Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
This isn't a criminal "investigation." It is background on a SC justice being considered. FBI did the background check and they should follow up with this additional information. For some reason, they are saying the WH has to request it. I think it's obfuscation, but that's just me.The FBI doesn't investigate those kind of crimes. However, it could fall to senate investigators or even local police, if she can provide enough info to get started. Like you, I think if an experienced investigator interviews her, they can determine some of the details that will allow an investigation of this to proceed.When filing such a report the police would require information such as, when the alleged crime happened, and the location.
Filing a false police report is not a good thing.
I'm sure she can nail down the house if she wanted to, she lives in CA.
In 36 years she didn't "want too"?
You've never faced an attorney in court, have ya?
No and I don't plan to, but I would in her position. What kind of women makes a claim like this and doesn't plan to come forward, so I would declare a crime and the FBI would investigate. I read she had to leave their home and got threats on her life. I'd come forward. There is no reason Trump can send the FBI in to investigate.
Talking about it with a counselor is not for the same reasons as an investigation, and probably no one has tried to get her to pull those memories up yet.
Any law enforcement agency would not even go that far especially when the most striking piece of evidence she has, the therapist report, has been said, by the victim herself, to contain bogus information which then would not be allowed in court.
It would go in the "no evidence of a crime" file.
We don't know there are no corroborating witnesses and I think some of the when/where stuff could be gotten to if she is interviewed by an experienced investigator. Witnesses having trouble with their recollection is pretty commonplace.The FBI should look into this as a background check question. However, the White House has to order that, since the background check was done for the WH as part of his vetting process. The FBI put the report in his file, but to investigate this additional background information the WH has to request it.Fine. She should be eager to answer any and all questions regarding her very serious accusations now that they have been made publicly.Maryland
· Has this state eliminated the statute of limitations for all felony sex crimes? Yes. Maryland has no statute of limitations for any felony sex crime.
· Does this state reduce a statute of limitations if a victim chooses not report? No. A victim's choice to report or not report does not affect the statute of limitations.
· Does this state have exceptions to statutes of limitations for DNA evidence? No. No exception is needed, as the state has eliminated the statute of limitations for all felony sex crimes.
· What is the state's statute of limitations for it’s most serious felony sex crimes? 21 years or more.
State by State Guide on Statutes of Limitations | RAINN
She should file charges and I'm sure the FBI would investigate then.
I kinda doubt Trump will order that.
I don't see why the FBI has to get the WH to order it, since it would seem to me if you did a background check on anyone and then got more serious information, you would look into it as a matter of course. Is this foot dragging on the part of the FBI in an attempt to stay off Trump's bad side for a few days?
The FBI should look into this as a background check question.
How would they "look into this"?
No corroborating witnesses, a sketchy claim, 36 years later.
I guess they could waterboard her...…….
An investigation would at least give us some reassurance that NON-PARTISAN investigators looked around and tried to determine if there were witnesses or other evidence that would come into play either way to shed light on these accusations. If they can't find anything, okay.
I think at this point, an investigation is necessary. A hearing with only Kavanaugh and Ford and nothing else is NOT going to answer anyone's questions.
For once, it would be nice if they don't use their questions to score political points instead of getting at the heart of the matter, the way they all do during most senate hearings.
Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee (from top left): Chuck Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Ben Sasse, Thom Tillis, Ted Cruz, John Cornyn; (from bottom left) Lindsey Graham, Jeff Flake, John Kennedy, Mike Crapo and Mike Lee. (Photos: U.S. Senate) UGH!!
Grassley, Hatch, Kennedy (ugh), and Graham come to mind. I think Jeff Flake would be the most decent of all of them.
Have you got a picture of the Dems who are on the committee, as well?
I realize you made up your mind before you even heard her story, you are so eager to see Kavanaugh on the Court. I am telling you there are reasons to request an investigation, regardless of your preconceived verdict.We don't know there are no corroborating witnesses and I think some of the when/where stuff could be gotten to if she is interviewed by an experienced investigator. Witnesses having trouble with their recollection is pretty commonplace.The FBI should look into this as a background check question. However, the White House has to order that, since the background check was done for the WH as part of his vetting process. The FBI put the report in his file, but to investigate this additional background information the WH has to request it.Fine. She should be eager to answer any and all questions regarding her very serious accusations now that they have been made publicly.
She should file charges and I'm sure the FBI would investigate then.
I kinda doubt Trump will order that.
I don't see why the FBI has to get the WH to order it, since it would seem to me if you did a background check on anyone and then got more serious information, you would look into it as a matter of course. Is this foot dragging on the part of the FBI in an attempt to stay off Trump's bad side for a few days?
The FBI should look into this as a background check question.
How would they "look into this"?
No corroborating witnesses, a sketchy claim, 36 years later.
