Hirano’s Hedge: Kavanaugh Not Entitled To Presumption Of Innocence Due To His Ideological Views

440px-Mazie_Hirono,_official_portrait,_113th_CongressWith the addition of a second woman alleging sexual misconduct of Brett Kavanaugh, it is still not clear what factual disputes will have to be addressed before a final confirmation vote occurs in the Senate. Putting aside questions over late timing of the allegations, there is agreement that the Senate will have to consider both the allegations of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and the new allegations of Deborah Ramirez. What is far more troubling is the continued disagreement on the standard that Senators should use in considering the allegations. While objecting that their Republican colleagues are not prepared to give the women an “impartial hearing,” various Democratic senators have declared (before any testimony is heard) that they believe Dr. Ford – and thus do not believe Judge Kavanaugh. That is troubling enough, but Sen. Mazie Hirono (D., HI) has introduced a far more troubling element in suggesting that she may decide the factual question on the basis of Kavanaugh’s jurisprudential views.

Hirono has previously declared that she believes Ford even before hearing either in testimony before the Committee. She also told all men everywhere to “shut up” and just stand with Ford. In her latest interview, Hirono was pressed on whether Kavanaugh has “the same presumption of innocence as anyone else in America?” For most people, the question would be an easy one to answer in the affirmative, Hirono demurred and declined to say that she would afford Kavanaugh this core presumption of the rule of law. She said that she would “put his denial in the context of everything that I know about him in terms of how he approaches his cases.” She said that she would consider his “ideological agenda” and her view that “he very much is against women’s reproductive choice.”

Hirono’s mixing of factual with ideological considerations further degrades a process that is already deeply undermined by last minute allegations and partisan bickering. It is also curious to see a senator tie credibility on sexual misconduct to one’s view of Roe v. Wade. Bill Clinton, Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer, Al Franken and others were all reportedly pro-choice but also labeled as abusers.

Such a reference to an accused’s political or ideological views by a judge would be viewed as the basis for a mandatory recusal for bias. It is entirely immaterial how one views constitutional rights in whether they should be believed in denying the admmission of a crime.

There was, of course, a time when such a presumption of guilt on the basis for religion or nationality or other characteristics was an accepted (even celebrated) practice. During the Spanish Inquisition, who you were would determine whether you would be believed. It was not just suspected Jews but others like foreigners who faced an effective presumption of guilt. When Pedro Ginesta, an elderly man from France was arrested in 1635 for eating bacon on a day of abstinence, the indictment declared “The said prisoner being of a nation infected with heresy [France], it is presumed” that he is lying and part of “the sect of Luther.”

France for its part had the same difficulty with separating politics from law. During the French Revolution, the Law of Suspects was passed in 1793 relieving tribunals of the burden of minimal evidence in ordering arrests and any perceived counter-revolutionary views was enough to be indicted. Jacobins saw law and politics as inextricably linked. Of course, the desire to use legal or legislative means to punish political opponents becomes an insatiable appetite. One year later, the tribunals passed the Law of 22 Prairial, which stripped away remaining protections for the accused and allowed juries to convict on the ambiguous basis of “moral certainty.”

Hirono’s description of her approach comes dangerously close to the Jacobin use of “moral certainty” in judging facts. If Kavanaugh’s opposition to Roe can be used to subject him to a higher burden, would Weinstein’s support of Roe afford him a lower burden of proof?

It is not enough for Democratic Senators to simply say that they are not judges and therefore entitled to any standard of review no matter how pre-determined or unfair. Members of Congress do not have license to mete out punishments and judgments without due process to citizens. The Framers expressly barred Congress from passing “bills of attainder” – legislation that effectively singles out individuals or groups for special punishment for perceived offenses. Likewise, committees are subject to individual constitutional rights including the right against self-incrimination and other constitutional protections. In other words, there are rules.

More importantly, there are principles. When a member swears to uphold the Constitution, they agree to respect our defining values and protections. One of the most central protections is to be allowed a fair hearing. This is particularly the case when someone is accused of a heinous criminal act.

Unfortunately, “moral certainty” appears to be the growing standard for members who are rushing to assure voters on both sides that they are respective locks for either Ford or Kavanaugh. Proof then becomes a simple political head count. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) has even declared that he expects that, if Kavanaugh is confirmed, a Democratic majority would launch an immediate investigation and possible impeachment against him as an associate justice.

