Ford - Kavanaugh Hearings 9-27-18

originally posted by: Quadrivium
Are the ones that walked out having press conference outside ATM?
My live feed just cut to Harris whining to the press.

Yep.

And they claim they didnt plan to walkout.

All the Dems outside hamming it up for the press instead of inside that room and doing their jobs.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

does it matter if they planned it or not?
why would they not stay and fight for what they believe in?

a reply to: Vasa Croe
They all need to be voted out. We need people on both sides that will WORK through problems and not just walk out like children.
When ever there is a big issue and they start bickering, I say chain the doors shut, no food, nothing to drink and no bathroom breaks until a verdict/compromised is reached.
Our government is a joke.

I thought Senator Feinstein's remarks were very judicious. This process has not been adequate.

A lot of bafflegab has been uttered. The fact remains (Senator Feinstein did not make this point.) that the committee could subpoena anyone they wanted to appear under oath before the committee. Any of the failures to show up could have been compelled to show up. They were not compelled to do so.

Whether or not Kavanaugh is confirmed is irrelevant. Sexual assault allegations can be brought against a SC justice (they are not immune to the law nor prosecution).

It doesn't compute in my brain how Republican senators can say with a straight face they believe Ford and they believe Kavanaugh. They are 100% contradictory positions. Its effectively admitting they believe Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Ford (along with Kavanaugh not assaulting Ford - enjoy that logic), but that it shouldn't disqualify him from being a SC justice.

I was watching and had to turn it off as I was getting a headache. This all may be divine providence as the Democrats will most assuredly give us the red wave we all hope will happen. The American people will wake up and and be pissed that the Democrats can believe the American people can be that dumb. The majority will stand up and reject this circus. I truly believe some democrats will vote for judge Kavanaugh as it would be political suicide to do otherwise. BTW go get your blood pressure cuffs and check pressures. I need a beer IN THE MORNING!!!!!

originally posted by: ipsedixit
This process has not been adequate.

Only because she made it so.

The democrats chose to sit on it, PRECISELY because THEY didn't want Ford's accusations to be fully vetted under the normal process or timeline. Rather, THEY saw it as a political opportunity to delay the vote at the very least, and at worst, hoped the minimally investigated, and therefore currently unfounded, accusation would be enough to scuttle the nomination. THEY re-victimized this accuser. And THEY attempted to utterly destroy a man's life and reputation for no greater reason than politics and without due process.

Whatever the truth between these two people, one thing is clear. The democrats had no interest in learning what the truth was.

I hope Kavanaugh gets the seat...and I hope Ford gets her investigation. If it later turns out he was indeed guilty of these claims, the Constitution and due process provides for his ultimate removal. But what the Democrats have attempted to do is unacceptable and should not be rewarded in any way. Period.

originally posted by: ipsedixit
I thought Senator Feinstein's remarks were very judicious. This process has not been adequate.

A lot of bafflegab has been uttered. The fact remains (Senator Feinstein did not make this point.) that the committee could subpoena anyone they wanted to appear under oath before the committee. Any of the failures to show up could have been compelled to show up. They were not compelled to do so.

What would have happened if she would have contacted the local authorities in Maryland and filed a report in June or July?
She chose not to do that.
She chose to go to the media FIRST.
Why?
She is a liberal progressive and is a known activist.
Does that make her claims false?
No, but it gives her motive to falsify the claim.

originally posted by: Wayfarer
Whether or not Kavanaugh is confirmed is irrelevant. Sexual assault allegations can be brought against a SC justice (they are not immune to the law nor prosecution).

It doesn't compute in my brain how Republican senators can say with a straight face they believe Ford and they believe Kavanaugh. They are 100% contradictory positions. Its effectively admitting they believe Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Ford (along with Kavanaugh not assaulting Ford - enjoy that logic), but that it shouldn't disqualify him from being a SC justice.

They are not contradictory.
They said they believe Mrs. Ford was Assaulted.
They said they believe Kav. is not the one who assaulted her.

I am tired of this mantra that Ford had nothing to gain from this. She got to be hero of the Metoo movement. She got tons of attention and sympathy and respect (IMO her driving reason). She stalled and possibly derailed a nomination. Her gains have far outweighed her losses of what? Having to stay in a hotel she isn't paying for?

originally posted by: Quadrivium

originally posted by: Wayfarer
Whether or not Kavanaugh is confirmed is irrelevant. Sexual assault allegations can be brought against a SC justice (they are not immune to the law nor prosecution).

It doesn't compute in my brain how Republican senators can say with a straight face they believe Ford and they believe Kavanaugh. They are 100% contradictory positions. Its effectively admitting they believe Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Ford (along with Kavanaugh not assaulting Ford - enjoy that logic), but that it shouldn't disqualify him from being a SC justice.

