Bro, their fear of Russian retaliation prevented them from telling the truth. It’s obvious they deemed that scarier than any murican penalty.
If she can offer anything at all on Thursday, maybe they will. But he has given a statement that he’s now bound to…
She appears to be reticent to show up to any cross examination whatsoever.
Well, we’ll all see if she’s got something she’s recalled or simply held back. If she shows up. The fact that they’re still negotiating has me wondering.
Wait–is someone on trial?
As she should be. She’s the victim, here. It should be up to Kavanaugh to prove that he didn’t do it—a simple thing to do.
1 Like
Heh, wait until Kavanaugh faces questions from the Democrats. Might look like it then.
Good enough to get elected president.
Demanding a specific type of questioner is not a normal senate request, and you know it.
So long as they don’t ask him the sorts of questions he wanted to ask Bill Clinton he’ll be fine.
So, it’s unreasonable for a witness appearing before the Senate to request to be questioned by senators? Seriously–you’re arguing that she’s the one out of line here?
She has requested, on basis of a criminal accusation, to have no corresponding legal counsel question her. So yes, I very much do think that.
I don’t know how to respond to that kind of sexist, victim-shaming.
1 Like
No one can be prosecuted for the acts under discussion (statute of limitations). Kavanaugh will not be ‘crossed’ by a sex-crime prosecutor; he will be questioned by Democratic senators. There is no reason to bring in ‘legal counsel’ to interview her. Thus, her objection is perfectly reasonable.
This is not a criminal proceeding. It is a job interview.
Her team themselves would have requested a woman outside counsel to question her so as to protect her from the trauma of having old white men questioning her about traumatic memories. IF, protecting her mental well-being was the consideration.
She and/or her team want her to be cross examined by Senators because of the optics of old white men questioning a victim.
Grassley dodged that narrative.
How does the female questioner change that?
And she is a sexual crimes prosecutor. Someone with experience interviewing victims.
But that doesn’t change it to criminal proceedings.
Really you guys should read this from an attorney that handles these types of cases, just to see things that he lloks for from both parties.
Literally? No.