Do you Believe Kavanaugh's Rape Accuser?

[Slade3200]

The FBI doesn't question principles in a supplemental investigation where the principles have already been questioned unless there is a discrepancy.

You don’t think there is discrepancy in this case?

 

[Ame®icano]

It seems you know better than the FBI what their job is. You're also forgetting that this is not criminal investigation.

After Senate testimony, FBI have enough to check if their stories adds up. If, or when they find out that someone lied, I hope they will be asking that person many questions.

I’m using common sense about how a situation should be investigated and not questioning the primary characters is sloppy work. I want to get the facts out and when I see key members and witnesses excluded from questioning it doesn’t give me confidence in the process they took. But I’ll reserve judgement till after I see what they found.

Didn't both, accuser and accused, already provided all the facts under oaths during their testimony?

What other facts you would need from them?

I would hope that professional FBI investigators would be trained and qualified to give inquiry designed to expose lies and/or get to the truth. I would especially pay a visit tot he accuser if she was publicly asking to be interviewed by the FBI. Blows my mind that they didn’t do a sit down. Even from looking at it from your side as a Kavanaugh supporter I’d think you’d want and expect her to be interviewed. If you think she is lying then don’t you want that exposed with evidence?

Your "mind" is getting blown in every post you write.

No, she asked for FBI investigation as one of the preconditions to testify. Then she testified without getting that.

In her letter to Senator Feinstein, and in her testimony under oath she made her accusation. There is no need to ask her any more questions in regards to her accusation. Their job is to investigate if what she wrote and what she said is true, and what Kavanaugh said in his testimony as well.

What else she can say that she hasn't said already? Or Kavanaugh?

Yes, my Brian is on the Wall right now. I’ve explained the advantages to having an investigator question an accuser but what I don’t get is why you are advocating for the none interview? Aren’t you interested in as much transparency as possible?

I'm not advocating for non interview, but for letting FBI do what they find to be necessary. In other words, I support what they're doing, regardless if is interview or not.

Speaking of transparency, don't you think it would be transparent if Christine Blasey released her therapist notes to the Committee when they asked for it, and not hide behind non existent doctor/patient privilege?

 

[Ame®icano]

If you know that for a fact, how about you provide the proof.

I will when you show me just one time the FBI didnt question the principals.

It's not how it works. I asked you first.

Thats exactly how it works. Show me a time when the FBI didnt question the principals.

Nope.

I asked you do you know that for a fact, and to prove that is a fact.

You said you know that for a fact and "you will prove if IF"...

I didn't make any claim, you did. So prove it. I doubt you can.

Yes I know for a fact and I want you to show me one investigation the FBI has conducted prior to this where they didnt question the principals. This is simply a requirement you must fulfill

Sure, right after you provide a proof that is "the fact".

 

[Aba Incieni]

This calls for an 8th investigation.

 

[Slade3200]

I’m using common sense about how a situation should be investigated and not questioning the primary characters is sloppy work. I want to get the facts out and when I see key members and witnesses excluded from questioning it doesn’t give me confidence in the process they took. But I’ll reserve judgement till after I see what they found.

Didn't both, accuser and accused, already provided all the facts under oaths during their testimony?

What other facts you would need from them?

I would hope that professional FBI investigators would be trained and qualified to give inquiry designed to expose lies and/or get to the truth. I would especially pay a visit tot he accuser if she was publicly asking to be interviewed by the FBI. Blows my mind that they didn’t do a sit down. Even from looking at it from your side as a Kavanaugh supporter I’d think you’d want and expect her to be interviewed. If you think she is lying then don’t you want that exposed with evidence?

Your "mind" is getting blown in every post you write.

No, she asked for FBI investigation as one of the preconditions to testify. Then she testified without getting that.

In her letter to Senator Feinstein, and in her testimony under oath she made her accusation. There is no need to ask her any more questions in regards to her accusation. Their job is to investigate if what she wrote and what she said is true, and what Kavanaugh said in his testimony as well.

What else she can say that she hasn't said already? Or Kavanaugh?

Yes, my Brian is on the Wall right now. I’ve explained the advantages to having an investigator question an accuser but what I don’t get is why you are advocating for the none interview? Aren’t you interested in as much transparency as possible?

