The Kavanaugh Conspiracy: Demands To Reopen Investigation Ignore Both Key Facts and Law

Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the renewed calls for the investigation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh.  The often over-heated coverage however omits key factual and legal context for a new report.

Here is the column:

It appears Washington has another conspiracy to make this a long, hot summer. Indeed, the conspiracy du jour has all of the favorite elements: a corrupted FBI, a powerful protected person, buried evidence of possible crimes. If it sounds like a Russia investigation redux, think again.

For years, Democrats in Congress defended the FBI over its mishandling of the Russia collusion investigation. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) denounced those alleging a “sham investigation” as “spreading a false narrative” for political purposes.

Now, however, Whitehouse and other Democrats are denouncing the same FBI as having run a “sham” investigation. The disclosure that the FBI received thousands of uninvestigated “tips” against now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh also led columnists to characterize the investigation as anything from “laughable” to “lying” in a confirmation cover-up. And Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick may have set a record for “sham” references (six) in a single short column, declaring that “because the shamming … happened openly, the revelation that it was shamatory feels underwhelming. We have become so inured to all the shamming in plain sight that having it confirmed years later barely even feels like news.”

It may not “feel like news” because the most newsworthy aspect of this controversy is, instead, the renewed — mostly implicit — call to remove Kavanaugh from the Supreme Court. And that’s not even news. It’s nonsense.

The furious allegations of a cover-up began this week with a letter from Assistant FBI Director Jill Tyson to Sens. Whitehouse and Chris Coons (D-Del.). The letter was a delayed response to an earlier inquiry on the investigation of tips given to the FBI during Kavanaugh’s heated confirmation process. To call the letter “delayed” is an understatement by a measure of years. Whitehouse and others are correct in objecting to the fact that these senators asked two years earlier about these tips and any investigation. There is no excuse for failing to respond to members of Congress on such questions, particularly given their oversight responsibilities of the FBI and the Department of Justice (DOJ).

Tyson disclosed that the FBI “received over 4,500 tips, including phone calls and electronic submissions,” after reopening the Kavanaugh investigation following allegations of sexual assault by Christine Blasey Ford. Only a few tips were investigated; instead, the FBI sent them to the Trump White House.

That led to media assertions that FBI Director Christopher Wray may have “lied” when he said the investigation was “by the book.” The problem is, it may well have been by the book — or at least by the memorandum, a memorandum written by the Obama White House.

The DOJ conducts background investigations pursuant to a March 2010 memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the DOJ and the White House. Under the Obama MOU, the FBI promptly notifies the “requesting entity” if it learns of new information before a candidate assumes a nominated position that would raise questions about the “candidate’s suitability or trustworthiness.” Clearly, the FBI can investigate any substantial evidence of a crime. However, the background investigation itself is not a criminal investigation.

Kavanaugh’s first background investigation was completed and disseminated on July 18, 2018, after interviews with 49 individuals over five days. On Sept. 12, 2018, a Democratic senator sent the FBI information regarding allegations of sexual assault. That was almost a week after the confirmation hearing for Kavanaugh had ended. The FBI sent the information to the Trump White House the next day and, on that day, the White House asked the FBI to perform a limited investigation on the new allegations. The FBI spent six days investigating and interviewing 10 more people. It did so, again, not as a criminal investigation but as “an investigative service provider” under the Obama-era MOU’s terms. It also took the unprecedented step of creating a “tip line” to facilitate the process and ultimately sent those tips to the White House, also under the Obama MOU.

For those of us who encouraged further investigation, it already was known that the FBI was swamped with often anonymous “tips” during that heated week. The confirmation process became a ragefest among senators, the press, and the nominee himself. Reporting that the FBI received 4,500 tips is hardly surprising. Indeed, the number seems modest, given the coverage of the tip line and advocacy groups pushing for new allegations. Moreover, given the short extension of the Senate for the “supplemental investigation,” no one could possibly believe the FBI would run down most, let alone all, of the tips. Finally, there is no indication of whether there were credible claims of criminality or wrongdoing in this torrent of tips.

