Democrat Senator Wants an Investigation Into the FBI Investigation of Brett Kavanaugh

[FA_Q2]

I think the question is whether "someone" in the DoJ or above told the FBI not not investigate. Ford was not the only accuser. Personally, imo, what someone does in HS or undergraduate is immaterial, unless it was a felony, and unless there are ongoing allegations during a person's professional career, as there were in Thomas's case. Pols like Slick Willy and Trump and Cuomo are a little different because they are not lifetime appointments people don't directly vote upon. We can always vote out a pol if he/she becomes too toxic.

And that just whooshes right over the heads of those who think this needs to go further.

Thank you. What Bart, Squee, Tobin and Donkey Dong Doug are accused of doing was a felony. Plus they didn't interview dozens of other women. Rigged investigation.

IOW, keep going until the correct result is obtained.

Seems to be the general idea.

The verdict is known. Proving it is just an inconvenient detail.

To me the issue is really about future FBI background checks. The failure to adequately investigate so a president could choose to not nominate a person has come up before. Nixon twice nomiated men who should have been disqualified for CURRENT racist assocations. LBJ nominated a guy for CJ who, it was found, had outside income. That was actually made into more than one book.

IF we don't want confirmation hearings to be circuses with "gotcha" moments we need the FBI to know what its supposed to investigate and for the FBI do do it. Consistently.

Sure but that has nothing to do with this case, actually. The FBI really should not be doing much investigating here either as this was a 'gotcha' moment from the get go. There was nothing to 'investigate' before the hearing as allegations had not been made. Once those allegations had been made we had one account that was 30 years old, lacked a single corroborating witness, time of the incident, location of the incident, any real details that could have been useful and would not even be, afaik, in the jurisdiction of the FBI in the first place. It was well known from the get go that nothing would be found here as there was nothing to the allegation in the first place and the other allegations were far worse.

The background check did not fail here, it cannot find what is not there. This was a hit job from day one.

But the FBI doesn't investigate "allegations" for a nominee or any background check. It's supposed to go out and interview people. There were not a few people who were familiar with Kegs' drunken behavior with women. That was what really spurred on Ford and other women. It all should have been fully disclosed to the judiciary committee, but even Kegs was blindsided. And it took a democrat who at best has dementia to make the committee aware.

The system was broken. The question is why. The FBI's excuse was "we don't look that far back." But that's not correct. They've looked back into college years in the past. And that trail would have uncovered Kegger's behavior. He cleaned up his own act at some point. The whole circus was avoidable and should have been avoided.

Yet you keep ignoring Dr. Fords lies and the testimony of various people who were under oath in the interviews, in which NONE of them support Dr. Ford

Yet you complain about the FBI who had little material to build on....., Ford REFUSED to give the documents to them.....

I dont think she lied, I think that is honestly what she thinks she remembered, something obviously seriously affected her.

You forget that her 4 named witnesses all say they were never there or knew about a sexual assault, she claims they were there that is LYING!

I think they said they didnt recall...which is different. It does not mean she was lying...how much of a drunk fueled highschool party are these folks going to acuurately remember, including Ford? It doesnt mean she was lying.

The coat and the front page magazine articles of her wearing it makes me question her honesty to be quite frank. Her story never added up and she was eating up the publicity over it.

The pressure that seems to have been applied to one of her friends so that she would back her up makes me question her even more.

The entire thing just does not make sense. In the end, there was nothing to back her up.

I agree, nothing to back her up and you cant run on that. But I do think something happened to her, based on the reputations of all concerned.

Possibly. Mostly immaterial though.

It is rather problematic the center stage sexual impropriety seems to take on the political stage. Cuomo is caught literally concealing evidence in a federal investigation and no one cares because there are allegations of sexual misconduct. It makes no sense why we seem to value who politicians might be screwing more than what they are actually doing.

 

[Coyote]

I think they said they didnt recall...which is different. It does not mean she was lying...how much of a drunk fueled highschool party are these folks going to acuurately remember, including Ford? It doesnt mean she was lying.

The story she told, while disturbing, was not really "criminal". She said a group of boys pushed her onto a bed and kinda got on top of her for a second then walked off laughing.

It's the kind of thing where if you told a cop, he'd say "You kids quit horsing around" or something...

I just wanted to add to this...I realize she said in her Congress testimony that it disturbed her greatly and she still thinks about it a lot...but I'm just saying, to an outside party, I wouldn't exactly arrest a young kid for doing that. I'm not condoning it, I'm jsut saying I dunno if it's worth Jailtime or charges or whatever.

