Jump to content

scottsins

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    1658
  • Joined

Everything posted by scottsins

  1. Have any of the GOP’s who sit on the committee given an explanation for why they refuse to ask the questions of Dr. Ford. Follow up: Will BK also be questioned by the same outside counsel?
  2. His thread is an abortion now, but I just want to jump in and point out how chickenshit it is for the senators to refuse to do the actual questioning.
  3. It’s one fucking day.
  4. That has not a thing to do with who requested the female outside counsel option, which is what we were discussing.
  5. What if...they don’t let her go second, but she shows up to testify anyway? Any conclusion to draw from that? You definitely are making some with your presumed scenario.
  6. The fuck are you talking about? Ford WANTED TO BE QUESTIONED BY SENATORS. The SJC is the party that requested female outside counsel. Don’t just make shit up.
  7. Explain.
  8. Disagree. POTUS has told us a million times that the Failing New York Times is nothing but fake news. He wouldn’t base a decision on more false reporting by that worthless rag.
  9. This isn’t a court/legal proceeding so your question is pretty irrelevant to the issue at hand.
  10. Pretty much the way I see it. And that’s exactly why I think doing 60 minutes AND releasing the polygraph results now would be the move to make.
  11. If Dr. Ford is not going to be able/choose to testify, she should just release her polygraph results. Would not matter in a court of law, but let the GOP senators explain at town halls the nuance of the Daubert line of cases, scientific certainty, etc.
  12. Doesn’t the mistake of fact have to be objectively reasonable? I haven’t run into the issue, so I honestly do not know.
  13. Maybe, but to me, it is akin to leaving a child in the car (in the cases where a different parent takes them, etc.).
  14. I believe that the main concern was protecting the identity of the accuser.
  15. Things will play out exactly as you say, IMO. That fact does not mean that it is “fair”. Also, no need for an argument to carry the day. The GOP will be moving forward and confirming him, regardless of the accuser’s testimony (or lack there of). There is no debate that will take place. It’s over.
  16. Probably because state regulations in this realm are a fucking joke.
  17. So what? It isn’t hurting Beto either.
  18. How has the “ship sailed”? Is that some legal argument that you are making? It’s confusing because the senate can conduct its confirmations any way that it wants to.
  19. No shit. He is even parroting the ridiculous “FBI jurisdiction” bullshit. Idiot.
  20. BACKGROUND. CHECK.
  21. Just stop with the conclusory assertions that are demonstrably false. https://abovethelaw.com/2018/09/christine-blasey-ford-wants-the-same-thing-anita-hill-got-an-f-b-i-investigation-into-her-claims/ Hint: This would be related to the FBI’s function regarding performing background checks on appointees.
×
×
  • Create New...