Posted on 09/21/2018 8:07:21 AM PDT by rktman
The woman accusing Judge Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault during a high school party nearly 40 years ago, Christine Blasey Ford, has given the Senate Judiciary Committee a list of demands she says must be met before she's willing to testify about the incident under oath.
According to Chairman Chuck Grassley's staff, these demands are non-starters.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
A rapist? Already then consider yourself reported.
So this ploy by the left isn’t going to work.
Up next, they’ll drag out another accuser. I will be stunned if they don’t.
Either that or they will bring out an activist that said an abortion saved her life and Kavanaugh (single handily mind you) is going to overturn roe v. wade.
The left is not done by a long shot, they still have to exercise alinsky’s rule 8 a bit more.
“It’s past time to stop worrying about what the Left (which includes the media) will say.”
Yep. Just ignore it. Reacting to it just gives them motivation to keep going, like a kid that gets what they want by acting out, if it works they will keep it up.
OMG, I can’t believe that Grassley is going to make us proud!!!
Please Senator, stick to your guns.
Those demands come from a demented person who thinks she is Queen Elizabeth I.
Works for me but I’m still waiting for the cave in. You know, the gopE war against wymun.
Seems like the committee offered up everything but a conviction of Kavanaugh to “allow” her to get her story out. Well the very few parts she remembers.
I suspect their next move will be to have Ford all over TV this weekend crying her eyes out and giving the “testimony” that Grassley denied her.
Probably looking for an “anal-ysts” position at cnbc or something. What a POS. Thanks AZ.
Grassley should reply with what General Anthony Clement McAuliffe once said.
So YOU outrank the Constitution? It and other of our Founding Documents GUARANTEE the accused the right to FACE their accuser. So it matters less than a d@*n what you, I, or anyone else fancies themselves preferring. And the prosecution ALWAYS goes first; and the defense gets to rebut it.
If she doesn't want to testify today, call the vote.
Whatever damage democrats can do they'll do no matter how we respond. But, if we 'give in' to democrat control freak tactics we'll lose our own people AND democrats will still do all the damage they can do ... (yes, this woman WILL appear on every liberal talk show for the next few months - and that will happen if we bend over backwards for her OR not... but if we stand firm at least we won't look like fools. )
VOTE.
The Bill of Rights applies to criminal charges brought by the government against a citizen. That's not what is happening here.
I'll do your research for you (note the bold text):
Amendment VI:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
There is no crime and no jury here, and a "tribunal" (the Senate committe) that are not from the jurisdiction where this "crime" was allegedly committed.
“According to Chairman Chuck Grassley’s staff, these demands are non-starters.”
In plain English...GFY.
It’s nice to see a republican with a backbone. It’s so rare that when it happens it’s a pleasure.
She's a leftist; of course she's crazy (cray cray). She has financial motivations as well since she works for an abortion pill maker. She's a fraud and of course cray cray.
We've all been wondering how long the republicans were going to let this farce go on. Apparently they are finally done.
Yeah, ignore this pretend-victim.
She ain’t no victim.
I guess that means she can make it on Monday.
He is not the moving party and he has already been heard for committee purposes, why call him? Unless there is yet some procedural step, at this point what would that serve?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.