Comments regarding the Kavanaugh nomination

[TJ in Oregon]

Anyway, there just isn't enough evidence to convince me Kavanaugh actually raped Ford. That IMO requires some corroboration at the very least, and probably something like a date and location. I think it was suggested somewhere in this thread that Kavanaugh doesn't have an alibi. How can he have an alibi? What, for the entire 1982 calendar year?

I'm sure this will be followed by arguments that rape claims from victims should be believed. But i don't see how we can simply take a claim as big as this on face value without more evidence, especially when it is made against a political figure.

Then comes the argument that we should at least wait to see what other information comes out. Not as ridiculous on its face; however, the fact that this allegation was sent to congress 6 weeks before we found out suggests it may be being used as a stall tactic. No doubt the Democrats have a fair point that a lifetime appointment should face scrutiny before being confirmed. However, if the shoe were on the other foot, I can't imagine they'd be singing the same tune. The same can be said for Sen. Feinstein's decision to wait until the very end of the hearings before releasing this kind of bombshell. No one is innocent of bad governance here, so I don't buy it.

Dianne Feinstein did not 'release the bombshell' and there is no credible evidence that she timed the release.  Odd how you don't need any evidence to state that falsehood.

She did not leak the letter, but she still announced she had received an anonymous complaint. I've read your article but it doesn't say what you claim it does. Feinstein announced she had received a complaint before either the letter or Ford's identity were known.

Except the rumors of the complaint had started to come out based on Dr Ford's friend speaking to the reporter.

Rumors that are unlikely to have turned into this circus had a US Senator not decided to announce it. People speculate about all kinds of things in American politics. Sen. Feinstein didn't have to go down this road, she chose it.

[Chief Justice PiT]

Anyway, there just isn't enough evidence to convince me Kavanaugh actually raped Ford. That IMO requires some corroboration at the very least, and probably something like a date and location. I think it was suggested somewhere in this thread that Kavanaugh doesn't have an alibi. How can he have an alibi? What, for the entire 1982 calendar year?

I'm sure this will be followed by arguments that rape claims from victims should be believed. But i don't see how we can simply take a claim as big as this on face value without more evidence, especially when it is made against a political figure.

Then comes the argument that we should at least wait to see what other information comes out. Not as ridiculous on its face; however, the fact that this allegation was sent to congress 6 weeks before we found out suggests it may be being used as a stall tactic. No doubt the Democrats have a fair point that a lifetime appointment should face scrutiny before being confirmed. However, if the shoe were on the other foot, I can't imagine they'd be singing the same tune. The same can be said for Sen. Feinstein's decision to wait until the very end of the hearings before releasing this kind of bombshell. No one is innocent of bad governance here, so I don't buy it.

     Indeed, I found the 6 week delay to be suspicious at best. The excuse that she was keeping it confidential until she could talk to Dr. Ford again also seemed flimsy; how does it take so long to follow up with such an important informant?

[TJ in Oregon]

Anyway, there just isn't enough evidence to convince me Kavanaugh actually raped Ford. That IMO requires some corroboration at the very least, and probably something like a date and location. I think it was suggested somewhere in this thread that Kavanaugh doesn't have an alibi. How can he have an alibi? What, for the entire 1982 calendar year?

I'm sure this will be followed by arguments that rape claims from victims should be believed. But i don't see how we can simply take a claim as big as this on face value without more evidence, especially when it is made against a political figure.

Then comes the argument that we should at least wait to see what other information comes out. Not as ridiculous on its face; however, the fact that this allegation was sent to congress 6 weeks before we found out suggests it may be being used as a stall tactic. No doubt the Democrats have a fair point that a lifetime appointment should face scrutiny before being confirmed. However, if the shoe were on the other foot, I can't imagine they'd be singing the same tune. The same can be said for Sen. Feinstein's decision to wait until the very end of the hearings before releasing this kind of bombshell. No one is innocent of bad governance here, so I don't buy it.

     Indeed, I found the 6 week delay to be suspicious at best. The excuse that she was keeping it confidential until she could talk to Dr. Ford again also seemed flimsy; how does it take so long to follow up with such an important informant?

One possible answer is that senators get these kinds of anonymous letters all the time and she didn't think it was credible enough to pursue.

[136or142]

Anyway, there just isn't enough evidence to convince me Kavanaugh actually raped Ford. That IMO requires some corroboration at the very least, and probably something like a date and location. I think it was suggested somewhere in this thread that Kavanaugh doesn't have an alibi. How can he have an alibi? What, for the entire 1982 calendar year?

I'm sure this will be followed by arguments that rape claims from victims should be believed. But i don't see how we can simply take a claim as big as this on face value without more evidence, especially when it is made against a political figure.

