Here's a sick man.

[White 6]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Why should she recuse herself based on your fictional belief. libtardo?

A newly appointed supreme court justice owes their appointment to the the president that appointed them, or they would not be there. trumpsucker.

What about Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? Trump appointed them also. Where is the precedent? Scalia ruled in Bush v. Gore after he was nominated by Bush. Why don't you just shut up and hide your ignorance?

Why don't you quit wasting your fingertips. I was under the impression Bush v Gore was decided December 12, 2000 and Bush did not take office until January 20, 2021. Scalia had been around on the court since 1986, nominated by Ronald Reagan. Kavenaugh confirmed October 6, and did not participate in AZAR, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. v. ALLINA HEALTH SERVICES during the first fall session of the Supreme court, inwhich the government lost and Gorsuch wrote the opinion, as well as two other decisions not related to government or politics. Why do you bring them up? Do you actually look up anything before you post or do you like, "use the force"?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Why should she recuse herself based on your fictional belief. libtardo?

A newly appointed supreme court justice owes their appointment to the the president that appointed them, or they would not be there. trumpsucker.

What about Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? Trump appointed them also. Where is the precedent? Scalia ruled in Bush v. Gore after he was nominated by Bush. Why don't you just shut up and hide your ignorance?

Why don't you quit wasting your fingertips. I was under the impression Bush v Gore was decided December 12, 2000 and Bush did not take office until January 20, 2021. Scalia had been around on the court since 1986, nominated by Ronald Reagan. Kavenaugh confirmed October 6, and did not participate in during the first fall session of the Supreme court, inwhich the government lost and Gorsuch wrote the opinion, as well as two other decisions not related to government or politics. Why do you bring them up? Do you actually look up anything before you post or do you like, "use the force"?

Hey shit for brains! The source I used was wrong. Sorry! I do research my statements. I rusted the source which was fucked up.

Kavenaugh's reasoning for not voting on the case were? You can't even tell me that.

I still want to know where the precedent is. You could not find one, could you dumbass?

 

[White 6]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Why should she recuse herself based on your fictional belief. libtardo?

A newly appointed supreme court justice owes their appointment to the the president that appointed them, or they would not be there. trumpsucker.

What about Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? Trump appointed them also. Where is the precedent? Scalia ruled in Bush v. Gore after he was nominated by Bush. Why don't you just shut up and hide your ignorance?

Why don't you quit wasting your fingertips. I was under the impression Bush v Gore was decided December 12, 2000 and Bush did not take office until January 20, 2021. Scalia had been around on the court since 1986, nominated by Ronald Reagan. Kavenaugh confirmed October 6, and did not participate in during the first fall session of the Supreme court, inwhich the government lost and Gorsuch wrote the opinion, as well as two other decisions not related to government or politics. Why do you bring them up? Do you actually look up anything before you post or do you like, "use the force"?

Hey shit for brains! The source I used was wrong. Sorry! I do research my statements. I rusted the source which was fucked up.

Kavenaugh's reasoning for not voting on the case were? You can't even tell me that.

I still want to know where the precedent is. You could not find one, could you dumbass?

Ethics does not require a precedent. You do, but that does not matter. Shouldn't you be ought campaigning for Moscow Mitch right now, instead of be obnoxious on the internet?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Why should she recuse herself based on your fictional belief. libtardo?

A newly appointed supreme court justice owes their appointment to the the president that appointed them, or they would not be there. trumpsucker.

What about Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? Trump appointed them also. Where is the precedent? Scalia ruled in Bush v. Gore after he was nominated by Bush. Why don't you just shut up and hide your ignorance?

Why don't you quit wasting your fingertips. I was under the impression Bush v Gore was decided December 12, 2000 and Bush did not take office until January 20, 2021. Scalia had been around on the court since 1986, nominated by Ronald Reagan. Kavenaugh confirmed October 6, and did not participate in during the first fall session of the Supreme court, inwhich the government lost and Gorsuch wrote the opinion, as well as two other decisions not related to government or politics. Why do you bring them up? Do you actually look up anything before you post or do you like, "use the force"?

Hey shit for brains! The source I used was wrong. Sorry! I do research my statements. I rusted the source which was fucked up.

Kavenaugh's reasoning for not voting on the case were? You can't even tell me that.

I still want to know where the precedent is. You could not find one, could you dumbass?

Ethics does not require a precedent. You do, but that does not matter. Shouldn't you be ought campaigning for Moscow Mitch right now, instead of be obnoxious on the internet?

Mitch doesn't need my help. He is running against a man-faced alleged former Marine who lies about being a combat pilot and has coal miners in her ads saying that Mitch did not meet with then, although they did. She was forced to pull her lying attack ad off the air because she is a dog-faced lying ex-Marine.

 

[White 6]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Why should she recuse herself based on your fictional belief. libtardo?

A newly appointed supreme court justice owes their appointment to the the president that appointed them, or they would not be there. trumpsucker.

