You're right. Dr. Ford should get to appoint who gets to ask the questions and she should also be allowed to provide the to be read verbatim questions in advance. I mean, after all, she's the victim. We've established that.
Improper though to have one witness testify as to the veracity of another. Like Jack Webb said, "Just the facts."
Are we back to probably actually happening now? I haven't been keeping up with the twitter storm today, but last I had seen this morning was "in serious doubt" because her camp was upset with the floor speech from The Turtle (R-KY) yesterday.
Trump should have just picked Barrett.... Dems were going to lose their mind and say, "the sky is falling" regardless of who he chose... They're crying that Kavanaugh would overturn Roe v. Wade even though he likely wouldn't have... Might as well give them something to cry about and give them Barrett who likely would've at least tried to overturn Roe v. Wade...
Yep and the thing is when Ginsburg goes, Trump is the kind of guy who won't forget this and we'll probably get Bill Pryor or someone that will make Gorsuch look like a tree hugging liberal. Solid work, Dems.
See lawyer and I's exchange yesterday. Barrett is probably the riskiest pick on his board, because she doesn't have a judicial track record in anything of consequence and the basis for the belief that she would be very conservative is just that she's very Catholic. If he wants to stick it to the Dems, there are plenty of potential picks much more conservative than Kavanaugh out there. But Barrett isn't the safe one of that group.
Have reread the article and do not see where she said she believed Ford Christine Blasey Ford has claimed that four other people attended a small gathering at which she was allegedly assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh. Three of those people, PJ Smyth, Mark Judge, and Kavanaugh, have already denied any recollection of attending such a party. On Saturday night, Leland Ingham Keyser, a classmate of Ford's at the all-girls school Holton-Arms and her final named witness, denied any recollection of attending a party with Brett Kavanaugh. "Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford," lawyer Howard J. Walsh said in a statement sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee. CNN reports that " Keyser is a lifelong friend of Ford's." Leland Ingham Keyser Courtesy of Facebook Keyser previously coached golf at Georgetown University and is now executive producer of Bob Beckel's podcast. Keyser is the ex-wife of Beckel, a former Democratic operative and commentator. A search on OpenSecrets.org reveals Keyser's only political donation has been to former Democratic senator Byron Dorgan. Keyser's denial, as a female lifelong friend and Ford's last named witness, is the most consequential development that has occurred since Ford publicly stepped forward last Sunday and detailed her allegations to the Washington Post. Ford's allegation of the 1982 incident was told to no one until a 2012 therapy session, when Kavanaugh was first touted in the media as the most likely GOP Supreme Court nominee. All of Ford's named witnesses of the party, both male and female, have now denied any recollection of attending such a party. John McCormack is a senior writer at The
Pryor is probably the hardest confirmation fight on his list (although probably not harder than this mess), so I would be a bit surprised to see Pryor himself. But I think you're right that, odds are, you're going to see one of the folks on his list (or an updated list) well to the right of either Gorsuch or Kavanaugh if he gets another vacancy with a GOP Senate.
This really doesn't make much sense. I mean, ultimately the votes they need to confirm are going to be Republican votes. The only thing that could probably defeat a nominee is say, Murkowski and Collins voting no because of someone who was blatantly anti-Roe that would give them none of the cover of a Gorsuch or Kavanaugh. If Kavanaugh doesn't get confirmed it will be because he didn't have enough Republican votes. There isn't a filibuster to overcome here.
I voted for Trump, but even I am not comfortable with a Bill Pryor on the SCOTUS. I tend to agree with you, that Trump will stick it to the Dems because #1 that's who he is and #2 well, that's who he is, lol. Again, solid work, Dems..
Nope. The Republican Senators should ask the questions. That was quite clearly the point being made by my post. I'm not using it as proof of veracity. I'm using it to dispute the claim that Keyser denied it happened. As far as I can tell, it's still on. It sounds like she's peeved at the Turtle from Kentucky and some of other Republicans, though. But that shouldn't surprise anyone. Ford friend says she doesn't recall party where alleged assault occurred Ford told The Washington Post that Keyser was at the party. Though Keyser says she has "no recollection" of being at a party that Kavanaugh attended, she told The Post that she believes Ford's allegation.
it is better sometimes to lose the battle to win the war. Sounds like the Republicans are getting smart for a change. The Democrats talking points about old white men demonizing poor little Ford are gone
Oh if Ginsburg goes while Trump is in office... There will be a war over the following pick... I hope it's Barrett... I will have zero sympathy for the Democrats if that happens to be the case...
THIS times 1,000,000,000,000. This is all you need to know at this point about the ordeal. All four witnesses are corroborating Kavanaugh. Not just they don't remember an assault, they don't even remember ever going to a party with Ford and Kavanaugh...EVER. This isn't a he said, she said. It's a he and 4 other people said he wasn't even at a party with Ford versus a she said. Just give me one... one person who even remembers being at a party with BK and CF.
I guess I wonder what the difference is between some generic conservative candidate and someone like Sotomayor, whose claim was to bring some latina flavor and life experiences to the bench in how she rules. She was obviously very biased toward the outcome of the cases she decides and later showed that in the Islam ban case. Morally she's right IMO, but her job isn't to put her own morality before the plain letter law. To me that's extreme, but she faced little opposition when it was evident ahead of time who she was. Bork would have probably been somewhere around Scalia ideologically. Thomas was more extreme and sounded downright scary based on the contemporary descriptions. We survived the "extremist" people and maybe even benefitted from the diversity of opinion. And many proved to be very different on the court than they were perceived to be when they were nominated. I disagree on your stare decisis bit. While the high court is not bound to follow precedent like the lower courts, they still have to give it deference and generally only step in when they think there is a significant problem with the original decision (e.g. Plessy). If each court flipped every decision they disagreed with, that would be a bad thing for the credibility of the court and for the country.
Yeah, but I don't really see why it would be different if the Dems were extra nice to Trump's other nominees. Like repaying kindness with no reward is something that happens in politics.
Diane Feinstein: Unsure If Brett Kavanaugh Accuser Will Testify | National Review "Feinstein’s comment came after Politico reported that Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley had contracted a female attorney to question Ford during the public hearing Thursday. In negotiating her appearance before the Committee, Ford’s attorney has requested that she not be questioned by outside counsel." You can't deliver your steamer to the meeting? Can't ride the S**t show you helped create. 21st century leadership there.
