Why No FBI....?

[iceberg]

Kavanaugh is NaziCon garbage. Long live Merrick Garland.

check please. this bitch is moved to ignore.

 

[iceberg]

If Senate Republicans don't treat Dr. Ford with a reasonable degree of fairness and respect, she may feel compelled to file a criminal complaint against Kavanaugh in Maryland which could trigger a criminal investigation. This was discussed by Rachel Maddow earlier tonight.

In fact it's possible that were he confirmed...we might be treated to the "joy" of having a sitting Supreme Court Justice brought up on charges of attempted rape

Lol, especially when the accuser can't even remember what year it all took place.

but she was 15. how many years was she 15? no more than 2 it would seem.

 

[Claudette]

Well, sparky, it was a local matter then - but it's a federal matter now. Dr. Ford can still file criminal charges in Maryland.

it's a federal matter?

Yeah, sparky, it certainly is - because the hearing and confirmation of Kavanaugh is being conducted by the U.S. Senate.

Still doesn't make a possible groping a federal matter.

You're missing the point. Crime and federal have nothing to do with it. The conduct and who is telling the truth is what matters.

Not the FBI job. Constitution says so. Congress swears them in. The Senate VETS them. And they can ASK the FBI to do a General background investigation. NOT gumshoe their way back 35 years to potential sexual relations between MINOR CHILDREN...

You HATE the FBI or something?

No she's just an idiot who listens to Madcow and that other idiot and believes whatever those idiots have to say.

This whole thing is a he said she said. No witnesses and Ford can't even remember what party it was. Judge was so drunk he doesn't remember any of it.

The case is 36 years old and neither the FBI or any local LEO's will be investigating it.

Grassly has been more than accommodating to Ford and she still says she won't testify. Grassly should take the vote. Elect Kav and get him seated on the SC.

Enough is enough of this horseshit.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Maryland Statutes of Limitations for Sexual Abuse | LegalMatch Law Library

Seems MD does have a statute of limitation


and in this case its long past

I recently heard it has been abolished.

It would have to of been very recently.

"Last Modified: 06-07-2018 07:44 PM PDT"

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Kavanaugh is NaziCon garbage. Long live Merrick Garland.

Hopefully he'll put you in a concentration camp....

 

[Rustic]

In the Kavanaugh hearing regarding the very serious allegations of sexual assault?

The FBI was called on during the Clarence Thomas hearings to investigate the accusations made by Anita Hill.

That is how this is done. In fact Orin Hatch REQUESTED that investigation in that case, He KNOWS that is the "regular order".

What are they afraid of?

The loopy **** Cannot remember what really happened, has no progress, and has no witnesses. And wants to play video games of delay.......

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Kavanaugh is NaziCon garbage. Long live Merrick Garland.

"Kavanaugh is NaziCon garbage" .... My friend, you are taking this far too seriously... maybe a (F politics) road trip might help...

.

He needs to some time in the old sweat lodge.....a year or two should do it.

 

[jc456]

If Senate Republicans don't treat Dr. Ford with a reasonable degree of fairness and respect, she may feel compelled to file a criminal complaint against Kavanaugh in Maryland which could trigger a criminal investigation. This was discussed by Rachel Maddow earlier tonight.

oh please do it. act more like a fool. yes sirree.

 

[jc456]

In the Kavanaugh hearing regarding the very serious allegations of sexual assault?

The FBI was called on during the Clarence Thomas hearings to investigate the accusations made by Anita Hill.

That is how this is done. In fact Orin Hatch REQUESTED that investigation in that case, He KNOWS that is the "regular order".

What are they afraid of?

Not regular order when you've already had 6 THOROUGH FBI checks and several clearance updates by the FBI. Also not anything the FBI can address because there are no potential criminal charges due to statute of limitations.

FBI is NOT a political tool. Have her hire a private investigation team. You Dems need to stop thinking that the FBI is your personal Gestapo..

Criminal has nothing to do with it. Research it. Lawrence O'Donnell reported tonight that the FBI has reopened 10 investigations on judicial nominees just in the past month.

what would they be looking for that they didn't find six other times?

 

[blackhawk]

What exactly would the FBI do? You have no physical evidence to examine no crime scene to examine there is no photographic, audio, or video evidence to examine one person who the accuser said was there says they have no recollection of the incident and one woman who claimed in a since deleted Facebook post she knew about it and that it was talked about in school for days afterwards the only problem that contradicts the accusers claim she didn’t tell anyone about this for thirty years.

 

[BluesLegend]

In the Kavanaugh hearing regarding the very serious allegations of sexual assault?

