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.

 

not even kidding. Dems double down on Kavanaugh

page: 4
36
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: ketsuko

Every person has their personal bias. Which is why source documents are so important.

Think of the game telephone. One person says one thing to the next and so on until what is at the end isnt the same as the start.


OK, so why didn't Fienstein intiate this investigation way back when she had the original allegation when the original background checks and Congressional investigations were taking place?

One would think it would make sense to handle this very sensitive matter then before it became a media circus that tainted the process like it has. One would also think she would want to personally question the Judge about it herself.

Why didn't she? Why did she instead recommend legal counsel to St. Christine and sit on her until the 11th hour when it would be too late to do the same kind of investigation that they claim they wanted and could have had?

And don't tell me no one knew, because that's a crock. They did, and everyone knows it. The timeline on this has been published. This was held and used to play politics, not to bring any kind of justice. They straight up believed they could force the nominee to be withdrawn or to withdraw himself and nothing else.




posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 11:45 AM
link   
I hope Kavakaugh's lawyers are doing a thorough search to ensure he has no upaid traffic tickets.
Maybe he didn't leave a decent tip once - that should be grounds for impeachment.

Imagine the desperation in the heads of Feinstein, Water and Pelosi.
It must be exquisite to generate the cartoon antics we've seen of late.



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 11:47 AM
link   
Dianne Feinstein and Nancy Pelosi have both lost what little of their minds that they had left. Now they are going to continue to help the Republicans win the midterms. I would say it’s time for new leadership at the DNC, but I like the devils we have, because they may eventually find someone with 1/2 a brain.
This time millions of walk-a-way’s can pull the big R with a clear conscience.



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

When I say Kava, you say....




posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

It don't matter.

The House gets absolutely No say in supreme court nominations.



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

You arent talking about some BS on Judicial Watch thats been overlooked and under reported, you are talking about the selection of a Supreme Court Justice that has been examined 6 times by the FBI and then this last time by the Senate Judicial committee. Thats been plastered all over the news and tv and had every left leaning low life journalists trying to find dirt on this man. And all they found was a squeaky forgetful accuser who doesnt even want him impeached LOL. Time to quit seeing what else the left is gonna try and pull out of their arse.
edit on 7-10-2018 by putnam6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 12:06 PM
link   


This time millions of walk-a-way’s can pull the big R with a clear conscience.



Straight Republican.

It is what we need at this place in time to get our country back on track and humming. We had eight years in the last administration under O and all that happened was division along every line you can think of...a constant diet of pull-apart sj raw meat. Taxpayer $$$ went everywhere except here, funding one globalist slush fund after another.

We have real work to do on our infrastructure, our economy, our security, our borders, better and fairer trade deals, and so much more. All the Dems will do is keep us bogged down and fighting because as long as we are divided, the Dems are happy and can use that division for power grabs.

Straight Republican ticket this time around.



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 12:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle

Its not what I wish for...
Its what the house minority leader wants...


I think she is out of line... Kind of like suggesting her counter parts in the senate are not capable...

As I said she just wants to join the party that she wasn't invited to...lol



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 12:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Pyle

As congressman they already had access to them.,

All GD SEVEN FBI background investigations.



Wrong only the Senate got access to all the information. Pelosi is in the House. Nice try though.


Why should every member of the House suddenly have access to that? They've never had access to background check and investigative information on judicial nominees, not SCOTUS ones. If you pay any attention to the proceedings you would know that the judicial committee has actual process for investigating this type of allegation, meaning this has happened in the past. Of course, we all know of Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas, but there have likely been others.

This is generally handled by having the allegations either given to the FBI while they make their traditional anal pro ... I mean background check, and every member of the committee has a team of investigators to go out and do investigations on things like this too.

This is traditionally handled behind closed doors - *meaning the public never sees it* - and neither does the House for that matter because the "advise and consent" function is not constitutionally theirs!

GET IT? It's not the House's problem to look at it and handle. So Pelosi is feeding you a line of unconstitutional bull.



But feelings override rule of law and precedent.
ETA:
People better realize how important this midterm is. The surreal circus we have seen with Kavanaugh is NOTHING compared to what will happen if these globalist fascists acquire any actual power.
edit on 10 7 2018 by stosh64 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 12:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Pyle

It don't matter.

The House gets absolutely No say in supreme court nominations.



You are correct that the house gets no say, but that in no way precludes a FOIA request from happening. You could do one yourself for the very same info.



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

Reading is fundamental.

Emphasis on mental.



Congress is legally exempt from FOIA requirements, and it was not immediately clear to what extent the FBI would respond to Pelosi's request.



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: ketsuko

Every person has their personal bias. Which is why source documents are so important.

Think of the game telephone. One person says one thing to the next and so on until what is at the end isnt the same as the start.


OK, so why didn't Fienstein intiate this investigation way back when she had the original allegation when the original background checks and Congressional investigations were taking place?

One would think it would make sense to handle this very sensitive matter then before it became a media circus that tainted the process like it has. One would also think she would want to personally question the Judge about it herself.

Why didn't she? Why did she instead recommend legal counsel to St. Christine and sit on her until the 11th hour when it would be too late to do the same kind of investigation that they claim they wanted and could have had?

And don't tell me no one knew, because that's a crock. They did, and everyone knows it. The timeline on this has been published. This was held and used to play politics, not to bring any kind of justice. They straight up believed they could force the nominee to be withdrawn or to withdraw himself and nothing else.


Maybe she thought Kavanaughs terrible record from the Bush years would end up stopping him before needing to break this last thing out? He is a bush neocon that was part of torture and domestic spying justification as well as many other bad things bush did. It is why it was so hard for him to get on the court the first time and that only happened after a grand bargain was made with democrats.



