Sen. Hirono Asked Barrett if She ‘Ever Made Unwanted Requests for Sexual Favors,’ or Committed Sexua

Yes, I asked the Lesbian I was out drinking with for sex, she turned me down. The Horror! The Horror!

 

The word "retarded" is offensive in this context. Her job is to question candidates. What's the problem with that? Would it be preferable to have a sexual predator serve on the SCOTUS?

 

If she does it for every nominee then I don't see the problem.

 

She should not ask retarded questions if she doesn't want to be offended.

 

Unecessary question. The nominee is doing a good job embarrassing herself already, why give ammo to RW snowflakes?
Just ask if her if a law is real and watch her act like she has no idea.

 

Yeppers... William Howard Taft... 4 years POTUS... 8 years off.... 10 years Chief Justice...

Kamala can join that guy, @ 2035...

 

Why is it a "retarded" question?

 

A Supreme Court appointment is adult stuff. It involves questions about cases that could include rape and murder, including that of children.

 

Has she done so for every judge before and again why in the public hearing and not in her private discussions and why when there is no premise for such a question? Shouldn't there be some level of decorum in the chamber?

 

Yes, when I was single I met a girl in a bar and after a few drinks I asked her if she would like to go home with me for the night. OH MY GOSH ARREST ME!!!!!

How do these people get elected in the first place.

 

So what? Are you accusing her of molesting children or raping someone? What is the premise of that? Was Ginsburg asked that? Was Sotomayor asked that? Was Kagan asked that?

 

An example of that was...................

 

You are really excusing this? Why did Hirono wait until the public forum before she inquired? Did she expect Barrett to go through he single years with "Yes Joe Smith and I were at the library and I felt horny and asked if he would like to go back to my place"?

 

I am not Hirono and I don't represent her. How in the world would I know why she chose to ask the question in a public forum? I don't.

I expect Barrett to answer the question as she has to for all questions posed. I'm not understanding why this one has you so bent out of shape. People misbehave all the time. The only way to ascertain the truth and avoid future problems is to address the problem. Or, do you think just pretending something doesn't exist means it shouldn't be discussed?

 

Because there's no indication that soon-to-be Justice ACB has ever sexually assaulted anyone. Hirono could ask her if she's ever trafficked heroine for MS-13 and that would be an equally retarded question, because there's no evidence to even hint at a suggestion that that's something soon-to-be Justice ACB has ever done.

 

@Daniel Light commented that the question and answer have to be on record. That makes sense. And, a hint of impropriety is not always found. In fact, predators often get away with their crimes because they are the people we least expect to do those types of things.

 

No, they don't "have to be". There's no requirement that questions about sexual assault, nor questions about MS-13 drug trafficking, be asked or answered before the nominee can be confirmed. Hirono wants them on the record, but it doesn't "have to be" that way. The confirmation hearing could have proceeded just fine without delving into ACB's sexual history, just like it has proceeded just fine without delving into her (non-existent) history of drug trafficking for MS-13. The questions were moronic, from the most moronic member of the committee (and that's saying a lot for a committee that includes Sheldon Whitehouse).

 

So you think she's a predator? What do you have to base that on?

I have often found people that are guilty, or have issues...often project those issues on other innocent people.

 

To answer this directly, no such requirement exists. For example, if a nominee had a history of trafficking dugs for MS-13, that might put the justice at risk of blackmail, but no Senator has felt the need to ask nominees if they've ever trafficked drugs for MS-13, because it's retarded to even ask that without some hint of evidence that they might have, and there's certainly no rule that "somebody on the committee has to ask". That's just made-up nonsense.

 

It's entirely inappropriate. We don't go scavenger hunting for every possible ill a person has committed in his/her life, and it's even worse to choose THAT specific topic to somebody who is married, has 7 kids, 2 of whom is adopted. It's what's known as 'low hanging fruit' but in this case even worse, it's a sign of complete disrespect, ironic coming from the hyper feminist Hirono.

Why do we have senators beneath the role of the US Senate?

 

I have no idea if she's any kind of predator. But it has to be on the record she said "no". If an intern shows up in a year with allegations that prove
to be true, then the Justice needs to be on record. These are more "pro-forma" questions than allegations, but given the weird crap that come up
over the last few decades, they need to be on record.

Due Diligence.

 

Sexual impropriety is VERY COMMON among government workers and officials and judges. It's a "pro-forma" question these days ... unlike your MS-13 question.

 

so desperation

 

No. Due diligence.

 

nah if you did that you wouldn’t of had to ask