Page 6 - Judiciary Process News Today

>> not about this. >> excuse me, he was grilled for 30 hours. >> not about this. >> i know your friends on the democratic side -- now theyre going backwards. >> personal insults of me, nobody caress about this. just speak to this. >> this mans denies being there. do you think this process matters to judge kavanaugh and his wife and two daughters? >> i think it would be more fair to enlist the fbi. i think youre hurting your guy. >> were not hurting our guy. >> you are. because it looks like your...

Encourage that kind of behavior and i dont think you do. >> but regardless of the process, and even if it was a delay the problem with the delay argument is delay of what? there is no hard time of what this means. >> no, there is delay for the purpose of pushing it beyond the mid-terms. that is the perceived goal. >> but theres no reason for it to get to that point. with anita hill you have precedent. the fbi looked into it three days, you have precedent, you set the time. but at least you show ...

First time, he was willing to testify and cleared his name and say under oath what he has said otherwise, which is unequivocally and categorically this is not true. so he was willing to do it last monday. shes not willing to do it the following monday. we have said from the very beginning that they both should be heard and that the process, because we respect the process, the senate judiciary process and the senates process. they are charged constitutionally with advising and consenting to the p...

The least possible sensitivity 27 years ago. >> tarana, what is your message to lawmakers on the judiciary committee? do you have any sense that the line of questioning, the tone of it, would be different this time? >> it has to be different. my message would be that you have to learn lessons from 27 years ago. we cant relive anita hill. also, you cant approach this the way you approach any other, you know, judiciary process. youre talking about questioning a person who survived sexual violence,...

Dont want to do this, im anonymous, use it for what its worth. >> and her friend posted on facebook, and had to retract it. now people want me to go on tv and back it up. i didnt mean what i said. shes not helpful. >> she will be her own advocate here, shell have to. heres my concern. this is a struggle, this is hard, we dont have standards, we dont have rules, we dont know how to judge these situations -- >> there is a process in the senate judiciary -- >> not to judge this -- >> the senate has...

Delay as dishonesty. >> she told other people. >> oh. >> she told her husband, her therapist? >> when? >> 2012 the husband, and when kavanaughs name started coming up she talked to friends to discuss whether she should bring it forward. >> how do you know she talked to friends? >> thats the reporting on it? >> from where. different sources that are reporting on it. >> do we know for sure? >> i havent heard of a single friend. >> go to them, go to the names she offers, who have you told this too?...

Judgment on whether or not you decide this person should be elevated to the highest purpose of integrity in our democracy? >> yeah, i would take a little bit of issue with lauras exposition there. i do think in a situation like this the senate is a bit of a fact finder. and as ive said before, each senator gets to set their own standard. i mean thats the way this process is. and theres no one else to do this. i do not think -- >> youre not digging into the facts here, though, ken. theyre not dig...

I think she expected it would come out this way. >> weve been trying to help our viewers understand why people dont speak out. do you have a sense or any conversations with your sister-in-law about why she didnt share this, if she didnt at the time. >> its. [ expletive ] -- completely understandable why she didnt share this at the time. i think its completely understandable to me and this is part of our culture that we live in. >> she said she would be willing to testify on thursday.

In the united states at some point theyll never be able to reunite the parents, theyll end up entering the foster care system in the united states depending what state they are in and what judiciary process that cob. whether they are lucky enough to find a family memory lated to those children here in the united states. but if not they will essentially become wards of the state. again, this country created orphans because this administration, the trump administration, secretary nielsen, basicall...

What if supreme court justices were chosen by voters. and imagine if we have another campaign for the supreme court between trumps election of gorsuch and obamas choice of garland. that would become as contentious as the presidential campaign and more consequential in the long term and we would end up with the president tweeting. we need more republicans in 2018 and must hold the supreme court. and in all seriousness, so many states do elect certain judges. ask yourself, why do we do it? it only...