What about Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? Trump appointed them also. Where is the precedent? Scalia ruled in Bush v. Gore after he was nominated by Bush. Why don't you just shut up and hide your ignorance?

Why don't you quit wasting your fingertips. I was under the impression Bush v Gore was decided December 12, 2000 and Bush did not take office until January 20, 2021. Scalia had been around on the court since 1986, nominated by Ronald Reagan. Kavenaugh confirmed October 6, and did not participate in during the first fall session of the Supreme court, inwhich the government lost and Gorsuch wrote the opinion, as well as two other decisions not related to government or politics. Why do you bring them up? Do you actually look up anything before you post or do you like, "use the force"?

Hey shit for brains! The source I used was wrong. Sorry! I do research my statements. I rusted the source which was fucked up.

Kavenaugh's reasoning for not voting on the case were? You can't even tell me that.

I still want to know where the precedent is. You could not find one, could you dumbass?

Ethics does not require a precedent. You do, but that does not matter. Shouldn't you be ought campaigning for Moscow Mitch right now, instead of be obnoxious on the internet?

Mitch doesn't need my help. He is running against a man-faced alleged former Marine who lies about being a combat pilot and has coal miners in her ads saying that Mitch did not meet with then, although they did. She was forced to pull her lying attack ad off the air because she is a dog-faced lying ex-Marine.

Her military record is out there online and nobody has sighted and error or false military combat claim, but you. She is not a former Marine or ex-Marine. She is an Honorably retired Marine Officer, who served her time, paid her dues and did her thing our country, as she freely chose to do, qualifying along with everybody else to pursue her accomplish her Marine career goals, and apparently did well. Unlike Private McConnell, a law student at Universty of Kentucky in 1967, who landed a position at an Army Reserve unit (Lyndon Johnson kept out of combat in Vietnam most of his presidency) during the final semester college at age 25. They say he had political aspirations, even back then. He trained at Fort Knox, Ky July 9th to Aug 15th (37 days) before being discharged on a medical discharge, (eye condition) 5 days after
U.S. Sen. John Sherman Cooper, R-Ky., for whom he had worked as an intern, sent a letter to the two-star general in command of Fort Knox. This comes from your local Lexington paper. The Lexington Herald Leader. https://www.kentucky.com/latest-news/article43980846.html
I understand he had an eye condition treatable back then and today.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Why should she recuse herself based on your fictional belief. libtardo?

A newly appointed supreme court justice owes their appointment to the the president that appointed them, or they would not be there. trumpsucker.

What about Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? Trump appointed them also. Where is the precedent? Scalia ruled in Bush v. Gore after he was nominated by Bush. Why don't you just shut up and hide your ignorance?

Why don't you quit wasting your fingertips. I was under the impression Bush v Gore was decided December 12, 2000 and Bush did not take office until January 20, 2021. Scalia had been around on the court since 1986, nominated by Ronald Reagan. Kavenaugh confirmed October 6, and did not participate in during the first fall session of the Supreme court, inwhich the government lost and Gorsuch wrote the opinion, as well as two other decisions not related to government or politics. Why do you bring them up? Do you actually look up anything before you post or do you like, "use the force"?

Hey shit for brains! The source I used was wrong. Sorry! I do research my statements. I rusted the source which was fucked up.

Kavenaugh's reasoning for not voting on the case were? You can't even tell me that.

I still want to know where the precedent is. You could not find one, could you dumbass?

Ethics does not require a precedent. You do, but that does not matter. Shouldn't you be ought campaigning for Moscow Mitch right now, instead of be obnoxious on the internet?

Mitch doesn't need my help. He is running against a man-faced alleged former Marine who lies about being a combat pilot and has coal miners in her ads saying that Mitch did not meet with then, although they did. She was forced to pull her lying attack ad off the air because she is a dog-faced lying ex-Marine.

Her military record is out there online and nobody has sighted and error or false military combat claim, but you. She is not a former Marine or ex-Marine. She is an Honorably retired Marine Officer, who served her time, paid her dues and did her thing our country, as she freely chose to do, qualifying along with everybody else to pursue her accomplish her Marine career goals, and apparently did well. Unlike Private McConnell, a law student at Universty of Kentucky in 1967, who landed a position at an Army Reserve unit (Lyndon Johnson kept out of combat in Vietnam most of his presidency) during the final semester college at age 25. They say he had political aspirations, even back then. He trained at Fort Knox, Ky July 9th to Aug 15th (37 days) before being discharged on a medical discharge, (eye condition) 5 days after
U.S. Sen. John Sherman Cooper, R-Ky., for whom he had worked as an intern, sent a letter to the two-star general in command of Fort Knox. This comes from your local Lexington paper. The Lexington Herald Leader. https://www.kentucky.com/latest-news/article43980846.html
I understand he had an eye condition treatable back then and today.

Didn't find any reference to his polio ?

McGath always claims to be a Marine combat pilot. She was not. She was a WSO when she flew in combat and became a pilot later.

 

[White 6]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Why should she recuse herself based on your fictional belief. libtardo?

