(September 21, 2018 at 10:59 am)Jörmungandr Wrote:(September 21, 2018 at 10:43 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote: They have delayed, and have offered to hear out the accuser. I don't think that it is a reasonable precedent to delay everything, because of a eleventh hour accusation. I think that this could encourage unfalsifiable claims, for just that purpose.
I think that such things need no encouragement. Even if they would, that is no reason to discourage them on its face. As noted by multiple authors, there is plenty of time for a fuller investigation, the Republicans don't seem to want that solely because if the charges are substantiated, that will bork that or any nomination until after the election. That is not a valid reason for not pursuing a fuller investigation. The question is not simply whether such an investigation might delay a vote on his nomination, but whether that delay is justified or not. I think it comical that we are 6 weeks away from the election, and Republicans are complaining that Feinstein brought the matter forward when she did rather than a mere seven days earlier.
They have delayed. Without a time, place, other witnesses etc... I'm unsure what further delay would accomplish. They have offered to let here speak to the committee in public or private. If she wants to give here testimony, then sooner rather than later seems better. It also doesn't stop an investigation.
It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. - Alexander Vilenkin
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire. - Martin Luther
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire. - Martin Luther