So, the Dems are just fine with Trump ordering the FBI around for their purposes, but not for his?

Guys we do not have the votes. If we did there would be no delay. Flake does not like Trump he likes attention. This all comes down to Roe vs Wade. That lady that questioned Ford did a piss poor job, if she had done her job we might not be having this delay.
Its not about the man its the position he is being appointed to.

I agree we may not have the votes but we are coming to a point where the vote will need to be taken, even if it fails. Trump has said he will have a new name to Mitch within an hour. We cannot guarantee we hold the senate so for all intents and purposes we have until 31 December to fill the seat. The clock is ticking. Every delay just closes the window on another possible nominee should that be needed.

This is not defeatism it is reality. All options need to be considered. All of them. The republicans need to set a "point of no return" and that is as far as they can go and they will have to make a decision. I hope they have one and this delay is within their margin, I really do.

The 6 P's:
Prior Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance.

That's all I'm saying.

SnowFlake!

Attorneys for Blasey-Ford say there should be “no artificial limits in terms of time or scope” for the supplemental investigation. Flake asked for a “limited in scope” investigation of no more than a week. That’s the deal.

What irks me most about Flake is how he put out a statement talking about the the presumption of innocence etc and said he will vote yes.

Then Coons gets a hold of him and it becomes yes with conditions. I mean talk about having absolutely NO scruples. That man works for the highest bidder, not the people who elected him.

I wouldn't piss in his mouth if he was dying of thirst.

I just wrote my Senator and told him that the Rep senators are running a circus in this thing.
I said why are you guys letting the insane Dems call the shots? They are making you guys look like idiots and I am beginning to believe it to be so.
I said maybe you could find at least one Rep senator to have the balls to stand up for what is right and call this to a vote. An FBI investigation? What facts do they have to investigate? Who, what, where and when, and we do not have anything to go on. You are wasting time and money and you look like wimps to the public.

quote:

Originally posted by sjtill:
I'd be fine with it if they also investigated Ford's testimony, how she came to contact Feinstein, how her name got leaked, who told her to claim she if afraid to fly, why her parents and siblings didn't support her, etc.

That would take a good deal longer than a week and, while I'd love to see that whole nest of snakes exposed, I'm not willing to sacrifice Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation to get it.

Would be nice if there was a full investigation after he was confirmed, though

quote:

Originally posted by TMats:
Attorneys for Blasey-Ford say there should be “no artificial limits in terms of time or scope” for the supplemental investigation.

Attorneys for Ford can KMA

quote:

Originally posted by yanici:
Jeff Flake is such a maverick, isn't he?

Much like McCain, except above ground...

quote:

Originally posted by Ryanp225:

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
I like Cotton, we need more like him.

Bold move Cotton.

He pulls very few punches - he dropped a load on Blumenthal the Stolen Valor guy after he had the gall to talk about ‘credibility’ with Kavanaugh.


——-
.@SenBlumenthal lied for years about serving in Vietnam, which is all you need to know about his courage & honesty. Maybe he should reconsider before questioning Judge Kavanaugh’s credibility.
——

As shitty as this is, it could turn out more of the vote come November. And we need to sock it those these bastards. Hard.

Pick up seats in both the Senate and the House. Grind them down for another two years after that.

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
What irks me most about Flake is how he put out a statement talking about the the presumption of innocence etc and said he will vote yes.

Then Coons gets a hold of him and it becomes yes with conditions. I mean talk about having absolutely NO scruples. That man works for the highest bidder, not the people who elected him.

I wouldn't piss in his mouth if he was dying of thirst.

He was also cornered by a couple of women protesters at some point before the vote and badgered over his vote. He's just a weak man.

We have a couple of options here.

1. The Deep State at the FBI pushes on and tries to pin Kavanaugh, guilty or not.

2. The FBI uses this opportunity to turn their boat around.

Brett Kavanaugh has been investigated.
We have affidavits from all parties involved under penalty of Felony Perjury.
Nothing left to be uncovered with Kavanaugh.

Pretty unlikely anyone will decide to change their story now and admit to a Felony.

Ms. Ford, The Creepy Porn Lawyer, DiFi and the gang have not been investigated by the FBI.

Seems to me they may have cracked the seal on a box they may have not wanted opened.

Would not the FBI be required to investigate crimes discovered?

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
What irks me most about Flake is how he put out a statement talking about the the presumption of innocence etc and said he will vote yes.

Then Coons gets a hold of him and it becomes yes with conditions. I mean talk about having absolutely NO scruples. That man works for the highest bidder, not the people who elected him.

I wouldn't piss in his mouth if he was dying of thirst.

He was also cornered by a couple of women protesters at some point before the vote and badgered over his vote. He's just a weak man.

That is no "man".

I predict Trump soon says "STFB Dems, if Kavanaugh goes down, meet my next honey badger"

Potential nominee profile: Amy Coney Barrett



In November 2017, President Donald Trump released a revised list of potential Supreme Court nominees. The November 2017 list was an expanded version of two earlier lists, announced during the 2016 presidential campaign, from which then-candidate Trump pledged, if elected, to pick a successor to the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who died on February 13, 2016.