There is a valid concern about the propriety of referring tips to the White House about its own nominee. However, this was the system created under the Obama-era MOU. If someone accused Kavanaugh of rape, prosecutors could have investigated that crime. Indeed, state prosecutors offered to open an investigation if Ford filed a complaint. But this was a background investigation done in an artificially short time frame. The reason for that rush is that either Ford or Democratic senators waited until after the confirmation hearings to make this bombshell disclosure.

Despite the supplemental investigation by the FBI and the exhaustive investigations by the media and advocacy groups, there still is no concrete evidence against Kavanaugh that would support criminal investigation, let alone prosecution. It certainly is possible that one of these tips disclosed clear criminal conduct, but it also would likely mean that the witness never revealed such evidence to the police when it occurred or the Senate during Kavanaugh’s 2006 appellate nomination or before his initial Supreme Court nomination hearings ended.

Of course, Democrats are not the only ones keeping such speculation alive. In a recent interview, former President Trump said of Kavanaugh: “I saved his life. He wouldn’t even be in a law firm. Who would have had him? Nobody. Totally disgraced. Only I saved him. … I saved his life, and I saved his career.”

However, the demands for the removal of Kavanaugh this week are hardly new, including an ongoing petition drive. Calls to impeach Kavanaugh or prosecute him for perjury arose shortly after his confirmation from then-Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Texas), and others.

It is exceptionally unlikely that Kavanaugh could be charged with perjury — let alone prosecuted — over allegations that likely occurred decades ago. The anti-Kavanaugh activists know that. But that is not their point. Some are surprisingly honest about using this latest controversy to renew efforts to pack the court with a liberal majority. Columnist Joan McCarter noted, for example, that impeachment would take time but that the court can be packed now to rid it of “dangerous ideologues, and a few corrupt ones.” While Kavanaugh is investigated, she said, Democrats should “dilute the Trump/RNC/Koch/Federalist Society’s malign influence and balance it out with four or six or however many additional justices.”

That would do more than “dilute” the court. It would destroy it.

These advocates are trying to create new precedent to reopen confirmation hearings and expose justices to ongoing investigations with shifting majorities in Congress. The fact that many of these critics refer to Kavanaugh’s conservative rulings only emphasizes their raw political motives.

There are legitimate questions to raise about the FBI’s delayed response and even a possible need for new background investigation procedures for nominees. But the Senate declaring open season on a sitting justice would do great harm to both institutions.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can find his updates on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

178 thoughts on “The Kavanaugh Conspiracy: Demands To Reopen Investigation Ignore Both Key Facts and Law”

  1. I wonder how many know that some people admitted their rape accusations against Kavanaugh were lies. Politically motivated lies. The “rape train” and “rape on a boat” come to mind.

    People regularly say that women should be believed, because why would they possibly lie? Women lie just like men do.

    Political poisoning tempted a great many people to make up a terrible accusation that could have easily ruined Kavanaugh’s career and personal life, all because they opposed a conservative on the Bench. Machiavelli knows no ethics or morals.

    While Trump was gauche to brag about “saving Kavanaugh”, past predicts future. In the Age of Cancel Culture, if the Left had successfully smeared Kavanaugh with decades-old accusations, and prevented his confirmation, it indeed would have ruined his career.

    Most people don’t keep diaries for decades. If you asked me where I was 30 years ago, I’d have absolutely no idea. Most people don’t have the FBI investigating, which does create pressure on the dishonest to admit they lied.

    Most men would just have been hopelessly ruined, unable to defend themselves.

    It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not, provable or not. All that matters is that Kavanaugh suffer damage, and to gain support for expanding the Court in order to pack it with Leftists. This move would obviously be called a threat against Democracy and a justifiable reason to riot if Republicans did the same.

