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.

 

No Thanks Uttered From Ford's Attorney About FBI Being Used Just More Demands!

page: 4
27
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 05:12 AM
link   
a reply to: proximo


All the FBI is going to do is interview those witnesses - they will get the exact same answers. Their is nothing else to do, they have no date or location, they have no other witnesses. There is no physical evidence. 


Wouldn't it also be within the FBI's scope and purview to interview the guys who came forward to say it was really them -- or at least might be them? They could presumably provide those specific details like time and place.

I still don't understand the advantage of an FBI investigation over a Senate investigation, but there does seem to be far more to investigate now.




posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 05:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: Kryties
Wtf are the FBI going to #ing find d you tool?? What can they even find??? What did they ever find on Trump?? But im guessing your still on that bandwagon too.


So because you, in your expert opinion, THINK that there is no evidence (because you have convinced yourself the woman is lying) then the FBI shouldn't investigate?


Let them investigate. # it.


Great. Glad you agree. It's a simple request, to allow them to investigate, and it SHOULD be done for something this important that has ramifications for decades to come.

The ONLY reason people wouldn't want the FBI to take 1 MEASLY WEEK to investigate this is if they are afraid of what the FBI might find.



I am convinced she believes she is telling the truth. Guess what false memories are 100% real and documented.

But I also know all of the witnesses she named have already been interviewed and face jail time if they change their stories now - and all of them already said they know nothing about the incident.

All the FBI is going to do is interview those witnesses - they will get the exact same answers. Their is nothing else to do, they have no date or location, they have no other witnesses. There is no physical evidence. That means there is no new evidence. That means we will learn nothing of importance. That means this is all a huge waste of time


This seems to be glossed over by almost everyone in favor of this charade. I said in a previous thread, what exactly NEW would they be investigating? The answer is nothing. They will just re-interview witnesses and make a report.....no conclusions, as we already know. The committee knows this, and does not care....it is all about buying time.....

but, hey, why look into details when it is so easy to just drone on "what are you afraid of, huh, scared they will find something?".........unreal how gullible a large segment of our population has become.


edit on am99201818America/Chicago29p05am by annoyedpharmacist because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 05:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: proximo


All the FBI is going to do is interview those witnesses - they will get the exact same answers. Their is nothing else to do, they have no date or location, they have no other witnesses. There is no physical evidence. 


Wouldn't it also be within the FBI's scope and purview to interview the guys who came forward to say it was really them -- or at least might be them? They could presumably provide those specific details like time and place.

I still don't understand the advantage of an FBI investigation over a Senate investigation, but there does seem to be far more to investigate now.


No. the FBI has already stated they will only be interviewing the witnesses that have made statements.......

ETA: since we are doing this thing, I would love for them to do that, however, it appears that is not the case......at least as of now.
edit on am99201818America/Chicago29p05am by annoyedpharmacist because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 05:39 AM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Where was the outrage when they refused to even interview Merrick Garland for over a year and he was a very qualified man but that didnt stop the GOP from stonewalling him. Ths guy is seriously flawed but you want this man so badly???
The process wasnt delayed for Gorsuch so dont blame the democrats. Its not that they wont confirm any appointee its that they wont confirm this appointee.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 05:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Kryties


The situation demands an FBI probe. Anyone with half a brain and a modicum of common sense can see this. 


I guess I'm missing more than half my brain... So please enlighten me, because I really don't see the advantage of an FBI investigation over a Senate investigation.

What can the FBI do that the Senate cannot do? Or has not?


Are you seriously asking what highly trained investigators can do that politicians cannot?

Seriously?



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 05:46 AM
link   
a reply to: vinifalou

Gee to get a new candidate no?



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 05:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Kryties


The situation demands an FBI probe. Anyone with half a brain and a modicum of common sense can see this. 


I guess I'm missing more than half my brain... So please enlighten me, because I really don't see the advantage of an FBI investigation over a Senate investigation.

What can the FBI do that the Senate cannot do? Or has not?


Are you seriously asking what highly trained investigators can do that politicians cannot?

Seriously?


Ummm, most of the politicians on that panel are highly trained lawyers and a few of them were former prosecutors......so yeah, they should be quite capable of handling that.....
edit on am99201818America/Chicago29p05am by annoyedpharmacist because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 05:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Kryties


The situation demands an FBI probe. Anyone with half a brain and a modicum of common sense can see this. 


I guess I'm missing more than half my brain... So please enlighten me, because I really don't see the advantage of an FBI investigation over a Senate investigation.

What can the FBI do that the Senate cannot do? Or has not?


Are you seriously asking what highly trained investigators can do that politicians cannot?

Seriously?


