Kavanaugh accuser wants FBI investigation before hearing

[Cecilie1200]

No, I really don't.

And you ask why rape survivors hesitate to come forward?

If she came forward when it supposedly happened, it would have been water under the bridge. Trying to prove something that happened 36 years ago is like trying to predict what the weather will be on election night today.

They can find witnesses who were there and interview them. They can place Kavanaugh at the scene..or not. They unlike you...are not totally stupid

How are they supposed to do that, when she refuses to tell us when it happened, or where? Every witness she HAS tried to name has said she's full of shit. What "scene" are they supposed to place him at? What would you like done, even leaving aside the fact that you're demanding an investigation by an agency with no jurisdiction? You keep pretending this lying bitch has produced anything that can be investigated. If she had gone to the police with this exact story and exact lack of detail 36 years ago, THEY would have told her there was nothing they could do, as well.

NONE of that is true. Why do you continue to lie?

Is it because you know you are wrong?

"I can't deny anything specifically, so I'll just claim it's all lies with no proof!"

I can see why you're a fan of Saint Ford: your accusations are just as empty and false as hers.

 

[hadit]

BTW, a new big-gun lawyer has joined the Ford legal team.

She needs fewer lawyers and more corroborating witnesses. In fact, just one would be helpful.

How about Kavanaugh? Doesn't he need corroborating witnesses? Just 1 maybe?

We don't know because she hasn't made her case under oath yet. It's not his responsibility to prove his defense, it's her's to prove her accusation.

When she makes a specific allegation about a specific place and time, then Kavenaugh can produce (assuming they exist) witnesses that can put him elsewhere. I believe she is deliberately being vague so he can't totally eliminate her contention in five minutes or less. Thus far, she's not made a strong case.

 

[hadit]

The accuser set a precondition that the FBI investigate her claims prior to her testifying.

Since when does an accuser have the right to "set the preconditions" of a hearing? It doesn't work that way. The committee sets the preconditions of the hearing. You either accept or decline.

You're blind if you can't see that the Ford team set this up so they can make an excuse why they aren't coming.

The vastly more powerful Republican-controlled Senate denied her that righteous response and played chicken with her.

The Republicans had nothing to do with it. The FBI stated the case was laughable and is outside their purview. They don't investigate local teen house parties.

This is not about a house party but rather about a Supreme Court nominee. Every Senator should be screaming for the truth.

They are, but 1) it's a house party they want the truth ABOUT, and 2) it's not the FBI's job. Since it was allegedly 36 years ago, it's not ANYONE'S job to investigate it, except for the Judiciary Committee.

Maybe instead of wailing and posturing about the GOP Senators not demanding an impossible investigation from an agency that has no jurisdiction, the DEM Senators should be demanding that Ford get her lying butt up to Capitol Hill.

Maybe the GOP concern itself with the lies Kavanaugh told the senate during these hearings.

The opposition has taken everything from the hearings off the table. Did you notice that?

 

[Nova78]

Since she is the accuser, give her a lie detector test and a FBI background check.

 

[hadit]

You might want to repost this.

No, I really don't.

And you ask why rape survivors hesitate to come forward?

If she came forward when it supposedly happened, it would have been water under the bridge. Trying to prove something that happened 36 years ago is like trying to predict what the weather will be on election night today.

They can find witnesses who were there and interview them. They can place Kavanaugh at the scene..or not. They unlike you...are not totally stupid

They did find witnesses. All three said Ford is FOS. How many witnesses do you need for them to tell the committee that?

They need as many as they can get until they find one that supports her story. At that moment, they proclaim that everyone else is lying and only that one can be believed.

 

[hadit]

If this was a democratic nominee you'd be demanding investigations, so the only BS s coming from those like you.

When has it ever happened to a Democrat nominee? It doesn't because Republicans aren't shameless scumbags like Democrats are.

You might want to repost this.

No, I really don't.

Yes you do. And especially because the last 2 democratic presidents had endless investigations on them for their entire terms with nothing found but a cum stained dress. You republicans are the scumbags.

"Nothing found but a dress."

That's if you ignore all the people around the Clintons who were convicted of crimes or forced to quit their jobs.

Bubba left a trail of sexual assault accusations in his wake. Kavenaugh, not so much.