I dont know...but they minors, privelged and drunk a lot...impossible to say what really happened and attitudes were different then.

 

[Coyote]

I think the question is whether "someone" in the DoJ or above told the FBI not not investigate. Ford was not the only accuser. Personally, imo, what someone does in HS or undergraduate is immaterial, unless it was a felony, and unless there are ongoing allegations during a person's professional career, as there were in Thomas's case. Pols like Slick Willy and Trump and Cuomo are a little different because they are not lifetime appointments people don't directly vote upon. We can always vote out a pol if he/she becomes too toxic.

And that just whooshes right over the heads of those who think this needs to go further.

Thank you. What Bart, Squee, Tobin and Donkey Dong Doug are accused of doing was a felony. Plus they didn't interview dozens of other women. Rigged investigation.

IOW, keep going until the correct result is obtained.

Seems to be the general idea.

The verdict is known. Proving it is just an inconvenient detail.

To me the issue is really about future FBI background checks. The failure to adequately investigate so a president could choose to not nominate a person has come up before. Nixon twice nomiated men who should have been disqualified for CURRENT racist assocations. LBJ nominated a guy for CJ who, it was found, had outside income. That was actually made into more than one book.

IF we don't want confirmation hearings to be circuses with "gotcha" moments we need the FBI to know what its supposed to investigate and for the FBI do do it. Consistently.

Sure but that has nothing to do with this case, actually. The FBI really should not be doing much investigating here either as this was a 'gotcha' moment from the get go. There was nothing to 'investigate' before the hearing as allegations had not been made. Once those allegations had been made we had one account that was 30 years old, lacked a single corroborating witness, time of the incident, location of the incident, any real details that could have been useful and would not even be, afaik, in the jurisdiction of the FBI in the first place. It was well known from the get go that nothing would be found here as there was nothing to the allegation in the first place and the other allegations were far worse.

The background check did not fail here, it cannot find what is not there. This was a hit job from day one.

But the FBI doesn't investigate "allegations" for a nominee or any background check. It's supposed to go out and interview people. There were not a few people who were familiar with Kegs' drunken behavior with women. That was what really spurred on Ford and other women. It all should have been fully disclosed to the judiciary committee, but even Kegs was blindsided. And it took a democrat who at best has dementia to make the committee aware.

The system was broken. The question is why. The FBI's excuse was "we don't look that far back." But that's not correct. They've looked back into college years in the past. And that trail would have uncovered Kegger's behavior. He cleaned up his own act at some point. The whole circus was avoidable and should have been avoided.

Yet you keep ignoring Dr. Fords lies and the testimony of various people who were under oath in the interviews, in which NONE of them support Dr. Ford

Yet you complain about the FBI who had little material to build on....., Ford REFUSED to give the documents to them.....

I dont think she lied, I think that is honestly what she thinks she remembered, something obviously seriously affected her.

You forget that her 4 named witnesses all say they were never there or knew about a sexual assault, she claims they were there that is LYING!

I think they said they didnt recall...which is different. It does not mean she was lying...how much of a drunk fueled highschool party are these folks going to acuurately remember, including Ford? It doesnt mean she was lying.

The coat and the front page magazine articles of her wearing it makes me question her honesty to be quite frank. Her story never added up and she was eating up the publicity over it.

The pressure that seems to have been applied to one of her friends so that she would back her up makes me question her even more.

The entire thing just does not make sense. In the end, there was nothing to back her up.

I agree, nothing to back her up and you cant run on that. But I do think something happened to her, based on the reputations of all concerned.

Possibly. Mostly immaterial though.

It is rather problematic the center stage sexual impropriety seems to take on the political stage. Cuomo is caught literally concealing evidence in a federal investigation and no one cares because there are allegations of sexual misconduct. It makes no sense why we seem to value who politicians might be screwing more than what they are actually doing.

Ya, I know, right?

 

[AFrench2]

I think they said they didnt recall...which is different. It does not mean she was lying...how much of a drunk fueled highschool party are these folks going to acuurately remember, including Ford? It doesnt mean she was lying.

The story she told, while disturbing, was not really "criminal". She said a group of boys pushed her onto a bed and kinda got on top of her for a second then walked off laughing.

It's the kind of thing where if you told a cop, he'd say "You kids quit horsing around" or something...

I just wanted to add to this...I realize she said in her Congress testimony that it disturbed her greatly and she still thinks about it a lot...but I'm just saying, to an outside party, I wouldn't exactly arrest a young kid for doing that. I'm not condoning it, I'm jsut saying I dunno if it's worth Jailtime or charges or whatever.

