The Democrats should have hired a prosecutor to ask Kavanaugh questions at the hearing

[oberliner]

I think that could have been really effective.

For instance, as others have mentioned, I would have liked to have heard more questions regarding that July 1 gathering as noted on the calendar he provided.

The calendar identifies two people also named by Ford - and it seems more than possible that this was the date of the gathering in question.

I think one steady prosecutorial line of questions could have drilled down into asking him to provide more details about that evening of "brewskis" listed on the calendar (Booker touched on it briefly).

This approach might have helped keep the hearing focused on the allegation from Ford which I think would have been shown to have been convincingly credible, even for Republicans.

One critical goal is to create a situation where at least a handful of Republicans feel compelled to vote against the confirmation. I think that approach could have helped to achieve that goal.

As things stand now, I am not sure which Republican senators we can count on to vote no and stop this confirmation. I certainly hope they are out there.

[TheBlackAdder]

1. A few of the senators were former prosecutors.

[oberliner]

2. Yes, but I think one person asking all the questions would have been effective

Rather than having to sort of start over with each different senator.

[TheBlackAdder]

6. Did it matter? Kavanaugh blew off questions. The 5 minute flip flop was designed to take heat of him

.

The GOPers didn't invent the 5 minute alternating turn thing to use against Dr. Ford, they were using it so that when Kavanaugh would get thrown up against the ropes, the bell would ring and he would get a reprieve. The one person thing was shown not to be effective, because each Dem senator has their own questions and were able to see and probe topics that one person might not be able to respond to quickly enough. That tactic failed miserably with the GOP ringer.

.

[oberliner]

12. Maybe not

Again, I am just reflecting on the totality of the hearing and wondering if there could have been any way for more details about the specifics of that July 1 gathering elicited somehow.

I think that directing Kavanaugh to talk more about that night and what he remembers, especially since he wrote that he had beers with Judge and PJ, could have at least helped to center in people's minds the evening described by Ford during her testimony.

[RockRaven]

8. Someone (I think it was Coons?) floated the idea of yielding their time to Harris and Klobuchar

I think it could have been more effective if they had followed through, and as a group. It need not have been JUST women Senators with prosecutorial experience, if any of the men were former prosecutors they could have been used as well -- the point being that yielding the time to the 2 or 3 most experienced prosecutors, although with at least one women, might have been better.

[john657]

11. I believe Sen. Blumenthal was a State Prosecutor at one time. n/t

[oberliner]

13. Yes, I think that could have been a good idea

Perhaps if the Democrats had agreed that they would all yield their time to one of the senators who has experience as a prosecutor than that could have been similarly effective.

[pnwmom]

10. They would still have all their questions divided into 5 minute sections that he could blow off.

There was no magic solution to this. He was determined to not answer direct questions of the Democrats. Amy Klobuchar was a prosecutor. He not only blew off her questions, he snottily asked her about HER drinking.

[oberliner]

15. The 5 minute thing was awful

I certainly agree that it was not conducive in any way to getting answers to questions from him.

With that limitation in place, however, I think maybe a single questioner focused in a prosecutorial-like manner on the specifics of the gathering itself - especially as it seemed to coincide with what he wrote on his calendar for July 1 could have maybe put him a position where he may have said something incriminating.

Also, it would have had the effect of bringing back what Ford had described during the Kavanaugh section of the hearing.

Another frustrating thing was that Ford's testimony occurred while most people were at work, whereas much of Kavanaugh's testimony occurred as many people were getting home from work.

[pnwmom]

17. I was frustrated by the fact that he was allowed to substitute a different initial statement

for the one he'd made public the day before, and it was much, much longer than hers.

Imagine if she'd done that, what the reaction would have been.

[BeyondGeography]

3. Terrible idea

Prosecutors don’t know how to work in five-minute increments in between sympathetic (and often unrelated) questioning from people who want to be helpful to the witness. All you had to do was watch the Blasey Ford hearing to see how bad that works.

[oberliner]

7. I think it could have been effective

Though I do agree that the five-minute increment thing would have been a hindrance.

I just thought there were some unexplored avenues of questioning that could have elicited responses that could have been helpful.

Particularly, the July 1 date on the calendar - which seems to match up in some critical respects with the gathering Ford described.

[RockRaven]

14. Schiff is a former US Attorney and he did pretty well in HPSCI hearings...

Most of the times in those HPSCI hearing I'd rather have seen him get a second or third crack than some of the other Dem members.

The Dems on this committee could have done something similar, yield their time to their best/most experienced interrogators/prosecutors. They can't control the format since they don't have the gavel, but they could have tried to make the most of what they had to work with. Maybe they DID make the most of it, I think it is reasonable to think they could have done better.

[Hortensis]

19. Agree, terrible idea. Oberliner, please remember this

is supposed to be a courteous and very high minded examination of a candidate, character, background, and judicial philosophy and temperament, the mother of all job interviews for a life appointment to our highest court.

Nominees are presumed to be among our best, honored by being considered. Prosecutors do not belong in this process. That one was brought in, even just to hide white male domination, is a symptom of how Republican corruption is infecting our institutions.

Btw, for one brought in by the Republicans to act for them, this one seemed uncomfortable with comporting herself as a political hit man hiding behind her kindly, frumpy appearance. However, it's seeming quite likely that, while questioning Kavanaugh, she made a connection between the July 1 calendar entry and the party where the alleged attack took place and dropped that subject.

[brush]

4. Nah, that format blunted the effectiveness of the repug prosecutor and would've done the same...

if the Dems had deployed a prosecutor

That five minutes on then five minutes given over to the other side did not work which is why the repugs ditched it when Kavanaugh was being questioned.

[oberliner]

9. The format blunted the effectiveness of the hearing in general

Every time any Democratic senator asked a question, Kavanaugh would talk very slowly and about unrelated details (such as who was pitching at a baseball game he attended) in order to run out the five minutes.

I think if one person had the whole chunk of time - although there would be interruptions and the challenge of maintaining momentum - then there might have been a way to keep things more focused.

I think the other side ditched theirs because they wanted to rant and rave and grandstand and did not actually want to get answers to any questions.

[joshcryer]

5. They don't control the committee.

I'm sure that they offered it in private but it was scoffed at.

[oberliner]

16. But the Republicans were allowed to do that

I am not sure they could have prevented the Democrats from doing something similar.

[joshcryer]

18. The FBI isn't going to do "an investigation" without the committee head asking them.

It would be highly partisan and political from their point of view. They have to be asked by "the people in charge" which would be the Republicans in this case.

Also, pretty sure one of the Democratic senators did voice that he had reached out to the FBI.