Then comes the argument that we should at least wait to see what other information comes out. Not as ridiculous on its face; however, the fact that this allegation was sent to congress 6 weeks before we found out suggests it may be being used as a stall tactic. No doubt the Democrats have a fair point that a lifetime appointment should face scrutiny before being confirmed. However, if the shoe were on the other foot, I can't imagine they'd be singing the same tune. The same can be said for Sen. Feinstein's decision to wait until the very end of the hearings before releasing this kind of bombshell. No one is innocent of bad governance here, so I don't buy it.

Dianne Feinstein did not 'release the bombshell' and there is no credible evidence that she timed the release.  Odd how you don't need any evidence to state that falsehood.

She did not leak the letter, but she still announced she had received an anonymous complaint. I've read your article but it doesn't say what you claim it does. Feinstein announced she had received a complaint before either the letter or Ford's identity were known.

Except the rumors of the complaint had started to come out based on Dr Ford's friend speaking to the reporter.

Rumors that are unlikely to have turned into this circus had a US Senator not decided to announce it. People speculate about all kinds of things in American politics. Sen. Feinstein didn't have to go down this road, she chose it.

I presume she was asked a direct question about it from a journalist.  Would you have wanted her to lie?

Senator Charles Grassley is the chair of the committee, not Dianne Feinstein.  That this turned into a circus is entirely his fault and not hers.  Of course, this sleazy senator ensured this whole confirmation hearing would be nothing but a circus long before this second hearing.

Republican lie: 'we're the party of personal responsibility'
Republican truth:  'when something goes bad, it's not our fault.'

[136or142]

Anyway, there just isn't enough evidence to convince me Kavanaugh actually raped Ford. That IMO requires some corroboration at the very least, and probably something like a date and location. I think it was suggested somewhere in this thread that Kavanaugh doesn't have an alibi. How can he have an alibi? What, for the entire 1982 calendar year?

I'm sure this will be followed by arguments that rape claims from victims should be believed. But i don't see how we can simply take a claim as big as this on face value without more evidence, especially when it is made against a political figure.

Then comes the argument that we should at least wait to see what other information comes out. Not as ridiculous on its face; however, the fact that this allegation was sent to congress 6 weeks before we found out suggests it may be being used as a stall tactic. No doubt the Democrats have a fair point that a lifetime appointment should face scrutiny before being confirmed. However, if the shoe were on the other foot, I can't imagine they'd be singing the same tune. The same can be said for Sen. Feinstein's decision to wait until the very end of the hearings before releasing this kind of bombshell. No one is innocent of bad governance here, so I don't buy it.

     Indeed, I found the 6 week delay to be suspicious at best. The excuse that she was keeping it confidential until she could talk to Dr. Ford again also seemed flimsy; how does it take so long to follow up with such an important informant?

That's false.  She kept it confidential because Dr Ford asked her to.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

New Frontier claims he is disappointed or angry at anyone who doesnt oppose Kavanaugh but the fact is he is also acting in a super-partisan way too by basically believing anyone who doesnt oppose Kavanaugh are only doing it cause they are very partisan or they dont care about sexual assault victims. The fact is that isnt true at all as while some blue posters and Republicans certainly are supporting Kavanaugh cause of the two reasons he claims I would say most on here are not.

Since you mentioned my name, I have to respond. No, none of what you said is correct.

I am disappointed in you and other Republicans because you guys are 1) trying to have it both ways by saying that you find both Dr. Ford and Brett Kavanaugh credible and/or 2) you guys are saying that these allegations are a Democratic/left wing hut job to taint Kavanaugh.

Both things are not true. You can't find both Dr. Ford and Brett Kavanaugh credible because their testimonies directly contradict each other. Also, believing that this is a Democratic/left wing against is absolutely unfounded with NO evidence to support that claim. It's also hypocritical as many of you on the right have claimed that there is "no evidence" that Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Dr. Ford or any other woman.

That is how I feel and why I am disappointed.

[Chief Justice PiT]

Anyway, there just isn't enough evidence to convince me Kavanaugh actually raped Ford. That IMO requires some corroboration at the very least, and probably something like a date and location. I think it was suggested somewhere in this thread that Kavanaugh doesn't have an alibi. How can he have an alibi? What, for the entire 1982 calendar year?

I'm sure this will be followed by arguments that rape claims from victims should be believed. But i don't see how we can simply take a claim as big as this on face value without more evidence, especially when it is made against a political figure.

Then comes the argument that we should at least wait to see what other information comes out. Not as ridiculous on its face; however, the fact that this allegation was sent to congress 6 weeks before we found out suggests it may be being used as a stall tactic. No doubt the Democrats have a fair point that a lifetime appointment should face scrutiny before being confirmed. However, if the shoe were on the other foot, I can't imagine they'd be singing the same tune. The same can be said for Sen. Feinstein's decision to wait until the very end of the hearings before releasing this kind of bombshell. No one is innocent of bad governance here, so I don't buy it.

