Kavanaugh Accuser Won't Testify

[Asclepias]

Correct. Not sure why your brain is refusing to connect the dots for you? Drumpf didnt order them to investigate it.

Trump basically told them to cut the shit with the Russia probe too. The FBI may investigate if it feels it needs to.

No the FBI cant investigate a case that out of their jurisdiction moron.

Youre admitting Drumpf obstructed justice?

Wray can do what he wants. Trump didn't order them to. He said many times the Mueller probe is BS. He can also fire Mueller at will. You know that, right?

So why hasnt he fired Mueller then? You know right?

The perception would be bad. He could though. He fired Tillerson. He has fired many. Do you disagree that he can fire Mueller? Are you serious?

I never said he didnt have the legal right to fire Mueller. I dont even know why you deflected away from Kav to Mueller unless you were deflecting.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Are you not a logical human being? You're an FBI agent you have all the details we all have. What do you do next? Christ, the witness cannot even tell you the exact date and time. Do you think they are mind readers?

I dont think youre old enough to get that the FBI are elite for a reason. No one can walk in off the street and understand how to investigate a case to the standard the FBI does. Thats why they are the FBI and not your local yokel sheriff.

You watch way too much TV. They are regular human beings. Look at Page and Strzok. They look super human to you? I have met many. Work with many. They are not geniuses. There is NO CASE here even if they were.

Yeah ok dude. When you have gone to claiming things you cant prove in order to lend credibility to your ignorance you have basically taken a big fat L.

Again. How is this self serving? I don't follow. I work with many women and police and fire departments too.

Pretty easy. You want me to believe you have some insider information so you win the internet. Lots of guys that think like you do this all the time.

I don't have any insider info. I have not discussed this case with them. It would make me look stupid. Have you never met an FBI agent? Or a police officer? Or a fireman? Did they look any different to you than an average Joe? WTF are you talking about? You have gone insane.

 

[Asclepias]

Correct. Not sure why your brain is refusing to connect the dots for you? Drumpf didnt order them to investigate it.

I cannot believe I am admitting this. I train many FBI agents as part of my business. They are regular human beings like you and me. They don't have super powers. They have NO CASE here.

There is no pattern of abuse. The case is cold, actually freezing. The sole witness is not reliable or credible. She can only win in the court of public opinion.

I cant believe you expect me to believe that!

That is what I do for work. Not just with the Feds but in general. Why would I lie about that? What is in it for me?

You would lie because you lie a lot and youre on the internet trying to impress me?

My job impresses you? LOL. I just asked for one famous African American with naturally straight hair and you got all defensive. I run my own business. Glad that impresses you. Wait. Are you hitting on me? Weird.

No your job doesnt impress me. I said you were trying your best to impress me.

 

[sealybobo]

Until the FBI investigates him again.

The FBI has investigated him 25× for his previous positions and 6× for this nomination.

Delay! Delay! Delay!

Despicable Dem vermin.

Well he did write about being a black out drunk in his youth. That was when he hung out with Kav. And he wrote about rape. Not a feminist. Does Kav share his views?

And at first the guy denied the accusations but now he says he doesn't recall. Those are two different things.

Boy you guys sure are in a rush to put this RWNJ on the Supreme Court. You don't have to buy the first car you see. This guy might not be right for the job.

 

[hadit]

The same way I would investigate any case I was told to investigate.

I follow whatever policies and procedures I normally do for investiagtion.

Since this isnt a criminal case statutes of limitations dont apply which is another reason I am wondering why Kav is not welcoming an FBI investigation and his drunkard buddy is spouting the broiler plate legal defense response of "I dont recollect". What are they hiding if they are innocent?

"I follow whatever policies and procedures I normally do for investiagtion."

Then you understand that the FBI did just that. When dealing with a 36 year old case they would demand evidence that a crime was committed, evidence beyond dispute, in enough volume to make delegating manhours to it.

So, where is it?

No the FBI didnt do just that. They never have investigated this incident specifically because its out of their jurisdiction until Drumpf orders them to investigate it.

They were handed the information and refused to investigate dork.

That is actually true. They had no case. And he is a dork.

Kinda hard to have a case when you cant touch it unless ordered to by Drumpf.

Interesting. Now the FBI can only act on the direction of the POTUS?

