Kavanaugh accuser wants a full FBI investigation before she testifies

One unnamed source in a literal two paragraph click bait article.
Astounding must be true /s

a reply to: olaru12

originally posted by: highvein
a reply to: Grambler

This reeks of a political move.

That is because it is a political move. That is why they call it politics. Now it is the Republicans move, which really isn't much in my opinion.

To me it seems like the Democrate Leaders don't want Trump as President more than the Republican Leaders want him as President.


Trump is representing the people that voted for him against our own government moreso than any other President in my memory.

He should tell the republican leadership that if they will not support him then he will run 3rd party in the next election. I know, I know. Partisan Republicans will hate that idea, but imagine how much more support Trump will gain from the middle.

While I agree with your sentiments in principal.
3rd party is not yet a safe avenue to pursue, and I do not think it will be in 2020. There is no more sure way to get a democrat elected than for Trump to run 3rd party.

a reply to: randomtangentsrme

There is no more sure way to get a democrat elected than for Trump to run 3rd party.

Well then the Republican leadership would have a hard decision to make wouldn't they.

a reply to: highvein

Only if Trump is dumb enough to make the threat.
Do you think he is?

nice timing. She waits to say something for thirty five years, for something that supposedly happened when they were young. So I guess someone is going to donate a lot of money to this woman since she is saying something about one of Trump's picks. I think an investigation into her finances is what the FBI should investigate first. Whether there is something to what she is saying or not, it is not good when someone gets a pile of money to discredit a government official. I suppose to get by any bribing charges she will just have a Democratic supporter help her write a book which a bunch of idiots will buy and think it is real since it is in writing.

There is no evidence on either side, this kind of stuff should not even be considered unless there is more recent evidence to show it may be true. Another thing, what exactly happened, was it just inappropriate behavior or something more? Was it something considered normal at the time for teenagers to do, like saying no then giving in after a little foreplay? We do not have particulars on this, just a vague accusation. Sounds like she just wants to stop this guy from getting appointed, only after the FBI investigates will she go to tell her story under oath, when that point comes, the guy will not be in line for the job anymore and she will just drop it without any reason, before she perjurers herself.

If this was true, how come it is just coming out thirty some years after the fact? Sounds way too fishy to me, are there any other reputable people who can back this up, right now it seems like it could be heresay if someone testifies in her behalf, and there is not even any talk of witnesses or others who will even verify it happened.

Deception rules this country, it is only going to get worse, morals have gone down the drain. Back many years ago this kind of stuff was happening, sometimes a girl flirted too much and got caught up in some bad crap. She is not stating she was raped, not in what I have read anyway. Sexual assault does not always mean rape, inappropriate touching can be sexual assault, foreplay can be considered sexual assault.

So many right wing politicians, media personalities and friends of the right wing have been found guilty of sexual misdeeds, yet they continue to cry that they are being railroaded. Hell, even the president toad has been accused of it.

So once again they flood ATS with questions about the accuser, like they are dumbfounded that someone in their party is possibly guilty of something sexual.

All Hail President Toad.

Breaking !!!!!

When Brett Kavanaugh was 17....

He got fined for over due library books !!!

💥🎃💥

originally posted by: 2smart4u
So many right wing politicians, media personalities and friends of the right wing have been found guilty of sexual misdeeds, yet they continue to cry that they are being railroaded. Hell, even the president toad has been accused of it.

So once again they flood ATS with questions about the accuser, like they are dumbfounded that someone in their party is possibly guilty of something sexual.

All Hail President Toad.

And yet here you are making reference to something Stormy Daniels said in her book....

Pot meet kettle.....

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Bhadhidar



PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE.. WHAT PART OF THAT DON"T YOU MORONS GET, burden of proof is on the accuser not the accused

Presumption of innocence only applies during criminal proceedings.

This is a confirmation hearing, presumption does not apply.

In fact, considering that the position in question is for life, not just a certain term, it is even more important that the candidate be above even the suggestion of reproach.

Nice ad hominem, by the way.

a reply to: 2smart4u

Guilty with proof too !!!

originally posted by: Bhadhidar

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Bhadhidar



PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE.. WHAT PART OF THAT DON"T YOU MORONS GET, burden of proof is on the accuser not the accused

Presumption of innocence only applies during criminal proceedings.

This is a confirmation hearing, presumption does not apply.

In fact, considering that the position in question is for life, not just a certain term, it is even more important that the candidate be above even the suggestion of reproach.

Nice ad hominem, by the way.

I have heard 40 years ago ginsburg sexually assaulted a man.

She is no longer above even the suggestion of reproach.

Will you now be calling for her impeachment?

originally posted by: 2smart4u
So many right wing politicians, media personalities and friends of the right wing have been found guilty of sexual misdeeds, yet they continue to cry that they are being railroaded. Hell, even the president toad has been accused of it.

So once again they flood ATS with questions about the accuser, like they are dumbfounded that someone in their party is possibly guilty of something sexual.

