New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Attention, Mr. Grassley, McConnel, Hatch, Corker, Graham, Cornyn & Mr. 46-1:

NinaS

Senator
Supporting Member
This is how Pete Souza started his Instagram post with an imbedded picture of Garland with Obama and Biden.
The post says plenty..
this is Mr. Merrick Garland. Remember him. You held his Supreme Court nomination open for 293 days without a single hearing. During those 293 days, no one came forward with a shred of evidence about anything that would disqualify him. You just didn’t schedule a hearing or vote for purely political reasons. There is now a credible rape allegation against your Court nominee. For a lifetime appointment. Whose nomination has been open only for 71 days. And your plan is to rush a vote on his nomination without an FBI investigation into a sexual assault he may have committed? Because 46 minus 1 says about the FBI, “this is not their thing.” The “I” in FBI stands for “investigation.” Even I (and everyone that works at the White House) had two FBI investigations into my background as the White House photographer, though I had never committed a crime. So you don’t want the FBI to investigate someone for the Supreme Court about a credible attempted rape allegation? Please explain

Maybe you PJ cons who are whining that the "dirty dems" are HOLDING UP the nomination of Kavanaugh should STHU.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obama-photographer-brett-kavanaugh_us_5ba36246e4b0181540da49a0
 

justoffal

Senator
This is how Pete Souza started his Instagram post with an imbedded picture of Garland with Obama and Biden.
The post says plenty..
this is Mr. Merrick Garland. Remember him. You held his Supreme Court nomination open for 293 days without a single hearing. During those 293 days, no one came forward with a shred of evidence about anything that would disqualify him. You just didn’t schedule a hearing or vote for purely political reasons. There is now a credible rape allegation against your Court nominee. For a lifetime appointment. Whose nomination has been open only for 71 days. And your plan is to rush a vote on his nomination without an FBI investigation into a sexual assault he may have committed? Because 46 minus 1 says about the FBI, “this is not their thing.” The “I” in FBI stands for “investigation.” Even I (and everyone that works at the White House) had two FBI investigations into my background as the White House photographer, though I had never committed a crime. So you don’t want the FBI to investigate someone for the Supreme Court about a credible attempted rape allegation? Please explain

Maybe you PJ cons who are whining that the "dirty dems" are HOLDING UP the nomination of Kavanaugh should STHU.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obama-photographer-brett-kavanaugh_us_5ba36246e4b0181540da49a0
Obama already explained it...

"Elections have consequences"

Reid already sabotaged the process..

" We have no choice but to change the Senate rules"

Blame yourselves. If we had the old rules back none of this would be happening....Kavanaugh wouldn't even have made the list.

Oh and the accusation will become very credible when she takes an oath! Until then it's just BS.

Jo
 

Dawg

President
Supporting Member
Obama already explained it...

"Elections have consequences"

Reid already sabotaged the process..

" We have no choice but to change the Senate rules"

Blame yourselves. If we had the old rules back none of this would be happening....Kavanaugh wouldn't even have made the list.

Oh and the accusation will become very credible when she takes an oath! Until then it's just BS.

Jo
She is as dumb as a box of rocks when it comes to how politics works.

She's just here trolling for "DICKS"
 

Winston

Do you feel lucky, Punk
This is how Pete Souza started his Instagram post with an imbedded picture of Garland with Obama and Biden.
The post says plenty..
this is Mr. Merrick Garland. Remember him. You held his Supreme Court nomination open for 293 days without a single hearing. During those 293 days, no one came forward with a shred of evidence about anything that would disqualify him. You just didn’t schedule a hearing or vote for purely political reasons. There is now a credible rape allegation against your Court nominee. For a lifetime appointment. Whose nomination has been open only for 71 days. And your plan is to rush a vote on his nomination without an FBI investigation into a sexual assault he may have committed? Because 46 minus 1 says about the FBI, “this is not their thing.” The “I” in FBI stands for “investigation.” Even I (and everyone that works at the White House) had two FBI investigations into my background as the White House photographer, though I had never committed a crime. So you don’t want the FBI to investigate someone for the Supreme Court about a credible attempted rape allegation? Please explain

Maybe you PJ cons who are whining that the "dirty dems" are HOLDING UP the nomination of Kavanaugh should STHU.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obama-photographer-brett-kavanaugh_us_5ba36246e4b0181540da49a0
Now if you could only remember to take your Zoloft
 