Ummm, most of the politicians on that panel are highly trained lawyers and a few of them were former prosecutors......so


Makes you wonder why they dismiss the idea of a proper investigation then doesn't it?



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 05:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Kryties


The situation demands an FBI probe. Anyone with half a brain and a modicum of common sense can see this. 


I guess I'm missing more than half my brain... So please enlighten me, because I really don't see the advantage of an FBI investigation over a Senate investigation.

What can the FBI do that the Senate cannot do? Or has not?


Are you seriously asking what highly trained investigators can do that politicians cannot?

Seriously?


Ummm, most of the politicians on that panel are highly trained lawyers and a few of them were former prosecutors......so


Makes you wonder why they dismiss the idea of a proper investigation then doesn't it?


again, what else are they investigating here that makes it proper as opposed to what is already known? they are only interviewing those witnesses who made statements.......Ford, Kav, Judge, PJ, and Ford's friend......that's it. they already gave statements under penalty of perjury. so, what new are we expecting to be uncovered here, really?
edit on am99201818America/Chicago29p05am by annoyedpharmacist because: spelling, I hate you



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 05:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

Define, as it relates to this case, what a "proper investigation" is.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 06:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

The thing about Garland is he faced a Republican majority Senate. Kavanaugh does not face a Dem majority.

In the former, presumably, its the will of tue constituents, who provided for the majority. In tye spirit of Obama....you wanna get confirmations you gotta win seats. Or whip.

In the latter the minority party is using national level appeal to emotion to override the will of the constituents of tue majority.

Not quite apples and oranges....maybe grapefruit and oranges. But you get the picture.
edit on 9/29/2018 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 06:40 AM
link   
a reply to: annoyedpharmacist


No. the FBI has already stated they will only be interviewing the witnesses that have made statements....... 


Well darn. I must have misunderstood. I thought they'd be included since they also submitted statements.

That makes no sense to me... But none of this is sensible, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 07:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Kryties


Are you seriously asking what highly trained investigators can do that politicians cannot? 

Seriously?


Yup. That's what I'm asking in regards to this specific investigation.

The Senate can subpoena any witness they so choose. They can take sworn statements and depositions and affidavits under penalty of perjury. The Senate can subpoena records and documents. The Senate can obtain forensic analysis of any material evidence.

So, please, skool me: What is the advantage in an FBI investigation?

Or, for that matter, why not just call every witness before the Senate for questioning for the whole world to see.

So? Skool me. What am I missing?



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 07:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

What can they probe? Based on Ford's information about what happened what are they investigating specifically?



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 08:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Kryties
Considering she has less evidence to back her own story, my story is equally valid. You blindly believe her without question. Why won't you believe me?? If I had a vagina would you then accept any accusation I make without question??



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 08:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: Kryties
Considering she has less evidence to back her own story, my story is equally valid. You blindly believe her without question. Why won't you believe me?? If I had a vagina would you then accept any accusation I make without question??



I certainly wouldn't just automatically deny it.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 08:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: worldstarcountry
What if

And this explains it all. We don't live in the world of "what if". We live in reality. You live in a fantasy world. Magic fairy dust and gender fluidity. That's your world.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea
Ha don't bother. Your question will be ignored and like a broken record the next reply will be "why are you afraid of an Investigation" or " makes you wonder what they Are afraid to investigate."

A reply to Kryties

Mark my words right here, this man will hold his head high when he is confirmed soon. You will make no apologies or. "I admit I was wrong" statements. You will just move on to the next chapter in this soap opera swear it is holding fire to the feet of the president or the next poor schmuck trying to get appointed to a position or up for elections.

I'ma betting this is far from the last person you will be repeating the line "what makes you afraid of investigate?? Why you no like justice, ra ra ra" about an individual being obstructed for political reason.
edit on 9-29-2018 by worldstarcountry because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 09:10 AM
link   
a reply to: annoyedpharmacist


Just saw this morning on the news (don't have a link), but since the evidence came out that

Ford's attorney Katz, was suggested by Feinstein and according to Ford's own testimony, wasn't aware that she was offered to have the committee fly to her for her statement and avoiding the circus we all witnessed, yet the commitee sent 3 requests to do so to her attorney, Katz.


Lindsey Graham is requesting an investigation into her attorneys. They violated Ford's rights as her attorney's by not informing her of these 3 letters.


Other than for political reasons, why would an attorney do this? It was her attorney's who said she couldn't fly, yet it was proven by her own testimony under questioning that she seems to fly quite often.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 09:16 AM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963

I cannot help but suspect that it was Katz who leaked to the press too. Katz was all in wanting to make sure this opportunity didn't slip from her grasp. I hope Ford realizes this and gets another attorney to properly advise her!




top topics



 
27
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join