It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kavanaugh accuser wants a full FBI investigation before she testifies

page: 23
74
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 12:28 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

How much weight should it have in determining his suitability?
Based on the evidence we've been provided, Zero.
If he assaulted a girl at that age does it mean he will go through life assaulting other women?
Almost certainly.
Men who assault women generally have a complete lack of respect for women and almost always harbor a deep resentment for women.
In BK's extensive and well documented record that spans 20+ years, there has not been a whisper of anything remotely like that and much to support his respect and support of women.
Let me ask you this...
Have you researched his background and his history? (Before this dubious accusation)
Have you looked at any of his rulings?
Perhaps you should.
Maybe then you wouldn't be so quick to judge him without any evidence.
ELO
edit on 9201818 by Elostone because: Forgot my beer




posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 01:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Vasa Croe

and... pray tell...
where was this claim found????



Just about every media outlet.

Her name is Cristina Miranda King....she went to school with Ford.

Where was Fords claim found?


She backed off her statement i think she posted it bragging to friends. And then when the press got word of her post she isnt willing to risk lying over it. So she deletes the post and puts this in its place.


She later posted on Facebook: "To all media, I will not be doing anymore interviews. No more circus for me. To clarify my post: I do not have first hand knowledge of the incident that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford mentions, and I stand by my support for Christine. That's it. I don't have more to say on the subject. Please don't contact me further."



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 01:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

Do you believe Kavanaugh?


I believe that she has basically said nothing...The strange part in all this would be if she said he groped her, forced a kiss on her, hell play with her tits then yes at least we are talking some kind of sexual assault. She doesn't say that, but instead says he "tried" to pull her one piece down and put his hand over her mouth to have it all end with him actually accomplishing nothing as his friend laughing jumped on both of them and that was the end of the encounter.

We already have one person who lived through rape and is offended by how flimsy this all is as two teens who were basically friends with really nothing in the end and people are comparing it to what women have actually gone though with no sh@t sexual assault...


edit on 20-9-2018 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 01:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Elostone

Ill say this as a teenager i did some stupid things. Was not until i joined the military that my morals became set. Having had something show on a background check i had to explain my use of narcotics in high school. Luckily from a military perspective they took into account i was 16.

We should never hold teenagers to the same standards as adults. Lets face it they dont know who they are or what they stand for yet.

Teenagers are learning things like what a man is how to deal with sex and drugs. This learning process can be nasty with mistakes being made. In this case we have to look at the 35 years since this occured. In 35 years he has done nothing but support women and treat them with respect. Judging from this i don't believe one incident as a teenager changes the character of the man.

As far as the FBI they won't investigate he went through 6 background checks. This isnt a legal matter and a 7th investigation is useless. They will simply take the accusation and put it in his file. The FBI doesnt decide if an incident is true or not thats why they asked me if it was true and i admitted it was. To be honest i had forgotten about it until they brought it up.



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 01:44 AM
link   
If Christina Ford wants an investigation she should visit a regression hypnotist. This professional can help recover painful memories. Doc Ford can then tell the FBI where to start looking.

In the meantime, the Senate should vote and place Brett Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court in a temp status until the investigation is completed. It will find nothing.



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 01:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Annee

Do you believe Kavanaugh?


I believe that she has basically said nothing...The strange part in all this would be if she said he groped her, forced a kiss on her, hell play with her tits then yes at least we are talking some kind of sexual assault. She doesn't say that, but instead says he "tried" to pull her one piece down and put his hand over her mouth to have it all end with him actually accomplishing nothing as his friend laughing jumped on both of them and that was the end of the encounter.

We already have one person who lived through rape and is offended by how flimsy this all is as two teens who were basically friends with really nothing in the end and people are comparing it to what women have actually gone though with no sh@t sexual assault...


I've been raped too -- so let's just not go there.

I have not followed this closely, but didn't she go to a private girls school?

My point is perspective.

She may have been very naive, over protected by her parents.



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 02:01 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr
You'll get no argument from me, I agree with you on all points.
There are good and valid reasons we have 2 court systems in this country; one for adults and another for juveniles.
It should be also noted that many states seal the court records of juveniles once they reach the age of majority, for the very reasons you mentioned.
ELO



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 03:29 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

You misunderstand. I'm saying it's not positive for her or the Democrats because she's being evasive when they extend an invitation to testify at the hearings. I wish she would testify. There are already holes in her statements to drive a truck through and I'm sure she knows that and is backing out. Otherwise why not testify?? She's being given every consideration despite the Democrats using her as a political football.



