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.
originally posted by: ketsuko
originally posted by: pavil
a reply to: Grambler
Not gonna happen. They won't delay things.
The FBI HAS done a background check.
Dems think they can stop things.
They have bigger problems with the Declassified Documents about to hit.
Dems are holding on because they think they will retake the Senate. All the published polls say so.
originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist
So she wont testify under oath because she wants the FBI to investigate, even though the FBI already declined to investigate. Sure, nothing stinks here. Seems perfectly legit.
IF there was anything to this claim, why on earth (since we now all know her name AND the supposed story) would she not want to testify to it and confirm her story, and in doing so block the nomination?
originally posted by: whywhynot
a reply to: Grambler
All true but I’m telling you that if two FBI agents try to begin their investigation by taking her statement you will never hear from the lovely professor again. Plus, the Left will have nothing legitimate to gripe about in this regard.
originally posted by: six67seven
a reply to: Grambler
Can’t they just use money from the congressional hush fund to shut this accuser up??
I made a funny hehehe
originally posted by: carewemust
originally posted by: whywhynot
a reply to: Grambler
All true but I’m telling you that if two FBI agents try to begin their investigation by taking her statement you will never hear from the lovely professor again. Plus, the Left will have nothing legitimate to gripe about in this regard.
BINGO! The first step in an FBI investigation of matters like this is a thorough interview with the person who is the accuser.
originally posted by: Rewey
originally posted by: carewemust
originally posted by: whywhynot
a reply to: Grambler
All true but I’m telling you that if two FBI agents try to begin their investigation by taking her statement you will never hear from the lovely professor again. Plus, the Left will have nothing legitimate to gripe about in this regard.
BINGO! The first step in an FBI investigation of matters like this is a thorough interview with the person who is the accuser.
Just a thought, but wouldn't an FBI investigation also require an in-depth interview with Feinstein, to uncover why she sat on it for so long, and only brought it to light at the most politically opportune time?
Now that I'd like to see...
originally posted by: carewemust
originally posted by: whywhynot
a reply to: Grambler
All true but I’m telling you that if two FBI agents try to begin their investigation by taking her statement you will never hear from the lovely professor again. Plus, the Left will have nothing legitimate to gripe about in this regard.
BINGO! The first step in an FBI investigation of matters like this is a thorough interview with the person who is the accuser.
originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: annoyedpharmacist
FBI is terrible at tooting their own horn. I bet they've foiled a few terrorist attacks over the past couple of years.
originally posted by: Chickensalad
What's this about his mother presiding over the accusers parents foreclosure?
And her brother worked at Fusion???
Are these true and verified??
originally posted by: Chickensalad
What's this about his mother presiding over the accusers parents foreclosure?
And her brother worked at Fusion???
Are these true and verified??