A newly appointed supreme court justice owes their appointment to the the president that appointed them, or they would not be there. trumpsucker.

What about Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? Trump appointed them also. Where is the precedent? Scalia ruled in Bush v. Gore after he was nominated by Bush. Why don't you just shut up and hide your ignorance?

Why don't you quit wasting your fingertips. I was under the impression Bush v Gore was decided December 12, 2000 and Bush did not take office until January 20, 2021. Scalia had been around on the court since 1986, nominated by Ronald Reagan. Kavenaugh confirmed October 6, and did not participate in during the first fall session of the Supreme court, inwhich the government lost and Gorsuch wrote the opinion, as well as two other decisions not related to government or politics. Why do you bring them up? Do you actually look up anything before you post or do you like, "use the force"?

Hey shit for brains! The source I used was wrong. Sorry! I do research my statements. I rusted the source which was fucked up.

Kavenaugh's reasoning for not voting on the case were? You can't even tell me that.

I still want to know where the precedent is. You could not find one, could you dumbass?

Ethics does not require a precedent. You do, but that does not matter. Shouldn't you be ought campaigning for Moscow Mitch right now, instead of be obnoxious on the internet?

Mitch doesn't need my help. He is running against a man-faced alleged former Marine who lies about being a combat pilot and has coal miners in her ads saying that Mitch did not meet with then, although they did. She was forced to pull her lying attack ad off the air because she is a dog-faced lying ex-Marine.

Her military record is out there online and nobody has sighted and error or false military combat claim, but you. She is not a former Marine or ex-Marine. She is an Honorably retired Marine Officer, who served her time, paid her dues and did her thing our country, as she freely chose to do, qualifying along with everybody else to pursue her accomplish her Marine career goals, and apparently did well. Unlike Private McConnell, a law student at Universty of Kentucky in 1967, who landed a position at an Army Reserve unit (Lyndon Johnson kept out of combat in Vietnam most of his presidency) during the final semester college at age 25. They say he had political aspirations, even back then. He trained at Fort Knox, Ky July 9th to Aug 15th (37 days) before being discharged on a medical discharge, (eye condition) 5 days after
U.S. Sen. John Sherman Cooper, R-Ky., for whom he had worked as an intern, sent a letter to the two-star general in command of Fort Knox. This comes from your local Lexington paper. The Lexington Herald Leader. https://www.kentucky.com/latest-news/article43980846.html
I understand he had an eye condition treatable back then and today.

Didn't find any reference to his polio ?

You local paper did not have anything on polio. You saying he kept polio off his pre-induction physical? Got a source reference?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Why should she recuse herself based on your fictional belief. libtardo?

A newly appointed supreme court justice owes their appointment to the the president that appointed them, or they would not be there. trumpsucker.

What about Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? Trump appointed them also. Where is the precedent? Scalia ruled in Bush v. Gore after he was nominated by Bush. Why don't you just shut up and hide your ignorance?

Why don't you quit wasting your fingertips. I was under the impression Bush v Gore was decided December 12, 2000 and Bush did not take office until January 20, 2021. Scalia had been around on the court since 1986, nominated by Ronald Reagan. Kavenaugh confirmed October 6, and did not participate in during the first fall session of the Supreme court, inwhich the government lost and Gorsuch wrote the opinion, as well as two other decisions not related to government or politics. Why do you bring them up? Do you actually look up anything before you post or do you like, "use the force"?

Hey shit for brains! The source I used was wrong. Sorry! I do research my statements. I rusted the source which was fucked up.

Kavenaugh's reasoning for not voting on the case were? You can't even tell me that.

I still want to know where the precedent is. You could not find one, could you dumbass?

Ethics does not require a precedent. You do, but that does not matter. Shouldn't you be ought campaigning for Moscow Mitch right now, instead of be obnoxious on the internet?

Mitch doesn't need my help. He is running against a man-faced alleged former Marine who lies about being a combat pilot and has coal miners in her ads saying that Mitch did not meet with then, although they did. She was forced to pull her lying attack ad off the air because she is a dog-faced lying ex-Marine.

Her military record is out there online and nobody has sighted and error or false military combat claim, but you. She is not a former Marine or ex-Marine. She is an Honorably retired Marine Officer, who served her time, paid her dues and did her thing our country, as she freely chose to do, qualifying along with everybody else to pursue her accomplish her Marine career goals, and apparently did well. Unlike Private McConnell, a law student at Universty of Kentucky in 1967, who landed a position at an Army Reserve unit (Lyndon Johnson kept out of combat in Vietnam most of his presidency) during the final semester college at age 25. They say he had political aspirations, even back then. He trained at Fort Knox, Ky July 9th to Aug 15th (37 days) before being discharged on a medical discharge, (eye condition) 5 days after
U.S. Sen. John Sherman Cooper, R-Ky., for whom he had worked as an intern, sent a letter to the two-star general in command of Fort Knox. This comes from your local Lexington paper. The Lexington Herald Leader. https://www.kentucky.com/latest-news/article43980846.html
I understand he had an eye condition treatable back then and today.

