Discreet Dolls

Brett Kavanaugh and His Accuser Say They’re Willing to Testify

Previous Thread Next Thread
bver_hunter

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,005
6,927
113
Aardvark154 said:
Seemingly you don't read or don't believe what others post. The FBI will interview people, transcribe the interviews and turn the whole thing over to the Senate Judiciary Committee, but they will not be linking any dots.
Click to expand...
Given the unprecedented situation, the FBI could also employ novel tools, or create a "special" investigative team that exists across agency divisions, the former officials said.
While background checks typically take days of on-the-ground investigation, in a case this closely scrutinized, FBI leaders could decide to go full bore, assigning a slew of agents from multiple squads to wrap the probe in short time.
"They could just about drop everything else they're doing, every other background check for generals to get the next star, and cabinet secretaries and US attorneys," said Tom Fuentes, a former FBI assistant director and senior CNN law enforcement analyst. "They could wrap everything. If they want to put 500 agents on this tomorrow they could do that."
The scope of the investigation that FBI agents will undertake now is unclear.

That is why I am saying that they could connect the dots whether the allegations made by the two ladies are credible. Do not give me the nonsense that they will not be "linking any dots", as you do not know the scope as yet!!
 
D

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,501
4,911
113
Aardvark154 said:
Really, but despite this he has been a brilliant jurist for the past 12 years.
Click to expand...
Brilliant enough to not oppose the Bush administrations policy on torture when on the Bush white house staff. Brilliant indeed!

PS: It is clear from your posts that you are not against heavy drinking, counselor. Have that perchance impacted your views on Cavanaugh?
 
mandrill

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
75,927
85,674
113
Aardvark154 said:
Really, but despite this he has been a brilliant jurist for the past 12 years.
Click to expand...

Also unpleasant, overly emotional, bitchy, partisan, arrogant and given to conspiracy theories. I would hate to appear before him if his demeanour at the Senate hearings is anything to go by.

I appreciate that it's a 50:50 he said / she said and he might be unfairly attacked, if he is the honest one and Ford is lying or remembering inaccurately. But he has a shitload to learn about grace under pressure, patience and humility.

I am very unimpressed with the guy and I have been avoiding the coverage and trying to keep a clear mind about it. But every time I see him speaking on the Net, he just strikes me as one entitled spiteful little fucker.
 
F

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,128
22,003
113
oagre said:

Also unpleasant, overly emotional, bitchy, partisan, arrogant and given to conspiracy theories. I would hate to appear before him if his demeanour at the Senate hearings is anything to go by.

I appreciate that it's a 50:50 he said / she said and he might be unfairly attacked, if he is the honest one and Ford is lying or remembering inaccurately. But he has a shitload to learn about grace under pressure, patience and humility.

I am very unimpressed with the guy and I have been avoiding the coverage and trying to keep a clear mind about it. But every time I see him speaking on the Net, he just strikes me as one entitled spiteful little fucker.
Click to expand...
Yup, well said.
His approach has been DARVO.

Even if he's innocent he doesn't have the temperament and his conspiracy theory rant should just disqualify him.
 
D

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,501
4,911
113
oagre said:

Also unpleasant, overly emotional, bitchy, partisan, arrogant and given to conspiracy theories. I would hate to appear before him if his demeanour at the Senate hearings is anything to go by.

I appreciate that it's a 50:50 he said / she said and he might be unfairly attacked, if he is the honest one and Ford is lying or remembering inaccurately. But he has a shitload to learn about grace under pressure, patience and humility.

I am very unimpressed with the guy and I have been avoiding the coverage and trying to keep a clear mind about it. But every time I see him speaking on the Net, he just strikes me as one entitled spiteful little fucker.
Click to expand...
In other words, a typical lawyer
 
B

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
30,365
4,570
113
bver_hunter said:
Given the unprecedented situation, the FBI could also employ novel tools, or create a "special" investigative team that exists across agency divisions, the former officials said.
While background checks typically take days of on-the-ground investigation, in a case this closely scrutinized, FBI leaders could decide to go full bore, assigning a slew of agents from multiple squads to wrap the probe in short time.
"They could just about drop everything else they're doing, every other background check for generals to get the next star, and cabinet secretaries and US attorneys," said Tom Fuentes, a former FBI assistant director and senior CNN law enforcement analyst. "They could wrap everything. If they want to put 500 agents on this tomorrow they could do that."
The scope of the investigation that FBI agents will undertake now is unclear.

