0
1

[–] 14142851? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I am trying to figure this out! I trust the plan, and I've read the comments, but how is this an advantage for Kavenaugh?

0
0

[–] 14143448? ago 

I think it's good for Judge K because now the dems get their investigation, and it should show that it was all a farce, further damaging them. this is what I think, as it's clearly all a pack of lies.

0
1

[–] 14142752? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I expected less dem votes with the threat of walk-outs. Seems like they are yet still all bark and no bite. They must have realized the support percentage change that would be represented by such a move. 91% opposition versus 73%. If considering 11/10 versus 11/8 for example.

0
1

[–] 14146759? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Going back to the Anita Hill FBI investigation... it was only conducted (as I saw it) because it was sexual harassment on the job as government employees which is not the case with Ford-Kavanaugh.

0
1

[–] 14141853? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Does not the SCOTUS term start officially on 10-1-18? If K is confirmed after that date, say 10-10-18 what affect does that have in participation in 2018 term rulings?

0
1

[–] 14141781? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Fucking brilliant!!!

0
1

[–] 14141724? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

11 Yeah 10 neah Looks like we vote on Tuesday. Let the chips fall where they will.

0
1

[–] 14139783? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

That's what the vote was going to be anyway, before the false accusation/delay tactic.

0
1

[–] 14139740? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

The Rep Sens should have been a bubble around Flake protecting him from the Snakes.

0
2

[–] 14139839? 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Protect a snake from snakes?

0
1

[–] 14139723? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

And no official commitment or amendment to the decision of the SJC.

load more comments ▼ (44 remaining)