The FBI was called on during the Clarence Thomas hearings to investigate the accusations made by Anita Hill.

That is how this is done. In fact Orin Hatch REQUESTED that investigation in that case, He KNOWS that is the "regular order".

What are they afraid of?

Not regular order when you've already had 6 THOROUGH FBI checks and several clearance updates by the FBI. Also not anything the FBI can address because there are no potential criminal charges due to statute of limitations.

FBI is NOT a political tool. Have her hire a private investigation team. You Dems need to stop thinking that the FBI is your personal Gestapo..

The left think its okay to use the FBI and other government agencies to attack their opponents, that's why they are confused.

 

[flacaltenn]

That precedent was established in 1991 when the Judiciary Committee reopened their hearing to hear Anita Hill's testimony and ordered an additional FBI background check which took a whooping 2 1/2 days to complete. It is recorded in the Senate committee records and memorialized on video of how both Grassley and Hatch clearly stated the absolute necessity of FBI background checks of all parties involved in the allegations. Now ~27 years later, Hatch and Grassley seem to have conveniently forgotten about the precedent they argued for and established. I wonder why????

Because they were relatively CURRENT allegations AND it didn't involve 15 year olds. And what was the findings of this whopping 2.5 day "investigation"? Think I'll go find it. Because anything that 2.5 days was probably a waste of the FBI's man-hours.

 

[flacaltenn]

In the Kavanaugh hearing regarding the very serious allegations of sexual assault?

The FBI was called on during the Clarence Thomas hearings to investigate the accusations made by Anita Hill.

That is how this is done. In fact Orin Hatch REQUESTED that investigation in that case, He KNOWS that is the "regular order".

What are they afraid of?

Not regular order when you've already had 6 THOROUGH FBI checks and several clearance updates by the FBI. Also not anything the FBI can address because there are no potential criminal charges due to statute of limitations.

FBI is NOT a political tool. Have her hire a private investigation team. You Dems need to stop thinking that the FBI is your personal Gestapo..

Not regular order when you've already had 6 THOROUGH FBI checks and several clearance updates by the FBI.

Regular Order, in so far as a Senate committee's "advise and consent" Constitutional responsibilities are concerned, come in the form of Senate rules of order and established committee precedent and custom. Regular Order of the Senate Judiciary Committee includes an additional FBI background check if necessary under certain circumstances.

That precedent was established in 1991 when the Judiciary Committee reopened their hearing to hear Anita Hill's testimony and ordered an additional FBI background check which took a whooping 2 1/2 days to complete. It is recorded in the Senate committee records and memorialized on video of how both Grassley and Hatch clearly stated the absolute necessity of FBI background checks of all parties involved in the allegations. Now ~27 years later, Hatch and Grassley seem to have conveniently forgotten about the precedent they argued for and established. I wonder why????

The number of previous background checks for other government positions are NOT relevant other that to help with yielding additional background material, your surmise, notwithstanding. What one believes from the propaganda mill is one thing, but propaganda has a distinct problem of being at odds with fact and truth!

Here ya go smartass.. THIS was the massive conclusion of that "massive" FBI RE-investigation of Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill...

Note to Nets: FBI Investigation of Anita Hill Claims Was Inconclusive

Amazingly, not one of the correspondents on the three networks managed to share the outcome of the FBI investigation into Hill’s allegations against Thomas. On October 7, 1991, The New York Times reported:

Only on Sept. 23, Mr. Biden said, did she agree to allow the Federal Bureau of Investigation to investigate the allegations. The report was finished by Sept. 25, he said, and all committee members were notified of it by the next day. On Sept. 27, the committee deadlocked 7 to 7 on the nomination.

The White House today described the F.B.I. report as finding the allegations as “without foundation.” But Congressional officials who have seen the report said the bureau could not draw any conclusion because of the "he said, she said" nature of the subject.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Trump's FBI should investigate Ford and Feinstein

 

[Hiryuu]

If Senate Republicans don't treat Dr. Ford with a reasonable degree of fairness and respect, she may feel compelled to file a criminal complaint against Kavanaugh in Maryland which could trigger a criminal investigation. This was discussed by Rachel Maddow earlier tonight.

Unless she testifies to murder in the first degree, or tax violations, there is nothing she can testify to, that happened 36 years ago, that will qualify for criminal charges being filed in Maryland, or anywhere else for that matter.

 

[Votto]

In the Kavanaugh hearing regarding the very serious allegations of sexual assault?

The FBI was called on during the Clarence Thomas hearings to investigate the accusations made by Anita Hill.

