Clearly I didn't see his full testimony. Appreciate the correction. Only just now hearing the "have you" remark. Yikes. Not exactly even tempered response to a sitting Senator.seacoaster wrote:Disagree old friend and distiller. Thomas was truculent and angry and said the famous phrase. But I don't think he called up the recent election, political payback by the Clintons, or chastised the Bluecoats so vehemently, so full of partisan vitriol. This performance -- and that is the difference between him and Dr. Ford; his was theatre -- was remarkable and malignanta fan wrote:Clarance Thomas has already done that.seacoaster wrote:The damage that Kavanaugh has done to the Court he supposedly reveres will be lasting and maybe irreparable -- if he gets confirmed.
The Independent State Legislature Doctrine
Re: SCOTUS
-
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: SCOTUS
Respectfully, not so. She informs him well before that part of the exchange that her father, who is 90, was an alcoholic:tech37 wrote:I'm not sticking up for him but let's be accurate...Klobuchar didn't mention her alcoholic parent until after K apologized. He didn't say "have you?" knowing that personal info.seriously? wrote:I don't know how any woman could watch that exchange and not feel the deep-rooted misogyny and total disrespect just hiding right below the surface.He sneered in response, “Have you?” It was a moment of singular cruelty and disrespect. One saw a flash in the exchange with Klobuchar the same sense of entitlement...
Here's the clip: https://www.wdio.com/politics/kavanaugh ... g/5087638/
Re: SCOTUS
Ford says 100% it was Kav. Kav says 100% it wasn't him. They both literally used the words 100%. Tough situation.
You know, wouldn't it be nice if there was maybe some kind of federal agency or office that could help out with this? Like maybe some kind of bureau that did investigations? So they could talk to the eye witnesses?
You know, wouldn't it be nice if there was maybe some kind of federal agency or office that could help out with this? Like maybe some kind of bureau that did investigations? So they could talk to the eye witnesses?
Boycott stupid. If you ignore the gator troll, eventually he'll just go back under his bridge.
Re: SCOTUS
runrussellrun wrote:Well paid $200k in the DC area is a joke. What, is he taking the MARC train from Harper Ferry of Hagerstown? Prep schools ain't cheap. I guess Woodward, BCC or Churchill are good enough though. Not Perry Hall though. Linganore to far? Tough to pay the mortgage in Chevy Chase taking home only $140Ka fan wrote:A valid point? How soon we forget. Why do you think there's an opening on the court in the first place? That's right. Because Graham and his fellow Republican wankers decided to "play politics" and deny Garland a vote. Any tears for Garland?thatsmell wrote:The Dr was extremely credible, IMO.
Regardless if she can't name a time, date and place.
Lindsay Graham is rightfully upset because Feinstein did use her as a pawn and kept her complaint in the dark to pull a last minute "gotcha" when she could have brought the issue to light earlier,before BKL was nominated.
Graham has a serious, valid point. Until he then said that he is going to go ahead and confirm BK to teach the Dems a lesson for playing politics.
If Graham had "played fair", Garland would already be on the bench, and none of this Kavanaugh stuff would ever have happened. Kavanaugh would be a well paid judge enjoying his career.
In short, F you, Graham, you hypocritical moron that's too stupid to understand his own hypocrisy.
Edit to add, ThatSmell-----wanted to make it clear, since I didn't put it in words, that I thought what Feinstein did was disgusting. She's as big of a POS as there is on the hill, and sandbagging both Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford by holding on to Fords story until it was maximum political benefit is as low as it gets. I hope Ford figures out what Feinstein did and why she did it, and pens one hell of an op-ed. However.....Feinstein not the only POS in that room, is my point.
Afan, I think we agree. I get the Dems are still ticked about Garland. I saw the live Graham interview. He was personally moved by the Dr’s testimony. He had the opportunity to put it all behind and do the right thing. But if his last comment holds true, he’s back in the oneupanship game. He was more ticked he got outplayed by Feinstein. Who was willing to use the DR for her purpose. An embarrassment. Moreso that this fact will probably be swept under the mat. The republicans have/ had a chance to do the right thing. But if Graham is the barometer, this cycle of win at all costs or obstruct will continue.
This November, Throw all the incumbents out.