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Pyle

Reading is fundamental.

Emphasis on mental.



Congress is legally exempt from FOIA requirements, and it was not immediately clear to what extent the FBI would respond to Pelosi's request.


The FBI isnt though.

Maybe your fundamentals need checked when you contradict yourself in your own post?



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 01:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: ketsuko

Every person has their personal bias. Which is why source documents are so important.

Think of the game telephone. One person says one thing to the next and so on until what is at the end isnt the same as the start.


OK, so why didn't Fienstein intiate this investigation way back when she had the original allegation when the original background checks and Congressional investigations were taking place?

One would think it would make sense to handle this very sensitive matter then before it became a media circus that tainted the process like it has. One would also think she would want to personally question the Judge about it herself.

Why didn't she? Why did she instead recommend legal counsel to St. Christine and sit on her until the 11th hour when it would be too late to do the same kind of investigation that they claim they wanted and could have had?

And don't tell me no one knew, because that's a crock. They did, and everyone knows it. The timeline on this has been published. This was held and used to play politics, not to bring any kind of justice. They straight up believed they could force the nominee to be withdrawn or to withdraw himself and nothing else.


Maybe she thought Kavanaughs terrible record from the Bush years would end up stopping him before needing to break this last thing out? He is a bush neocon that was part of torture and domestic spying justification as well as many other bad things bush did. It is why it was so hard for him to get on the court the first time and that only happened after a grand bargain was made with democrats.


Now I'm confused as to which is worse. Don't you think it would be worse to sit a criminal or someone whom you merely think has a judicial record of which you do not approve?

How many of the Republican Senators on the judicial committee, for example, really approved of either Kagan or Sotomayor's judicial philosophies? I'm betting very few, and I'm guessing they thought both of those ladies had poor records in keeping with judicial philosophies with which they disapproved.

But this isn't about the individual Senators getting to pick judges of which they approve ... merely judges who can do the job and did Kavanaugh or did he not have that record? If he did, then it's not Feinstein's call to say that his philosophy if unfit beyond voting "no" which she announced at the outset she would do ... like every. other. Democrat.

But, if she thought she had news of a valid criminal accusation, then don't you think it's important at that point when all of the initial investigating is going on to add it to the pile and have it thoroughly vetted as per the usual process, and investigated by *both* the FBI and *her own team of investigators*? At that point, we could have laid both these arguments of bias and no thoroughness to rest. Don't you think she would have done that?

But she didn't. Why?



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 01:18 PM
link   
I think Pelosi is bluffing in order to garner support and become semi-relevant again.
The last thing the Dems want is for the supplemental FBI investigation to become public.

Just as Dems called for an FBI investigation late in the Kavanaugh hearings to delay...they never expected it to be granted.


This is why it will be Trump that says: "Nancy says she wants the report public?---OKAY...make it public."

This will happen BEFORE the midterms...rather than AFTER, as Pelosi is feigning.



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 01:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Pyle


If the 302s proved what the right thinks, they would have used them already to completely destroy the FBI years ago.

Did you just lose all track of the conversation? I'm talking about releasing what Pelosi is trying to make a conspiracy out of. Those 302s have only existed about a week now.

Destroy the FBI? How would releasing the information to the public destroy anyone but the Democrats? If there were incriminating evidence in there, don't you think one of the 49 Democratic Senators would have mentioned it?

No, forget network dude's advice... keep some of those vitamins for yourself. It sounds like you need them as bad as Ginsberg.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

He did not have the record of someone who should be on the court. BUSH JR, had to lobby GOP senators to make sure he passed...

His record and actions prior to his appointment to the appellate court should have had his nomination thrown out before it started. Might be why the White House made sure to hide 100,000 of documents from that era and why Kavanaugh himself lied about his actions during those years during not just the most resent nomination but his first back in 2006.

BTW Kagan 13-6 and Sotomayor also 13-6 in committee. Both got over 60 votes in the final count meaning a few GOP had to cross the line.

She has said why many times as to why she didnt come out sooner. Anonymity of the alleged victim due to the victims request. Also I am not so sure it was secret from the rest of the committee. Their reactions specifically being able to find and get "60" women to say he never raped me so quickly points to them knowing ahead of the allegations.

I am still not sure why people are so scared of a FIOA request about the FBI's investigation.



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Pyle


If the 302s proved what the right thinks, they would have used them already to completely destroy the FBI years ago.

Did you just lose all track of the conversation? I'm talking about releasing what Pelosi is trying to make a conspiracy out of. Those 302s have only existed about a week now.

Destroy the FBI? How would releasing the information to the public destroy anyone but the Democrats? If there were incriminating evidence in there, don't you think one of the 49 Democratic Senators would have mentioned it?

No, forget network dude's advice... keep some of those vitamins for yourself. It sounds like you need them as bad as Ginsberg.

TheRedneck


My Mistake

Usually when someone supporting Trump and his crew starts going on about 302s its the magical ones that prove the FBI was evil during the Russian investigation, or carter page FISA application being phony, or Flynn getting screwed.

Honestly, they may not have 302s as they were informal interviews because it was a background check and not a criminal investigation thus different rules apply.



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 01:58 PM
link   
a reply to: ignorant_ape

That's a very interesting question, isn't it??

The entirety of the Senate has access, as part of their Constitutionally mandated duties, to all the FBI report on Justice Kavanaugh.

Apparently, she's as distrustful of them, as most of us are...



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

*sigh*

All government documents have an identifying designation, such as the form 10-99 or W-2 or 1040 used by the IRS. The FBI has the 302, which is simply a detailed report on an interview. It's not a criminal report; if there were any interviews conducted, there will be a 302 for each one.

Your mistake version 2.0?

TheRedneck



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join