I guess they could waterboard her...…….
An investigation would at least give us some reassurance that NON-PARTISAN investigators looked around and tried to determine if there were witnesses or other evidence that would come into play either way to shed light on these accusations. If they can't find anything, okay.
I think at this point, an investigation is necessary. A hearing with only Kavanaugh and Ford and nothing else is NOT going to answer anyone's questions.
We don't know there are no corroborating witnesses
It's not what we know, it's what she said.
You want the FBI to ask people who can't be identified, what happened at a party, sometime in the 1980s, somewhere near a country club, maybe, what happened behind a closed door? That's hilarious!!
Witnesses having trouble with their recollection is pretty commonplace.
Liars having trouble keeping their story straight is even more commonplace.
An investigation would at least give us some reassurance
Bullshit.
A hearing with only Kavanaugh and Ford and nothing else is NOT going to answer anyone's questions.
Especially because she won't show up.
Enough with the games, start the vote.
I realize you made up your mind before you even heard her story, you are so eager to see Kavanaugh on the Court. I am telling you there are reasons to request an investigation, regardless of your preconceived verdict.We don't know there are no corroborating witnesses and I think some of the when/where stuff could be gotten to if she is interviewed by an experienced investigator. Witnesses having trouble with their recollection is pretty commonplace.The FBI should look into this as a background check question. However, the White House has to order that, since the background check was done for the WH as part of his vetting process. The FBI put the report in his file, but to investigate this additional background information the WH has to request it.She should file charges and I'm sure the FBI would investigate then.
I kinda doubt Trump will order that.
I don't see why the FBI has to get the WH to order it, since it would seem to me if you did a background check on anyone and then got more serious information, you would look into it as a matter of course. Is this foot dragging on the part of the FBI in an attempt to stay off Trump's bad side for a few days?
The FBI should look into this as a background check question.
How would they "look into this"?
No corroborating witnesses, a sketchy claim, 36 years later.
I guess they could waterboard her...…….
An investigation would at least give us some reassurance that NON-PARTISAN investigators looked around and tried to determine if there were witnesses or other evidence that would come into play either way to shed light on these accusations. If they can't find anything, okay.
I think at this point, an investigation is necessary. A hearing with only Kavanaugh and Ford and nothing else is NOT going to answer anyone's questions.
We don't know there are no corroborating witnesses
It's not what we know, it's what she said.
You want the FBI to ask people who can't be identified, what happened at a party, sometime in the 1980s, somewhere near a country club, maybe, what happened behind a closed door? That's hilarious!!
Witnesses having trouble with their recollection is pretty commonplace.
Liars having trouble keeping their story straight is even more commonplace.
An investigation would at least give us some reassurance
Bullshit.
A hearing with only Kavanaugh and Ford and nothing else is NOT going to answer anyone's questions.
Especially because she won't show up.
Enough with the games, start the vote.
Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee (from top left): Chuck Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Ben Sasse, Thom Tillis, Ted Cruz, John Cornyn; (from bottom left) Lindsey Graham, Jeff Flake, John Kennedy, Mike Crapo and Mike Lee. (Photos: U.S. Senate) UGH!!
Grassley, Hatch, Kennedy (ugh), and Graham come to mind. I think Jeff Flake would be the most decent of all of them.
Fine. She should be eager to answer any and all questions regarding her very serious accusations now that they have been made publicly.MarylandIf "the female" told the truth about the incident she claims happened some thirty years ago, then she can handle questioning.
Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee (from top left): Chuck Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Ben Sasse, Thom Tillis, Ted Cruz, John Cornyn; (from bottom left) Lindsey Graham, Jeff Flake, John Kennedy, Mike Crapo and Mike Lee. (Photos: U.S. Senate) UGH!!
Grassley, Hatch, Kennedy (ugh), and Graham come to mind. I think Jeff Flake would be the most decent of all of them.
· Has this state eliminated the statute of limitations for all felony sex crimes? Yes. Maryland has no statute of limitations for any felony sex crime.
· Does this state reduce a statute of limitations if a victim chooses not report? No. A victim's choice to report or not report does not affect the statute of limitations.
· Does this state have exceptions to statutes of limitations for DNA evidence? No. No exception is needed, as the state has eliminated the statute of limitations for all felony sex crimes.
· What is the state's statute of limitations for it’s most serious felony sex crimes? 21 years or more.
State by State Guide on Statutes of Limitations | RAINN
She should file charges and I'm sure the FBI would investigate then.
What is she hiding from?
The question what is he and judge hiding from?
Maryland
· Has this state eliminated the statute of limitations for all felony sex crimes? Yes. Maryland has no statute of limitations for any felony sex crime.
· Does this state reduce a statute of limitations if a victim chooses not report? No. A victim's choice to report or not report does not affect the statute of limitations.