Thus, as Ella Wheeler Wilcox said, “no question is ever settled until it is settled right.” Yet, what is “right” increasingly appears like a simple question of math rather than principle in the United States Senate.

It is doubtful that Kavanaugh could be impeached absent clear proof of perjury before Congress. Thus, what happens next year may be less important than what happens this week. Senators on both sides must decide if they will act to further their constitutional institution or just their political instincts.

348 thoughts on “Hirano’s Hedge: Kavanaugh Not Entitled To Presumption Of Innocence Due To His Ideological Views”

  1. Of course this claim SHOULD HAVE BEEN investigated. It WOULD HAVE BEEN if the letter had appeared six weeks ago. It was “saved up” to be used as a last-minute delaying tactic. Had this claim been made public long since, it would have been disposed of long ago.

    The presumption of innocence is not a legalism. It is the fact that the person making a claim always bears the burden of proof even outside a court.

    A claim made without evidence may be dismissed without evidence. — Hitchens

    Any claim, including an accusation of social misbehavior.

  2. Hirono was pressed on whether Kavanaugh has ‘the same presumption of innocence as anyone else in America?’ . . . Hirono demurred and declined to say that she would afford Kavanaugh this core presumption of the rule of law.”

    Surely Turley knows that Kavanaugh is not currently a defendant in a court of law. Surely Turley knows that if Senator Hirono votes against Kavanaugh’s confirmation, Kavanaugh will not be sentenced to a term of incarceration in any penitentiary. Surely Turley knows that the Advice and Consent of The Senate is a political process rather than a legal process. Surely Turley knows that the vaunted rule of law is the end result of that and other political processes. Surely Turley knows that Merrick Garland never demanded to have his day in court nor to have compulsory legal process to confront the witnesses against him. Surely Turley knows that if Merrick Garland had asserted his right to speedy and fair trial by a jury of his peers, then Turley surely would have explicitly stated that Senate confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominees are neither criminal nor civil trials and, therefore, not subject to assertions of ones Sixth Amendment rights. So now Turley surely knows that everyone else knows what Turley surely does. Or does he?

    1. L4D:
      Surely you know that Western civilization has, as one of its foundational pillars, the concept that “he who asserts must prove.” That applies even to the lawmakers who say otherwise but know better. What a fraud this demagogue Mazie Hirono is. Disgusting in her utter contempt for the law.

      1. The burden of proof is, indeed, the basis for the presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It’s a pity that Turley didn’t frame his critique in terms of burden shifting. Even so, it is not strictly necessary for any Senator to prove the innocence of his or her vote to confirm or not to confirm Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court beyond a reasonable doubt. How could any of them prove the innocence of any of their votes? Besides, according to McConnell jury nullification is part and parcel of Advice and Consent. No means no!

    2. >Surely Turley knows that Merrick Garland never demanded to have his day in court

      This is ridiculous even for a “progressive”…

  3. Rev. Dash, I’ve heard some older women actually like going on a date with a gay man. Look at it from a woman’s point of view. Dinner, dancing, no real commitments. You know what those strait guys are looking for.

      1. Hiram I was the Phoenician King of Tyre who allied himself with King David father of King Solomon who asked Hiram to help build the Temple of David in Jerusalem.

        There’s a bunch more biblical business after that. In any case, I-Bob’s reference to Senator Hiram might be a continuation of his reply to The Reverend Dash.

      1. Mespo, your question is good, but what makes you think Hirano ‘thinks’? What I have seen of her is not thinking but reflexive action such as seen in lower forms of animals.

        1. And what kind of “thinking,” higher animal goes on Fox News with his wife sitting beside him and says the following:

          KAVANAUGH: We’re talking about an allegation of sexual assault. I’ve never sexually assaulted anyone. I did not have sexual intercourse or anything close to sexual intercourse in high school or for many years there after. And the girls from the schools I went to and I were friends —

          Doesn’t that remind you at least a little bit of Bill Clinton’s infamous non-denial denial, “I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinski”? Had Kavanaugh simply asserted that he “never sexually assaulted anyone,” he’d have been much better off. But for some reason, Kavanaugh felt the need to add that he “did not have sexual intercourse or anything close to sexual intercourse in high school or for many years there after.” So when do we get to the part where Kavanaugh says “it depends what the meaning of the word is is”? Or, to put it more plainly, does Kavanaugh truly believe that sexual assault requires sexual intercourse? Remember: Kavanaugh claimed that Bill Clinton perjured himself by denying that receiving fellatio from Monica Lewinski was the same as having sex with Monicsa Lewinsky.