    1. No, Karen, the “threat against democracy” is an ever-expanding minority (Republicans) shoving far-right judges onto the court of last resort for a lifetime appointment. How about refusing to allow Obama’s nominee to even get a vote because of the proximity of the election, then doing a 180 when the tables were turned? But for such mendacity, Barrett wouldn’t be on the court. Gorsuch is sitting in Merrick Garland’s seat. Kavanaugh was not properly investigated, but was shoved onto the court because Republicans were afraid of what a complete investigation would disclose. Another “threat against democracy”: Trump being in the WH to make these nominations in the first place, since his fake presidency was procured by cheating with the help of Russia, and Republicans refusing to impeach him twice.

      1. The prosecutor’s investigation exposed collusion between Biden, the DNC, British, and Russian and Ukrainian special and peculiar interests. With Trump’s threat to end Obama’s world war (wars without borders, transnational terrorism, catastrophic anthropogenic immigration reform) from Tripoli to Damascus to Baghdad to Kiev forced an acutely phobic, democratic/dictatorial response.

      2. No the threat to democracy is the idiotic beleif of those like you that the courts are a legislative branch of government.

        They are not. The courts do not exist to write laws. They do not exist to correct laws.
        They exist to apply the law as written – whether they like it or not – EXCEPT where that law is unconstitutional, in which case they are there to invalidate it.

        Simple, Aply the law as written when it is constitutional.
        Throw it out when it is not.

        This should be uncontroversial. It should not be a left/right issue.

        There should be no such thing as a far right or left judge.

        There should only be judges that follow the law and constitution and those that should be removed.

        As to Garland – he has rapidly proven as AG that he never should have been nominated.

        Garland has publicly equated support for limited govenrment with domestic terrorism.

        It would be hard for me to immagine a stupider or more anti-constitutional position to take.

        No one in their right mind wants such a person on the supreme court.

      3. Kavanaugh was followed by ACB – would you prefer that we toss Kavanuagh and replace him with ACB and follow ACB with another Gorsuch.

        I have no attachment to Kavanaugh. I would be happy to see him gone.

        But whether you like it or not, circumstances resulted in Trump getting 3 supreme court appointments.

        So far Gorsuch is pretty stellar – not perfect but really good.
        ACB is too new to be sure but looks like another Roberts alocolyte,
        Kavanaugh is “baby roberts”.

        Overall Trump appears 1:3 in his appointments.
        Democrats lucked out.

        But go ahead – go after Kavanaugh.

        I am hard pressed to think of a way to drive the supreme court to a strong pro 4th amendment position than to go after Kavanaugh.

        You of course presume you will get him.

        That either you will find something – because you ALWAYS beleive that those you politically oppose are inherently evil.

        Kavanaugh must be a rapist in your mind – Trump appointed him.

        It is not possible in left wing nut world for decent people to disagree with them.

        I do not like Kavanaugh – but I do not think he is a rapist. Nor is there credible evidence that he is.

        But if you want to Red Pill Kavanaugh and the rest of the court – GO FOR IT.

    2. Karen says:

      “It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not, provable or not. All that matters is that Kavanaugh suffer damage, and to gain support for expanding the Court in order to pack it with Leftists. This move would obviously be called a threat against Democracy and a justifiable reason to riot if Republicans did the same.”

      Republicans do the same:

      It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not, provable or not. All that matters is that Republicans claim the election was stolen, and to gain support by packing the Congress with Republicans.

      1. Jeff, I have no wish to stop you or democrats or the left from doing stupid things and engaging in self harm.

        If you actually think dredging up Kavanaugh again is a good idea – GO FOR IT.

        You need not convince me.

        All I have pointed out REPEATEDLY is that you seek to violate the 4th amendment – a very unwise choice when you are dealijng with a supreme court justice. But again GO FOR IT.

        I would further note that you FAILED to come up with anything the first time. The Senate failed, the FBI failed, the press failed.

        You are gambling that in these 4500 tips you will find one that not only did the FBI not investigate – but that the press and the Senate democrats did not either, AND that it leads somewhere.

