Kennedy to retire - USSC will swing even further right

Yes, and apparently you can't count to know that only one conservative voted for it, the other 4 did not.

Bobby logic: 1 is greater than 4.

You know you are a bit twisted when you can't even admit that it was liberals on the court that delivered on this as every liberal on the court voted for it. This delusion is not a good look dude, just admit that we have legal gay marriage because of liberals and move on. It's just a fact, it's as much as a fact as the sum of 1+1.

I've not taken them as anything but allegations.

You've taken them as lies. Proof that they are lies?

 

I've taken them as baseless and false allegations given that's what the evidence suggests. When someone has no memory of something then spends 6 days with a DNC provided lawyer and then comes out making very specific accusations they weren't willing to make at any point in the last 30+ years.....I mean what do you call that?

 

Stop the misrepresentation

3 of the 4 conservative justices voted against it i.e 75% of the conservative judges on SCOTUS were against it.

 

There's no misrepresentation, it was a conservative majority SCOTUS that did it. I know you crazy kids want to believe that we live in a post factual world but you can't just call a fact "misrepresentation"

 

FIFY.

 

So all he's saying is it could've happened but never a witness to it.

 

I personally don't think it should be disqualifying, if again, the person has clearly shown they truly understood, have learn from it and demonstrate real corrective behaviors. Realistically, they don't have a chance at the SCJ because society will think there are others that are more "deserving" (never made such mistake). Personally, I actually think someone that make a huge mistake and is able to completely turned around (morally) to be as qualified (again, from a moral standpoint). That turn-around from a devastating personal challenge is as much if not harder than someone that have performed at the highest level without any incidents. Of course, I'm not advocating that anyone go through that path!

 

Yes, and every actual alleged witness says it didn't happen. Again, completely baseless allegation that should just be dismissed.

 

He keeps repeating that a 'it was a conservative majority SCOTUS that did it.' as if that contradicts the fact that only one conservative on the court was for it.

It was passed in spite of the conservative judges on the court, not because of them. It's amazing to me that he keeps repeating this to himself...

 

Its a misrepresentation cos while the composition of the SCOTUS had a majority of conservatives, that particular ruling was not granted by a conservative majority. Most of the conservatives judges were in dissent.

Most conservatives were against LGBT rights and would try to take it away if given the opportunity

Stop trying to take credit for something you did not do - that is theft

 

Any ruling with a conservative majority is one granted by the conservative majority. Think long and hard about that and get back at me.....or don't.

 

Majority Opinion - Justice Anthony Kennedy (conservative) joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg (liberal), Stephen Breyer (liberal), Sonia Sotomayor (liberal), and Elena Kagan (liberal).

Dissenting Opinons - Chief Justice John Roberts (conservative) joined by Justices Antonin Scalia (conservative) and Clarence Thomas (conservative).

THE RULING DID NOT HAVE A CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY AND THUS WAS NOT GRANTED BY THE CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY!!!!

 

Seriously, I want one of you conservatives to tell me with a straight face that if roles were reversed and this was Obama's ultra liberal supreme court nominee, that you wouldn't be losing your s**t right now about the radical liberal Godless rapist that the party of no morals was rushing through. Probably throw in more than a few "Bengazi!" and "Born in Kenya" rants for no apparent reason, too. Maybe even a "Vince Foster" or two.

 

You would not be seeing anything approaching the most vile smear campaign in American history being coordinated right out of the offices of the Senate Minority Leader and the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, as we are witnessing right now from the Democrat left.

Honestly, I cannot imagine how you people could be any more vile and despicable if you tried, than you have been here during this episode.

 

As I have been telling you all along, Christine Ford will not testify on Thursday or at any other time. With that in mind, here is the latest from one of her attorneys:

Hearing in Doubt? Christine Ford’s Lawyer Rips Senate Plan to Have Prosecutor Ask Questions: Not ‘Fair and Respectful’

Dr. Christine Blasey Ford‘s legal team has sent a letter (which can be seen below via NBC’s Frank Thorp) to the Senate Judiciary Committee amid continuous negotiations ahead of Thursday’s scheduled hearing.

In a new letter from Dr Ford’s Attorney to the Judiciary Committee, they again object to having outside counsel ask questions for Republicans at Thursday’s hearing, and ask for the name and resume of who that person or persons will be.

This does not appear to be a done deal. pic.twitter.com/MwggIeBGbs

— Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) September 25, 2018
​

In the letter addressed to Sen. Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Ford’s legal team cites Sen. Majority Leader’s Mitch McConnell’s (R-KY) speech on the Senate floor on Monday afternoon as “flatly inconsistent” with Grassley’s promise of a “fair and credible process.”

“In our view, the hiring of an unnamed ‘experienced sex crimes prosecutor’ as Mr. Davis described in his email, is contrary to the Majority’s repeated emphasis on the need for the Senate and this Committee’s members to fulfill their constitutional obligations,” attorney Michael Bromwich wrote. “It is also inconsistent with your stated wish to avoid a ‘circus,’ as well as Dr. Blasey Ford’s repeated requests through counsel that senators conduct the questioning. This is not a criminal trial for which the involvement of an experienced sex crimes prosecutor would be appropriate.”​

So, the unraveling begins. I was expecting they would wait until Wednesday, or maybe later tomorrow, but apparently they could not resist. Here we go. They are clearly quite upset at the possibility of facing a criminal lawyer who is a sex assault specialist (and a woman).

Does anyone with even half a brain believe that Christine Ford will testify? I do not think so. She will not testify. This is all a ruse.

 

That sir, would be typical liberal hypocrisy at its finest!

This is different. Pay attention.

The outrage here is the disgraceful muckraking Libtards have resorted to for a man of such high character! He hasn’t even cried in front of his church while asking Jesus to forgive him, so why are we even discussing how far Cons will go to lengths to defend him?!??

 

I quite literally laughed out loud that you are this self deluded.

 

What this means is that Jeff Flake has apparently committed to vote Kavanaugh's nomination out of committee and we will see this Supreme Court Justice confirmation vote conducted on the floor of the Senate very soon.

If either Collins or Murkowski also votes yes (I believe they both likely will), then Brett Kavanaugh is on his way to a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.

 

Elena Kagen....confirmed just 8 years ago UNDER OBAMA not only flew through confirmation, she did so avoiding filibuster on a 63-37 vote having FIVE Republican who voted for her.

Sonia Sotomayor...confirmed just 9 years ago UNDER OBAMA not only flew through confirmation she did so avoiding filibuster on a 68-31 vote having NINE Republicans who voted for her.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg....confirmed in 1993 UNDER CLINTON not only flew through confirmation, she did so avoiding filibuster on a 96-3 vote having FORTY ONE Republicans who voted for her. (side note....Ginsburg replaced Byron White...one of 2 dissenting opinions on Roe vs. Wade)

That is the last 3 SC Associate Justice nominees put up by Democrat Presidents...all of them considered...in your words...ultra liberal

You were saying?!?!?