-
-
Chris Geidner Retweeted Senate Judiciary
In addition to Judge and Smyth (and Kavanaugh), the Senate Judiciary Committee claims to know and have reached out to a fourth person alleged to have been at the party.https://twitter.com/senjudiciary/status/1042825426769461249?s=20 …
Chris Geidner added,
Senate JudiciaryVerified account @senjudiciaryStaff contacted Mark Judge and obtained a statement under penalty of felony. Staff contacted third person allegedly at party described by Dr. Ford and obtained a statement under penalty of felony. Staff contacted fourth person allegedly at party.Show this thread5 replies 44 retweets 77 likesShow this thread -
Note that they only got statements from Judge and (presumably) Smyth; there were not interviews. Also, of course, note that this was a Republican-only effort, given that the Democrats have not participated because they do not agree with Grassley’s process.
6 replies 36 retweets 86 likesShow this thread -
Chris Geidner Retweeted Andrew Desiderio
The Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans (11 men), who insist they can handle the investigation on their own this week, are, at the same time, trying to find "someone" — read: a woman — to handle the questioning of Ford next week.https://twitter.com/desiderioDC/status/1042851656935907329 …
Chris Geidner added,
8 replies 74 retweets 133 likesShow this thread -
The Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans believe they are capable of questioning and, effectively, judging would-be justices for the Supreme Court. There is absolutely no reason, other than optics, why they could not handle next week's hearing.
8 replies 20 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @chrisgeidner
Surely you see this is lose-lose, right? If they decide to question her personally, they'll be attacked as "old white men interrogating a victim," and that will be held against them. If they hire outside counsel, it's just optics and tactics, and that will be held against them.
12 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @jay_schweikert
I mean, I didn't set up the committee membership or Senate makeup.
1 reply 0 retweets 37 likes -
Replying to @chrisgeidner
Well, fair enough. And it's not crazy to suggest there should be more (any) Republican women on Judiciary. But given where we are now, they have to do *something.* And it seems all but guaranteed that whatever they decide will be attacked as the wrong thing to have done.
5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jay_schweikert
There has never been a woman on the Judiciary Committee for the Republicans, as I understand it.
1 reply 3 retweets 20 likes -
Replying to @chrisgeidner
Sure, and that's a fair criticism. But it's not immediately correctable. So given where we are now, what's the best choice? It's debatable, but until recently, I'd been seeing more consensus on the value of independent counsel than on literally any other part of this process.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
From whom? From my recollection of the past days, it's only been Senate Republicans (and outside allies), trying to set up this idea as an acceptable one.
-
-
Replying to @chrisgeidner
Jay Schweikert Retweeted Ronald Klain
Jay Schweikert added,
Ronald KlainVerified account @RonaldKlainHere's some advice, based on the Thomas-Hill experience: Both Dems and GOP should want professional, outside counsel to question Kavanaugh and Ford at a public hearing -- not Senators. Make this a search for the truth, not a political platform for Senators of EITHER party.3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jay_schweikert @chrisgeidner
Jay Schweikert Retweeted
Jay Schweikert added,
This Tweet is unavailable.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jay_schweikert @chrisgeidner
@ElieNYC also favorably retweeted Ron Klain's suggestion, and@ScottGreenfield tweeted something to the same effect.0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.