Based on what? The only people who supposedly know what happened are the ones allegedly in that room and the only evidence is their testimony. Judge gave a written statement and he is not going to talk to investigators. That leaves Ford and Kavanaugh who will say essentially the same thing to the committee as they say to investigators. An investigator might be able to tear down one or the other's story more easily than the hearing would, but we are never going to know definitively what happened. They are evaluating two stories and the outcome is deciding which on they believe more. An investigation is more likely to be bad for Ford because the FBI can ask her hard questions and identify inconsistencies in what she is saying that a senator won't be able to do for fear of looking like an ass on TV. But if there aren't any inconsistencies, then the same thing comes out in the hearing.
Apparently Dr. Ford has agreed to testify in principal. Not sure what "in principal" means. I wouldn't be surprise if they are still fighting the outside counsel issue.
CNN interviewed some Republican women about these allegations, I don't think they were expecting the response they received.
From reading WaPo’s email blast on it, I’m not sure it’s much of a change. They had a 2:30 deadline and knew they couldn’t very well just say no, so they said “yes if we can negotiate appropriate terms,” which is I thought where they already stood.
The letter was not turned over to the FBI until Sept 12 “Upon receipt of the information on the night of September 12, we included it as part of Judge Kavanaugh’s background file, as per the standard process.“ Feinstein Turned Over A Mysterious Letter About Brett Kavanaugh To The FBI
Why did Feinstein hold the letter till the last minute and so far refused to turn over a copy of it to the committee
Probably so there could be no investigation but the dems could make political hay out of the Senate Judicial Committee not allowing an independent investigation of Ford’s allegation ...... one for which she did not care having investigated for the last 36 years. The stench from entire episode is worse than that from a nole fan who’s not bathed since their last loss to the Gators.
it means we have agreed to testify but we reserve the right to keep moving the goal posts still it is not possible to do it.
Yeah, get in an argument with sexual assault survivors about what they should and shouldn't remember. That's a really good idea.
Anita Hill was already a success before her accusations. And she has been vindicated by what has come out subsequently. Dr. Blasey is already a success before her accusations. Your financial motives argument is nothing but a baseless character attack that doesn't hold water in light of what we know. She did that right before she came forward. Why do that? Pretty obvious. I guess I can predict the future because somebody asked the same question right when it happened. I told them it was because she'd start getting a bunch of threats and harassment when she came forward. Guess what happened? Would you leave up your social media accounts with pictures of you, your family, your house, etc.? Yep. I saw that days ago. I decided not to post it. CNN got exactly the response they wanted. Those women made fools of themselves, and it allowed CNN to portray Republicans as having heinous opinions like those.
Alleged torment. Because without proof, it is only an allegation, and the only allegation levied against Kavanugh in the past 25+ years. So pardon me if I don’t take the word of a random woman of a single allegation with no proof. It takes more faith for you to believe her than it does for me to be skeptical. The question is why do you put so much faith in an unproven allegation lacking in detail. Is it because you believe the statistics that state that the woman must be telling the truth, since women almost never lie about these things? Or because his politics are opposite to the politics you want appointed to the Supreme Court.
So if I agree to testify if you get naked and sing the National Athem, does that mean that if you refuse, then I can claim I was willing to testify, but you were being unreasonable?
