Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Employees Outraged Over Exec's Appearance at Kavanaugh Hearing (thedailybeast.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Hundreds of Facebook employees have reportedly expressed anger that an executive attended Supreme Court Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh's public hearing last week to support him, The Wall Street Journal reports. Joel Kaplan, Facebook's head of global policy, was at Kavanaugh's hearing because he is reportedly close friends with the Supreme Court Justice nominee. Outraged employees reportedly brought his appearance up during an internal question-and-answer session with CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and have been expressing their concerns in internal discussion threads. On Friday, Zuckerberg said that "he wouldn't have made the same decision but the appearance didn't violate Facebook policies," the Journal reports.
No unauthorized thoughts allowed. You WILL believe the only authorized thing. NO EXCEPTIONS!
How you feel if you raped in high school ? Disgusting you support this guy, the 99% are outraged over rapists be put in office.
Nobody was raped.
Just lies from a delusional nutbag.
Full-blown Trump Derangement Syndrome in effect.
... are you aware that there are two other women besides Dr. Ford who have accused him of rape at this point? Because he's shaping up to be a real Bill Cosby. The confirmation hearing with Dr. Ford was a circus, they deliberately set it up as a "he said she said" thing because they're avoiding giving any air time to the other two accusers.
Three unrelated women accusing him of three different rapes is not a coincidence. That's a pattern.
Will you feel the same way when it's a D nominee being accused at the 11th hour. Because it will happen, assuming they ever nominate a decent presidential candidate.
Those of us greater than 5 years old don't have to wonder how we'd feel. Garland's case is arguable more heinous, because Rs simple refused to discuss his nomination for no reason other than partisan politics.
In an unprecedented move, Senate Republicans (under Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell) refused to consider Garland's nomination, holding "no hearings, no votes, no action whatsoever" on the nomination.[83][84] The refusal was highly controversial, with some commentators saying the seat on the Court to which Garland was nominated was "stolen".[85][86][87] Over 170,000 people signed a White House petition asking President Obama to independently appoint Garland to the Supreme Court, arguing that the Senate had waived its advise and consent role.[88] On November 17, U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras threw out a lawsuit against Senator McConnell seeking to compel a vote on the nomination, finding that the plaintiff, who had simply alleged he was a voter, had no standing to sue.[88]
Garland had more federal judicial experience than any Supreme Court nominee in history,[33] and was the oldest Supreme Court nominee since Lewis F. Powell, Jr. in 1971.[89] The American Bar Association (ABA) Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary unanimously rated Garland "well-qualified" to sit on the Supreme Court, the committee's highest rating.[90]
Garland's nomination expired on January 3, 2017, with the end of the 114th Congress after a period of 293 days.[91] On January 31, 2017, President Donald Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch to fill the Court vacancy.[92]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
And the Democrats are more than willing to go this way, because they both crave power and believe they are unassailable in their pursuit of that power.
Here you go.
In an unprecedented move, Senate Republicans (under Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell) refused to consider Garland's nomination, holding "no hearings, no votes, no action whatsoever" on the nomination.[83][84] The refusal was highly controversial, with some commentators saying the seat on the Court to which Garland was nominated was "stolen".[85][86][87] Over 170,000 people signed a White House petition asking President Obama to independently appoint Garland to the Supreme Court, arguing that the Senate had waived its advise and consent role.[88] On November 17, U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras threw out a lawsuit against Senator McConnell seeking to compel a vote on the nomination, finding that the plaintiff, who had simply alleged he was a voter, had no standing to sue.[88]
Garland had more federal judicial experience than any Supreme Court nominee in history,[33] and was the oldest Supreme Court nominee since Lewis F. Powell, Jr. in 1971.[89] The American Bar Association (ABA) Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary unanimously rated Garland "well-qualified" to sit on the Supreme Court, the committee's highest rating.[90]
Garland's nomination expired on January 3, 2017, with the end of the 114th Congress after a period of 293 days.[91] On January 31, 2017, President Donald Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch to fill the Court vacancy.[92]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
you fucking retard, the accuser that accused him of GANG RAPE has been proven to be full of shit even by MSNBC.
her sworn statement taken by the stormy daniels attorney DOES NOT MATCH
her written statement to MSNBC which also DOES NOT MATCH
her on camera interview
she gave a SWORN testimony he put Qualudes in her drink and GANG RAPED her.....
this eventually turned into :
I saw him by the punchbowl standing there
He was at the party and laughing with some other guys
And lets not forget that the Ex Boyfriend had filed a RESTRAINING Order against her for threatening him, his soon to be wife, and future kids, saying she will accuse him of rape.
Lets not also forget that her former employer FIRED her for sexually harassing clients, and then tried to claim it was the clients that harassed her.
But you want to pretend Kavenaugh is a gang rapist without one shred of evidence nor trial. This is what we call PROJECTION in psychology terms you gang raping AC fuck.