Accuser of Supreme Court nominee Kavanaugh agrees to testify to Senate committee

From a legal standpoint I don't see much point in her testifying before a Senate committee. She should go to the police and the courts.

Or perhaps the statute of limitations has expired for this type of crime and so she and her backers simply want to derail judge Kavanaugh's appointment.

Of course, at least for the Democrats, this is more about protecting Roe vs Wade than justice for Ms. Ford. Otherwise they don't care about her.

In the end, if Kavanaugh is guilty I hope he is not appointed and gets justice. If not, I hope she gets justice.

Everyone wanted her to testify - both pro and anti Trump - and now she is going to.

Let's see how convincing she is.

I'm sure the evangelical Christians will stick their fingers in their ears - as long as they get their man in they won't care what he did before.

I completely understand why she felt compelled to say something, then was forced to give up her privacy by the Dems. It won't matter.

Even if everything she claims is true, there is zero legal case. Statute of limitations ran out decades ago. This is a total waste of time and effort.

Kavanaugh will be confirmed before the Nov elections.

Nobody has yet been able to explain to me why it is necessary for Congress to ram this Kavanaugh hearing down the people's throat so quickly. The GOP forced us to go about a year with an 8-person SCOTUS under Obama. What possible reason could the GOP have to rush this evaluation of a potentially violent man for a vacancy only a couple months old? Why this rush to an arbitrary deadline?

Why this rush to an arbitrary deadline?

We all know the tall deadline is November when the Republicans may lose control of the Senate for years, so they need to rush their man in before that.

From a legal standpoint I don't see much point in her testifying before a Senate committee. She should go to the police and the courts.

From a legal standpoint the issue at stake here is not whether Kavanagh will be convicted (the statute of limitations expired long ago, which debars criminal proceedings but does not mean the acts never happened), but rather in determining whether or not a rapist is going to be appointed to the United States Supreme Court. Being of good character is a precondition to appointment to that position and if the allegations are true (and he has been lying about it all along) that would obviously cause him to fail that test.

Dr. Ford

We are with you. We support you

Justice will prevail

From a legal standpoint I don't see much point in her testifying before a Senate committee. She should go to the police and the courts. 

Or perhaps the statute of limitations has expired for this type of crime and so she and her backers simply want to derail judge Kavanaugh's appointment. 

Of course, at least for the Democrats, this is more about protecting Roe vs Wade than justice for Ms. Ford. Otherwise they don't care about her. 

Let’s be honest, that’s really the underlying reason that they’re doing this and Schumer said from the beginning they would oppose any new conservative SCJ nominee and Kavanaugh who is cleaner than a pair of white vans didn’t have a single blemish on his record, passed 6 grueling background FBI checks, numerous polygraph tests and nothing ever came up on the Feds radar in over 30 years and now this? The Democrats showed their hand with Schumer’s statement as well as 1 min into Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing they immediately went into action in opposing him. Look what happened to Thomas, ever notice for almost 10 years he hasn’t spoken? He’s the most quietest SCJ the man was really scarred by what he went through and the Democrats are doing it once again. We probably won’t have public SC hearings anymore is my guess by the way things have been going. But if Kavanaugh is totally innocent, his reputation by these attacks is damaged no doubt about it.

In the end, if Kavanaugh is guilty I hope he is not appointed and gets justice. If not, I hope she gets justice.

I will agree with that, but it will be next to impossible to establish if a crime was committed or not, but given the fact that so much of what allegedly happened 36 years ago she can’t recall locations or events or who was present and on the other hand 3 people with Kavanaugh can recall more accurate details of what was going on, but in the end it will come down to who looks and sounds more credible.

Judge Kavanaugh

We are with you. We support you

Justice will prevail

Dr. Ford

We are with you. We support you

Justice will prevail

Just because somebody says something, doesn't make it's true.

Thats right, justice will prevail as long as she tells the WHOLE truth and nothing but the TRUTH. Oh I forgot,

she doesn't want to testify under oath.