Last edited by thatsmell on Thu Sep 27, 2018 8:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I never knew no Godfather. I got my own family, Senator."
-
- Posts: 7583
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 11:07 am
Re: SCOTUS
BAM....thank you for the clip.seacoaster wrote:Respectfully, not so. She informs him well before that part of the exchange that her father, who is 90, was an alcoholic:tech37 wrote:I'm not sticking up for him but let's be accurate...Klobuchar didn't mention her alcoholic parent until after K apologized. He didn't say "have you?" knowing that personal info.seriously? wrote:I don't know how any woman could watch that exchange and not feel the deep-rooted misogyny and total disrespect just hiding right below the surface.He sneered in response, “Have you?” It was a moment of singular cruelty and disrespect. One saw a flash in the exchange with Klobuchar the same sense of entitlement...
Here's the clip: https://www.wdio.com/politics/kavanaugh ... g/5087638/
ILM...Independent Lives Matter
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
-
- Posts: 34195
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm
Re: SCOTUS
If they GOP pushes this through, for the first time in my life, I won't vote for a single Republican. A person would be hard pressed to make a determination of my "party affiliation" based on my voting history but I am not sure I will vote for a single Republican. Find a better candidate. This guy is not worthy. It was there for the world to see. Nominate a better conservative Judge. Goes on FoxNews, invokes Clintons, talks about a conspiracy.... this is a Supreme Court justice? This country has fallen.thatsmell wrote:runrussellrun wrote:Well paid $200k in the DC area is a joke. What, is he taking the MARC train from Harper Ferry of Hagerstown? Prep schools ain't cheap. I guess Woodward, BCC or Churchill are good enough though. Not Perry Hall though. Linganore to far? Tough to pay the mortgage in Chevy Chase taking home only $140Ka fan wrote:A valid point? How soon we forget. Why do you think there's an opening on the court in the first place? That's right. Because Graham and his fellow Republican wankers decided to "play politics" and deny Garland a vote. Any tears for Garland?thatsmell wrote:The Dr was extremely credible, IMO.
Regardless if she can't name a time, date and place.
Lindsay Graham is rightfully upset because Feinstein did use her as a pawn and kept her complaint in the dark to pull a last minute "gotcha" when she could have brought the issue to light earlier,before BKL was nominated.
Graham has a serious, valid point. Until he then said that he is going to go ahead and confirm BK to teach the Dems a lesson for playing politics.
If Graham had "played fair", Garland would already be on the bench, and none of this Kavanaugh stuff would ever have happened. Kavanaugh would be a well paid judge enjoying his career.
In short, F you, Graham, you hypocritical moron that's too stupid to understand his own hypocrisy.
Edit to add, ThatSmell-----wanted to make it clear, since I didn't put it in words, that I thought what Feinstein did was disgusting. She's as big of a POS as there is on the hill, and sandbagging both Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford by holding on to Fords story until it was maximum political benefit is as low as it gets. I hope Ford figures out what Feinstein did and why she did it, and pens one hell of an op-ed. However.....Feinstein not the only POS in that room, is my point.
Afan, we agree. Graham had the opportunity to put it all behind and do the right thing. But he’s back in the oneupanship game. The republicans have/ had a chance to do the right thing. But if Graham is the barometer, this cycle of win at all costs or obstruct will continue.
This November, Throw all the incumbents out.
“I wish you would!”
-
- Posts: 7583
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 11:07 am
Re: SCOTUS
But, Kav's swore to casper the ghost (dog backwards) Did Ford?ggait wrote:Ford says 100% it was Kav. Kav says 100% it wasn't him. They both literally used the words 100%. Tough situation.
You know, wouldn't it be nice if there was maybe some kind of federal agency or office that could help out with this? Like maybe some kind of bureau that did investigations? So they could talk to the eye witnesses?
Like I said, Kav will NEVER be confirmed, but for all the writeful wrong weasons. Now, about that federal budget and something about the last day of September.
