Supreme Court

floridays

Well-Known Member
Enough already, the clown that makes the allegations against Kavanaugh will not confirm an acceptance to "perform" before the Senate Judiciary Committee. She made the claims, she set the fire. The ball less Grassley and the rest of the committee should subpoena her to appear, under oath with the jeopardy of perjury. This is, after all a Court for the citizens, not a plaything for politicians and activists.
 

newfie

Well-Known Member
42058642_10217363137293000_4747180399686320128_n.jpg
 

Sportello

Well-Known Member
Enough already, the clown that makes the allegations against Kavanaugh will not confirm an acceptance to "perform" before the Senate Judiciary Committee. She made the claims, she set the fire. The ball less Grassley and the rest of the committee should subpoena her to appear, under oath with the jeopardy of perjury. This is, after all a Court for the citizens, not a plaything for politicians and activists.
Is it?
 

BrownArmy

Well-Known Member
It’s curious, when Anita Hill made her accusations against Clarence Thomas, there were 22 witnesses in the televised hearings and the FBI reopened their background file on Thomas.

Hill’s accusations were much less serious.

Today? FBI declines to get involved, Republicans want to interview two people, the accuser, and the accused.

Curious.

It’s so political on both sides, whatta mess!
 

BrownArmy

Well-Known Member
Enough already, the clown that makes the allegations against Kavanaugh will not confirm an acceptance to "perform" before the Senate Judiciary Committee. She made the claims, she set the fire. The ball less Grassley and the rest of the committee should subpoena her to appear, under oath with the jeopardy of perjury. This is, after all a Court for the citizens, not a plaything for politicians and activists.

As such, being a Court for the Citizens, with a lifetime appointment to a position that may literally decide the fate of women to have control over their reproductive rights, it seems a fair question to ask, does this accusation hold merit?

If not, great.

Not sure we’re going to get there in five business days...
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
"Hill’s accusations were much less serious."(Brownarmy)

From those times all I remember is the "pubic hair on the coke can". Sounds more serious to me.
 

BrownArmy

Well-Known Member
"Hill’s accusations were much less serious."(Brownarmy)

From those times all I remember is the "pubic hair on the coke can". Sounds more serious to me.

Yah, ‘pubic hair on a coke can’ is more serious than alleged physical sexual assault.

What planet are you on?
 

newfie

Well-Known Member
It’s curious, when Anita Hill made her accusations against Clarence Thomas, there were 22 witnesses in the televised hearings and the FBI reopened their background file on Thomas.

Hill’s accusations were much less serious.

Today? FBI declines to get involved, Republicans want to interview two people, the accuser, and the accused.

Curious.

It’s so political on both sides, whatta mess!

they could brought all this up in july when they knew about it and investigated the piss out of it.
 
Top