Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Mitchell would be the woman whose skirts the Republican men hid behind. What a bunch of cowards!
Mitchell also notes the lack of corroboration of Ford's account, including recalling details that could back her story.
Thus the need for an investigation. Duh!
Outside counsel tells GOP 'reasonable prosecutor' would not bring Ford case against KavMitchell tells Republican senators "reasonable prosecutor" would not bring Ford case against Kavanaugh - CNNPolitics
Mitchell cites inconsistencies in Ford's statements to the committee, The Washington Post, and her therapist about the alleged assault, which Ford alleges took place when she and Kavanaugh were in high school.
Mitchell also notes the lack of corroboration of Ford's account, including recalling details that could back her story.
Mitchell says Ford's account of her age at the time has varied, and raises questions about her recollection of some events, but noted her inability to remember details such as how she got to and from the party where the alleged assault occurred.
In the legal context, here is my bottom line: A 'he said, she said' case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that," she wrote. "Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard."
Bottom line --- only one person to blame here ---- DIANE FEINSTEIN!!!!
She could have easily shared the letter with the FBI and had them investigate the verasity. Instead she went to the press knowing that she could win in the court of public opinion but not in a court of law. What an underhanded and evil person she is.
Outside counsel tells GOP 'reasonable prosecutor' would not bring Ford case against KavMitchell tells Republican senators "reasonable prosecutor" would not bring Ford case against Kavanaugh - CNNPolitics
Mitchell cites inconsistencies in Ford's statements to the committee, The Washington Post, and her therapist about the alleged assault, which Ford alleges took place when she and Kavanaugh were in high school.
Mitchell also notes the lack of corroboration of Ford's account, including recalling details that could back her story.
Mitchell says Ford's account of her age at the time has varied, and raises questions about her recollection of some events, but noted her inability to remember details such as how she got to and from the party where the alleged assault occurred.
In the legal context, here is my bottom line: A 'he said, she said' case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that," she wrote. "Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard."
Bottom line --- only one person to blame here ---- DIANE FEINSTEIN!!!!
She could have easily shared the letter with the FBI and had them investigate the verasity. Instead she went to the press knowing that she could win in the court of public opinion but not in a court of law. What an underhanded and evil person she is.
Who's trying to?
Well, considering this ISN'T a court case, that's nice dear.Mitchell tells Republican senators "reasonable prosecutor" would not bring Ford case against Kavanaugh - CNNPolitics
Mitchell cites inconsistencies in Ford's statements to the committee, The Washington Post, and her therapist about the alleged assault, which Ford alleges took place when she and Kavanaugh were in high school.
Mitchell also notes the lack of corroboration of Ford's account, including recalling details that could back her story.
Mitchell says Ford's account of her age at the time has varied, and raises questions about her recollection of some events, but noted her inability to remember details such as how she got to and from the party where the alleged assault occurred.
In the legal context, here is my bottom line: A 'he said, she said' case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that," she wrote. "Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard."
Bottom line --- only one person to blame here ---- DIANE FEINSTEIN!!!!
She could have easily shared the letter with the FBI and had them investigate the verasity. Instead she went to the press knowing that she could win in the court of public opinion but not in a court of law. What an underhanded and evil person she is.
Outside counsel tells GOP 'reasonable prosecutor' would not bring Ford case against KavMitchell tells Republican senators "reasonable prosecutor" would not bring Ford case against Kavanaugh - CNNPolitics
Mitchell cites inconsistencies in Ford's statements to the committee, The Washington Post, and her therapist about the alleged assault, which Ford alleges took place when she and Kavanaugh were in high school.
Mitchell also notes the lack of corroboration of Ford's account, including recalling details that could back her story.
Mitchell says Ford's account of her age at the time has varied, and raises questions about her recollection of some events, but noted her inability to remember details such as how she got to and from the party where the alleged assault occurred.
In the legal context, here is my bottom line: A 'he said, she said' case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that," she wrote. "Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard."
Bottom line --- only one person to blame here ---- DIANE FEINSTEIN!!!!