     Indeed, I found the 6 week delay to be suspicious at best. The excuse that she was keeping it confidential until she could talk to Dr. Ford again also seemed flimsy; how does it take so long to follow up with such an important informant?

One possible answer is that senators get these kinds of anonymous letters all the time and she didn't think it was credible enough to pursue.

     My understanding is that it was shepherded to her by Representative Eshoo, though. That should lend it some credibility.

Anyway, there just isn't enough evidence to convince me Kavanaugh actually raped Ford. That IMO requires some corroboration at the very least, and probably something like a date and location. I think it was suggested somewhere in this thread that Kavanaugh doesn't have an alibi. How can he have an alibi? What, for the entire 1982 calendar year?

I'm sure this will be followed by arguments that rape claims from victims should be believed. But i don't see how we can simply take a claim as big as this on face value without more evidence, especially when it is made against a political figure.

Then comes the argument that we should at least wait to see what other information comes out. Not as ridiculous on its face; however, the fact that this allegation was sent to congress 6 weeks before we found out suggests it may be being used as a stall tactic. No doubt the Democrats have a fair point that a lifetime appointment should face scrutiny before being confirmed. However, if the shoe were on the other foot, I can't imagine they'd be singing the same tune. The same can be said for Sen. Feinstein's decision to wait until the very end of the hearings before releasing this kind of bombshell. No one is innocent of bad governance here, so I don't buy it.

     Indeed, I found the 6 week delay to be suspicious at best. The excuse that she was keeping it confidential until she could talk to Dr. Ford again also seemed flimsy; how does it take so long to follow up with such an important informant?

That's false.  She kept it confidential because Dr Ford asked her to.

     Asked to keep it confidential until they could speak again was how it was described.

[TJ in Oregon]

Anyway, there just isn't enough evidence to convince me Kavanaugh actually raped Ford. That IMO requires some corroboration at the very least, and probably something like a date and location. I think it was suggested somewhere in this thread that Kavanaugh doesn't have an alibi. How can he have an alibi? What, for the entire 1982 calendar year?

I'm sure this will be followed by arguments that rape claims from victims should be believed. But i don't see how we can simply take a claim as big as this on face value without more evidence, especially when it is made against a political figure.

Then comes the argument that we should at least wait to see what other information comes out. Not as ridiculous on its face; however, the fact that this allegation was sent to congress 6 weeks before we found out suggests it may be being used as a stall tactic. No doubt the Democrats have a fair point that a lifetime appointment should face scrutiny before being confirmed. However, if the shoe were on the other foot, I can't imagine they'd be singing the same tune. The same can be said for Sen. Feinstein's decision to wait until the very end of the hearings before releasing this kind of bombshell. No one is innocent of bad governance here, so I don't buy it.

Dianne Feinstein did not 'release the bombshell' and there is no credible evidence that she timed the release.  Odd how you don't need any evidence to state that falsehood.

She did not leak the letter, but she still announced she had received an anonymous complaint. I've read your article but it doesn't say what you claim it does. Feinstein announced she had received a complaint before either the letter or Ford's identity were known.

Except the rumors of the complaint had started to come out based on Dr Ford's friend speaking to the reporter.

Rumors that are unlikely to have turned into this circus had a US Senator not decided to announce it. People speculate about all kinds of things in American politics. Sen. Feinstein didn't have to go down this road, she chose it.

I presume she was asked a direct question about it from a journalist.  Would you have wanted her to lie?

Senator Charles Grassley is the chair of the committee, not Dianne Feinstein.  That this turned into a circus is entirely his fault and not hers.  Of course, this sleazy senator ensured this whole confirmation hearing would be nothing but a circus long before this second hearing.

Republican lie: 'we're the party of personal responsibility'
Republican truth:  'when something goes bad, it's not our fault.'

I've been scouring the news articles from the day Feinstein made her statement, and all of them refer to Feinstein saying "in a statement" rather than in response to a question. For example, here is the New York Times version of the story:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/13/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-dianne-feinstein.html

I suppose it could be literally consistent with Feinstein answering a question from a reporter, but the article sure doesn't read like that's what happened.

[136or142]

Anyway, there just isn't enough evidence to convince me Kavanaugh actually raped Ford. That IMO requires some corroboration at the very least, and probably something like a date and location. I think it was suggested somewhere in this thread that Kavanaugh doesn't have an alibi. How can he have an alibi? What, for the entire 1982 calendar year?

I'm sure this will be followed by arguments that rape claims from victims should be believed. But i don't see how we can simply take a claim as big as this on face value without more evidence, especially when it is made against a political figure.