Judge Kavanaugh

We are with you. We support you

The "We" being Donald Trump (20 sexual abuse allegations and counting - and brags about it), Roy Moore, the GOP Senate Judiciary Committee adviser working on Kavanaugh nomination that just resigned because of a history of sexual harassment, and many more Republican harassers...

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/09/22/politics/senate-judiciary-committee-adviser-quits-kavanaugh-nomination/index.html

Justice will prevail

Already failed - if justice had prevailed then Merrick Garland would be sitting on the court....

given the fact that so much of what allegedly happened 36 years ago she can’t recall locations or events or who was present 

Details fade with time - 36 years is s long time. The bit that probably sticks in her mind is the face of the man that was on top of her trying to take off her clothes.

Exactly! Kavanaugh has been through the legal and criminal process as a Judge sitting on the highest court, he is willing to go under oath know that if he perjures himself it's over. There is no way this guy would take that chance if he didn't think or believe in his innocence. Yes, I personally want an investigation, I think all sides should be heard, but this woman doesn't want to go under oath because whatever she says will be on the record and if she's not telling the truth, she's through.

The "We" being Donald Trump (20 sexual abuse allegations and counting - and brags about it), Roy Moore, the GOP Senate Judiciary Committee adviser working on Kavanaugh nomination that just resigned because of a history of sexual harassment, and many more Republican harassers...

For the life of me, I have no idea how Trump got into this conversation, but....whatever. Anyway, back to the real here and the now none of us know if anything happened, the left always claim they are for equal justice unless it's for a conservative, they want due process unless it's for a conservative. Keith Ellison's ex-girlfriend has tangible evidence, she has audio tapes, medical records, photos, police records of the alleged attack and the Dems don't care, now the man is poised to become the next AG of Minnesota. The Dems promised an ethics investigation, you have women that say they don't believe her even with all the physical evidence she has, but they believe Ford with zero evidence and a person that doesn't want to testify to an alleged crime that may have happened 36 years ago, but Kavanaugh is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt with zero evidence? On top of that as an accuser she wants Kavanaugh to testify first, this is just nonsense! She is making the accusation, she needs to make her claims to her accuser and her accuser needs to respond to the alleged charges.

Already failed - if justice had prevailed then Merrick Garland would be sitting on the court....

If justice had prevailed Robert Bork would have been on the Supreme Court. Politics is getting ever more harsh and mean-spirited. Republicans have no choice but to fight fire with fire.

Fords lawyer is a self avowed Socialist and Leftist activist. Ford herself is a Leftist who has given away her independence by coordinating her potential testimony with the Democrats on the committee. She scrubbed her social media accounts right before her name was “leaked” to the press. She even hired out her own lie detector at the same time she claimed she was seeking anonymity. Since the Dems paid for it - naturally she passed.

The goal is to prevent a solid conservative from gaining a fifth seat on the Supreme Court. I applaud the extreme Lefts use of an unprovable allegation from 36 years ago involving two minors. It has forced Republicans to take a hard vote right before an election. Bravo Senator Feinstein. Now Republicans need to step up and cement a solid Conservative court for the next 10 to 15 years. Losing the Congress is easily worth the sacrifice. The GOP could end up keeping the Senate anyway. Thank the gods that the Dems ran Hillary in the 2016 election. She lost to Trump! Hilarious!

Elections have consequences. - Barack Hussein Obama

@Bass: Keith Ellison's ex-girlfriend has tangible evidence, she has audio tapes, medical records, photos, police records of the alleged attack and the Dems don't care, 

Exactly Bass. Thus isn’t about sexual assault or “hearing the voices of women.”. If it were, Senator Gillibrand and other Dems would not have supported Bill Clinton against the credible allegations of rape and sexual assault. Feinstein and other Dems would be calling for Rep. Keith Ellison step down from his leadership position in the Democrat party. Democrats would be speaking out against Senator Corey Booker, himself a member of the Judiciary Committee who has admitted sexually assaulting a girl when he, like Kavanaugh, was a young man.

This is about one thing and one thing only. The desperation of Democrats who are facing a roll back of a policy agenda that they can not advance through the democratic process but can only advance through control of the court system.

