And the only one that is admitted now is the underage drinking by this woman. Maybe she should go to juvi court now.
Hill said in the October 1991 televised hearings that Thomas had sexually harassed her while he was her supervisor at the Department of Education and the EEOC.
That’s why the fbi had grounds to investigate.
This is what libs want.
“Judge Kavanaugh, have you or have you ever tried to obtain sexual gratification from a young woman?”
Where is Bernie Sanders in all this. He said women fantasize about rape. It’s clear he has some evidence right here that he was correct.
While he was her supervisor.
Senator Collins said that the FBI does not normally do background checks of a nominee from a time when they were a minor.
And besides that being her opinion, it is also significant because she is going to be one of the key Senators in this.
Does the power of subpoena even exist for a nearly 40 year old allegation?
What else is there to say? The guy has publicly denied the incident. It’s a dead issue. There aren’t any facts to either refute or verify.
WAIT … WAIT…WE HAVE WOMAN WHO SAYS IT DID HAPPEN.
“Christine Blasey Ford was a year or so behind me,” wrote the woman, Cristina Miranda King, who now works as a performing arts curator in Mexico City. “I did not know her personally but I remember her. This incident did happen.”
Don’t Democrats want to hear more from her? I mean … she said it DID HAPPEN.
EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT
Oh my . Oh my. Looks like libs have made a mistake.
In this scenario, are you a SCOTUS nominee?
If Democrats were really champions of the victims, they would not be applying completely different standards between Keith Ellison’s accuser and Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser.
It’s simple, victims are nothing more than political pawns for Democrats and the way they’ve handled both of these situations is proof.
If you still don’t get it, ask any one of Bill Clinton’s accusers if they feel the Democrats believe they should be heard.
3 Likes
The way I framed it was my wife was telling the truth. But to be honest it doesn’t really matter if she was telling the truth or not. I wouldn’t want her to testify because I know people like you would rip her to pieces and it would devastate our family once Rush and Laura Ingram and Fox News jump on the bandwagon. That’s the point. No way I’m putting my family through that.
The current administration can request an FBI investigation. They haven’t. wonder why.
We’re no longer talking about a background check.
And yet, he seems unwilling to say those things under oath. Odd.
It was a loaded question. The accuser has been given a platform, and refused it thus far. Why would “witnesses” testify willingly if she won’t. And before subpoenaing witnesses, wouldn’t it be proper to first have her on record making these allegations? The battle Dems are having now is the chicken and the egg.
Then the FBI shouldn’t be involved. Glad you agree.
Because a Dem sat on the allegation for over a month?
Because there is not going to be any way to prove anything on this. If all three stick to their stories, there is nothing else that can be done. Dem’s will yell that Kavanaugh has lied to the FBI and lied to the committee and isn’t fit for the bench.
Is there a special set of laws just for SCOTUS nominee’s? Do they lose their constitutional rights?
Because there has been no credible allegation of a crime, let alone evidence of one.
Do you actually know anything about the Ellison situation or are you merely parroting what you’ve heard?
You’re certainly entitled to your opinion about it.