ILM...Independent Lives Matter
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
-
- Posts: 34195
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm
Re: SCOTUS
Trust Fund.runrussellrun wrote:Well paid $200k in the DC area is a joke. What, is he taking the MARC train from Harper Ferry of Hagerstown? Prep schools ain't cheap. I guess Woodward, BCC or Churchill are good enough though. Not Perry Hall though. Linganore to far? Tough to pay the mortgage in Chevy Chase taking home only $140Ka fan wrote:A valid point? How soon we forget. Why do you think there's an opening on the court in the first place? That's right. Because Graham and his fellow Republican wankers decided to "play politics" and deny Garland a vote. Any tears for Garland?thatsmell wrote:The Dr was extremely credible, IMO.
Regardless if she can't name a time, date and place.
Lindsay Graham is rightfully upset because Feinstein did use her as a pawn and kept her complaint in the dark to pull a last minute "gotcha" when she could have brought the issue to light earlier,before BKL was nominated.
Graham has a serious, valid point. Until he then said that he is going to go ahead and confirm BK to teach the Dems a lesson for playing politics.
If Graham had "played fair", Garland would already be on the bench, and none of this Kavanaugh stuff would ever have happened. Kavanaugh would be a well paid judge enjoying his career.
In short, F you, Graham, you hypocritical moron that's too stupid to understand his own hypocrisy.
Edit to add, ThatSmell-----wanted to make it clear, since I didn't put it in words, that I thought what Feinstein did was disgusting. She's as big of a POS as there is on the hill, and sandbagging both Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford by holding on to Fords story until it was maximum political benefit is as low as it gets. I hope Ford figures out what Feinstein did and why she did it, and pens one hell of an op-ed. However.....Feinstein not the only POS in that room, is my point.
“I wish you would!”
Re: SCOTUS
I stand corrected...sorry...must have been the low point in hearing (one can only hope)seacoaster wrote:Respectfully, not so. She informs him well before that part of the exchange that her father, who is 90, was an alcoholic:tech37 wrote:I'm not sticking up for him but let's be accurate...Klobuchar didn't mention her alcoholic parent until after K apologized. He didn't say "have you?" knowing that personal info.seriously? wrote:I don't know how any woman could watch that exchange and not feel the deep-rooted misogyny and total disrespect just hiding right below the surface.He sneered in response, “Have you?” It was a moment of singular cruelty and disrespect. One saw a flash in the exchange with Klobuchar the same sense of entitlement...
Here's the clip: https://www.wdio.com/politics/kavanaugh ... g/5087638/
-
- Posts: 7583
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 11:07 am
Re: SCOTUS
like tRump, a different kind of TAATS (modernized to TAMATS )Typical Lax Dad wrote:If they GOP pushes this through, for the first time in my life, I won't vote for a single Republican. A person would be hard pressed to make a determination of my "party affiliation" based on my voting history but I am not sure I will vote for a single Republican. Find a better candidate. This guy is not worthy. It was there for the world to see. Nominate a better conservative Judge. Goes on FoxNews, invokes Clintons, talks about a conspiracy.... this is a Supreme Court justice? This country has fallen.thatsmell wrote:runrussellrun wrote:Well paid $200k in the DC area is a joke. What, is he taking the MARC train from Harper Ferry of Hagerstown? Prep schools ain't cheap. I guess Woodward, BCC or Churchill are good enough though. Not Perry Hall though. Linganore to far? Tough to pay the mortgage in Chevy Chase taking home only $140Ka fan wrote:A valid point? How soon we forget. Why do you think there's an opening on the court in the first place? That's right. Because Graham and his fellow Republican wankers decided to "play politics" and deny Garland a vote. Any tears for Garland?thatsmell wrote:The Dr was extremely credible, IMO.
Regardless if she can't name a time, date and place.
Lindsay Graham is rightfully upset because Feinstein did use her as a pawn and kept her complaint in the dark to pull a last minute "gotcha" when she could have brought the issue to light earlier,before BKL was nominated.
Graham has a serious, valid point. Until he then said that he is going to go ahead and confirm BK to teach the Dems a lesson for playing politics.
If Graham had "played fair", Garland would already be on the bench, and none of this Kavanaugh stuff would ever have happened. Kavanaugh would be a well paid judge enjoying his career.
In short, F you, Graham, you hypocritical moron that's too stupid to understand his own hypocrisy.
