Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If this was before a jury he would be acquitted. If she was so sure of her story, why did she have to read her testimony? She sure as heck wouldn’t get to do that at a trial. If she was so sure of herself, she would have been looking straight at the panel and forcefully telling her story from memory. This is not believable!
If you ever have to go to trial, which I have, you better have everything written down. As soon as the nerves kick in and you start getting questioned, your mind goes blank.
He/she/they got one yesterday. Why is that soooo hard to understand? The FBI wouldn't/couldn't do anything more than what the Senators did. Question under oath,submit sworn statements and that's it.
Mark Judge should have been questioned under oath, he is a key witness.
Can you imagine what would happen to our justice system if witnesses were not allowed to be questioned under oath?
Let's be clear -- while no eye witness has come forth to support Ford's claims, there is no eye witness that says Kavanaugh most definitely was not at any party like that. There is written documentation of the partying culture at the high school.
Folks claim they don't remember or recall...conveniently......
Get real. There could never be any witness to say that. Not about Kavanaugh. Not about you. Not about anybody. You know that. You cannot prove a negative. Unless you were with someone every night of their life, you cannot vouch for every night of their life.
But her friend's declaration that she doesn't know Kavanaugh and has never met him comes pretty close, since she is vouching for her own life and her knowing Kavanaugh is a requirement for Ford's story to be true as she told it.
On the other hand the democrat senator from red state alabama will vote against Kavanaugh. If you remember he was elected because republican candidate for senator, roy moore, was determined by voters to be a man who had inappropriate relationships with teenagers.
" A background check doesn't necessarily cover your high school years" Mine DID and I was 40 at the time with a clean record.
M old high school friends I had NOT heard from for YEARS got in touch with me asking what it was all about.
My grandma told me she was interviewed all the time about people she knew going all the way back to grade school because they applied to work at the place where they make nuclear warheads near Amarillo. They don’t just check off boxes for them or people who work in the White House like Kavanaugh did. And he got that background check in 1993, much closer to his high school and college years.
I have a question to pose: By falsely smearing this man's reputation, don't you think now that even if it's subconsciously, that Kavanaugh is going to get even with them in his rulings on the court? Haven't the Dems done their voters a HUGE disservice by opposing his nomination with such dirty tactics?
If I were Kavanaugh, I'd privately be getting even with the Dems for the rest of my life.
I have a question to pose: By falsely smearing this man's reputation, don't you think now that even if it's subconsciously, that Kavanaugh is going to get even with them in his rulings on the court? Haven't the Dems done their voters a HUGE disservice by opposing his nomination with such dirty tactics?
If I were Kavanaugh, I'd privately be getting even with the Dems for the rest of my life.
Exactly, the redemption factor will be huge for as long as he lives.
And it will be justice served.
Because people don't think the dems are finished trying to destroy this man's reputation.
People are furious that Feinstein started all of this. She had two months to bring this letter forward, but she waited until the vetting process was over, and drops this bomb on the public.
We have a process of vetting SCOTUS nominees. It consists of two months where members of the Senate meet one-on-one with the nominee, and then a public Senate hearing.
Way back in July, Feinstein should have provided Christine Ford's letter to the Judiciary Committee. The committee would have reviewed it, and the accusations investigated.
Way back in July, the people Ford identified as being witnesses would have given their sworn, under oath statements, denying EVERYTHING that Ford said happened. The matter would have been a dead issue.
That's why we have the vetting process, so a nominee's reputation is not needlessly destroyed in public like this.
Feinstein has created lasting damage. Many good people will pause, and may refuse to accept high level federal appointments. They will fear they me be the next target of salacious and unverified rumors, innuendo and accusations, and have their reputations dragged thru the mud.
If that’s the case, get pissed at Feinstein. Don’t confirm an unfit justice over it.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Because people don't think the dems are finished trying to destroy this man's reputation.
People are furious that Feinstein started all of this. She had two months to bring this letter forward, but she waited until the vetting process was over, and drops this bomb on the public.
We have a process of vetting SCOTUS nominees. It consists of two months where members of the Senate meet one-on-one with the nominee, and then a public Senate hearing.
Way back in July, Feinstein should have provided Christine Ford's letter to the Judiciary Committee. The committee would have reviewed it, and the accusations investigated.
Way back in July, the people Ford identified as being witnesses would have given their sworn, under oath statements, denying EVERYTHING that Ford said happened. The matter would have been a dead issue.
That's why we have the vetting process, so a nominee's reputation is not needlessly destroyed in public like this.
Feinstein has created lasting damage. Many good people will pause, and may refuse to accept high level federal appointments. They will fear they me be the next target of salacious and unverified rumors, innuendo and accusations, and have their reputations dragged thru the mud.
The thing is-is the general public smart enough to figure out that this whole case was fabricated by Feinstein to manipulate the SCOTUS confirmation process and provide a tool to delay it until after the November elections, when Dems hope to become relevant. Will they realize that Dr. Ford was USED and forced to testify publicly when they had the information and could have simply taken it to Trump months ago-or debated in in the normal confirmation hearings, not a dog and pony show. Will the public hear that ALL the witnesses SHE named said she is lying-or at best don't confirm her story?
Given the way the MSM is covering this-I highly doubt it. If you watch NBC (unfortunately TV reception is very limited where I live so I do) you would never even think those things-because that is not what they are focusing on. Instead it's all about this poor, sweet little girl molestered by the big, bad man.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