First on the new list – because it was in alphabetical order – was Amy Coney Barrett, a Notre Dame law professor (and former Scalia clerk) who had recently been confirmed to a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit. Barrett’s confirmation hearings had received considerable attention after Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee – most notably, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California – grilled her on the role of her Catholic faith in judging. Feinstein’s criticism did not stop Barrett from being confirmed, and since then there has been speculation that it may have in fact strengthened her case to fill the seat that will be vacated by the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy.

The 46-year-old Barrett grew up in Metairie, Louisiana, a suburb of New Orleans, and attended St. Mary’s Dominican High School, a Catholic girls’ school in New Orleans. Barrett graduated magna cum laude from Rhodes College, a liberal arts college in Tennessee affiliated with the Presbyterian Church, in 1994. (Other high-profile alumni of the school include Abe Fortas, who served as a justice on the Supreme Court from 1965 to 1969 and Claudia Kennedy, the first woman to become a three-star general in the U.S. Army.) At Rhodes, she was a member of Phi Beta Kappa and was also recognized as the most outstanding English major and for having the best senior thesis.

After graduating from Rhodes, Barrett went to law school at Notre Dame on a full-tuition scholarship. She excelled there as well: She graduated summa cum laude in 1997, received awards for having the best exams in 10 of her courses and served as executive editor of the school’s law review.

Barrett then held two high-profile conservative clerkships, first with Judge Laurence Silberman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, from 1997-1998 then with the late Justice Antonin Scalia, from 1998-1999. After leaving her Supreme Court clerkship, she spent a year practicing law at Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & Lewin, a prestigious Washington D.C. litigation boutique that also claims former U.S. solicitor general Seth Waxman, former deputy attorney general Jamie Gorelick, and two regular contributors to this blog – John Elwood and editor Edith Roberts – as alums. Barrett went to Baker Botts, a Texas-based firm, after Miller Cassidy merged with the larger law firm, in 2000 and spent another year there before leaving for academia. To the chagrin of Democratic senators during her confirmation process, Barrett was only able to recall a few of the cases on which she had worked, and she indicated that she had not argued any appeals while in private practice.

Barrett spent a year as a law and economics fellow at George Washington University before heading to her alma mater, Notre Dame, in 2002 to teach federal courts, constitutional law and statutory interpretation. Barrett was named a professor of law at the school in 2010; four years later, she became the Diane and M.O. Research Chair of Law. Barrett twice received a “distinguished professor of the year” award, in 2010 and 2016.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2018...e-amy-coney-barrett/

quote:

He was also cornered by a couple of women protesters at some point before the vote and badgered over his vote

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...r-kavanaugh-n2523573

video at link

On Thursday morning Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ) announced he will vote in favor of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to become the next Supreme Court Justice of the United States.

Shortly after the announcement, Flake was confronted by leftists in the halls of the Senate. They blocked his ability to exit an elevator and screamed in his face.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

we need to keep these hysterical protesters out of the halls of congress

https://www.cnn.com/politics/l...7294b187c03a8336f2d8

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn says there will still be a motion to proceed vote in the Senate tomorrow, with an agreement for a supplemental background check for no longer than one week.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Barbara Van Gelder, attorney for Mark Judge, says: “Mr. Judge asked not testify publicly. If the FBI or any law enforcement agency requests Mr. Judge’s cooperation, he will answer any and all questions posed to him.”

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:

quote:

He was also cornered by a couple of women protesters at some point before the vote and badgered over his vote

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...r-kavanaugh-n2523573

video at link

On Thursday morning Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ) announced he will vote in favor of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to become the next Supreme Court Justice of the United States.

Shortly after the announcement, Flake was confronted by leftists in the halls of the Senate. They blocked his ability to exit an elevator and screamed in his face.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

we need to keep these hysterical protesters out of the halls of congress

I’d be happy they could keep hysterical protesters out of the Senate.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
https://www.cnn.com/politics/l...7294b187c03a8336f2d8

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn says there will still be a motion to proceed vote in the Senate tomorrow, with an agreement for a supplemental background check for no longer than one week.

We need the vote tomorrow, otherwise the new Judge cannot participate in rulings until next year, correct?

quote:

Originally posted by kimber1911:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
https://www.cnn.com/politics/l...7294b187c03a8336f2d8

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn says there will still be a motion to proceed vote in the Senate tomorrow, with an agreement for a supplemental background check for no longer than one week.

We need the vote tomorrow, otherwise the new Judge cannot participate in rulings until next year, correct?

No, he just can’t rule on any cases that have been heard already (or started). So things that start before he is seated would be left to the 8 on the bench right now.

Gorsuch was seated in the spring and it didn’t mean he had to sit on his hands for 6 months.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
https://www.cnn.com/politics/l...7294b187c03a8336f2d8

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn says there will still be a motion to proceed vote in the Senate tomorrow, with an agreement for a supplemental background check for no longer than one week.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Barbara Van Gelder, attorney for Mark Judge, says: “Mr. Judge asked not testify publicly. If the FBI or any law enforcement agency requests Mr. Judge’s cooperation, he will answer any and all questions posed to him.”

Smart move, push the vote with the stipulation. Keep the ball rolling.