Kavanaugh SCOTUS hearings

[Dill]

(10-03-2018, 10:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Ford has been interviewed by 10 Senators and one expert investigator under oath. She has been asked plenty questions. Perhaps Ford's attorneys think they will ask her the extra special FBI question that will suddenly make her remember everything and make those she claimed as witness to suddenly remember they do remember the party. 

No Dem should balk about Ford or Kavs not being interviewed. They had the opportunity to have an investigator interview Ford, but they wanted to spend that time hailing her a hero for asserting unsubstantiated claims. They had the opportunity to question Kavs, but they wanted to spend that time talking about his yearbook. 

Any thought on evidence rebutting what the women say being considered attacks? 

No, I found Trump's remarks to be below the office of POTUS. While 100% true; leave it to other folks.

Ford has been asked "plenty" of questions--and given convincing answers. What is needed now is not more "memories" but third party corroboration.

Senate "interviews" are not the same as FBI questioning. And one reason why that is, is because the Senators do not have the time and resources to question all parties mentioned in Ford's testimony and follow any leads from them. Journalists were their only source of background info. When allowed, FBI investigators make a point of cross examining sources, rigorously, systematically, and professionally addressing questions those like you ask above--witnesses who suddenly claim they do not remember, which can be for a number of reasons, including staying out of the limelight, avoiding repercussions. The FBI follows leads, compares notes on different sources, returns to ask about discrepancies. As I say--SYSTEMATIC.

Another reason is that Senators grandstand and play to voters.  They are not single-mindedly establishing a factual record free of inconsistencies. That is why more than an interview--ground work--is needed in cases such as this.

Had an FBI investigation preceded the Senate's question and answer session, that could have greatly affected which questions were asked and followed up.

You appear not to have noticed that "Bart's" yearbook helps substantiate Ford's claims--and certainly that he lied under oath.  Asked if he had ever attended a party such as that described by Ford, with "PJ" and Judge and heaving drinking, he said unequivocally 'NO.'  But his own calender puts him at such a party with the afore-named partiers.  That's why they "spent time talking about his year book."

Sounds like you take the Trump view of yet another woman alleging sexual assault. And you support him putting another man with similar inclinations on the Supreme Court--even if you agree that he shouldn't mock her publicly.