Stalling. FBI can’t investigate a case where statute of limitation has run its course. They can do a background check which they did already on Kavanaugh
-
-
-
They did *without* this new derogatory information. Common sense says reopen it. There's clearly something still to resolve.
-
Lol yeah the resolution is it was an obvious replay of the Hill/Thomas tactic that worked oh so well. Unprovable claims in order to attempt to delay confirmation. Thats why Clarence Thomas isnt a justice...oh, wait

-
You could be 100% correct & of course that is exactly what the Dems are doing, however, both can be correct. This event could have happened and the Dems could be using it to stall hearing. I do find it suspicious that the other “witness” refuses to testify & cant remember event
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
-
Kavanaugh should welcome an investigation. This would clear him and remove any doubt. That’s how an innocent person would react. As opposed to spending the better part of two days in the White House.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
She should be investigated. There will be evidence of a payment for this 30yr old fabrication.
#LiarLiar#MeTooHuckstersThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Christine Blasey Ford is showing common sense. The
@SenateMajLdr, the@GOP men on the@SenateJudiciary and it's Chairman@ChuckGrassley are showing they have NO DECENCY and NO COMMON SENSE. -
-
Tweet unavailable
-
The process thus far has been a sham. The vast majority of his records were not released nor able to be reviewed in time for the hearing. It's in the public's best interest for Reps and Dems to thoroughly scrutinize and interogate a nominee.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Did the allegations from over 40 years ago invoke any federal jurisdiction? Did Kavanaugh get drunk in a manner that invoked interstate commerce before going to the party?
-
Eh, what’s a little sexual assault from 40 years ago, right? He’s only being considered for a lifetime appointment to a position where he can influence the lives of Americans for decades..Not like this is a big deal or anything..
-
It certainly may be a big deal, if the applicable statute of limitations has not lapsed or if there exists some federal jurisdiction over the matter that is not time barred. The article set the tempo of my response. Outside the hyperbole, good reason may exist to question.
-
It’s not the statute of limitations that’s in question, she’s not trying to prosecute him. It’s his character. This incident, if true, is extremely damning.
-
Certainly. The accusation is damning. It’s damning impact, if true, could have mitigated years of his decisions in the second most powerful appellate court in the United States, D.C. Circuit, a court which churns our more than four times the cases than the Supreme Court.
-
Oh geez. There is also that. Sorry, I just read your bio...you’re a lawyer, and I’m just a mom. Didn’t mean to sound like I’m explaining the law to you!
-
I promise you, you know as much or more about the law than I do. Lawyers largely make things up out of insecurity in the face of uncertainty. Mothers, parents, generally, express certainty from experience to override insecurity in the face of uncertainty.
-
You are kind.

- 6 more replies
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.