It's one thing to claim the FBI has to obey the orders of the president, quite another to claim they are forbidden to act without his authorization. I'd like to see your source on that one.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Trump basically told them to cut the shit with the Russia probe too. The FBI may investigate if it feels it needs to.

No the FBI cant investigate a case that out of their jurisdiction moron.

Youre admitting Drumpf obstructed justice?

Wray can do what he wants. Trump didn't order them to. He said many times the Mueller probe is BS. He can also fire Mueller at will. You know that, right?

So why hasnt he fired Mueller then? You know right?

The perception would be bad. He could though. He fired Tillerson. He has fired many. Do you disagree that he can fire Mueller? Are you serious?

I never said he didnt have the legal right to fire Mueller. I dont even know why you deflected away from Kav to Mueller unless you were deflecting.

My point is he would call the FBI and they would say, if you ordered us to investigate we would but we would not know where to start. He would say OK. Let her testify in front of Congress. She refuses. What next? They offered her to testify behind closed doors. She refuses. Why?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I cannot believe I am admitting this. I train many FBI agents as part of my business. They are regular human beings like you and me. They don't have super powers. They have NO CASE here.

There is no pattern of abuse. The case is cold, actually freezing. The sole witness is not reliable or credible. She can only win in the court of public opinion.

I cant believe you expect me to believe that!

That is what I do for work. Not just with the Feds but in general. Why would I lie about that? What is in it for me?

You would lie because you lie a lot and youre on the internet trying to impress me?

My job impresses you? LOL. I just asked for one famous African American with naturally straight hair and you got all defensive. I run my own business. Glad that impresses you. Wait. Are you hitting on me? Weird.

No your job doesnt impress me. I said you were trying your best to impress me.

I cannot impress you. I am white, remember. You do PC shit for work right? I would not argue with you about PC programming. I don't know enough about it. Not sure why you would argue with me about FBI agents being just regular people. Weird.

 

[Asclepias]

I dont think youre old enough to get that the FBI are elite for a reason. No one can walk in off the street and understand how to investigate a case to the standard the FBI does. Thats why they are the FBI and not your local yokel sheriff.

You watch way too much TV. They are regular human beings. Look at Page and Strzok. They look super human to you? I have met many. Work with many. They are not geniuses. There is NO CASE here even if they were.

Yeah ok dude. When you have gone to claiming things you cant prove in order to lend credibility to your ignorance you have basically taken a big fat L.

Again. How is this self serving? I don't follow. I work with many women and police and fire departments too.

Pretty easy. You want me to believe you have some insider information so you win the internet. Lots of guys that think like you do this all the time.

I don't have any insider info. I have not discussed this case with them. It would make me look stupid. Have you never met an FBI agent? Or a police officer? Or a fireman? Did they look any different to you than an average Joe? WTF are you talking about? You have gone insane.

I know you dont have insider info. Thats why I am laughing at you. Ive met people from most LE agencies. I know they get training that enables them to do their jobs where most people would have no clue. You claimed that you trained LEOs. Are you saying everything you train them on they already know? Contradicting yourself again huh?

 

[hadit]

The same way I would investigate any case I was told to investigate.

I follow whatever policies and procedures I normally do for investiagtion.

Since this isnt a criminal case statutes of limitations dont apply which is another reason I am wondering why Kav is not welcoming an FBI investigation and his drunkard buddy is spouting the broiler plate legal defense response of "I dont recollect". What are they hiding if they are innocent?

"I follow whatever policies and procedures I normally do for investiagtion."

Then you understand that the FBI did just that. When dealing with a 36 year old case they would demand evidence that a crime was committed, evidence beyond dispute, in enough volume to make delegating manhours to it.

So, where is it?

No the FBI didnt do just that. They never have investigated this incident specifically because its out of their jurisdiction until Drumpf orders them to investigate it.

They were handed the information and refused to investigate dork.

Correct. Not sure why your brain is refusing to connect the dots for you? Drumpf didnt order them to investigate it.

I cannot believe I am admitting this. I train many FBI agents as part of my business. They are regular human beings like you and me. They don't have super powers. They have NO CASE here.

There is no pattern of abuse. The case is cold, actually freezing. The sole witness is not reliable or credible. She can only win in the court of public opinion.

Her backers don't care if she wins, loses, or disappears in a cloud of dust. All she's good for to them is delay and smear. That's it. Once this is over, they'll drop her like a hot potato.

