Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Again, how do you prove or disprove this? The FBI can offer some sort of subjective opinion, but how much value is there in that? We’re never going to know either way what happened.

Things are proven by circumstantial evidence and the credibility of witnesses all the time.

Just give up already.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Gotta say, the whole Michael Avenatti thing is so funny. It just shows how desperate the left is to fling poo at the wall in the hopes that some sticks. It might have worked in Alabama, but now the people smell a rat. We'll see how the vote goes on Friday.

And I love how the left on here are whining about why they didn't get a hearing after murdering a justice in order to "flip the court". You woke the beast. We're taking back freedom.

 

[unofan]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Again, how do you prove or disprove this? The FBI can offer some sort of subjective opinion, but how much value is there in that? We’re never going to know either way what happened.

Gee, and then you wonder why sexual assault cases are hard to win and why women don't come forward more often.

You do understand that credibility determinations in he said, she said cases are done all the time, and are proper under the law?

Oh wait, you don't because you're running for village idiot.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Can we agree that democrats investigating a republican is good and republicans investigating a democrat is bad?

No we cant. We can agree you have no idea how to read or actually critically think though.

But please tell me how we are saying investigating Clinton is bad? We are saying she was investigated and they found nothing. Further investigations still found nothing. They trumped up new charges and wasted tax payer money on hearings (of which they want more) and further FBI investigations nothing.

With Kavanomeansyes they wont even look. (and when they found out about issues they tried to ignore them and just pass him through) Cant have the FBI look into sexual assault, cant have the committe hear testimony, wont even delay. The vote is set for Friday. This is a fraud on the American people all so a bunch of hillbillies at Saint Rapey McToucheskids Church can feel confident women have less rights.

See the subtle difference there? In one case we got endless investigations based on no evidence and no crime and that was for someone who A) was the Secretary of State (non-lifetime appointment) and B) currently isnt holding public office. The other is for pretty serious crimes for someone holding a lifetime appointment DEALING WITH JUDGING CRIMES AND LAWS!

Look I get it, you arent super bright and you do whatever the NRA and Faux News tells you. That is fine you are well within your rights. But Jesus I hope you dont have a daughter.

 

[Rover]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Oh wait, you don't because you're running for village idiot.

Drew needs to set his sights on vice village idiot. Flaggy's going win that village idiot race with a margin of victory that would put Vladimir Putin to shame!

 

[Handyman]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Again, how do you prove or disprove this? The FBI can offer some sort of subjective opinion, but how much value is there in that? We’re never going to know either way what happened.

So then what screw it? Just give up before we even start? Great message to send to women.

Seriously...please dont procreate and if you did tell them to ignore everything you ever tell them.

 

[Drew S.]

Gee, and then you wonder why sexual assault cases are hard to win and why women don't come forward more often.

You do understand that credibility determinations in he said, she said cases are done all the time, and are proper under the law?

Oh wait, you don't because you're running for village idiot.

If someone doesn’t agree with everyone else here they must be a f’ing moron.

Haven’t hundreds of people been wrongly executed because of incorrect witness testimony? Just because something is ‘proper’ doesn’t make it reliable or good practice. Human beings are incredibly flawed and unreliable and for someone to think they’re going to be able to work out what really happened 35 years ago is completely delusional.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

If someone doesn’t agree with everyone else here they must be a f’ing moron.

Haven’t hundreds of people been wrongly executed because of incorrect witness testimony? Just because something is ‘proper’ doesn’t make it reliable or good practice. Human beings are incredibly flawed and unreliable and for someone to think they’re going to be able to work out what really happened 35 years ago is completely delusional.

Supreme Court Confirmation does not have the same ****ing standard as a criminal court. HOW MANY ****ING TIMES DOES THAT HAVE TO BE SAID?????

Seriously people wake the **** up.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

If someone doesn’t agree with everyone else here they must be a f’ing moron.

Haven’t hundreds of people been wrongly executed because of incorrect witness testimony? Just because something is ‘proper’ doesn’t make it reliable or good practice. Human beings are incredibly flawed and unreliable and for someone to think they’re going to be able to work out what really happened 35 years ago is completely delusional.

So why investigate anything amirite?

