The Kavanaugh conundrum: Trump's FBI grandstanding highlights flaw in the bureau's background check

NewsVine_Mariyam

Platinum Member
Mar 3, 2018
9,285
6,138
1,030
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
The thing about background checks, even FBI background checks is that they don't detect hidden or in some cases not so hidden character flaws. There are a lot of people with no criminal history to speak of who are basically sociopaths, the two serial rapists and in one case murderers captured via DNA in California recently come to mind

Opinion | Frank Figliuzzi: Kavanaugh chaos highlights major flaw in FBI background check process

This White House has repeatedly undermined the institutions charged with upholding the law.

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation has been stalled by a credible allegation dating back three decades to his high school days at Georgetown Prep. What appeared to be a confirmation certainty is now in question as the reporting victim, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, requests an FBI investigation to substantiate her claims.

And yet, the only entity who can grant Ford’s request seems wholly uninterested in making that happen. President Donald Trump can, with one phone call, request the FBI re-open its background inquiry into Kavanaugh. Thus far he has both refused to issue such a request and uttered false statements about the FBI’s willingness and authority to investigate if he were to do so. Similarly, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the committee chair, wrongly asserted that this is not a job for the FBI. I disagree. Congress and the White House must take steps to modify the existing memorandum of understanding between the White House and the FBI as well as current protocols so that the bureau can unilaterally and independently pursue logical follow-ups to background inquiries.

Meanwhile, the GOP-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee seems to have learned little from the travesty of the Anita Hill hearings, nor from our evolving cultural understanding of how to handle credible allegations. The White House and the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are so myopically focused on getting Kavanuagh confirmed that they can’t see the logical solution staring them in the face.

[snipped]
Any rookie FBI agent can recite the acronym used to shape the interview questions posed to colleagues, neighbors, scorned significant others and family members of a nominee — CARLA. CARLA stands for character, aptitude, reputation, loyalty (to our nation) and associations. There are sub-headings under each of those categories — such as finances and temperament — but you get the idea. Here’s the thing though; these SPINs are unlike almost any other investigation the FBI conducts. They are neither criminal nor national security investigations but rather more akin to hiring a private eye to check on your cheating spouse. By that I mean that unlike the FBI’s other work, the FBI’s client in these investigations isn’t the American public, it’s the nominating agency; in this case the White House.​
 
The thing about background checks, even FBI background checks is that they don't detect hidden or in some cases not so hidden character flaws. There are a lot of people with no criminal history to speak of who are basically sociopaths, the two serial rapists and in one case murderers captured via DNA in California recently come to mind

Opinion | Frank Figliuzzi: Kavanaugh chaos highlights major flaw in FBI background check process

This White House has repeatedly undermined the institutions charged with upholding the law.

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation has been stalled by a credible allegation dating back three decades to his high school days at Georgetown Prep. What appeared to be a confirmation certainty is now in question as the reporting victim, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, requests an FBI investigation to substantiate her claims.

And yet, the only entity who can grant Ford’s request seems wholly uninterested in making that happen. President Donald Trump can, with one phone call, request the FBI re-open its background inquiry into Kavanaugh. Thus far he has both refused to issue such a request and uttered false statements about the FBI’s willingness and authority to investigate if he were to do so. Similarly, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the committee chair, wrongly asserted that this is not a job for the FBI. I disagree. Congress and the White House must take steps to modify the existing memorandum of understanding between the White House and the FBI as well as current protocols so that the bureau can unilaterally and independently pursue logical follow-ups to background inquiries.

Meanwhile, the GOP-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee seems to have learned little from the travesty of the Anita Hill hearings, nor from our evolving cultural understanding of how to handle credible allegations. The White House and the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are so myopically focused on getting Kavanuagh confirmed that they can’t see the logical solution staring them in the face.