Didn't find any reference to his polio ?

You local paper did not have anything on polio. You saying he kept polio off his pre-induction physical? Got a source reference?

You are too stupid to carry on a conversation you fake.

 

[White 6]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Why should she recuse herself based on your fictional belief. libtardo?

A newly appointed supreme court justice owes their appointment to the the president that appointed them, or they would not be there. trumpsucker.

What about Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? Trump appointed them also. Where is the precedent? Scalia ruled in Bush v. Gore after he was nominated by Bush. Why don't you just shut up and hide your ignorance?

Why don't you quit wasting your fingertips. I was under the impression Bush v Gore was decided December 12, 2000 and Bush did not take office until January 20, 2021. Scalia had been around on the court since 1986, nominated by Ronald Reagan. Kavenaugh confirmed October 6, and did not participate in during the first fall session of the Supreme court, inwhich the government lost and Gorsuch wrote the opinion, as well as two other decisions not related to government or politics. Why do you bring them up? Do you actually look up anything before you post or do you like, "use the force"?

Hey shit for brains! The source I used was wrong. Sorry! I do research my statements. I rusted the source which was fucked up.

Kavenaugh's reasoning for not voting on the case were? You can't even tell me that.

I still want to know where the precedent is. You could not find one, could you dumbass?

Ethics does not require a precedent. You do, but that does not matter. Shouldn't you be ought campaigning for Moscow Mitch right now, instead of be obnoxious on the internet?

Mitch doesn't need my help. He is running against a man-faced alleged former Marine who lies about being a combat pilot and has coal miners in her ads saying that Mitch did not meet with then, although they did. She was forced to pull her lying attack ad off the air because she is a dog-faced lying ex-Marine.

Her military record is out there online and nobody has sighted and error or false military combat claim, but you. She is not a former Marine or ex-Marine. She is an Honorably retired Marine Officer, who served her time, paid her dues and did her thing our country, as she freely chose to do, qualifying along with everybody else to pursue her accomplish her Marine career goals, and apparently did well. Unlike Private McConnell, a law student at Universty of Kentucky in 1967, who landed a position at an Army Reserve unit (Lyndon Johnson kept out of combat in Vietnam most of his presidency) during the final semester college at age 25. They say he had political aspirations, even back then. He trained at Fort Knox, Ky July 9th to Aug 15th (37 days) before being discharged on a medical discharge, (eye condition) 5 days after
U.S. Sen. John Sherman Cooper, R-Ky., for whom he had worked as an intern, sent a letter to the two-star general in command of Fort Knox. This comes from your local Lexington paper. The Lexington Herald Leader. https://www.kentucky.com/latest-news/article43980846.html
I understand he had an eye condition treatable back then and today.

Didn't find any reference to his polio ?

You local paper did not have anything on polio. You saying he kept polio off his pre-induction physical? Got a source reference?

You are too stupid to carry on a conversation you fake.

I'm conversing. I just did not see anything about polio. Are you asking me to have charity for the man's conditions or just making a polio reference for some unknown effect.

 

[Care4all]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Agree. She has to recuse on any election cases, mainly because of Trump and his big mouth, telling the country he needs her on the SC Court done before the election so she can rule in his favor....

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Why should she recuse herself based on your fictional belief. libtardo?

A newly appointed supreme court justice owes their appointment to the the president that appointed them, or they would not be there. trumpsucker.

What about Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? Trump appointed them also. Where is the precedent? Scalia ruled in Bush v. Gore after he was nominated by Bush. Why don't you just shut up and hide your ignorance?

Why don't you quit wasting your fingertips. I was under the impression Bush v Gore was decided December 12, 2000 and Bush did not take office until January 20, 2021. Scalia had been around on the court since 1986, nominated by Ronald Reagan. Kavenaugh confirmed October 6, and did not participate in during the first fall session of the Supreme court, inwhich the government lost and Gorsuch wrote the opinion, as well as two other decisions not related to government or politics. Why do you bring them up? Do you actually look up anything before you post or do you like, "use the force"?

Hey shit for brains! The source I used was wrong. Sorry! I do research my statements. I rusted the source which was fucked up.

Kavenaugh's reasoning for not voting on the case were? You can't even tell me that.

I still want to know where the precedent is. You could not find one, could you dumbass?

Ethics does not require a precedent. You do, but that does not matter. Shouldn't you be ought campaigning for Moscow Mitch right now, instead of be obnoxious on the internet?

Mitch doesn't need my help. He is running against a man-faced alleged former Marine who lies about being a combat pilot and has coal miners in her ads saying that Mitch did not meet with then, although they did. She was forced to pull her lying attack ad off the air because she is a dog-faced lying ex-Marine.