That is why I am saying that they could connect the dots whether the allegations made by the two ladies are credible. Do not give me the nonsense that they will not be "linking any dots", as you do not know the scope as yet!!
Click to expand...
Anyone else find this humorous?
 
O

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,555
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
Insidious Von

Insidious Von

My head is my home
Sep 12, 2007
39,798
7,284
113
Aardvark154 said:
Really, but despite this he has been a brilliant jurist for the past 12 years.
Click to expand...
Who am I to question your profession Aardie, he probably is a brilliant jurist. But the strategist in me thinks his judgement is poor. He made two vey bad mistakes. He shouldn't have gone on FoxNews and claimed he was a virgin, that makes him look like he was desperate to shuck his greenhorn. The fact that she escaped reinforces that. And taking Trump's advice regarding his testimony smacks of poor judgement. Coming on like a raging fop makes him look undignified and weak to half the population. Does he not realize that Trump is only loyal to himself and wont hesitate to thrown him under a cement truck if it makes him look good?

And the biggest question, when he drinks, who does he think he is?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BprKOz8P1Jg
 
A

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,768
3
0
Well enjoy Justice Barrett.


Of course there will some slight pleasure in seeing Margaret Atwood go into total meltdown.
 
oldjones

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,489
11
38
K Douglas said:
I couldn't disagree with you more.
Kavanaugh has already been through 6 FBI investigations. He sat on the 2nd highest court in the land for 12 years. He had to go through an extensive background check.
The onus is on Blasey Ford to prove her allegations. Simple. She has no corroborative evidence. In fact she has 3 witnesses who are all on record as stating they don't recall any such event. She can't even name a date, time or place that this happened.
FBI investigation what a FARCE. There's literally nothing to investigate. Which is why the FBI has already stated that they didn't want to touch it.
But now here we are. Nothing is going to change. It will be just delayed a week and more taxpayer dollars will be sucked up. The media is lapping this up.

BTW did anyone see Sheila Jackson Lee pass an envelope to one of Blasey Ford's lawyers at the hearing?
Click to expand...
I think you have it completely backwards on the onus thing: He's not the accused in a criminal trial; he's the applicant trying to impress the Hiring Committee at his job interview. It is all on him.

The only onus on Ford is to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but. It was apparent she did, complete with signalling the gaps where she had no recall. The Committee has every right and reason to weigh partial facts and possible evasions, as well as attitudes and emotions, in determining its recommendation to the Senate about the fitness of the candidate for a lifetime appointment to the highest position in the Judicial Branch of the United States government.

Although it certainly would discredit their own high office and responsibility, it is also entirely proper under the Constitution, for them to decide for entirely partisan reasons, irrespective of actual merits. Exactly the same as any citizen voting in the privacy of their polling booth. If they pick him for no other reason than, "he's one of us and talks our language", then that's the rung the country must want to be stuck on.

And the standard it will have to live with, when deciding right and wrong.
 
Last edited:
mandrill

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
75,927
85,674
113
Aardvark154 said:
Well enjoy Justice Barrett.
Of course there will some slight pleasure in seeing Margaret Atwood go into total meltdown.
Click to expand...

Don't count your chickens before the eggs have hatched.

As a supporter of the party which has fucked up every legislative initiative it has attempted the last two years, aside from a ludicrous tax break for the wealthy, I wouldn't be optimistic that they can even accomplish appointing a USSC justice despite having control of the Senate and the WH. They're making a prime fuck-up of the current appointment procedure and it should have been a slam dunk.

Not only is the GOP corrupt and incompetent to a degree not seen outside the Third World or Post Soviet Russia, but the Dems are running circles around them at every opportunity.
 
mandrill

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
75,927
85,674
113
A

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,768
3
0
oagre said:

Don't count your chickens before the eggs have hatched.
Click to expand...
Given what has happened with 36 year old accusations emerging out of the woodwork, and being treated as absolutely true even though there is no corroboration. I will be very surprised, presuming Judge Kavanaugh is not confirmed, if the next SCUS nominee is not a woman. Further it is utter lunacy to expect the President not to nominate a judicial conservative.
 
oldjones

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,489
11
38
Aardvark154 said:
Given what has happened with 36 year old accusations emerging out of the woodwork, and being treated as absolutely true even though there is no collaboration. I will be very surprised, presuming Judge Kavanaugh is not confirmed, if the next SCUS nominee is not a woman. Further it is utter lunacy to expect the President not to nominate a judicial conservative.
Click to expand...
Corroboration?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Previous Thread Next Thread
Toronto Escorts
Top Bottom