For the life of me, I have no idea how Trump got into this conversation, but....whatever

Yeah, its weird, isn’t it? A guy who we literally have on tape admitting to sexually abusing women has nominated another guy who is accused of sexually abusing a woman to the Supreme Court. Clearly irrelevant so why are peopke insisting on making this connection? Liberal bias in the JT comment section at work again.

Today's GOP: A spokesman for the Senate Judiciary Committee who was involved in Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court has abruptly resigned after allegations surfaced that he was dismissed from a previous job following a claim of sexual misconduct.

Senate Judiciary aide resigns amid sexual harassment allegation: NBC

https://www.yahoo.com/news/senate-judiciary-aide-resigns-amid-sexual-harassment-allegation-151505990.html

Yes, I personally want an investigation,

Another screeching 180.

> I think all sides should be heard, but this woman doesn't want to go under oath because whatever she says will be on the record and if she's not telling the truth, she's through.

She just agreed to testify in front of the committee, which means she will be under oath.

Donald Trump + Clarence Thomas + Brett Kavanaugh = ?

Pervs of a feather flock together.

I would think GOP folks would agree with this if they had any sense.

You are talking about the party that has bent over for Trump. Before that, they blocked Obama from an appointment to fill Scalia's seat.

It is quite telling how repugnant republicans/conservatives were completely okay with an 8-person court for over a year but are now in a rush.

If justice had prevailed Robert Bork would have been on the Supreme Court

Let's fact-check:

Democrats controlled Congress at the time, and the Senate ended up voting against Bork’s confirmation by a vote of 58-42, the biggest margin of any failed Supreme Court nominee in history.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/news/robert-bork-ronald-reagan-supreme-court-nominations

The Democrats didn't have to even put Bork to a vote, but did. Then, the democrats did what was their right and rejected him. Now, barely literate conservatives hold Bork up as an example of dirty democrats. Odd given Bork was actually voted on.

Imagine how boring these threads would be if conservatives were accurate and held themselves to the standards they hold liberals.

Clarence Thomas had an accuser, but he became a justice. I doubt this will be any different.

"A White House official said it appeared that Ford's lawyers were trying to prolong negotiations.

"We look at this statement as a delay tactic" 

Kavanaugh's accuser is Democrats' 'last hope' to derail the Supreme Court nominee's confirmation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djYQ0aE-du4

Great. Now they're all set to hear, then ignore her testimony.

You know who won't ignore it? Voters.

No president under legal investigation should be allowed to appoint a SCOTUS justice.

Only this WH would look at a letter saying, "I'll testify next week" and declare it a delaying tactic. Only ignorant Truml supporters would buy this line.

Keith Ellison's ex-girlfriend has tangible evidence, she has audio tapes, medical records, photos, police records of the alleged attack and the Dems don't care, now the man is poised to become the next AG of Minnesota.

For the life of me, I have no idea how Keith Ellison got into this conversation, but . . . whatever. Looks like barely literate conservatives are spreading falsehoods about Ellison to deflect from Kavanaugh:

Karen Monahan also affirmed that the video did exist, sharing with CNN screenshots of messages between her and Ellison that referenced it:

Monahan provided one text of her mentioning the physical altercation to Ellison in December 2017.

*“Keith, We never discussed — the video I have of you trying to drag me off the bed, yelling get the f** out now, calling me a bitch and saying I hate you bitch,” the text message read. In follow up texts viewed by CNN, Ellison did not directly address the physical altercation.

However, CNN reported that when they asked Monahan for a copy of the video, “Monahan said she misplaced it when moving and provided no other evidence to corroborate her story at the time.”

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/keith-ellison-former-girlfriend-photo/

Monahan told MPR she never intended for the existence of the video to be public and she has no intention of releasing it.

All that evidence conservatives claim is available against Ellison seems to have stealth technology because nobody can find it.

It indicates a lack of critical reasoning ability and literacy that so many conservatives are pushing this nothinburger as a way to paint the Dems in a bad light. Conservatives are claiming it shows the Dems have a double standard vis-a-vis Kavanaugh. However, it decidedly does not demonstrate that because the alleged evidence is MIA.

