I have no idea. That’s why Feinstein should have come forth 2 months ago and this whole thing quietly investigated as part of or in addendum to his background check, rather than result in the cluster we have. Yet here we are. Do you really think she put every detail in the letter? Or wrote it in anticipation of answering what every Senator on the Judiciary Committee may ask? Hardly. Otherwise we would have plaintiffs only send letters to judges in cases involving circumstantial evidence. Who needs a trial with witness testimony when we have a letter. And I think some of her demands are silly. She made the accusation, she should go first, so he can defend himself afterwards. And even though this isn’t a trial, if she’s going to make the accusation and then testify in person, she should face him and his family in an open session. And the Senate should question, or maybe a panel of 3 from each side to keep it manageable, but not an outside lawyer. That’s just pure politics. The only reason the Pubs don’t want to is that somehow now, 30 years after embarrassing themselves during the Hill hearings, they have managed to still not have one woman R on the committee and don’t want bad optics. Some of this stuff isn’t partisan, it’s just common sense.
She can request what she wants to. Doesn't mean she'll get it. Most of it I don't think is too meaningful to the outcome one way or another. I do agree with her requesting that Judge should be subpoenaed. He's an alleged witness to the event.
It was somewhere. She said the people there sat around each having a beer and hanging out before she ended up upstairs. Kav and Judge were already sloshed from what she guessed was pre-gaming.
Is this the couple dozen you speak of ? More than 50 arrested on Capitol Hill after Senate office Kavanaugh protests - CNNPolitics
CNN: Trump seems to be handling this well. I'm surprised. Good job, Donald. Trump: Good job? Fake News! I'll show you handling this well! *starts tweeting*
I think Dr. Ford clearly needs to be the first to testify. She has not provided any unprovable information at this point. It is time for her to give her account to the committee and make it as clear as possible what she remembers. If she refuses to go first, the hearing does not happen and Republicans move forward with a vote. There is no way Judge is going to be at that hearing. He will say he has submitted his sworn statement and that is it. There is no way he is going to sit in front of the committee and have the Democrats accusing him of awful things because they don't like his published opinions. They would accuse him of being a racist and a homophobe and then try and smear Kavanaugh by saying he was friends with a racist homophobe so he must be one as well. Avoiding a subpoena from the Senate doesn't really have any real consequences if you are a private citizen, so why worry about it.
If she can show up and relive her trauma (if she's telling the truth), he can deal with some mean Dems. She goes first. Then Judge and Kavanaugh. And then she finishes it off.
Well, basic English would seem to imply that in order for one thing to happen in advance of another (the “pre” part), then the other would have to occur.
Original story was a couple dozen at Grassley's office. Nobody was arrested (as of the time the story was published at least). Apparently there were several other protests at different offices and some of them got arrested for blocking the halls and refusing to clear way, if I read that correctly. Sounds appropriate.
I think the nature of several of the demands or requirements are such that the Senate Judicial Committee cannot meet them ….. which then provides the Ford team an easy out as regards her testifying. If the requirements aren't met and Ford is unable to experience/enjoy a "fair hearing" ...… she cannot testify. She offered and the committee declined … so to speak. Democrats and leftists can then fully embrace their conclusion that Kavanaugh is guilty of attempted rape ….. one so severe that Ford thought she might die. IMO, this all follows on quite nicely with the theory this entire matter is a contrivance (Ford's knowing who Kavanaugh was during their HS years being quite a convenience) created to derail the Kavanaugh nomination. Just consider the demands by so many ...… that Kavanaugh must prove his innocence ….. as apposed to Ford, etal proving her assertion. WRT Judge …. he should be allowed to tender a proper affidavit as to what he knows about the allegation. It's truly a win/win for democrats and Ford ........ and a lose/lose for Kavanaugh and his family.
I would be interested to know if it was actually only one beer. I don't remember anyone in high school showing up to a party and having only one beer. It is very possible that it was only one beer, ie it was her first time at a party and wanted to fit in but never drank much so she was just milking the beer. If it was more than one beer, then we are moving into the "Did the drinking have an effect on her memory" territory.
I'm no psychologist, but I've been around more than one survivor of sexual assault for most of my life. These types of demands are perfectly in line with the types of demands a survivor of sexual assault would make. Additionally, it is clear she does not trust the committee to be impartial and/or do its due diligence to get to the real truth. Once again, this is what happens when the various committees do everything they can to protect someone rather than legitimately trying to investigate. They've shown through their actions that they're willing to cover things up, refuse to subpeona witnesses that might testify against their partisan agenda, etc.. These are the consequences of those actions. Also, as any dealmaker should know, you always ask for more than you want so that you have room to negotiate. IMO these are totally reasonable requests that I expect will be--totally reasonably--negotiated down a bit.
Could be they will try to play it that way. If the Senate's response is reasonable I don't think most people will accept that narrative, but who knows. All kinds of strange narratives being accepted in politics these days. I'll just wait it out and see what happens. I disagree on Judge though... I think credibility is more easily assessed in person. He may indeed have "no knowledge" of the event, but that is also a typical cop out line for somebody who indeed does have knowledge and doesn't want to get caught in perjury by making a definitive statement.
The youth don't care about your silly, old man English. A 15 year old girl only having a single beer doesn't seem odd to me. And I think you're majorly stretching things trying to argue that the alcohol had an effect on her memory.
@GatorBen Took a look at what Erickson is saying this morning. He wrote a blog post on Whelan's theory and had a few other tweets on it. None gave off the impression that he has any independent information beyond his belief that Whelan's story is more believable than hers. We'll see what comes out over the next few days.
But the position of the Ford camp has been …. these are the only conditions under which she will respond to questions re her allegations. I understand your first two paragraphs …. but given the totality of the known facts in the matter, I have difficulty embracing Ford's allegations as being accurate as they relate to Kavanaugh. I've enumerated those facts in a number of emails in support of my position. I think she may have experienced some form of sexual assault in her teenage years …. I don't think it was Kavanaugh and that it happened as she thinks. IMO, this article covers much of what I believe Brett Kavanaugh Sexual Assault Allegation -- Evaluating Credibility: Signs Point in Kavanaugh’s Favor | National Review