Edit to add, ThatSmell-----wanted to make it clear, since I didn't put it in words, that I thought what Feinstein did was disgusting. She's as big of a POS as there is on the hill, and sandbagging both Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford by holding on to Fords story until it was maximum political benefit is as low as it gets. I hope Ford figures out what Feinstein did and why she did it, and pens one hell of an op-ed. However.....Feinstein not the only POS in that room, is my point.
Afan, we agree. Graham had the opportunity to put it all behind and do the right thing. But he’s back in the oneupanship game. The republicans have/ had a chance to do the right thing. But if Graham is the barometer, this cycle of win at all costs or obstruct will continue.
This November, Throw all the incumbents out.
Can you, or anyone, name the top 5 Supreme court decisions in the past decade that didn't speak to globalism and support for the oligarchy? Is the ACA a tax, or not? Do Supreme Court Justices have to reveal their holdings/investments?
exactly. Important issues. Like dying of cancer, except we are focused on using a coaster under that drink. Meaningless.
ILM...Independent Lives Matter
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
Re: SCOTUS
Hogan gets my vote. None of the other incumbents in my neck of Maryland.Typical Lax Dad wrote:If they GOP pushes this through, for the first time in my life, I won't vote for a single Republican. A person would be hard pressed to make a determination of my "party affiliation" based on my voting history but I am not sure I will vote for a single Republican. Find a better candidate. This guy is not worthy. It was there for the world to see. Nominate a better conservative Judge. Goes on FoxNews, invokes Clintons, talks about a conspiracy.... this is a Supreme Court justice? This country has fallen.thatsmell wrote:runrussellrun wrote:Well paid $200k in the DC area is a joke. What, is he taking the MARC train from Harper Ferry of Hagerstown? Prep schools ain't cheap. I guess Woodward, BCC or Churchill are good enough though. Not Perry Hall though. Linganore to far? Tough to pay the mortgage in Chevy Chase taking home only $140Ka fan wrote:A valid point? How soon we forget. Why do you think there's an opening on the court in the first place? That's right. Because Graham and his fellow Republican wankers decided to "play politics" and deny Garland a vote. Any tears for Garland?thatsmell wrote:The Dr was extremely credible, IMO.
Regardless if she can't name a time, date and place.
Lindsay Graham is rightfully upset because Feinstein did use her as a pawn and kept her complaint in the dark to pull a last minute "gotcha" when she could have brought the issue to light earlier,before BKL was nominated.
Graham has a serious, valid point. Until he then said that he is going to go ahead and confirm BK to teach the Dems a lesson for playing politics.
If Graham had "played fair", Garland would already be on the bench, and none of this Kavanaugh stuff would ever have happened. Kavanaugh would be a well paid judge enjoying his career.
In short, F you, Graham, you hypocritical moron that's too stupid to understand his own hypocrisy.
Edit to add, ThatSmell-----wanted to make it clear, since I didn't put it in words, that I thought what Feinstein did was disgusting. She's as big of a POS as there is on the hill, and sandbagging both Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford by holding on to Fords story until it was maximum political benefit is as low as it gets. I hope Ford figures out what Feinstein did and why she did it, and pens one hell of an op-ed. However.....Feinstein not the only POS in that room, is my point.
Afan, we agree. Graham had the opportunity to put it all behind and do the right thing. But he’s back in the oneupanship game. The republicans have/ had a chance to do the right thing. But if Graham is the barometer, this cycle of win at all costs or obstruct will continue.
This November, Throw all the incumbents out.
I never knew no Godfather. I got my own family, Senator."
-
- Posts: 7583
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 11:07 am
Re: SCOTUS
Any healthcare stock held by the trustTypical Lax Dad wrote:Trust Fund.runrussellrun wrote:Well paid $200k in the DC area is a joke. What, is he taking the MARC train from Harper Ferry of Hagerstown? Prep schools ain't cheap. I guess Woodward, BCC or Churchill are good enough though. Not Perry Hall though. Linganore to far? Tough to pay the mortgage in Chevy Chase taking home only $140Ka fan wrote:A valid point? How soon we forget. Why do you think there's an opening on the court in the first place? That's right. Because Graham and his fellow Republican wankers decided to "play politics" and deny Garland a vote. Any tears for Garland?thatsmell wrote:The Dr was extremely credible, IMO.
