Trump says FBI should not probe allegations against Kavanaugh

JacksinPA said:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-allegations-against-kavanaugh-idUSKCN1LY2K5

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The FBI should not investigate a California professor’s allegations of sexual assault against U.S. Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump said on Tuesday, adding that he wanted his nominee to be confirmed quickly.

Asked whether he would ask the FBI to open its background check on Kavanaugh, Trump told reporters at the White House: “I don’t think the FBI really need to be involved because they don’t want to be involved. If they wanted to be, I would certainly do that, but as you know, they say this is not really their thing.”
===========================================================
Trump's rush to push through this nomination has him holding his thumb on the scales of justice. I don't know if there are any historical parallels for this type of interference, but Kavanaugh, if confirmed, should have an asterik after his name to signify the improper moves behind his nomination.

Click to expand...

It's not a rush at all - the nomination is following a normal timeframe, even a bit slower than other recent nominations. Democrats are trying to slow the process, in hopes that they can block it, for political reasons.

How do you think he's 'holding his thumb on the scale of justice'? Even in your quote, he noted that the FBI had already reviewed the matter.

JacksinPA said:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-allegations-against-kavanaugh-idUSKCN1LY2K5

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The FBI should not investigate a California professor’s allegations of sexual assault against U.S. Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump said on Tuesday, adding that he wanted his nominee to be confirmed quickly.

Asked whether he would ask the FBI to open its background check on Kavanaugh, Trump told reporters at the White House: “I don’t think the FBI really need to be involved because they don’t want to be involved. If they wanted to be, I would certainly do that, but as you know, they say this is not really their thing.”
===========================================================
Trump's rush to push through this nomination has him holding his thumb on the scales of justice. I don't know if there are any historical parallels for this type of interference, but Kavanaugh, if confirmed, should have an asterik after his name to signify the improper moves behind his nomination.

Click to expand...

Reuters' title;

*Trump says FBI should not probe allegations against Kavanaugh*

And your C&P;

*Asked whether he would ask the FBI to open its background check on Kavanaugh, Trump told reporters at the White House: “I don’t think the FBI really need to be involved because they don’t want to be involved. If they wanted to be, I would certainly do that, but as you know, they say this is not really their thing.”*

Contradict each other, Trump didn't say what Reuters' title says he says.

JacksinPA said:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-allegations-against-kavanaugh-idUSKCN1LY2K5

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The FBI should not investigate a California professor’s allegations of sexual assault against U.S. Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump said on Tuesday, adding that he wanted his nominee to be confirmed quickly.

Asked whether he would ask the FBI to open its background check on Kavanaugh, Trump told reporters at the White House: “I don’t think the FBI really need to be involved because they don’t want to be involved. If they wanted to be, I would certainly do that, but as you know, they say this is not really their thing.”
===========================================================
Trump's rush to push through this nomination has him holding his thumb on the scales of justice. I don't know if there are any historical parallels for this type of interference, but Kavanaugh, if confirmed, should have an asterik after his name to signify the improper moves behind his nomination.

Click to expand...

If you want justice, you should be demanding the state of Maryland take action. If there is a crime, it is a state crime, not Federal.

hanger4 said:

Reuters' title;

*Trump says FBI should not probe allegations against Kavanaugh*

And your C&P;

*Asked whether he would ask the FBI to open its background check on Kavanaugh, Trump told reporters at the White House: “I don’t think the FBI really need to be involved because they don’t want to be involved. If they wanted to be, I would certainly do that, but as you know, they say this is not really their thing.”*

Contradict each other, Trump didn't say what Reuters' title says he says.

Click to expand...

mainstream outlets have gone the way of Buzzfeed in order to steal readers back via clickbait headlines. They are fighting for their lives.

Captain Adverse said:

Well according to this report:

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...tor-he-didnt-attend-party-of-alleged-incident

Then there is this report:


Sen. Orrin Hatch says Kavanaugh denied being at party described by accuser Ford | Fox News

Aside from it being a second-hand report from Hatch, and not a direct response from Kavanaugh himself, all he seems to be saying is that he never went to any party like that she describes. :shrug:

Click to expand...

So which party was he at originally, before he wasn't?

Taylor said:

Oh look, another case of a headline having little to do with what was actually said.

Click to expand...

Only if you can't actually understand the English language.

Of course such a thing would never happen on FOX News, Breitbart, or InfoWars - would it?

Skeptic Bob said:

Does that statute of limitations apply when the alleged victim was a minor?

Click to expand...

Good question.

Generally speaking statutory limitations start to run as of the day that the alleged (minor) victim attains their majority.

trouble13 said:

Personally I would love it if he used it as leverage to get everything he wants on immigration reform. Offer them a moderate left judge if they unconditionally surrender on immigration.

That would be some serious political hardball I could see trump trying. It would force the left to choose between abortion or illegals.

Click to expand...

Would a condition of that agreement be that the "moderate left judge" was confirmed before the Democrats "unconditionally surrender on immigration"?

