Kavenaugh Hearing Travesty. Dems Obstruct throughout

[Tom]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller View Post
Ummm no...

The FBI does carry out "vetting" operations. Its actually pretty common for them.

Done it 6 times already.
Nothing found.

Wouldn't it make sense to have her testify - under oath - and THEM decide if there is anything worth investigating and WHAT they should be looking for or who they should talk to?

Seems to me she is scared to lie to congress.
And seems she and the DNC don't really care about the allegations - only the delay tactics.

Why did 100% of the dem senators refuse to sit in on the conference call with the FBI about this?

For someone who wants her story out there, it is ONLY the republicans who want to get it done.

Fact, hcap.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by Tom

Done it 6 times already.
Nothing found.

As new info is uncovered which was not available previously, the preznit has the authority to re open the case.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by mostpost

You believe that a school, any school, would allow pictures of underaged drinking in its yearbook, when such pictures could be used as proof of child endangerment. A crime which could result in faculty member going to prison.


Those pictures are photoshopped. Or fake in their entirety.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool. And that is being kind.

Nowadays maybe. Back then though, it was a WAY different time.

Hell, James Comey (district attny at the time) let Isaac Asimov's son get away with ZERO JAIL TIME after he was found to have a SHITLOAD of child porn in his possession back in the 90s.

Who would you like to call a fool again, sir?

[Tom]

There pictures of kids holding up their hunting rifles in my yearbook.

They brought them to school in their cars and showed them off at recess.

We weren't a bunch of whinny little liberals back then.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

In both hearings the preznit simply orders the FBI to reopen the "background investigation".
I have already answered this. THE FBI conducts "background investigation"on both civilians and federal of all backgrounds of all individuals appointed to or about to be confirmed to office

Trump went thru a FBI background investigation. To bad they did not have Mueller back in the FBI when it was done.

I am not reading your link unless you summarize the relevant parts first.

So far you are batting 0%

Tough. Don't read the link. The bottom line is that there was no federal crime, therefore, the FBI has no jurisdiction to investigate a complaint of a crime.

And Kavanaugh, I'm sure has had numerous background checks by the feds, since being in governebnt, and has come up squeaky clean every time. So, again...what in the world would another routine FBI background check/investigation yield at this late date, since the alleged crime took place over 35 years ago? Are you expecting the FBI to discover something they have missed in all their previous background checks? Are you suggesting that the FBI is that incompetent?

[Redboard]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Tough. Don't read the link. The bottom line is that there was no federal crime, therefore, the FBI has no jurisdiction to investigate a complaint of a crime.

And Kavanaugh, I'm sure has had numerous background checks by the feds, since being in governebnt, and has come up squeaky clean every time. So, again...what in the world would another routine FBI background check/investigation yield at this late date, since the alleged crime took place over 35 years ago? Are you expecting the FBI to discover something they have missed in all their previous background checks? Are you suggesting that the FBI is that incompetent?

If the president asked the FBI to do an investigation, they would. But it's not something they would relish. Getting witnesses to remember an alleged drunken teenage party that happened 35 years ago, where some 17-year-old tried unsuccessfully to take off a bra. It's not something the FBI has a lot of successful experience with.

[OntheRail]

Originally Posted by hcap

As new info is uncovered which was not available previously, the preznit has the authority to re open the case.

There is no new info... A wild ass accusation from 35 or so years ago with NO Corroborating Evidence to be had... date time or place. Matter of Fact one of her claimed people of knowledge refute her claims.. Both she placed in the room flat out deny any part in it. ALL UNDER OATH. We have seen evidence from the time that "Chrissy" was quit the Party Girl and getting blackout drunk was the norm for her.. it was BBB.. Beer Booze and Boys. So not as lilly white as she first tried to paint herself... in other words she came out of the gate lying... but tools like you just believe. Not due to any evidence cause we know she has none. But on the hope of obstructing Trump's will and those who voted for him.. for that you guys believe in her full tilt.


CAN YOU SAY DEMOCRAT'S LAST DITCH STALL TACTIC... Anyone can see that...



