What we know is that you lied your ass off and when you are challenged you back down.
Then come back and lie about what you know ... a few weeks later.
You back down and come back with this garbage.
No proof. Just a bunch of weak conjecture.
If you had an ounce of integrity you would send yourself to a shrink or a confessional.
Then come back and lie about what you know ... a few weeks later.
You back down and come back with this garbage.
No proof. Just a bunch of weak conjecture.
If you had an ounce of integrity you would send yourself to a shrink or a confessional.
Sadly, we just may have to relegate you to that gullible group of low information Americans who are convinced Bart was a fictitious character in a novel, and the Devil's triangle is a drinking game. Or we relegate you to that group who are not gullible, know he was lying and are OK with it. If you are in this latter group you probably justify putting an ethically challenged lawyer on the Court by saying he never should have been asked those questions in the first place. The up-side for the rest of us is that you at least will get the Supreme Court you deserve.
