On September 27 2018 23:52 xDaunt wrote:
I will say this. Regardless of whether Kavanaugh did anything, I do think that something bad did happen to Ford. She clearly has problems.

Hey, thanks for this. Honestly you've said a lot recently that pissed me off for its lack of compassion, either for Ford or for assault and rape victims in general. Maybe I'm over interpreting, but this reads like a bit of empathy for Ford.

xDaunt

United States17988 Posts

September 27 2018 14:57 GMT

#404

On September 27 2018 23:56 ChristianS wrote:

Show nested quote +

I just call it like I see it.

xDaunt

United States17988 Posts

September 27 2018 14:59 GMT

#405

Mitchell is walking Ford through the inconsistencies in her statements.

brian

United States9618 Posts

September 27 2018 14:59 GMT

#406

in the same vein, personally i don’t see having Mitchell question on behalf of the GOP senators as anything but a good idea. having people already on record disbelieving the accuser cross examine an alleged sexual assault victim would be the grossest thing i can fathom watching. so far she is bringing much needed dignity to the proceedings.

GreenHorizons

United States23221 Posts

September 27 2018 15:01 GMT

#407

This is so dumb and this isn't even the bad part yet. Democrats are going to try to make her cry for sure.

xDaunt

United States17988 Posts

September 27 2018 15:04 GMT

#408

I don't like the structure of this hearing. 5 minutes of questioning isn't enough to do anything. Grassley should have just given the floor to Mitchell to get everything on the record for at least an hour.

xDaunt

United States17988 Posts

September 27 2018 15:06 GMT

#409

This answer regarding why she knows it's Kavanaugh is not a good one. The scientific answer is the wrong one for this forum. She should have just said "because I know him and I saw him."

Plansix

United States60190 Posts

September 27 2018 15:14 GMT

#410

I don’t think Grassley could give the floor to Mitchell, since the Democrats never agreed to use her. At best they could give Mitchell all of their time, but that is equally problematic.

xDaunt

United States17988 Posts

September 27 2018 15:16 GMT

#411

I'm not familiar with SJC procedure, but I'd think that Grassley is in command of how the hearing is structured, or at a minimum, that he could get the GOP majority on the SJC to set the procedure.

Plansix

United States60190 Posts

September 27 2018 15:20 GMT

#412

He can set the rules for the hearing, but he cannot remove the ability for senators to ask questions at a hearing they are part of. They have to give that up. No one can put a senator in the corner.

xDaunt

United States17988 Posts

September 27 2018 15:21 GMT

#413

On September 28 2018 00:20 Plansix wrote:
He can set the rules for the hearing, but he cannot remove the ability for senators to ask questions at a hearing they are part of. They have to give that up. No one can put a senator in the corner.

I wasn't suggesting that he remove their ability to ask questions. But this 5 minutes for a republican and 5 minutes for a democrat is stupid.

GreenHorizons

United States23221 Posts

September 27 2018 15:24 GMT

#414

iirc they have to give equal time to everyone on the committee but he can divide it as he likes. But if Republicans went for an hour then Democrats would too and either he really didn't ask if that was best until I heard it at the hearing or he figured it was the better optics choice to break it up. Probably to make it unwatchable so that people were even more dependent on the highlights from their propaganda outlet of choice.

Plansix

United States60190 Posts

September 27 2018 15:29 GMT

#415

On September 28 2018 00:21 xDaunt wrote:

Show nested quote +

I wasn't suggesting that he remove their ability to ask questions. But this 5 minutes for a republican and 5 minutes for a democrat is stupid.

It is short, but I think 5 is standard for most hearings. 10 minutes across 21 senators is 3.5 hours, not counting cross talk. This would be a 2 day event if they did that.

xDaunt

United States17988 Posts

September 27 2018 15:30 GMT

#416

I'm sure that the structure is driving Mitchell nuts. Examining a witness (especially cross examining a witness) is all about flow. There's no flow to what she's doing, which lessens the effectiveness of the examination. She's getting the inconsistencies on the record, but she's not really able to snowball them like she should.

GreenHorizons

United States23221 Posts

September 27 2018 15:32 GMT

#417

On September 28 2018 00:30 xDaunt wrote:
I'm sure that the structure is driving Mitchell nuts. Examining a witness (especially cross examining a witness) is all about flow. There's no flow to what she's doing, which lessens the effectiveness of the examination. She's getting the inconsistencies on the record, but she's not really able to snowball them like she should.

Won't matter, they're already being slammed together in a supercut that's going to run non-stop on Fox News just like there's one of her getting emotional getting put together for MSNBC and CNN will run half of each

brian

United States9618 Posts

September 27 2018 15:32 GMT

#418

well in any other structure whoever goes last would have the clear political advantage, as much as it sucks to put it that way, right? and he wouldn’t want to give that to the dems, and i think appopriately avoids the appearance of demanding it go to the GOP as well.

xDaunt

United States17988 Posts

September 27 2018 15:34 GMT

#419

On September 28 2018 00:32 GreenHorizons wrote:

Show nested quote +

It matters because Ford is being given an opportunity to mentally recover after each set of questions. What typically happens in this situation is that the examination wears the witness down and the answers become progressively worse.

GreenHorizons

United States23221 Posts

September 27 2018 15:38 GMT

#420

On September 28 2018 00:34 xDaunt wrote:

Show nested quote +

Well answering "worse" is something someone does who is trying to break a witness/suspect, not someone seeking the truth. In a courtroom that type of morality works, but that brings it's own negative political optics.

Unless they think the person is lying, otherwise her intention is to get the truth, not to make Ford rhetorically screw up her story absent from the facts.

So getting her to say "I don't think it was Brett" might be great if winning is all that matters but if the truth is that she 100% believes it was him and accidentally puts those words in that order as a result of clever questioning/being worn down imo that's despicable to attempt to use to discredit her.