I dont know...but they minors, privelged and drunk a lot...impossible to say what really happened and attitudes were different then.

Attitudes are the exact same. If a group of white upper-class boys grinded on a fully clothed girl in 2021 they wouldn't get in trouble, either.

 

[hadit]

I think the question is whether "someone" in the DoJ or above told the FBI not not investigate. Ford was not the only accuser. Personally, imo, what someone does in HS or undergraduate is immaterial, unless it was a felony, and unless there are ongoing allegations during a person's professional career, as there were in Thomas's case. Pols like Slick Willy and Trump and Cuomo are a little different because they are not lifetime appointments people don't directly vote upon. We can always vote out a pol if he/she becomes too toxic.

And that just whooshes right over the heads of those who think this needs to go further.

Thank you. What Bart, Squee, Tobin and Donkey Dong Doug are accused of doing was a felony. Plus they didn't interview dozens of other women. Rigged investigation.

IOW, keep going until the correct result is obtained.

Seems to be the general idea.

The verdict is known. Proving it is just an inconvenient detail.

To me the issue is really about future FBI background checks. The failure to adequately investigate so a president could choose to not nominate a person has come up before. Nixon twice nomiated men who should have been disqualified for CURRENT racist assocations. LBJ nominated a guy for CJ who, it was found, had outside income. That was actually made into more than one book.

IF we don't want confirmation hearings to be circuses with "gotcha" moments we need the FBI to know what its supposed to investigate and for the FBI do do it. Consistently.

Sure but that has nothing to do with this case, actually. The FBI really should not be doing much investigating here either as this was a 'gotcha' moment from the get go. There was nothing to 'investigate' before the hearing as allegations had not been made. Once those allegations had been made we had one account that was 30 years old, lacked a single corroborating witness, time of the incident, location of the incident, any real details that could have been useful and would not even be, afaik, in the jurisdiction of the FBI in the first place. It was well known from the get go that nothing would be found here as there was nothing to the allegation in the first place and the other allegations were far worse.

The background check did not fail here, it cannot find what is not there. This was a hit job from day one.

But the FBI doesn't investigate "allegations" for a nominee or any background check. It's supposed to go out and interview people. There were not a few people who were familiar with Kegs' drunken behavior with women. That was what really spurred on Ford and other women. It all should have been fully disclosed to the judiciary committee, but even Kegs was blindsided. And it took a democrat who at best has dementia to make the committee aware.

The system was broken. The question is why. The FBI's excuse was "we don't look that far back." But that's not correct. They've looked back into college years in the past. And that trail would have uncovered Kegger's behavior. He cleaned up his own act at some point. The whole circus was avoidable and should have been avoided.

Yet you keep ignoring Dr. Fords lies and the testimony of various people who were under oath in the interviews, in which NONE of them support Dr. Ford

Yet you complain about the FBI who had little material to build on....., Ford REFUSED to give the documents to them.....

I dont think she lied, I think that is honestly what she thinks she remembered, something obviously seriously affected her.

Once they knew she had no corroboration they should never have put her on the stand.

 

[Coyote]

I think the question is whether "someone" in the DoJ or above told the FBI not not investigate. Ford was not the only accuser. Personally, imo, what someone does in HS or undergraduate is immaterial, unless it was a felony, and unless there are ongoing allegations during a person's professional career, as there were in Thomas's case. Pols like Slick Willy and Trump and Cuomo are a little different because they are not lifetime appointments people don't directly vote upon. We can always vote out a pol if he/she becomes too toxic.

And that just whooshes right over the heads of those who think this needs to go further.

Thank you. What Bart, Squee, Tobin and Donkey Dong Doug are accused of doing was a felony. Plus they didn't interview dozens of other women. Rigged investigation.

IOW, keep going until the correct result is obtained.

Seems to be the general idea.

The verdict is known. Proving it is just an inconvenient detail.

To me the issue is really about future FBI background checks. The failure to adequately investigate so a president could choose to not nominate a person has come up before. Nixon twice nomiated men who should have been disqualified for CURRENT racist assocations. LBJ nominated a guy for CJ who, it was found, had outside income. That was actually made into more than one book.

IF we don't want confirmation hearings to be circuses with "gotcha" moments we need the FBI to know what its supposed to investigate and for the FBI do do it. Consistently.

Sure but that has nothing to do with this case, actually. The FBI really should not be doing much investigating here either as this was a 'gotcha' moment from the get go. There was nothing to 'investigate' before the hearing as allegations had not been made. Once those allegations had been made we had one account that was 30 years old, lacked a single corroborating witness, time of the incident, location of the incident, any real details that could have been useful and would not even be, afaik, in the jurisdiction of the FBI in the first place. It was well known from the get go that nothing would be found here as there was nothing to the allegation in the first place and the other allegations were far worse.