Fords lawyer is a self avowed Socialist and Leftist activist. Ford herself is a Leftist who has given away her independence by coordinating her potential testimony with the Democrats on the committee. She scrubbed her social media accounts right before her name was “leaked” to the press. She even hired out her own lie detector at the same time she claimed she was seeking anonymity. Since the Dems paid for it - naturally she passed.

Female voters - more evidence for your consumption of what Trump supporters think of women who come forward with sexual assault allegations - it's all about destroying you, the victim.

A majority of America has moved forward on these issues over the past several decades - Trump and his supporters have not - irrespective of the topic; support for sexual assault victims, race relations, diversity, rights for LBGT citizens, they want America to go back to the "Dark Ages"....similar to what we see in Russia today.

We won't allow them to do that...

I just saw on CNN that Kavanaugh's mother who is also judge ruled against Ford's parents in a home foreclosure case back in 1997. Of course the libs will say Ford doesn't hold any grudges...

She didn’t get paid off enough?

Now all the GOP has to do is stop themselves from yawning while she speaks, then they can vote to confirm the alleged sexual predator.

Party before country.

Ah_soToday  08:18 am JST

Why this rush to an arbitrary deadline?

We all know the tall deadline is November when the Republicans may lose control of the Senate for years, so they need to rush their man in before that.

Delusional libruls who actually believe in the "blue wave" may think that, but the many people insisting Kavanaugh's appointment be rushed through have confidently assured me there will be no blue wave. If anything, they say there is going to be a red wave. The coastal globalist socialist vocalists who listen to "polls" and "news" and "facts" just don't understand how much harder the real Americans in this country are going to vote for Trump's Republicans once he finally makes the Russians stop interfering in our election to make illegal immigrants vote for Hillary.

So if anything, the same people who want Kavanaugh appointed no matter who he really is are sure the GOP will have an even bigger margin in November. So why the rush?

You are talking about the party that has bent over for Trump. Before that, they blocked Obama from an appointment to fill Scalia's seat.

Which was their constitutional right.

Now all the GOP has to do is stop themselves from yawning while she speaks, then they can vote to confirm the alleged sexual predator.

Yes, they might have to fight to stay awake while the alleged victim speaks.

Party before country.

I would expect nothing less from the Democrats.

Which was their constitutional right.

First, people have rights, not governments.

Second, where does that "right" come from in the constitution.

Third, your assertion negates all the moaning you've done about Bork.

Yes, they might have to fight to stay awake while the alleged victim speaks

Never miss an opportunity to degrade a victim of sexual assault.

I would expect nothing less from the Democrats.

Ah, yes, Bass' favorite retort: I know you are, but what am I?

*The federal government does not have rights. State snd local governments do.

Female voters - more evidence for your consumption of what Trump supporters think of women who come forward with sexual assault allegations

Yes! By the way speaking of liberals and deeply caring for women, what’s going on with Democrat Keith Ellison his ex-girlfriend who was verbally and physically abused by her husband and where the Democrats SAID they were going to have an ethics investigation? Since liberals CARE so much about this woman and all women equally as Mrs. Ford we should be getting results and even better in her case which is solid since there is a lot of tangible evidence that backs up her claims. I’m sure they’ll be on it and treat with the importance and dire urgency as Ford.

- it's all about destroying you, the victim. 

Well, the Dems aren’t joking about that, like a Tomahawk missile.

A majority of America has moved forward on these issues over the past several decades - Trump and his supporters have not

As long as there is no proof or evidence to back up a claim then, No.

- irrespective of the topic; support for sexual assault victims, race relations, diversity, rights for LBGT citizens, they want America to go back to the "Dark Ages"....similar to what we see in Russia today. 

Nice try, but explain how liberal policies have been destructive to minorities and their communities.

We won't allow them to do that...

We shouldn’t.

Laguna: No president under legal investigation should be allowed to appoint a SCOTUS justice.

So you believe that Bill Clinton’s Supreme Court appointees are illegimate? He was under investigation during his entire presidency starting with the fraudulent Whitewater deal and ending with his abuse of Lewinsky and perjury.

