by AmericanKulak ➕follow (9) 💰tip ignore
Comments 1 - 40 of 65 Next » Last » Search these comments
I hope she gets the job, we need a good long enduring reminder of what happens when people are hired for a position based on gender and race, rather than qualifications.
richwicks saysI hope she gets the job, we need a good long enduring reminder of what happens when people are hired for a position based on gender and race, rather than qualifications.
VP Harris is a daily (current) reminder of that already. Not settling for one mistake, Biden doubles down for his 21st.
What is a woman? Nobody knows—not even Supreme Court nominees. But we've come up with a few key indicators to look for. Run through this list and keep track of how many "yes" answers you come up with. The more affirmatives, the more likely you're a chick!
1. Are you always cold?
2. Has a human ever popped out of you?
3. Have you ever decorated a bed with six or more pillows?
4. Can you tell the difference between cream white and rustic farmhouse white?
5. Have you run into a curb in the past 24 hours? Be honest, CAROL.
6. DO YOU BLEED? Like, for an extended period of time at regular intervals?
7. Does it take you over three hours to decide what you want to eat?
8. Are you currently a member of at least three pyramid schemes?
9. Do you find simple movie plots hard to follow?
10. Do you frequently describe your emotional state as "fine" when you are not in fact fine?
11. Is your Starbucks drink order anything other than black coffee?
12. Do you have two X chromosomes?
Next election, will be somebody slick and smooth talking, but just as much of a puppet.
Who even cares. Doesn't move the needle on the balance of the court. She'll likely go diabetic at some point in her life. She won't be an 80 year old Justice, let's put it that way. She's literally a pawn in the political game to get the first black, unqualified women on the Supreme Court to check that box that 90% of the population gives no shits about.
I don't agree with Lindsey Graham on a lot of things, but when he's right, he's right.
In Wednesday's Supreme Court nomination hearing, South Carolina's Lindsey Graham asked Ketanji Brown Jackson to explain why she goes soft on distributors of child porn.
Her answer doesn't satisfy Senator Graham and he lets her know it...
Graham absolutely destroys Jackson, even with the Democrats trying to help her out.
Jackson: "On the internet, with one click, you can receive you can distribute TENS OF THOUSANDS (of child pornographic images). You can be doing this for 15 minutes and all of a sudden you are looking at 30, 40, 50 years in prison—"
Graham: "Good! Good! Absolutely right! I hope you would! I hope you go to jail for 50 years if you're on the internet trolling for children in sexual exploitation – see you don't think that's a bad thing, I think that's a horrible thing."
Graham is 100% correct here, and it's appropriate to call out Judge Jackson for not recognizing the severity of the crime.
Convict Grateful to Supreme Court Nominee for Light Sentence for Child Pornography
Things are getting interesting. It was all but guaranteed confirmation last week.
Looks like Murkowski's challenger threat and Manchin constituency may change the calculus.
One tell is the media avoided the subject entirely today. Murkowski's hand might be forced.
Kelly Tshibaka leading Murkowski in Alaska Senate Poll:
https://rumble.com/vyuedr-episode-1740-the-decline-and-fall-of-lisa-murkowski-lies-of-tony-fauci.html?mref=4slod&mc=bbcua&source=patrick.net
Comments 1 - 40 of 65 Next » Last » Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,194,769 comments by 13,933 users - desertguy, DudeAbides, LittleLostLucy online now