I'm not advocating for non interview, but for letting FBI do what they find to be necessary. In other words, I support what they're doing, regardless if is interview or not.

Speaking of transparency, don't you think it would be transparent if Christine Blasey released her therapist notes to the Committee when they asked for it, and not hide behind non existent doctor/patient privilege?

Yeah I’m all about transparency, I think she should share the notes with the fbi and I think the fbi should release their report to the public. Guess that’s up to the White House though

 

[Ame®icano]

Didn't both, accuser and accused, already provided all the facts under oaths during their testimony?

What other facts you would need from them?

I would hope that professional FBI investigators would be trained and qualified to give inquiry designed to expose lies and/or get to the truth. I would especially pay a visit tot he accuser if she was publicly asking to be interviewed by the FBI. Blows my mind that they didn’t do a sit down. Even from looking at it from your side as a Kavanaugh supporter I’d think you’d want and expect her to be interviewed. If you think she is lying then don’t you want that exposed with evidence?

Your "mind" is getting blown in every post you write.

No, she asked for FBI investigation as one of the preconditions to testify. Then she testified without getting that.

In her letter to Senator Feinstein, and in her testimony under oath she made her accusation. There is no need to ask her any more questions in regards to her accusation. Their job is to investigate if what she wrote and what she said is true, and what Kavanaugh said in his testimony as well.

What else she can say that she hasn't said already? Or Kavanaugh?

Yes, my Brian is on the Wall right now. I’ve explained the advantages to having an investigator question an accuser but what I don’t get is why you are advocating for the none interview? Aren’t you interested in as much transparency as possible?

I'm not advocating for non interview, but for letting FBI do what they find to be necessary. In other words, I support what they're doing, regardless if is interview or not.

Speaking of transparency, don't you think it would be transparent if Christine Blasey released her therapist notes to the Committee when they asked for it, and not hide behind non existent doctor/patient privilege?

Yeah I’m all about transparency, I think she should share the notes with the fbi and I think the fbi should release their report to the public. Guess that’s up to the White House though

Why she hasn't provided notes to the Senate Committee?

 

[Slade3200]

I would hope that professional FBI investigators would be trained and qualified to give inquiry designed to expose lies and/or get to the truth. I would especially pay a visit tot he accuser if she was publicly asking to be interviewed by the FBI. Blows my mind that they didn’t do a sit down. Even from looking at it from your side as a Kavanaugh supporter I’d think you’d want and expect her to be interviewed. If you think she is lying then don’t you want that exposed with evidence?

Your "mind" is getting blown in every post you write.

No, she asked for FBI investigation as one of the preconditions to testify. Then she testified without getting that.

In her letter to Senator Feinstein, and in her testimony under oath she made her accusation. There is no need to ask her any more questions in regards to her accusation. Their job is to investigate if what she wrote and what she said is true, and what Kavanaugh said in his testimony as well.

What else she can say that she hasn't said already? Or Kavanaugh?

Yes, my Brian is on the Wall right now. I’ve explained the advantages to having an investigator question an accuser but what I don’t get is why you are advocating for the none interview? Aren’t you interested in as much transparency as possible?

I'm not advocating for non interview, but for letting FBI do what they find to be necessary. In other words, I support what they're doing, regardless if is interview or not.

Speaking of transparency, don't you think it would be transparent if Christine Blasey released her therapist notes to the Committee when they asked for it, and not hide behind non existent doctor/patient privilege?

Yeah I’m all about transparency, I think she should share the notes with the fbi and I think the fbi should release their report to the public. Guess that’s up to the White House though

Why she hasn't provided notes to the Senate Committee?

I don’t know. If I was guessing it would be because they politicize the shit out of EVERYHING and she probably has some pretty personal stuff in there. What do you think?

 

[Ame®icano]

Your "mind" is getting blown in every post you write.

No, she asked for FBI investigation as one of the preconditions to testify. Then she testified without getting that.

In her letter to Senator Feinstein, and in her testimony under oath she made her accusation. There is no need to ask her any more questions in regards to her accusation. Their job is to investigate if what she wrote and what she said is true, and what Kavanaugh said in his testimony as well.

What else she can say that she hasn't said already? Or Kavanaugh?