She could have easily shared the letter with the FBI and had them investigate the verasity. Instead she went to the press knowing that she could win in the court of public opinion but not in a court of law. What an underhanded and evil person she is.
Who's trying to?
Point is there is nothing here to believe Kav is guilty.
Outside counsel tells GOP 'reasonable prosecutor' would not bring Ford case against KavMitchell tells Republican senators "reasonable prosecutor" would not bring Ford case against Kavanaugh - CNNPolitics
Mitchell cites inconsistencies in Ford's statements to the committee, The Washington Post, and her therapist about the alleged assault, which Ford alleges took place when she and Kavanaugh were in high school.
Mitchell also notes the lack of corroboration of Ford's account, including recalling details that could back her story.
Mitchell says Ford's account of her age at the time has varied, and raises questions about her recollection of some events, but noted her inability to remember details such as how she got to and from the party where the alleged assault occurred.
In the legal context, here is my bottom line: A 'he said, she said' case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that," she wrote. "Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard."
Bottom line --- only one person to blame here ---- DIANE FEINSTEIN!!!!
She could have easily shared the letter with the FBI and had them investigate the verasity. Instead she went to the press knowing that she could win in the court of public opinion but not in a court of law. What an underhanded and evil person she is.
Who's trying to?
Point is there is nothing here to believe Kav is guilty.
So why not just say that then?
There is no criminal standard here so the premise is just dumb.
Use the standard of following the facts as they are found.Outside counsel tells GOP 'reasonable prosecutor' would not bring Ford case against KavMitchell tells Republican senators "reasonable prosecutor" would not bring Ford case against Kavanaugh - CNNPolitics
Mitchell cites inconsistencies in Ford's statements to the committee, The Washington Post, and her therapist about the alleged assault, which Ford alleges took place when she and Kavanaugh were in high school.
Mitchell also notes the lack of corroboration of Ford's account, including recalling details that could back her story.
Mitchell says Ford's account of her age at the time has varied, and raises questions about her recollection of some events, but noted her inability to remember details such as how she got to and from the party where the alleged assault occurred.
In the legal context, here is my bottom line: A 'he said, she said' case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that," she wrote. "Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard."
Bottom line --- only one person to blame here ---- DIANE FEINSTEIN!!!!
She could have easily shared the letter with the FBI and had them investigate the verasity. Instead she went to the press knowing that she could win in the court of public opinion but not in a court of law. What an underhanded and evil person she is.
Who's trying to?
Point is there is nothing here to believe Kav is guilty.
So why not just say that then?
There is no criminal standard here so the premise is just dumb.
Then what standard shall we use? Why are we using the FBI? LOL.
You're right about the he said, they said. There are three accusers and many others who have come out about kavanaugh's behavior.This is not a "he said...she said" case. It is a "She said...they said"
case.
Kav said he didn't do anything and the 4 witnesses she provided either
refute her testimony or cannot reinforce her statement.
This is as cut and dry as it gets.
guilt is guiltWell, considering this ISN'T a court case, that's nice dear.Mitchell tells Republican senators "reasonable prosecutor" would not bring Ford case against Kavanaugh - CNNPolitics
Mitchell cites inconsistencies in Ford's statements to the committee, The Washington Post, and her therapist about the alleged assault, which Ford alleges took place when she and Kavanaugh were in high school.
Mitchell also notes the lack of corroboration of Ford's account, including recalling details that could back her story.
Mitchell says Ford's account of her age at the time has varied, and raises questions about her recollection of some events, but noted her inability to remember details such as how she got to and from the party where the alleged assault occurred.
In the legal context, here is my bottom line: A 'he said, she said' case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that," she wrote. "Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard."
Bottom line --- only one person to blame here ---- DIANE FEINSTEIN!!!!
She could have easily shared the letter with the FBI and had them investigate the verasity. Instead she went to the press knowing that she could win in the court of public opinion but not in a court of law. What an underhanded and evil person she is.
Use the standard of following the facts as they are found.Outside counsel tells GOP 'reasonable prosecutor' would not bring Ford case against KavMitchell tells Republican senators "reasonable prosecutor" would not bring Ford case against Kavanaugh - CNNPolitics
Mitchell cites inconsistencies in Ford's statements to the committee, The Washington Post, and her therapist about the alleged assault, which Ford alleges took place when she and Kavanaugh were in high school.
