Brett Kavanaugh now under FBI investigation

[Pavlov]

The FBI investigated the Anita Hill case because it had jurisdiction under federal law. It does not have jurisdiction in this case. That is the truth and not a lie or being misinformed. But again, this whole line of arguing by Democrats is only believable to those who want to believe. What is the FBI going to find in a case where the accuser can't name the place or the time or how she got there or where she went after and that she told no one and the only person who has ever said that she named him before the letter to Feinstein was her husband? Kavanaugh and the two others named have said they have no recollection of the events. Ford has said everything that she remembers. If not, it would be leaking. To be honest, the only one that needs investigating is Ford because if she can't get more details, she has a paper thin allegation and they can't do anything with it.

Great, then you should really want the FBI to investigate.

What are you afraid of?

[RandomGuy]

That's good.

Waiting for her conditions of "fairness".

Fairness would be Brett serving jail time for felony assault. His crime has no statute of limitation in Maryland.

You probably don't care about fairness to the victim though. He has the magic "R" behind his name after all.

Just guessing.

[cd98]

Great, then you should really want the FBI to investigate.

What are you afraid of?

I'm not afraid of anything. I've said they should get the local authorities that have jurisdiction to investigate. That actually makes sense. But getting the FBI to investigate is just a Democrat ploy to try and delay the vote. Knowing that he has passed several background checks and knowing that outside of this story that appears crafted, he has no similar allegations against him, I'm confident that he should be voted in as a Supreme Court justice. Now, if Ford actually provides some reason to investigate other than some well-crafted, but evidence-less story, then I'm all ears to reconsider.

[Winehole23]

"it is entirely possible" = pure speculation

[cd98]

Fairness would be Brett serving jail time for felony assault. His crime has no statute of limitation in Maryland.

You probably don't care about fairness to the victim though. He has the magic "R" behind his name after all.

Just guessing.

Let the local authorities investigate him for attempted felony assault. But when there turns out to be no evidence and the investigation is dropped, are you going to acknowledge that you were wrong in assuming guilt by being a member of a different political party?

[RandomGuy]

They've already done a background check. But as I've said many times, how does the FBI investigate a claim that supposedly only three people know about that has no location, no time, no date, no explanation for how Ford got there and no explanation for how she left or where she went. They have no physical evidence for DNA. All they can do is ask Kavanaugh and the three others if they did it and they say they have no idea what Ford is taking about and it is made up. So they go to Ford, and she can only give them what we have so far. End of story. Nothing to "investigate." You act like there is concrete evidence. It is entirely possible that this is a political hit with a story crafted so that it gets an allegation out that can never be proved or disproved, especially because Ford just hired a Democrat political operative and she has been working in concert with the Dems on asking for a hearing, then saying a hearing shouldn't happen, then saying that the FBI should investigate first.

Possible, but highly unlikely.

Her story does not fit the normal pattern of false reports, and women in general do not decide to brave death threats for such things.

The more likely explanation, the one that requires fewer assumptions overall, is that she is telling the truth.

Waiting a long time, having inconsistencies in her story, and other things are all fully consistent with someone who is telling the truth. I have provided a raft of scientific research on this.

Occam's razor suggests she is simply telling the truth.

[RandomGuy]

"it is entirely possible" = pure speculation

It is entirely possible that she is a paid martian operative, because the martians need to have us distracted for their invasion.

If I had a dollar for "it is entirely possible" followed by some bull conspiracy theory...

[RandomGuy]

Let the local authorities investigate him for attempted felony assault. But when there turns out to be no evidence and the investigation is dropped, are you going to acknowledge that you were wrong in assuming guilt by being a member of a different political party?

Guilty people have charges dropped all the time for lack of evidence. "not guilty" does not mean "innocent".

[RandomGuy]

Let the local authorities investigate him for attempted felony assault. But when there turns out to be no evidence and the investigation is dropped, are you going to acknowledge that you were wrong in assuming guilt by being a member of a different political party?

I assume guilt because the odds of the woman lying are low based on the scientific research we have available on such things, and the theory that someone might want to endure death threats and a ruined career to potentially perjure herself to be implausible on its face.

Doesn't really matter which political party the guy is from. That only matters to conservatives, it seems.