UPNYA2

Mayor
This is how Pete Souza started his Instagram post with an imbedded picture of Garland with Obama and Biden.
The post says plenty..
this is Mr. Merrick Garland. Remember him. You held his Supreme Court nomination open for 293 days without a single hearing. During those 293 days, no one came forward with a shred of evidence about anything that would disqualify him. You just didn’t schedule a hearing or vote for purely political reasons. There is now a credible rape allegation against your Court nominee. For a lifetime appointment. Whose nomination has been open only for 71 days. And your plan is to rush a vote on his nomination without an FBI investigation into a sexual assault he may have committed? Because 46 minus 1 says about the FBI, “this is not their thing.” The “I” in FBI stands for “investigation.” Even I (and everyone that works at the White House) had two FBI investigations into my background as the White House photographer, though I had never committed a crime. So you don’t want the FBI to investigate someone for the Supreme Court about a credible attempted rape allegation? Please explain

Maybe you PJ cons who are whining that the "dirty dems" are HOLDING UP the nomination of Kavanaugh should STHU.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obama-photographer-brett-kavanaugh_us_5ba36246e4b0181540da49a0

"So you don’t want the FBI to investigate someone for the Supreme Court about a credible attempted rape allegation?"

What makes this allegation "credible"?

"Please explain"

Some bi tch said it about a man that dems/libs fear does not share their political views?
Near as I can tell that is pretty much all you have...…..
 

Winston

Do you feel lucky, Punk
"So you don’t want the FBI to investigate someone for the Supreme Court about a credible attempted rape allegation?"

What makes this allegation "credible"?

"Please explain"

Some bi tch said it about a man that dems/libs fear does not share their political views?
Near as I can tell that is pretty much all you have...…..
We want this investigated. Step 1 is the accuser needs to testify under oath
 

RickWA

Senator
This is how Pete Souza started his Instagram post with an imbedded picture of Garland with Obama and Biden.
The post says plenty..
this is Mr. Merrick Garland. Remember him. You held his Supreme Court nomination open for 293 days without a single hearing. During those 293 days, no one came forward with a shred of evidence about anything that would disqualify him. You just didn’t schedule a hearing or vote for purely political reasons. There is now a credible rape allegation against your Court nominee. For a lifetime appointment. Whose nomination has been open only for 71 days. And your plan is to rush a vote on his nomination without an FBI investigation into a sexual assault he may have committed? Because 46 minus 1 says about the FBI, “this is not their thing.” The “I” in FBI stands for “investigation.” Even I (and everyone that works at the White House) had two FBI investigations into my background as the White House photographer, though I had never committed a crime. So you don’t want the FBI to investigate someone for the Supreme Court about a credible attempted rape allegation? Please explain

Maybe you PJ cons who are whining that the "dirty dems" are HOLDING UP the nomination of Kavanaugh should STHU.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obama-photographer-brett-kavanaugh_us_5ba36246e4b0181540da49a0
No dice. The Dems, specifically Feinstein, deliberately SAT on this information (i.e. completely WITHHELD it) for eight (8) weeks. This was done to preserve last minute abrupt shock value in the closing hours of the appointment process.

Those of us who are not terrible people/morons immediately recognize this and urge the vote. Hopefully the cowardly GOP moves on this straight away.

Thanks.
 

UPNYA2

Mayor
We want this investigated. Step 1 is the accuser needs to testify under oath
I agree.

Testifying under oath would be a good way of making the allegation more credible.
Until something like this happens this allegation is no more credible than someone saying the accuser orally serviced the entire football team, including the coaches, one night 35 or 36 years ago at someone's house during a party they attended on some night and someone also knows about it.
 

NinaS

Senator
Supporting Member
No dice. The Dems, specifically Feinstein, deliberately SAT on this information (i.e. completely WITHHELD it) for eight (8) weeks. This was done to preserve last minute abrupt shock value in the closing hours of the appointment process.

Those of us who are not terrible people/morons immediately recognize this and urge the vote. Hopefully the cowardly GOP moves on this straight away.

Thanks.
AND how long did the REPUBLICANS stall the nomination of Obama's choice?? That was okay? You are a HYPOCRITE to the max.
 

NinaS

Senator
Supporting Member
We want this investigated. Step 1 is the accuser needs to testify under oath
And the ACCUSED?? Should he have to testify under oath as well? And why is Trump refusing to testify UNDER OATH to Mueller? Because he's the biggest liar of the century? He knows he'd screw up.
 