[snipped]
Any rookie FBI agent can recite the acronym used to shape the interview questions posed to colleagues, neighbors, scorned significant others and family members of a nominee — CARLA. CARLA stands for character, aptitude, reputation, loyalty (to our nation) and associations. There are sub-headings under each of those categories — such as finances and temperament — but you get the idea. Here’s the thing though; these SPINs are unlike almost any other investigation the FBI conducts. They are neither criminal nor national security investigations but rather more akin to hiring a private eye to check on your cheating spouse. By that I mean that unlike the FBI’s other work, the FBI’s client in these investigations isn’t the American public, it’s the nominating agency; in this case the White House.​

The thing about background checks, even FBI background checks is that they don't detect hidden or in some cases not so hidden character flaws.

Or imaginary flaws either.
 
Really? You're blaming the FBI because they failed to uncover a 36 year old "alleged" improper touching incident that may or may not have ever happened?
 
the Kavanugh one comes to mind...
What part is the flaw? What is he alleged to have done or the fact that so many in society don't believe it should be a disqualified if true?
Kavanugh had 6 FBI background investigations. They talked with friends, family, school mates, teachers, school staff and administrators and looked into social media, news, and all school records. They talked with friend and foe alike from those periods.

What was it they missed? From the evidence shown so far they did not miss anything. Ford has yet to produce any credible witness or evidence to support the accusations. While Kavanugh has produced hundreds of witnesses that have never seen any predatory behaviors of any kind and many of them go back to when he was 16 years of age...

Now what is it you think they missed?
 
There is nothing wrong with the investigations that are done by the rank and file FBI...it's what's been done by a select few in high level positions in Washington that have made the FBI a joke. Comey, McCabe, Page, Strzok...those are the people who have brought disrepute to the FBI...not Donald Trump!
 
The thing about background checks, even FBI background checks is that they don't detect hidden or in some cases not so hidden character flaws. There are a lot of people with no criminal history to speak of who are basically sociopaths, the two serial rapists and in one case murderers captured via DNA in California recently come to mind

Opinion | Frank Figliuzzi: Kavanaugh chaos highlights major flaw in FBI background check process

This White House has repeatedly undermined the institutions charged with upholding the law.

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation has been stalled by a credible allegation dating back three decades to his high school days at Georgetown Prep. What appeared to be a confirmation certainty is now in question as the reporting victim, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, requests an FBI investigation to substantiate her claims.

And yet, the only entity who can grant Ford’s request seems wholly uninterested in making that happen. President Donald Trump can, with one phone call, request the FBI re-open its background inquiry into Kavanaugh. Thus far he has both refused to issue such a request and uttered false statements about the FBI’s willingness and authority to investigate if he were to do so. Similarly, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the committee chair, wrongly asserted that this is not a job for the FBI. I disagree. Congress and the White House must take steps to modify the existing memorandum of understanding between the White House and the FBI as well as current protocols so that the bureau can unilaterally and independently pursue logical follow-ups to background inquiries.

Meanwhile, the GOP-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee seems to have learned little from the travesty of the Anita Hill hearings, nor from our evolving cultural understanding of how to handle credible allegations. The White House and the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are so myopically focused on getting Kavanuagh confirmed that they can’t see the logical solution staring them in the face.

[snipped]
Any rookie FBI agent can recite the acronym used to shape the interview questions posed to colleagues, neighbors, scorned significant others and family members of a nominee — CARLA. CARLA stands for character, aptitude, reputation, loyalty (to our nation) and associations. There are sub-headings under each of those categories — such as finances and temperament — but you get the idea. Here’s the thing though; these SPINs are unlike almost any other investigation the FBI conducts. They are neither criminal nor national security investigations but rather more akin to hiring a private eye to check on your cheating spouse. By that I mean that unlike the FBI’s other work, the FBI’s client in these investigations isn’t the American public, it’s the nominating agency; in this case the White House.​

What can the FBI do here? Ford is the only person who remembers this event happening, and she can't remember where or when the event occurred.
 
The thing about background checks, even FBI background checks is that they don't detect hidden or in some cases not so hidden character flaws. There are a lot of people with no criminal history to speak of who are basically sociopaths, the two serial rapists and in one case murderers captured via DNA in California recently come to mind

Opinion | Frank Figliuzzi: Kavanaugh chaos highlights major flaw in FBI background check process

This White House has repeatedly undermined the institutions charged with upholding the law.