· Does this state have exceptions to statutes of limitations for DNA evidence? No. No exception is needed, as the state has eliminated the statute of limitations for all felony sex crimes.
· What is the state's statute of limitations for it’s most serious felony sex crimes? 21 years or more.
State by State Guide on Statutes of Limitations | RAINN
Indeed, there is no relevant statute of limitations, because no crime has been committed.
That is why she needs to press charges.
Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee (from top left): Chuck Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Ben Sasse, Thom Tillis, Ted Cruz, John Cornyn; (from bottom left) Lindsey Graham, Jeff Flake, John Kennedy, Mike Crapo and Mike Lee. (Photos: U.S. Senate) UGH!!
Grassley, Hatch, Kennedy (ugh), and Graham come to mind. I think Jeff Flake would be the most decent of all of them.
Did you know that you CAN be a feminist without hating men?
These are the men who think they have control over a women's reproductive rights.
How so?
Anti abortion and also anti health ins paying for the pill. Most of them have not expanded Medicaid in their states either, so pro birth, not healthcare. Also most of them are behind the closing of the PP's. Codgers.
What is she hiding from?
The question what is he and judge hiding from?
Maryland
· Has this state eliminated the statute of limitations for all felony sex crimes? Yes. Maryland has no statute of limitations for any felony sex crime.
· Does this state reduce a statute of limitations if a victim chooses not report? No. A victim's choice to report or not report does not affect the statute of limitations.
· Does this state have exceptions to statutes of limitations for DNA evidence? No. No exception is needed, as the state has eliminated the statute of limitations for all felony sex crimes.
· What is the state's statute of limitations for it’s most serious felony sex crimes? 21 years or more.
State by State Guide on Statutes of Limitations | RAINN
Indeed, there is no relevant statute of limitations, because no crime has been committed.
That is why she needs to press charges.
She has been invited to do so. If she does not, the matter is ended.
Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee (from top left): Chuck Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Ben Sasse, Thom Tillis, Ted Cruz, John Cornyn; (from bottom left) Lindsey Graham, Jeff Flake, John Kennedy, Mike Crapo and Mike Lee. (Photos: U.S. Senate) UGH!!
Grassley, Hatch, Kennedy (ugh), and Graham come to mind. I think Jeff Flake would be the most decent of all of them.
Did you know that you CAN be a feminist without hating men?
These are the men who think they have control over a women's reproductive rights.
All Americans have a voice in the crafting of our nation’s laws. Men and women , as long as they vote.
True but this is the judicial committee on the GOP side, not one woman even though they have ….. wait for it.... 6.
It's Official: Record Number Of Women Nominated For House Seats In 2018
Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee (from top left): Chuck Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Ben Sasse, Thom Tillis, Ted Cruz, John Cornyn; (from bottom left) Lindsey Graham, Jeff Flake, John Kennedy, Mike Crapo and Mike Lee. (Photos: U.S. Senate) UGH!!
Grassley, Hatch, Kennedy (ugh), and Graham come to mind. I think Jeff Flake would be the most decent of all of them.
Did you know that you CAN be a feminist without hating men?
These are the men who think they have control over a women's reproductive rights.
All Americans have a voice in the crafting of our nation’s laws. Men and women , as long as they vote.
True but this is the judicial committee on the GOP side, not one woman even though they have ….. wait for it.... 6.
What do you want? To institute a draft and force women to run for public office? Don’t let your sexist bias make you an idiotic asshole.
Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee (from top left): Chuck Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Ben Sasse, Thom Tillis, Ted Cruz, John Cornyn; (from bottom left) Lindsey Graham, Jeff Flake, John Kennedy, Mike Crapo and Mike Lee. (Photos: U.S. Senate) UGH!!
Grassley, Hatch, Kennedy (ugh), and Graham come to mind. I think Jeff Flake would be the most decent of all of them.
Did you know that you CAN be a feminist without hating men?
These are the men who think they have control over a women's reproductive rights.
How so?
Anti abortion and also anti health ins paying for the pill. Most of them have not expanded Medicaid in their states either, so pro birth, not healthcare. Also most of them are behind the closing of the PP's. Codgers.
How do they have control?
Did you know that you CAN be a feminist without hating men?
These are the men who think they have control over a women's reproductive rights.
How so?
Anti abortion and also anti health ins paying for the pill. Most of them have not expanded Medicaid in their states either, so pro birth, not healthcare. Also most of them are behind the closing of the PP's. Codgers.
How do they have control?
Just got a letter from Rand Paul asking mainly for money, but he wants to make abortion illegal at conception. That is how.
------------------------------------------- i think that the male questioners will ask pertinent questions anyway that they like OldLady rather than 'kowtow' to this woman or any male if a male is questioned OldLady .For once, it would be nice if they don't use their questions to score political points instead of getting at the heart of the matter, the way they all do during most senate hearings.
Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee (from top left): Chuck Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Ben Sasse, Thom Tillis, Ted Cruz, John Cornyn; (from bottom left) Lindsey Graham, Jeff Flake, John Kennedy, Mike Crapo and Mike Lee. (Photos: U.S. Senate) UGH!!
Grassley, Hatch, Kennedy (ugh), and Graham come to mind. I think Jeff Flake would be the most decent of all of them.
Have you got a picture of the Dems who are on the committee, as well?
----------------------------------------- good , the more women in charge will just be more examples of how women will do as they have more political Power Penny .It's Official: Record Number Of Women Nominated For House Seats In 2018Did you know that you CAN be a feminist without hating men?
These are the men who think they have control over a women's reproductive rights.
All Americans have a voice in the crafting of our nation’s laws. Men and women , as long as they vote.
True but this is the judicial committee on the GOP side, not one woman even though they have ….. wait for it.... 6.
What do you want? To institute a draft and force women to run for public office? Don’t let your sexist bias make you an idiotic asshole.
I don't need to, the GOP men are doing enough to make women want to run.
-------------------------------------- i keep hearing from different talking heads that are advertised as being in the KNOW that the FBI doesn't do these kinds of investigations . I don't know though OldLady .This isn't a criminal "investigation." It is background on a SC justice being considered. FBI did the background check and they should follow up with this additional information. For some reason, they are saying the WH has to request it. I think it's obfuscation, but that's just me.The FBI doesn't investigate those kind of crimes. However, it could fall to senate investigators or even local police, if she can provide enough info to get started. Like you, I think if an experienced investigator interviews her, they can determine some of the details that will allow an investigation of this to proceed.I'm sure she can nail down the house if she wanted to, she lives in CA.
In 36 years she didn't "want too"?
You've never faced an attorney in court, have ya?
No and I don't plan to, but I would in her position. What kind of women makes a claim like this and doesn't plan to come forward, so I would declare a crime and the FBI would investigate. I read she had to leave their home and got threats on her life. I'd come forward. There is no reason Trump can send the FBI in to investigate.
Talking about it with a counselor is not for the same reasons as an investigation, and probably no one has tried to get her to pull those memories up yet.
Any law enforcement agency would not even go that far especially when the most striking piece of evidence she has, the therapist report, has been said, by the victim herself, to contain bogus information which then would not be allowed in court.
It would go in the "no evidence of a crime" file.
She should file charges and I'm sure the FBI would investigate then.
About what?
When filing such a report the police would require information such as, when the alleged crime happened, and the location.
Filing a false police report is not a good thing.
I'm sure she can nail down the house if she wanted to, she lives in CA.
In 36 years she didn't "want too"?
You've never faced an attorney in court, have ya?
No and I don't plan to, but I would in her position. What kind of women makes a claim like this and doesn't plan to come forward, so I would declare a crime and the FBI would investigate. I read she had to leave their home and got threats on her life. I'd come forward. There is no reason Trump can send the FBI in to investigate.
Not as a crime, Pismoe, as an extension of their background investigation.-------------------------------------- i keep hearing from different talking heads that are advertised as being in the KNOW that the FBI doesn't do these kinds of investigations . I don't know though OldLady .This isn't a criminal "investigation." It is background on a SC justice being considered. FBI did the background check and they should follow up with this additional information. For some reason, they are saying the WH has to request it. I think it's obfuscation, but that's just me.The FBI doesn't investigate those kind of crimes. However, it could fall to senate investigators or even local police, if she can provide enough info to get started. Like you, I think if an experienced investigator interviews her, they can determine some of the details that will allow an investigation of this to proceed.In 36 years she didn't "want too"?
You've never faced an attorney in court, have ya?
No and I don't plan to, but I would in her position. What kind of women makes a claim like this and doesn't plan to come forward, so I would declare a crime and the FBI would investigate. I read she had to leave their home and got threats on her life. I'd come forward. There is no reason Trump can send the FBI in to investigate.
Talking about it with a counselor is not for the same reasons as an investigation, and probably no one has tried to get her to pull those memories up yet.
Any law enforcement agency would not even go that far especially when the most striking piece of evidence she has, the therapist report, has been said, by the victim herself, to contain bogus information which then would not be allowed in court.
It would go in the "no evidence of a crime" file.
Rapists all huh?
Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee (from top left): Chuck Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Ben Sasse, Thom Tillis, Ted Cruz, John Cornyn; (from bottom left) Lindsey Graham, Jeff Flake, John Kennedy, Mike Crapo and Mike Lee. (Photos: U.S. Senate) UGH!!
Grassley, Hatch, Kennedy (ugh), and Graham come to mind. I think Jeff Flake would be the most decent of all of them.