Quite frankly, given the history of "vote deals" during Mr. Trump's tenure, I can't see the Democrats agreeing to "unconditionally surrender on immigration" WITHOUT Mr. Trump actually nominating the "moderate left judge" and BEFORE that "moderate left judge" was confirmed AND sworn in.

The odds that Mr. Trump would nominate a "moderate left Judge" and steer that nomination through to confirmation and swearing in AFTER the Democrats "unconditionally surrendered on immigration" are about as good as the odds on "Man-O-War" winning the Kentucky Derby next year (or maybe worse).

Not only that, but the Democrats know it.

TU Curmudgeon said:

Would a condition of that agreement be that the "moderate left judge" was confirmed before the Democrats "unconditionally surrender on immigration"?

Quite frankly, given the history of "vote deals" during Mr. Trump's tenure, I can't see the Democrats agreeing to "unconditionally surrender on immigration" WITHOUT Mr. Trump actually nominating the "moderate left judge" and BEFORE that "moderate left judge" was confirmed AND sworn in.

The odds that Mr. Trump would nominate a "moderate left Judge" and steer that nomination through to confirmation and swearing in AFTER the Democrats "unconditionally surrendered on immigration" are about as good as the odds on "Man-O-War" winning the Kentucky Derby next year (or maybe worse).

Not only that, but the Democrats know it.

Click to expand...

Honestly I'm not sure about the logistics but I'm sure they could manage it

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk

trouble13 said:

Honestly I'm not sure about the logistics but I'm sure they could manage it

Click to expand...

About the only way that the Democrats could be sure of receiving what they were being promised in return for their votes would be if they were to receive the full agreed "purchase price" in advance.

Mr. Trump simply doesn't do business that way. In fact he has a lengthy history of not paying the full agreed purchase price even after 100% of the goods have been delivered.

TU Curmudgeon said:

About the only way that the Democrats could be sure of receiving what they were being promised in return for their votes would be if they were to receive the full agreed "purchase price" in advance.

Mr. Trump simply doesn't do business that way. In fact he has a lengthy history of not paying the full agreed purchase price even after 100% of the goods have been delivered.

Click to expand...

That isn't completely accurate. But the fact is that it's the Republican senators that would have to be convinced, and that's likely not happening for any judge the left would accept.

However, on the other side, Democrats have a lengthy history of not following through on deals, or 'delivering the goods', especially on immigration issues. Remember when they said they would help lock down illegal immigration in exchange for amnesty?

Skeptic Bob said:

Does that statute of limitations apply when the alleged victim was a minor?

Click to expand...

You’ll have to ask a lawyer. May I suggest Corey Sparticus Booker?

JacksinPA said:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-allegations-against-kavanaugh-idUSKCN1LY2K5

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The FBI should not investigate a California professor’s allegations of sexual assault against U.S. Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump said on Tuesday, adding that he wanted his nominee to be confirmed quickly.

Asked whether he would ask the FBI to open its background check on Kavanaugh, Trump told reporters at the White House: “I don’t think the FBI really need to be involved because they don’t want to be involved. If they wanted to be, I would certainly do that, but as you know, they say this is not really their thing.”
===========================================================
Trump's rush to push through this nomination has him holding his thumb on the scales of justice. I don't know if there are any historical parallels for this type of interference, but Kavanaugh, if confirmed, should have an asterik after his name to signify the improper moves behind his nomination.

Click to expand...

Of sorts.

- After Jefferson was elected, the Federalist Congress reduced the size of the Supreme Court from six to five in order to limit Jefferson's influence over the court. A few years later, the Republican Congress repealed it and expanded the Court to seven to give Jefferson another appointment. This back-and-forth crap went on for decades.

- In 1866 the Republican Congress reduced the size of the Court from ten to seven to prevent Andrew Johnson (D) because he was actively pursuing an agenda to subvert Reconstruction after the Civil War. This meddling with the Court over partisanship came to a halt with the Compromise of 1877, which took race off of the political playing field. Coincidence? No.

- February 1937: Roosevelt (D) proposed to add a new justice for every judge over the age of seventy, with a maximum court size of fifteen. He proposed this because the New Deal kept coming up on brick walls and this would have allowed him to appoint six brand new seats. His proposal did not pass because Republicans and the Democrat-dominated Congress opposed setting this precedence. The norms of the constitution held because our elected leadership cared more about our country and less about Party "winning" for idiot constituents who really care about nothing but themselves.

All of this is considered "COURT-PACKING." It's a routine tool used by would-be autocrats and is normally found among the many failed democracies in the twentieth century. Our recent history involves the Republican-dominated Congress denying Obama's pick for consideration throughout the 2016 year (a first in American history). The GOP has been hallowed out, largely since 2008, but over the last couple decades. Idiot constituents, who care more about themselves while pretending that "America" first has meaning, now only want to "win."

And now, whatever is going on with Kavanaugh as the DNC is seemingly taking a page out of the GOP playbook. Political extremism eventually encourages political extremism.

dcsports said:

It's not a rush at all - the nomination is following a normal timeframe, even a bit slower than other recent nominations. Democrats are trying to slow the process, in hopes that they can block it, for political reasons.

How do you think he's 'holding his thumb on the scale of justice'? Even in your quote, he noted that the FBI had already reviewed the matter.