Hell Ray Charles Would of said.

Hey.. Hoe.. That ain't Right... What I'd Say... Hey mama, you know your wrong... Tell your mama, tell your pa... I'm gonna send you back to Californ... Oh yes, ma'm, you don't do right, don't do right
Aw, you tried to play that boy but can't say when...

That's what I'd Say... you know your wrong.

[OntheRail]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

You mean all of the felony pleas that have occurred from investigating the President?

Republicans threw everything including the kitchen sink at Hillary Clinton too...

As this has gone on... the likely perjury in 2006. His steadfast judicial action stance on presidential indictments.

Yes, I think he isn't the best selection. I didn't feel that way before the hearings started even stated so on here.

This stuff with the woman is mostly noise for me.

We also know that the same Deep State Players that handed out the kitchen sinks to be tossed also guarded Hill from them.

So there's that...

[davew]

Originally Posted by tucker6

Ever occur to you that her lawyer knows this isn't in the FBI's jurisdiction, and therefore a request for an FBI investigation will never happen and uncover the lie? Come on man. You have to be more jaded that you're letting on.

All I hear is from dim politicians or Ford's lawyers. I have not seen any interviews of her. If she is a college professor, she must have enough social skills to speak on camera, unless she is mute.

I heard she does not want to fly and prefers to drive, therefore would be 'open' to a meeting after Wednesday. WTF, I am glad Grassley has called for the committee vote on Monday.

Feinstein needs censured for this obstruction of the process, considering she got the letter in July.

[woodtoo]

Sen. Grassley just upped the ante saying, Mrs. Blasey-Ford has until 10:00 pm
tonite to respond whether she will appear Monday or not. And if not a vote may be taken on Kavanaugh on Monday.

Congrats Mr.Grassley on owning a pair.

Put up or shut up.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Redboard

If the president asked the FBI to do an investigation, they would. But it's not something they would relish. Getting witnesses to remember an alleged drunken teenage party that happened 35 years ago, where some 17-year-old tried unsuccessfully to take off a bra. It's not something the FBI has a lot of successful experience with.

That's questionable, since they would have no legal authority. Jurisdiction counts.

[chadk66]

If Trump asked the FBI to investigate they'd laugh his ass off the planet.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by woodtoo

Sen. Grassley just upped the ante saying, Mrs. Blasey-Ford has until 10:00 pm
tonite to respond whether she will appear Monday or not. And if not a vote may be taken on Kavanaugh on Monday.

Congrats Mr.Grassley on owning a pair.

Put up or shut up.

Grassley is a worm of a man. His previous deadline was 10 A.M. this morning. He keeps moving the goal posts.

And I don't know how many of you know this, but his accuser not only wants to stand legal jurisdiction on its head by insisting on a federal investigation into her alleged crime but she, through her attorney, demanded that Kavanaugh speak first at any hearing. What a mockery this moonbat wants to make of the long established judicial principle that the accused FIRST hears the accuser and then the accused answers!

God only knows at this point what Grassley has agreed to in her latest set of demands or what his counter-offer is, if any.

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by OntheRail

We also know that the same Deep State Players that handed out the kitchen sinks to be tossed also guarded Hill from them.

So there's that...

Yeah... Republicans were secretly protecting Hillary back before Trump was even on the radar...

[fast4522]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Grassley is a worm of a man. His previous deadline was 10 A.M. this morning. He keeps moving the goal posts.

And I don't know how many of you know this, but his accuser not only wants to stand legal jurisdiction on its head by insisting on a federal investigation into her alleged crime but she, through her attorney, demanded that Kavanaugh speak first at any hearing. What a mockery this moonbat wants to make of the long established judicial principle that the accused FIRST hears the accuser and then the accused answers!

God only knows at this point what Grassley has agreed to in her latest set of demands or what his counter-offer is, if any.

It is all about perception, make it look like he is bending over backwards before he cold cocks them. I believe Chairman Grassley is maintaining the respect his position requires, who here does not agree with this view.