3 ms·

Testimony is evidence[1]. Leland Kaiser, named by Christine Ford as someone else at the party, submitted a statement that she did not recall the party. This is

Testimony is evidence[1]. Leland Kaiser, named by Christine Ford as someone else at the party, submitted a statement that she did not recall the party. This is not a denial of Ford's claim. This is consistent with Christine Ford's testimony that for the other people present, it would have been a normal, unmemorable event. The narrative that "all named people denied Ford's claim" is an intentional oversimplification spread by the GOP to discredit her evidence[2]. 1. https://thelawdictionary.org/testimony/ https://thelawdictionary.org/testimony/ 2. https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/8x75y5/cornyn-says-allegations-against-mark-judge-are-uncorroborated-but-judges-ex-corroborated-them https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/8x75y5/cornyn-says-alleg...

oh_sigh 8y ago
Ok, I apologize in that I was using the vernacular of evidence and not the legal definition. Did Ford or anyone provide any evidence beyond her testimony? There isn't much of a case when they only thing that can be said is "you did this" and "no I didn't"
- omegaworks 8y ago
  The Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Kavanaugh were deliberately structured to give the appearance of "he-said-she-said." Senator Grassley prevented both sides from presenting witnesses that would have corroborated their testimony. The GOP members of the committee unanimously voted down a motion to subpoena Mark Judge[1]. 1. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/28/republican-senators-vote-down-motion-to-subpoena-mark-judge-to-testify.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/28/republican-senators-vote-dow...
  - oh_sigh 8y ago
    Do you have any reason to believe judge would flip his previous statements in his sworn testimony?
    - omegaworks 8y ago
      Judge did not give sworn testimony. He gave a written statement. He was not cross-examined by investigators. There was no followup effort made to understand his involvement in the allegation.
      - oh_sigh 8y ago
        And your assumption is that he would flip what he was claiming if pressed, not continue to deny that he knows what she is talking about?
        omegaworks 8y ago
        I'm not going to make any presumptions about his hypothetical behavior, that is not relevant. I'm simply emphasizing the lack of followup here. We were perfectly capable of investigating Christine Ford's claim fully and thoroughly, and the Republicans in power opted not to. It doesn't make a great case for the "historical power of allegations."

oh_sigh 8y ago

Ok, I apologize in that I was using the vernacular of evidence and not the legal definition. Did Ford or anyone provide any evidence beyond her testimony? There isn't much of a case when they only thing that can be said is "you did this" and "no I didn't"

omegaworks 8y ago
The Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Kavanaugh were deliberately structured to give the appearance of "he-said-she-said." Senator Grassley prevented both sides from presenting witnesses that would have corroborated their testimony. The GOP members of the committee unanimously voted down a motion to subpoena Mark Judge[1]. 1. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/28/republican-senators-vote-down-motion-to-subpoena-mark-judge-to-testify.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/28/republican-senators-vote-dow...
- oh_sigh 8y ago
  Do you have any reason to believe judge would flip his previous statements in his sworn testimony?
  - omegaworks 8y ago
    Judge did not give sworn testimony. He gave a written statement. He was not cross-examined by investigators. There was no followup effort made to understand his involvement in the allegation.
    - oh_sigh 8y ago
      And your assumption is that he would flip what he was claiming if pressed, not continue to deny that he knows what she is talking about?
      - omegaworks 8y ago
        I'm not going to make any presumptions about his hypothetical behavior, that is not relevant. I'm simply emphasizing the lack of followup here. We were perfectly capable of investigating Christine Ford's claim fully and thoroughly, and the Republicans in power opted not to. It doesn't make a great case for the "historical power of allegations."