The real time-line----a better perspective.....

[Big Muddy]

Here's a timeline:
1982 - Something may or may not have happened with another 2 (or 4) teenagers at a party, she cannot remember who threw the party, where the party was held, who she was with or how she got home. She was drinking and said nothing to anyone.
1983,
1984,
1985,
1986,
1987,
1988,
1989,
1990,
1991,
1992,
1993,
1994,
1995,
1996,
1997,
1998,
1999,
2000,
2001,
2002... She said nothing.
July 25, 2003: President George W. Bush nominated Kavanaugh to the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C Circuit... She said nothing.
2004,
2005... She said nothing.
May 11, 2006: The United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary recommended confirmation. Kavanaugh subsequently confirmed by the United States Senate... She said nothing.
June 1, 2006: Kavanaugh sworn in by Justice Anthony Kennedy... She said nothing.
2007,
2008,
2009,
2010,
2011... She said nothing.
2012... She remembered 'something' happened in 1982, yet doesn't name Kavanaugh, still said nothing to authorities.
2013,
2014,
2015,
2016,
2017 - becomes an anti-trump activist.
2018 - now 36 years later, with Kavanaugh's SCOTUS confirmation looming, she pens an anonymous letter with grave accusations against Kavanaugh regarding foggy circumstance that occurred while they were both minors, then reveals herself and DEMANDS an FBI investigation before testifying to her incredible allegations?
Who does she think she is......Do you get the point?

[Thumper]

One word ..... midterms.

[airbud7]

the silent majority will dominate the midterms. going to be fun watching them scream at the sky again.

[johnboy]

I've been an observer of American politics for many years and find it more entertaining than Netflix but this has got to be the topper of them all. It's positively Machiavellian and it does seem to me that the Dems are far better at this sort of thing than the Republicans. No matter what happens from this point, Kavanaugh will be tainted and the R's will lose. Very clever, which makes me wonder who the brains behind this action might be? None of the up-front politicians I see on CNN or MSNBC every minute of every day seems to have the chops to come up with this. Too dumb!

[Thumper]

I was in Russia for close to a month during the Clinton/Lewinsky fiasco and it seemed every television I came across was tuned in to the latest news on the subject. Airports, train stations, electronics shops, etc. etc. I remember being embarrassed as shit and got to the point I imagined everybody around was looking at me, pointing and smirking (99% my imagination I'm sure) .. but the whole thing was an embarrassment as I was from a country that always bragged about being the greatest in the world. I can't imagine what it would be like to be over there today, with all the "Russian collusion" and political silliness going on these days. This bullshit is getting out of hand and every time I think it can't get any worse, it does just that, gets worse! I wonder how many billions of government dollars are being wasted when these cry-baby politicians spend so much time and effort accomplishing NOTHING ... while they could be conducting LEGITIMATE government business.

I'll be honest. It seems Trump is the ONLY frigging politician actually working these days! When does that man sleep???

[airbud7]

I'll be honest. It seems Trump is the ONLY frigging politician actually working these days! When does that man sleep???

Hey, that's what the boss and i were saying all week....MAGA!

[BarryBobPosthole]

Run a similar timeline on the accusers that are saying priests abused them thirty years ago and tell me how similar they are. And tell me if they have any validity.

Just a question. I have no idea if the lady is bona fide or not.

[Chicken Dinner]

Seems like they’re coming out of the woodwork now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[airbud7]

5 minutes of fame

[DeputyDog]

Run a similar timeline on the accusers that are saying priests abused them thirty years ago and tell me how similar they are. And tell me if they have any validity.

Just a question. I have no idea if the lady is bona fide or not.

The big difference is that most of the incidents with the Priests were reported to church officials at the time but were not properly handled by the church hierarchy. The reports weren’t passed on to law enforcement and in some cases the priests were just moved to a different church rather than removed from public ministry.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Penguin]

It didn't need to go down this way...

Will

[quercus alba]

Trump could pick Hilary and they'd fight him tooth and nail

[BarryBobPosthole]

Trump could pick Hilary and they'd fight him tooth and nail

which is why we need to make it law that 60 votes are required to confirm. we wouldn’t have this bullshit.

BKB

[airbud7]

which is why we need to make it law that 60 votes are required to confirm. we wouldn’t have this bullshit.