 

[Asclepias]

I cant believe you expect me to believe that!

That is what I do for work. Not just with the Feds but in general. Why would I lie about that? What is in it for me?

You would lie because you lie a lot and youre on the internet trying to impress me?

My job impresses you? LOL. I just asked for one famous African American with naturally straight hair and you got all defensive. I run my own business. Glad that impresses you. Wait. Are you hitting on me? Weird.

No your job doesnt impress me. I said you were trying your best to impress me.

I cannot impress you. I am white, remember. You do PC shit for work right? I would not argue with you about PC programming. I don't know enough about it. Not sure why you would argue with me about FBI agents being just regular people. Weird.

Just because you cant impress me doesnt mean youre not trying. Its a well known fact that the FBI is the gold standard for LEOs in the US. If they were regular people skill wise all PD's would be at their level.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

You watch way too much TV. They are regular human beings. Look at Page and Strzok. They look super human to you? I have met many. Work with many. They are not geniuses. There is NO CASE here even if they were.

Yeah ok dude. When you have gone to claiming things you cant prove in order to lend credibility to your ignorance you have basically taken a big fat L.

Again. How is this self serving? I don't follow. I work with many women and police and fire departments too.

Pretty easy. You want me to believe you have some insider information so you win the internet. Lots of guys that think like you do this all the time.

I don't have any insider info. I have not discussed this case with them. It would make me look stupid. Have you never met an FBI agent? Or a police officer? Or a fireman? Did they look any different to you than an average Joe? WTF are you talking about? You have gone insane.

I know you dont have insider info. Thats why I am laughing at you. Ive met people from most LE angencies. I know they get training that enables them to do their jobs where most people would have no clue. You claimed that you trained LEOs. Are you saying everything you train them on they already know? Contradicting yourself again huh?

I don't train them in investigative duties. I train in H2H combat.

 

[Pop23]

The notes from her therapist don't match her testimony. A lot of holes. Doesn't mean she is lying but it seems fishy.

Not really. The only thing is that the therapist said different was that 4 males were in the room instead of 2 in the room and 2 outside the room.

Ohhhhhh, that's all! Well then, they are disputing THE KEY FACT IN THE EVIDENCE.

You can't make this shit up, you really can't

Yep thats all. Would you correct someone if they got something you said wrong?

Forgetting a couple of key things aintcha. The therapist is trained in this. There would have to be recorded evidence of the mistake (audio) for the change in the document to be considered as correct. If they exist (highly doubt that after six years), then you have something, if they don't, then hell, why can't the therapist simply write up new notes today, SIX YEARS AFTER THE SESSION and submit them. They would have equal validity.

If you keep talking you may answer more of your questions like you just did. Just because someone is trained doesnt mean they dont make mistakes. Lets not even debate that point.

OK, because this little hissy fit has gone far enough, lets break this down:

There is a single piece of evidence that can be used in court. It is the note from the therapist.

The Attorney for Dr. Ford attempts to place this into a trial hearing in a redacted form.

Judge Kav's attorney objects, states that the evidence must be placed in it's original form, or not at all

The Judge then has a hearing on the evidence and calls in the Therapist to testify

The Therapist testifies that those are indeed his notes, and maybe he made a mistake on that key point.

The Judge asks the Therapist how he can be sure

The Therapist: I can't be absolutely sure, that was six years ago.

The Attorney for Dr. Ford: You're honor, Dr. Fords husband was also present at the session and will verify the mistake.

The Attorney for Judge Kav: Your Honor, this is highly questionable. The two are married and the husband's testimony is unreliable due to their Marital Status.

Judge to Therapist: Do you have any other ways to validate the mistake, audio or video recordings?

The Therapist: No your honor

The Attorney for Judge Kav: Your honor, we move that the notes be thrown out due to their unreliability. In the best case for Dr. Ford, the witness has just admitted that he possibly made one mistake on the notes, how do we know that he was paying attention at all and didn't make more mistakes?

Judge to Dr. Ford's Attorney: Looks to me that you will have to either accept the notes as written, or withdraw them as evidence.

Get it now?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

That is what I do for work. Not just with the Feds but in general. Why would I lie about that? What is in it for me?

You would lie because you lie a lot and youre on the internet trying to impress me?