Her military record is out there online and nobody has sighted and error or false military combat claim, but you. She is not a former Marine or ex-Marine. She is an Honorably retired Marine Officer, who served her time, paid her dues and did her thing our country, as she freely chose to do, qualifying along with everybody else to pursue her accomplish her Marine career goals, and apparently did well. Unlike Private McConnell, a law student at Universty of Kentucky in 1967, who landed a position at an Army Reserve unit (Lyndon Johnson kept out of combat in Vietnam most of his presidency) during the final semester college at age 25. They say he had political aspirations, even back then. He trained at Fort Knox, Ky July 9th to Aug 15th (37 days) before being discharged on a medical discharge, (eye condition) 5 days after
U.S. Sen. John Sherman Cooper, R-Ky., for whom he had worked as an intern, sent a letter to the two-star general in command of Fort Knox. This comes from your local Lexington paper. The Lexington Herald Leader. https://www.kentucky.com/latest-news/article43980846.html
I understand he had an eye condition treatable back then and today.

Didn't find any reference to his polio ?

You local paper did not have anything on polio. You saying he kept polio off his pre-induction physical? Got a source reference?

You are too stupid to carry on a conversation you fake.

I'm conversing. I just did not see anything about polio. Are you asking me to have charity for the man's conditions or just making a polio reference for some unknown effect.

McConnell should have never allowed to enlist in the first place because he was disqualified by having polio as a child. The military covered their asses by discharging him for a nother reason.

 

[White 6]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Why should she recuse herself based on your fictional belief. libtardo?

A newly appointed supreme court justice owes their appointment to the the president that appointed them, or they would not be there. trumpsucker.

What about Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? Trump appointed them also. Where is the precedent? Scalia ruled in Bush v. Gore after he was nominated by Bush. Why don't you just shut up and hide your ignorance?

Why don't you quit wasting your fingertips. I was under the impression Bush v Gore was decided December 12, 2000 and Bush did not take office until January 20, 2021. Scalia had been around on the court since 1986, nominated by Ronald Reagan. Kavenaugh confirmed October 6, and did not participate in during the first fall session of the Supreme court, inwhich the government lost and Gorsuch wrote the opinion, as well as two other decisions not related to government or politics. Why do you bring them up? Do you actually look up anything before you post or do you like, "use the force"?

Hey shit for brains! The source I used was wrong. Sorry! I do research my statements. I rusted the source which was fucked up.

Kavenaugh's reasoning for not voting on the case were? You can't even tell me that.

I still want to know where the precedent is. You could not find one, could you dumbass?

Ethics does not require a precedent. You do, but that does not matter. Shouldn't you be ought campaigning for Moscow Mitch right now, instead of be obnoxious on the internet?

Mitch doesn't need my help. He is running against a man-faced alleged former Marine who lies about being a combat pilot and has coal miners in her ads saying that Mitch did not meet with then, although they did. She was forced to pull her lying attack ad off the air because she is a dog-faced lying ex-Marine.

Her military record is out there online and nobody has sighted and error or false military combat claim, but you. She is not a former Marine or ex-Marine. She is an Honorably retired Marine Officer, who served her time, paid her dues and did her thing our country, as she freely chose to do, qualifying along with everybody else to pursue her accomplish her Marine career goals, and apparently did well. Unlike Private McConnell, a law student at Universty of Kentucky in 1967, who landed a position at an Army Reserve unit (Lyndon Johnson kept out of combat in Vietnam most of his presidency) during the final semester college at age 25. They say he had political aspirations, even back then. He trained at Fort Knox, Ky July 9th to Aug 15th (37 days) before being discharged on a medical discharge, (eye condition) 5 days after
U.S. Sen. John Sherman Cooper, R-Ky., for whom he had worked as an intern, sent a letter to the two-star general in command of Fort Knox. This comes from your local Lexington paper. The Lexington Herald Leader. https://www.kentucky.com/latest-news/article43980846.html
I understand he had an eye condition treatable back then and today.

Didn't find any reference to his polio ?

You local paper did not have anything on polio. You saying he kept polio off his pre-induction physical? Got a source reference?

You are too stupid to carry on a conversation you fake.

I'm conversing. I just did not see anything about polio. Are you asking me to have charity for the man's conditions or just making a polio reference for some unknown effect.

McConnell should have never allowed to enlist in the first place because he was disqualified by having polio as a child. The military covered their asses by discharging him for a nother reason.

I must have missed that in his bio. Ran a Bde S-1 section. Think you are right, that it would probably be a dis-qualifier, though brother had a touch and was accepted, US Navy. Still not the stated reason for the medical discharge. Congrats on making two lines without an abstract insult.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Why should she recuse herself based on your fictional belief. libtardo?

A newly appointed supreme court justice owes their appointment to the the president that appointed them, or they would not be there. trumpsucker.

What about Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? Trump appointed them also. Where is the precedent? Scalia ruled in Bush v. Gore after he was nominated by Bush. Why don't you just shut up and hide your ignorance?

Why don't you quit wasting your fingertips. I was under the impression Bush v Gore was decided December 12, 2000 and Bush did not take office until January 20, 2021. Scalia had been around on the court since 1986, nominated by Ronald Reagan. Kavenaugh confirmed October 6, and did not participate in during the first fall session of the Supreme court, inwhich the government lost and Gorsuch wrote the opinion, as well as two other decisions not related to government or politics. Why do you bring them up? Do you actually look up anything before you post or do you like, "use the force"?

