The Smearing Of Brett Kavanaugh Is Truly Evil

Althea said:
Kinda cute how a guy who never leaves his house, quotes the Federalist in defense of a nominee who was suggested by the Federalist Society.

Gotta be credible.
Click to expand...

Althea said:
They would love Avenati if Clinton were POTUS, and he was working to uncover her dirty secrets.
Click to expand...

Althea said:
And trump. That Cohen recording with trump is the nail in the coffin. Why do you think trump NEEDS a SC justice who believes that POTUS is above the law?
Click to expand...

Althea said:
Why should this be in good faith? (I don't see his posts). Garland was not handled in 'good faith'.
Click to expand...

:lolup:This is a small minded idiot on steroids; don't be one. :rofl2:
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello anatta,

You should be ashamed if you believe any of this.

You've been taken in by fake news.

It's OK. Anybody can make a mistake.

The thing to do is learn why it is a mistake to put any faith into stuff like this, and vow to avoid making similar mistakes in the future.

It's troubling for our Democracy that anyone puts any faith into such pure hack opinion and lies as the Federalist.

This piece goes well beyond opinion; and into lies.

It claims that Kavanaugh is being smeared without evidence. That is not true. Witnesses giving testimony is evidence.

It also claims he is being convicted without evidence. That's a ridiculous lie. He is not even on trial.

I'm glad this kind of trash writing is out there.

It serves as an example of the kind of thing sensible people should ignore.

Our freedom of speech and the ability to have a free press is important to having a free nation.

The fact that so many people can't tell the difference between credible reporting and hack propaganda is a strong wake-up call that we need to improve our education system, and we need to educate our young people to be able to identify real information and propaganda, and to know the difference.

We should all be more vigilant to the fact that this kind of propaganda is out there, and learn to recognize it for what it is. Devious.
Click to expand...
that's some sad shit, poli....
 
PoliTalker said:
Looks like Kavanaugh was naugh tee.

Looks like he may have sewn some wild oats before he settled down.

Maybe privileged kid took some privileges while he had the chance.

Drinking games and clothes coming off with lots of people in the room?

And touching?

Doesn't sound like SCOTUS material.
Click to expand...
not to people stupid enough to fall for the lies......
 
Truth Detector said:
Was Garland smeared?
Click to expand...

No. He didn't even get the Constitutionally required advice and consent of the senate. The Republicans in the Senate simply decided to betray their oath of office entirely.

As for Kavanaugh, neither you nor I has any idea whether he's been smeared, since we don't know whether the claims against him are true or not. Saying they did if they didn't would be a smear. But, in the same way, saying they didn't, if they did, would be a smear of the women who made those claims.

Did Democrats declare that the Senate should withhold nominations before Presidents leave office and wait until AFTER the elections are decided?
Click to expand...

No. Why do you ask?

"should not confirm any Bush nominee to the Supreme Court except in extraordinary circumstances."
Click to expand...

Check out the quotation in its entirety. He was open to confirming those who proved they were mainstream. He just didn't think it was likely Bush would nominate any mainstream judges (which, of course, he never did).
 
Phantasmal said:
Avenatti brought us Cohen, served on a platter. You may not like him, but he delivers and he has said his client is believable. He has to much at stake at this point to be wrong.
Click to expand...

you people have to be brain dead to pay attention to this and pretend its news......."he has said his client is believable"........WHO HAS SAID HE IS BELIEVABLE?......
 
Truth Detector said:
Now you are lying again; the only one's trying to move goalposts here are liars like you and your leftist pals. I wish you would think before you post instead of emote.
Click to expand...

Stop calling me a liar. You can't read, so it's just a last resort for you.

Read & think. I have lied about nothing. You have misinterpreted everything, and knee-jerk responded (yes, emotionally) without really reading or thinking. It's somewhat annoying.
 
Oneuli said:
What am I pretending it is? What it is, is a claim by a highly accomplished academic who says Kavanaugh tried to rape her when she was fifteen years old. It is a claim with no supporting physical evidence or direct third-party corroboration, but with third-party evidence that at least establishes that her story long predates the Kavanaugh nomination.
Click to expand...

This is a pointless post; we already know the claim has no merit or corroboration rocket scientist. There is no evidence other than, "because she said so." That's the basic fact.

Oneuli said:
That's a fair question for her to be asked when she testifies. I don't know what her answer would be, but I can certainly see a woman deciding that the hell she'd inevitably go through for messing with Republican plans wasn't worth it just to try to stop her attacker from serving on a lower court, but it was enough once it was about a higher court, where the damage he could do to women was much greater. Or maybe she just wasn't in a place, in terms of emotional strength, to think she could withstand the inevitable character assassination years back when he was previously nominated, but she feels she has grown tougher since then and is willing to do it.
Click to expand...

This is a pile of nonsensical crap. If the man truly is the sexual predator the lunatics on the left are claiming he is, he shouldn't be serving on ANY court snowflake. Stop making yourself look stupid; you don't have to prove it, we get it. You're an idiot.

It is clear that sitting on the Federal bench is far more influential in lives than the supreme court. The Federal courts make hundreds of decisions every year as opposed to maybe 75 on the Supreme Court.