Click to expand...

Slower than recent nominees?

Garland 293 days, no vote...

JacksinPA said:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-allegations-against-kavanaugh-idUSKCN1LY2K5

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The FBI should not investigate a California professor’s allegations of sexual assault against U.S. Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump said on Tuesday, adding that he wanted his nominee to be confirmed quickly.

Asked whether he would ask the FBI to open its background check on Kavanaugh, Trump told reporters at the White House: “I don’t think the FBI really need to be involved because they don’t want to be involved. If they wanted to be, I would certainly do that, but as you know, they say this is not really their thing.”
===========================================================
Trump's rush to push through this nomination has him holding his thumb on the scales of justice. I don't know if there are any historical parallels for this type of interference, but Kavanaugh, if confirmed, should have an asterik after his name to signify the improper moves behind his nomination.

Click to expand...

Considering Trump actually brags about sexually assaulting women, and brags about being a perverted Peeping Tom, why would we expect him to demand an investigation into the exact type of behaviour he brags about doing?

JacksinPA said:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-allegations-against-kavanaugh-idUSKCN1LY2K5

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The FBI should not investigate a California professor’s allegations of sexual assault against U.S. Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump said on Tuesday, adding that he wanted his nominee to be confirmed quickly.

Asked whether he would ask the FBI to open its background check on Kavanaugh, Trump told reporters at the White House: “I don’t think the FBI really need to be involved because they don’t want to be involved. If they wanted to be, I would certainly do that, but as you know, they say this is not really their thing.”
===========================================================
Trump's rush to push through this nomination has him holding his thumb on the scales of justice. I don't know if there are any historical parallels for this type of interference, but Kavanaugh, if confirmed, should have an asterik after his name to signify the improper moves behind his nomination.

Click to expand...

How the **** would he know what the FBI wants? I also don't think the FBI wants him speaking for them. Hasn't anyone told the Idiot in chief that only he can order the FBI to investigate these allegations? If the FBI doesn't become involved it will only be because the President doesn't want the FBI to investigate.

Captain Adverse said:

The FBI should not be involved.

The allegations involve a STATE crime and if anyone needs to investigate it should be the local police.

However since in Maryland the crime appears to be a fourth degree sex offense, with a statute of limitations of one year from the alleged crime, what would there be to investigate?




Of course her story seems to be "modifying" after each telling, sooo...

Click to expand...

Some experts believe that Kavanaugh can still be charged on Maryland law. The way described the incident with Kavanaugh on top holding his hand over mouth so that she couldn't call out for help could be interpreted as being attempted rape. For that charge in Maryland there is no statute of limitations.. So if Kavanaugh is confirmed the possibility that he could be charged with a crime at some point down the road could be hanging over his head.

Atomic Kid said:

Some experts believe that Kavanaugh can still be charged on Maryland law. The way described the incident with Kavanaugh on top holding his hand over mouth so that she couldn't call out for help could be interpreted as being attempted rape. For that charge in Maryland there is no statute of limitations.. So if Kavanaugh is confirmed the possibility that he could be charged with a crime at some point down the road could be hanging over his head.

Click to expand...

...and some people believe (including myself) that SHE added that little "gem" of a descriptor exactly because otherwise without it there is no chance in hell he could be charged with anything other than a 4th degree Sexual Offense. :shrug:

Still, as I pointed out it remains her naked word uttered decades after the fact; with no forensic evidence, no corroborative testimony from any people at the time the alleged incident is supposed to have occurred, and complete "loss of memory" of key facts (time, place, participants) necessary for any investigation to proceed.

No prosecutor would try this case under these circumstances. Nor is it the FBI's role to investigate. It would be the local police...except we don't know which local police would have jurisdiction.

dcsports said:

That isn't completely accurate. But the fact is that it's the Republican senators that would have to be convinced, and that's likely not happening for any judge the left would accept.

However, on the other side, Democrats have a lengthy history of not following through on deals, or 'delivering the goods', especially on immigration issues. Remember when they said they would help lock down illegal immigration in exchange for amnesty?

Click to expand...

Actually BOTH the Republicans and the Democrats have a "deal honouring record" that would get them a 60 to 63.99 rating if they were on-line retailers.

GDViking said:

Slower than recent nominees?

Garland 293 days, no vote...

Click to expand...

Again, Garland was a different situation.

TU Curmudgeon said:

Actually BOTH the Republicans and the Democrats have a "deal honouring record" that would get them a 60 to 63.99 rating if they were on-line retailers.

Click to expand...

I'd be surprised if they were that high.

IMHO, they spend way too much time making things complicated in DC. They should focus on incremental change beginning with areas of agreement.

dcsports said:

I'd be surprised if they were that high.

IMHO, they spend way too much time making things complicated in DC. They should focus on incremental change beginning with areas of agreement.

Click to expand...

That's an interesting idea.

However, if a Democrat/Republican were to make a proposal, all the Republicans/Democrats would immediately oppose it. But, if a Republican/Democrat were to make the identical proposal then all the Democrats/Republicans would immediately oppose it.