Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation Hearing Now with Poll

[Thermodolia]

FFTFY

Why can't it be corroborated? She's named another person who allegedly was in the room.

Said person says that they where not there

[The Black Forrest]

Ok. What's the relevance? Hmm? You aren't suggesting that its not real unless there is a police report?

No quite the opposite if I just told my congressman I was robbed that's just me saying I was robbed now if I told the police I was robbed then that's me reporting a crime to the authorities.

Again. Relevance?

[Tarsonis]

FFTFY

Why can't it be corroborated? She's named another person who allegedly was in the room.

Who categorically denied. She also named another witness who was allegedly at the party....who categorically denied it.

[Petrasylvania]

The Republicans will insure fairness and safety for Ford just like they'll insure election cybersecurity.

Anita Hill 2: Electric Boogaloo.

Their version of the Witness Protection Program. They'll wear a sensitive condom.

Never. That would be promoting contraception.

[The Black Forrest]

Why can't it be corroborated? She's named another person who allegedly was in the room.

Said person says that they where not there

And said person said he won't testify or was that two now?

[Gig em Aggies]

No quite the opposite if I just told my congressman I was robbed that's just me saying I was robbed now if I told the police I was robbed then that's me reporting a crime to the authorities.

Again. Relevance?

In this case she only wrote a vague letter with little detail and handed it in 2012 to Feinstein both women then sat on the letter for 6 years until this very moment and she has yet to report it a story a crime.

[Petrasylvania]

Why can't it be corroborated? She's named another person who allegedly was in the room.

Said person says that they where not there

Because getting implicated in a sexual assault in a state with no statute of limitation promotes open honesty.

[Fartsniffage]

She's not actually asking the FBI to investigate it as a crime. She's asking them to vet the candidate in addition to the Senate vetting process. For some reason she doesn't think that a Republican controlled senate will be impartial.

Vetting candidates for the Supreme Court is a Federal matter, not a state one.

The FBI already did that. He had to have an FBI background check the moment he was nominated

And apparently she wishes to add to that background check.

Also, really? I've found references to the Senate vetting process for Supreme court nominees, but nothing that states the FBI conducts a check? Honest question.

[Petrasylvania]

Again. Relevance?

In this case she only wrote a vague letter with little detail and handed it in 2012 to Feinstein both women then sat on the letter for 6 years until this very moment and she has yet to report it a story a crime.

I'm sure facing a sexual assaulter with a highly influential mother at a young age is no big deal to you.

[Fartsniffage]

Again. Relevance?

In this case she only wrote a vague letter with little detail and handed it in 2012 to Feinstein both women then sat on the letter for 6 years until this very moment and she has yet to report it a story a crime.

Where are you getting that from? I read she sent the letters in July of this year?

[Telconi]

There's a difference between saying something and reporting it. As far as we know she's never actually reported this is a crime in any jurisdiction or to any agency.

Ok. What's the relevance? Hmm? You aren't suggesting that its not real unless there is a police report?

No, I'm suggesting that law enforcement often doesn't launch investigations into matters in which no crime had been reported to them.

[Gravlen]

Why can't it be corroborated? She's named another person who allegedly was in the room.

Said person says that they where not there

Link?

Why can't it be corroborated? She's named another person who allegedly was in the room.

Who categorically denied. She also named another witness who was allegedly at the party....who categorically denied it.

Link?

[Auralia]

Said person says that they where not there

Link?

Who categorically denied. She also named another witness who was allegedly at the party....who categorically denied it.

Link?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/18/politics ... index.html

[Gravlen]

Link?


Link?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/18/politics ... index.html

Thanks.

Regardless, she claims they can corroborate it. Law enforcement usually question such people, and don't simply go by what they say to the media. It could concievably be corroborated.

[The Black Forrest]

Ok. What's the relevance? Hmm? You aren't suggesting that its not real unless there is a police report?

No, I'm suggesting that law enforcement often doesn't launch investigations into matters in which no crime had been reported to them.

Oh ok.

[Petrasylvania]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/18/politics ... index.html

Thanks.

Regardless, she claims they can corroborate it. Law enforcement usually question such people, and don't simply go by what they say to the media. It could concievably be corroborated.

It would be interesting if she did report it only for Mommy to quash it.

[Fartsniffage]

Thanks.

Regardless, she claims they can corroborate it. Law enforcement usually question such people, and don't simply go by what they say to the media. It could concievably be corroborated.

It would be interesting if she did report it only for Mommy to quash it.

I'm pretty sure she would have mentioned that in the letter if it had happened.

[Gig em Aggies]

In this case she only wrote a vague letter with little detail and handed it in 2012 to Feinstein both women then sat on the letter for 6 years until this very moment and she has yet to report it a story a crime.

I'm sure facing a sexual assaulter with a highly influential mother at a young age is no big deal to you.

Really? the fact that Kavanaughs mother and the woman's parents were in court together doesn't mean anything to the confirmation hearing today.

[Grinning Dragon]

Again. Relevance?

In this case she only wrote a vague letter with little detail and handed it in 2012 to Feinstein both women then sat on the letter for 6 years until this very moment and she has yet to report it a story a crime.

I believe difi sat on the letter for 6 weeks.
Lets see if I can recount the time line.
2012 was when she spoke about it with her shrink. In July of 2018 she spoke with some CA rep (whose name escapes me) in which a letter was drafted and that letter which has some contradiction from the shrink session and this letter found its way into difi's hands and difi sat on it.
Difi, claims the existence of the letter was leaked and then difi turned the letter over to the fbi.

[The South Falls]

The president, always saying "He's innocent", with no proof or evidence.

[The Two Jerseys]

Thanks.

Regardless, she claims they can corroborate it. Law enforcement usually question such people, and don't simply go by what they say to the media. It could concievably be corroborated.

It would be interesting if she did report it only for Mommy to quash it.

Judge blatantly violates ethics rules and nobody notices.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...

[Vassenor]

A competent, earnest political party would have withdrawn Kavanaugh by now, and replaced him with any of dozens of qualified judges who would rule the same way.

That they don't is an act of force.

They're pushing Kavanaugh just to show us they can.

It's a middle finger.

[Questers]

The president, always saying "He's innocent", with no proof or evidence.

have you ever heard of "innocent until proven guilty"

[The Two Jerseys]

The president, always saying "He's innocent", with no proof or evidence.

Yet he still has more evidence than Kavanaugh's accuser does...

[Grinning Dragon]

A competent, earnest political party would have withdrawn Kavanaugh by now, and replaced him with any of dozens of qualified judges who would rule the same way.

That they don't is an act of force.

They're pushing Kavanaugh just to show us they can.

It's a middle finger.

Seriously. Why withdraw? At this point it is an uncorroborated allegation that is so thin on facts and details it is almost invisible.
The fact that they don't is NOT an act of force.
There holding proceedings based on the fact there has been no evidence that corroborates the allegations.
One does not step down if one has done nothing wrong. An oncorroborated accusation are not grounds to step down.