What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Valmy]

Gross

Interesting demographic breakdown in this NBC/WSJ poll.

Kavanaugh's net support among GOP men has gone UP points since his accuser went public.

Among Dem women it's gone DOWN 14 points.

It's also fallen among independent men and women.

Notable: Kavanaugh's net support has gone up 5 points among GOP men and up 3 points among Democratic men (!!!) since Christine Blasey Ford went public.

Why is the largest increase, +8 for Republican women, not as notable as the two smaller increases? Or is it just normal for Republican women to react that way?

[The Minsky Moment]

The Dem men shift is within the MOE. His net negatives were so high with them it's hard to move that needle.  The GOP moves are also not the big and follow from the common trend that partisanship hardens when the stakes are raised.

The moves among independents are significant and should be concerning to BK.

[Eddie Teach]

Least he could do after Kavanaugh took the rap for him.

Well, he's a middle school teacher, so somehow I don't think he's going to roll with it and take the blame.

Lol ty Captain.

[FunkMonk]

I kind of like this episode "Where are they now?" of this rich Washington suburb, but it took a dark and absurd turn after the rape allegations.

[FunkMonk]

Donald is openly mocking Ford on Twitter now. The President of the United States is trolling an alleged sexual assault victim.

The amount of abuse and humiliation she has received has probably ruined her life and I'm sure she deeply regrets ever having told anyone about Kav. 




Happy Friday everyone!

[derspiess]

Donald is openly mocking Ford on Twitter now. The President of the United States is trolling an alleged sexual assault victim.

Ugh.  He was kind of behaving himself on this issue up until this point.  What did he say?

[FunkMonk]

Donald is openly mocking Ford on Twitter now. The President of the United States is trolling an alleged sexual assault victim.

Ugh.  He was kind of behaving himself on this issue up until this point.  What did he say?

Dumbass tweeted:

I have no doubt that, if the attack on Dr. Ford was as bad as she says, charges would have been immediately filed with local Law Enforcement Authorities by either her or her loving parents. I ask that she bring those filings forward so that we can learn  date, time, and place!

[Eddie Teach]

That's rich. How many times has Trump gotten away with worse?

[Razgovory]

Yeah, teenagers are always calling the cops to report a crime as soon as they see it.

[Barrister]

So apparently some fellow Ed Whelan, whom I've never heard of but articles state is a deeply connected Republican (and personal friends with Kavanaugh) sent out a series of tweets suggesting Ford was mistaken - that she may have been sexually assaulted to a classmate of Kavanaugh's (who does appear to look similar to Kavanaugh).

Multiple people pointed out that he just accused a random private citizen of rape with no real evidence, which is likely defamation, and Whelan then deleted his tweets and apologized.

Does this move the needle?

[Eddie Teach]

Just muddies the water a bit more.

[Barrister]

Also...

negotiations are ongoing to have Ford testify before the Judiciary committee.  Now most of her requests sound reasonable.  But one of them is "to testify after Kavanaugh".

Now how is that going to work?  She's the one making the allegation.  How is he supposed to testify without hearing her evidence?

Yankee law-talkers - do you have a rule similar to the rule in Browne v Dunn (which is an old House of Lords case), which states that if an alternate series of events is going to be alleged, the witness must have an opportunity to respond to those allegations?  The way it works in criminal trials is, if the Accused is going to take the stand and say "well the complainant is the one who hit me first", then the defence lawyer will, in cross-examining the complainant will ask "so didn't you hit my client first"?

If the rule in Browne v Dunn isn't complied with, the court could theoretically ignore the contradictory evidence.  In reality they will usually allow us to re-call a witness.

[OttoVonBismarck]

The judiciary committee hearing room isn't a courtroom, and its rules are the rules of Senate parliamentary procedure. But the committee chair has significant latitude to allow essentially whatever he wants in terms of testimony.

[Barrister]

The judiciary committee hearing room isn't a courtroom, and its rules are the rules of Senate parliamentary procedure. But the committee chair has significant latitude to allow essentially whatever he wants in terms of testimony.

AGreed.  But a number of Senators are formal lawyers, so they should be familiar with the principle.

[dps]

The judiciary committee hearing room isn't a courtroom, and its rules are the rules of Senate parliamentary procedure. But the committee chair has significant latitude to allow essentially whatever he wants in terms of testimony.

AGreed.  But a number of Senators are formal lawyers, so they should be familiar with the principle.

Of course they're familiar with the principle.  But it doesn't  matter.  The Republicans on the committee basically don't want Ford to testify at all, but if they have to hear her testimony, they certainly want Kavanaugh to testify after her.  The Democrats would want her to be the last witness.  It's about politics at this point, not uncovering the truth and certainly not about justice.