Yes, my Brian is on the Wall right now. I’ve explained the advantages to having an investigator question an accuser but what I don’t get is why you are advocating for the none interview? Aren’t you interested in as much transparency as possible?

I'm not advocating for non interview, but for letting FBI do what they find to be necessary. In other words, I support what they're doing, regardless if is interview or not.

Speaking of transparency, don't you think it would be transparent if Christine Blasey released her therapist notes to the Committee when they asked for it, and not hide behind non existent doctor/patient privilege?

Yeah I’m all about transparency, I think she should share the notes with the fbi and I think the fbi should release their report to the public. Guess that’s up to the White House though

Why she hasn't provided notes to the Senate Committee?

I don’t know. If I was guessing it would be because they politicize the shit out of EVERYHING and she probably has some pretty personal stuff in there. What do you think?

Didn't lefties politicized shit out of everything even without those notes?

What do I think? Well, you said you're all about transparency. Why not to start from the person that made accusations?

 

[Slade3200]

Yes, my Brian is on the Wall right now. I’ve explained the advantages to having an investigator question an accuser but what I don’t get is why you are advocating for the none interview? Aren’t you interested in as much transparency as possible?

I'm not advocating for non interview, but for letting FBI do what they find to be necessary. In other words, I support what they're doing, regardless if is interview or not.

Speaking of transparency, don't you think it would be transparent if Christine Blasey released her therapist notes to the Committee when they asked for it, and not hide behind non existent doctor/patient privilege?

Yeah I’m all about transparency, I think she should share the notes with the fbi and I think the fbi should release their report to the public. Guess that’s up to the White House though

Why she hasn't provided notes to the Senate Committee?

I don’t know. If I was guessing it would be because they politicize the shit out of EVERYHING and she probably has some pretty personal stuff in there. What do you think?

Didn't lefties politicized shit out of everything even without those notes?

What do I think? Well, you said you're all about transparency. Why not to start from the person that made accusations?

My question was why do you think she didn’t release her notes.

Also don’t pretend like Dems are the only ones playing politics. Reps are just as bad

 

[Ame®icano]

I'm not advocating for non interview, but for letting FBI do what they find to be necessary. In other words, I support what they're doing, regardless if is interview or not.

Speaking of transparency, don't you think it would be transparent if Christine Blasey released her therapist notes to the Committee when they asked for it, and not hide behind non existent doctor/patient privilege?

Yeah I’m all about transparency, I think she should share the notes with the fbi and I think the fbi should release their report to the public. Guess that’s up to the White House though

Why she hasn't provided notes to the Senate Committee?

I don’t know. If I was guessing it would be because they politicize the shit out of EVERYHING and she probably has some pretty personal stuff in there. What do you think?

Didn't lefties politicized shit out of everything even without those notes?

What do I think? Well, you said you're all about transparency. Why not to start from the person that made accusations?

My question was why do you think she didn’t release her notes.

Also don’t pretend like Dems are the only ones playing politics. Reps are just as bad

I am talking about this case, where left did it for sole reason of delaying confirmation enough to get to the elections.

How do I know why she didn't release notes? If there was anything relevant in there, she would have done it without request.

 

[JimBowie1958]

This calls for an 8th investigation.

...of the Senate

 

[Tilly]

Why they should? Is FBI conducting criminal investigation?

No dummy. Its a background investigation where allegations of sexual assault are in hand. Dont you think the two people involved should be questioned?

No dunce.

They already gave testimony in front of Senate Judiciary Committee, under oath with penalty of perjury. What do you think, if FBI question them again they're gonna say something different? Of course not. What FBI is doing, or have done, is to use their sworn testimonies to verify who was telling the truth, and who hasn't.

A good investigator would test both their testimonies. I’ve heard you all ***** for the past couple days about the questions Ford was not asked at the hearing that would test the inconsistencies of her story. That’s exactly what the FBI should have done. Blows my mind that they didn’t question to two key players in this thing.

It seems you know better than the FBI what their job is. You're also forgetting that this is not criminal investigation.

After Senate testimony, FBI have enough to check if their stories adds up. If, or when they find out that someone lied, I hope they will be asking that person many questions.

I’m using common sense about how a situation should be investigated and not questioning the primary characters is sloppy work. I want to get the facts out and when I see key members and witnesses excluded from questioning it doesn’t give me confidence in the process they took. But I’ll reserve judgement till after I see what they found.