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 04:15 AM
link   
At the end of the day, what do we have here? We have a statement from a woman who wished initially to be anonymous describing an incident she alleges happened over 35 years ago when both she and the accused were teenagers. We have the accused in the midst of a political confirmation to the US Supreme Court. We have questionable witnesses who refuse to testify. We have an obvious delay by Feinstein to even acknowledge the accusation. We have an accused who has undergone multiple background checks from the FBI. We have unreasonable demands by the accuser to be available to testify. And we have an entire political party bent on delaying the confirmation of the accused until the upcoming elections.

Here's the bottom line as I see it: This has nothing whatsoever to do with whether Kavanaugh did what to Ford. That is not the issue. The issue is whether or not Kavanaugh has the integrity to perform his proposed role as US Supreme Court Justice. If Kavanaugh is a sexual predator, that goes against his supposed integrity and could easily be seen as a reason to deny confirmation. If not, then his previous record would appear to be quite acceptable for the position.

So how do we determine this? Let's look at the evidence that we know:
  • Despite several FBI background checks, Kavanaugh has not previously faced such accusations. Typically a sexual predator is not a one-shot deal; a sexual predator will continue to prey on others throughout his/her life until stopped (and even after that the tendency remains). An FBI background check will interview those who worked with the subject, socially mingled with the subject, and are related to the subject. Such an investigation might miss a single occurrence of drunken debauchery toward a relative stranger, but it would not miss a continual pattern of illicit activity. We can therefore conclude that even if the accusations are true, they are not indicative of a pattern of behavior.

  • The original accusation was received sometime, I believe, in July. Since that date, the Congresswoman who received it has had multiple opportunities to bring it up to Kavanaugh, both during private talks and in open confirmation hearings. That would appear to be the most proper venue in which to question Kavanaugh about the allegation, but instead the letter was buried until all talks had ended, all hearings were completed, and the case was being wrapped up for a vote. That is pure obstructionism, not a bona fide attempt to investigate a nominee's character.

  • Despite the above bullet point, multiple attempts have been made to allow the accuser to testify. Despite this, the accuser has refused, stating that they instead wanted an FBI investigation prior to testifying. Such an investigation would be completely improper, as the venue of the FBI does not include the type of activity that was alleged and there is nothing specific enough to discover information with. We have a two-year time period and an entire state that might be investigated. More initial information is absolutely required, and in any case could not lead to any type of actual criminal charge... only to information on the accusation that could be considered by the Senate as toward confirmation. In contrast, the Hill-Thomas investigation had more specific times and places, and were supposedly committed by someone who was at the time employed by the government as a supervisor, placing it within the venue of the FBI.

  • It is a well-known and self-evident fact that those who are calling for this improper investigation are the same Congress members who have tried other delay tactics time and time again to delay the confirmation. This raises the likelihood that the purpose is not to vet Kavanaugh, but to politically delay the confirmation, which is itself a violation of their position and the duties thereof.
The only proper way to proceed is exactly what is being done: Dr. Ford has until tomorrow at 10:00 AM (~29 hours as I type this) to accept the invitation to testify. Should she do so, Kavanaugh should be allowed to testify on his own behalf on Monday, and the results be considered by the Senate in their final vote. If Dr. Ford refuses to testify, the confirmation vote should be immediately held and the matter closed.

This is not a dismissal of anything having to do with sexual assault; this has nothing to do with the law. The law cannot be invoked at this point due to the statutes of limitation. I feel for those who state, accurately, that many victims simply want to move on from the incident instead of navigating the legal process. But that is their choice and a choice that cannot be justifiably ignored. Imagine if someone who were accused of any other crime could be held in irons indefinitely while the accuser became comfortable with testifying? That is essentially what some are arguing should happen. No. In our legal system, both the accuser and the accused have rights, and neither has the right to strip rights for the other until and unless their position is proven in court. Brett Kavanaugh has the right to be considered for the office he is seeking; Dr. Ford has the right to level an accusation at Kavanaugh. Dr. Ford does not have the right to effectively remove Kavanaugh's chance to receive reasonable consideration due to delay tactics.

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 05:04 AM
link   
It's obvious he's guilty, because he denies being guilty.

That's exactly what guilty people do.



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 07:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Boadicea

two words...
and I am sure you have heard them before....
from somewhere.....
PERJURY TRAP!!!


Interesting. I've already mentioned the possibility of a perjury trap.... But not for the accuser. I don't even know how that would work... It's not the accuser being set up for criminal charges with vague and ambiguous statements. Its Kavanaugh and the witnesses being set up for investigation an questioning and potential criminal charges.

However, given her own contradictory accounts, and dubious evidence, I can see a big problem for her.


close to half the people who will be questioning her seem to have already decided she is lying.


More likely, every single one sees and knows that her various stories cannot all be true, even with the absence of vital details.

But only half will call her on it... And the other half will tow the party line.


Read about the Franklin Cover up and note what happen to Alisha Owen.