That is how this is done. In fact Orin Hatch REQUESTED that investigation in that case, He KNOWS that is the "regular order".

What are they afraid of?

They are too busy chasing Russian collusion to be bothered.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

That precedent was established in 1991 when the Judiciary Committee reopened their hearing to hear Anita Hill's testimony and ordered an additional FBI background check which took a whooping 2 1/2 days to complete. It is recorded in the Senate committee records and memorialized on video of how both Grassley and Hatch clearly stated the absolute necessity of FBI background checks of all parties involved in the allegations. Now ~27 years later, Hatch and Grassley seem to have conveniently forgotten about the precedent they argued for and established. I wonder why????

Because they were relatively CURRENT allegations AND it didn't involve 15 year olds. And what was the findings of this whopping 2.5 day "investigation"? Think I'll go find it. Because anything that 2.5 days was probably a waste of the FBI's man-hours.

Because they were relatively CURRENT allegations AND it didn't involve 15 year olds. And what was the findings of this whopping 2.5 day "investigation"? Think I'll go find it. Because anything that 2.5 days was probably a waste of the FBI's man-hours.

Your initial post #3, to which I responded, dealt with the narrow topic below of Regular Order procedures of the Senate Judiciary Committee are, along with it's precedents and customs.Can you find any bloody correspondence between your quote above with the topic of Regular Order procedures of that committee along with it's precedents and customs which you raised in your post #3 quoted below!?

Neither can I nor any other reasonable person. Please stop the deflection, stay on topic and don't respond with garbage to avoid addressing relevant of the TOPIC of Regular order you evoked! In the case of FBI background checks, the number of other background checks a person has had in the past I'm not going to follow you down a rabbit hole!

Not regular order when you've already had 6 THOROUGH FBI checks and several clearance updates by the FBI.

********************************************************************************

Here ya go smartass.. THIS was the massive conclusion of that "massive" FBI RE-investigation of Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill...

Note to Nets: FBI Investigation of Anita Hill Claims Was Inconclusive

Amazingly, not one of the correspondents on the three networks managed to share the outcome of the FBI investigation into Hill’s allegations against Thomas. On October 7, 1991, The New York Times reported:

Only on Sept. 23, Mr. Biden said, did she agree to allow the Federal Bureau of Investigation to investigate the allegations. The report was finished by Sept. 25, he said, and all committee members were notified of it by the next day. On Sept. 27, the committee deadlocked 7 to 7 on the nomination.

The White House today described the F.B.I. report as finding the allegations as “without foundation.” But Congressional officials who have seen the report said the bureau could not draw any conclusion because of the "he said, she said" nature of the subject.

Here ya go smartass.. THIS was the massive conclusion of that "massive" FBI RE-investigation of Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill...

You fall back on ad hominem when I had been level, measured and objective in my post to you? And just where did I employ the adjective 'massive' anywhere in my post which you have quoted? Did you make a unintentional mistake or...?

And your second post to me directly above has what to do with the initial topic of Regular Order procedures of that committee along with it's precedents and customs which you raised in your post #3 which YOU raised but will not now approach? I suggest you edify thyself of what the Regular Order procedures of that committee are along with its precedents and customs might be also for future reference. Else, hold your breath for several days.

 

[flacaltenn]

That precedent was established in 1991 when the Judiciary Committee reopened their hearing to hear Anita Hill's testimony and ordered an additional FBI background check which took a whooping 2 1/2 days to complete. It is recorded in the Senate committee records and memorialized on video of how both Grassley and Hatch clearly stated the absolute necessity of FBI background checks of all parties involved in the allegations. Now ~27 years later, Hatch and Grassley seem to have conveniently forgotten about the precedent they argued for and established. I wonder why????

Because they were relatively CURRENT allegations AND it didn't involve 15 year olds. And what was the findings of this whopping 2.5 day "investigation"? Think I'll go find it. Because anything that 2.5 days was probably a waste of the FBI's man-hours.

Because they were relatively CURRENT allegations AND it didn't involve 15 year olds. And what was the findings of this whopping 2.5 day "investigation"? Think I'll go find it. Because anything that 2.5 days was probably a waste of the FBI's man-hours.

Your initial post #3, to which I responded, dealt with the narrow topic below of Regular Order procedures of the Senate Judiciary Committee are, along with it's precedents and customs.Can you find any bloody correspondence between your quote above with the topic of Regular Order procedures of that committee along with it's precedents and customs which you raised in your post #3 quoted below!?