Democrats don't care about sexual predators at all. If they did, they wouldn't still celebrate Bubba and Ted Kennedy.

 

[hadit]

At this point the deal should be closed. We gave you yesterday until 10:00pm, and extended it to today at 2:00pm and you're still jacking us around. Deal off. There will be no testimony.

Do you know this for a fact?

The truth is, that, despite their bluster, GOP leadership is $hitting their pants over this, and dare not pull the plug, now.

The truth is that you're once again counting on public support you don't have.

The GOP has no reason to fear this, or you, and is 100% doing this because THEY actually care about the charges and the process, while the left only cares about the politics.

If the GOP cared about the process Merrick Garland would be a supreme court justice. And if they were really concerned, they'd wait for the Mueller investigation to end so we would not have a president who is under investigation appointing SCOTUS judges who can stop him from being subpoenaed.

If the Dems cared about the process enough to even know what it is, they'd know that Merrick Garland did not have the votes, and wasn't going to have the votes. The Senate is not obligated to give anyone a vote if they know there's no chance of it being affirmative. And the process has NEVER involved depriving the President of his Constitutional powers and duties based on how many accusations his opponents can make up.

I really think they should have held the vote though. It would have taken the whole talking point completely off the table. They would still be whining, but that's just what they do.

 

[hadit]

BTW, a new big-gun lawyer has joined the Ford legal team.

She needs fewer lawyers and more corroborating witnesses. In fact, just one would be helpful.

How about Kavanaugh? Doesn't he need corroborating witnesses? Just 1 maybe?

To corroborate what? Witnesses corroborate affirmative statements, not negatives, you moron. How do you corroborate, "It never happened", particularly when you have no idea when or where it was supposed to have happened?

Maybe if Saint Ford could pin down a date more specifically than "sometime in the summer", he could THEN make an affirmative statement along the lines of "I wasn't even in town that week" and THEN he could produce witnesses or evidence to support that statement.

Idiot.

I think that's why she's being vague.

 

[Avatar4321]

It ain't rocket science to see who's telling the truth.

Lying under oath is also a crime.

Kavanaugh and every other person she has said was at the party has made statements under oath that it didn’t happen. She is the only one that hasn’t made a statement under oath.

Why do you think that is? Can you please stop these disingenuous stupid arguments?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Since she is the accuser, give her a lie detector test and a FBI background check.

She already took a polygraph (which is NOT a lie detector, no matter what the general public misbelieves), and it was bullshit even aside from the fact that it would prove nothing.

 

[Cecilie1200]

BTW, a new big-gun lawyer has joined the Ford legal team.

She needs fewer lawyers and more corroborating witnesses. In fact, just one would be helpful.

How about Kavanaugh? Doesn't he need corroborating witnesses? Just 1 maybe?

To corroborate what? Witnesses corroborate affirmative statements, not negatives, you moron. How do you corroborate, "It never happened", particularly when you have no idea when or where it was supposed to have happened?

Maybe if Saint Ford could pin down a date more specifically than "sometime in the summer", he could THEN make an affirmative statement along the lines of "I wasn't even in town that week" and THEN he could produce witnesses or evidence to support that statement.

Idiot.

I think that's why she's being vague.

Oh, I know it is.

 

[Avatar4321]

It ain't rocket science to see who's telling the truth.

So when did Kavanaugh ever say he doesn't want to talk to the FBI? When did Ford say she did?

Bigger question is what is stopping her from going into the fbi

 

[Avatar4321]

...Yes.....well.....nobody knows the truth and never will given the fact it's been over 35 years and Ford wants to make this an issue now. ..

That's exactly why the FBI needs to re-engage... a good-faith due-diligence effort to get us sufficiently close to the truth, to assess.

...So all we really have is he said/ she said, and nothing more...

Which is exactly why the FBI needs to re-engage.

...If the nomination depends on this house party, it's not the business of the FBI as it is not a federal issue--especially since he too was a minor at the time. ..

Au contraire... the FBI conducts the background investigations for SCOTUS nominees... including personal character attributions.

That makes it a Federal issue.

...Now if local agencies were involved, that's a different subject. Apparently nobody knew about this so-called attack so nothing was documented to make this about Kavanaugh's nomination.

Nobody's looking to prosecute... merely to complete an extensive background investigation...