Mitchell also notes the lack of corroboration of Ford's account, including recalling details that could back her story.
Mitchell says Ford's account of her age at the time has varied, and raises questions about her recollection of some events, but noted her inability to remember details such as how she got to and from the party where the alleged assault occurred.
In the legal context, here is my bottom line: A 'he said, she said' case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that," she wrote. "Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard."
Bottom line --- only one person to blame here ---- DIANE FEINSTEIN!!!!
She could have easily shared the letter with the FBI and had them investigate the verasity. Instead she went to the press knowing that she could win in the court of public opinion but not in a court of law. What an underhanded and evil person she is.
Who's trying to?
Point is there is nothing here to believe Kav is guilty.
So why not just say that then?
There is no criminal standard here so the premise is just dumb.
Then what standard shall we use? Why are we using the FBI? LOL.
Kavanaugh has already had difficulty answering questions and answering truthfully. He has not been as open as Ford.
We use the FBI because they do the background investigations for nominees and because they are a non political third party.
guilt is guiltWell, considering this ISN'T a court case, that's nice dear.Mitchell tells Republican senators "reasonable prosecutor" would not bring Ford case against Kavanaugh - CNNPolitics
Mitchell cites inconsistencies in Ford's statements to the committee, The Washington Post, and her therapist about the alleged assault, which Ford alleges took place when she and Kavanaugh were in high school.
Mitchell also notes the lack of corroboration of Ford's account, including recalling details that could back her story.
Mitchell says Ford's account of her age at the time has varied, and raises questions about her recollection of some events, but noted her inability to remember details such as how she got to and from the party where the alleged assault occurred.
In the legal context, here is my bottom line: A 'he said, she said' case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that," she wrote. "Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard."
Bottom line --- only one person to blame here ---- DIANE FEINSTEIN!!!!
She could have easily shared the letter with the FBI and had them investigate the verasity. Instead she went to the press knowing that she could win in the court of public opinion but not in a court of law. What an underhanded and evil person she is.
-Geaux
You're right about the he said, they said. There are three accusers and many others who have come out about kavanaugh's behavior.This is not a "he said...she said" case. It is a "She said...they said"
case.
Kav said he didn't do anything and the 4 witnesses she provided either
refute her testimony or cannot reinforce her statement.
This is as cut and dry as it gets.
It's not cut and dry. Kavanaugh is the only one of those four to deny the charges. The other three do not remember. Ford's friend actually said she believes her.
Use the standard of following the facts as they are found.Outside counsel tells GOP 'reasonable prosecutor' would not bring Ford case against Kav
Who's trying to?
Point is there is nothing here to believe Kav is guilty.
So why not just say that then?
There is no criminal standard here so the premise is just dumb.
Then what standard shall we use? Why are we using the FBI? LOL.
Kavanaugh has already had difficulty answering questions and answering truthfully. He has not been as open as Ford.
We use the FBI because they do the background investigations for nominees and because they are a non political third party.
Subjective 100%. He has not had any difficulty IMO. If that were you in his shoes and your legacy was being destroyed by an uncoroborrated charge you would be flipping out. His family and reputation are ruined forever because of Feinstein. I would have been much more angry. You have memory that goes back 36 yrs? He said he was not there, he doesn't know her, she has zero corroborating evidence. What else can he answer? You are a Leftist. Yes?
Subjective 100%. He has not had any difficulty IMO.
Stupid questions. They did talk about farts though... that was specialUse the standard of following the facts as they are found.Point is there is nothing here to believe Kav is guilty.
So why not just say that then?
There is no criminal standard here so the premise is just dumb.
Then what standard shall we use? Why are we using the FBI? LOL.
Kavanaugh has already had difficulty answering questions and answering truthfully. He has not been as open as Ford.
We use the FBI because they do the background investigations for nominees and because they are a non political third party.