 

[Handyman]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-cards="hidden" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Tucker Carlson asks if sexual assault victims are “part of the problem” if they don’t report assault <a href="https://t.co/s6u0MvTp6u">https://t.co/s6u0MvTp6u</a> <a href="https://t.co/quL05Ow6Lr">pic.twitter.com/quL05Ow6Lr</a></p>— The Hill (@thehill) <a href="https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1044939410943430657?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 26, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Drew agrees with this...

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-cards="hidden" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Tucker Carlson asks if sexual assault victims are “part of the problem” if they don’t report assault <a href="https://t.co/s6u0MvTp6u">https://t.co/s6u0MvTp6u</a> <a href="https://t.co/quL05Ow6Lr">pic.twitter.com/quL05Ow6Lr</a></p>— The Hill (@thehill) <a href="https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1044939410943430657?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 26, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Drew agrees with this...

So Tucker didn't read a single story online about why women don't come forward? Seriously?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

These people don't even remember Merrick Garland.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/PressSec?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@PressSec</a>: “The president wants this process to come to a vote because that’s what’s supposed to happen in every single one of these instances where someone is nominated, they go before, they have a hearing, and then the senators vote on it.” <a href="https://twitter.com/foxandfriends?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@foxandfriends</a> <a href="https://t.co/w5vXOWdzqQ">pic.twitter.com/w5vXOWdzqQ</a></p>— Fox News (@FoxNews) <a href="https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/1044559991842254848?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 25, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

I’m sure this ***** is lying too, just ask drew.

“BREAKING: Julie Swetnick filed a sworn declaration saying President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh grabbed women without their consent, tried to drug women at parties and was present when she was gang-raped.”
http://hill.cm/Iu1Ghkw

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

These people don't even remember Merrick Garland.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/PressSec?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@PressSec</a>: “The president wants this process to come to a vote because that’s what’s supposed to happen in every single one of these instances where someone is nominated, they go before, they have a hearing, and then the senators vote on it.” <a href="https://twitter.com/foxandfriends?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@foxandfriends</a> <a href="https://t.co/w5vXOWdzqQ">pic.twitter.com/w5vXOWdzqQ</a></p>— Fox News (@FoxNews) <a href="https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/1044559991842254848?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 25, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Good lord. **** these people with a cactus.

 

[rufus]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Again, how do you prove or disprove this? The FBI can offer some sort of subjective opinion, but how much value is there in that? We’re never going to know either way what happened.

They can interview the people who were there, their classmates, etc. They can interview mark Judge, under penalty of perjury. They can interview all those Yale alumni trading emails, wondering if the story about Kavanaugh sticking his dick in a woman's face was gonna come out. There's lots they can do.

This isn't a criminal investigation, it's not a proof beyond a reasonable doubt. it's a preponderance of evidence. One side will have it and one will not. Then, people can make their decisions accordingly.

 

[BassAle]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

If someone doesn’t agree with everyone else here they must be a f’ing moron.

you're not a moron because you don't agree with us. You're a moron because you post things that are incredibly stupid

 

[rufus]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Drew needs to set his sights on vice village idiot. Flaggy's going win that village idiot race with a margin of victory that would put Vladimir Putin to shame!

I'm not so certain about that anymore. The race is tightening significantly. Flaggy needs to up his game if he's gonna stave off Drew, which I see he's already trying with his "left murdered a SC judge" conspiracy theory.

 

[rufus]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

If someone doesn’t agree with everyone else here they must be a f’ing moron.

.

No. When they post astoundingly moronic things here day after day, they must be a ***** moron. Take a look in the mirror, you have only yourself to blame here.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

I'm not so certain about that anymore. The race is tightening significantly. Flaggy needs to up his game if he's gonna stave off Drew, which I see he's already trying with his "left murdered a SC judge" conspiracy theory.

Of course Flaggy still believes that an octogenarian smoker was "murdered".

 

[Drew S.]

They can interview the people who were there, their classmates, etc. They can interview mark Judge, under penalty of perjury. They can interview all those Yale alumni trading emails, wondering if the story about Kavanaugh sticking his dick in a woman's face was gonna come out. There's lots they can do.

This isn't a criminal investigation, it's not a proof beyond a reasonable doubt. it's a preponderance of evidence. One side will have it and one will not. Then, people can make their decisions accordingly.

This isn’t an episode of law & order no matter how much you wish it was. They can do all of those things and at best they will offer a subjective opinion. Given how political this has become you can bet your bottom dollar they will sit on the fence as much as possible.