My job impresses you? LOL. I just asked for one famous African American with naturally straight hair and you got all defensive. I run my own business. Glad that impresses you. Wait. Are you hitting on me? Weird.

No your job doesnt impress me. I said you were trying your best to impress me.

I cannot impress you. I am white, remember. You do PC shit for work right? I would not argue with you about PC programming. I don't know enough about it. Not sure why you would argue with me about FBI agents being just regular people. Weird.

Just because you cant impress me doesnt mean youre not trying. Its a well known fact that the FBI is the gold standard for LEOs in the US. If they were regular people skill wise all PD's would be at their level.

They don't perform miracles. Did you think Strzok and Page were super human? They have more resources, can cross state lines and are generally better trained but they are not deities. There are 1000s of cases they cannot resolve.

 

[Asclepias]

Yeah ok dude. When you have gone to claiming things you cant prove in order to lend credibility to your ignorance you have basically taken a big fat L.

Again. How is this self serving? I don't follow. I work with many women and police and fire departments too.

Pretty easy. You want me to believe you have some insider information so you win the internet. Lots of guys that think like you do this all the time.

I don't have any insider info. I have not discussed this case with them. It would make me look stupid. Have you never met an FBI agent? Or a police officer? Or a fireman? Did they look any different to you than an average Joe? WTF are you talking about? You have gone insane.

I know you dont have insider info. Thats why I am laughing at you. Ive met people from most LE angencies. I know they get training that enables them to do their jobs where most people would have no clue. You claimed that you trained LEOs. Are you saying everything you train them on they already know? Contradicting yourself again huh?

I don't train them in investigative duties. I train in H2H combat.

Lets say I believe you. Why would you have to train them in H2H combat if all regular people already know this?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Not really. The only thing is that the therapist said different was that 4 males were in the room instead of 2 in the room and 2 outside the room.

Ohhhhhh, that's all! Well then, they are disputing THE KEY FACT IN THE EVIDENCE.

You can't make this shit up, you really can't

Yep thats all. Would you correct someone if they got something you said wrong?

Forgetting a couple of key things aintcha. The therapist is trained in this. There would have to be recorded evidence of the mistake (audio) for the change in the document to be considered as correct. If they exist (highly doubt that after six years), then you have something, if they don't, then hell, why can't the therapist simply write up new notes today, SIX YEARS AFTER THE SESSION and submit them. They would have equal validity.

If you keep talking you may answer more of your questions like you just did. Just because someone is trained doesnt mean they dont make mistakes. Lets not even debate that point.

OK, because this little hissy fit has gone far enough, lets break this down:

There is a single piece of evidence that can be used in court. It is the note from the therapist.

The Attorney for Dr. Ford attempts to place this into a trial hearing in a redacted form.

Judge Kav's attorney objects, states that the evidence must be placed in it's original form, or not at all

The Judge then has a hearing on the evidence and calls in the Therapist to testify

The Therapist testifies that those are indeed his notes, and maybe he made a mistake on that key point.

The Judge asks the Therapist how he can be sure

The Therapist: I can't be absolutely sure, that was six years ago.

The Attorney for Dr. Ford: You're honor, Dr. Fords husband was also present at the session and will verify the mistake.

The Attorney for Judge Kav: Your Honor, this is highly questionable. The two are married and the husband's testimony is unreliable due to their Marital Status.

Judge to Therapist: Do you have any other ways to validate the mistake, audio or video recordings?

The Therapist: No your honor

The Attorney for Judge Kav: Your honor, we move that the notes be thrown out due to their unreliability. In the best case for Dr. Ford, the witness has just admitted that he possibly made one mistake on the notes, how do we know that he was paying attention at all and didn't make more mistakes?

Judge to Dr. Ford's Attorney: Looks to me that you will have to either accept the notes as written, or withdraw them as evidence.

Get it now?

There is no case here. Assfaceias is claiming she can win in terms of public opinion. But that didn't work for Anita Hill.

 

[Asclepias]

Not really. The only thing is that the therapist said different was that 4 males were in the room instead of 2 in the room and 2 outside the room.

Ohhhhhh, that's all! Well then, they are disputing THE KEY FACT IN THE EVIDENCE.

You can't make this shit up, you really can't

Yep thats all. Would you correct someone if they got something you said wrong?