Again, given her own contradictory statements, I see the potential problem... Which she created. And her high-powered attorney sure doesn't seem to be serving HER best interests.

She's just the sacrificial lamb for the party.



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 07:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Vasa Croe

go read the article from the hill....

thehill.com...

it gives the quotes from the letter that her lawyer wrote to Grassley and gives basically the same story as the business insider does outside of the security... and as I said, there's been one or more go fund me sites raising money for her security...
so... what can I say except that at least I ain't getting my information from twitter!



You should know by now how the press operates. The stupid dossier should have taught you this!

It doesn't have to be true for the press to run with it. All it takes is for one halfway credible member of the press to pick up a story, and all the rest will cite that member as their credible source for the story.

In that case, BuzzFeed did the deed with the dossier that no one member of the press would touch for months. Once one member of the press picked it up, it then became legit for every other member of the press to run with using BuzzFeed as their source on the assumption that BuzzFeed had done the legwork to verify it and that they could all disavow BuzzFeed if they hadn't.



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 07:27 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

If, if, if ...

Remember Roy Moore? I'm sure everyone does. First there was one, then there were two, etc., although I'm not sure he ever did get his day in court now that I think about it.

In this case, first there was one, but then there were an entire flood of people on the other side defending the guy, including the people named by the accuser as witnesses.

The scary thought here is that we as society are going to far down this "always believe the woman" line that we're currently lynching this guy on a thin story with no proven facts at all (look at yourself and say that's not so). If we're really putting ourselves up to this and scrapping our standards of justice that far that a man is now guilty anytime and anywhere a woman wants to pop up out of his past and say he looked at her funny, brushed up against her in the hall, ran into her, etc., and she was terribly traumatized by the dramatic sexual nature of it and now, 30 years later when he's running for office with an ideological bent she doesn't like, she has decided she was terribly scarred by it ... she can torpedo his career, we're setting a really bad precedent.

We're making #MeToo into the new racism. And we're cheapening the experiences of women who really were victimized.

Do you think minorities who actually have experienced racism, real racism, not just having to the last person to walk into a room full of people not the same color as them, appreciate it when that person screams racism and whines about how traumatized they were by having to do that?

I'll bet not. Not anymore than women who actually have been raped and assaulted likely enjoy watching spectacles like this where their very real issues are used solely for political gain and not because anyone actually cares.



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 07:38 AM
link   
So, despite numerous requests, Fiendstein STILL hasn't shared an unredacted copy of Ford's original letter with the Republican committee chair.

Factor in that her therapist's notes are from late 2016.

IMO...Fiendstien's original letter is dated from 2017 or earlier...and was sent concerning allegations against Neil Gorsuch...NOT Kavanaugh.

Out of desperation...Di-Fi recycled and redacted this letter to delay/derail Kavanaugh.



edit on 20-9-2018 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 07:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
So, despite numerous requests, Fiendstein STILL hasn't shared an unredacted copy of Ford's original letter with the Republican committee chair.


Factor in that her therapist's notes are from late 2016.

IMO...Fiendstien's original letter is dated from 2017 or earlier...and was sent concerning allegations agaist Neil Gorsuch...NOT Kavanaugh.

Out of desperation...Di-Fi recycled and redacted this letter to delay/derail Kavanaugh.



sounds like it is all just a big dem lie.....
wouldn't be the first time



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 07:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: IAMTAT
So, despite numerous requests, Fiendstein STILL hasn't shared an unredacted copy of Ford's original letter with the Republican committee chair.


Factor in that her therapist's notes are from late 2016.

IMO...Fiendstien's original letter is dated from 2017 or earlier...and was sent concerning allegations agaist Neil Gorsuch...NOT Kavanaugh.

Out of desperation...Di-Fi recycled and redacted this letter to delay/derail Kavanaugh.



sounds like it is all just a big dem lie.....
wouldn't be the first time


Keep in mind, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh attended the same school and have only a two year different in age.



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 07:52 AM
link   
I hope Kavanaugh would file suit against Ford for defamation and subpoena the original/unredacted letter.
Love to see DI-FI called into court to testify.



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 07:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
I hope Kavanaugh would file suit against Ford for defamation and subpoena the original/unredacted letter.
Love to see DI-FI called into court to testify.


The cold medicine confused her.



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 07:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
I hope Kavanaugh would file suit against Ford for defamation and subpoena the original/unredacted letter.
Love to see DI-FI called into court to testify.

perhaps she will just no show and this will all blow over?
or will the fbi be investigating other decades old sexual harassment claims??



posted on Sep, 20 2018 @ 07:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: IAMTAT
I hope Kavanaugh would file suit against Ford for defamation and subpoena the original/unredacted letter.
Love to see DI-FI called into court to testify.


The cold medicine confused her.


Chinese flu.







 
74
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join