They are not contradictory.
They said they believe Mrs. Ford was Assaulted.
They said they believe Kav. is not the one who assaulted her.

They are, because Ford said she was assaulted by Kavanaugh, and you and most other here are choosing to say she's wrong but in some wackadoo twist of idiot logic then turn around with a straight face and say you believe her and she's telling the truth. It doesn't work that way. What you should actually be saying is, 'I believe her sincerity, but I don't believe her story'. Its just the optics look/sound way worse to so boldly side against a potential sexual assault victim that you and most other want to have your cake and eat it to by 'saying you believe her story' but that all details are wrong/incorrect (which is expressly not believing her account).

a reply to: Wayfarer

What you should actually be saying is, 'I believe her sincerity, but I don't believe her story'.

thats nice
but I believe kavanaugh will be the next judge appointed to the scotus

originally posted by: Identified
I am tired of this mantra that Ford had nothing to gain from this. She got to be hero of the Metoo movement. She got tons of attention and sympathy and respect (IMO her driving reason). She stalled and possibly derailed a nomination. Her gains have far outweighed her losses of what? Having to stay in a hotel she isn't paying for?

Go ahead and tell us you name and address and see how you like being known (note: Please don't, the point is to give you some perspective of what she's going through). Living in fear (from the death threats among other things) is a terrible experience and I shake my head at anyone who so easily claims there's no hardship involved without having experienced it themselves. You're not even somebody in any kind of movement, and you're too afraid to name yourself for just the crowd here on ATS, so imagine what the rest of her life is going to be like.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer

What you should actually be saying is, 'I believe her sincerity, but I don't believe her story'.

thats nice
but I believe kavanaugh will be the next judge appointed to the scotus

Almost assuredly, but I don't see the point of your response here. I'm just claiming y'all should man-up about disbelieving Ford, rather than couching your disbelief in a fake example of sincerity.

originally posted by: Quadrivium

originally posted by: Wayfarer
Whether or not Kavanaugh is confirmed is irrelevant. Sexual assault allegations can be brought against a SC justice (they are not immune to the law nor prosecution).

It doesn't compute in my brain how Republican senators can say with a straight face they believe Ford and they believe Kavanaugh. They are 100% contradictory positions. Its effectively admitting they believe Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Ford (along with Kavanaugh not assaulting Ford - enjoy that logic), but that it shouldn't disqualify him from being a SC justice.

They are not contradictory.
They said they believe Mrs. Ford was Assaulted.
They said they believe Kav. is not the one who assaulted her.

They're tip-toeing around it, but I think what they're implying is that they believe that SHE believes her story, but they do not find her recollection to be reliable.

a reply to: Wayfarer

I watched the hearing with an open mind yesterday.
The part where ford told the chief of the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office’s sex crimes bureau Special Victims Division that her "lifelong" friend had submitted a sworn statement that the event did not happen is where she lost me.
When your friend won't vouch for you that says a lot.
I feel bad for Ford. The DNC used here and has discarded her.

Public record on her permits

From the hearing:

GRAHAM:
Here’s my understanding, if you lived a good life people would recognize it, like the American Bar Association has

KAVANAUGH: For 12 years, everyone who has appeared before me on the D.C. Circuit has praised my judicial temperament. That’s why I have the well unanimous, well qualified rating from the American Bar Association

Last Night:

The American Bar Association called Thursday evening for postponing a vote on Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court until sexual assault allegations made by Christine Blasey Ford and others are investigated by the F.B.I.
www.nytimes.com...

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Quadrivium

originally posted by: Wayfarer
Whether or not Kavanaugh is confirmed is irrelevant. Sexual assault allegations can be brought against a SC justice (they are not immune to the law nor prosecution).

It doesn't compute in my brain how Republican senators can say with a straight face they believe Ford and they believe Kavanaugh. They are 100% contradictory positions. Its effectively admitting they believe Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Ford (along with Kavanaugh not assaulting Ford - enjoy that logic), but that it shouldn't disqualify him from being a SC justice.

They are not contradictory.
They said they believe Mrs. Ford was Assaulted.
They said they believe Kav. is not the one who assaulted her.

They are, because Ford said she was assaulted by Kavanaugh, and you and most other here are choosing to say she's wrong but in some wackadoo twist of idiot logic then turn around with a straight face and say you believe her and she's telling the truth. It doesn't work that way. What you should actually be saying is, 'I believe her sincerity, but I don't believe her story'. Its just the optics look/sound way worse to so boldly side against a potential sexual assault victim that you and most other want to have your cake and eat it to by 'saying you believe her story' but that all details are wrong/incorrect (which is expressly not believing her account).

You do know that its been scientifically proven that memories become faulty after 10 or more years right? Her mind has jumbled up her memories. without forensic evidence its he said she said.