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation has been stalled by a credible allegation dating back three decades to his high school days at Georgetown Prep. What appeared to be a confirmation certainty is now in question as the reporting victim, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, requests an FBI investigation to substantiate her claims.

And yet, the only entity who can grant Ford’s request seems wholly uninterested in making that happen. President Donald Trump can, with one phone call, request the FBI re-open its background inquiry into Kavanaugh. Thus far he has both refused to issue such a request and uttered false statements about the FBI’s willingness and authority to investigate if he were to do so. Similarly, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the committee chair, wrongly asserted that this is not a job for the FBI. I disagree. Congress and the White House must take steps to modify the existing memorandum of understanding between the White House and the FBI as well as current protocols so that the bureau can unilaterally and independently pursue logical follow-ups to background inquiries.

Meanwhile, the GOP-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee seems to have learned little from the travesty of the Anita Hill hearings, nor from our evolving cultural understanding of how to handle credible allegations. The White House and the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are so myopically focused on getting Kavanuagh confirmed that they can’t see the logical solution staring them in the face.

[snipped]
Any rookie FBI agent can recite the acronym used to shape the interview questions posed to colleagues, neighbors, scorned significant others and family members of a nominee — CARLA. CARLA stands for character, aptitude, reputation, loyalty (to our nation) and associations. There are sub-headings under each of those categories — such as finances and temperament — but you get the idea. Here’s the thing though; these SPINs are unlike almost any other investigation the FBI conducts. They are neither criminal nor national security investigations but rather more akin to hiring a private eye to check on your cheating spouse. By that I mean that unlike the FBI’s other work, the FBI’s client in these investigations isn’t the American public, it’s the nominating agency; in this case the White House.​

What can the FBI do here? Ford is the only person who remembers this event happening, and she can't remember where or when the event occurred.

Considering her history of heavy drinking, that's not a huge surprise.
 
The thing about background checks, even FBI background checks is that they don't detect hidden or in some cases not so hidden character flaws. There are a lot of people with no criminal history to speak of who are basically sociopaths, the two serial rapists and in one case murderers captured via DNA in California recently come to mind

Opinion | Frank Figliuzzi: Kavanaugh chaos highlights major flaw in FBI background check process

This White House has repeatedly undermined the institutions charged with upholding the law.

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation has been stalled by a credible allegation dating back three decades to his high school days at Georgetown Prep. What appeared to be a confirmation certainty is now in question as the reporting victim, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, requests an FBI investigation to substantiate her claims.

And yet, the only entity who can grant Ford’s request seems wholly uninterested in making that happen. President Donald Trump can, with one phone call, request the FBI re-open its background inquiry into Kavanaugh. Thus far he has both refused to issue such a request and uttered false statements about the FBI’s willingness and authority to investigate if he were to do so. Similarly, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the committee chair, wrongly asserted that this is not a job for the FBI. I disagree. Congress and the White House must take steps to modify the existing memorandum of understanding between the White House and the FBI as well as current protocols so that the bureau can unilaterally and independently pursue logical follow-ups to background inquiries.

Meanwhile, the GOP-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee seems to have learned little from the travesty of the Anita Hill hearings, nor from our evolving cultural understanding of how to handle credible allegations. The White House and the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are so myopically focused on getting Kavanuagh confirmed that they can’t see the logical solution staring them in the face.

[snipped]
Any rookie FBI agent can recite the acronym used to shape the interview questions posed to colleagues, neighbors, scorned significant others and family members of a nominee — CARLA. CARLA stands for character, aptitude, reputation, loyalty (to our nation) and associations. There are sub-headings under each of those categories — such as finances and temperament — but you get the idea. Here’s the thing though; these SPINs are unlike almost any other investigation the FBI conducts. They are neither criminal nor national security investigations but rather more akin to hiring a private eye to check on your cheating spouse. By that I mean that unlike the FBI’s other work, the FBI’s client in these investigations isn’t the American public, it’s the nominating agency; in this case the White House.​

Just as an aside...

