Kavanaugh vote postponed. Judiciary Committee hearing on Sexual Assault complain Monday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a Trump supporter in the least, but imagine that he might not have been president if it weren't for Hilary's history of being complicit in her husband's history of alleged sexual harassment/assault. Do his accusers deserve a bigger spotlight now, 30+ years later? We cheapen political discourse and the MeToo movement by pretending that one political party is entrenched and the other blameless.

Well said. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a Trump supporter in the least, but imagine that he might not have been president if it weren't for Hilary's history of being complicit in her husband's history of alleged sexual harassment/assault. Do his accusers deserve a bigger spotlight now, 30+ years later? We cheapen political discourse and the MeToo movement by pretending that one political party is entrenched and the other blameless.

Al Franken says "what u talkin' 'bout, Willis"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kavanaugh is in board to testify under oath. She has not stated she will.

How could she get away without testifying under oath???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a Trump supporter in the least, but imagine that he might not have been president if it weren't for Hilary's history of being complicit in her husband's history of alleged sexual harassment/assault. Do his accusers deserve a bigger spotlight now, 30+ years later? We cheapen political discourse and the MeToo movement by pretending that one political party is entrenched and the other blameless.

Al Franken says "what u talkin' 'bout, Willis"

+1 Clinton's sex life resulted in an impeachment 20 years ago. No one is holding one party "blameless." Anthony Weiner resigned for sexting and Al Franken resigned for air groping. Trump, with 16 women having various degrees of charges against him, is still in office. Rob Porter, with two domestic violence accusations is still in a high level job. And Kavanaugh, it sounds like people knew about these rumors even before he was nominated, so apparently the GOP thinks this is all fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We deserve better then BK is what we all deserve.

Which conservative would you like to see?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kavanaugh is in board to testify under oath. She has not stated she will.

How could she get away without testifying under oath???

Get away with? Get away with what? Kavanaugh being the picture of a Prep boy?

[Anonymous]

Who exactly would cross examine her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a Trump supporter in the least, but imagine that he might not have been president if it weren't for Hilary's history of being complicit in her husband's history of alleged sexual harassment/assault. Do his accusers deserve a bigger spotlight now, 30+ years later? We cheapen political discourse and the MeToo movement by pretending that one political party is entrenched and the other blameless.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. I think Franken was treated wrongly, but if he's an example of a party being blameless, then I'll buy your bridge.

I actually think Franken was treated wrongly as well. But...
Keith Ellison
Ted Kennedy
John Conyers
Anthony Weiner
Eric Massa
and, not elected but certainly connected, Harvey Weinstein

Neither party is blameless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a Trump supporter in the least, but imagine that he might not have been president if it weren't for Hilary's history of being complicit in her husband's history of alleged sexual harassment/assault. Do his accusers deserve a bigger spotlight now, 30+ years later? We cheapen political discourse and the MeToo movement by pretending that one political party is entrenched and the other blameless.

You mean like how Hillary was speaking as a cheated upon spouse? If that’s relevant, let’s ask Mrs. Kavanaugh how she feels about all this, but by all means, let’s wait until all the victims are public. And if you want to talk irrelevant, why did Trump try to bring Hillary’s spouse’s affair partners (and yes, the rape claims were investigated by none other than Ken Starr, Kavanugh’s old boss) to the debates?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kavanaugh is in board to testify under oath. She has not stated she will.

How could she get away without testifying under oath???

The goal is to trash Kavanaugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kavanaugh is in board to testify under oath. She has not stated she will.

How could she get away without testifying under oath???

The goal is to trash Kavanaugh.

Or to prevent a person of low character from being confirmed a Supreme Court Justice...

[Anonymous]

New Democrat talking pint: forget about her at the hearing, no Mark Judge testimony, no vote. It has some merit. If there’s like a third witness, you might want to hear from said witness. But this is getting weirder by the minute. Stay tuned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The GOP is going to shred Ford like they did Hill. They will stop at nothing to discredit women.

They have every right to assess the credibility of claimants. Very weird that you seem to think otherwise. Do you favor star chambers?

Hatch has already declared her to be "confused." Is he prepared to assess her credibility? Doesn't seem so.

1. She can't remember the approximate year.
2. She can't remember who else was there.
3. She can't remember where it was,
or even which neighborhood.
4. She can remember who's house it was.

Why is she so confused?
Was she drunk before she got there?

No one has responded to my previous question so I'll ask again. If she has been so vague with the time and place, how can he be so sure he wasn't there?

If I said to you, "I saw you at that party a year or two ago!"

And you immediately said, "I wasn't there! Wasn't me!" That would be weird, unless the last two years you didn't leave your house or knew without a doubt you never attended any parties.

You can't have it both ways. If she is vague, he can't know he wasn't there. He clearly went to plenty of parties with that cohort of kids during high school. He should never have said, I wasn't at that party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New Democrat talking pint: forget about her at the hearing, no Mark Judge testimony, no vote. It has some merit. If there’s like a third witness, you might want to hear from said witness. But this is getting weirder by the minute. Stay tuned.

I thought Mark Judge had already said that he doesn't remember any sort of incident with her, but then he doesn't have much memory of any high school party...

[Anonymous]

Maybe they were all smoking something. Didn't everyone back in the day? Especially in Montgomery County.