New York Times: White House Tells F.B.I. to Interview Anyone Necessary for Kavanaugh Inquiry
WASHINGTON — The White House has authorized the F.B.I. to expand its abbreviated investigation into sexual misconduct allegations against Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh by interviewing anyone it deems necessary as long as the review is finished by the end of the week, two people briefed on the matter said on Monday.
The new directive came in the past 24 hours after a backlash from Democrats, who criticized the White House for limiting the scope of the bureau’s investigation into President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court. The F.B.I. has already completed interviews with the four witnesses its agents were originally asked to talk to, the people said.
Mr. Trump said on Monday that he favored a “comprehensive” F.B.I. investigation and had no problem if the bureau wanted to question Judge Kavanaugh or even a third accuser who was left off the initial witness list if she seemed credible. His only concerns he said, were that the investigation be wrapped up quickly and that it take direction from the Senate Republicans who will determine whether Judge Kavanaugh is confirmed.
Read more ....
Update #1: White House authorizes FBI to expand Kavanaugh investigation: report -- The Hill
Update #2: FBI Instructed To Expand Kavanaugh Probe After Trump Clashes With Reporters -- Zero Hedge
WNU Editor: A few thoughts .....
This is going to be a short investigation. Professor Ford does not even know the year or place where this alleged assault occurred. And the witnesses that she named say that it did not happen. So where do you begin?
I am not sure about this .... Yale classmate to tell FBI of Brett Kavanaugh's 'violent drunken' behavior (NBC). More here .... READ: Yale classmate's full statement on Kavanaugh (CNN). Judge Kavanaugh graduated at the top of his class .... in my experience people who drank a lot and who are violent never succeed in university. Certainly not making it to the top of your class.
This is why Republicans rejected him before the primaries, thereby forcing him to resign .... Flake Admits He Wouldn't Have Sabotaged Kavanaugh Confirmation If He Wasn't Retiring (Zero Hedge). And yes, he was an easy target .... Look who was behind the Jeff Flake elevator setup (Joe Fund, NYPost)
There are too many inconsistencies in Professor Ford's story .... Rachel Mitchell Memo Highlights Weaknesses In Ford Testimony, Exonerates Kavanaugh (Zero Hedge). More here .... Rachel Mitchell's memo is damaging to Christine Blasey Ford's case against Brett Kavanaugh (Washington Examiner).
The Crazies are now coming out .... Brett Kavanaugh denies ANOTHER sex assault claim – this time by a 'Jane Doe' who accuses Supreme Court nominee of 'raping me several times' and hitting her after offering a ride home from a party and saying: 'No one will believe you' (Daily Mail). And then there is this sick editorial cartoon (link here).
This makes me laugh. He had a different approach when he investigated Hillary Clinton .... ‘Little lies point to bigger lies’: How James Comey thinks the FBI could investigate Kavanaugh (Washington Post).
This poll is bogus .... Poll: Nearly half of voters say Kavanaugh shouldn't be confirmed (CNN). When the person being polled is then told that none of the witnesses are corroborating Professor Ford's accusations, two-thirds say he should be confirmed.
I expect a confirmation vote will be done in the following week, and there is a very real chance that 2 Republican Senators may say no. In that case .... this will become the rallying cry for Republican voters this November.
9 comments:
I think I had earlier today read the GOP planned to rush through a vote sooner than you noted. A rallying cry indeed for the GOP...but also for many women upset by these doings and thus on the opposite side in this issue.
What, then, will elected women in the Senate do? they belong to the tribe called GOP and to the tribe called Women...they will have to choose which "trumps" the other
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/29/politics/ford-friend-cooperate-fbi/index.html Not everything you are pointing out is true. Be careful of the spin. Especially with that prosecutor That questioned her. It was weak because it was he said she said And that was all there was. No prosecutor would prosecute with that. But they are investigating more.
Common you don't care what justice or truth is. .you'll just do whatever cnn and nsnbc tell you to do that day
Unless and until there are severe consequences for falsely accusing someone of such crimes, people will do it for political gain.
Ms. Ford after 36 years is 100% sure it was Cavanaugh. Anyone who ever was a victim of something (I was) knows that your own mind tells you otherwise. You will never be 100% sure -especially not after decades. She probably dreamed it. Have you considered that? Many women have rape fantasies and dream of this. And she was apparently quite Sexually active. But no. ..it's the man that needs to prove his innocence. Society has come a long way, from equality under the law to women get your jobs by law and get society's trust and belief by law. If you doubt a woman, women will come bully you in an elevator and then say YOU are an aggressive man. You are entitled. Not them. Just wow
Text messages suggest Kavanaugh wanted to refute accuser's claim before it became public
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it’s probably a duck.
If Dr. Ford is for real, she is an indictment of the letters P H D. And for parents to allow a 15 year old girl as vacuous as their now 57!!! year old daughter still appears to be, go out on the town unchaperoned[sp] has to be in violation of some regulation concerning child welfare.
She has become an unbelievable bundle of contradictions.
Blackdog I think you missed many telling subtleties.
If someone were making claims about someone that they did not believe to be accurate about them, they knew their accuser had the media fully behind them, and they knew the accusations that they believe to be inaccurate could severely hurt them and their family in every way imaginable, it would be reasonable to seek to refute the accuser's claims before they go public. Such actions would hardly be suspicious. Instead they would be indicative of a prudent person seeking to protect their family and their livelyhood. It's never a good idea to absorb a crushing blow from a powerful adversary and hope you're going to be able to respond.
Quite right. And if he wouldn't have defended himself forcefully they'd have painted him like this: "Kavvanaugh's weak response likely show of guilt" (and of course wrapped in an "analysis" or "opinion" hit piece to avoid a defamation law suit ).. if you vote left this year, we'll have the end of law and justice
Post a Comment