          1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – Chrissy Blasey has made a squishy accusation against him. Kavanaugh is covering all his bases. Mandy checked him out for truthfulness and found him to be truthful in that interview. I wonder if Chrissy can say the same thing?

            1. Is Mandy a polygraph? Or an E-Meter? They say Kavanaugh is a Catholic–not a Scientologist. Wasn’t his wife sitting next to him while he was being “truthyful” to Mandy? Doesn’t Mandy work for Fox News?

              In what way, exactly, does “virginity” refute “attempted rape”? Truthyfully?

              1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – Mandy is an expert on body language. She has a site where she deconstructs public appearances and comments on the truthfulness of the appearance using their body language. She also teaches you how to do it for yourself.

                1. Is Mandy infallible? Has Mandy been scientifically studied and proven safe and effective for over the news-desk use? Has Mandy ever coached General Michael Flynn? Do the Scientologists know about Mandy undercutting the price of their E-Meters? [If not, then don’t tell them. Make them “perceive” it “dianetically”.]

          2. “Doesn’t that remind you at least a little bit of Bill Clinton’s infamous non-denial denial”

            Diane, it reminds me of the likely truth that Kavanaugh is a very decent man. Clinton had been known to be an abuser with accusations from many women that didn’t have a political ring to it.

            No one has ever said anything of this nature about Kavanaugh until politics became involved and the one statement made was used as a political weapon at the same time the claimant refused to testify in the normal fashion.

            You are a pig and that is why you mold the daily events the way you do. If we look back at everything you have said on this blog we note error after error as the data piles up. You have no reputation worth debating with.

  4. Two cases for study

    John the Baptist vs Queen Herodias:

    John had rebuked Herod for marrying Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother (named as Philip). Herodias demands his execution, but Herod, who ‘liked to listen’ to John, is reluctant to do so because he fears him, knowing he is a ‘righteous and holy man’.

    Joseph the Hebrew slave vs Potiphar’s wife:

    Joseph was bought as a slave by the Egyptian Potiphar, an officer of the Pharaoh. Potiphar’s Wife tried to seduce Joseph, who eluded her advances. As Joseph repelled her attempt to lure him into her bed, she grabbed him by his coat: “And it came to pass about this time, that Joseph went into the house to do his business; and there was none of the men of the house there within. And she caught him by his garment, saying, Lie with me: and he left his garment in her hand, and fled, and got him out”. Citing his garment as evidence, Potiphar’s wife falsely accused Joseph of having assaulted her, and he was sent to prison.

    1. You do realize the bible is a book you men made up whereby women are depicted as jezebels and thus substantiates your justification for rape–it’s always the women that tempt you. It starts with Eve and then goes on through each book of the bible. Only Mary “who was without sin” could give birth to Jesus, a prophet who loves his mother dearly. No wonder women are intrigued by gay men! 😂

    2. You forgot to add that though Herod was loathe to give his wife what she asked for, he did it anyway, and the ” righteous and holy” man’s severed head was brought into the dining hall after dinner.

  5. Just to clear up where some women stand on this issue: The reason why Roe v. Wade is brought up in this is without Roe v. Wade children that are the product of rape are protected from abortion! If you have men with certain sexual dominance proclivities towards women, then the punishment for rape is having to carry the child to term–you may not think this is that much to worry about, but what if it were your sister, daughter or your wife? Would you want them to carry to term the product of a rape because someone believes every life should be protected–in theory only? If they did think every life should be protected, they would not be gunning down young black men, kidnapping people’s children–in one instance killing a child that was in custody by not providing proper care. Who is going to pay for the healthcare for the mothers and children? Not the government according to the same senators. What about the children who normally would not be born due to genetics whereby the pregnancy is terminated? This would be children that fit into the category of pre-existing conditions. The government already has told the insurance company they do not have to pay for them, they will not be covered! As in the past when I was a child, I remembered parents leaving these children at the hospital and walking away. Who is going to take care of them? Where is the money coming from? What about people who have too many children and no place to sleep, no food for them? We already have a homeless problem with families. This is all being done because there are no white babies for adoption. Whites are now in the minority and they will be more the minority when there is no abortion. You have so many young whites on drugs–methamphetamines, heroin, etc.–what about those children being born addicted to drugs? Who is going to pay for them? They already come in with several strikes against them. To think overturning Roe v. Wade will not impact life in America is stupid old white men wishing for the good old days–there were never any good old days! Only what is on their mind. Women are not getting money to support their families and have to work two and three jobs to support the children they have. There are no jobs coming back to America– three-quarters of the supposed workforce are drugged out and on disability, the rest are barely making it working two jobs to make ends meet.

