Biden's unforced decision to hold a second round of Clarence Thomas hearings was critical.

[pnwmom]

Last edited Thu Mar 28, 2019, 07:32 PM - Edit history (1)

Anita Hill had been reluctant to come forward, and she wasn't a part of the first week of hearings. On the day the nomination was to be voted on, the Republicans suddenly realized they didn't have enough votes to be certain of his approval.

Biden could have called to have the vote on that day, as scheduled. And Clarence Thomas probably wouldn't be on the Supreme Court today.

Instead, Biden decided to hold another few days of hearings, which Thomas began with his angry man speech, and the men on the committee used to interrogate Anita, some of them viciously. Biden allowed NO expert witnesses on sexual assault to testify, and did allow John Doggett to speculate she had something called "erotomania." And he would not allow her corroborating witnesses to testify.

But NONE OF THAT HAD TO HAPPEN. He could have held the vote as scheduled and not given the R's 3 more days to regroup.

https://www.npr.org/2018/09/23/650138049/a-timeline-of-clarence-thomas-anita-hill-controversy-as-kavanaugh-to-face-accuse

Oct. 7: Hill holds a press conference and says she is willing to testify.

Oct. 8: This is the day the final vote on the Thomas nomination had been scheduled. But Republicans realize they do not have enough certain votes for confirmation. Republican leader Bob Dole and the Democratic leader George Mitchell huddle. With the Democrats in control of the Senate, Democrats have the upper hand, but they agree to a second round of hearings to begin just three days later.

SNIP

Republicans went after Hill with vengeance. Sen. Arlen Specter accused Hill of "flat-out perjury" at one point. At another, he suggested her testimony was the "product of fantasy."

Sen. Orrin Hatch, who is still on the committee, suggested that she got the idea for some of her charges from the movie The Exorcist.

Democrats were sometimes flat-footed in their attempts to show that Hill had no motive to lie. "Are you a scorned woman. ... Are you a zealoting civil rights believer. ... Do you have a martyr complex?" asked Democratic Sen. Howell Heflin of Alabama.

[Ninga]

1. This, sadly, this. Nt

[TwilightZone]

2. Should Hill have been allowed to testify?

Had the vote been held on October 8th, Hill wouldn't have been allowed to testify. I suspect that that wouldn't have gone over well, either.

[DURHAM D]

3. More testimony meant more days for

Biden to bask in the glory of all that tv coverage.

White House here I come.

well...maybe not

[pnwmom]

7. That's how it felt to me at the time. He liked his time on the nation's stage. n/t

[LakeArenal]

4. I remember it all. I was mad at Joe then

I’m not anymore. If Anita is, she has a right to be, but I’m not mad at Joe.

In the end Joe voted no.

Also, Joe remains the most qualified both nationally and globally.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

5. K and R for vetting

[bahrbearian]

6. Maybe Biden will choose David Brock For his Campaign manager

https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/Anita-Hill-hit-man-recants-2904817.php

[Pisces]

11. Trill bait

[Pisces]

12. Maybe Gabbard would choose Assad as chief of staff

[ehrnst]

13. That's not fair.

It could be Abdel Fattah el-Sisi.

Brutal authoritarians have different skillsets!

[question everything]

8. I don't remember the details, but I think that it was right for Biden to use all information

and, let us not forget - Anita Hill ushered the "year of the woman" the following elections.

Anita Hill ushered many corporations realizing that harassment on the job was a serious problem.

[pnwmom]

9. "All information" would have included allowing experts in sexual harassment to testify

as well as the women sitting in the hotel room, waiting to tell their stories -- but never called.

[DURHAM D]

10. He deliberately avoided using information.

jftr - Anita Hill paid a high price and never wanted to be the symbol of any movement.