Then comes the argument that we should at least wait to see what other information comes out. Not as ridiculous on its face; however, the fact that this allegation was sent to congress 6 weeks before we found out suggests it may be being used as a stall tactic. No doubt the Democrats have a fair point that a lifetime appointment should face scrutiny before being confirmed. However, if the shoe were on the other foot, I can't imagine they'd be singing the same tune. The same can be said for Sen. Feinstein's decision to wait until the very end of the hearings before releasing this kind of bombshell. No one is innocent of bad governance here, so I don't buy it.

     Indeed, I found the 6 week delay to be suspicious at best. The excuse that she was keeping it confidential until she could talk to Dr. Ford again also seemed flimsy; how does it take so long to follow up with such an important informant?

One possible answer is that senators get these kinds of anonymous letters all the time and she didn't think it was credible enough to pursue.

     My understanding is that it was shepherded to her by Representative Eshoo, though. That should lend it some credibility.

Anyway, there just isn't enough evidence to convince me Kavanaugh actually raped Ford. That IMO requires some corroboration at the very least, and probably something like a date and location. I think it was suggested somewhere in this thread that Kavanaugh doesn't have an alibi. How can he have an alibi? What, for the entire 1982 calendar year?

I'm sure this will be followed by arguments that rape claims from victims should be believed. But i don't see how we can simply take a claim as big as this on face value without more evidence, especially when it is made against a political figure.

Then comes the argument that we should at least wait to see what other information comes out. Not as ridiculous on its face; however, the fact that this allegation was sent to congress 6 weeks before we found out suggests it may be being used as a stall tactic. No doubt the Democrats have a fair point that a lifetime appointment should face scrutiny before being confirmed. However, if the shoe were on the other foot, I can't imagine they'd be singing the same tune. The same can be said for Sen. Feinstein's decision to wait until the very end of the hearings before releasing this kind of bombshell. No one is innocent of bad governance here, so I don't buy it.

     Indeed, I found the 6 week delay to be suspicious at best. The excuse that she was keeping it confidential until she could talk to Dr. Ford again also seemed flimsy; how does it take so long to follow up with such an important informant?

That's false.  She kept it confidential because Dr Ford asked her to.

     Asked to keep it confidential until they could speak again was how it was described.

The obvious interpretation is if and when Dr Ford contacted Senator Feinstein again.  After all, how else would Senator Feinstein know if it was okay to release the letter or contact authorities?

[136or142]

Anyway, there just isn't enough evidence to convince me Kavanaugh actually raped Ford. That IMO requires some corroboration at the very least, and probably something like a date and location. I think it was suggested somewhere in this thread that Kavanaugh doesn't have an alibi. How can he have an alibi? What, for the entire 1982 calendar year?

I'm sure this will be followed by arguments that rape claims from victims should be believed. But i don't see how we can simply take a claim as big as this on face value without more evidence, especially when it is made against a political figure.

Then comes the argument that we should at least wait to see what other information comes out. Not as ridiculous on its face; however, the fact that this allegation was sent to congress 6 weeks before we found out suggests it may be being used as a stall tactic. No doubt the Democrats have a fair point that a lifetime appointment should face scrutiny before being confirmed. However, if the shoe were on the other foot, I can't imagine they'd be singing the same tune. The same can be said for Sen. Feinstein's decision to wait until the very end of the hearings before releasing this kind of bombshell. No one is innocent of bad governance here, so I don't buy it.

Dianne Feinstein did not 'release the bombshell' and there is no credible evidence that she timed the release.  Odd how you don't need any evidence to state that falsehood.

She did not leak the letter, but she still announced she had received an anonymous complaint. I've read your article but it doesn't say what you claim it does. Feinstein announced she had received a complaint before either the letter or Ford's identity were known.

Except the rumors of the complaint had started to come out based on Dr Ford's friend speaking to the reporter.

Rumors that are unlikely to have turned into this circus had a US Senator not decided to announce it. People speculate about all kinds of things in American politics. Sen. Feinstein didn't have to go down this road, she chose it.

I presume she was asked a direct question about it from a journalist.  Would you have wanted her to lie?

Senator Charles Grassley is the chair of the committee, not Dianne Feinstein.  That this turned into a circus is entirely his fault and not hers.  Of course, this sleazy senator ensured this whole confirmation hearing would be nothing but a circus long before this second hearing.

Republican lie: 'we're the party of personal responsibility'
Republican truth:  'when something goes bad, it's not our fault.'

I've been scouring the news articles from the day Feinstein made her statement, and all of them refer to Feinstein saying "in a statement" rather than in response to a question. For example, here is the New York Times version of the story:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/13/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-dianne-feinstein.html

I suppose it could be literally consistent with Feinstein answering a question from a reporter, but the article sure doesn't read like that's what happened.