Blasey Fraud had her chance to give her testimony under oath and she did so.

People aren’t usually allowed to embellish and add items to their testimony after they’ve given it. That would seem wrong generally and wrong particularly in this case after she has now seen Kavs diary/calendar having never provided any accurate times and locations herself.

No doubt they made the unprecedented demand that Kav give testimony first in order to use info about his whereabouts to improve her story.

The FBI investigated her sworn and complete testimony.

If they speak to her again it will probably be becuase of all her inconsistencies and possible perjury, IMO.

The Reps are still asking for the therapists notes, the lie detector info etc as she used these to support her allegations, yet won’t let anyone see them. She might be in a lot of trouble.

 

[Tilly]

Your "mind" is getting blown in every post you write.

No, she asked for FBI investigation as one of the preconditions to testify. Then she testified without getting that.

In her letter to Senator Feinstein, and in her testimony under oath she made her accusation. There is no need to ask her any more questions in regards to her accusation. Their job is to investigate if what she wrote and what she said is true, and what Kavanaugh said in his testimony as well.

What else she can say that she hasn't said already? Or Kavanaugh?

Yes, my Brian is on the Wall right now. I’ve explained the advantages to having an investigator question an accuser but what I don’t get is why you are advocating for the none interview? Aren’t you interested in as much transparency as possible?

I'm not advocating for non interview, but for letting FBI do what they find to be necessary. In other words, I support what they're doing, regardless if is interview or not.

Speaking of transparency, don't you think it would be transparent if Christine Blasey released her therapist notes to the Committee when they asked for it, and not hide behind non existent doctor/patient privilege?

Yeah I’m all about transparency, I think she should share the notes with the fbi and I think the fbi should release their report to the public. Guess that’s up to the White House though

Why she hasn't provided notes to the Senate Committee?

I don’t know. If I was guessing it would be because they politicize the shit out of EVERYHING and she probably has some pretty personal stuff in there. What do you think?

Probably because the therapists notes don’t match her recent version of events. She’s already at odds with the therapists notes saying the therapist made a mistake about the number of boys at the ‘event’.

 

[saveliberty]

I’m using common sense about how a situation should be investigated and not questioning the primary characters is sloppy work. I want to get the facts out and when I see key members and witnesses excluded from questioning it doesn’t give me confidence in the process they took. But I’ll reserve judgement till after I see what they found.

Name a key member who wasn't interviewed by the FBI or gave testimony before the Senate. Keep in mind Kavanaugh had SIX FBI investigations over the years.

 

[Slade3200]

No dummy. Its a background investigation where allegations of sexual assault are in hand. Dont you think the two people involved should be questioned?

No dunce.

They already gave testimony in front of Senate Judiciary Committee, under oath with penalty of perjury. What do you think, if FBI question them again they're gonna say something different? Of course not. What FBI is doing, or have done, is to use their sworn testimonies to verify who was telling the truth, and who hasn't.

A good investigator would test both their testimonies. I’ve heard you all ***** for the past couple days about the questions Ford was not asked at the hearing that would test the inconsistencies of her story. That’s exactly what the FBI should have done. Blows my mind that they didn’t question to two key players in this thing.

It seems you know better than the FBI what their job is. You're also forgetting that this is not criminal investigation.

After Senate testimony, FBI have enough to check if their stories adds up. If, or when they find out that someone lied, I hope they will be asking that person many questions.

I’m using common sense about how a situation should be investigated and not questioning the primary characters is sloppy work. I want to get the facts out and when I see key members and witnesses excluded from questioning it doesn’t give me confidence in the process they took. But I’ll reserve judgement till after I see what they found.

Blasey Fraud had her chance to give her testimony under oath and she did so.

People aren’t usually allowed to embellish and add items to their testimony after they’ve given it. That would seem wrong generally and wrong particularly in this case after she has now seen Kavs diary/calendar having never provided any accurate times and locations herself.

No doubt they made the unprecedented demand that Kav give testimony first in order to use info about his whereabouts to improve her story.

The FBI investigated her sworn and complete testimony.

If they speak to her again it will probably be becuase of all her inconsistencies and possible perjury, IMO.