Hey shit for brains! The source I used was wrong. Sorry! I do research my statements. I rusted the source which was fucked up.

Kavenaugh's reasoning for not voting on the case were? You can't even tell me that.

I still want to know where the precedent is. You could not find one, could you dumbass?

Ethics does not require a precedent. You do, but that does not matter. Shouldn't you be ought campaigning for Moscow Mitch right now, instead of be obnoxious on the internet?

Mitch doesn't need my help. He is running against a man-faced alleged former Marine who lies about being a combat pilot and has coal miners in her ads saying that Mitch did not meet with then, although they did. She was forced to pull her lying attack ad off the air because she is a dog-faced lying ex-Marine.

Her military record is out there online and nobody has sighted and error or false military combat claim, but you. She is not a former Marine or ex-Marine. She is an Honorably retired Marine Officer, who served her time, paid her dues and did her thing our country, as she freely chose to do, qualifying along with everybody else to pursue her accomplish her Marine career goals, and apparently did well. Unlike Private McConnell, a law student at Universty of Kentucky in 1967, who landed a position at an Army Reserve unit (Lyndon Johnson kept out of combat in Vietnam most of his presidency) during the final semester college at age 25. They say he had political aspirations, even back then. He trained at Fort Knox, Ky July 9th to Aug 15th (37 days) before being discharged on a medical discharge, (eye condition) 5 days after
U.S. Sen. John Sherman Cooper, R-Ky., for whom he had worked as an intern, sent a letter to the two-star general in command of Fort Knox. This comes from your local Lexington paper. The Lexington Herald Leader. https://www.kentucky.com/latest-news/article43980846.html
I understand he had an eye condition treatable back then and today.

Didn't find any reference to his polio ?

You local paper did not have anything on polio. You saying he kept polio off his pre-induction physical? Got a source reference?

You are too stupid to carry on a conversation you fake.

I'm conversing. I just did not see anything about polio. Are you asking me to have charity for the man's conditions or just making a polio reference for some unknown effect.

McConnell should have never allowed to enlist in the first place because he was disqualified by having polio as a child. The military covered their asses by discharging him for a nother reason.

I must have missed that in his bio. Ran a Bde S-1 section. Think you are right, that it would probably be a dis-qualifier, though brother had a touch and was accepted, US Navy. Still not the stated reason for the medical discharge. Congrats on making two lines without an abstract insult.

I know my shit as I am a US Army recruiting contractor and one of only two who can disqualify personnel based on their applications through online or telephone applications before they even talk to a recruiter.

 

[White 6]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Why should she recuse herself based on your fictional belief. libtardo?

A newly appointed supreme court justice owes their appointment to the the president that appointed them, or they would not be there. trumpsucker.

What about Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? Trump appointed them also. Where is the precedent? Scalia ruled in Bush v. Gore after he was nominated by Bush. Why don't you just shut up and hide your ignorance?

Why don't you quit wasting your fingertips. I was under the impression Bush v Gore was decided December 12, 2000 and Bush did not take office until January 20, 2021. Scalia had been around on the court since 1986, nominated by Ronald Reagan. Kavenaugh confirmed October 6, and did not participate in during the first fall session of the Supreme court, inwhich the government lost and Gorsuch wrote the opinion, as well as two other decisions not related to government or politics. Why do you bring them up? Do you actually look up anything before you post or do you like, "use the force"?

Hey shit for brains! The source I used was wrong. Sorry! I do research my statements. I rusted the source which was fucked up.

Kavenaugh's reasoning for not voting on the case were? You can't even tell me that.

I still want to know where the precedent is. You could not find one, could you dumbass?

Ethics does not require a precedent. You do, but that does not matter. Shouldn't you be ought campaigning for Moscow Mitch right now, instead of be obnoxious on the internet?

Mitch doesn't need my help. He is running against a man-faced alleged former Marine who lies about being a combat pilot and has coal miners in her ads saying that Mitch did not meet with then, although they did. She was forced to pull her lying attack ad off the air because she is a dog-faced lying ex-Marine.

Her military record is out there online and nobody has sighted and error or false military combat claim, but you. She is not a former Marine or ex-Marine. She is an Honorably retired Marine Officer, who served her time, paid her dues and did her thing our country, as she freely chose to do, qualifying along with everybody else to pursue her accomplish her Marine career goals, and apparently did well. Unlike Private McConnell, a law student at Universty of Kentucky in 1967, who landed a position at an Army Reserve unit (Lyndon Johnson kept out of combat in Vietnam most of his presidency) during the final semester college at age 25. They say he had political aspirations, even back then. He trained at Fort Knox, Ky July 9th to Aug 15th (37 days) before being discharged on a medical discharge, (eye condition) 5 days after
U.S. Sen. John Sherman Cooper, R-Ky., for whom he had worked as an intern, sent a letter to the two-star general in command of Fort Knox. This comes from your local Lexington paper. The Lexington Herald Leader. https://www.kentucky.com/latest-news/article43980846.html
I understand he had an eye condition treatable back then and today.