You know...the kind of thing that the FBI does all the time for prospective high government officials.

--------------------

This is entirely within the purview of the FBI... and represents new information pertaining to a recently-completed investigation.

What’s exactly does the FBI need to do? Everyone said to have been there has made statements saying it didn’t happen under oath. The alleged victim is the only one who hasn’t been under oath

 

[Avatar4321]

BTW, a new big-gun lawyer has joined the Ford legal team.

She needs fewer lawyers and more corroborating witnesses. In fact, just one would be helpful.

How about Kavanaugh? Doesn't he need corroborating witnesses? Just 1 maybe?

so the four witnesses she named who denied it happened under oath aren't enough?

Heck, her friend stated she has never met Kavanaugh and was never, to her knowledge, at a party with him

 

[BS Filter]

This should be investigated. Period.

Feinstein should be investigated. Why didn't she share this letter when she first got it in July?

Feinstein did not commit the act. This should be investigated. Maybe you need to experience being sexually assaulted to understand why women don't want to say anything about it. I don't need that to happen to ne in order to understand why Feinstein complied the wishes of the individual as long as she could.

The victim told Feinstein to hold the letter until the vote? How do you know that?

 

[Avatar4321]

When has it ever happened to a Democrat nominee? It doesn't because Republicans aren't shameless scumbags like Democrats are.

You might want to repost this.

No, I really don't.

And you ask why rape survivors hesitate to come forward?

If she came forward when it supposedly happened, it would have been water under the bridge. Trying to prove something that happened 36 years ago is like trying to predict what the weather will be on election night today.

They can find witnesses who were there and interview them. They can place Kavanaugh at the scene..or not. They unlike you...are not totally stupid

they have found the witnesses who were supposedly at the party. Everyone named at.that party has denied it under oath.

The only person we know of who was allegedly at.this party who hasn't made a statement under oath is the alleged victim.

any guesses why?

 

[BS Filter]

Feinstein should be investigated. Why didn't she share this letter when she first got it in July?

Feinstein did not commit the act. This should be investigated. Maybe you need to experience being sexually assaulted to understand why women don't want to say anything about it. I don't need that to happen to ne in order to understand why Feinstein complied the wishes of the individual as long as she could.

If this was a democratic nominee you'd be demanding investigations, so the only BS s coming from those like you.

Baloney.............No charges can come of this.

She does not have witnesses to back up her claim.

The 4 she says were present when it happened deny that it happened.........

Game ...........Set..............match.............this is BS.........and a Democratic BS game that they have played before.

Seems that she does have witnesses. On top of that only 35-36 percent of the American people approve of this guy being confirmed.

You're so full of crap. It doesn't matter what poll you believe. Republicans run Congress and Trump is President. Win some elections and then you can pick someone.

 

[Avatar4321]

attempted rape is not a crime. Kavanaugh protected and respected Mrs Ford by not finishing the job

don't be stupid

 

[hadit]

BTW, a new big-gun lawyer has joined the Ford legal team.

She needs fewer lawyers and more corroborating witnesses. In fact, just one would be helpful.

How about Kavanaugh? Doesn't he need corroborating witnesses? Just 1 maybe?

so the four witnesses she named who denied it happened under oath aren't enough?

Heck, her friend stated she has never met Kavanaugh and was never, to her knowledge, at a party with him

It's never going to be enough until they can find just one person to back up her story, no matter how far removed from the alleged incident. At that point they will run around like triumphant villagers after a successful gerbil hunt, shouting, banging their spears against their shields and boasting about overcoming the extreme dangers of the hunt. EVERY other witness, whether one or a thousand, will be accused of lying and ONLY the one must be believed.

 

[BS Filter]

If this was a democratic nominee you'd be demanding investigations, so the only BS s coming from those like you.

When has it ever happened to a Democrat nominee? It doesn't because Republicans aren't shameless scumbags like Democrats are.

You might want to repost this.

No, I really don't.

Yes you do. And especially because the last 2 democratic presidents had endless investigations on them for their entire terms with nothing found but a cum stained dress. You republicans are the scumbags.

And you don't even have a cum stained dress. When Bill Clinton was having his fun Democrats defended him. Such phonies. You don't care about sexual harassment. You're using it to smear an innocent man because he isn't one of you lecherous pusillanimous putrid pissants. Shame on you.