    It has a lot to do with why women seem to say he is guilty because although he may claim to be so pure that he did not have sexual relations through high school and college–his words on Fox News, not mine–and stands on a pulpit to say this is the reason he could not have attempted to rape anyone…. The other telling tale is the fraternity he belonged to and frat house he lived in; same frat house at that time was banned from Harvard for the same activities at Yale: excessive drinking, drugs, wild parties, and carousing! Was he there as a voyeur? Was he taking notes? Why did he live there? Was he the “straight guy who cleaned up after the beer parties?”

    There are reports that Kavanaugh is aggressive when he gets drunk–this is from his frat brothers. We all know about nasty drunks. Quite obviously the women involved were that drunk also–they’re all the upper crust of society. One starts to see a pattern of drinking in excess which started in high school and continued into college. Drinking until you are so drunk you do not know what is happening around you. You cannot remember what happened. And, I do not believe you kept your calendars from when you were in high school so that you could look in it and say, no I did not go to a party that night. We know from his testimony for his present position as a federal judge and this current “future position,” that he lies. A judge who lies under oath, what does that tell you. A judge that believes the ends justifies the means sitting on the highest court of the land. A judge who has a gambling party where he had his gambling tab wiped out at the Trump Casino in New Jersey most likely by the Donald himself. I guess we now know how Trump could bankrupt 2 casinos. With friends like that he didn’t need enemies, because that comes in handy now. So, you have a judge that is a nasty drunk with a gambling problem sitting on the highest court of the land who can be blackmailed on his indiscretions, just what the GOP likes. Just the man to stop the Russia investigation. The same one to take apart the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, NSA, and whatever other security organizations we have. While they are at it, they want to change some of the amendments to the Constitution. They just wrote in an executive order to protect the Evangelicals and make it so that they do not have to prove they are tax exempt. The IRS cannot ask them for their tax records, all they need to know is that they are Evangelicals. The same people that were in charge of most of the holding areas for the infants, toddlers, and youngsters kidnapped from their parents and those 500 whose parents were deported without their children. Those children are already placed in Evangelical homes.

    As the mother of two young men who did go away to college wherein one asked for his own room because he could not stand the partying roommates that would interrupt his studies (which I paid for), and the other more social son who thought he wanted to join a frat–an extremely popular one, until it came to the part of “debasing a young woman, taking her underwear and telling about his exploits….” He refused and although his best friends tried to talk him into it, he said, “no, I can’t do that.” They said just get her here and we will do the rest, and you’re in. He said, no. Needless to say, he did not make it into the fraternity. It did not bother him. His ethics and moral fiber and respect for women would not let him even think of doing this. He did all the other stupid asinine things that they asked, this was “the final step to be in,” and he turned his back on it. It was not that important to him. I felt proud that although we were hundreds of miles apart, he could not be swayed by others, he was not a follower but a leader. The head of the frat despised him for it but couldn’t keep his friends in the frat from speaking to him. It just was not that important to him because he has a conscious. We are not an overly “religious” family; I like to believe we are a spiritual and ethical family. My children grew up in the New York City Area–all three of them are artists and I work as artists. We are more cosmopolitan and bohemian, yet we have ethics and morals without running into a church or trying to convert others.

