Obstruction of Justice?: White House Forbids FBI to Investigate Swetnick Allegations

a reply to: angeldoll

What?

I drink a ton. If not water, then tea. It's a habit I've always had.

My parents noticed it early on and gave me the nickname "Guzzle-Gums" because I could down 32oz of liquid in nothing flat. I need to keep my hands busy, so if I have liquid to hand, I'm constantly drinking. If not drinking liquid, then I might be eating which is far worse.

And honestly, most people should be drinking more. Most people are chronically dehydrated.

Donald J. Trump
‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump
2h

NBC News incorrectly reported (as usual) that I was limiting the FBI investigation of Judge Kavanaugh, and witnesses, only to certain people. Actually, I want them to interview whoever they deem appropriate, at their discretion. Please correct your reporting!

tweet

a reply to: ipsedixit

No this is potus saying enough is enough. Why have these women come out of woodwork now after nearly 40 years? Why not when he was first running for judge? The Ford chick supposedly has ties to big pharm company that makes morning after pills which would mean if he was made justice they think he will overturn roe vs wade which no. Matter how much demote try to tell use he would overturn it would likely never happen.

a reply to: BlueAjah


Re: twitter.com...

The President is asking NBC to "correct" a FAKE news story? If they do, it will be a first for this dysfunctional network.

a reply to: carewemust

NBC will now print that the President is trying to control NBC's reporting.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: BlueAjah


Re: twitter.com...

The President is asking NBC to "correct" a FAKE news story? If they do, it will be a first for this dysfunctional network.

Kind of an ambiguous tweet, isn't it?

Maybe he should clearly clarify the exact limitations he did in fact set for the FBI investigation... You know, so theirs no more misunderstandings.

Will they investigate the public rape of Kavanaugh's reputation?

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

Lol

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, because saying the FBI can investigate anything they deem appropriate, at their discretion seems about as clear as you can get. Nothing ambiguous about that.

It also sounds like a lawyer drafted that, because it's fairly boilerplate language that gets used when you really want a wide standard. The only limitation is whatever the FBI deems appropriate.

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

Lol

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, because saying the FBI can investigate anything they deem appropriate, at their discretion seems about as clear as you can get. Nothing ambiguous about that.

But their were originally and still are (as far as I can tell) limitations on the investigation, which Trump ordered... right?

So why wouldn't Trump straight out clarify exactly what those limitations are, instead of just stating what they aren't?

Seems like that'd be the most logical approach, to ensure theirs no more 'misunderstandings' on what these limitations actually are.

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

So you weren't being sarcastic.

What limitations then? And from what source is that claim made, because his tweet seems pretty clear.

Looks like NBC's little fake story is shot in the ass.

😎

[sounds of air coming from a broken balloon as it spins and falls to the ground]😃

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

If you can tell there are limitations then tell us what those are.

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

What limitations then? And from what source is that claim made, because his tweet seems pretty clear.

Theirs the one week limit of the investigation he ordered, which was being reported by most of the media... not just NBC.

Its a purely politically motivated limitation and isn't disputed or even mentioned in Trumps tweet.

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

That's a time limit not a limit on scope. Nice changing the goal post.

There is no reason to go beyond a week if nothing else is found.

At this point the only thing that can be investigated is whether Ford lied.

But she won't give the FBI access to evidence as of her last statement on the issue.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

That's a time limit not a limit on scope. Nice changing the goal post.

I haven't changed the goal post from my original statement. I said he should clarify what limitations he obviously has ordered... Never specified between "time" or "scope" limitations.

There is no reason to go beyond a week if nothing else is found.

Shouldn't that be up to the investigators to decide?

What reason would Trump have for ordering a one week limitation... unless its purely politically motivated?

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

The agreement the committee and Senate came to is a one week investigation. That’s what the democrats wanted and it’s what the republicans agreed to ask for.

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

Asking for the investigation is politically motivated. There is literally nothing they can uncover and Ford refuses access to her records which she says support her accusation.

We know the people involved and already have sworn statements. What about Ford's case can they investigate exactly, be specific.

How long do they need to investigate without uncovering anything do you think?

originally posted by: angeldoll
One things for sure. I've never seen anybody, anywhere, in any meeting like this or any other kind of meeting drink as much water as he did.
My God! A new bottle every ten minutes or so? Whew. Weird.

It sort of reminded me of people coming out of rehab for alcoholism. They have to have a LOT to drink. Water, tea, soda, anything.
(Used to always drinking and have a drink in their hand, and feel naked without something to drink.)

Anyway. It was bizarre.

how long have you been clean and sober? Congrats on working that way. Addiction can be tough. Glad you are working on it.

This entire process is political.

Kavanaugh is qualified for the position on the Supreme Court, as are other judges on the short list, but thinking that is the only factor involved in his appointment is silly. His main qualification from Trump's point of view is that he thinks that a serving president ought not to be indicted while in office. This is something that could have importance in a potential impeachment undertaking. It would be much easier to impeach or to force the resignation of the president if he were indicted on some criminal charge, like money laundering or collusion with a hostile foreign power to boost his own campaign and damage the campaign of his opponent in the 2016 presidential election.

Kavanaugh's personal behavior is not really that important to me in a general sense. It only becomes important in the larger political context of Donald Trump's political career.

Having said that, it is not in the interest of the United States to have any coke snorting rapist on the Supreme Court, just as it is not in the interest of the United States to have a political imbecile and serial sexual abuser in the White House.

There have been jeers from posters in this thread who have laughed about the idea of Kavanaugh spending the next decades on the Supreme Court reaming people with whom he and the relevant posters disagree. That's where we are and it's not good for the country as a whole.

If Kavanaugh's appointment can be stopped, it will advance the cause of the American people and retard the progress of a deeply flawed, capricious, possibly co-opted by a foreign power president.

originally posted by: DJMSN
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck
ignorance is ignorance. I welcome any view. However if you don't know the basics then ask questions. When someone claims that the local police was pulled off the JFK investigation so the FBI could take over, I am going to correct them.
I know you to be an intelligent and thoughtful poster and surely even you can admit this thread is not much more than a troll job. I know we differ at times as far as our political beliefs but again you are too intelligent to defend this. Perhaps I was more harsh than I should have been, if so my apologies.

I think both sides are exploiting the circumstances to the fullest, and are proving that there is, indeed, no shame in politics. The one constant is that with Kav's character being cast in doubt, both accuser and accused need to have their stories properly investigated. And apologies accepted...emotions run high.