[Pavlov]

I'm not afraid of anything. I've said they should get the local authorities that have jurisdiction to investigate. That actually makes sense. But getting the FBI to investigate is just a Democrat ploy to try and delay the vote. Knowing that he has passed several background checks and knowing that outside of this story that appears crafted, he has no similar allegations against him, I'm confident that he should be voted in as a Supreme Court justice. Now, if Ford actually provides some reason to investigate other than some well-crafted, but evidence-less story, then I'm all ears to reconsider.

For some reason you are afraid of an FBI investigation and demand they not investigate.

[Winehole23]

just because something can't be prosecuted to a legal certainty doesn't mean it never happened, or that the allegation is frivolous.

[ducks]

Why is Monday not fair ?

[RandomGuy]

I don't have one. I would like for him to say how it was all paid.

Under oath.

Too scary for Darrin?

That is, indeed a good question. How did the hundreds of thousands of dollars for his gambling debts magically appear?

[ducks]

just because something can't be prosecuted to a legal certainty doesn't mean it never happened, or that the allegation is frivolous.

Should we do this to all rape allegations just not fords

[Pavlov]

Why is Monday not fair ?

Why is an FBI investigation not fair?

[cd98]

Possible, but highly unlikely.

Her story does not fit the normal pattern of false reports, and women in general do not decide to brave death threats for such things.

The more likely explanation, the one that requires fewer assumptions overall, is that she is telling the truth.

Waiting a long time, having inconsistencies in her story, and other things are all fully consistent with someone who is telling the truth. I have provided a raft of scientific research on this.

Occam's razor suggests she is simply telling the truth.

Actually, it fits the profile of a well-crafted accusation that is impossible to prove or disprove. Is it a coincidence that she has acted lock stop with the democrats and just hired a democratic operative? Normally allegations from rape are not orchestrated by the democratic party.

[cd98]

just because something can't be prosecuted to a legal certainty doesn't mean it never happened, or that the allegation is frivolous.

That's true. But the timing on this one sounds fishy.

[Winehole23]

what would it harm to wait a day or two?

we had an eight member Supreme Court for over a year after Scalia died.

[Winehole23]

That's true. But the timing on this one sounds fishy.

your spidey-sense tingles?

how persuasive.

[CosmicCowboy]

I assume guilt because the odds of the woman lying are low based on the scientific research we have available on such things, and the theory that someone might want to endure death threats and a ruined career to potentially perjure herself to be implausible on its face.

Doesn't really matter which political party the guy is from. That only matters to conservatives, it seems.

A psychology professor in California? If anything, this probably enhanced her career. If in fact there actually were death threats they should definitely be investigated and the idiots arrested. Hopefully she can remember when and where she was when she heard them.

[Pavlov]

A psychology professor in California? If anything, this probably enhanced her career. If in fact there actually were death threats they should definitely be investigated and the idiots arrested. Hopefully she can remember when and where she was when she heard them.

Yeah, death threats are always a boon to one's career.

Dumbass.

[cd98]

I assume guilt because the odds of the woman lying are low based on the scientific research we have available on such things, and the theory that someone might want to endure death threats and a ruined career to potentially perjure herself to be implausible on its face.

Doesn't really matter which political party the guy is from. That only matters to conservatives, it seems.

You assume guilt because you are a Democrat. Statistics don't matter. What matters is in this case, what evidence does she have of her claim? That's all that matters. Not a percentages of women that come forward and not percentages of false reports. What does she have to substantiate her allegation? At this point, a story that cannot be proven or proved false. It's the perfect story to hang up a judicial nomination. And since Ford is working lock stop with Democrats, I assume that is the case. She adds some evidence, and I'll give it another look.

[ducks]

Why is an FBI investigation not fair?

Can not prosecute waste of time and funds and manpower

[Winehole23]

Should we do this to all rape allegations just not fords

why not?

we're talking about an appointment with life-tenure.

[Pavlov]

You assume guilt because you are a Democrat. Statistics don't matter. What matters is in this case, what evidence does she have of her claim? That's all that matters. Not a percentages of women that come forward and not percentages of false reports. What does she have to substantiate her allegation? At this point, a story that cannot be proven or proved false. It's the perfect story to hang up a judicial nomination. And since Ford is working lock stop with Democrats, I assume that is the case. She adds some evidence, and I'll give it another look.

Great, in the meantime have the FBI investigate. Since you think she's lying about it all, she'll pay the price.