Kavanaugh accuser wants a full FBI investigation before she testifies

a reply to: 2smart4u

There is no burden on the accused.

originally posted by: 2smart4u

originally posted by: Grambler


Again I ask, do you think the burden of proof is on kavanaugh to prove his innocence?

The burden is on both parties, the accuser and the accused.

He says it didnt happen, so why dont you believe him? He is ready and willing to say it under oath on Monday. She is the one avoiding.

Just look at how the left is setting up their case against Kavanaugh. He literally has no means by which to exonerate himself in their eyes. Which should tell you one thing, this is purely a political game. And a sick one that could have deleterious ramifications for the standard being set. How do you fight an accusation when you are guilty without being proven guilty when it is one person's word against yours? We've seen before. As I said, McCarthyism to the letter.

I'm sorry, but the new illiberal left needs to be destroyed. And if us classical liberals and our friends on the right that haven't yet lost their minds join forces we can drive this beast into the sea where it belongs. I'm typically open to all ideas and views, but sometimes you have to recognize evil for what it is and put a stop to it.

a reply to: Grambler

This reeks of a political move.

It really does.

It was just to convenient that this women waited to come out right after the dems ran out of ways to stall.

I give kavanah the benefit of the doubt.

I do think it was wrong , underhanded that obama was denied his judge pick. I think the repubs that lead the charge and stalled for nine months are scum.

The dems should be less like the repubs in this mater and follow the law.

But I know that both parties don't really give a damn about the law. Unless it favors their agenda.

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme
a reply to: highvein

Only if Trump is dumb enough to make the threat.
Do you think he is?

He beat them once. You don't think he could do it again?

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Bhadhidar
a reply to: Grambler

You have a source for that?

If so, it should be investigated by the appropriate authorities.

If not, I take it that was your lame attempt to make a point.

The person wants to remain anonymous. He also does not remember the specific time, place, how he got there, etc.

And he refuses to testify in front of the senate until there is a full fbi investigation.

Until the end of that investigation, ginsburg should not be allowed to render decisions.

Because she now has the suggestion of not being beyond reproach.

Can you see how this standard will end up very poorly.

Having already been confirmed to her seat on the SCOTUS, unlike Kavanaugh, I would suggest that she perhaps be required to recuse herself from any case that involves such an assault (female assaulting a male).

The “Standard” should be that we demand people of high character In ALL public offices; not just those who serve our own partisan ideals.

But we, as a nation seem unable, or unwilling, to rise above our petty “tribalism” even to the point that we lend our support to people we wouldn’t trust to be alone with our children,

And make excuses for them when their unsavory acts become public.

a reply to: Bhadhidar

And our system is also broke to the point that we deem people guilty based merely on accusations if we happen to disagree with them on policy.

I dont see how grinding everything to a halt based on a 30 old accusation from a person unwilling to testify in front of the senate is a solution to electing immoral people.

I was molested by Nancy Pelosi when I was 15 and she was 49.

We were at a campaign dinner party. She kept feeding me $100 glasses of wine spiked with Cosby's. Later, in her hotel suite in Sacremento, she made me do things.

I will testify under oath, but not until the FBI investigates.

Joe Biden and Barry Sotoro were also in the room fondling each other and occasionally taking pictures between snorting lines of coke.

I expect the FBI to expend resources on my claim and Pelosi to be removed from any ballots until the matter is settled; otherwise the Trump DOJ is sexist against men.

a reply to: Grambler

Isn’t she refusing to testify Until the FBI has had a chance to investigate?

That is not quite the same as “refusing to testify”, is it?

Sounds like she wants the full weight of the law brought to bear on the issue.

And that could be very much a “double-edged sword” hanging over her if her claims prove groundless.

originally posted by: GenerationGap
I was molested by Nancy Pelosi when I was 15 and she was 49.

We were at a campaign dinner party. She kept feeding me $100 glasses of wine spiked with Cosby's. Later, in her hotel suite in Sacremento, she made me do things.

I will testify under oath, but not until the FBI investigates.

Joe Biden and Barry Sotoro were also in the room fondling each other and occasionally taking pictures between snorting lines of coke.

I expect the FBI to expend resources on my claim and Pelosi to be removed from any ballots until the matter is settled; otherwise the Trump DOJ is sexist against men.

I identify as Hillary Clinton and I also identify as being in the room during your molestation. You just couldn't see me because I "wiped" myself with a cloth.....

a reply to: GenerationGap

And are you willing to serve a prison sentence (I believe it’s up to five years) if/when you are determined to have lied to the FBI in their investigation of your claims?

Be careful of what you wish for, your wishes come true!

originally posted by: Bhadhidar
a reply to: Grambler

Isn’t she refusing to testify Until the FBI has had a chance to investigate?

That is not quite the same as “refusing to testify”, is it?

Sounds like she wants the full weight of the law brought to bear on the issue.