The Reps are still asking for the therapists notes, the lie detector info etc as she used these to support her allegations, yet won’t let anyone see them. She might be in a lot of trouble.

You make a case that supports the FBI interviewing her... if there are inconsistencies with her testimony and statements then they should dig in. They should do the same to Kav. If either one them is lying the. I’d like to know wouldnt you? If any of those three ladies are proven to have lied in their accusation of Kav then they should go to jail. Don’t you want to see this thing resolved if possible?

 

[Slade3200]

I’m using common sense about how a situation should be investigated and not questioning the primary characters is sloppy work. I want to get the facts out and when I see key members and witnesses excluded from questioning it doesn’t give me confidence in the process they took. But I’ll reserve judgement till after I see what they found.

Name a key member who wasn't interviewed by the FBI or gave testimony before the Senate. Keep in mind Kavanaugh had SIX FBI investigations over the years.

Kavanaugh and Ford were not interviewed by the FBI. They both had conflicts with their testimonies which should have been ironed out. One of them is lying. It makes no sense to me that they would not be questioned

 

[Tilly]

No dunce.

They already gave testimony in front of Senate Judiciary Committee, under oath with penalty of perjury. What do you think, if FBI question them again they're gonna say something different? Of course not. What FBI is doing, or have done, is to use their sworn testimonies to verify who was telling the truth, and who hasn't.

A good investigator would test both their testimonies. I’ve heard you all ***** for the past couple days about the questions Ford was not asked at the hearing that would test the inconsistencies of her story. That’s exactly what the FBI should have done. Blows my mind that they didn’t question to two key players in this thing.

It seems you know better than the FBI what their job is. You're also forgetting that this is not criminal investigation.

After Senate testimony, FBI have enough to check if their stories adds up. If, or when they find out that someone lied, I hope they will be asking that person many questions.

I’m using common sense about how a situation should be investigated and not questioning the primary characters is sloppy work. I want to get the facts out and when I see key members and witnesses excluded from questioning it doesn’t give me confidence in the process they took. But I’ll reserve judgement till after I see what they found.

Blasey Fraud had her chance to give her testimony under oath and she did so.

People aren’t usually allowed to embellish and add items to their testimony after they’ve given it. That would seem wrong generally and wrong particularly in this case after she has now seen Kavs diary/calendar having never provided any accurate times and locations herself.

No doubt they made the unprecedented demand that Kav give testimony first in order to use info about his whereabouts to improve her story.

The FBI investigated her sworn and complete testimony.

If they speak to her again it will probably be becuase of all her inconsistencies and possible perjury, IMO.

The Reps are still asking for the therapists notes, the lie detector info etc as she used these to support her allegations, yet won’t let anyone see them. She might be in a lot of trouble.

You make a case that supports the FBI interviewing her... if there are inconsistencies with her testimony and statements then they should dig in. They should do the same to Kav. If either one them is lying the. I’d like to know wouldnt you? If any of those three ladies are proven to have lied in their accusation of Kav then they should go to jail. Don’t you want to see this thing resolved if possible?

Well none of Fords testimony has been supported and there are a lot of discrepancies with it. But the FBI wouldn’t interview her before they’ve checked out the allegations in her testimony and the witnesses she named.
Now they have done that, they may well interview her.

 

[Slade3200]

A good investigator would test both their testimonies. I’ve heard you all ***** for the past couple days about the questions Ford was not asked at the hearing that would test the inconsistencies of her story. That’s exactly what the FBI should have done. Blows my mind that they didn’t question to two key players in this thing.

It seems you know better than the FBI what their job is. You're also forgetting that this is not criminal investigation.

After Senate testimony, FBI have enough to check if their stories adds up. If, or when they find out that someone lied, I hope they will be asking that person many questions.

I’m using common sense about how a situation should be investigated and not questioning the primary characters is sloppy work. I want to get the facts out and when I see key members and witnesses excluded from questioning it doesn’t give me confidence in the process they took. But I’ll reserve judgement till after I see what they found.

Blasey Fraud had her chance to give her testimony under oath and she did so.

People aren’t usually allowed to embellish and add items to their testimony after they’ve given it. That would seem wrong generally and wrong particularly in this case after she has now seen Kavs diary/calendar having never provided any accurate times and locations herself.