Didn't find any reference to his polio ?

You local paper did not have anything on polio. You saying he kept polio off his pre-induction physical? Got a source reference?

You are too stupid to carry on a conversation you fake.

I'm conversing. I just did not see anything about polio. Are you asking me to have charity for the man's conditions or just making a polio reference for some unknown effect.

McConnell should have never allowed to enlist in the first place because he was disqualified by having polio as a child. The military covered their asses by discharging him for a nother reason.

I must have missed that in his bio. Ran a Bde S-1 section. Think you are right, that it would probably be a dis-qualifier, though brother had a touch and was accepted, US Navy. Still not the stated reason for the medical discharge. Congrats on making two lines without an abstract insult.

I know my shit as I am a US Army recruiting contractor and one of only two who can disqualify personnel based on their applications through online or telephone applications before they even talk to a recruiter.

Nice contractor gig. Haven't done much recruiting. Last I did, is a Colonel now. It was an easy recruit as I was already commissioned and serving at the time.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Why should she recuse herself based on your fictional belief. libtardo?

A newly appointed supreme court justice owes their appointment to the the president that appointed them, or they would not be there. trumpsucker.

What about Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? Trump appointed them also. Where is the precedent? Scalia ruled in Bush v. Gore after he was nominated by Bush. Why don't you just shut up and hide your ignorance?

Why don't you quit wasting your fingertips. I was under the impression Bush v Gore was decided December 12, 2000 and Bush did not take office until January 20, 2021. Scalia had been around on the court since 1986, nominated by Ronald Reagan. Kavenaugh confirmed October 6, and did not participate in during the first fall session of the Supreme court, inwhich the government lost and Gorsuch wrote the opinion, as well as two other decisions not related to government or politics. Why do you bring them up? Do you actually look up anything before you post or do you like, "use the force"?

Hey shit for brains! The source I used was wrong. Sorry! I do research my statements. I rusted the source which was fucked up.

Kavenaugh's reasoning for not voting on the case were? You can't even tell me that.

I still want to know where the precedent is. You could not find one, could you dumbass?

Ethics does not require a precedent. You do, but that does not matter. Shouldn't you be ought campaigning for Moscow Mitch right now, instead of be obnoxious on the internet?

Mitch doesn't need my help. He is running against a man-faced alleged former Marine who lies about being a combat pilot and has coal miners in her ads saying that Mitch did not meet with then, although they did. She was forced to pull her lying attack ad off the air because she is a dog-faced lying ex-Marine.

Her military record is out there online and nobody has sighted and error or false military combat claim, but you. She is not a former Marine or ex-Marine. She is an Honorably retired Marine Officer, who served her time, paid her dues and did her thing our country, as she freely chose to do, qualifying along with everybody else to pursue her accomplish her Marine career goals, and apparently did well. Unlike Private McConnell, a law student at Universty of Kentucky in 1967, who landed a position at an Army Reserve unit (Lyndon Johnson kept out of combat in Vietnam most of his presidency) during the final semester college at age 25. They say he had political aspirations, even back then. He trained at Fort Knox, Ky July 9th to Aug 15th (37 days) before being discharged on a medical discharge, (eye condition) 5 days after
U.S. Sen. John Sherman Cooper, R-Ky., for whom he had worked as an intern, sent a letter to the two-star general in command of Fort Knox. This comes from your local Lexington paper. The Lexington Herald Leader. https://www.kentucky.com/latest-news/article43980846.html
I understand he had an eye condition treatable back then and today.

Didn't find any reference to his polio ?

You local paper did not have anything on polio. You saying he kept polio off his pre-induction physical? Got a source reference?

You are too stupid to carry on a conversation you fake.

I'm conversing. I just did not see anything about polio. Are you asking me to have charity for the man's conditions or just making a polio reference for some unknown effect.

McConnell should have never allowed to enlist in the first place because he was disqualified by having polio as a child. The military covered their asses by discharging him for a nother reason.

I must have missed that in his bio. Ran a Bde S-1 section. Think you are right, that it would probably be a dis-qualifier, though brother had a touch and was accepted, US Navy. Still not the stated reason for the medical discharge. Congrats on making two lines without an abstract insult.

I know my shit as I am a US Army recruiting contractor and one of only two who can disqualify personnel based on their applications through online or telephone applications before they even talk to a recruiter.

Nice contractor gig. Haven't done much recruiting. Last I did, is a Colonel now. It was an easy recruit as I was already commissioned and serving at the time.

I was an officer and ran enlisted recruiting for the equivalent of a brigade. When I retired from teaching, I became a Virtual recruiting supervisor

 

[White 6]

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Amy Coney Barrett’s qualifications are irrelevant. Her willingness to accept the nomination under these circumstances reveals a disqualifying lack of character.
_____

Walter Shaub.