Chip: For the life of me, I have no idea how Keith Ellison got into this conversation, but . . . whatever. Looks like barely literate conservatives are spreading falsehoods about Ellison to deflect from Kavanaugh:

It is relevant because it shows the Dems selective idea of justice. An even more relavent case is Democrat Judiciary Committee Corey Booker who has openly admitted that he sexually assaulted a girl when he was a young man. How can Dems have no problem with a Democrat sitting in judgement of Kavanaugh and Ford when he has admitted he committed a crime?

Kavanaugh has stated that he is innocent and he must be given the presumption of innocence. Apparently “barely literate” progressives don’t understand how fairness works. Being “barely literate” means Dems are right no matter what they do. That is Orwellian justice.

First, people have rights, not governments. 

Yeah, liberals think that, sadly they don’t teach about how the constitution works in schools nowadays.

Senators opposed to a nomination have broad discretion as to how they go about doing it. They have no constitutional obligation to hold hearings (which did not exist at all until 1916) or to take a vote. The Constitution does not impose any such requirement. 

Some argue that, even if the Constitution does not require the Senate to hold hearings and take a vote, informal political norms do.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/03/16/gop-senators-may-be-justified-in-blocking-the-garland-nomination-until-the-election-but-not-if-it-means-opening-the-door-for-trump/?utm_term=.39117c0c536f

The relevant text is the appointments clause of Article II, Section 2, which provides: “[The president] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States…” This language makes the Senate’s consent a prerequisite to presidential appointments, but it does not place any duty on the Senate to act nor describe how it should proceed in its decision-making process. Even if the word “shall” in the clause is read as mandatory, “shall” refers only to things the president does. Instead, the Senate’s core role in appointments is as a check on the president, which it exercises by not giving consent—a choice it can make simply by not acting.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/senate-obama-merrick-garland-supreme-court-nominee/482733/

Chip: *The federal government does not have rights. State snd local governments do.

The government does not have rights- the people do. It is incumbent upon government to not infringe upon those rights and to ensure that the rights of individuals are not infringed upon by others.

State and local governments have rights against the federal government. Read the constitution. Study SCOTUS caselaw, like some of us literate individuals have.

I thought Leftists didn’t believe in States Rights? I get your point about the powers reserved to the Federal government and the states. But rights are for people. You are trying to make an argument in suppo of the former slave states?

I know you haven't studied constitutional law by the way you incorrectly speak about it.

You should not be jumping on Bass’ understanding of Consititional law Chip. I’ve been reading your comments here and you are no scholar yourself.

Ford has a right to claim that she was assaulted and she has had 36 years to file a criminal complaint. She has not and still has not. Just as Ford has rights so does Kavanaugh. He has the right to the presumption of innocence. Ford has made an accusation timed to damage his prospects for a major position in the government. She has provided no evidence to support her claim. She hasn’t even been able to state when or where it happened. She has admitted that she was also drunk so that makes her recollection suspect as it would Kavanaugh’s IF she could even prove he was there.

Ford is an arch Progressive and she has hired an attorney who is an avowed Socialist who has stated in public that she is #resist (ing) the current administration. Like Anita Hill she stands to gain a great deal by making these allegations. She will become lionized by her piers in her Leftist academic and social circles. She stands to make millions with a book deal. She will become a celebrity just like Anita Hill. In the Left, victim status reigns supreme. All she has to do is make it through the coming show trial in the Senate without sounding like a loon. A low barrier to overcome for the daughter of the elite who has been educated in elite prep schools.

Ford may have been assaulted by Kavanaugh 36 years ago. If she can prove it I can believe her. She may have no way to prove it anymore because she waited three decades to tell anyone about it. Where does that leave this? There can be no justice in the case as she hasn’t even filed a criminal complaint. Maybe this will simply end up scaring his marriage and his relationship with his daughters. What good is that?

Lets not forget that there have been high profile cases of accusations of sexual assault upon defenseless and sympathetic females that have turned out to be false. The Duke Lacrosse case and the accusations against the University of Virginia fraternity’s were huge eye openers for me.

