• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Kavanaugh SCOTUS Senate Judicial Hearing

Page 121 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
You're a racist to bring up Cosby.
haha

h05110D73
 
Do you approve of an investigation - for the effort to bring forth such witnesses?
The problem is that if Republicans put off the hearings for a month and investigate the accusations and dismiss them. 2 days before the next vote they'd just be a new accusation made, or 3. Whatever it takes.
 
You apparently have a lot more faith in the journalistic integrity and vetting process of right wing talk radio than I do.

Just in case you were wondering, the credibility of right wing talk radio is literally zero. If it's credible, a real news source will catch it. Only a fool would believe what he hears on those shows.
Second-hand, anonymous, hearsay accounts aren't credible? Imagine that! lol
 
And also because Feinstein hid the claim for so long it delayed the "investigation" for at least 6 weeks.

So now you're saying it was worth investigating all along?

I thought it was all lies from some evil commie bitch? You already know the truth of it, anyway--why would you blame Feinstein for anything? Isn't she an actual hero in your book--keeping these lies away from any unwarranted besmirching of the canonized Kavanaugh?
 
Second-hand, anonymous, hearsay accounts aren't credible? Imagine that! lol

You should go back and read my post more closely because I said nothing about the credibility of the account, I was talking about the credibility of right wing talk radio as a source.

When a highly credible publication like the Washington Post or New York Times uses anonymous sources this is credible because they've built up a reputation for integrity and high quality journalism over the course of decades. Right wing talk radio has also built up a reputation over decades, but it's about the worst reputation you can imagine. It's a refuge for psychos, cranks, and conspiracy theorists. Therefore, when an actually credible journalistic enterprise cites an anonymous source, I judge that to be generally credible because the WaPo or the Times is putting their reputation behind it. When right wing talk radio cites an anonymous source I ignore it because they have literally zero credibility. Anyone who listens to right wing radio and believes a word of it is a moron.

I also suspect you don't know what hearsay is.
 
Second-hand, anonymous, hearsay accounts aren't credible? Imagine that! lol

IF "Bobby Joe from Boston" had an account worth any kind of salt, he would lawyer up, testify, submit it as a confession and appear as a witness.

Just like the accusers have already done.

But hey, it's cute to watch you struggle and make the same dumbshit comparisons that no middle-school graduate would ever attempt to make. Maybe cute isn't the proper word, but let's go with that. You're having a good week, no?
 
The problem is that if Republicans put off the hearings for a month and investigate the accusations and dismiss them. 2 days before the next vote they'd just be a new accusation made, or 3. Whatever it takes.

How many accusations did Gorsuch have?

Maybe they need to admit they picked, at best, a person with significant issues and move on to someone else. I mean, we all know why he was added to the list at the last minute but it seems like he won't be worth the trouble at this point.
 
So now you're saying it was worth investigating all along?

I thought it was all lies from some evil commie bitch? You already know the truth of it, anyway--why would you blame Feinstein for anything? Isn't she an actual hero in your book--keeping these lies away from any unwarranted besmirching of the canonized Kavanaugh?
Shithole, i've always said it's worth investigating.
 
How many accusations did Gorsuch have?

Maybe they need to admit they picked, at best, a person with significant issues and move on to someone else. I mean, we all know why he was added to the list at the last minute but it seems like he won't be worth the trouble at this point.

Gorsuch was replacing Scalia.
 
How many accusations did Gorsuch have?

Maybe they need to admit they picked, at best, a person with significant issues and move on to someone else. I mean, we all know why he was added to the list at the last minute but it seems like he won't be worth the trouble at this point.
Who cares? Not me, but it was within the power of the Senate Majority leader not to bring it to the floor.
 
Back
Top