RickWA

Senator
AND how long did the REPUBLICANS stall the nomination of Obama's choice?? That was okay? You are a HYPOCRITE to the max.
Nope. No dice. We're talking about a SENIOR Democrat Senator woman...highly powerful...who SAT on this poor, vulnerable lady's case for TWO MONTHS. How hateful, uncompassionate, and anti-woman must SHE be? Eh, Nina? Don't you find this savagely COLD and HATEFUL?

My goodness gracious.

Ah well, all this gives you Democrats time to conjure up an additional "victim" here or there over the course of the next three days, right?

I wonder if Diane Feinstein will STIFLE their claims for months as well...
 

Constitutional Sheepdog

][][][%er!!!!!!!
And the ACCUSED?? Should he have to testify under oath as well? And why is Trump refusing to testify UNDER OATH to Mueller? Because he's the biggest liar of the century? He knows he'd screw up.
the accuser said she wasn't going to talk until the FBI investigated
The FBI said they weren't going to investigate
next.........
 

NinaS

Senator
Supporting Member
Nope. No dice. We're talking about a SENIOR Democrat Senator woman...highly powerful...who SAT on this poor, vulnerable lady's case for TWO MONTHS. How hateful, uncompassionate, and anti-woman must SHE be? Eh, Nina? Don't you find this savagely COLD and HATEFUL?

My goodness gracious.

Ah well, all this gives you Democrats time to conjure up an additional "victim" here or there over the course of the next three days, right?

I wonder if Diane Feinstein will STIFLE their claims for months as well...
ANd you're too big of a COWARD to answer my question. REPUBLICANS SAT ON OBAMA'S NOMINATION FOR SCOTUS FOR NEARLY A YEAR. Yet, you DODGE that. Feinstein should have brought it up immediately. THEN maybe there would have been an investigation by the FBI who DOES investigate such things. You should be glad she didn't because who know what they'd have found in his drunken teenage past.
 

RickWA

Senator
ANd you're too big of a COWARD to answer my question. REPUBLICANS SAT ON OBAMA'S NOMINATION FOR SCOTUS FOR NEARLY A YEAR. Yet, you DODGE that. Feinstein should have brought it up immediately. THEN maybe there would have been an investigation by the FBI who DOES investigate such things. You should be glad she didn't because who know what they'd have found in his drunken teenage past.
You're not going to nag your way out of this, Nina. The GOP did not TRASH Garland. They simply didn't vote on him. Feinstein DID sit on Ford's case for TWO MONTHS. Such disregard for a vulnerable woman. The Dems ARE trashing Kavanaugh (as are you underachieving leftist hack clowns).

Hag it up, midget.
 

NinaS

Senator
Supporting Member
You're not going to nag your way out of this, Nina. The GOP did not TRASH Garland. They simply didn't vote on him. Feinstein DID sit on Ford's case for TWO MONTHS. Such disregard for a vulnerable woman. The Dems ARE trashing Kavanaugh (as are you underachieving leftist hack clowns).

Hag it up, midget.
THEY SIMPLY DIDN'T VOTE FOR HIM>>>>WHY???? You are the most pathetic liar on this forum. Tell us, Mr. genius....WHY didn't they vote for or against him? Why did they stall? SURELY not to be partisan and make sure that Obama couldn't put a Liberal judge in place when he had every right to. NEARLY A YEAR!!!! And now you whine that for TWO MONTHS this went on. LOLOL What a damn baby you are.
 

NinaS

Senator
Supporting Member
Nope. No dice. We're talking about a SENIOR Democrat Senator woman...highly powerful...who SAT on this poor, vulnerable lady's case for TWO MONTHS. How hateful, uncompassionate, and anti-woman must SHE be? Eh, Nina? Don't you find this savagely COLD and HATEFUL?

My goodness gracious.

Ah well, all this gives you Democrats time to conjure up an additional "victim" here or there over the course of the next three days, right?

I wonder if Diane Feinstein will STIFLE their claims for months as well...
LOL...Speaking of COLD AND HATEFUL....you obviously thought it was funny when your orange monster had Bill Clinton's accusers sitting front row at a debate. Hillary was his opponent...not Bill. Wasn't that cruel of him? Why didn't Hillary put Trump's accusers on the front row? Maybe she thought he'd skip the debate like he did previously. Don't you think that Hillary should have had them there...just to teach Trump's family a lesson? LOL
 
Top