If he cannot be proven guilty then he is innocent. Sorry but that’s the way it has to be. Otherwise the system will break down over time into chaos.

He has the right to the presumption of innocence.

You are conflating the standards of proof in a criminal proceeding, which this is not, and that in a confirmation hearing, which this is.

In a criminal trial you are presumed innocent, but this isn’t one of those, nor is Kavavagh in any danger of facing one since the statute of limitations has expired.

In a proceeding like this there are no such presumptions, nor is anyone required to prove anything. Its basically just her testimony, then his and political considerations will likely be the only thing that determines the outcome unless one of them is either super convincing or comes off unusually bad.

Wolfpack: Fords lawyer is a self avowed Socialist and Leftist activist. Ford herself is a Leftist who has given away her independence by coordinating her potential testimony with the Democrats on the committee.

Making her 38.5% more likely to make up a fake attempted rape claim to derail a Supreme Court justice.

Ford is an arch Progressive and she has hired an attorney who is an avowed Socialist who has stated in public that she is #resist (ing) the current administration.

Ah, so we should revise upward? Maybe a 87.4% chance she would make a false attempted rape claim?

The Duke Lacrosse case and the accusations against the University of Virginia fraternity’s were huge eye openers for me.

Ah, so now you're less likely to believe a woman's claim of sexual assault because of these two incidents. You were naive before (like the rest of us), then you had your eyes opened. Must have been a profound change for you.

A better option would be to let her speak, then you can toss her story aside and confirm Kavanaugh. You have plenty of time to do so and we both know that will be the result. She is a Democrat, after all, so there is some justification to ignoring her claims as you've spelled out for us.

You guys were always going to get the seat. The question is how many midterm votes you will lose while you fumble through this.

Her refusal to testify under oath speaks volumes about her and the Democrats. She is lying. Probably had a derailed crush when they were younger. Democrats want damage at any cost. That’s it.

katsu78 - Nobody has yet been able to explain to me why it is necessary for Congress to ram this Kavanaugh hearing down the people's throat so quickly. What possible reason could the GOP have to rush this evaluation of a potentially violent man for a vacancy only a couple months old? Why this rush to an arbitrary deadline?

Elected Democrats have made it abundantly clear that they will not vote in favor of Kavanaugh's confirmation. It wouldn't matter if Ford were to admit that she had lied, mis-remembered, didn't remember, couldn't remember, or just wanted to punish Kavanaugh because Hillary lost her 2nd attempt to become POTUS. There is no point in waiting for any elected Democrats to change their mind. The party leadership has spoken!

Plus, Ford's story doesn't seem to agree with the notes taken by her own psychiatrist. The psychiatrist would only have written down what Ford had told her at that point in time.

If Ford shows up, and testifies, that would be great. Kavanaugh will then be given a chance to testify. I Ford doesn't show up, if Ford doesn't testify, Kavanaugh may, or may not, chose to testify. Again. But if Ford isn't willing to publically tell her side of her fantasy, there is no reason (other than political fervor/obedience) for anyone else to believe her.

@Chip: Where did you go to law school? I finished one term early in 2010.

Wow - a whole semester!

This demonstrates you lack of understanding of the constitution. The presumption of innocence is applicable only in courts of law, not in front of senate committees.

Are you are making the case that in employment law an unproven accusation is actionable? That’s not in the constitution either but in many jurisdictions it is illegal to fire a person without just cause. You quit school too early.

Ford is claiming that a crime was committed against her and instead of taking her case to the proper authorities for prosecution she is instead attempting to destroy Kavanaugh’s career and reputation. Dems are already talking about impeaching him should they take the Senate in November. For that to occur there will be a trial in the Senate with prosecuting and defense attorneys. What is most telling about Fords accusations is that she has never attempted to bring a legal case against him. Given that four of the witnesses she identified have all denied any knowledge of the alleged crime I can see why she saved her accusation for a political hit job.

If you took 5 minutes to research, you would know states' rights are not only about slavery. Yet more evidence that you have a very limited understanding of constitutional law.