Oneuli said:
Yes, I've noticed that those of you with the intelligence of a gnat all see this the same way, with absolute, lock-step uniformity. Actual thinking people, on the other hand, have a variety of views on this, with widely differing levels of certainty about what may have happened.
Click to expand...

This is rather laughable and ironic coming from a dunce trying to argue that one doesn't care if a sexual predator sits on the Federal bench. But then, you're not very bright at all. You just THINK you are which is a glaring lack of self awareness on your part.

Oneuli said:
Neither you nor I knows whether he's a good man or an attempted rapist. That's what we're trying to determine. Perhaps when they're questioned under oath about these charges we will have more of an idea.
Click to expand...

Another laughably stupid claim; it is easy to judge Kavanaugh's character by 35 years of public service, 300 decisions on the bench, no criminal record, his marriage to a supportive and loving wife and being a father to two lovely daughters. Not to mention the man has deeply religious convictions which beats the hell out of a drunk party girl who can't remember much of anything.

Meanwhile, you cretins on the left want to smear him on nothing more than "because she said so" in a claim that dates back to high school. I think it is fairly easy to judge you based on that; you're a low information dishonest partisan hack on steroids to even come up with such flimsy stupidity.

Do yourself a favor and STFU. It's obvious you don't know what you are talking about, don't think for yourself and can only parrot the loony false narratives you see on MSNBC.
 
Last edited:
Oneuli said:
Again, neither you nor I knows whether he's a good man. You assume so because you like his politics. I'm taking a wait-and-see approach, and will tailor my view in part to what comes out in these hearings.
Click to expand...

See above; nothing says "you're a dishonest moron" better than this statement. Listen carefully dumbass; if we can't judge that Kavanaugh is a good man, there aren't any on the planet.
 
Oneuli said:
Exactly. We have plenty of time to investigate this thing thoroughly.
Click to expand...

There is nothing to investigate you willful lying idiot. The accusers can't corroborate anything they have claimed and they date back 35 years. Only clueless loony tunes parrot this MSNBC talking point. :rofl2:
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Oh no he was just denied an up and down vote for partisan political reasons using every parliamentary trick in the book. You're beyond niave as hell if you don't expect a political payback. Also, the GOP has written the book on smearing political opponents so spare me the cry babying and answer my question...shouldn't we post pone the vote on Kavanaugh till after the midterm to let the people have their say? :) LOL LOL LOL
Click to expand...


they were stupid not to wait until they held power to try payback.......now they will go down for lying as well.........the last thing demmycrats want is for the people to have their say........it will cost them even more seats in senate.......
 
archives said:
So all the macho rhetoric regarding Georgetown prep was just innocent fun? He was a preppie, one of those that think he hit a triple cause he was born of third base. And anyone who feels the need to tell the world he was a virgin most of his youth is just weird, strangely weird

His past shows he was heavily politically partisan with no attempt to project an objective image

And none of that disqualifies a him, but to portray him now as a martyr and simply dismiss the women's accusations as attempts to smear him as if he was Jefferson Smith is inane
Click to expand...

so are you trying to convict Kavanaugh or prep schools.......
 
Oneuli said:
No. He didn't even get the Constitutionally required advice and consent of the senate. The Republicans in the Senate simply decided to betray their oath of office entirely.
Click to expand...

There you go with the laughable lies again; please show us where in the Constitution it says that the Senate is required to give Garland a hearing. Yet, you ignore the FACT that the Democrats set the precedent of not hearing a nominee offered by an outgoing President. Why is that other than being a dishonest asshole?

Again, NOTHING related to Garland was unusual or unconstitutional. Smearing Kavanaugh as payback or for purely political purposes? Repugnant, stupid and pathetic.

Oneuli said:
As for Kavanaugh, neither you nor I has any idea whether he's been smeared, since we don't know whether the claims against him are true or not. Saying they did if they didn't would be a smear. But, in the same way, saying they didn't, if they did, would be a smear of the women who made those claims.
Click to expand...

You have to be a complete and utter dumbfuck to even make a post like this, or the most uninformed low IQ dullard on the planet. I am thinking you are BOTH.

The man has been called a sexual predator in the media you willful asshole. That's called a smear no matter how much you stomp your feet like an idiot and stupidly claim it isn't.

Oneuli said:
No. Why do you ask?
Click to expand...

There you go lying again; I even gave you the quote and video.

Oneuli said:
Check out the quotation in its entirety. He was open to confirming those who proved they were mainstream. He just didn't think it was likely Bush would nominate any mainstream judges (which, of course, he never did).
Click to expand...

It isn't Shumer's decision as to what is mainstream. It isn't yours It isn't anyone's. That isn't the charge of the Senate. It is to ADVISE and CONSENT. Not to obstruct, not to smear and not to set precedents one will not enjoy having shoved back in their faces when it is the OTHER guy.

Alas, I am arguing with low IQ dullard who is a pathological liar.
 
Thing1 said:
Stop calling me a liar. You can't read, so it's just a last resort for you.

Read & think. I have lied about nothing. You have misinterpreted everything, and knee-jerk responded (yes, emotionally) without really reading or thinking. It's somewhat annoying.
Click to expand...

Don't cry; just focus like a laser on your dishonest efforts to avoid honest debate, tell the truth and stay on topic. It's not a difficult thing to do, try it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top