The background check did not fail here, it cannot find what is not there. This was a hit job from day one.

But the FBI doesn't investigate "allegations" for a nominee or any background check. It's supposed to go out and interview people. There were not a few people who were familiar with Kegs' drunken behavior with women. That was what really spurred on Ford and other women. It all should have been fully disclosed to the judiciary committee, but even Kegs was blindsided. And it took a democrat who at best has dementia to make the committee aware.

The system was broken. The question is why. The FBI's excuse was "we don't look that far back." But that's not correct. They've looked back into college years in the past. And that trail would have uncovered Kegger's behavior. He cleaned up his own act at some point. The whole circus was avoidable and should have been avoided.

Yet you keep ignoring Dr. Fords lies and the testimony of various people who were under oath in the interviews, in which NONE of them support Dr. Ford

Yet you complain about the FBI who had little material to build on....., Ford REFUSED to give the documents to them.....

I dont think she lied, I think that is honestly what she thinks she remembered, something obviously seriously affected her.

Once they knew she had no corroboration they should never have put her on the stand.

they shouldnt have period...they were minors

 

[DrLove]

I think they said they didnt recall...which is different. It does not mean she was lying...how much of a drunk fueled highschool party are these folks going to acuurately remember, including Ford? It doesnt mean she was lying.

The story she told, while disturbing, was not really "criminal". She said a group of boys pushed her onto a bed and kinda got on top of her for a second then walked off laughing.

It's the kind of thing where if you told a cop, he'd say "You kids quit horsing around" or something...

I just wanted to add to this...I realize she said in her Congress testimony that it disturbed her greatly and she still thinks about it a lot...but I'm just saying, to an outside party, I wouldn't exactly arrest a young kid for doing that. I'm not condoning it, I'm jsut saying I dunno if it's worth Jailtime or charges or whatever.

I dont know...but they minors, privelged and drunk a lot...impossible to say what really happened and attitudes were different then.

Attitudes are the exact same. If a group of white upper-class boys grinded on a fully clothed girl in 2021 they wouldn't get in trouble, either.

That may be a LITTLE pessimistic but think you're a lot younger than I. Attitudes have definitely changed since I was in high school mid-late 70s. Then, and even more recently in Bart O'Kavanaugh's day it may have been a wink and a nod. Now I don't think so.

We were raised better than Bart and his buddies Squee, Tobin, PJ and Donkey Dong Doug. We didn't attempt to hold girls down and grind on 'em. I don't recall any stories like that even in college, although I recall one rape accusation against a guy I barely knew.

Now, there's a higher awareness of crap like that and the 'boys will be boys' thing don't fly as much.

 

[Synthaholic]

News on this story. Who Owns Brett Kavanaugh?

 

[Synthaholic]

 

[Synthaholic]

 

[FA_Q2]

Blah blah blah.

Your partisan hitjob and outright lies flopped. You do not need to remind us by bringing up months old threads.

 

[whitehall]

Let me get this straight, democrats want to overturn Trump's nomination to the S.C. because the FBI's investigation may have been tainted but nobody in the democrat party thinks the FBI's role in the impeachment including the now debunked "dossier" needs looking in to. No surprises here.

 

[struth]

Pj Media

Democrat Senator Wants an Investigation Into the FBI Investigation of Brett Kavanaugh
BY MATT MARGOLIS MAR 16, 2021

Excerpt:

It’s been over two years since Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed, yet some Democrats still can’t get over it.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), is suggesting that the FBI investigation into Brett Kavanaugh may have been “fake” and is calling on Merrick Garland, the recently confirmed attorney general, to facilitate “proper oversight” by the U.S. Senate into questions about the FBI’s investigation of Kavanaugh, who faced multiple uncorroborated allegations of sexual misconduct during his confirmation hearings.

LINK

======

He doesn't realize that Ford refused to give the FBI her "evidence".

Now we have Whiteass wants Garland to investigate the FBI.

What a dumbass!

isn’t this the senator that’s a member of a whites only private club?

 

[Dragonlady]

Probably the same guy who spent $17 million for the Federalist Society to lobby on Kavenaugh’s behalf.

The Federalist Society spent a similar amount on Amy Coney Barrett nomination as well. In both cases the money was donated by an “anonymous donor”.

 

[justoffal]

Seems to me his hearing was pay back for his work with the lurid details of the Star Report.

Yep