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.

 

Senator Grassley Sends Criminal Referral to FBI - Investigate This Brett Kavanaugh Accuser.

page: 7
67
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: ausername

Senator Lindsay Graham says his office just started a probe to determine what Democrats have done to undermine Kavanaugh's confirmation.


Sen. Lindsey Graham promised Sunday he'll "to get to the bottom of" the FBI investigation into the sexual assault allegations leveled against Judge Brett Kavanaugh and said that his own investigation into how the Democrats have handled the Supreme Court nominee’s confirmation hearings has only just begun.
www.foxnews.com...

Since his buddy John McCain's departure, Lindsay is on fire...like he was 20 years ago.




posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 01:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: carewemust


So, this isn't about Christine Ford's allegations, or Ramirez' allegations or Swetnik's allegations. This is about the guys who said they went to the boat to beat up Brett and Mark for raping their friend. The guy recanted and apologized. I guess that wasn't good enough.

Rape is a serious crime, and lying about rape is as well.

Neither are fixed with with "I'm sorry".


More so than just a false accusation of rape or sexual assault, this ass wipe is guilty of interfering with government processes, fraud, and a bunch of other stuff. I hope the FBI pursues charges and slaps him down as hard as the law permits. The Senate and the American Public have enough issues to sort through with Kavenaugh without jack-asses throwing BS into the fire. He deserves every consequence the law permits.



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 01:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: Identified

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: ausername

Her friend doesn't deny Kavanaugh raped her either. But the fact she said she doesn't remember ever meeting him is more meaningful.


Don't forget Ford also testified that she had been at 4 or 5 other parties with Kavanaugh prior to this incident. So Leland must not have been at those either.

I'm surprised not a single person has dug out old party photos showing any of these people together.
She testified that Leland drove her home from that party but Leland has no recollection of seeing Kavanaugh.


No she didn't. She said she came from the Country Club, where she had been swimming, but she didn't remember how she got there. She also didn't remember how she got home.


Correct.
The reason she "can't" remember is, most likely, because at the time of the alleged event, she was licensed to drive herself...
Which means she was NOT 15 at the time, as she claimed
Which means the alleged event did NOT happen in 1982, as she claimed

Her entire timeline is bogus.



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: Identified

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: ausername

Her friend doesn't deny Kavanaugh raped her either. But the fact she said she doesn't remember ever meeting him is more meaningful.


Don't forget Ford also testified that she had been at 4 or 5 other parties with Kavanaugh prior to this incident. So Leland must not have been at those either.

I'm surprised not a single person has dug out old party photos showing any of these people together.
She testified that Leland drove her home from that party but Leland has no recollection of seeing Kavanaugh.


No she didn't. She said she came from the Country Club, where she had been swimming, but she didn't remember how she got there. She also didn't remember how she got home.



For context, where?

Watch Rachel Mitchell's complete questioning of Christine Blasey Ford, without interruptions



edit on Sep-30-2018 by xuenchen because: ⚖



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

People don't realize it yet. But that is a declaration of war following an ACT of war by the enemy.




posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Do your own homework.



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 02:44 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Oh, oh, Lindsay Graham lit the fuse! October should be interesting.




posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04


You and OP need to prove your assertion. I can't prove a negative. Chairman Grassley did not offer to send the Judicial committee to California to hear Ford's testimony.


Committee staff reiterates request that Dr. Ford agree to an interview with Committee investigative staff. Committee staff offers to fly to California to obtain testimony. Dr. Ford’s attorneys do not respond to request.
www.judiciary.senate.gov... made-and-disputed-regarding-judge-brett-kavanaugh

Dr Ford wanted to testify to the Judicial Committee and answer their questions. She didn't want her statement simply entered into the hearing records.
edit on 30-9-2018 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 03:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: OccamsRazor04


You and OP need to prove your assertion. I can't prove a negative. Chairman Grassley did not offer to send the Judicial committee to California to hear Ford's testimony.


Committee staff reiterates request that Dr. Ford agree to an interview with Committee investigative staff. Committee staff offers to fly to California to obtain testimony. Dr. Ford’s attorneys do not respond to request.
www.judiciary.senate.gov... made-and-disputed-regarding-judge-brett-kavanaugh

Dr Ford wanted to testify to the Judicial Committee and answer their questions. She didn't want her statement simply entered into the hearing records.


Again, for context, where did she actually say that?

Watch Rachel Mitchell's complete questioning of Christine Blasey Ford, without interruptions



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen



Dr. Ford’s counsel appears on morning shows saying her client wants public hearing to tell her story.


www.judiciary.senate.gov... made-and-disputed-regarding-judge-brett-kavanaugh

Where does Grassley say that Ford can have her public hearing with the Judicial Committee in California? You know, for context.



