Your “grasping at straws” comment shows you continue to have a fundamental misunderstanding as to how investigations work. I’m telling you how a legitimate investigation works - and that’s backed by direct professional experience. They have to be broad because investigators/fact finders/Senators/general public “don’t know what they don’t know.” And that goes for witnesses too. I can’t even tell you how many times I’ve seen witnesses truly believe someone was or wasn’t present and then be proven wrong. Sitting here today how can you of all people definitely state that there is no one else with relevant knowledge? We both know the answer to that.
All I had to go by was Kavanaugh's conduct at the hearing.....his partisan rant and presenting himself as a victim did reek of privilege. He only has himself to blame if many got the same impression.
As That infamous brick layer in PF’s Brick in the Wall stated “If you don’t produce yer therapist’s notes, you can’t have an investigation. How can you have an investigation if you don’t produce yer therapist’s notes?”
Substitute liar with incorrect, and you'd be dead on... Being a liar and being incorrect aren't the same thing...
Agreed the Post doesn't have the notes and were probably only allowed to see them. However, we know that they exist and cover what Dr. Ford remembered about the incident six years ago. They need to be turned over to the FBI.
Wow Nana, I guess I was never taught to be careful when defending myself against unsubstantiated, uncorroberated criminal accusations to be careful to not "reek of privilege". This whole charade was a ploy to play to the emotions of the Libs who already were against Kavanaugh but had no logical, reasonable way to explain why. Your biases apparently run deeper than I had ever gotten the impression they did. I have to say, based on your posting history that I am disappointed.
That’s related to another allegation, right? BK was there when she was drugged and raped? Sure, it’s possible, I guess. Doesn’t sound likely to me.
My take is a little different than most men......I've had experiences with men who conduct themselves like Kavanaugh did in this hearing. In addition, his trying to blame the Democrats and Clintons hit a cord with me. The loss of his emotions and anger, the blaming others and his anti-Dem rant told me he's unfit for the SC no matter what the outcome of the sexual allegations. I can't just erase my history or life experiences.....so in this case, my take will be a little different than yours.
What is the over/under on the day the Democrats drop the next accuser? Wednesday, Thursday of next week? Maybe sooner if they have reason to believe the FBI is going to wrap it up early.
I’ll grant you that just because he’s an accused punk with a seemingly terrible viewpoint on women as a youth doesn’t mean he assaulted her. There will be no justice. I supported the last dude. He was great even if conservative. This guy isn’t. Trump is 1-2. Why not be 2-3?
Why did D's on the committee only want to talk to Judge? Why not demand that her life long friend show up as well? Why should Judge appear when Dr. Ford has not provided any information that can be disproven? And as I’ve said earlier, it is awfully helpful to Dr. Ford’s account that the other person in the room just happened to be a recovering alcoholic that wrote a book detailing his struggles with drinking and is also a provocative, conservative writer that has published opinions liberals hate.
My understanding from reading various articles is that the Dems wanted numerous witnesses including Judge to appear at the hearing. It's the GOP that refused wanting only Dr. Ford and Kavanaugh to appear. They needed this hearing to end in a she said/he said stalemate in order to be able to move to vote him on to the SC.
Well, for one, he was accused of being in the room whereas neither her friend nor PJ Smith were accused of being in the room. So he is clearly more material than either of them. If you want to call her, you should probably call both her and Smith (and Judge would certainly be more important than either). To be honest, an alcoholic with clear issues in terms of his viewpoints on sex would be the type of person that you would expect to be involved in something like a drunken sexual assault.
Sorry but Kavanaugh is not going to role over and quit because Democrats attempt a political assassination of him. Kavanaugh's reaction is exactly what Democrats should have expected from anyone who has worked extremely hard to achieve much and establish a sterling reputation and then had the accusations that Kavanaugh has had thrown at them. And do not compare this man with Bill Clinton. I find it extremely intellectually bankrupt that the party and their enablers that allowed Clinton to continue to sexual harass women in the Oval Office by calling women awful things are now claiming that they believe a woman that has put forward far less evidence than each of Clinton's accusers did.
Fair enough, but I'm good with liar, especially in the how die phrased it. Here it is again for reference:
No, they just wanted to get Judge in front of the committee. That is the only person the Democrats wanted a subpoena for on Friday.
Judge should be forced to testify just as soon as some disprovable information is provided. Until then, there is nothing else he can say other than he has no recollection of a gathering that Dr. Ford described. So a conservative with a drinking problem is clearly a serial sexaul harasser/rapist? Got it.
