Why are Grassley and Hatch Lying...?

Hank77 said:

The source is videos from 1991 of both Grassley and Hatch saying that the FBI was told to do and investigation into the Anita Hill accusation. Hatch says that was the 'very right thing to do' and what had been done in the past. Grassley says that he thought it was the right thing to do.
But now Grassley for some reason is saying that in the exact same circumstance it's not in the FBI's job description. Why?

There is still plenty of time before the elections.....

Click to expand...

..further, the GOP has already demonstrated that upcoming elections provide no 'deadline' for confirmations. Even that is not a requirement.

grasping the after wind said:

Or even better , perhaps you could make an argument for you accusations in your own words ? I expect you have your own thoughts and do not need to simply parrot the words of others or need them to speak for you?

Click to expand...

Not too many ways to phrase "Grassley lied."

Could go Yoda I guess.

Lie, Grassley did.

No demonstrable lie present. Waste of time

Hank77 said:

You can't change your mind about what the FBI does and has always done. It's not a matter of hypocrisy because the circumstances are exactly the same and both are Republican nominees.

What do you suggest it is?

Click to expand...

Show us that it is "exactly the same" and I think you will get answers to your question.

Albion said:

Show us that it is "exactly the same" and I think you will get answers to your question.

Click to expand...

Let's just remove that part of my statement, it isn't that important to the discussion.
To keep it simple, a Republican nominee to the SCOTUS was accused of sexual misbehavior.
Now we have a Republican nominee to the SCOTUS being accused of sexual misbehavior.

Hank77 said:

Let's just remove that part of my statement, it isn't that important to the discussion.
To keep it simple, a Republican nominee to the SCOTUS was accused of sexual misbehavior.
Now we have a Republican nominee to the SCOTUS being accused of sexual misbehavior.

Click to expand...

On the contrary, it appears to me that that point you are now dismissing is the most important part of the matter. It is not enough to say that two different cases are alike or comparable because something which might be called "sexual misbehavior" is alleged in both of them. And that doesn't even touch the primary claim made here which was that several senators are lying.

Hank77 said:

Let's just remove that part of my statement, it isn't that important to the discussion.
To keep it simple, a Republican nominee to the SCOTUS was accused of sexual misbehavior.
Now we have a Republican nominee to the SCOTUS being accused of sexual misbehavior.

Click to expand...

You know, maybe there really is a difference. In 1991 the one being accused was Clarence Thomas. I wonder, what is/was different about Thomas.. you'd think that it'd be more black and white when it comes to calling for an investigation.

Because caring about character is just the lie they tell Christians to get them to vote against dems. They don't want to know the truth, they just want their pick on the SCOTUS and a"win" for Trump so close to the midterms.

Albion said:

On the contrary, it appears to me that that point you are now dismissing is the most important part of the matter. It is not enough to say that two different cases are alike or comparable because something which might be called "sexual misbehavior" is alleged in both of them. And that doesn't even touch the primary claim made here which was that several senators are lying.

Click to expand...

This is what I said.

Hank77 said:

It's not a matter of hypocrisy because the circumstances are exactly the same and both are Republican nominees.

Click to expand...

What would you call the discrepancy in their statements?

Albion said:

On the contrary, it appears to me that that point you are now dismissing is the most important part of the matter. It is not enough to say that two different cases are alike or comparable because something which might be called "sexual misbehavior" is alleged in both of them. And that doesn't even touch the primary claim made here which was that several senators are lying.

Click to expand...

The only ones being accused in this article is Grassley and Hatch.

camille70 said:

Because caring about character is just the lie they tell Christians to get them to vote against dems. They don't want to know the truth, they just want their pick on the SCOTUS and a"win" for Trump so close to the midterms.

Click to expand...

Uh, isn't it the other side that is trying to make character an issue that will provide them with a win in this case? Look at how Sen. Feinstein sat on the alleged letter from Prof. Ford until the last moment.

Hank77 said:

The only ones being accused in this article is Grassley and Hatch.

Click to expand...

The only one being accused in this article is Grassley.

Click to expand...

Which is it to be?

Albion said:

Uh, isn't it the other side that is trying to make character an issue that will provide them with a win in this case? Look at how Sen. Feinstein sat on the alleged letter from Prof. Ford until the last moment.

Click to expand...

No she immediately gave it to the FBI.

Hank77 said:

No she immediately gave it to the FBI.

Click to expand...

Sen. Feinstein definitely kept it a secret throughout the exhausting hearings and the much-discussed need to examine every one of hundreds of thousands of documents. Not until all that was concluded and the committee was set to vote was the committee informed.

Albion said:

Sen. Feinstein definitely kept it a secret throughout the exhausting hearings and the much-discussed need to examine every one of hundreds of thousands of documents. Not until all that was concluded and the committee was set to vote was the committee informed.

Click to expand...

This is true. Maybe she was waiting for a response from the FBI, idk.

I suspect that the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee already knew about the letter before she brought it up. It's hard to believe that the Republican DOJ didn't tell them.

Hank77 said:

This is true. Maybe she was waiting for a response from the FBI, idk.

I suspect that the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee already knew about the letter before she brought it up. It's hard to believe that the Republican DOJ didn't tell them.

Click to expand...

I'm sure she timed it the way she did for exactly the reason the conservatives are saying; to delay the voting. However, it's a bit late for people to be crying foul that people are playing politics. Mitch McConnell decided that the Constitution meant that a President can only appoint a justice for 3/4 of his or her term, all because of politics. If the Democrats come to power, it's going to mean a President can't appoint a justice for 1/2 of the time. We might as well just skip to the real answer right now: the Senate is no longer going to confirm Justices unless they are from the party in power. And here we are.

grasping the after wind said:

MSNBC? Perhaps you could refer us to a reputable source? Or a t least one that was not considered an unintentional parody?

Click to expand...

Why don't you actually address Lawrence O'Donnell's comments? Are you unable to?

Moreover, if I'm not mistaken (I was seven when the Anita Hill hearing(s) took place), Thomas was only accused of harassment and they still wanted an FBI investigation. Not that harassment should be acceptable, but Kavanaugh is credibly accused of assault and they're trying to stonewall and whitewash the alleged victim.

Changelog: Changed 'rape' to 'assault'.
Ringo

Ringo84 said:

Moreover, if I'm not mistaken (I was seven when the Anita Hill hearing(s) took place), Thomas was only accused of harassment and they still wanted an FBI investigation. Not that harassment should be acceptable, but Kavanaugh is credibly accused of rape and they're trying to stonewall and whitewash the alleged victim.
Ringo

Click to expand...

Assault, not rape.

Hank77 said:

This is true. Maybe she was waiting for a response from the FBI, idk.

Click to expand...

The same FBI that said it wouldn't have any cause to investigate after she finally revealed the existence of the letter?