One of Trump’s aides, Porter I think his name was, was a serial wife beater. It wasn’t just hear say, one of his former wives got an EPO against him…

Read the emergency protective order against Rob Porter

I guess the White House aides are not required to have FBI background checks done but one would think the Secret Service would do one anyway…. The WaPO got a copy of it; the Treasury and DOJ couldn’t? It’s a joke.

In other news, Trump is considering bringing the serial spouse abuser back into the White House.

The level of sleaze gets deeper daily at 1600 Pennsylvania.
 
The thing about background checks, even FBI background checks is that they don't detect hidden or in some cases not so hidden character flaws. There are a lot of people with no criminal history to speak of who are basically sociopaths, the two serial rapists and in one case murderers captured via DNA in California recently come to mind

Opinion | Frank Figliuzzi: Kavanaugh chaos highlights major flaw in FBI background check process

This White House has repeatedly undermined the institutions charged with upholding the law.

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation has been stalled by a credible allegation dating back three decades to his high school days at Georgetown Prep. What appeared to be a confirmation certainty is now in question as the reporting victim, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, requests an FBI investigation to substantiate her claims.

And yet, the only entity who can grant Ford’s request seems wholly uninterested in making that happen. President Donald Trump can, with one phone call, request the FBI re-open its background inquiry into Kavanaugh. Thus far he has both refused to issue such a request and uttered false statements about the FBI’s willingness and authority to investigate if he were to do so. Similarly, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the committee chair, wrongly asserted that this is not a job for the FBI. I disagree. Congress and the White House must take steps to modify the existing memorandum of understanding between the White House and the FBI as well as current protocols so that the bureau can unilaterally and independently pursue logical follow-ups to background inquiries.

Meanwhile, the GOP-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee seems to have learned little from the travesty of the Anita Hill hearings, nor from our evolving cultural understanding of how to handle credible allegations. The White House and the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are so myopically focused on getting Kavanuagh confirmed that they can’t see the logical solution staring them in the face.

[snipped]
Any rookie FBI agent can recite the acronym used to shape the interview questions posed to colleagues, neighbors, scorned significant others and family members of a nominee — CARLA. CARLA stands for character, aptitude, reputation, loyalty (to our nation) and associations. There are sub-headings under each of those categories — such as finances and temperament — but you get the idea. Here’s the thing though; these SPINs are unlike almost any other investigation the FBI conducts. They are neither criminal nor national security investigations but rather more akin to hiring a private eye to check on your cheating spouse. By that I mean that unlike the FBI’s other work, the FBI’s client in these investigations isn’t the American public, it’s the nominating agency; in this case the White House.​
He was background checked FIVE TIMES before this 6th time for the SC nomination....ALL FIVE of those Trump was not president.
 
This is so absurd. We're talking about one action that he supposedly, allegedly did when he was 15 years old and intoxicated. You must be kidding.

What about the dozens of people who have come forward who have vouched for Kavanaugh's character? What about the fact that NOT ONE of the people who were supposedly there supports Ford's story? What about the fact that her current version of this incident is markedly different from the version she gave to her therapist in 2012?
 
The FBI investigates federal crimes this is not one. This is a 36 year old allegation there is no physical eveidence to examine there is no photographic, audio, or video eveidence to examine there is no crime scence to examine and the few people named who were supposed to be a witness to the alleged crime have stated they have no recolletion of it or it didn't happen. So given this exactly what is the FBI supposed to do here?
 
Credible reports have dates, times, places, names and most importantly proof. None of that holds in this case. Stop wasting government resources on Democrat fantasies.
 
the Kavanugh one comes to mind...
What part is the flaw? What is he alleged to have done, the fact that so many in society don't believe it should be a disqualifier if true, or the fact that he lied about it or failed to disclose it when asked?

If it never happened, why would he disclose it? You apparently have lost all common sense when it comes to this topic. Several of your cohorts seem to think he should have admitted to something he never did, just to satisfy your lust for blood.
 

Forum List

Back
Top