I keep seeing “credible allegations” as if it’s a single word.
What makes this allegation credible? The fact that it’s coming from a woman?
Do you consider yourself or this thread to be a professional investigation made by experts who understand whether the passage of time impacts certain details of one’s memory?
If you aren’t familiar with linkedin, it’s like Facebook but for work. And, unlike Facebook, it tells you when someone has been looking at your profile. Well, apparently Whelen was looking at Ford’s profile. That, wouldn’t be so surprising, except that it was before her name was made public. So, how did he get the name?
You may find in life that if you don’t poison the well, people are more willing to engage with you. Just a thought.
Thank you for walking me through that. I didn’t know. I admit, I’m not as politically savvy or even keep up with this stuff to be honest. So, the Republicans have the votes, but some of their moderates aren’t in lock-step to just vote him in. In that case, I guess I don’t see the big hurry, assuming that when push comes to shove they will vote in lock-step rather than see the Dems get more leverage, assuming the election goes their way. So, I apologize to Raven as well…I guess it might be a case that they are afraid of more witnesses coming forth.
We shall see what next week brings wrt the accusation and rebuttal. I’ll be interested in seeing where that goes. And I’m hoping that Kavanaugh does need to be abandoned, though for reasons other than the rape charge…though obviously if that is substantiated, or even if there is a reasonable doubt that would be a major factor even if this guy was my perfect candidate otherwise. That would be a show stopper no matter who he or she is.
Collins, Murkowski & Flake are not really moderates. In fact, they do basically vote in lockstep with the rest of the pubs. They just say they have “concerns” because they’re trying to snow their voters. Collins & Murkowski were all set to vote for Kavenough before Blasey Ford spoke up. (I forget about Flake, but if he were to vote with the dems, it would be an anomaly).
The actual source of the hurry here is that the next Supreme Court session starts October 1. McConnell wants to get Kavanough seated in time to start on day 1. In the larger picture, they want to get this settled before the midterms, where they might lose congress (although it’s still a longshot that the dems will take the Senate.) It’s debatable how much they really believe in the blue wave, but they know that historically, the party in power loses seats in the midterm. The smarter pubs at least understand that it’s going to be a fight.
“We are unwilling to accommodate your unreasonable demands,” Grassley wrote.
Good for him.
Link?
To be fair, Collins and Murkowski voted against ACA repeal/replace last year when it counted. But other than that, yeah: their game is to talk a good moderate game, to occasionally vote with the Dems when McConnell doesn’t need their votes, but otherwise vote the party line.
The problem with that argument in practical political terms is that the midterms themselves could be seriously affected by delaying the nomination, two ways
-
It does not force Senate candidates in Trump 2016 states to vote for or against Kavanaugh, a plain stall anyway does not. A month or so ago a conditional poll asked WV voters their choice assuming Joe Manchin did or didn’t voter for K. If he voted for K he was within the margin of error of his GOP opponent. If he didn’t he was like 20 points behind. That was then and maybe can’t be taken literally anyway but in particular key Senate races this could make a real difference.
-
The GOP base, and party bases are key in off year elections, are not especially fond of the GOP Congress as representing ‘the establishment’. That didn’t all change just because ‘anti establishment’ Trump won the WH (leave aside the underlying validity of ‘establishment’/‘anti establishment’ for given politicians, this is a real dynamic in the GOP). Either a plain stall past the election or worse (from this political perspective) a down vote on Kavanaugh caused by even a tiny handful of GOP defectors will leave them very likely more enraged at the GOP than at the Democrats.
I believe that Democrats’ recognition of this is why they are working so furiously to stall this for political purposes. The ‘moral imperative’ is coincidental at best, speaking of Democratic politicians, IMO.
There could be a lose-lose aspect to this for the GOP whether they confirm K now or let the Democrats stall it past the election. I’m sure the Democrats hope that’s true. But I guess both sides realize the heavier political blow would be to prevent the GOP confirming K before the election or defeating him outright.
No prob, happy to help. 
Meant to add, but apparently didn’t, that the Senate Judiciary Committee has an 11-10 GOP majority. Which is perfectly kosher; when the Dems next control the Senate, it’ll have an 11-10 Dem majority. But right now it means that if all 11 Republicans on the committee are in agreement over what the schedule should be, or what the setup for Monday’s hearing should be, what the Dems think about it doesn’t matter: the majority rules.
OK, here’s a question I have: how did Ed Whelan know the identity of the unnamed female guest at the party that may or may not have happened? He knows where she lived, which seems to imply he knows who she was. But if there was no particular party, then this girl didn’t exist, except in Ford’s imagination or faulty memory. But since Ford hasn’t named her, the only way I can see that he could have gotten info about her from Kavanaugh is if they knew what party it was, and knew who was there.
I wish I could say I saw this for myself, but I’m just repeating what brighter minds than mine noticed. (I’m kicking myself a bit for not having noticed this last night, but such is life.)
I think she should let it go, further negotiation or even communication with the Ghastly Grassley is futile. No further point remains to be made, the point has been made already with bells, whistles and roman candles. She will not get a fair hearing, and even if she did, they would go straight ahead nonetheless. This is low, mean, and corrupt.
And Kavanaugh is complicit, it is done in his name, he can’t speak up? This is the Kavanaugh I wanted exposed, the Kavanaugh that is an operative, an apparatchik. He didn’t believe HRC murdered Vince Foster. He didn’t believe there was some civic purpose in forcing Bill Clinton into lurid and detailed recollections of his…ah…interactions with Ms Lewinski. He gave Ms Collins the minimum possible assurance on Roe and I got a nickel says he didn’t mean a word of it.
She hasn’t done enough? She couldn’t do enough anyway. You done good, go home. We’ll either take it from here, or we won’t, but that damn sure isn’t your fault. Enduring fear for a good cause is noble and worthy, suffering needlessly is a waste of courage. And no one is brave enough to afford that.
The unreasonable demand of meeting on Thursday instead of Wednesday?
That, plus, Ford wanting to testify second; Kavanaugh not being in the room when she does; and Ford wanting the questions from the Senators versus a single lawyer.
Not unreasonable, but not up to Ford.
She also wanted the Republicans to acknowledge that the person she said was in the room at the time of the attack, might be worth hearing from under oath. Likewise with the people she told about Kavanaugh’s alleged attack, years before Trump nominated him.
But, no. Hear from witnesses??? Of course not!
Heaven forfend the pussy-grabbing reality show “star” would have to wait a couple extra days for his radical conservative SCOTUS nominee to be confirmed.
You say that like its a bad thing!
You are too generous … there has been ZERO evidence presentated to date.
The letter she wrote to Feinstein has not been released unredacted. The claimed polygraph results have never been seen. The people she cited as witnesses have denied any such knowledge. There has not even been any actual “evidence” that Ford and Kavanaugh have ever so much as been in the same room together.
Literally the only thing we know for sure is that they went to nearby high schools at about the same time. She’s not even so much as issuing unsworn statements in her own name … everything is secondhand or filtered through friendly media. She’s concocting ever more bizarre excuses to avoid testifying (the latest and most amusing being a newfound fear of flying).
It’s vaporware.
As I said two days ago, she will never, ever make her claims under oath. Even after Kavanaugh is confirmed next week, there will be every opportunity for her to do so. She could file a criminal complaint. She could pursue a civil action. She could make an affidavit pursuant to an impeachment. None of these have a time limit, none require her to leave her house, and none will ever happen. She will be used as a mascot to drive turnout and raise money, and 90 seconds after election day she’ll be as invisible as Karen Monahan.