Forgetting a couple of key things aintcha. The therapist is trained in this. There would have to be recorded evidence of the mistake (audio) for the change in the document to be considered as correct. If they exist (highly doubt that after six years), then you have something, if they don't, then hell, why can't the therapist simply write up new notes today, SIX YEARS AFTER THE SESSION and submit them. They would have equal validity.

If you keep talking you may answer more of your questions like you just did. Just because someone is trained doesnt mean they dont make mistakes. Lets not even debate that point.

OK, because this little hissy fit has gone far enough, lets break this down:

There is a single piece of evidence that can be used in court. It is the note from the therapist.

The Attorney for Dr. Ford attempts to place this into a trial hearing in a redacted form.

Judge Kav's attorney objects, states that the evidence must be placed in it's original form, or not at all

The Judge then has a hearing on the evidence and calls in the Therapist to testify

The Therapist testifies that those are indeed his notes, and maybe he made a mistake on that key point.

The Judge asks the Therapist how he can be sure

The Therapist: I can't be absolutely sure, that was six years ago.

The Attorney for Dr. Ford: You're honor, Dr. Fords husband was also present at the session and will verify the mistake.

The Attorney for Judge Kav: Your Honor, this is highly questionable. The two are married and the husband's testimony is unreliable due to their Marital Status.

Judge to Therapist: Do you have any other ways to validate the mistake, audio or video recordings?

The Therapist: No your honor

The Attorney for Judge Kav: Your honor, we move that the notes be thrown out due to their unreliability. In the best case for Dr. Ford, the witness has just admitted that he possibly made one mistake on the notes, how do we know that he was paying attention at all and didn't make more mistakes?

Judge to Dr. Ford's Attorney: Looks to me that you will have to either accept the notes as written, or withdraw them as evidence.

Get it now?

Is this a dream or a daytime fantasy? I'm not clear on why you gave me this.

 

[Asclepias]

Ohhhhhh, that's all! Well then, they are disputing THE KEY FACT IN THE EVIDENCE.

You can't make this shit up, you really can't

Yep thats all. Would you correct someone if they got something you said wrong?

Forgetting a couple of key things aintcha. The therapist is trained in this. There would have to be recorded evidence of the mistake (audio) for the change in the document to be considered as correct. If they exist (highly doubt that after six years), then you have something, if they don't, then hell, why can't the therapist simply write up new notes today, SIX YEARS AFTER THE SESSION and submit them. They would have equal validity.

If you keep talking you may answer more of your questions like you just did. Just because someone is trained doesnt mean they dont make mistakes. Lets not even debate that point.

OK, because this little hissy fit has gone far enough, lets break this down:

There is a single piece of evidence that can be used in court. It is the note from the therapist.

The Attorney for Dr. Ford attempts to place this into a trial hearing in a redacted form.

Judge Kav's attorney objects, states that the evidence must be placed in it's original form, or not at all

The Judge then has a hearing on the evidence and calls in the Therapist to testify

The Therapist testifies that those are indeed his notes, and maybe he made a mistake on that key point.

The Judge asks the Therapist how he can be sure

The Therapist: I can't be absolutely sure, that was six years ago.

The Attorney for Dr. Ford: You're honor, Dr. Fords husband was also present at the session and will verify the mistake.

The Attorney for Judge Kav: Your Honor, this is highly questionable. The two are married and the husband's testimony is unreliable due to their Marital Status.

Judge to Therapist: Do you have any other ways to validate the mistake, audio or video recordings?

The Therapist: No your honor

The Attorney for Judge Kav: Your honor, we move that the notes be thrown out due to their unreliability. In the best case for Dr. Ford, the witness has just admitted that he possibly made one mistake on the notes, how do we know that he was paying attention at all and didn't make more mistakes?

Judge to Dr. Ford's Attorney: Looks to me that you will have to either accept the notes as written, or withdraw them as evidence.

Get it now?

There is no case here. Assfaceias is claiming she can win in terms of public opinion. But that didn't work for Anita Hill.

Nope. I'm claiming there should be an FBI investigation just like what happened in the Anita Hill case. I can always tell when youre getting frustrated. You start lying about what I said.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Again. How is this self serving? I don't follow. I work with many women and police and fire departments too.

Pretty easy. You want me to believe you have some insider information so you win the internet. Lots of guys that think like you do this all the time.