So she was asked about it and given the sensitive nature put out a statement instead of answering on the spot.  That doesn't change that her only other possible responses were to say 'no comment' or to lie.

Nor does it change that it was Senator Grassley who turned this into a farce and not Senator Feinstein.

[OSR stands with Israel]

New Frontier claims he is disappointed or angry at anyone who doesnt oppose Kavanaugh but the fact is he is also acting in a super-partisan way too by basically believing anyone who doesnt oppose Kavanaugh are only doing it cause they are very partisan or they dont care about sexual assault victims. The fact is that isnt true at all as while some blue posters and Republicans certainly are supporting Kavanaugh cause of the two reasons he claims I would say most on here are not.

Since you mentioned my name, I have to respond. No, none of what you said is correct.

I am disappointed in you and other Republicans because you guys are 1) trying to have it both ways by saying that you find both Dr. Ford and Brett Kavanaugh credible and/or 2) you guys are saying that these allegations are a Democratic/left wing hut job to taint Kavanaugh.

Both things are not true. You can't find both Dr. Ford and Brett Kavanaugh credible because their testimonies directly contradict each other. Also, believing that this is a Democratic/left wing against is absolutely unfounded with NO evidence to support that claim. It's also hypocritical as many of you on the right have claimed that there is "no evidence" that Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Dr. Ford or any other woman.

That is how I feel and why I am disappointed.

See the problem is there is no more evidence against Kavanaugh then there was against Clinton on Broaddrick(which clearly wasnt enough either) . This is not Roy Moore 2.0 this is more Clinton 2.0 .


Also the reason why we feel this way about the Dems on this issue especially Feinstein is the fact that she says she did address the letter or send it to the FBI for a background check in July was to protect her confidently when she did just that in September.


Now can you please just address the points I made instead of assuming I came to my position on this issue for the same reason Reaganfan did which I clearly did not.

[TJ in Oregon]

Anyway, there just isn't enough evidence to convince me Kavanaugh actually raped Ford. That IMO requires some corroboration at the very least, and probably something like a date and location. I think it was suggested somewhere in this thread that Kavanaugh doesn't have an alibi. How can he have an alibi? What, for the entire 1982 calendar year?

I'm sure this will be followed by arguments that rape claims from victims should be believed. But i don't see how we can simply take a claim as big as this on face value without more evidence, especially when it is made against a political figure.

Then comes the argument that we should at least wait to see what other information comes out. Not as ridiculous on its face; however, the fact that this allegation was sent to congress 6 weeks before we found out suggests it may be being used as a stall tactic. No doubt the Democrats have a fair point that a lifetime appointment should face scrutiny before being confirmed. However, if the shoe were on the other foot, I can't imagine they'd be singing the same tune. The same can be said for Sen. Feinstein's decision to wait until the very end of the hearings before releasing this kind of bombshell. No one is innocent of bad governance here, so I don't buy it.

Dianne Feinstein did not 'release the bombshell' and there is no credible evidence that she timed the release.  Odd how you don't need any evidence to state that falsehood.

She did not leak the letter, but she still announced she had received an anonymous complaint. I've read your article but it doesn't say what you claim it does. Feinstein announced she had received a complaint before either the letter or Ford's identity were known.

Except the rumors of the complaint had started to come out based on Dr Ford's friend speaking to the reporter.

Rumors that are unlikely to have turned into this circus had a US Senator not decided to announce it. People speculate about all kinds of things in American politics. Sen. Feinstein didn't have to go down this road, she chose it.

I presume she was asked a direct question about it from a journalist.  Would you have wanted her to lie?

Senator Charles Grassley is the chair of the committee, not Dianne Feinstein.  That this turned into a circus is entirely his fault and not hers.  Of course, this sleazy senator ensured this whole confirmation hearing would be nothing but a circus long before this second hearing.

Republican lie: 'we're the party of personal responsibility'
Republican truth:  'when something goes bad, it's not our fault.'

I've been scouring the news articles from the day Feinstein made her statement, and all of them refer to Feinstein saying "in a statement" rather than in response to a question. For example, here is the New York Times version of the story:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/13/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-dianne-feinstein.html

I suppose it could be literally consistent with Feinstein answering a question from a reporter, but the article sure doesn't read like that's what happened.

So she was asked about it and given the sensitive nature put out a statement instead of answering on the spot.  That doesn't change that her only other possible responses were to say 'no comment' or to lie.

Nor does it change that it was Senator Grassley who turned this into a farce and not Senator Feinstein.

I still don't see how you're able to presume a reporter asked her about it, nor would I think a many term senator such as Feinstein has any trouble deflecting without lying when she doesn't want something known. The NYT article doesn't imply your claim at all.