All Hail President Toad.

So many left wing politicians, celebrities, and media personalities have been found guilty.

So I guess any suggestions against left wing people must also be automatically believed as well, correct?

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: 2smart4u
So many right wing politicians, media personalities and friends of the right wing have been found guilty of sexual misdeeds, yet they continue to cry that they are being railroaded. Hell, even the president toad has been accused of it.

So once again they flood ATS with questions about the accuser, like they are dumbfounded that someone in their party is possibly guilty of something sexual.

All Hail President Toad.

So many left wing politicians, celebrities, and media personalities have been found guilty.

So I guess any suggestions against left wing people must also be automatically believed as well, correct?

Of course. When it comes to sexual assault of any kind, the assault should be taken seriously until proven to be false.

Yet, it appears you guys are not willing to give this woman a chance. Why don't you guys find it curious that Kavanaugh or his people had a list of women willing to say he is not an assaulter, ready so quickly, it is like he or his people were expecting it?

a reply to: Grambler

You have a source for that?

If so, it should be investigated by the appropriate authorities.

If not, I take it that was your lame attempt to make a point.

originally posted by: Bhadhidar
a reply to: Grambler

You have a source for that?

If so, it should be investigated by the appropriate authorities.

If not, I take it that was your lame attempt to make a point.

The person wants to remain anonymous. He also does not remember the specific time, place, how he got there, etc.

And he refuses to testify in front of the senate until there is a full fbi investigation.

Until the end of that investigation, ginsburg should not be allowed to render decisions.

Because she now has the suggestion of not being beyond reproach.

Can you see how this standard will end up very poorly.

originally posted by: 2smart4u

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: 2smart4u
So many right wing politicians, media personalities and friends of the right wing have been found guilty of sexual misdeeds, yet they continue to cry that they are being railroaded. Hell, even the president toad has been accused of it.

So once again they flood ATS with questions about the accuser, like they are dumbfounded that someone in their party is possibly guilty of something sexual.

All Hail President Toad.

So many left wing politicians, celebrities, and media personalities have been found guilty.

So I guess any suggestions against left wing people must also be automatically believed as well, correct?

Of course. When it comes to sexual assault of any kind, the assault should be taken seriously until proven to be false.

Yet, it appears you guys are not willing to give this woman a chance. Why don't you guys find it curious that Kavanaugh or his people had a list of women willing to say he is not an assaulter, ready so quickly, it is like he or his people were expecting it?

Hahahaha!

So if he has no women defend him, that is proof he is guilty.

If women do defend him, this is proof he is guilty.

Who is not giving this woman a chance?

I am willing to hear her out. So is the senate.

Yet she is refusing to testify now.

Are you saying you presume kavanaugh is guilty based merely on the accusation, and saying its up to him to prove his innocence?

originally posted by: Grambler

Hahahaha!

So if he has no women defend him, that is proof he is guilty.

If women do defend him, this is proof he is guilty.

Who is not giving this woman a chance?

I am willing to hear her out. So is the senate.

Yet she is refusing to testify now.

Are you saying you presume kavanaugh is guilty based merely on the accusation, and saying its up to him to prove his innocence?

Actually i find it suspicious how fast this letter came out. It was like he or his people knew this would come out, so had a letter prepared.

You don't find this suspicious?

You're probably going to ask wasn't i suspicious of this woman, yep but let there be an investigation to clear him or her.

originally posted by: 2smart4u

originally posted by: Grambler

Hahahaha!

So if he has no women defend him, that is proof he is guilty.

If women do defend him, this is proof he is guilty.

Who is not giving this woman a chance?

I am willing to hear her out. So is the senate.

Yet she is refusing to testify now.

Are you saying you presume kavanaugh is guilty based merely on the accusation, and saying its up to him to prove his innocence?

Actually i find it suspicious how fast this letter came out. It was like he or his people knew this would come out, so had a letter prepaid.

You don't find this suspicious?

You're probably going to ask wasn't i suspicious of this woman, yep but let there be an investigation to clear him or her.

No i did not find it suspicious.

I bet if I was accused of something like this in such a public manner broadcast all over tv, there would be a lot of peopple that would immediately come together to defend my character.

There was an attempt at investigating; she is declining to show up and give her side of the story.

Again I ask, do you think the burden of proof is on kavanaugh to prove his innocence?

originally posted by: Grambler


Again I ask, do you think the burden of proof is on kavanaugh to prove his innocence?

The burden is on both parties, the accuser and the accused.

originally posted by: 2smart4u

originally posted by: Grambler


Again I ask, do you think the burden of proof is on kavanaugh to prove his innocence?

The burden is on both parties, the accuser and the accused.

Right she wrote her letter and gave her side.

He denies it and says he will testify in front of the senate about it.

She is refusing to go in front of the senate.

So what more can kavanaigh do?

"Prove you didnt assault this woman 30 years ago, and an undetermined location, at an undetermined date, with undeteremined people there"

He said he didnt do anything like this, so what more can he do?