BKB

let's make it 70...no 80!....shit lets just make it 100 or no go.

PS: your buddy Harry Reid did away with 60vote rule in 2013

Democrats always shit and fall backwards in it...

[Thumper]

... your buddy Harry Reid did away with 60vote rule in 2013

Democrats always shit and fall backwards in it...

Ha ha ha! BAM!!!

Yep, it was the DEMOCRATS who came up with the option when the Republicans' were blocking Obama's U.S. Court of Appeals nominees! Anybody believe in Karma?

Frankly, this politics game is really tiring. They're all dicks ... it's just that some dicks are bigger than others depending on which party holds the majority.

[Penguin]

Frankly, this politics game is really tiring.

Or maybe sad would be a better word? Ungovernable might be a word that slips into our subconsciousness....

Will

[BarryBobPosthole]

I’m quite aware which asshole changed it. i’m also quite aware why Democrats are so pissed off about this nomination when your boy McConnell sat on Obama’s nomination for over 400 days.

The only way I see to stop this shit in the Senate is to reinstate the filibuster and require 60 votes to pass bills and nominations. they used to be the higher congressional body because of those rules but now they are no better than the House of Reps.

BKB

[DeputyDog]

There is a bit of a difference between this situation and the Gorsuch nomination. This is just a mid-term Congressional election, not the Presidential election.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Penguin]

The only way I see to stop this shit in the Senate is to reinstate the filibuster and require 60 votes to pass bills and nominations....

BKB

You dream my friend. This goes way beyond simple cutthroat politics.

Do you honestly believe that the legislative equivalent of Citizens United would have a chance in hell of passing into law? And on and on and on and on?

The Supreme Court has been the main way for powerful people who can't get legislation passed to make their preferred policy positions into the law of the land. This is the end result: A situation where it is becoming impossible to place judges onto the bench. This is a direct result of having one of the most politicized bodies in your government being the one who decides what the constitution says.

Will

[BarryBobPosthole]

There was no historical precedent for delaying the Merrit Garland nomination anywhere. It was plain and simple: they are wanting to stack the courts, and not just SCOTUS, with political conservatives. And that was the only thing that delay was about. And then the same people want to bemoan the politicization of the nomination process.

And Chilly Willy, we lived with the 60 vote rule, as the founders intended for us to do, since 1806. A constructionist, as republicans claim to be, would want us to strongly consider doing what the founders intended the Senate to be: a higher more contemplative body than the People’s House.

Its worked for us until we changed it. We need no further proof that it will work if we change it back.

And I’m convinced until this current generation of old fuckers dies off, nothing much will change. A lot of our issues are generational and its our generation that is the problem.

BKB

[Thumper]

And I’m convinced until this current generation of old fuckers dies off, nothing much will change. BKB

OR ... we could just drain the swamp! Are you on-board now?

[BarryBobPosthole]

The swamp has gotten bigger since the Drainer in Chief got elected. The Opioid crisis is a prime example of swampy politics. And there’s been shit all done about it.


BKB

[Thumper]

TBH, I don’t have a clue how the “Drainer in Chief” gets ANYTHING done with the Dems fighting him at every turn!

[Chicken Dinner]

There is a bit of a difference between this situation and the Gorsuch nomination. This is just a mid-term Congressional election, not the Presidential election.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It was still wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Big Muddy]

senchk.jpg#@.jpg

[airbud7]

It was still wrong.

not according to Joe Biden

Biden Rule:
Republicans cited a 1992 speech by then-senator Joe Biden, arguing that if a Supreme Court seat became vacant during the summer, President Bush should wait until after the election to appoint a replacement, or else appoint a moderate acceptable to the then-Democratic Senate.

[Chicken Dinner]

not according to Joe Biden

Biden Rule:
Republicans cited a 1992 speech by then-senator Joe Biden, arguing that if a Supreme Court seat became vacant during the summer, President Bush should wait until after the election to appoint a replacement, or else appoint a moderate acceptable to the then-Democratic Senate.

That still doesn’t make it right. Stop trying to rationalize.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[airbud7]

That still doesn’t make it right. Stop trying to rationalize.

sure it is....that's the norm now

[Chicken Dinner]

sure it is....that's the norm now

Thanks, Trump!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BarryBobPosthole]

So tell me what nomination he held up.

Answer: none

BKB