Agnostic.com

12 2

Having now had a day or two to digest what we all saw, who among us really thinks this man is possessed of the kind of character that we want to see in our Supreme Court Justices?

  • 1 vote
  • 34 votes
MrLink 8 Sep 28
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

12 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

No way in hell!!!!!!

0

He isn't fit to be a judge in a traffic court.

1

That he didn't insist on a full FBI investigation to clear him was all I needed to decide his guilt. The Republican defenders seem to think he denied everything is proof of something. Did anyone expect him to admit to rape, assaulting 15 year old girls or gang bang participation?

3

He shouldn't be any type of judge....

4

The first few minutes of his opening statement, I started worrying because he sounded convincing and then the waterworks started and everything went down the sewer. Ford manned it so much better. She was emotional at times but she never sniveled. She was totally believable and he was a spoiled little lying bully just like his uncle Don.

gearl Level 7 Sep 29, 2018
7

He's a privileged, whiny, lying wimp!

11

IF they came out tomorrow and proved absolutely that every allegation was false, he still did not exhibit a temperament or an impartiality needed for that seat.

hell, he shouldn't have been a federal judge to begin with.

13

I am British and watched the entire performance. He exhibited 3 telltale signs of lying. In addition, a job like this requires a person of extremely high emotional intelligence, not a petulent cry baby.

Amisja Level 8 Sep 29, 2018

Agreed. We need emotional intelligence.

Please tell me those three signs?

@Cutiebeauty Well tongue in the cheek which he does several times, answering negatively whilst nodding when asked a question he looks down towards the left. Dogs this too.

@Amisja thank you

@Amisja I would add deflecting by answering a direct question with a personal question, homy stories irrelevant to the line of the questions and invoking the family card in reply to a question directed only at him.

4

Sadly character doesn't really count in contemporary American politics.

Let's all start insisting on it.

8

I was trying very hard to be impartial. I caught some of Dr. Ford's testimony and found it personal, calm, and heartfelt. Then I listened to him and after ten minutes had to turn off the radio (which by the way causes you to listen more intently than watching on television). I left shaking my head and wondering how this guy was ever nominated in the first place.

I also listened live on the radio. but also for me it really sunk in once i watched him on video feed. seeing his conduct that way... He was unhinged and petulant. Not good.

His facial expressions would have added to the context. When a guilty person gets confronted with his crimes.

6

Can't see any purpose for him beyond covering Toadstool's ass.

You are right, from the get go his nomination was for all the wrong reasons.

8

He's not Supreme Court material, and for more reasons than the sexual assault. I've read several thing by people who know him, and he's a Republican shill who does whatever they say, and is obsessively anti-Clinton.

I found his bazaar comment about how this was revenge for the Clintons to be... A bit cockoo.

@ProudMary Skip! ?

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:189451
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.