    Finally, it seems ironic: the story out of Pennsylvania with over 700 young men raped by the Catholic Priests that has just come to light, and these victims are coming forward now–these men who were raped, 30, 40, 50, 60 years later. No one is asking them why it took them so long to come forward; why? They are heroes because they are coming forward now, and their story can finally be told. They are “tortured victims of rape,” yet a woman who takes 20-40 years to come out and face the suspect is lying because she should have said something then. Why didn’t these men come out before? Why are you believing them now? Is it because they are men and you can align your feelings with them, but you believe women should not align themselves with other women? Why the double standard.

    In the end, the senators have already made up their mind they are voting this man in because Mitch McConnell has already said he has the votes to put him in. This is just a show sort of we let her have her say so what else do you expect? You women need to know your place! After all, you put Trump in the white house to represent your values: greed, greed, greed, and more greed. Uncivilized, the lowest of any human being that berates women every chance he can get, and only cares about himself. The Senate now resembles the president, they now proudly show their greed. No one else matters. Only if they can get more money, money, money, power and more money, and more power. Sort of like the age of the Romanovs, maybe that’s why Putin is so slyly sitting on the sidelines waiting for them to be consumed in their own greed. There will be no need to attack as we will have no defenses at all as they are currently being disbanded, there will not be one shot fired, not one nuclear weapon spent. The only positive side of the Russians taking over: they support the creative and performing arts.

        1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – I think he made his point. Calling one unhinged does not require explanation. It is all subsumed in the word unhinged.

          1. Assertion is not demonstration. tedseay asserted that The Reverend Dash was deeply unhinged. tedseay did not demonstrate his “point,” which, in turn, was merely an opinion on a par with nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah. Is that a self-explanatory opinion?

            1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark when you say someone is unhinged, the listener goes back to the original comment to decide if there is truth to the comment. It is not a term I would use, but it does come up from time to time.

              1. Mandy says there’s no body language to read in the original comment and, thereby, no truthyfullness to the opinion about the original comment, either.

  6. The Accusation Industrial Complex needs to be taken down. This jive is so far over the top…words fail. There needs to be some kind of ‘prove it or shut up & back off’ movement. The timing of all these accusations is a huge tell.


  7. I don’t give this Member of Congress from Hawaii the same level of consideration that our Host provided showing the historical and legal context contesting her assertions. I also don’t find her that clever or researched in her position, and likely her contributions in general. Her thinking is more along the lines of Garbage in, Garbage out. She’s just looking for a way to “justify” her vote on Mr. Kavanaugh. She’s not voting for him regardless (since he is an appointee of President Trump) and doing poorly at excusing it.

  8. The Senator from HI is a great disappointment to us all. Supposedly Flake of AZ (my state) is going to vote present.

    1. Paul C, my state as well. Born in Tucson I was. I voted for Kelli Ward. Oh well. The RINO got the nomination. Hope I am wrong about McSally.

      All this ‘at the very very very last minute’ accusation bull stuff needs to be stopped. Real victims are being put in a bad place. Now most REAL victims are in danger of not being taken seriously.

      And dontcha just the love the fascist dimm prog left once again displaying their ‘standards’? Oh yeah, that would be double standards. One set for them & another for those they oppose. Where are the rants & raves for an investigation into Keith Ellison? Many other Dimms as well.


      1. Did I miss something? Is this Ellison character soon to be nominated for a lifetime seat on the United States Supreme Court? So sorry for your confusion. Pro tip: just because it sounds good when hannity preaches to the choir doesn’t mean that rational people with cognitive ability will also be fooled.

        this is to “ya, iffen they don’t espouse hatred for the darkies, they be RINO fo sho” sammie the “brave”

        1. Mark M., Ellison is not being nominated for a lifetime seat at SCOTUS but his habits with women might have a lot in common with yours. You seem to work for a private boss who seems likely to barely stomachs you while Ellison works for the public that can’t stand the abuse of women.

  9. To be blunt. that piece of crap ought to be behind bars right now this very second for violating her oath of office, stripped of that office and awaiting disposition of sentence. This isn’t a game. When an enemy domestic reveals them selves the least punishment is impeachment , conviction and removal from office. I do not care what is their sex or preference, what is their religion or not, what is their problem. That party sent us around the world for decades to kill people just like this one. And we let one of them survive to infect the nation? .

