Kavanaugh Confirmation

#4,708
#4,708
NurseGoodVol said:
Id be fine with not having any press there. Why limit, exclude.
Click to expand...
I don't care if they do it behind closed doors. I think they've offered that. I mean if I was a sexual assault victim I would want it to be as discreet as possible. Maybe publicly and negative publicity for Kavenaugh is their ultimate goal.
 
#4,711
#4,711
InVOLuntary said:
I don't care if they do it behind closed doors. I think they've offered that. I mean if I was a sexual assault victim I would want it to be as discreet as possible. Maybe publicly and negative publicity for Kavenaugh is their ultimate goal.
Click to expand...

Ford publicly accused Kavanaugh, a nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, of sexual assault. She should be forced to testify under oath in public.
 
#4,714
#4,714
evillawyer said:
Click to expand...

Let her go make a statement then. But she has refused to testify to the committee on 5 separate occasions according to Davis I think? Link was posted earlier that Ramirez atty refered the committee to the New Yorker article for her statement. And that’s a flippant reply if true.
 
#4,717
#4,717
Cotton: Some Statements by Dems About Kavanaugh Resemble ‘Stalinist Show Trials’

On Tuesday’s “Hugh Hewitt Show,” Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) argued that some of the statements made by Democratic senators about Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh “resemble the kind of Stalinist show trials you saw in the Soviet Union,” where making an accusation is enough.

Cotton said, “[T]he Democrats and the media have spent a lot of the last couple of years talking about undermining basic democratic norms. They should look in the mirror. Talk about undermining basic democratic norms of due process and the presumption of innocence. These are things that go back 800 years to the Magna Carta. And the Democrats, like Mazie Hirono or Richard Blumenthal or other senators, are essentially saying that Brett Kavanaugh is guilty simply because he faces an allegation, allegations in the New Yorker article, that are completely unsupported by any evidence and that, by the accuser’s own admission, only came to her after she spent six days working with a former elected Democrat and her lawyer, and allegations from Ms. Ford that are disputed by the four people she claims were in the house at the time what she said happened, happened.”

Cotton: Some Statements by Dems About Kavanaugh Resemble 'Stalinist Show Trials' | Breitbart
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLICKYINC
#4,720
#4,720
Stew Cook said:
So Ramirez offered to testify, and they declined, or Ramirez never offered to testify..

Someone is lying. Who and why?
Click to expand...

Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., who sits on the committee, said a lawyer for Ramirez told committee staff she would not speak to them about her allegation that Kavanaugh flashed his naked groin in her face during an alcohol-laden party their freshman year. Ramirez made the accusation in a blockbuster Sunday night New Yorker story.

“Our counsel repeatedly tried to reach him,” Kennedy said of Ramirez's lawyer. “They finally did reach him, and he said we are not issuing a statement. He said if you want our statement, read the New Yorker.”

Lawmakers, including Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, a key swing vote, have said they want to hear from Ramirez about her accusation. But talking to committee staff is the first step to testifying in the committee.
 
#4,721
#4,721
Franklin Pierce said:
Ford publicly accused Kavanaugh, a nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, of sexual assault. She should be forced to testify under oath in public.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree but my point is she wanted ananimoty to begin with. They offered to hear her testimony out of the public eye. They offered to go to her. Why does she want it out in the open? I think we all know the answer to that.
 
#4,722
#4,722
Stew Cook said:
So Ramirez offered to testify, and they declined, or Ramirez never offered to testify..

Someone is lying. Who and why?
Click to expand...

It would help if Ramirez' attorney could provide some documentation of an offer along with the terms (including time).

Seems now the claim is we won't testify to the Committee but will to the FBI (knowing I presume there will be no FBI inquiry).

I'm still not sure what prevents someone from going to the FBI on their own unless the FBI would refuse to listen (don't know).
 
#4,724
#4,724
Franklin Pierce said:
Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., who sits on the committee, said a lawyer for Ramirez told committee staff she would not speak to them about her allegation that Kavanaugh flashed his naked groin in her face during an alcohol-laden party their freshman year. Ramirez made the accusation in a blockbuster Sunday night New Yorker story.

“Our counsel repeatedly tried to reach him,” Kennedy said of Ramirez's lawyer. “They finally did reach him, and he said we are not issuing a statement. He said if you want our statement, read the New Yorker.”

Lawmakers, including Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, a key swing vote, have said they want to hear from Ramirez about her accusation. But talking to committee staff is the first step to testifying in the committee.
Click to expand...

Sounds like someone is trying to pass off asking for a statement as offering to be heard by the committee. I'm sure their will be some more clarity forthcoming.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top