        Establish that Kavanaugh is a rapist – and NO ONE will defend him. ‘

        But fall short of that objective – and it is not KAvanaugh that loses – but YOU.
        What happens when you do this and come up empty ?

        Kavanaugh is NOT Trump – people will be far less tolerant of your abuse of Kavanaugh’s rights of your invasion of his privacy of your defamation.

        I could be wrong – the country has tolerated far more idiotic nonsense from the left than I would have imagined.
        Though I would note that trust in the press, in government in most of our institutions, in democrats is at record lows.
        Nearing single digits in some cases.

        If you wish to destroy it further – GO FOR IT.

        I am fully prepared to gamble that you will find nothing and only further damage yourself in the process.

        I think that is an excellent bet.

        If you think I am wrong – GO FOR IT.

  2. Kavanaugh will be targeted and unfairly attacked for the rest of his time on the court and he is cracking under the pressure. Trump should have cut him loose.

    1. It is not ethical to stand by and watch an innocent man be destroyed. In addition, cowardly stepping aside would only embolden the savage mob to do this more often.

      Just fake rape accusations even time a conservative is appointed. Bring out the women in red cloaks to claim that Christians want to enact the anti-Christian bigotry of Handmaid’s Tale, when it’s the Left who uses force and control against people.

      1. I felt strongly during the confirmation hearings that they should hang tough, never back down –like Clarence Thomas when he declared he would rather die than withdraw. I felt that way about Kavanaugh then, but, as John Says put it,”he appears to be far too much of another Roberts” (who cannot step down soon enough).

        Let’s pray Kavanaugh digs deep and finds the strength to stay true to his convictions in the face of the most destructive, outrageous, grotesque character assassination smear campaigns we’ve seen — maybe ever — in the cesspool that is Washington DC.

      2. Kavanaugh was never proven innocent. The sheer number of uninvestigated leads puts serious doubt on the notion that Kavanaugh could be innocent. You might be able to make a plausible argument for this if all 4,500 leads were investigated, but they weren’t because Republicans are afraid of the truth. At the time, there were 25 additional witnesses who begged to be allowed to testify, but Republicans blocked them. So, Kavanaugh is far from proven innocent.

        1. Guilty until proven innocent beyond a reasonable doubt is the directive of witch hunts and warlock trials, the abortionists’ religion to relieve perceived “burdens”, to deny women and men’s dignity and agency, and reduce human life to a property. It is the modern jurisprudence of a depraved mind that passes judgments and applies labels for plausible rather than probable cause.

          1. This is an investigation into someone’s background for the purpose of a LIFETIME appointment to the court of last resort in America, not a criminal trial. Dr. Ford came forward and exposed what Kavanaugh did to her when he was in high school. She still pays the price for telling the truth. Remember all of the sexual references and other less-than-stellar remarks attributed to him? Who knows what the 25 witnesses who were denied the opportunity to testify would have said, much less the 4,500 because Trump and Republicans decided to conceal this information. If Kavanaugh was a choir boy, then he had nothing to worry about. Neither Gorsuch nor Barrett had such dirt in their profiles. The purpose behind such investigations is to look into the character of someone making crucial decisions on the law, not for criminal prosecutions. There are NO assumptions involved at all. Americans have the right to know all about someone being placed in a position of such responsibility, especially when nominated by someone who lost the popular vote and who cheated his way into office.

            1. That is irrelevant.

              Government GAINS power in a legitimate criminal investigation.

              They have LESS power absent a credible criminal allegations.

              Neither Kavanaugh nor Garland have a right to a seat on the supreme court.

              But they and we ALL have a right to a government constrained by the constitution.
              That includes a government that is NOT free to investigate individuals for non-crimes.

              This is pretty trivial. The FBI may investigage where there is reasonable suspicion of a crime.
              Government as a whole may NOT investigate any person where there is not.

