Thursday may be a big day for other reasons.

IrishTxAggie said:

---

Should've kept it for Thursday.

---

I don't think it was ever scheduled for Thursday

IrishTxAggie said:

---

Should've kept it for Thursday.

---

Was a vote schedule for Thursday?

no.

aginlakeway said:

---

IrishTxAggie said:

---

Vote rescheduled
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/25/senate-judiciary-committee-reschedules-vote-on-brett-kavanaugh-for-friday-morning.html

---

When was it moved from? This sounds like the perfect time to vote.

---

She's not going to show and they know that, is my suspicion. They probably have investigators who have located her and were watching to see when or if she left.

The committee vote was scheduled immediately following the hearing on Thursday. This way, if they wait until the next morning, the cries of rushing to vote won't be as loud, since she failed to show the day before.

aggiehawg said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

IrishTxAggie said:

---

Vote rescheduled
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/25/senate-judiciary-committee-reschedules-vote-on-brett-kavanaugh-for-friday-morning.html

---

When was it moved from? This sounds like the perfect time to vote.

---

She's not going to show and they know that, is my suspicion. They probably have investigators who have located her and were watching to see when or if she left.

The committee vote was scheduled immediately following the hearing on Thursday. This way, if they wait until the next morning, the cries of rushing to vote won't be as loud, since she failed to show the day before.

---

I agree. I bet they're watching her every move.

aginlakeway said:

---

IrishTxAggie said:

---

Should've kept it for Thursday.

---

Was a vote schedule for Thursday?

---

Actually, the committee vote was scheduled for Thursday immediately following the hearing.

Pinche Abogado said:

---

Thursday may be a big day for other reasons.

---

I believe that our friends Messrs. Rosenstein and Trump have a meeting, no?

Rosenatein has been called to the principal's office. I bet he gets expelled or drops out.

aggiehawg said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

IrishTxAggie said:

---

Should've kept it for Thursday.

---

Was a vote schedule for Thursday?

---

Actually, the committee vote was scheduled for Thursday immediately following the hearing.

---

Thought there was some rule about the vote not being able to be held on Friday?

I remain pleased at how the Senate GOP has handled this.

if Kavenaugh gets confirmed as he should, then they handled it well, but they still haven't learned that you can't be so "well, we don't want to offend anyone". They should have gone after the Democrats and all of the obvious signs of this being a scam from the beginning and never let their foot of the Dems' necks.

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

Prognightmare said:

---

If you email staff they will email you back and usually include the exact post that brought on the ban. I know from many experiences.

---

ditto... and then you can make your case.

i've gotten bans reduced or removed with explanation and/or extenuating circumstances. although that's rare.

---

I have likewise, but that begs the question, "why the arbitrary ban? Why not do some basic investigation before simply dropping the hammer, based upon a post getting a certain number of flags, or whatever the case? Especially with a long-time poster, such as Sqd 7!

Free Squadron 7!

TriAg2010 said:

---

I remain pleased at how the Senate GOP has handled this.

---

BoerneGator said:

---

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

Prognightmare said:

---

If you email staff they will email you back and usually include the exact post that brought on the ban. I know from many experiences.

---

ditto... and then you can make your case.

i've gotten bans reduced or removed with explanation and/or extenuating circumstances. although that's rare.

---

I have likewise, but that begs the question, "why the arbitrary ban? Why not do some basic investigation before simply dropping the hammer, based upon a post getting a certain number of flags, or whatever the case? Especially with a long-time poster, such as Sqd 7!

Free Squadron 7!

---

He's out of ban jail. Argued his case and won on appeal.

Ultimately all of our opinions are pure conjecture as we have no idea what is going on behind closed doors. It's reasonable to assume there were a handful of Republican Senators holding out. The **** storm of the past few days possibly gave those holdouts the cover they needed to vote yes. So now the Republican leadership is finally in a position to pay hardball. And as others have mentioned this fiasco may have even forced a few Democrats to defect to the right.

What's to stop the Dem dewshes from dropping another accuser each night until the hearing and demanding a delay because of "the number of legitimate women who need to be heard"? At this point I would be surprised if they don't.

Any other allegation would damage them...I think they realize this stunt has energized the GOP going into November.

They gambled and lost.

The fear of getting voted out of office.

houag80 said:

---

What's to stop the Dem dewshes from dropping another accuser each night until the hearing and demanding a delay because of "the number of legitimate women who need to be heard"? At this point I would be surprised if they don't.

---

Their returns have diminished into the negative. They used an old playbook and thought they had a guaranteed win but they lost public opinion in the last day or two, so no use digging a deeper hole.

It was a desperate move riding the coattails of the #metoo movement.

It's a referendum on decades-old democratic BS and false sexual assault allegations.

ETA: America is waking up

I don't think they ever had good support among their less rabid supporters. I have some reliable dem voters as FB friends and they have all completely left the Kavanaugh thing alone since the Ford story leaked. They've been really vocal about the Cruz "Summons" and that's about it.

GCP12 said:

---

Sucks to suck

---

You snooze, you lose. Your "ace in the hole" should have testified when she had the chance.

aginlakeway said:

---

bigcat22 said:

---

BarKeep_03 said:

---

It is. After a fundraiser in the Hamptons in August 2016.

---

---

Shows at least a 2-year history between the 2 ... I'm sure it's longer ...

---

This has probably already been discussed (still playing catch-up on the thread) but pretty sure that atty Katz has run interference for Slick Willie back in the day on his "bimbo eruptions". No, it was since then, but cannot recall the precise details, but she has a long history of defending Slick.

nm...I'm an idiot.

Whens lunch said:

---

GCP12 said:

---

Sucks to suck

---

Seems Feinstein doesn't understand that Friday comes after Thursday.

---

Unless Ford doesn't testify on Thursday ...

Those cold Republican bastages keeping their procedural options open.

Wildmen03 said:

---

GCP12 said:

---

Sucks to suck

---

You snooze, you lose. Your "ace in the hole" should have testified when she had the chance.

---

But...but....but...but...you can't vote yet. Why, how do they know ChiFi doesn't have another letter? Have they even bothered to ask?

GCP12 said:

---

Sucks to suck

---

Poor stupid Diane. Say goodbye to Roe you *****.

aginlakeway said:

---

Whens lunch said:

---

GCP12 said:

---

Sucks to suck

---

Seems Feinstein doesn't understand that Friday comes after Thursday.

---

Unless Ford doesn't testify on Thursday ...

---

Seriously how can she say this when everyone knows she's been aware since July? The timing is on the Dems

agmag90 said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

Whens lunch said:

---

GCP12 said:

---

Sucks to suck

---

Seems Feinstein doesn't understand that Friday comes after Thursday.

---

Unless Ford doesn't testify on Thursday ...

---

Seriously how can she say this when everyone knows she's been aware since July? The timing is on the Dems

---

Because everyone doesn't know this. The media ignores it.

GCP12 said:

---

---

I actually tend to agree with Chuckie's last statement, to wit:

"There is NO presumption of guilt OR innocence".

But, the accused needn't prove his innocence, or in this case, prove a negative. Can't be done. Otherwise, he could be accused of anything, nevermind how absurd, and it's impossible to "prove" innocence, beyond a stern, categorical denial!

Bo Darville said:

---

GCP12 said:

---

Sucks to suck

---

Poor stupid Diane. Say goodbye to Roe you *****.

---

No. Roe or more precisely, Casey, won't happen. A ban on late term abortions could result however.

FTR: I still consider viability as the determinative issue. If the fetus can survive out side of the womb? Nah. Before that? A choice that is the woman's to make.