As for Grassley, his performance is unremarkable compared with anyone else in the SJC. Why is he the man responsible?

[136or142]

Anyway, there just isn't enough evidence to convince me Kavanaugh actually raped Ford. That IMO requires some corroboration at the very least, and probably something like a date and location. I think it was suggested somewhere in this thread that Kavanaugh doesn't have an alibi. How can he have an alibi? What, for the entire 1982 calendar year?

I'm sure this will be followed by arguments that rape claims from victims should be believed. But i don't see how we can simply take a claim as big as this on face value without more evidence, especially when it is made against a political figure.

Then comes the argument that we should at least wait to see what other information comes out. Not as ridiculous on its face; however, the fact that this allegation was sent to congress 6 weeks before we found out suggests it may be being used as a stall tactic. No doubt the Democrats have a fair point that a lifetime appointment should face scrutiny before being confirmed. However, if the shoe were on the other foot, I can't imagine they'd be singing the same tune. The same can be said for Sen. Feinstein's decision to wait until the very end of the hearings before releasing this kind of bombshell. No one is innocent of bad governance here, so I don't buy it.

Dianne Feinstein did not 'release the bombshell' and there is no credible evidence that she timed the release.  Odd how you don't need any evidence to state that falsehood.

She did not leak the letter, but she still announced she had received an anonymous complaint. I've read your article but it doesn't say what you claim it does. Feinstein announced she had received a complaint before either the letter or Ford's identity were known.

Except the rumors of the complaint had started to come out based on Dr Ford's friend speaking to the reporter.

Rumors that are unlikely to have turned into this circus had a US Senator not decided to announce it. People speculate about all kinds of things in American politics. Sen. Feinstein didn't have to go down this road, she chose it.

I presume she was asked a direct question about it from a journalist.  Would you have wanted her to lie?

Senator Charles Grassley is the chair of the committee, not Dianne Feinstein.  That this turned into a circus is entirely his fault and not hers.  Of course, this sleazy senator ensured this whole confirmation hearing would be nothing but a circus long before this second hearing.

Republican lie: 'we're the party of personal responsibility'
Republican truth:  'when something goes bad, it's not our fault.'

I've been scouring the news articles from the day Feinstein made her statement, and all of them refer to Feinstein saying "in a statement" rather than in response to a question. For example, here is the New York Times version of the story:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/13/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-dianne-feinstein.html

I suppose it could be literally consistent with Feinstein answering a question from a reporter, but the article sure doesn't read like that's what happened.

So she was asked about it and given the sensitive nature put out a statement instead of answering on the spot.  That doesn't change that her only other possible responses were to say 'no comment' or to lie.

Nor does it change that it was Senator Grassley who turned this into a farce and not Senator Feinstein.

I still don't see how you're able to presume a reporter asked her about it, nor would I think a many term senator such as Feinstein has any trouble deflecting without lying when she doesn't want something known. The NYT article doesn't imply your claim at all.

As for Grassley, his performance is unremarkable compared with anyone else in the SJC. Why is he the man responsible?

Because Grassley is the chair of the committee.  If he didn't want this to turn into the public spectacle it became, he could have asked the FBI to investigate in the first place (after it became public).  He not only refused, but he was the one who said that Dr Ford would have only chance to appear (although he did move the date forward) and refused to allow any other witnesses to provide testimony.

The idea that this became a circus because it was released at the last minute simply makes no sense whatsoever.  Even by your argument (and clearly by Kavanaugh's argument as well) it was the release of the allegation and Senator Grassley's handling of it and that is as true in September as it would have been in July.

He also did nothing to prevent Kavanaugh from filibustering in response to questions from Democratic Senators and he also stepped in to save Kavanaugh from his inability to respond to Senator Durbin's question as to why Kavanaugh opposed an FBI investigation.

You can try and blame Senator Feinstein, but everything in terms of the circus is on Senator Grassley.

[|˶˙ᵕ˙ )ﾉﾞ]

Grifter Falwell makes the case for porn star president Trump over people like Sen. Flake:

https://mobile.twitter.com/JerryFalwellJr/status/1045853333007798272

[OSR stands with Israel]

Every single one of you who has in any way defended or made excuses for Kavanaugh, I just want you to know that you utterly disgust me. I don't want to see or hear from you ever again. There is a disease in you that it slowly eating away at your soul, and if there is an afterlife that's in any way reflective of Christian morality then you will spend a long time expiating your sins. And this is the optimistic outcome. The pessimistic one is that you'll just cease existing as the despicable wretches you are in this mortal life. I really hope you'll be spared such a fate.

None of us have defended or made excuses for what Kavanaugh has allegedly done. If he has done what he has been accused of doing I would be completely opposed to his nomination and would even support impeaching him from his current position as well.

