He also does this weird toothy smile when he asks a question that he hopes the person will side with him on.
He also does this weird toothy smile when he asks a question that he hopes the person will side with him on.He’s sniffing and crinkling his nose again, every time he doesn’t like a question, he’d suck at poker.
How is it relevant to anything?What do you think she should have done?
I assume he was in the back reading the script he very quickly went off of. Probably having a 'ski as well.Wut. He denied he watched the Ford testimony.
She should have talked to Dr. Ford and convinced her to come forward in a confidential setting with the Senators to hear her allegation.What do you think she should have done?
Collins and Murkowski will decide, Corker will vote yes.Flake sounds like he's gonna vote for Kavanaugh. I guess it's all up to Collins and Corker now.
Ugh, I hate this douche Kennedy
It's what you want as a litmus test for a court position... right? In America?Great a "do you believe in god" question./eye roll
Murkowski too, Corker will vote yes.
Give him a break, he's talking to God."Are the Ramirez allegations true?"
"Those are...... not. Uhhhhh....."
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you next lifetime nomination to the supreme court.
Collins will also be a yes.Murkowski too, Corker will vote yes.
What do you think she should have done?
Handled it in a closed and confidential session? Or better yet just let a Democratic aide leak it at a later date
Oh Man... Kav Swore to god.
Whats next? Swear on his mother's grave? Stick a needle in his eye? God damn this is childish.
She may have intended to, it was indicated earlier by Grassley (or Feinstein? Might have missed that one) that the shit hit the fan outside her scope, by Ford herself/her friends/the media or whatever. She didn't leak and this shit probably exploded before she could do whatever, I presume.She should have talked to Dr. Ford and convinced her to come forward in a confidential setting with the Senators to hear her allegation.
I thought one of Booker's questions was childish IMO - The one of "Do you drink on weekdays?"... That's not a yes or no question. That can be...
"Yes, I drink every now and then when it's a friday after work"
"Yes, I drink on weekdays that are national holidays that extend the weekend"
"Yes, I drink on weekdays - but only occasionally during summer months when school is out"
I edited it, Collins and Murkowski will decide and I don’t trust Collins.Murkowski no, Collins probably(?) yes, Corker lol.
It's what you want as a litmus test for a court position... right? In America?
WTF.
If we’re talking about putting party before country, what is the appropriate action for a Senator on the judiciary committee that receives confidential but serious and credible allegations against a judicial nominee?How is it relevant to anything?
The DC bureau chief of The Intercept just stated they did not get their information from Feinstein's office. The Intercept is no fan of Feinstein's so I'd consider that a pretty credible statement.As to the first, NO. Confidential means you don't tell anybody.
As to the second, sure there was a leak to the press. It was likely either a staffer of Feinstein or of Anna Eshoo's office. Whether it was a staffer who did it on his or her own initiative or at the direction of Feinstein or Eshoo is unknown. Everyone involved theoretically had a motive. These kinds of leaks happen both ways. Trump's WH has had staffers leaking information to the press without his direction since the beginning.
What I don't agree with is conservative media, which I've been reading this morning, criticizing a decision to withhold a letter the author of which requested confidentially. I just read a lengthy piece on Fox News quoting lots of these criticisms and not once even mentioning the confidentiality request.