        2. “Kavanaugh was never proven innocent. The sheer number of uninvestigated leads puts serious doubt on the notion that Kavanaugh could be innocent.”
          ——————-

          “Bill Clinton” was never proven innocent.

          “Gov. Andrew Cuomo” was never proven innocent. The sheer number of uninvestigated leads puts serious doubt on the notion that Cuomo could be innocent.

          “Joe Biden” was never proven innocent.

          Gov. Northam of Virginia was never “proven innocent.”

          Who else among the Democrat Party has “never been proven innocent”?

          We can all see how people like Natacha think, which is exactly why her kind (authoritarians like Kamala Harrris, for example) should never hold positions of power over others.

            1. “Dr. Ford came forward and exposed what Kavanaugh did to her when he was in high school. She still pays the price for telling the truth.”

              She lied. She made sh*t up. And she was paid a cool million or so for her troubles. Plus given some meaningless awards for her courage. All of it pure rubbish.

              1. Prove she lied. Who paid her the “cool million”? Last time I heard, she was still receiving death threats, she still had not returned to her university teaching position, and she and her family were forced to move from their home. Just because Republicans and Kavanaugh deny what she claimed, this does not make her out to be a liar, but you are an alt-right media disciple, so whatever they tell you is what you believe.

                1. No one needs to prove Ford lied.

                  It is possible that she is telling the truth. That not only Kavanaugh but something like 5 other witnesses are all lying.

                  But the odds of that are small.

                  Divorce this case from politics and you could convict Ford of perjury in much of the country.

                  You are correct – it is not possible to prove beyond ANY doubt that ford is lying.

                  But it has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

                  That is what it means when there is no corroboration for your testimony, where all the people you identify as at an event deny the event ever happened.

            2. Correct, Justices serve for life, and are appointed not elected. This is to isolate them from political presures.

              Exactly as you are trying to apply.

              Justices have a simple job.
              First determine if in the cases brought before them the constitution was followed,
              and where the laws are found constitutional that the law was followed.

              I partly agree with Turley that the workload for the Supreme court is too high.
              But not with his remedy.

              The Supreme court is not and should not be the adjudicator of every CASE in the country.
              The vast majority of cases that SCOTUS hears should be resolve by an inferior court.

              I would propose a “superior court of the united states” – an appelate court above the circuit courts of appeals and below the supreme court.
              The Superior court could be made of rotating judges from each of the circuits. The superior court would be in all circumstances the final court of ordinary appeals. They would resolve conflicts between circuits.

              The supreme court workload would then be reduced substantially, and consist primarily of remedying constitutional errors by the superior court.

              1. “The supreme court workload would then be reduced ”

                John, if the Supreme Court did its job, they wouldn’t be so overloaded. They are supposed to decide constitutionality. If a law is not constitutional, they should throw it out, not give hope that the court will bend to make it constitutional as Roberts did with ObamaCare. AS soon as Congress gets the point, they will be more careful in writing the bills, and lower courts would be more cautious about reading things into the Constitution that do not exist.

                The Supreme Court makes sure things are Constitutional not to impart their feelings about what laws should or should not exist. The left doesn’t have any affinity towards the Constitution, so it threatens the court and tries to politicize it.

                Almost everything that comes before the court was due to poorly written laws or judges that decided politics was more important than the law.

        3. “Kavanaugh was never proven innocent. ”
          Correct, it is nearly impossible to prove anyone who is accused innocent.
          The standard in the US is proof beyond a reasonabkle doubt of guilt.

          The standard for a warrant is proof that rises to probable cause – no warrants were issued – therefore probable cause did not exist.
          The standard to open an investigation is reasonable suspicion.

          “The sheer number of uninvestigated leads puts serious doubt on the notion that Kavanaugh could be innocent.”
          The opposite is true.
          The FBI is free – even obligagted to investigate where there is reasonable suspicion.
          The fact that they did not means that all these uninvestigated tips did not meet the reasonable suspicion standard.

          Logic is clearly not your forte.