Neither can I nor any other reasonable person. Please stop the deflection, stay on topic and don't respond with garbage to avoid addressing relevant of the TOPIC of Regular order you evoked! In the case of FBI background checks, the number of other background checks a person has had in the past I'm not going to follow you down a rabbit hole!

Not regular order when you've already had 6 THOROUGH FBI checks and several clearance updates by the FBI.

********************************************************************************

Here ya go smartass.. THIS was the massive conclusion of that "massive" FBI RE-investigation of Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill...

Note to Nets: FBI Investigation of Anita Hill Claims Was Inconclusive

Amazingly, not one of the correspondents on the three networks managed to share the outcome of the FBI investigation into Hill’s allegations against Thomas. On October 7, 1991, The New York Times reported:

Only on Sept. 23, Mr. Biden said, did she agree to allow the Federal Bureau of Investigation to investigate the allegations. The report was finished by Sept. 25, he said, and all committee members were notified of it by the next day. On Sept. 27, the committee deadlocked 7 to 7 on the nomination.

The White House today described the F.B.I. report as finding the allegations as “without foundation.” But Congressional officials who have seen the report said the bureau could not draw any conclusion because of the "he said, she said" nature of the subject.

Here ya go smartass.. THIS was the massive conclusion of that "massive" FBI RE-investigation of Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill...

You fall back on ad hominem when I had been level, measured and objective in my post to you? And just where did I employ the adjective 'massive' anywhere in my post which you have quoted? Did you make a unintentional mistake or...?

And your second post to me directly above has what to do with the initial topic of Regular Order procedures of that committee along with it's precedents and customs which you raised in your post #3 which YOU raised but will not now approach? I suggest you edify thyself of what the Regular Order procedures of that committee are along with its precedents and customs might be also for future reference. Else, hold your breath for several days.

It is not regular order to use the FBI as Congress's "private dick" shop.. In cases like this or Anita Hill, the Senate Judiciary Committee needs to assess whether a probable crime was committed BEFORE referring it to authorities. Even Biden resisted the call to the FBI for Hill/Thomas and ONLY did it because they HAD NOTHING ELSE TO OBSTRUCT THE NOMINATION.. Sound familiar? Good.

Ask the fucking questions in PUBLIC SESSION. Assess the answers, and decide whether to "pick up the phone" to any local, state, or applicable criminal enforcement agencies. Good luck with that considering the 2 folks would have been MINORS at the time 35 years ago.

We have too much political abuse at the FBI already. Hire a gumshoe. Better yet, that's what Ford SHOULD have done thru her lawyer MONTHS AGO. Virtually the entire top echelons of the FBI have been fired, demoted, sanctioned or fled from the election cycle abuses. Let's not ring them up every time the same tired game delaying sliming is required for political expediency..

 

[ABikerSailor]

In the Kavanaugh hearing regarding the very serious allegations of sexual assault?

The FBI was called on during the Clarence Thomas hearings to investigate the accusations made by Anita Hill.

That is how this is done. In fact Orin Hatch REQUESTED that investigation in that case, He KNOWS that is the "regular order".

What are they afraid of?

Not regular order when you've already had 6 THOROUGH FBI checks and several clearance updates by the FBI. Also not anything the FBI can address because there are no potential criminal charges due to statute of limitations.

FBI is NOT a political tool. Have her hire a private investigation team. You Dems need to stop thinking that the FBI is your personal Gestapo..

Wrong. There is no statute of limitations for attempted rape in the state of MD, where the attack is supposed to have happened.

Maryland Prosecutor on Kavanaugh Allegations: “When There’s Something the Police Have Brought to Us, We’ll Address It”

But the FBI is not the only law enforcement agency that could launch an investigation.

In Maryland, there is no statute of limitations for rape or attempted rape and the alleged incident took place in suburban Montgomery County, outside Washington, D.C.

 

[ABikerSailor]

In the Kavanaugh hearing regarding the very serious allegations of sexual assault?

The FBI was called on during the Clarence Thomas hearings to investigate the accusations made by Anita Hill.

That is how this is done. In fact Orin Hatch REQUESTED that investigation in that case, He KNOWS that is the "regular order".

What are they afraid of?

Not for something from 40 years ago with NO physical evidence no list of witnesses no location listed. Further it was a local matter between TEENAGERS. Any possibility it had a criminal component is null and void by statute of Limitations to boot.

Google is your friend, you can look it up. For the record, MD (where the alleged incident happened), has no statute of limitations for attempted rape.

Bad thing? He could get confirmed, and because there is no statute, she could wait until he was a sitting SC judge, press charges, and the police would have to pursue it.