Snarky, substance-free one liners? Wherever did you pick up such an unseemly habit?
Gloat while you can. Tick tock.
That kind of thing can get.a person disbarred.
BWAHAHAHAHA! Guess I’ve won the argument now.
The argument is that, if you’re going to say something is right or wrong, you need to back it up. If you won’t back up your claim, that suggests that you know your reasoning won’t hold up to scrutiny.
Morals are not a special case. Either your morals are consistent and follow from your moral foundations, or they don’t.
Nitpick: free rein.
It’s okay when Republicans do it.
One guy’s tyranny is another guy’s *bidness as ushall. *
…
…
Spartacus.
I’d really like some discussion of this. It appears he lied then. It also appears he has lied several times now. Are there actual repercussions for this beyond the Senate (ha, hee, hoo) calling him a lying snake and throwing him out?
What could happen? Is anything mandated to happen?
Nah, if you can get worked up about something like that, then you don’t have the temperament to deal with some of our nations most fundmental issues.
By someone who would rather act like a child than act as someone who is interviewing for one of the most powerful positions in the world, sure.
coordinated and paid for…?
The kind that I would like to see in office. People can get themselves worked up over stuff, or they can exercise their own agency and ability to regulate their emotions. I’d rather have someone who would not act like a child on the supreme court, YMMV.
For instance, Trump has the kind of self control that you are seeming to prefer to have in office. That’s not working out too well.
Is it the perjury that Kabvanaugh has committed that makes you so proud, or that your ilk will be overlooking the perjury in order to confirm an activist judge who will vote in your favor?
For all his neutrality, Kavanaugh was one of the biggest proponents of the conspiracy that the Clintons murdered someone, and reportedly called Hillary Clinton a bitch. But he’s neutral and not biased.
You’re right! I can’t believe that both Obama and Garland were so stupid that they didn’t ever read the relevant part of the constitution, thereby knowing they could take this to the SCOTUS and win. And they’re both supposed to be constitutional scholars. I guess we can thank McConnell for saving the nation from these constitutional know-nothings!
It doesn’t seem like he lied IMO.
I don’t know if he lied, but his response to Kamala Harris’s questions about the DC law firm struck me as a very poor and obvious attempt at pretending he didn’t know what she was talking about.
My understanding is that he claimed to not have had any insider knowledge on the democratic communications about Bush’s judicial picks during his first term when he testified in front of congress during his nomination hearings to a lower court.
My further understanding is that some of the documents that were “leaked” by democratic senators were emails specifically involving him discussing the inside information he had about the democratic communications.
No links, as this is what I have seen and heard on the news, but is this information not accurate?
It’s accurate. And as I mentioned above, the leaked communications clearly show that the information arrived in Kavanaugh’s inbox with the subject line “spying” just to avoid all subtlety.
Not perjury.
Why do you suppose she did not make clear what she was talking about?
This is an incorrect reading of the Constitution, as you should know (since it’s been pointed out on the Board I believe multiple times).
The President is the only person who is mandated to do anything. The President shall nominate … [the President] shall appoint. In making his appointment, he must do so “by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate”. There is no requirement that they offer any such advice or consent, unless you wish to assert that the Senate must somehow consent to any nomination made by the President? Of course not. So neither the Advice nor the Consent is mandated.
Was what the GOP leadership in the Senate did a naked political ploy to stymie President Obama? Yes. What is the punishment, if any? The people vote them out of office. Oh, wait, that didn’t happen (yet). Sucks to be someone who wanted that justice confirmed.
No idea – maybe saving it for later, maybe she didn’t have proof, or a million other things. But his answer (especially the way he mouthed “Kaso…” like he’d never heard the name Kasowitz before) indicated to me that he was bullshitting.
Oh, what is the term for when you lie to congress during your confirmation hearings?
There was also an interesting catch in his voice at that time, I only hear that from people when they realize that they have been caught in a lie.
So, there could be a million reasons why Harris did what she did, but only one reason why Kavanaugh did what he did? Seems rather lopsided.