          While you can beleive that somehow Trump directed the FBI to not investigate – despite the EVIDENCE that the FBI had gone rogue and was not paying any attention to Trump, the FBI is currently in control of Biden – and is STILL free to investigate – if reasonable suspicion existed.

          “You might be able to make a plausible argument for this if all 4,500 leads were investigated”

          Do you think that the FBI should investigate a tip that claims Kavanaugh is the bride of Frankenstein ?

          The vast majority of tips received by tip lines are bat$hit.

          regardless if you wish to delude yourself into beleiving going forward on this is a good idea – GO FOR IT.

          “but they weren’t because Republicans are afraid of the truth.”
          What truth – you have not as of yet offered any truth to be afraid of.
          Do you honestly think that there was some tip on the FBI tip line that went beyond what the press reported that blew up spectacularly ?

          “At the time, there were 25 additional witnesses who begged to be allowed to testify, but Republicans blocked them.”
          All of which got to “testify” in the press and failed spectacularly.

          Ford did badly, and danced close to being prosecuted for perjury.
          Why would you want to allow 25 more people to fup their lives ?

          “So, Kavanaugh is far from proven innocent.”

          Correct, what was proven is there was no credible case.

          Ford made an allegation – but ultimately there was not a single bit of corroboration.

          She could not identify the place the event took place, the time it happened, and the people she claimed were present all claimed this party never occured.

          The fact is that it was very nearly proven that Fords account was impossible.

      3. Karen.

        I do not think that further inquiry by the left would harm Kavanaugh – would “destroy” him.

        In fact I think further investigation of this is so stupid for democrats and so beneficial to individual rights that I hope thy continue to go forward with this stupid thing.

        If there is real credible evidence that Kavanaugh committed a crime – he should be impeached.
        The odds of that are zero. That is not something that could have been successfully hidden from a voracious and hostile press since 2019.
        They did everything they possibly could to take him out then. And FAILED.

        They have nothing but emnity.

        I would like to see democrats go after a sitting supreme court justice. Espeically in violation fo the 4th amendment.

        The courts have nearly destroyed the 4th amendment – what better way to get it back than to make its importance PERSONAL to all of them.

        I do not like Kavanaugh. I think he is too much of a “roberts boy” and we would be better off with left wing nbuts on the court than either of them.

        But the left going bat$hit over this might “red pill” Kavanaugh – and probably other justices.
        Little is more effective in driving the importants of individual rights through then persecution.

        So I hope democrats go for it.

    2. I do not like Kavanaugh. and I am not happy with him so far as a justice. He appears to be of the same cloth as his mentor Roberts.

      Trump could have and should have done much better.

      But the Kavanuagh hearings were an “insurrection” – democratic senators and representatives incivted violence to disrupt the legitimate proceedings of the senate and no one was prosecuted, no one was impeached.

  3. The speaker of the house sets the agenda for the house. Love to see Trump become speaker. Could you imagine his agenda?

    1. First of all, Americans rejected Trump, twice, but the first time he found a way around the negative polls with a little help from Russia. He was found out, so the second time he was rejected, he started the “stolen election” rhetoric, even before all of the ballots were counted. He still won’t stop lying about it, and the Republicans are going along with it because they know they have nothing to offer the American people, they are consistently losing support, but Trump’s disciples are good for at least 30%, which is more than they can get on their own. You can only gerrymander so much and can only suppress the votes of Democrats so much, but it’s not enough to win elections. All Republicans do is obstruct the Biden agenda, even though most Americans approve of Biden, approve of COVID relief, and approve of proposed infrastructure projects. Yesterday, Trump told Republicans not to follow through with their agreement on infrastructure, despite agreeing to do so publicly at a news conference. Let’s see if they obey Trump or the will of the American people. Trump also is trying to scuttle success overcoming the pandemic, again making it all about him, claiming that Americans are rejecting the vaccine because Biden is not legitimately the President, so they don’t trust him or the vaccine advice, which doesn’t even make sense. The motivation for discouraging vaccination is personal: he want to cause Biden’s agenda to fail, and doesn’t care what the consequences will be. He is actually stoking fear of the vaccine and supporting those who won’t listen to public health officials, the result of which will not just be unnecessary deaths and illness, but the economy may not recover. Children may be forced to wear masks or return to internet learning. Restaurants, bars, gyms, theaters and indoor sporting arenas may have to limit customers and spectators. All because Trump lost an election and refuses to accept the will of the American people. So, he keeps trying to maintain power. Republicans go along with it because they have nothing to offer the American people.