Subjective 100%. He has not had any difficulty IMO. If that were you in his shoes and your legacy was being destroyed by an uncoroborrated charge you would be flipping out. His family and reputation are ruined forever because of Feinstein. I would have been much more angry. You have memory that goes back 36 yrs? He said he was not there, he doesn't know her, she has zero corroborating evidence. What else can he answer? You are a Leftist. Yes?Subjective 100%. He has not had any difficulty IMO.
It's objectively clear. Kavanaugh did not once give a clear answer on his drinking or anything about his yearbook entries.
Use the standard of following the facts as they are found.Point is there is nothing here to believe Kav is guilty.
So why not just say that then?
There is no criminal standard here so the premise is just dumb.
Then what standard shall we use? Why are we using the FBI? LOL.
Kavanaugh has already had difficulty answering questions and answering truthfully. He has not been as open as Ford.
We use the FBI because they do the background investigations for nominees and because they are a non political third party.
Subjective 100%. He has not had any difficulty IMO. If that were you in his shoes and your legacy was being destroyed by an uncoroborrated charge you would be flipping out. His family and reputation are ruined forever because of Feinstein. I would have been much more angry. You have memory that goes back 36 yrs? He said he was not there, he doesn't know her, she has zero corroborating evidence. What else can he answer? You are a Leftist. Yes?Subjective 100%. He has not had any difficulty IMO.
It's objectively clear. Kavanaugh did not once give a clear answer on his drinking or anything about his yearbook entries.
You're right about the he said, they said. There are three accusers and many others who have come out about kavanaugh's behavior.This is not a "he said...she said" case. It is a "She said...they said"
case.
Kav said he didn't do anything and the 4 witnesses she provided either
refute her testimony or cannot reinforce her statement.
This is as cut and dry as it gets.
It's not cut and dry. Kavanaugh is the only one of those four to deny the charges. The other three do not remember. Ford's friend actually said she believes her.
I would believe one of my friends, but under oath, I would tell the truth.
"I don't know anything about it!"
You have to have proof. An allegation alone does not suffice.
And that is in business, not just in court. If you fire someone for
something and cannot back up your reasons for firing...they will sue
your ass for everything you've got.
Stupid questions. They did talk about farts though... that was specialUse the standard of following the facts as they are found.So why not just say that then?
There is no criminal standard here so the premise is just dumb.
Then what standard shall we use? Why are we using the FBI? LOL.
Kavanaugh has already had difficulty answering questions and answering truthfully. He has not been as open as Ford.
We use the FBI because they do the background investigations for nominees and because they are a non political third party.
Subjective 100%. He has not had any difficulty IMO. If that were you in his shoes and your legacy was being destroyed by an uncoroborrated charge you would be flipping out. His family and reputation are ruined forever because of Feinstein. I would have been much more angry. You have memory that goes back 36 yrs? He said he was not there, he doesn't know her, she has zero corroborating evidence. What else can he answer? You are a Leftist. Yes?Subjective 100%. He has not had any difficulty IMO.
It's objectively clear. Kavanaugh did not once give a clear answer on his drinking or anything about his yearbook entries.
-Geaux
Use the standard of following the facts as they are found.So why not just say that then?
There is no criminal standard here so the premise is just dumb.
Then what standard shall we use? Why are we using the FBI? LOL.
Kavanaugh has already had difficulty answering questions and answering truthfully. He has not been as open as Ford.
We use the FBI because they do the background investigations for nominees and because they are a non political third party.
Subjective 100%. He has not had any difficulty IMO. If that were you in his shoes and your legacy was being destroyed by an uncoroborrated charge you would be flipping out. His family and reputation are ruined forever because of Feinstein. I would have been much more angry. You have memory that goes back 36 yrs? He said he was not there, he doesn't know her, she has zero corroborating evidence. What else can he answer? You are a Leftist. Yes?Subjective 100%. He has not had any difficulty IMO.
It's objectively clear. Kavanaugh did not once give a clear answer on his drinking or anything about his yearbook entries.
Would you? It was 36 yrs ago. Who the F*CK remembers. I thought his answers were as clear as they could have been. The accuser could not recall what she did 7 weeks ago.