I never stated that states rights is or was only about slavery. You are debating with yourself. That’s probably why you only made it through one semester of law school.

Superlib: Ah, so now you're less likely to believe a woman's claim of sexual assault because of these two incidents. You were naive before (like the rest of us), then you had your eyes opened. Must have been a profound change for you.

Actually I believed the accusers in both the Duke and Virginia cases. It was easy to believe that the rich pampered boys that go to those two colleges could have done what they were accused of. But just because it’s easy to believe and it seems like it’s true doesn’t mean it is. A false accusation is not justified no matter how poor the alleged victim or elite the alleged perpetrator.

What we are witnessing is a perfect example of the new McCarthyism whereby it is impossible for a person from the out group to be innocent of any accusation regardless of the evidence. American society is collapsing in true Orwellian fashion.

It is unfortunate that Ford wasted the last 36 years without making any attempt to bring her case to the legal system. The fact that she has not done so means so investigation was ever done. She never sought justice and isn’t doing so now. Waiting to the day before a scheduled vote in the committee to bring forth this charge is transparently a political act. It is an act of opportunism as well. She is going to make millions off of this unproven allegation. Book will hit the shelves next Spring - guaranteed NY Times best seller.

If the Democrats haven't been purposefully stalling, they should. Just like the Republicans did during the last administration.

Stall away Democrats. Stall away.

Waiting to the day before a scheduled vote in the committee to bring forth this charge is transparently a political act.

Right. Bless them, they're playing the hyper-partisanship game like the Republicans now. Good on them. Good on them.

Strangerland: If the Democrats haven't been purposefully stalling, they should. Just like the Republicans did during the last administration.

I couldn’t agree more. Every thing the Dems do to make things difficult for government to function the Republicans will have precedent to use against the Democrats when they inevitably regain power at some point in the future. The Left has twice used the last minute sexual assault accusation that subverts due process. I wholeheartedly endorse this same tactic by conservatives. The burden of proof is on the accused now. Conservatives need to get busy accusing. They can start with Judiciary Committee member Corey Booker.

Every thing the Dems do to make things difficult for government to function the Republicans will have precedent to use against the Democrats when they inevitably regain power at some point in the future.

Exactly! You guys decided during the last administration that it was time to turn the game hyperpartisan, with your teabaggers, and switched from opposition to obstruction. Now that's the name of the game, which both parties are playing.

It's too bad, but the Democrats would be stupid to let the Republicans play and keep winning with that game.

Yes! By the way speaking of liberals and deeply caring for women, what’s going on with Democrat Keith Ellison his ex-girlfriend who was verbally and physically abused by her husband and where the Democrats SAID they were going to have an ethics investigation? Since liberals CARE so much about this woman and all women equally as Mrs. Ford we should be getting results and even better in her case which is solid since there is a lot of tangible evidence that backs up her claims. I’m sure they’ll be on it and treat with the importance and dire urgency as Ford.

From your favorite Senator - you know, the one you keep telling to shut her mouth....

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/09/23/politics/mazie-hirono-keith-ellison-cnntv/index.html

Well, the Dems aren’t joking about that, like a Tomahawk missile.

????  You offered no substantive reply.

A majority of America has moved forward on these issues over the past several decades - Trump and his supporters have not

As long as there is no proof or evidence to back up a claim then, No.

Compare the first sentence above with your reply - it makes no sense...

- irrespective of the topic; support for sexual assault victims, race relations, diversity, rights for LBGT citizens, they want America to go back to the "Dark Ages"....similar to what we see in Russia today. 

Nice try, but explain how liberal policies have been destructive to minorities and their communities.

Some liberal policies have been less than successful for minorities, but give us all a break, when you roll back health care for the poor, cut food subsistence programs, and give tax breaks to billionaires it's pretty clear who you side with....

We won't allow them to do that...

We shouldn’t.

I'm glad to count you as one helping us defend America from the Republican-complicit Russian takeover of our democracy....