      Trump’s “agenda”: praise, flattery, adulation, attention, all about him, HIM, H I M, and how wonderful, how beautiful, how amazing, how powerful, how smart, he is. Trump didn’t have an “agenda” after he cheated his way into the White House, other than to connive ways to get attention, praise, flattery and to park his fat ass in front of cameras whenever and wherever possible. You don’t really understand a narcissistic personality disorder, do you? You must not, because I really don’t understand how anyone can fail to see that Trump couldn’t care less about anything other than himself, wielding power and garnering praise, attention and adulation. All he does at the vainglory rallies is brag about his alleged “success” and how he got cheated out of a second term, despite the fact that dozens of courts rejected his claims, there is no evidence, and the “Cyber Ninjas” are on their third review of the Maricopa County ballots (why do you suppose this is?). Recall that the “Cyber Ninjas” promised results before they ever started. I don’t know how you can overlook the damage he did to America: botched pandemic, constant lying, causing Americans to doubt the validity of elections and the advise of public health officials, trashing the economy, damaging our relationships with allies and enemies alike, and stoking racism, xenophobia and misogyny. You want more of this? What the hell is wrong with you? Are you that deep into your discipleship that you don’t see these things?

      1. Why do we have to continue to deal with this nonsense.

        Collusion delusion is DEAD.

        If you want elections by popular vote – change the constitution.

        In football the team that scores the most points through touchdowns and field goals wins.
        Not the team with the most yards or that controlled the ball most of the time.

        Our constitution provided for election by popular vote for a single office – Representative.
        Later we amended the constitution to allow election of senators by popular vote.

        The 2020 election like EVERY prior election was conducted to be decided by electoral college votes – not popular votes.

        Candidates based their campaigns – for over 200 years on trying to win the electoral college – not the popular vote.

        But as is typical of those on the left – when the rules do not suit you – you seek to change them AFTER THE FACT.

        Mailin voting has been unconstitutional in nearly all states for over 100 years – because of the massive fraud that occured in the 19th century when ballots floated arround in public before the election.
        Mailin voting remains unconstitutional in all those states.

        If you do not like that – change those constitutions.

        Instead by hook or crook, through corrupt governors or courts or sometimes duped legislatures you violated state constitutions and managed to conduct elections in one of the stupidest possible ways.

        Many of us were pointing out the disaster that was coming when democratic primaries in NJ in May resulted in over 200,000 mailin votes being tossed as invalid.

        While the recent mess in the NYC mayor race was not specific to mailin voting – it should pretty much make clear that huge election errors are not only possible but even commonplace. i doubt the NYC mayors race debacle was fraud – though it certainly was incompetence.
        But Fraud is not an impossible explanation.

        I have gone over and over and over the established facts regarding the disasterous 2020 election – well only SOME of them – there was so much wrong with the conduct of that election that it would take a book to cover it all.

        We now KNOW that about 75,000 more votes were counted in AZ than there were people who voted.
        Maybe that is not fraud. Though that is highly likely. There is no possibility it is not massive error that means the election result is meaningless.

        We KNOW that tens of thousands of ballots were copied because the originals were purportedly damaged.
        But we either do not have the originals or the originals were ALSO counted. This is again either large scale error or large scale fraud.

