Oh, I do suspect a stall. And, if in the event that the committee does grant this point, and not bring in outside counsel (a woman), then an unenviable visual. A bunch of old men beating up on a female victim. #metoo.
But, I am open and interested in hearing alternative explanations. Perhaps from a legal perspective, where I admit serious limitation in my knowledge.
Cool. You’re doing exactly what the Dems want you to do. Cheers lol
There is no legal perspective. Charges are not being brought forward.
Eh? I’m questioning this ‘request’ as a lay person. That’s what they want me to do? Not trying to be smart. Just not picking up what you’re putting down.
Understood. But many of the same tactics and practices would be fitting, I’m sure.
Lol… you got me there. I bow to you sir…
The entire goal of the stall was to create confusion and arguments where people go round and round looking for information. You’re asking all of the irrelevant questions the Dems want you asking so the midterms sneak up.
Nah not really. There’s zero legal standing here. No charges are being brought or could be brought. This is entirely public perception driven.
How does his categorical denial look bad in the face of utterly baseless accusations?
She can accuse, he can deny. She has no evidence that there was even a party.
The one person she said can corroborate the party said he knows of no such party ever happening. She has zero evidence and zero corroboration.
She has nothing putting him on top of her.
She’s been invited to testify but is making rediculous conditions not heard of in the history of jurisprudence.
What that means is presently, his complete denial looks fuckin fantastic. There’s zero evidence of any aspect of her story, and you don’t do anything except complete denial in the face of zero evidence.
Dude is literally a lawyer, and not some joe schmo lawyer. He’s going to end up one of the most powerful lawyer’s in history. The shit would he do other than complete denial.
Read more of the above for explanation. Or don’t. I’m gonna go weekend.
If he is found to be lying about anything, then I will oppose his confirmation.
If she is lying then I think she should be arrested for falsely accusing someone for a crime they didn’t commit.
One thing is certain, one of them is lying.
Eh. It’s not like that’s possible. Even if someone tried to ID him there, which they won’t, because duh, they’d be claiming to have that memory after being at an underage drinking party. They’d be obliterated.
Truth is we’ll never really know. Either the GOP will sack up and force the vote this upcoming week, or they’ll let the vote go past the midterms. You either rip off the band-aid or leave it on.
The new and improved Sloth is trying to refrain from going over the same points too many times. We’re going to have to disagree while actually agreeing (stall tactics, yadda yadda).
Have a good one!
Is that your way of saying “I completely understand why this is happening but I want to argue with liberals about this because Congress was sneaky and yay tribalism?”
I couldn’t pass it up…
Like I said, earlier, I do suspect it is stalling. Though I’m willing to discuss alternative views of the moves taken by Ford and her team. And, yes,I have serious reservations about the story itself. But I won’t completely dismiss the idea that she is telling the truth to some degree, either. And so, on a political forum I decided to politely discuss the various points with others. Without questioning their intelligence and character, even. I am open to hearing their view on various points I’ve raised. @Californiagrown and I seem to be approaching things from a different perspective, but respectfully. I just want to share my view on something I’m following, and hopefully hear from others.
.
As I’ve said before, I’ve burnt GOP candidates over allegations I believed to be credible.
I think this is horseshit, So every moment. of this pains me .
Oh I know you do. That’s what makes it such a damn brilliant move.
To be clear, which and/or whose move? Sorry. The team surrounding Ford, correct? Just making sure I understand before heading out.
You shouldn’t have. I left that one over the middle of the plate.
They need to sack up. Give her her fair shot under the law, if she does not agree, tough shit. Now is her chance. If she didn’t feel that before she had a chance, now she has one. But she gets no preferential treatment over other accusers under the law.
If you cannot agree on terms, let the law be the bar.
You don’t get to have the accused testify before the accuser. She shows up when the committee says she does. Then she provides a convincing accusation or she does not. She picked this fight, she cannot make the rules.
What’s Kavanaugh going to say if he goes first? “Never heard of the woman, I wasn’t at any party and I have no idea who she is.”
Mkay…
“He knows what he did, he knows I am right.”
“I sorry but I don’t know who the fuck you are, never met you, ever.”
This concludes the procedings, thank you.