable.

0 for 3 there, my man.

 

So the SIX FBI investigations he has already passed for previous positions in government are not enough for you? Don't give you a clue here?

 

If it were not for the double standard, Liberals/Democrats would have no standards at all.

 

Reported

 

Correct, they are not, as new allegations have arisen. Very simple.

 

And those new allegations relate exactly to things (basic conduct and character, including high school times) of the nominee.
They have looked before for any signs of misconduct in that same time frame.

Now if allegations are all it takes to block progress or appointments, then all we have to do to throw the entire nation into paralysis is make allegations.
Do you think there are any politicians in Washington willing to do that to further their own agenda?
I mean, these people are "honorable" aren't they?
Even counting the gullible and stupid among us, 85% of the public says they aren't.

 

Exactly.

They can reject him for ANY reason.

It isn't criminal proceeding and no "evidence" is required.

Period.

 

And apparently did not find this.

Now it's public.

Very simple.

 

That has always been the case. At any time women could have come forward to accuse any nominee. This man has 4 women who have come forward. 4 is more than zero, right?