SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics - Left, Right and Center
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
From: Incitatus9/21/2018 8:24:05 AM
   of 133
 
The Demands the “Ford Team” Has Made Are Ludicrous

The answer to these demands is, clearly, “No.” The Senate is not a courtroom. But we have strong reasons for requiring that accused people are “confronted with the witnesses against” them, and those reasons transcend narrow constitutional obligation. Yes, the Senate can hold a hearing in which the witnesses never lock eyes. No, it would not be good practice.

We also have good reasons for ensuring that accusers testify first. And yet, per Bream, Ford’s “team” insists that “Kavanaugh must testify FIRST.” Which raises the obvious question: Testify against what exactly? A half-leaked letter? A piece in the Washington Post? The ever-churning rumor mill? How utterly preposterous it would be to hold a hearing in which the accused is expected to refute allegations that have not yet been made under oath, and then to watch in silence as the accuser responds to his “refutation.” How far down the rabbit hole must we go to sustain this charade?

nationalreview.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News