New SCOTUS Judge

Status
Not open for further replies.
Avenatti making more promises, saying he has evidence and supporting witnesses.

The lawyer issued a stern warning on Friday to Republicans on the committee, tweeting, “Warning - If the committee advances the nomination this afternoon, my client and I are going to thoroughly enjoy embarrassing @ChuckGrassley @LindseyGrahamSC @tedcruz and all of the other GOP members on the committee this weekend when her story is told and is deemed credible,” Friday afternoon.

“And if you think I am bluffing, you have not been paying attention the last 7 months. I don’t traffic in nonsense. I traffic in facts and evidence,” he added.
Click to expand...

Linky.

It seems there are people banking their reputations and careers all over the place.
 
Tsukasa Buddha said:
The Judiciary Committee is requesting the White House instruct the FBI to investigate. The scope:

"The supplemental FBI background investigation would be limited to current credible allegations against the nominee and must be completed no later than one week from today."
Click to expand...

My questions:

- Who decides what a 'credible allegation' is? I assume that 'credible' would include Ford, but what about Ramerez or Swetnick? I could easily see the White House directing the FBI to ignore those other 2 allegations completley

- Will the results of the investigation be released to the public, or will we be stuck with a heavily redacted document or a summary that the republicans can claim exonerates kavanaugh (even though the results show the allegations are credible and probably truthful)
 
The Ford investigation is mostly done.

The Yale gal story will not take long to investigate.

Avenatti is a grifter and will probably refuse to let his client cooperate
 
theprestige said:
Seems like the FBI would need a week just to determine which allegations were credible enough to warrant an investigation.
Click to expand...
Errr... not really.

We've seen enough evidence (through credible media sources) that the 3 main figures (Ford, Ramerez and Swetnick) all have elements that contribute to their credibility (earlier disclosures to 3rd parties, individuals within Kavanaugh's social circles describing similar events, etc.) Maybe there are additional allegations which AREN'T credible that just haven't been publically announced, but those 3 fit the bill.

The only question is, will the White House have all 3 investigated or sweep one or 2 under the rug.

And would it really matter? Say the White House complies, and the FBI spends the next week investigating. At the end of the week, they've uncovered nothing conclusive. What happens then?
Click to expand...
Again, we go with a preponderance of evidence. We shed light on the credibility of the individuals involved. And if enough credible evidence is found that Kavanaugh is likely guilty, maybe a couple of republican senators will vote not to confirm.

Do the Never-Kavanaughs pack up their bags and go home? Does anyone actually say, "all I wanted was for the FBI to investigate. Now they've done that, and I'm satisfied."
Click to expand...
You're not just dealing with the "never Kavanaughs". Some people actually do have an interest in the truth.

I'm against Kavaunaugh because the preponderance of the evidence that's already been made available suggests he's a scuz bag.

Do we all agree that in the absence of any negative result after a whole week of investigation, Kavanaugh should indeed be confirmed to the Supreme Court?
Click to expand...
The FBI will likely not be producing an overall "thumbs up/thumbs down" report. They will likely point to factors both in favor of the rapey judge and against rapey, along with how credible each source or piece of evidence is.
 
The Big Dog said:
The Ford investigation is mostly done.

The Yale gal story will not take long to investigate.

Avenatti is a grifter and will probably refuse to let his client cooperate
Click to expand...

No, Trump is a grifter and Kavanaugh is a scumbag.
 
Busta Capp said:
I can't help but wonder what Feinstein was doing with this letter from Ford, from July to mid Sept, if it wasn't to investigate the claims in it before unleashing the knockout punch.

Why didn't she/they have the FBI investigate back when it was originally received ?
Click to expand...
Aside from the request for anonymity, do you think that Feinstein can actually order the FBI to investigate?
 
Stacyhs said:
What bothered me most about Kavanaugh yesterday in no particular order:

1. His lack of control over his emotions.
2. His anger, belligerence, aggressiveness.
3. His evasiveness on issues, most importantly re the FBI investigation.
4. His downplaying of his excessive drinking despite numerous statements otherwise by people who knew him at the time.
5. His refusal to admit that "Bart O'Kavanaugh" in Judge's book referred to him.
6. His claim that being the "ralphing winner" was connected to a "sensitive stomach" with food.
7. His claim that "boofing" refereed to "farts".
8. His claim that "Devil's Triangle' was a drinking game.
9. His claim that "Renate's Alumnius" was a sign of her "being one of the group".
10. His repeated, evasive tactic of resorting to listing all of his achievements and choir boy dedication to his studies and virginity instead of directly answering questions.
Click to expand...
I was ROFL at the excruciating twisting of truth into pretzels. My jaw-dropping moment was when he tried to press Amy Klobuchar about whether she had ever blacked out from drinking. How inappropriate, arrogant, and irrelevant could you get? Is that how he will treat the women who come to argue before him in the SCOTUS? And he went to law school?
 
The Big Dog said:
The Ford investigation is mostly done.

The Yale gal story will not take long to investigate.

Avenatti is a grifter and will probably refuse to let his client cooperate
Click to expand...

Don't forget about the new charges to come next week(from protected sources):
Kavanaugh was a serial animal abuser;
Kavanaugh was the Junior Wizard of his local KKK.
 
Busta Capp said:
You are wrong.

When asked, Ford stated that she didn't know who released the letter.
She didn't heroically jump on the grenade. Her info was "leaked."

My question involved the timing of this "leak."


If from July to Sept no Democrat thought it was worth investigating, even on their own to people who would corroborate Ford's story so they would have ammo, then why is it so important now ?
Click to expand...
Who knows who leaked it? It shouldn't have been leaked.

If it came from Feinstein, then that's a shame. If it came from some aide, with no direction to do so, that's a shame, too, but a lesser shame, one of mismanagement but not subterfuge.

None of this has to do with whether the allegation should be investigated. How Ford's allegation became public has little to do with whether this man ought to be on the highest court.
 
Last edited:
pgwenthold said:
I read today that the Wikipedia page for "Devil's triangle" was recently updated by an editor with a congressional account. Coincidentally, it now matches the description that BK gave yesterday!
Click to expand...
It totally could've been a quarters game back then, in that group. I'm not concerned about that part of his testimony.
 
Busta Capp said:
Someone may have investigated sooner and proved or disproved it long before now.

"The victim" has no info, doesn't remember much and all the people she named denied any knowledge of an incident.

Where do you think an FBI investigation is gonna lead ?
Click to expand...
Who knows, absent such investigation?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom