at first glance, this sounds not so smart

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...g-she-shows-n2522600

the Planned Format For the Ford Hearing

The Chairman and Ranking Member will give their opening statements. There is no time limitation.

Dr. Ford will get sworn and have the opportunity to give an opening statement. There is no time limitation.

Each senator will then have the opportunity to ask questions of Dr. Ford.

If any senator prefers, another committee member or staff counsel can ask questions on behalf of that senator.

Per Dr. Ford’s request, each senator has 5 minutes of questioning.

Per Dr. Ford’s request, will limit questioning to 1 round. The Committee Democrats object to Dr. Ford’s requests. The Chairman, however, promised Dr. Ford that he would agree to these requests as part of his promise to provide Dr. Ford a safe, comfortable, and dignified forum

1 round ?

Will alternate questioning between the Republican and Democrat committee members (or staff counsel).

Will do the same for Judge Kavanaugh’s testimony.

According to CBS News, "Democrats are expected to ask questions, while Republicans are likely to defer to a special counsel."

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

not sure I understand this. There 11 REPs and 10 DEMs on the comm. 1 round implies the total time is 5*21 = 105 minutes

?? We went thru all this for 105 minutes ?
When we know DEMs will be going bonkers throughout the REP time ?

maybe I just don't understand

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
maybe I just don't understand

What's to understand? It's simply a classic GOAT ROPE!

Yes, that is how I understand it as well.

Don't forget there will be a break at 45 minutes.

And Ds will try to interrupt the Rs.

And the protesters.

And so forth.

It all assumes Ford shows up. I don't think she will.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
1 round ?

That is fun, isn't it?

- Less discussion means fewer subjects can be discussed as well as discussed in depth, so there are fewer situations where Ford might contradict herself, admit a gap in her knowledge or memory, etc. The only way to make use of ten or eleven discrete five-minute periods is to focus on what can be done in each five minute period if Ford can convincingly complain that being recalled to her previous testimony by the staff attorney is somehow overly demanding or even harassment. And bear in mind, folks, the staff attorney will have to spend some time resetting the conversation with Ford at the beginning of every five minute period in order to continue a line of questioning from a previous five minute period.

- Few effective follow-up questions for the reasons given above.

- By going back and forth every five minutes, Ford may be able to play off multiple Dem question sessions against the efforts of the staff attorney. Ford may plausibly "find" herself confused at times by the multiplicity of topics and things said about them. Ford way wind up going off on a tangent by answering something a Dem said - in response to a question asked on the Reps' behalf by the staff attorney. That wouldn't just frustrate the efforts of the staff attorney, it could potentially eat up the clock as well. The staff attorney may find her game plan for questioning Ford thrown off if the Dems and Ford wind up raising other issues, distractions or postures that the staff attorney feels compelled to address while she has Ford in front of her and can question Ford.

- In a sense, it restarts the clock for Ford every time a new five-minute period begins. Perhaps she'll feel like she got a bad time in one five-minute period? Maybe she'll do better in the staff attorney's next five-minute period. What does she do if the staff attorney corners her? Get hostile, vague or even emotional until she runs the clock out. Who knows? Maybe the staff attorney will forget to come back to it later or have other things the staff attorney thinks it's more important to ask about. Perhaps just as importantly, the Dems will have a chance to "rehabilitate" her - help her answer questions, present her as a sympathetic figure, chew out the staff attorney for being a bully, etc., before Ford has to go back and spend another five minutes being questioned by the staff attorney.

That's all I can come up with off of the top of my head, but, yeah, 1 round for sure works in some ways for Ford.

The interesting thing is that it runs directly contrary to the interests and goals of the Dems on the Committee. Is Ford's lawyer getting all mamma bear or is Ford somewhat leery of the Dems', ah, good intentions?

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
Yes, that is how I understand it as well.

Don't forget there will be a break at 45 minutes.

And Ds will try to interrupt the Rs.

And the protesters.

And so forth.

It all assumes Ford shows up. I don't think she will.

I think the Senate Chambers should be closed to the public--let them watch on TV. There should be no demonstrating in the room at all. Anyone there who yells or interrupts should be immediately grabbed by the guards and thrown out (bodily).

Senators that interrupt out of turn should also be silenced--with gags if necessary.


flashguy

I'm just waiting for the next shoe to drop from the Democrats any minute now...something along the lines of "Breaking news...a retired nurse claims Kavanaugh exposed himself to her and several other people back in February of 1965 (his birth month) disqualifying him from being a Supreme Court justice".

I'm with those that think an excuse will be made or something will happen, and Ford will not testify. Their bluff has been called and they're only holding a pair of deuces.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
GOP lawmaker: Second Kavanaugh accuser refusing to talk to Congress

https://www.washingtonexaminer...-to-talk-to-congress

Deborah Ramirez, a Yale University classmate of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, is refusing to talk to the Senate Judiciary Committee about her accusation against Kavanaugh, a GOP lawmaker said Tuesday.

Hmmm, that’s interesting.

I turned on CNN tonight for the first time since Election Night really, so see the Left’s perspective on this whole thing and Anderson Cooper was reporting that Ramirez was trying to contact people in Congress and they were blowing her off.

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
Yes, that is how I understand it as well.

Don't forget there will be a break at 45 minutes.

And Ds will try to interrupt the Rs.

And the protesters.

And so forth.

It all assumes Ford shows up. I don't think she will.

I think the Senate Chambers should be closed to the public--let them watch on TV. There should be no demonstrating in the room at all. Anyone there who yells or interrupts should be immediately grabbed by the guards and thrown out (bodily).

Senators that interrupt out of turn should also be silenced--with gags if necessary.


flashguy

I like the Liberal Circus show.
It provides a good visual of how moonbat crazy the Democrats are.
Works more in favor for the Conservatives than the Liberals in the long run.

Stolen from WaPo comments today regarding continued demands from Dr. Ford:

I will not testify on a boat,...
I will not testify with a goat....
I will not testify,....
Here nor there.....
I will not testify anywhere.....
I will not testify first. Or last.....
I will not testify slow or fast.....

There's nothing more for me to say..... I can't remember, anyway.....

-Dr. Seuss-Ford

Just for kicks. I switched to Lawrence O’Donnell.

The straws he’s grasping at are epic. Seat Cavanaugh. Keep the Senate. Seat Amy Barrett.

Maricopa County Attorney for Thursday's Hearing

WASHINGTON - Arizona prosecutor Rachel Mitchell has emerged as Senate Republicans' choice to question Brett Kavanaugh and the woman who has accused the Supreme Court nominee of sexually assaulting her when they were teenagers, according to two people familiar with the decision.
Mitchell, the sex crimes bureau chief for the Maricopa County Attorney's office in Phoenix, is the leading candidate to query the two at Thursday's highly anticipated hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee, according to the individuals.
They spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it on the record.
A registered Republican, Mitchell has worked for the Maricopa County Attorney's Office for 26 years.
Christine Blasey Ford, who has accused Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her when they were both in high school, will testify under oath on Thursday. So will Kavanaugh.

Republicans have opted to bring in a female representative to ask questions for the 11 GOP men on the committee.
Mitchell did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A representative for the Senate Judiciary Committee declined to comment Tuesday night. Representatives for Kavanaugh and Ford did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In a 2011 interview, Mitchell said she was drawn to sex crimes work after she was paired with a senior lawyer prosecuting a youth choir director after joining the office as a law clerk awaiting the results of her bar exam. "It was different than anything that I would have ever imagined it being," she said. "It struck me how innocent and vulnerable the victims of these cases really were."
She is now a supervisor, where her duties include analyzing legislative changes and managing other attorneys. In an interview earlier this year on a local NPR radio station, Mitchell talked about the nuts-and-bolts of the office's adoption of a new sex crimes protocol, the first in office history, intended to improve the investigation and prosecution of cases. She said the new manual would ensure prosecutors "have something to look at to say, OK, these are the best practices, so that we can do the best we can for victims."
Tracy Westerhausen, a Phoenix defense attorney who has gone up against Mitchell in 30 cases, over more than 20 years, said she has developed a close friendship with Mitchell over their time on opposite sides of the courtroom.
"Part of the reason we're very good friends, she is a very nuanced and wise prosecutor," she said. "She doesn't pigeon-hole defendants. In my experience, she is a very pointed questioner of adverse witnesses. But she is also very fair."
A lifelong registered Democrat, Westerhausen said she has never discussed politics with Mitchell but considers her a good choice for the high-stakes job. "As an American, it would make me more comfortable to see her selected. I really do think that she's a very professional person, who is out to make sure the right thing is done," Westerhausen said.
Bruce Feder, a defense attorney in the county, said that as a manager, Mitchell spends less time now in the courtroom but had plenty of experience questioning both victims and people accused of wrongdoing.
He helped represent a priest who was prosecuted by Mitchell in 2004 for abusing a boy. Media reports indicated that the priest, the principal of a local school, was one of the first to be prosecuted for sex abuse in the county. The priest pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated assault with sexual motivation on the first day of his trial.
"She's been either a trial lawyer or a supervisor for decades. I'm guessing she knows what she's doing," he said.
In enlisting a woman to join their staff, Republican senators are taking an unusual step. Turning to a woman to ask Ford what are expected to be personal and potentially painful questions about her youth on live television spares the all-male panel of Republican senators some uncomfortable exchanges that could sway the public's opinion about the session.
"Inadvertently somebody will do something that's insensitive. I would not be wanting to ask questions about something like this," said Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., who is not on the Judiciary Committee.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Tuesday that Republican lawmakers hired "a female assistant" to "ask these questions in a respectful and professional way. We want this hearing to be handled very professionally, not a political sideshow." McConnell would not reveal the woman's identity.
Congressional hearings are typically plum opportunities for lawmakers to grab the spotlight, draw attention to the issues they care about, and on occasion, create a moment that goes viral online.
But this time, Republicans on the committee prefer to keep lower profile.
"I'm going to let the professional person do it," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who would not name the woman working with the Republicans.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said he expected the counsel would conduct all questioning of Ford, "although I'm very capable of doing it."
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said he appointed a woman from the outside in order to "depoliticize" the process and prevent a rerun of Anita Hill's testimony at Justice Clarence Thomas's 1991 confirmation hearing.
"The whole point is to create an environment where it's what Doctor Ford has asked for, to be professional and to not be a circus," said Grassley.
Democrats criticized their Republican colleagues for leaving them in the dark and accused them of shirking their senatorial duties.
"Who is going to speak for all of the 11 Republican senators? We don't have the name, do we?" said Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. "Someone has been given a new job, a person we don't know. At some point, that secrecy has to be unveiled. We should at least know who's going to take the place of 11 duly-sworn senators of the United States."

Link to Original Article Maricopa County Attorney for Thursday's Hearing

Arguably, this is putting Flake on the spot too. It's someone from his home turf running the show on Thursday; a strategic move hopefully meant to get him to quit his grandstanding.

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:
I think the Senate Chambers should be closed to the public--let them watch on TV. There should be no demonstrating in the room at all.

I agree.

Crying Chuck has the dirt flying in Phoenix now, trying to dig up the intel on this female questioner. Sleepless nights in Phoenix

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
Crying Chuck has the dirt flying in Phoenix now, trying to dig up the intel on this female questioner. Sleepless nights in Phoenix

Yeah, so much for the "but she's going to be questioned by 11 old white guys!" argument. Talk about a spastic change of opinion as they flail around in panic now. To continue with the poker references, the Republicans just turned over their ace in the hole.

Ladies and gentlemen, should Ford show up and the Thursday hearing go forward as scheduled, this is what I'd like to see Judge Kavanaugh end his time in front of the committee with. 'This' is how a man of courage puts an end to the nonsense.

How about they try this?

"Let us not assassinate this lad further, Senator. You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"

Wonder if Justice Thomas is saying "Here we go again!"

quote:

Originally posted by CoinRoller:
Stolen from WaPo comments today regarding continued demands from Dr. Ford:

I will not testify on a boat,...
I will not testify with a goat....
I will not testify,....
Here nor there.....
I will not testify anywhere.....
I will not testify first. Or last.....
I will not testify slow or fast.....

There's nothing more for me to say..... I can't remember, anyway.....

-Dr. Seuss-Ford

Great! Made it a meme.