Kavanaugh Can Join Thomas.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Perjury, as determined by Congress, is different than perjury as determined in a criminal court.

Personally, I'm skeptical of politicians judging anyone's honesty.

[Angrboda]

Truth will out.

---

---

(on Twitter)



Breitbart has apparently made up its mind about this in the aftermath of the tweet being deleted.

“Hi all, deleted this because it served its purpose and I am now dealing with a slew of requests for interviews from The Wash Post, CNN, CBS News,” she tweeted. “Organizing how I want to proceed. Was not ready for that, not sure I am interested in pursuing. Thanks for reading.”

The key words there are “not sure I am interested in pursuing.”

(Breitbart.com)

[Angrboda]

By the way, Democrats may well partly want to delay this until after the midterms. But even if true, the fact that Republicans are citing this is still revealing. Republicans, after all, could support a fuller investigation into what happened while also getting in the vote before the elections — there is still time for both. The only thing that would delay this until after the elections is if Kavanaugh’s nomination became untenable due to that fuller investigation, forcing Trump to nominate a replacement. Thus, that is what they really want to avoid — a fuller accounting that could scuttle the nomination.

Giving away the game

What’s more, when Corker claims Republicans have acted in “good faith” in scheduling a hearing and that this justifies sticking to a Monday vote, this, too, illuminates what’s really motivating Republicans. It’s a stretch to say Republicans showed good faith here. Remember, Grassley originally wanted to schedule only private calls between Ford and senators, and agreed to a public hearing for her only after that became politically untenable. Again, the desire was to do the absolute minimum to appear to be taking the charges seriously while doing everything possible to limit a full accounting in the eyes of the public. Corker is doing the same again.

This is also at the core of the current GOP stance. Republicans — Trump included — say it’s not the FBI’s role to investigate Ford’s claims. But as NBC News points out, as part of the background check process, the White House could ask the FBI to look into the veracity of her claims if it wanted to. What’s more, Democrats have proposed that, if an FBI investigation doesn’t happen, the Judiciary Committee could conduct a fuller investigation, hearing from more witnesses other than just Ford and Kavanaugh. But Republicans don’t want to.

To be clear, it’s a good thing that Republicans have invited Ford to testify. And if the FBI does not conduct an investigation, our preference should be that Ford goes forward with the testimony anyway (though that is her decision, obviously). But there is no obvious reason this can’t be accompanied by as robust an effort as possible to determine the truth.

(Washington Post)

[Jehanne]

Perjury, as determined by Congress, is different than perjury as determined in a criminal court.

Personally, I'm skeptical of politicians judging anyone's honesty.

It's called Contempt of Congress.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Judge Kavanaugh faces, due to allegations of sexual assault, the punishment of not becoming a Supreme Court Justice.  This is exactly the punishment that was given to Merrick Garland for the heinous crime of being nominated by a Democrat.

Boru

[Lek]

As of now Ms Ford doesn't want to discuss her allegations against Mr Kavanaugh either publicly or privately with congress.  If she wants to make an accusation that will potentially destroy his career and possibly his life during this public process, then she should state her allegations for the public record.  This is a matter that most definitely should have been presented during the hearings and not at the last second after their closing.  We're in danger of setting a precedent for allowing unfounded last minute allegations to be brought forth just for the purpose of delaying or derailing a vote.  This stinks of being a purely political maneuver with no concern for the accused or the accuser.

[Minimalist]

Unless it is a last minute revelation against a democrat, eh Lek?  That would be "different."

We know your kind.

[Lek]

Unless it is a last minute revelation against a democrat, eh Lek?  That would be "different."

We know your kind.

Nope.  Either way.

[Rev. Rye]

As of now Ms Ford doesn't want to discuss her allegations against Mr Kavanaugh either publicly or privately with congress.  If she wants to make an accusation that will potentially destroy his career and possibly his life during this public process, then she should state her allegations for the public record.  This is a matter that most definitely should have been presented during the hearings and not at the last second after their closing.  We're in danger of setting a precedent for allowing unfounded last minute allegations to be brought forth just for the purpose of delaying or derailing a vote.  This stinks of being a purely political maneuver with no concern for the accused or the accuser.

Well, at least there's a legitimate reason to question his fitness for the office this time around. There was fuck all of the sort for Merrick Garland.

[Angrboda]

As of now Ms Ford doesn't want to discuss her allegations against Mr Kavanaugh either publicly or privately with congress.  If she wants to make an accusation that will potentially destroy his career and possibly his life during this public process, then she should state her allegations for the public record.  This is a matter that most definitely should have been presented during the hearings and not at the last second after their closing.  We're in danger of setting a precedent for allowing unfounded last minute allegations to be brought forth just for the purpose of delaying or derailing a vote.  This stinks of being a purely political maneuver with no concern for the accused or the accuser.

It's nice to hear that you believe your own propaganda. The rest of us are interested in something else, like the truth.