[Chief Justice PiT]

Anyway, there just isn't enough evidence to convince me Kavanaugh actually raped Ford. That IMO requires some corroboration at the very least, and probably something like a date and location. I think it was suggested somewhere in this thread that Kavanaugh doesn't have an alibi. How can he have an alibi? What, for the entire 1982 calendar year?

I'm sure this will be followed by arguments that rape claims from victims should be believed. But i don't see how we can simply take a claim as big as this on face value without more evidence, especially when it is made against a political figure.

Then comes the argument that we should at least wait to see what other information comes out. Not as ridiculous on its face; however, the fact that this allegation was sent to congress 6 weeks before we found out suggests it may be being used as a stall tactic. No doubt the Democrats have a fair point that a lifetime appointment should face scrutiny before being confirmed. However, if the shoe were on the other foot, I can't imagine they'd be singing the same tune. The same can be said for Sen. Feinstein's decision to wait until the very end of the hearings before releasing this kind of bombshell. No one is innocent of bad governance here, so I don't buy it.

     Indeed, I found the 6 week delay to be suspicious at best. The excuse that she was keeping it confidential until she could talk to Dr. Ford again also seemed flimsy; how does it take so long to follow up with such an important informant?

That's false.  She kept it confidential because Dr Ford asked her to.

     Asked to keep it confidential until they could speak again was how it was described.

The obvious interpretation is if and when Dr Ford contacted Senator Feinstein again.  After all, how else would Senator Feinstein know if it was okay to release the letter or contact authorities?

     I would expect Senator Feinstein to take the initiative and try to get approval to release it. The possibility that the nominee for our highest court is a sexual predator is a pretty damning one to just sit on.

[136or142]

Anyway, there just isn't enough evidence to convince me Kavanaugh actually raped Ford. That IMO requires some corroboration at the very least, and probably something like a date and location. I think it was suggested somewhere in this thread that Kavanaugh doesn't have an alibi. How can he have an alibi? What, for the entire 1982 calendar year?

I'm sure this will be followed by arguments that rape claims from victims should be believed. But i don't see how we can simply take a claim as big as this on face value without more evidence, especially when it is made against a political figure.

Then comes the argument that we should at least wait to see what other information comes out. Not as ridiculous on its face; however, the fact that this allegation was sent to congress 6 weeks before we found out suggests it may be being used as a stall tactic. No doubt the Democrats have a fair point that a lifetime appointment should face scrutiny before being confirmed. However, if the shoe were on the other foot, I can't imagine they'd be singing the same tune. The same can be said for Sen. Feinstein's decision to wait until the very end of the hearings before releasing this kind of bombshell. No one is innocent of bad governance here, so I don't buy it.

     Indeed, I found the 6 week delay to be suspicious at best. The excuse that she was keeping it confidential until she could talk to Dr. Ford again also seemed flimsy; how does it take so long to follow up with such an important informant?

That's false.  She kept it confidential because Dr Ford asked her to.

     Asked to keep it confidential until they could speak again was how it was described.

The obvious interpretation is if and when Dr Ford contacted Senator Feinstein again.  After all, how else would Senator Feinstein know if it was okay to release the letter or contact authorities?

     I would expect Senator Feinstein to take the initiative and try to get approval to release it. The possibility that the nominee for our highest court is a sexual predator is a pretty damning one to just sit on.

Why? Look at how the Republicans have handled the whole thing afterwards.  A whole bunch of them have already said "even if this did happen, it was 35 years ago."

I have no doubt Senator Feinstein knew that would be the Republican reaction.  

Why aren't you similarly saying that "the Republicans voting for a possible sexual predator when no further investigation other than this one circus is pretty damning"?

Why is Senator Feinstein here the only one you find fault with?

[IceSpear]

To all the lefties being indignant: The GOP does not care what you/we think because you weren't voting Republican to begin with. They lose nothing by you hating them more than you already did.

If you weren't one of the 62,984,828 that voted for Donald Trump, he or the GOP could not give give any less of a sh**t what you think. There's only one way to fix that problem: the ballot box.

And to think we wouldn't be in this position now if it wasn't for incompetent James Comey and the left wing whiners throwing a temper tantrum by voting for Jill Stein.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

To all the lefties being indignant: The GOP does not care what you/we think because you weren't voting Republican to begin with. They lose nothing by you hating them more than you already did.

If you weren't one of the 62,984,828 that voted for Donald Trump, he or the GOP could not give give any less of a sh**t what you think. There's only one way to fix that problem: the ballot box.

And to think we wouldn't be in this position now if it wasn't for incompetent James Comey and the left wing whiners throwing a temper tantrum by voting for Jill Stein.