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 03:31 PM
link   
a reply to: thepixelpusher

I wonder what kind of false flag Democrats have up their sleeve for this coming week? It would have to be really big.



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 03:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: xuenchen



Dr. Ford’s counsel appears on morning shows saying her client wants public hearing to tell her story.


www.judiciary.senate.gov... made-and-disputed-regarding-judge-brett-kavanaugh

Where does Grassley say that Ford can have her public hearing with the Judicial Committee in California? You know, for context.



Your link is busted (surprise)

And I'm not disputing anything, just want the actual words in writing or verbal.

Don't get nervous.

😎



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 03:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: xuenchen



Dr. Ford’s counsel appears on morning shows saying her client wants public hearing to tell her story.


www.judiciary.senate.gov... made-and-disputed-regarding-judge-brett-kavanaugh

Where does Grassley say that Ford can have her public hearing with the Judicial Committee in California? You know, for context.



Your link is busted (surprise)

And I'm not disputing anything, just want the actual words in writing or verbal.

Don't get nervous.

😎


My link is not "busted". You just need to go into "quote" and cut and paste it into your web browser. I don't know why ATS won't post the whole link.


https: *//www.*judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/summary-of-actions-by-chairman-grassley-and-the-senate-judiciary-committee-related-to-allegations-made -and-disputed-regarding-judge-brett-kavanaugh

The above link won't work either, because I put a * between https: and //www. and before judiciary.senate.gov to get it to post.

edit on 30-9-2018 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 03:52 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

You know, there was a time when people who blamed the victim were thought to be intellectually challenged, or "stupid" if you like.
my my how things have changed since 2016.

Should we start a campaign to get BK to take a polygraph like Ford did?

If he's innocent, he should make the offer. I mean when the world made sense it was the alleged perpetrator who took it, not the alleged victim, and if he passed it, he was dropped as a suspect.


edit on 9/30/2018 by angeldoll because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: thepixelpusher

I wonder what kind of false flag Democrats have up their sleeve for this coming week? It would have to be really big.


Jeez, I heard of "closed minds" and "shallow minds" before, but you take the cake!



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: carewemust

You know, there was a time when people who blamed the victim were thought to be intellectually challenged, or "stupid" if you like.
my my how things have changed since 2016.

Should we start a campaign to get BK to take a polygraph like Ford did?

If he's innocent, he should make the offer. I mean when the world made sense it was the alleged perpetrator who took it, not the alleged victim.



Polygraphs are not very reliable

For example, ford past hers, but now has changed her story about how many people were there from her statement

So either the polygraph was not reliable, or she lied in her testimony to the committee

Looking into ford and her story isn’t victim blaming

Given your stance here, I assume that you think that if the democrats don’t call for fbi investigations into yjemseyamd take polygraphs about setting in the accusation and the leaks, that should mean they are not innocent



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


But Brett Kavanaugh likes them.


In his opinion, Kavanaugh concluded that polygraphs are a valuable tool for the government to determine credibility and decide who should be allowed to handle classified information.

As the Government notes, law enforcement agencies use polygraphs to test the credibility of witnesses and criminal defendants. Those agencies also use polygraphs to “screen applicants for security clearances so that they may be deemed suitable for work in critical law enforcement, defense, and intelligence collection roles.”
The Government has satisfactorily explained how polygraph examinations serve law enforcement purposes.


……………...

Second, the reports contain information about techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations. As the Government points out, the reports detail whether a particular agency’s polygraph procedures and techniques are effective. The reports identify strengths and weaknesses of particular polygraph programs. In describing the effectiveness of polygraph techniques and procedures, the reports necessarily would disclose information about the underlying techniques and procedures themselves, including when the agencies are likely to employ them.
www.huffingtonpost.com...



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 04:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

She says in her letter to her polygraph that there were four boys and a couple of girls

Her testimony was different than her letter to Feinstein

It was then again in her senate testimony

So either her polygraph was not reliable or she lied in her testimony



posted on Sep, 30 2018 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: angeldoll

You know there was a time when people who condemned people without trial or evidence were thought to be...

She chose to take a polygraph thinking it mattered one iota mto anything when it doesn't. She wasn't forced to take it and the accused certainly didn't ask her to.

All this - if he's innocent he'd ask for an FBI investigation; if he's innocent he'd take a polygraph; if he's innocent he'd stand on his head; if he's innocent fill in the blank with my hurdle of nonsense proof that won't prove anything - is ridiculous.




top topics



 
67
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join