Posted on 12/04/2019 7:32:51 PM PST by Kevin in California
Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan – the Democrats’ “constitutional expert” in the Judiciary Committee hearings – launched into a scathing tirade against white people in a 2006 speech to the American Constitution Society.
File under:
Unhinged
Why is that washed-out, prune-faced angry dyke even there?
What possible connection does she have to Trump, the State Department, Ukraine, or anything else?
The only thing that sleeps next to her are her cats.
“The only thing that sleeps next to her are her cats.”
I doubt even the cats
Here’s the Wiki info on her “partner” Viola Canales.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viola_Canales
During her undergraduate time at Harvard College, she left twice to work for different organizations.[6] She worked for the United Farm Workers Union as a community organizer and completed training for the United States Army at Fort Benning. She was stationed in West Germany and served as a tactical director who oversaw the Patriot and Hawk missile systems.[7] After graduating from Harvard Law School, Canales worked for O’Melveny & Myers. She also served as Civil Service Commissioner for Los Angeles and San Francisco.[3] In 1994, Canales was appointed regional administrator for the U.S. Small Business Administration by the Clinton Administration.[6] She is currently a lecturer at Stanford Law School, where she teaches courses that combine law and fiction writing.
“Caught the Car” Karlin.
Ugly as a bag full of a$$holes.
How dare you insult all the good ugly a$$holes of the world.
I doubt anybody has ever forbid her to think or say what she wants, after all, nobody stopped her stupid rant then. Read what she wants? Since when has anybody been forbidden to read what she wants? Love who she will? Ditto.
She has every freedom she says she lacks. Has somebody scorned her? Undoubtedly. Perhaps more than once.
She’s made a mess of her life and wants to blame it on men.
Blind cats.
“Ugly enough to chase a scarecrow out of a corn field,” as they sometimes say out on the Great Plains.
Liberals are the littlest snowflakes and the most foul mouthed, traitorous, booger-eating, seditious, nature hating, aggressive, immature, insane, intolerant, bigoted, stingiest, polluting, off-key flat singing, angry, unfriendly, greedy, fascist, hate-filled, mean-spirited, envious, resentful, vicious, close-minded, violent, murdering, child-abusing, amoral, stupid, censoring, horse-punching, book-burning, ignorant, uneducated, unskilled, childish, prejudiced, racist, women-hating, man-hating, perverted, thieving, destructive, American-hating, Christian-hating, muslim-loving, Jew-hating, Israel-hating, communist, vote-rigging, vulgar, dirty, smelly, election-rejecting, regressive, restrictive, prohibitive, bed-wetting, poo-flinging, cop-killing, war-mongering, law-breaking, conservative black hating, and scared little lying thumb-sucking pussified idiots God has ever created.
I like that! I think I’ll just steal, cut and paste and add a few next time someone asks me about leftists. Thank-you
I consider it free-form liberal poetry; anything goes!
She’s bitter because men rejected her being BF ugly
She can’t stand to look in the mirror
She’s not fooling anyone. She’s not bisexual, she’s not snarky, she’s a bitter lesbian.
Surprise surprise a homofascist nazi.
She has described herself as an example of “snarky, bisexual, Jewish women”.
She doesn’t have to have any connection. All she has to do is say that the President is bad and she feels that this is wrong and that is wrong. Just like with Schiff, no evidence has to be presented. Just feelings and emotions. And the lapdogs on the Left will believe anything that comes out of her mouth.
Not sure if Collins went back at her, but she teed herself up yesterday, when he asked if she had read any of the testimony from Schiff’s hearing. She said that she did and that she was insulted. Well, Collins could have come right back at her and asked her, what facts were presented during that hearing? As only 2 or 3 of the witnesses actually heard the call and none of them said there was a ‘this for that’ but they felt that was what the President was asking for. And the fact that one of the star witnesses admitted to falsifying a intel summary to suit his political needs, almost as if he was coached to do it.
Look at her resume, she’s never been a real lawyer. I guess she’s the epitome of, Those Who Can’t, Teach.
The woman? is vile!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.