Are you are making the case that in employment law an unproven accusation is actionable? That’s not in the constitution either but in many jurisdictions it is illegal to fire a person without just cause. You quit school too early.

I don’t wish to trot out my resume, but I seem to be the only one here who actually completed law school, so let me reiterate my statement above: there is no presumption if innocence or any other presumption at work here, nor is it required for anybody to prove anything to a certain standard. This is not a trial, it is a confirmation hearing and different rules apply.

Employment law is irrelevant here because nobody is firing anybody, thus there us no claim for wrongful dismissal (and even if there were, there is no presumption of innocence in a wrongful dismissal claim, the standard is merely proving on a balance of probabilities it is more likely that the employee did the bad thing complained of).

This hearing is somewhat equivalent to a job interview and employment law does not protect you from anything, even unproven allegations, that an employer might use to decide whether or not to hire you (and even that is irrelevant since Supreme Court judges are governed by different rules from regular employees).

Well stated Rainy Day.

That is like how the right was screaming about first amendment infringments when Alex Jones got thrown off itunes. They scream bloody murder about something that isn't applicable to the situation about which they are screaming.

HakmanToday  02:15 pm JST

The anti-Kavanaughs — i.e. the Left, the Democrats — could not care less whether he’s innocent or guilty. They do not care what he may have done as an intoxicated teen.

Neither, obviously, do you because it reads like you're very keen for him to be confirmed and further whatever agenda you think is important.

These sexual deviant Republicans must have some kind of secret handshake so they recognize each other? How could it be an immoral self admitted p**sy grabber like Trump randomly pick a rapist for the SCOTUS.

The hypocrisy of the usual crowd of braying partisan loons stinks to high heaven. For consensual sex Clinton was impeached, for rape Kavanaugh gets a pass to the SCOTUS. The republicans use to claim they held the moral high ground with their self-righteous zealotry but after voting for the morally empty Trump and now pushing a rapist on they show the world what they truly are, that is as ethically empty as their dear leader.

but rather in determining whether or not a rapist is going to be appointed to the United States Supreme Court.

Groping has been claimed, not rape.

Nobody is claiming rape, certainly not Ms. Ford. Saying that is a lie.

zurcronium - The hypocrisy of the usual crowd of braying partisan loons stinks to high heaven. For consensual sex Clinton was impeached,

FYI - Billy Clinton was impeached for lying under oath. I hope Christine Blasey Ford is aware that there are penalties for lying under oath. I doubt if the usual suspects will offer to help Ford if/when she is sentenced for perjury.

I hope Christine Blasey Ford is aware that there are penalties for lying under oath.

I hope both Ford AND Kavanaugh understand the penalties for lying under oath. I want to hear the truth, not lies, from both sides. Isn't that what you want? Or is your primary goal that Kavanaugh be on the SCOTUS no matter what?

I doubt if the usual suspects will offer to help Ford if/when she is sentenced for perjury.

Will they help Kavanaugh if he's sentenced for perjury?

Strangerland - If the Democrats haven't been purposefully stalling, they should. Just like the Republicans did during the last administration.

Stall away Democrats. Stall away.

It is all that U.S. voters have allowed elected Democrats to do. Elections have consequences.

It is all that U.S. voters have allowed elected Democrats to do. Elections have consequences.

Exactly. That's why it's so ridiculous when Republicans try to blame ANYTHING on the Democrats right now - the electoral college has decided that the Republicans bear all responsibility for all governing decisions at the moment, and the Democrats bear none. That doesn't stop so many Republicans for blaming their own party's ineptitude on the Democrats.

It appears that the Democrats are now grasping at straws in order to prove that they are still relevant. The voters have spoken. Most U.S. governors are Republicans. Most of the state legislatures are controlled by Republicans. The U.S. House, Senate, and Whitehouse are controlled by Republicans. The voters simply aren't buying what the Democrats are selling.

It also appears that Kavanaugh isn't going to be bullied by the Democrats. And you know Trump isn't going to be bullied by the Democrats. Christine Blasey Ford had better bring her A-game to the hearing she's requested, or the voters are going to start wondering why the Democrats have made much ado about nothing.