Obviously not, you're still typing.yes. I have grabbed you.
Obviously not, you're still typing.
Less of a dirty trick then holding up Obama's nominee for almost 1 year. However I don't want made up accusationsWell, here's the thing. Kavanaugh's 2003 appointment to the DC Circuit was very contentious and held up for three years. If there was something there, it would have been expected to have come out at that time. That's why I think this latest accusation is simply made up or grossly exaggerated. Anyone can accuse anyone of anything. I don't particularly like this guy, but these kinds of left field, last minute accusations just smack of dirty tricks to me.
You TDS suffering fucktards are grasping at straws so thin they'd probably be legal in California.Some interesting questions being asked about his finances.
Kavanaugh contradicts White House account of credit card debt, raising more questions
https://www.yahoo.com/news/kavanaug...it-card-debt-leaving-questions-234449883.html
You realize credit question are asked of anyone applying for a security clearance, so what's the problem here??You TDS suffering fucktards are grasping at straws so thin they'd probably be legal in California.
Good job.
You are an hysterically wrong-headed regressive, but I admit it, I laughed.You TDS suffering fucktards are grasping at straws so thin they'd probably be legal in California.
Good job.
I think now that this particular Pandora’s Box is opened, we are going to start hearing an awful lot about what candidates did when they were teenagers.And if the situation was reversed, do you think republicans would be better or worse in trying to stop Kavanaugh?
I think now that this particular Pandora’s Box is opened, we are going to start hearing an awful lot about what candidates did when they were teenagers.
If what you did as a teenager was bad enough to upset another teenager.I think now that this particular Pandora’s Box is opened, we are going to start hearing an awful lot about what candidates did when they were teenagers.
It seems a bit odd to pass on to the FBI something that happened in high school, based off an letter she received during the hearings.It seems a bit odd to think this is such a bad thing without knowing what is even alleged. If it turns out to be a nothing stunt then shame on her. The confidence that it’s nothing but a stunt seems pretty groundless though.
The person wanted to remain anonymous. DF honoring that request. FBI will handle in a bi-partisan manner.It seems a bit odd to pass on to the FBI something that happened in high school, based off an letter she received during the hearings.
She had an opportunity to question Kavanaugh on this during the hearings, she chose not to.
Some interesting questions being asked about his finances.
Kavanaugh contradicts White House account of credit card debt, raising more questions
https://www.yahoo.com/news/kavanaug...it-card-debt-leaving-questions-234449883.html
In July, White House spokesman Raj Shah offered an explanation of the debts to the Washington Post: that Kavanaugh had purchased season tickets to the Nationals for a group of friends, putting them on his credit card near the end of a year and collecting reimbursements the following year. That practice, along with some home-improvement expenses, resulted in the large year-end balances that appeared on his disclosure forms. Shah emphasized that Kavanaugh’s credit card balances were transitory and that he had discontinued the practice in 2017. “He did not carry that kind of debt year over year,” Shah told the Post.
You will be one of the first to complain when the GOP takes this new precedent of candidate vetting and throws it right back at the Democrats.If what you did as a teenager was bad enough to upset another teenager.
Of course they want to remain anonymous. Its a second hand account. I heard from someone who knew someone that was at the prom with Kavanaugh...The person wanted to remain anonymous. DF honoring that request. FBI will handle in a bi-partisan manner.
Ask the FBI, because it is measure of whether a security clearance will be granted or not.Seems questionable at first - but the answer given seems legit.
Ultimately though, why do we really care how in-debt someone is? What bearing does that have on one's job? Unless you're a fucktard congressman who tries to use political fundraising to pay your debts - then we have a problem.
It seems a bit odd to pass on to the FBI something that happened in high school, based off an letter she received during the hearings.
She had an opportunity to question Kavanaugh on this during the hearings, she chose not to.
The letter is also apparently from someone affiliated with Stanford who had the incident described to them.
So we are now submitting as evidence secondhand accounts of something that may or may not have happened in high school?
Again, if there's nothing to it or there isn't enough evidence FBI will flush that out.Of course they want to remain anonymous. Its a second hand account. I heard from someone who knew someone that was at the prom with Kavanaugh...
Ask the FBI, because it is measure of whether a security clearance will be granted or not.
Ultimately though, why do we really care how in-debt someone is? What bearing does that have on one's job? Unless you're a fucktard congressman who tries to use political fundraising to pay your debts - then we have a problem.
Why are you so desperate that you’re willing to rarionalize nth hour allegations based off secondhand accounts that should have been addressed during the hearings.Again, if there's nothing to it or there isn't enough evidence FBI will flush that out.
Why are you in such a rush to bury the accusation?
Why are you so desperate that you’re willing to rarionalize nth hour allegations based off secondhand accounts that should have been addressed during the hearings.
I think its weird that we are considering second hand accounts from high school in the nth hour. Those are called rumors.We already covered why they couldn't be addressed during the hearings.
As for rationalizing them I don't see anyone doing that, they are simply (and correctly!) saying that we should see what they are. It would be really weird if people DIDN'T want to do that.
It would have been very easy for Feinstein to ask the question in an appropriate way during the hearing, kind of like how Harris bluffed with evidence of a conversation happening.We already covered why they couldn't be addressed during the hearings.