And that could be very much a “double-edged sword” hanging over her if her claims prove groundless.

No...she is refusing to UNLESS the FBI investigates first. The FBI had already said it wasnt going to based on them already having been asked by Feinstein.

So her refusal to testify unless they investigate is an obvious attempt to derail the confirmation further. They already released a statement that they weren't going to before she decided to pull this move.

originally posted by: Bhadhidar
a reply to: Grambler

Isn’t she refusing to testify Until the FBI has had a chance to investigate?

That is not quite the same as “refusing to testify”, is it?

Sounds like she wants the full weight of the law brought to bear on the issue.

And that could be very much a “double-edged sword” hanging over her if her claims prove groundless.

Sounds like she is reciting democratic talking points to delay the conformation hearing.

What is there for the fbi to investigate? They can not charge a crime, that statute of limitations is over.

All they can do is interview the people and get their comments, which is exactly what the senate can do, and would still have to do after an fbi investigation.

This woman is being given a chance to give her side of the story, but is declining until an unrealistic standard of the fbi investigating a 30 year old case that was never reported that has no physical evidence, corroborating witnesses, or even a definitive place or time given.

She has a public forum in front of the senate to give her case, and she is denying that.

If she does so that is her loss, and not a mark against kvanaigh or a reason to hold up his conformation.

originally posted by: Bhadhidar
a reply to: Grambler

Isn’t she refusing to testify Until the FBI has had a chance to investigate?

That is not quite the same as “refusing to testify”, is it?

Sounds like she wants the full weight of the law brought to bear on the issue.

And that could be very much a “double-edged sword” hanging over her if her claims prove groundless.

With out sworn testimony, they shouldn't waste the resources.

At this point, the only evidence is this woman's word. The FBI doesn't have the resources, and shouldn't be allotted the resouces, to start investigations based on hearsay alone... especially heasay that's unwilling to state their claim under oath at the time of reporting such criminal activity when no other evidence is brought forward.

But I suspect the left wants that... I mean, look at how the KGB, a leftist protection agency in the USSR, placed millions of innocent people in Siberian gualgs based merely on the hearsay of a left wing red coat.

The socialists in Germany did it, the communists in Russia did it, why wouldn't the same ilk in America desire as much?

originally posted by: GenerationGap
I was molested by Nancy Pelosi when I was 15 and she was 49.

We were at a campaign dinner party. She kept feeding me $100 glasses of wine spiked with Cosby's. Later, in her hotel suite in Sacremento, she made me do things.

I will testify under oath, but not until the FBI investigates.

Joe Biden and Barry Sotoro were also in the room fondling each other and occasionally taking pictures between snorting lines of coke.

I expect the FBI to expend resources on my claim and Pelosi to be removed from any ballots until the matter is settled; otherwise the Trump DOJ is sexist against men.

Geesh people, at least tell a possible story like;
"I was invited to a campaign dinner for Hillary that had an open bar. They weren't asking for ID, so me and my friends took some drinks, then I remember waking up to Adam Schiff and Berry Sotoro moaning while sitting on a smelly couch"


There that more believable (you can go look up the facts, but sadly that story could be real for all we know)


Now back to reality.

If the FBI isn't interested in investigating this whole situation, and if she will only testify after the FBI has investigated, than can we all agree that she won't testify and this whole mess can just be ignored?

If the FBI conducted a THOROUGH investigation, and 6 months later, stated there's no evidence of Kavanaugh assaulting Christine Blasey Ford...do you know what the response would be from Democrats and Ford's lawyer???

"That was Trump's FBI !! This time we want a NEUTRAL investigation, or no testifying!"

originally posted by: carewemust
If the FBI conducted a THOROUGH investigation, and 6 months later, stated there's no evidence of Kavanaugh assaulting Christine Blasey Ford...do you know what the response would be from Democrats and Ford's lawyer???

"That was Trump's FBI !! This time we want a NEUTRAL investigation, or no testifying!"

Either that or a cry for another "Special" council to waste tax payers money.

originally posted by: Guyfriday

originally posted by: carewemust
If the FBI conducted a THOROUGH investigation, and 6 months later, stated there's no evidence of Kavanaugh assaulting Christine Blasey Ford...do you know what the response would be from Democrats and Ford's lawyer???

"That was Trump's FBI !! This time we want a NEUTRAL investigation, or no testifying!"

Either that or a cry for another "Special" council to waste tax payers money.

Thankfully, it looks like on-the-fence Republicans are starting to understand that Democrats are attempting to play them for fools. The hard-nosed/anti-Trump Senator JEFF FLAKE has just thrown accuser Christine Blasey Ford "under the bus".

Source: www.azcentral.com...

"she is refusing to UNLESS the FBI investigates first"

The first thing the FBI should do is ask her to take a lie detector test as soon a possible. before some one can hypnotize her enough time to change her response.

If she won't end of case. right then and there. I am betting she could not pass one. and why waste the FBI time after that.