No doubt they made the unprecedented demand that Kav give testimony first in order to use info about his whereabouts to improve her story.

The FBI investigated her sworn and complete testimony.

If they speak to her again it will probably be becuase of all her inconsistencies and possible perjury, IMO.

The Reps are still asking for the therapists notes, the lie detector info etc as she used these to support her allegations, yet won’t let anyone see them. She might be in a lot of trouble.

You make a case that supports the FBI interviewing her... if there are inconsistencies with her testimony and statements then they should dig in. They should do the same to Kav. If either one them is lying the. I’d like to know wouldnt you? If any of those three ladies are proven to have lied in their accusation of Kav then they should go to jail. Don’t you want to see this thing resolved if possible?

Well none of Fords testimony has been supported and there are a lot of discrepancies with it. But the FBI wouldn’t interview her before they’ve checked out the allegations in her testimony and the witnesses she named.
Now they have done that, they may well interview her.

I hope so. I think many people are still left with a lot of questions. If she was lying she should be punished. If he was lying then the public should know

 

[Ame®icano]

No dummy. Its a background investigation where allegations of sexual assault are in hand. Dont you think the two people involved should be questioned?

No dunce.

They already gave testimony in front of Senate Judiciary Committee, under oath with penalty of perjury. What do you think, if FBI question them again they're gonna say something different? Of course not. What FBI is doing, or have done, is to use their sworn testimonies to verify who was telling the truth, and who hasn't.

A good investigator would test both their testimonies. I’ve heard you all ***** for the past couple days about the questions Ford was not asked at the hearing that would test the inconsistencies of her story. That’s exactly what the FBI should have done. Blows my mind that they didn’t question to two key players in this thing.

It seems you know better than the FBI what their job is. You're also forgetting that this is not criminal investigation.

After Senate testimony, FBI have enough to check if their stories adds up. If, or when they find out that someone lied, I hope they will be asking that person many questions.

I’m using common sense about how a situation should be investigated and not questioning the primary characters is sloppy work. I want to get the facts out and when I see key members and witnesses excluded from questioning it doesn’t give me confidence in the process they took. But I’ll reserve judgement till after I see what they found.

Blasey Fraud had her chance to give her testimony under oath and she did so.

People aren’t usually allowed to embellish and add items to their testimony after they’ve given it. That would seem wrong generally and wrong particularly in this case after she has now seen Kavs diary/calendar having never provided any accurate times and locations herself.

No doubt they made the unprecedented demand that Kav give testimony first in order to use info about his whereabouts to improve her story.

The FBI investigated her sworn and complete testimony.

If they speak to her again it will probably be becuase of all her inconsistencies and possible perjury, IMO.

The Reps are still asking for the therapists notes, the lie detector info etc as she used these to support her allegations, yet won’t let anyone see them. She might be in a lot of trouble.

Christine claims attempted rape. And almost murder.

"I have therapist notes".
"Can we see those notes?"
"No".

"I passed lie detector."
"Can we see the results?"
"No."

Left: "She's credible."
Right: "???"

Left: "You must believe her."
Right: "Why?"
Left: "Because she's a woman."

"Indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter"

 

[Ame®icano]

Yes, my Brian is on the Wall right now. I’ve explained the advantages to having an investigator question an accuser but what I don’t get is why you are advocating for the none interview? Aren’t you interested in as much transparency as possible?

I'm not advocating for non interview, but for letting FBI do what they find to be necessary. In other words, I support what they're doing, regardless if is interview or not.

Speaking of transparency, don't you think it would be transparent if Christine Blasey released her therapist notes to the Committee when they asked for it, and not hide behind non existent doctor/patient privilege?

Yeah I’m all about transparency, I think she should share the notes with the fbi and I think the fbi should release their report to the public. Guess that’s up to the White House though

Why she hasn't provided notes to the Senate Committee?

I don’t know. If I was guessing it would be because they politicize the shit out of EVERYHING and she probably has some pretty personal stuff in there. What do you think?

Probably because the therapists notes don’t match her recent version of events. She’s already at odds with the therapists notes saying the therapist made a mistake about the number of boys at the ‘event’.

Her therapist probably has impaired hearing. The mistakes is obvious.