Don't know him. Never heard of him. But he is one of those Loon-Left-Bloggers whose political inclinations are so absurd, that his psychopathology becomes interesting.

Assholes like this live in a bubble, usually in one of those big bubbles--New York and Washington being prime examples---where they look (metaphorically) West and most certainly South, generally to the Heartland---and can't see anything but scenes from the old movie "Deliverance", and that presumably is their excuse for listening to no one except Assholes just like them---resulting in them making complete fools out of themselves in posts like the above.

Walter Shaub.

A nobody who has gained a wee bit of temporary notoriety by making a complete fool of himself.

He's done one other thing. He's shown just how desperate Assholes like him are to come up with something to criticize this outstanding Jurist, Woman, Human--Amy Coney Barrett.

__________

I see no ethical conflict with her accepting the nomination. She should recuse on decisions related to the voting related to the unethical person that nominated her, as that would be a conflict. That said. I have no problem with the woman any more than I have had any major problems with the opinions of Kavenaugh, and I was self certain he would be a consistent right wing tool, but have been pleasantly surprised, I think as RGB was also surprised.

Why should she recuse herself based on your fictional belief. libtardo?

A newly appointed supreme court justice owes their appointment to the the president that appointed them, or they would not be there. trumpsucker.

What about Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? Trump appointed them also. Where is the precedent? Scalia ruled in Bush v. Gore after he was nominated by Bush. Why don't you just shut up and hide your ignorance?

Why don't you quit wasting your fingertips. I was under the impression Bush v Gore was decided December 12, 2000 and Bush did not take office until January 20, 2021. Scalia had been around on the court since 1986, nominated by Ronald Reagan. Kavenaugh confirmed October 6, and did not participate in during the first fall session of the Supreme court, inwhich the government lost and Gorsuch wrote the opinion, as well as two other decisions not related to government or politics. Why do you bring them up? Do you actually look up anything before you post or do you like, "use the force"?

Hey shit for brains! The source I used was wrong. Sorry! I do research my statements. I rusted the source which was fucked up.

Kavenaugh's reasoning for not voting on the case were? You can't even tell me that.

I still want to know where the precedent is. You could not find one, could you dumbass?

Ethics does not require a precedent. You do, but that does not matter. Shouldn't you be ought campaigning for Moscow Mitch right now, instead of be obnoxious on the internet?

Mitch doesn't need my help. He is running against a man-faced alleged former Marine who lies about being a combat pilot and has coal miners in her ads saying that Mitch did not meet with then, although they did. She was forced to pull her lying attack ad off the air because she is a dog-faced lying ex-Marine.

Her military record is out there online and nobody has sighted and error or false military combat claim, but you. She is not a former Marine or ex-Marine. She is an Honorably retired Marine Officer, who served her time, paid her dues and did her thing our country, as she freely chose to do, qualifying along with everybody else to pursue her accomplish her Marine career goals, and apparently did well. Unlike Private McConnell, a law student at Universty of Kentucky in 1967, who landed a position at an Army Reserve unit (Lyndon Johnson kept out of combat in Vietnam most of his presidency) during the final semester college at age 25. They say he had political aspirations, even back then. He trained at Fort Knox, Ky July 9th to Aug 15th (37 days) before being discharged on a medical discharge, (eye condition) 5 days after
U.S. Sen. John Sherman Cooper, R-Ky., for whom he had worked as an intern, sent a letter to the two-star general in command of Fort Knox. This comes from your local Lexington paper. The Lexington Herald Leader. https://www.kentucky.com/latest-news/article43980846.html
I understand he had an eye condition treatable back then and today.

Didn't find any reference to his polio ?

You local paper did not have anything on polio. You saying he kept polio off his pre-induction physical? Got a source reference?

You are too stupid to carry on a conversation you fake.

I'm conversing. I just did not see anything about polio. Are you asking me to have charity for the man's conditions or just making a polio reference for some unknown effect.

McConnell should have never allowed to enlist in the first place because he was disqualified by having polio as a child. The military covered their asses by discharging him for a nother reason.

I must have missed that in his bio. Ran a Bde S-1 section. Think you are right, that it would probably be a dis-qualifier, though brother had a touch and was accepted, US Navy. Still not the stated reason for the medical discharge. Congrats on making two lines without an abstract insult.

I know my shit as I am a US Army recruiting contractor and one of only two who can disqualify personnel based on their applications through online or telephone applications before they even talk to a recruiter.

Nice contractor gig. Haven't done much recruiting. Last I did, is a Colonel now. It was an easy recruit as I was already commissioned and serving at the time.

I was an officer and ran enlisted recruiting for the equivalent of a brigade. When I retired from teaching, I became a Virtual recruiting supervisor

Like I said. That's a good gig. In Guard and reserve, the importance cannot be over estimated. When with Guard units, I always maintained a close relationship with the area recruiters, though close to 100% or comfortably over strength, allowing them to know my priorities were with quality, not quantity and making sure things were happening if they brought a potential recruit to the unit or to the field to see what we really did.