You're right, Comey should have indicted Hillary during the primary so that Bernie would defeat Trump in the general election.

[IceSpear]

To all the lefties being indignant: The GOP does not care what you/we think because you weren't voting Republican to begin with. They lose nothing by you hating them more than you already did.

If you weren't one of the 62,984,828 that voted for Donald Trump, he or the GOP could not give give any less of a sh**t what you think. There's only one way to fix that problem: the ballot box.

And to think we wouldn't be in this position now if it wasn't for incompetent James Comey and the left wing whiners throwing a temper tantrum by voting for Jill Stein.

You're right, Comey should have indicted Hillary during the primary so that Bernie would defeat Trump in the general election.

This should be making it crystal clear to you why you should've supported Hillary for SCOTUS reasons if nothing else. You don't see "neoliberal" Obama's appointments issuing awful right wing decisions. I hope the temper tantrum was worth conservative control of the Supreme Court for a generation. On the other hand, I'm sure it felt awesome in the moment.

[Beet]

Regardless of what the details are with Feinstein, the Democrats can't credibly deny that they have political motives. Neither can the Republicans. That's the problem, though. The Court has become so politicized that both sides are throwing sexual assault allegations around like a ping pong ball.

American society has become so hypocritical. We pretend like the people nominated to the Court are judges and not politicians, but know otherwise; we pretend like we care about sexual assault from a neutral standpoint apart from our political leanings, but know otherwise. That is what Graham was calling out yesterday. The only person in the entire hearing who didn't act completely political was Dr. Ford herself, but that doesn't mean she's telling the truth.

[For Trump, everything. For immigrants, the law]

To all the lefties being indignant: The GOP does not care what you/we think because you weren't voting Republican to begin with. They lose nothing by you hating them more than you already did.

If you weren't one of the 62,984,828 that voted for Donald Trump, he or the GOP could not give give any less of a sh**t what you think. There's only one way to fix that problem: the ballot box.

And to think we wouldn't be in this position now if it wasn't for incompetent James Comey and the left wing whiners throwing a temper tantrum by voting for Jill Stein.

This is the correct take. Republicans are ignoring/writing off the left because they can afford to, since the left has no power right now. (Imagine conservative Republicans romanticizing urban working class minorities the way some liberals romanticize rural WWC voters, lol.) The only way to show them otherwise is to vote and change the power structure. If Democrats don't want two more Kavanaughs on the Supreme Court, we've gotta do well in 2018 and 2020.

[IceSpear]

To all the lefties being indignant: The GOP does not care what you/we think because you weren't voting Republican to begin with. They lose nothing by you hating them more than you already did.

If you weren't one of the 62,984,828 that voted for Donald Trump, he or the GOP could not give give any less of a sh**t what you think. There's only one way to fix that problem: the ballot box.

And to think we wouldn't be in this position now if it wasn't for incompetent James Comey and the left wing whiners throwing a temper tantrum by voting for Jill Stein.

This is the correct take. Republicans are ignoring/writing off the left because they can afford to, since the left has no power right now. (Imagine conservative Republicans romanticizing urban working class minorities the way some liberals romanticize rural WWC voters, lol.) The only way to show them otherwise is to vote and change the power structure. If Democrats don't want two more Kavanaughs on the Supreme Court, we've gotta do well in 2018 and 2020.

Imagine Republicans being obsessed with winning San Francisco and NYC the same way some Democrats are obsessed with winning Appalachia, lol. Not only do they not try to win them, they actively use them as pinatas. And they face zero consequences for it.

[Pyro]

To all the lefties being indignant: The GOP does not care what you/we think because you weren't voting Republican to begin with. They lose nothing by you hating them more than you already did.

If you weren't one of the 62,984,828 that voted for Donald Trump, he or the GOP could not give give any less of a sh**t what you think. There's only one way to fix that problem: the ballot box.

And to think we wouldn't be in this position now if it wasn't for incompetent James Comey and the left wing whiners throwing a temper tantrum by voting for Jill Stein.

Just stop. You know what inserting this irrelevant bull will do.

[IceSpear]

To all the lefties being indignant: The GOP does not care what you/we think because you weren't voting Republican to begin with. They lose nothing by you hating them more than you already did.

If you weren't one of the 62,984,828 that voted for Donald Trump, he or the GOP could not give give any less of a sh**t what you think. There's only one way to fix that problem: the ballot box.

And to think we wouldn't be in this position now if it wasn't for incompetent James Comey and the left wing whiners throwing a temper tantrum by voting for Jill Stein.

Just stop. You know what inserting this irrelevant bull will do.

Sorry, the truth hurts. And it's not irrelevant at all. We wouldn't be in this position right now if Hillary Clinton was president, and Hillary Clinton would be president if not for those two factors (among many others.) Fact.