LOL, no, it does not. The sooner you can admit you got duped, just like the NYT, the better this will go for you.
The woman has no memory it. The alleged eyewitness, a Clinton-associated lawyer, doesn’t want to talk about it. The allegation was made third-hand by a couple of anonymous people that supposedly talked to him about it. And again, even if it were true, it’s not clear that Kavanaugh isn’t the victim in this case.
Some more details about how the FBI purposefully limited the investigation of the allegations against Kavanaugh: New reporting details how FBI limited investigation of Kavanaugh allegations
Congress should use its own powers, as much as they can, to fully investigate all of these allegations, as well as Kavanaugh’s possible perjury under oath.
Because I don’t see any other responses to this, YES. I would ABSOLUTELY and IMMEDIATELY push for RBG to be impeached if it had turned out that she had been a Nazi or KKK member. “Communist” is much more vague but since you put it in the same sentence as KKK or Nazi I would assume you’re not talking about some softcore “spread the wealth” communism but the kind of bomb-throwing communists people were so worried about in the 60s. Under any of those scenarios, unless RBG had a very good explanation, I would want her impeached ASAP.
I don’t understand how that’s even a question. Or rather, I do – if one is genuinely so much of a partisan back that he’s fine with a rapist on our supreme court just because he’ll protect gun rights and ban abortions, it makes sense to think that The “other side” would be cool with Nazis or KKK members as long as they are liberal enough. I’m sure there are some on the left for which this is true; they disgust me.
I find it more plausible that…
…than that Antifa (or whoever your left-wing boogeyman is these days) completely fabricated all these allegations out of whole cloth going back decades, and yet have zero interest in making other accusations about all the other right-wing judges on the bench throughout the Federal government.
“Come on, you guys are just as amoral as we are. Oppose Nazism? Now you’re just virtue signaling!”
Senator Chris Coons wrote to the FBI director last October about what Max Stier had said, and still the FBI did nothing: Coons Relayed Kavanaugh Allegation To FBI — They Didn’t Follow Up
If the FBI had investigated it, they could have possibly obtained more witness testimony, identified other possible witnesses and interviewed them, etc.
Remember the D side did cause Franken to leave without much investigation at all … meanwhile all that had been asked for and denied in this case is that full investigation. Mirror universe RBG would be investigated, allowed to offer explanations, and if such demonstrated her past evil deeds and her ongoing lying about them then she’d be tossed, gently (her bones are brittle), out the door.
I’m on record as thinking that elevating this with any attention and these calls for impeachment are dumb. Sure to change no minds, and to accomplish no good. But on the plus side … it at least gets Beto’s idiocy out of the news cycle!
Warren joining the impeachment chorus disappoints me. I may believe the allegations but impeachment would and should require more than personal belief. Demanding investigation into whether or not the Trump administration prevented full investigations and determining what the solid evidence is fair, as is a call to fully investigate whether or not Kavanaugh lied under oath or otherwise committed an impeachable offense. Calling for non-partisan complete investigations is fair and just (even if stupid politically). Calling for impeachment without that investigation? That’s “execute now trial later” shit.
You lose people with that shit.
Impeachment doesn’t mean what you think it does:
Calling for impeachment IS calling for an investigation. It’s not “execute now trial later”, it IS the trial.
It is alleging crimes and bringing charges based on them, with conviction resulting in removal from office. You bring charges AFTER you have the evidence of such alleged crimes in hand.
If that very precise rather than hyperbolic phrasing makes a difference to you fine. From a politically and public relations functional POV it is “execute first”. That’s how it plays even with many who believe he is guilty of both sexual assault and perjury, let alone to those who weren’t sure.
NYT retracted.
Seems to me like we have lots of evidence in the form of eyewitness testimony, which Congress should hear. What other kinds of evidence would you rather wait For? Rape kits?
No they didn’t.
In the same spirit of accuracy, Kavanaugh just admitted everything and resigned.
I think you’ve got a bright future writing for the NYT 
I’d like to understand **HurricaneDitka’s **conspiracy theory a bit better. Is your view that a dozen Yale grads and other people sat down and decided to fabricate a story about Kavanaugh in order to sink his nomination and that what they went with was something that happened at a high school party with no third party witnesses and the penis slap incident? In that scenario, why wouldn’t they have constructed a lie in which they themselves were witnesses if they were prepared to lie about, e.g., what the victim had told them at the time of the incident? Why didn’t they do this to Gorsuch or Roberts or Alito?
Your understanding isn’t accurate. What you’re suggesting is to charge a person with a crime, then do an investigation.
Oh, I get it. NYT reporting is Fake News. Funny.
Not so much as to be “lots” … possibly there would be with a real investigation … or not. I suspect strongly yes. Speaking to not just alleged witnesses and victims but those who might have been told of the events at the time by alleged victims and possible witnesses. Also investigation into the process of not fully investigating at the time of the hearing. What we so far have is enough that real investigation should have happened but is not enough to bring to trial on.
A. Impeachment has nothing to do with criminal law. It is a process of statecraft.
B. House committees do, in fact, do their own investigations quite routinely, including the HJC when considering impeachment.
Where did you get *your *understanding from, much less your absolute certainty about it?