Regardless if she can't name a time, date and place.
Lindsay Graham is rightfully upset because Feinstein did use her as a pawn and kept her complaint in the dark to pull a last minute "gotcha" when she could have brought the issue to light earlier,before BKL was nominated.
Graham has a serious, valid point. Until he then said that he is going to go ahead and confirm BK to teach the Dems a lesson for playing politics.
If Graham had "played fair", Garland would already be on the bench, and none of this Kavanaugh stuff would ever have happened. Kavanaugh would be a well paid judge enjoying his career.
In short, F you, Graham, you hypocritical moron that's too stupid to understand his own hypocrisy.
Edit to add, ThatSmell-----wanted to make it clear, since I didn't put it in words, that I thought what Feinstein did was disgusting. She's as big of a POS as there is on the hill, and sandbagging both Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford by holding on to Fords story until it was maximum political benefit is as low as it gets. I hope Ford figures out what Feinstein did and why she did it, and pens one hell of an op-ed. However.....Feinstein not the only POS in that room, is my point.
But, was addressing AFANS comment about being paid.
EDIT: It doesn't appear he has that much worth. Not like Breyer. Kav's house would be worth $50k in Auburn, NY or Rutland, VT. It's tiny, no land.
And, why are Supremes allowed to be flow here and there and everywhere, for free. But elected officials can't be. We get made at the stupid stuff. Just MHO
ILM...Independent Lives Matter
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
Re: SCOTUS
[quote=afan"]Edit to add, ThatSmell-----wanted to make it clear, since I didn't put it in words, that I thought what Feinstein did was disgusting. She's as big of a POS as there is on the hill, and sandbagging both Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford by holding on to Fords story until it was maximum political benefit is as low as it gets.[/quote]
Shumer was probably behind it
Shumer was probably behind it
Last edited by tech37 on Thu Sep 27, 2018 9:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: SCOTUS
We really need that applause emoji!thatsmell wrote:Afan, I think we agree. I get the Dems are still ticked about Garland. I saw the live Graham interview. He was personally moved by the Dr’s testimony. He had the opportunity to put it all behind and do the right thing. But if his last comment holds true, he’s back in the oneupanship game. He was more ticked he got outplayed by Feinstein. Who was willing to use the DR for her purpose. An embarrassment. Moreso that this fact will probably be swept under the mat. The republicans have/ had a chance to do the right thing. But if Graham is the barometer, this cycle of win at all costs or obstruct will continue.
This November, Throw all the incumbents out.
Throw all the bums out. Pelosi's had a freaking seat in Congress since 1993. That's insane, and has done some serious damage. Term limit. One and done, no reelection..serve your country, and get out.
-
- Posts: 7583
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 11:07 am
Re: SCOTUS
A Fan wrote that, not RRR.tech37 wrote:Shumer was probably behind itrunrussellrun wrote:Edit to add, ThatSmell-----wanted to make it clear, since I didn't put it in words, that I thought what Feinstein did was disgusting. She's as big of a POS as there is on the hill, and sandbagging both Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford by holding on to Fords story until it was maximum political benefit is as low as it gets.
Feinsteins husband's business doing OK? I'm worried
ILM...Independent Lives Matter
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
Re: SCOTUS
Im not against career politicians- the ones that go from school board to county council to state rep to federal rep to another office. But once you hit for the cycle, get out!
I never knew no Godfather. I got my own family, Senator."
-
- Posts: 34195
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm
Re: SCOTUS
Who knows. Most Americans would like to have it as rough as Kavanaugh has had it....Feel sorry for him and his family....not sure how they come back from this.....runrussellrun wrote:Any healthcare stock held by the trustTypical Lax Dad wrote:Trust Fund.runrussellrun wrote:Well paid $200k in the DC area is a joke. What, is he taking the MARC train from Harper Ferry of Hagerstown? Prep schools ain't cheap. I guess Woodward, BCC or Churchill are good enough though. Not Perry Hall though. Linganore to far? Tough to pay the mortgage in Chevy Chase taking home only $140Ka fan wrote:A valid point? How soon we forget. Why do you think there's an opening on the court in the first place? That's right. Because Graham and his fellow Republican wankers decided to "play politics" and deny Garland a vote. Any tears for Garland?thatsmell wrote:The Dr was extremely credible, IMO.
