Dems are going at Brett pretty hard.

The only recourse is to vote to censure Feinstein, and strip her of all committee memberships.

She lies during the Kavanaugh hearing, and then ensures this letter makes it's way to the press.

What a despicable stain this thing is for doing so.

 

Despicable stain? Pretty standard stuff as these things go.

 

This seems a bit desperate. Unless there's police records, or a lot of witnesses, it seems pretty empty.

 

Let's think that through.

Forget for a minute what is claimed in this so called letter.

This is what Feinstein said:

“That individual strongly requested confidentiality, declined to come forward or press the matter further, and I have honored that decision."
​

So what did Feinstein do? Make sure the press gets this unverifiable letter.

I referenced she was a stain. She's worse, but I held back.

 

Im betting Diane's Chinese handlers are feeding this to her. I bet that they fear having Kavanaugh on the bench so much, they are literally willing to burn down their own senator to try to stop him.....

 

Read the new IRS tax codes. Why do you think all the high tax states were complaining?

 

I don't doubt you I would just like it explained. You haven't really done that.

 

Yea, too bad . Different circumstance.

 

James, I have a deal for you. You have someone explain the 2018 IRS tax code to you and I will now exercise my option with the "ignore" button.

 

Meanwhile more than fifty of the women who were former coworkers or employees of Brett Kavanaugh claim him to be solid gold. Let's see fifty women who know him best say he is the best and one little scaredy cat who got lock in the bathroom in high school, by the way I know of no bathroom in any school I ever attended that could be locked from the outside or the inside. The story is bogus.

 

Cry me a river.

 

Holy crap...now the FBI has to conduct a witch hunt to discover who's name was redacted.

Maybe the FBI will get a half a dozen perjury indictments instead.

 

I wasn't trying to insult you, but you did not explain much.

 

Resorting to personal attack is noted. It's a poor replacement for intelligent rebuttal.

 

You should sit in a court room and watch.

 

This is the first reasonable thing I’ve seen you say. Ever. I am so ******n proud of you right now.

 

Why don’t you move?

 

You should sit in a courtroom sometime and watch. A court with lots of little misdemeanors is always interesting. These are the cases where the assistant DA essentially reads the police report and the defendant, usually without a lawyer, gives their side and the judge passes judgement.

It doesn't take long to see that one's appearance plays a role, not only in deciding one's guilt or innocence, but also in the degree of punishment. An ugly person gets far worse treatment in the criminal justice system than an attractive one.

Class plays a difference. In my last court battle, my opponents were very blue collar, and even though they dressed nicely, their blue collar status was obvious. At some point, it occurred to me, that the judge, was more able to relate to, not only my position, but also to me, moreso than than my opponents. It was at that point that I had known that I was going to win. I always knew I was in the right. My lawyer wanted to go without a jury, because average people would buy into my opponents mumbo jumbo (i.e. uneducated arguments) but a judge would see what the score was.

One of worse abuses, in my opinion, of the justice system, is the use of arbitration. It is were, instead of being able to take a corporation, or one's employer to court, one has to go to arbitration - a private court, paid for by the corporation/employer, with individuals having less rights than in a regular, court, including not having the right to appeal.

As of late, conservative judges have been favoring the use of such arbitration. It does little more than take power away from the people, and gives more to the most powerful.

 

So you are either a public defender or a habitual offender?.............hard to tell here.

 

I agree with you very much. Professional commentators make it sound as if it is just tRump and his influence. Not so, not at all. This crazy train had been building, at least since the time of Reagan. First they took away the fairness doctrine, which allowed radio stations to broadcast one sided arguments 24 hours a day. Even allowed them to create a news network that is little more than a propaganda outlet.


Notice this only works on conservatives. They've tried to have left-wing versions of right-wing propagandizers, think Ed Shulz, and they have not done so well. There have been articles in scientific and psychological journals on the subject. Apparently there is identifiable differences between conservative brains and liberal brains. Apparently conservatives are far more likely to fall for this kind of programming.

That is to say, it may be that primary difference between conservatives and liberals, in the USA, is that conservatives are those who accepted the conservative drumbeat and liberals are those who have not been swayed.

Back in the 1700s, liberalism was being defined as the idea, that through continuous expansion of scientific understanding and continuous technological improvements, that we, the people, can continuously improve the human condition. It is what it still is about.

I'm not sure conservatives really know what they are about, seems to me the story keeps changing, kind of like when one gets in caught in a lie and tries to lie one's way out of it.

 

You just described CNN and MSNBC to a tee. And as for Ed Shultz, I laugh every time I see his head ready to explode. The MSN Fake News even had the clarity to banish him to RT.

 

Just another DemocRat lie.

When they can't win honestly, DemocRats lie and cheat and create fake news.

 

Did you not read the part about uneducated arguments?

There is this interesting group of statistics. Around 22% of the population of the US are non-believers. In the prisons and jails of the US, less than 1% are non-believers, mostly on death row.

 

This is post #99. No, I do not read every post of drivel (even some of my old ones). Are you a public defender?