And that is what the FBI is supposed to be good at, isn't it?

tork you are so predictable and boring , everything you ever post is waffle about the so called left , truly its embarrassing

Whisperingdeath. It is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around. That is the point.


That is true and why the whole thing is unnerving. I do believe the woman though. She is very convincing but it is not proof. He is not on trial for sexual assault though. His character is being assassinated rightly or wrongly. Clarence Thomas got away with it. Was he sacked? No! What do you do? I take your point and you are right.

For torq from:https://legalbeagle.com/6596992-rules-removing-supreme-court-justice.html

Although an appointment to the United States Supreme Court is a lifetime appointment, the U.S. Constitution includes language that allows a justice to be impeached and forcibly removed from office. Article 3, Section 1 of the Constitution states, "The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour..."

Constitutional Language
Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution states: "The president, vice president and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." Because federal judges are considered civil officers, they are subject to this rule.

Article 3 mentions good behavior of judges, without defining it. According to the Congress.org website, produced by CQ-Roll Call Group, this is taken to mean that the reasons for impeachment of a federal judge aren't limited to criminal acts.

Impeachment Process
The impeachment process begins in the House of Representatives, with passage of articles of impeachment by a majority vote. The articles of impeachment state specific allegations of wrongdoing. The second step in the process is a trial in the U.S. Senate on the allegations. To convict someone who has been impeached, a two-thirds majority vote is required by the Senate. If convicted by the Senate, the accused is immediately removed from office.

Impeachment of Samuel Chase
The Federal Judicial Center lists federal judges who have been impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives. No Supreme Court justice has been convicted and removed, and only one has been impeached. The House impeached Justice Samuel Chase in 1804. The impeachment accused him of basing court decisions on political bias and misconduct. The Senate acquitted Chase in 1805 and he returned to duty.


The above is the best result for the dems - confirm Kav which satisfies the rep base for the midterms so they don't come out in numbers, meanwhile hold a proper investigation (which Ford has said she fully supports while Kav doesn't seem to) do well in  midterms with a few gains and then remove Kav when investigation (which will now have to be thorough) comes back with it's report/charges . There is enough already for the other judges to voice concerns (about demeaning the S.C.) and I wouldn't be at all surprised if Kav doesn't testify later or withdraws himself in the next few days which will get the reps out in larger numbers for the midterms.

well its  getting heated in my house i have one daughter who believes her and one daughter who does not.my daughter who thinks she is lying said for a woman with a phd in educational psychology she seems thick as shitte

Thank you Spyker and Whispering.

Confirm Kavanaugh, hold a full investigation and then let the cards fall where they may.

Why are you so desperate to have someone confirmed quickly who has gigantic clouds of doubt hanging over his (moral) qualification for one of the highest offices of the country?

Whether you believe 'er or 'im I think all believe that this now needs to be looked at further by the FBI etc at the very least but the way U.S politics work there needs to be a vote and I'd be surprised if they (rep) hold one unless they know they have the numbers irrespective of this committee..

if this is true how the fuuk does the fbi miss it in 6 background checks?surely they would have picked up a whisper from all the people interviewed

As it should be. After all, real conservatives care about moral qualities more than anything. Better be safe than sorry.

nellie,

It happened 35 years ago. How would the FBI know about it. The only person who could shed light on what really happened is Mark Judge. I doubt the FBI would interview random girls from 35 years ago.

think she will be at accademy awards

if she wins she will earn millions joke

wait till the Demon-Rats start questioning the judge they will go into everything not just the incident

whats in the coke bottle?

Kamala Harris just makes me want to smash the tv.

She claims it was a life changing event which she cant remember when it happened, where it happened, how she got there etc...

If Trump has done the public any service its to show the lengths these cretins will go to get what they want...

Kavanaugh should come into the hearing and say i am claiming this white privilege that all social justice warriors claims exists

wait till the Demon-Rats start questioning the judge they will go into everything not just the incident


You don't seem to understand the process going on here as that is exactly what they should be doing!

Lyndsey Graham just gone off on one