She passed a lie detector.
Her sayings are corroborated.
This is not a court of law, this is a job interview. Gorsuch passed it with flying colors.
I wouldn't allow Kavanaugh to be near any woman, specially with alcohol around.
#BelieveEvidences #unfit
-
-
-
She’s also a psychologist knew well how to perform up there !
-
Maybe, but she was good enough, and plausible enough to throw some doubts and questions on anyone's minds... Why not subpoenaed Mark Judge? 1 day job... That would have been over then...
-
He already said he didn’t see him do the things described ...I’m not saying he’s innocent I’m saying she wasn’t honest!
-
Then he could have said it under oath... (and probably perjured himself)
-
And that’s wrong because common sense knows it’s innocent until proven GUILTY!
-
In a court of law, I agree. But that's a job interview... Would you hire someone who had drinking problems... maybe, but only if he comes forward about it instead of hiding it...
#DevilsTriangle#RenateAlumni -
It wasn’t a job interview he was on trial by his accuser and I’m glad you pointed out she didn’t want to say anything really ..well stAged for the timing it was leaked and how emotional she was
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
So why deny an FBI investigation to establish ANY evidence? To draw a line between truth and fiction wherever one can be drawn for BOTH sides?
-
You have 3 cases, charges made by women who, reports indicate, oppose conservative values, all 35+ years old, none with any corroboration. In fact, witness statements in the opposite. All backed by rabid anti-Trump lawyers. Doubtful any law enforcement would touch it.
-
Which is why you want an FBI probe, on Dr. Ford's case at least. Avenatti's one thing, she's another. Ignoring precedent and procedure to push for this vote given her allegation means the midterms are viewed as the Two-Minute Warning for both teams.
-
Think everyone agrees mIdterm is 2-minute warning. Corroborating evidence is what binds us to the rule of law. There is none. The accused have rights too, you don't launch investigations when all indications are a dearth of evidence. We may find DOJ/FBI did so in Trump-Russia.
-
It's not an investigation, it's a background check. No charges, no indictments, just establishing a baseline for both sides to use. It's been done before. Dearth of evidence but a credible witness has kickstarted actual investigations. Dr. Ford could start one in MD.
-
He's had six...not that it matters. The left won't be satisfied until they get the outcome they want.
-
The politicking goes both ways and always has, from Robert Bork to Clarence Thomas to Merrick Garland to Brett Kavanaugh. Don't disagree the timing is more than fishy, but so is the rush to vote. Midterms are the two-minute warning for both sides.
-
I can't recall the Republicans ever presiding over and/or encouraging the smearing of a SCOTUS nominee. Again, no way to know, but I'd wager if Trump nominated Garland for the next SCOTUS seat, the DEMS would oppose it.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thank you for saying this!!!!
#MomsForKavanaugh Women everywhere should be angry that unfounded accusations that were refuted by her own witnesses should get this far. The#BarAssociation should be ashamed of themselves. -
I didn’t even vote for Trump. In 2016, I was trying to be fair and liberal. After the past month, I want nothing to do with the likes of the Democrats on the senate Judiciary Committee much less the hysterics protesting these hearings.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
- 1 more reply
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.