Regardless if she can't name a time, date and place.
Lindsay Graham is rightfully upset because Feinstein did use her as a pawn and kept her complaint in the dark to pull a last minute "gotcha" when she could have brought the issue to light earlier,before BKL was nominated.
Graham has a serious, valid point. Until he then said that he is going to go ahead and confirm BK to teach the Dems a lesson for playing politics.
If Graham had "played fair", Garland would already be on the bench, and none of this Kavanaugh stuff would ever have happened. Kavanaugh would be a well paid judge enjoying his career.
In short, F you, Graham, you hypocritical moron that's too stupid to understand his own hypocrisy.
Edit to add, ThatSmell-----wanted to make it clear, since I didn't put it in words, that I thought what Feinstein did was disgusting. She's as big of a POS as there is on the hill, and sandbagging both Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford by holding on to Fords story until it was maximum political benefit is as low as it gets. I hope Ford figures out what Feinstein did and why she did it, and pens one hell of an op-ed. However.....Feinstein not the only POS in that room, is my point.
But, was addressing AFANS comment about being paid.
EDIT: It doesn't appear he has that much worth. Not like Breyer. Kav's house would be worth $50k in Auburn, NY or Rutland, VT. It's tiny, no land.
And, why are Supremes allowed to be flow here and there and everywhere, for free. But elected officials can't be. We get made at the stupid stuff. Just MHO
“I wish you would!”
-
- Posts: 7583
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 11:07 am
Re: SCOTUS
TLD, why do you post comments that you aren't sure of ? Like the "trust fund" ?
Sure, cry us a river for going to Yale. Twice. Or able to afford a private HS. (was he on scholarship?)
Yeah, it bothers me too that we have never had a NON-Ivy league law school grad on the Supremes. (in modern times)
Heck, you don't even have to BE a licensed lawyer to be nominated, vetted and voted. But, the pretends LOVE them the elites. Only three states allow you to take the bar without a JD. If you can pass, you can pass. Why hasn't Sen. Feinstein presented legislation making the JD requirement illegal? Oh, states rights stuff. Guess I-9's and FICA don't apply to workers of the USA
Sure, cry us a river for going to Yale. Twice. Or able to afford a private HS. (was he on scholarship?)
Yeah, it bothers me too that we have never had a NON-Ivy league law school grad on the Supremes. (in modern times)
Heck, you don't even have to BE a licensed lawyer to be nominated, vetted and voted. But, the pretends LOVE them the elites. Only three states allow you to take the bar without a JD. If you can pass, you can pass. Why hasn't Sen. Feinstein presented legislation making the JD requirement illegal? Oh, states rights stuff. Guess I-9's and FICA don't apply to workers of the USA
ILM...Independent Lives Matter
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
-
- Posts: 7583
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 11:07 am
Re: SCOTUS
What's the average age of the Senate Judiciary committee? 69thatsmell wrote:Im not against career politicians- the ones that go from school board to county council to state rep to federal rep to another office. But once you hit for the cycle, get out!
ILM...Independent Lives Matter
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
-
- Posts: 34195
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm
Re: SCOTUS
Trust Fund is my guess. Plenty of good law schools and business schools. Some of the most successful guys in Manhattan were City College guys. Everyone I dealt with was sharp. I don't know and I don't care about Feinstein... Ruling class and peasant class is pretty much the system.runrussellrun wrote:TLD, why do you post comments that you aren't sure of ? Like the "trust fund" ?
Sure, cry us a river for going to Yale. Twice. Or able to afford a private HS. (was he on scholarship?)
Yeah, it bothers me too that we have never had a NON-Ivy league law school grad on the Supremes. (in modern times)
Heck, you don't even have to BE a licensed lawyer to be nominated, vetted and voted. But, the pretends LOVE them the elites. Only three states allow you to take the bar without a JD. If you can pass, you can pass. Why hasn't Sen. Feinstein presented legislation making the JD requirement illegal? Oh, states rights stuff. Guess I-9's and FICA don't apply to workers of the USA
“I wish you would!”