    1. Wow! A noted flip for sure. Just for your information, nominee Kav should not suffer any criminal penalties unless and until a grand jury returns a “true” bill, and a petit jury composed of his peers finds during a fair trial and beyond a reasonable that he has committed a criminal offense. I’m shocked that your venom for such an honorable man has engendered a marked hatred for the Bill of Rights.

      this is to “I left drinking this batch I save from the still explosion” mikey

  10. and I was embarrassed being from Nevada and having Harry Reid as a Senator…

    what a nightmare it must be to be a Hawaiian and have her representing you

  11. The joke is that Mazie here has a JD from Georgetown Law Center. Any law being taught there anymore? And you thought nobody could make Wacky Maxey Waters look smart. Guess again.

    1. If I were defending Harvard in the race discrimination suit brought by Asian students. I think I call Mazie as my witness that good reason exists for questioning whether high Asian American test results translates into good lawyering skills.

      1. Not all Asian American students have high test scores. Some can be quite mediocre. Look at Kamala Harris. Her mother is from India, and is a cancer researcher. Her father is half white and half black. She was raised by a highly educated mother, but went to college at Howard and law school at Hastings. Those are both decent institutions, but a long way from the Ivy League, where someone who claims to be black when it suits her interests would have gone had she achieved even average test scores.

          1. So far as I know, Stefanie Cliffords never worked for The U.S. Mint nor The Dept. of Justice. Avenatti says his client who will accuse Kavanaugh did work for both The U.S. Mint and The Dept. of Justice.

            1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – we have a whole list of people who worked for the DoJ who are avowed liars. Comey, McCabe (now on Chrissy Blasey’s team), Strzok, Page, two Ohrs, etc. So, working for the Dept of Justice means nothing to me except that she is part of the Deep State.

              1. You conveniently forgot The U.S. Mint. Something tells me that The U.S. Mint is far less tolerant of liars than The DoJ. After all, there’s no indication that the U.S. Mint ever employed Brett Kavanaugh. Maybe Mandy at Fox News’s word for Kavanaugh’s truthyfullness isn’t good enough for those uber blue noses at The U.S. Mint.

      1. Excerpted from the article linked above:

        He [Avenatti] has also “warned” that his client is a credible person who has worked for the federal government and has undergone several background checks.

        “The facts and circumstances about what she experienced and what she witnessed, I’m confident that people are going to find those credible. I’m confident that those facts and circumstances are going to be disqualifying for Brett Kavanaugh, and I will also say this: This is a woman passed multiple security clearances administered by the U.S. government.” He said she has worked for the U.S. Mint and the Dept. of Justice.

        “To the individuals on the committee, like Mr. Grassley, to Donald Trump, and to his surrogates, I say this: You better be very, very careful before you come after my client and call her a liar or engage in some of the other despicable conduct that you’ve engaged in relating to Dr. Ford over the last four to five days.

        “I do not traffic in rumor and nonsense,” Avenatti added.

        CBS News reports Avenatti’s client has not gone public with her allegations because “we have to make sure security precautions are taken before we publicly release her identity[…] we have to make sure she’s in a safe place.”

          1. Why would The U.S. Mint or The Justice Department ask any employee if she had been gang raped in prep school? Honestly, you make no sense, sometimes.

            1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – her attorney is making the claim she has been polygraphed by the Mint and DoJ, I am wondering if they asked her about gang rapes. Or HER sexual history or HER drinking history.

              1. Obviously they should have asked her about Mark Judge. Who else would the ring leader be but the author of God and Man at Georgetown Prep? What will the body language expert from Fox News have to say about Mark Judge? Will The Amazing Mandy even get a chance to form an opinion about Mark Judge’s truthyfullness? Somebody remind me what happens to the member of an Omerta who can’t be trusted to remain silent anymore.

      2. Also excerpted from the article linked above:

        . . . Avenatti said his client is willing to talk to the Federal Bureau of Investigation to detail “how she was victimized and what she observed” during parties where Kavanaugh and his friends would allegedly get girls intoxicated on drugs and alcohol in order to “gang rape them.”

  12. Where is the column on Senator Graham saying he does not the care what Dr. Ford has say? It won’t change his vote. Talk about Double Standard.

  13. George,

    I believe we are in complete agreement Sen Hirinos is to stupid to be a voter let alone a US Senator.

    In the current USA it is a certainty we suffer from nor to many imbeciles like Hironos.

Leave a Reply