Should Brett Kavanaugh SCOTUS Nomination Continue?

[Final-Fan]

EricHiggin said:

Final-Fan said:

I wonder how many times you'll post before what it is you're supposedly "proving" is actually explained? 

Whenever someone goes back and reads the first few initial posts that were made. Since I've had to repost some of those so far, I'm guessing, infinity?

Since you're either trolling or honestly too myopic to understand that you need to articulate the point you're trying to make instead of just post "evidence" and assume everyone has magical psychic knowledge of your thought process, I'll do your job for you and guess that you're trying to say that
"TYT talking about it and FOX reporting it. They may do either or try both."
was addressing my post,
"As for what McConnell said, just because the Republicans take their cues nowadays from extremist bloggers, radio talk show hosts, etc., doesn't mean the Democrats are following suit.  Let me know if someone in Congress proposes that, but until then McConnell—and you—are just stretching "a human being in the USA has this idea" to mean "the Democratic Party plans to do this".  I mean, shit, if they were going to pack the court there wouldn't even be a need to impeach Kavanaugh."

First, I'll point out that back when those posts were fresh I had already pointed out that your response did NOT address what I said, and when you disputed it you pointed ONLY to the part that talked about whether McConnell laughed and NOT the other parts.  Until now I have taken this to be a tacit admission that the other stuff was not on point and have repeatedly told you so, which you have yet to explicitly dispute. 

Second, "TYT talking about it and FOX reporting it."  TYT talking about the possibility of trying one or both of those things (which I don't know is true but I'm taking your word for it for now) doesn't mean that Democrats in Congress actually plan on trying any such thing.  So how was that a substantive response to my post?  Fox reporting about speculation that the Democrats are wild-eyed lunatics desperate to destroy America is nothing new and I don't see what this has to do with anything. 

Third, "They may do either or try both."  Taken literally as a claim that this it's not physically impossible that this could happen, I agree.  By that standard, it's equally true that "the Republicans may do either or try both".  But I already said in the first post that I see no indications that there is a moderate likelihood (or more) that either one will actually be attempted and you gave no argument to the contrary.  So how was that a substantive response to my post?