I don't have any insider info. I have not discussed this case with them. It would make me look stupid. Have you never met an FBI agent? Or a police officer? Or a fireman? Did they look any different to you than an average Joe? WTF are you talking about? You have gone insane.

I know you dont have insider info. Thats why I am laughing at you. Ive met people from most LE angencies. I know they get training that enables them to do their jobs where most people would have no clue. You claimed that you trained LEOs. Are you saying everything you train them on they already know? Contradicting yourself again huh?

I don't train them in investigative duties. I train in H2H combat.

Lets say I believe you. Why would you have to train them in H2H combat if all regular people already know this?

Certain people get into leveraged situations and need specific training. Disarming persons while not always causing massive harm, also how to leverage larger persons when helping them (fire fighters and EMTs), and women. It is not all about punches, kicks and throws. A lot of it is pressure points, positioning, leverage, etc. A 130 pound woman can take down a 300 pound untrained man if she understands leverage.

I am not an expert on criminal investigations. I just have commons sense. But these persons are regular Joes.

 

[Asclepias]

You would lie because you lie a lot and youre on the internet trying to impress me?

My job impresses you? LOL. I just asked for one famous African American with naturally straight hair and you got all defensive. I run my own business. Glad that impresses you. Wait. Are you hitting on me? Weird.

No your job doesnt impress me. I said you were trying your best to impress me.

I cannot impress you. I am white, remember. You do PC shit for work right? I would not argue with you about PC programming. I don't know enough about it. Not sure why you would argue with me about FBI agents being just regular people. Weird.

Just because you cant impress me doesnt mean youre not trying. Its a well known fact that the FBI is the gold standard for LEOs in the US. If they were regular people skill wise all PD's would be at their level.

They don't perform miracles. Did you think Strzok and Page were super human? They have more resources, can cross state lines and are generally better trained but they are not deities. There are 1000s of cases they cannot resolve.

Who said they perform miracles and why would they need to? I thought Strzok and Page knew a hell of a lot more than the random civillian about the FBI's procedures for investigating something.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Yep thats all. Would you correct someone if they got something you said wrong?

Forgetting a couple of key things aintcha. The therapist is trained in this. There would have to be recorded evidence of the mistake (audio) for the change in the document to be considered as correct. If they exist (highly doubt that after six years), then you have something, if they don't, then hell, why can't the therapist simply write up new notes today, SIX YEARS AFTER THE SESSION and submit them. They would have equal validity.

If you keep talking you may answer more of your questions like you just did. Just because someone is trained doesnt mean they dont make mistakes. Lets not even debate that point.

OK, because this little hissy fit has gone far enough, lets break this down:

There is a single piece of evidence that can be used in court. It is the note from the therapist.

The Attorney for Dr. Ford attempts to place this into a trial hearing in a redacted form.

Judge Kav's attorney objects, states that the evidence must be placed in it's original form, or not at all

The Judge then has a hearing on the evidence and calls in the Therapist to testify

The Therapist testifies that those are indeed his notes, and maybe he made a mistake on that key point.

The Judge asks the Therapist how he can be sure

The Therapist: I can't be absolutely sure, that was six years ago.

The Attorney for Dr. Ford: You're honor, Dr. Fords husband was also present at the session and will verify the mistake.

The Attorney for Judge Kav: Your Honor, this is highly questionable. The two are married and the husband's testimony is unreliable due to their Marital Status.

Judge to Therapist: Do you have any other ways to validate the mistake, audio or video recordings?

The Therapist: No your honor

The Attorney for Judge Kav: Your honor, we move that the notes be thrown out due to their unreliability. In the best case for Dr. Ford, the witness has just admitted that he possibly made one mistake on the notes, how do we know that he was paying attention at all and didn't make more mistakes?

Judge to Dr. Ford's Attorney: Looks to me that you will have to either accept the notes as written, or withdraw them as evidence.

Get it now?

There is no case here. Assfaceias is claiming she can win in terms of public opinion. But that didn't work for Anita Hill.

Nope. I'm claiming there should be an FBI investigation just like what happened in the Anita Hill case. I can always tell when youre getting frustrated. You start lying about what I said.

Anita Hill was different as it was fluid. If this took place in 2010. OK. This took place in 1982 allegedly. If that were the case with AH. I'd say the same thing.