        We KNOW that the AZ sec state voter registration database was hacked shortly before the election.
        We know that the security of the voting machines was so poor that a script kiddie could have hacked them in 10 minutes and a true black hat in a minute or less. Evidence of fraud ? Probably not. Evidence of incompetence – undeniably. Evidence the results are not trustworthy – completely. Evidence that this election was inarguably the least secure in my lifetime – certainly.

        The GA audit is barely started – only about 60000 out of 2 million ballots have been audited, yet already hundreds of absolutely identical ballots have been identified. There is no decent explanation for this. It is near certain fraud. But the only innocent explanation is guargantuan error of a type that is not supposed to be possible.

        If you want election results to be trusted – run trustworthy elections.

        Raffensburger – your hero and a scorned republican is now seeking to decertify the entire Fulton county election board – on the grounds of historic incompence and systemic fraud. The only question is why wasn’t raffensberger speaking out about the obvious in November.

        You rant about gerry mandering.

        What are you talking about ? There constitution mandates that congressional districts have equal numbers of people in them.
        There is absolutely no other constitutional guidance. The courts have subsequently added a few other criteria – compactness as an example
        But beyond that there are no criteria for constructing districts. The constitution delegates the task to state legislatures – without further criteria.

        But lets look further – there is quite litterally no objectively correct means to allocate congressional districts.
        You can personally prefer one way and I another. But there is no means to demonstrate that there is a way that is correct.
        The entire concept DOES NOT EXIST.

        The primary gerry mandering issue in the country today is that democrats have CHOSEN to self gerrymander themselves into cities.
        I beleive every one of the top 100 US cities today is super majority democrat. The consequence of this is that every one of our failing cities has been run nearly exclusively by democrats for decades – sometimes a century. A republican getting elected in the top 100 US cities is nearly impossible. That is true of local offices, as well as state and federal ones as well.

        No republican is ever going to defeat pelosi or AOC.

        All the cities in the US have self gerrymandered themselves into supremajority democrat enclaves.

        But this comes at a consequence – those parts of the country outside the top 100 cities are almost entirely read or pink.

        Republicans did not create that – democrats did. Just as US cities are nearly exclusively self gerrymandered democrat the exact same choices – the choice of democrats to congregate in cities has resulted in nearly all the rest of the country being republican.

        All the democratic nonsense about Gerry mandering is, is an attempt to undo the consequences of their own choices.

        I have no problem with democrats self gerrymandering in cities.

        Nor does the constitution. In fact the constitution somewhagt presciently anticipated this.

        While it did not predict this republican democrat split – the republican party did not exist when the constitution was written.

        Our founders explicitly understood and SOUGHT to have political power centers throughout the country.

        They expected that some parts of govenrment would be exclusively controled by rural farmers and serve their interests and others would be served by ubran dwellers and serve their interests.

        The construction of states throughout US history has been a constant Gerrymander. The civil war was atleast partly in response to a change in the way states were going to be gerrymandered into existance.

        Anyway you have this constant left wing nut idiotic argument – that anything that precludes the results you desire is inherently wrong.
        That is not so.

        Ultimately you are NOT arguing against gerrymandering – only seeking to do so in a different way – one that will produce the outcomes YOU desire.

  4. Everyone seems to be getting lost in the weeds about this. The only thing that matters is, like the original Blasey-Ford story this is merely the left’s desperate attempt to prevent a SCOTUS reversal of Roe v. Wade. Is it a coincidence that abortion is the main event of the upcoming SCOTUS calendar? When will we learn that these ‘allegations’ ALWAYS come up when the left perceives there is an imminent threat to their Sacred Cows.

    1. There is no “Left vs. us” when it comes to abortion rights. The majority of Americans support a woman’s right to choose, and do NOT want Roe v. Wade to be reversed. The majority of Americans are not members of the Cult of Trump, which is what the Republican party has become, so there’s no “we vs. the Left” here. Causing you to believe this myth is part of the indoctrination of alt-right media.

      1. Rights are not determined by polls.

        In fact a right is by definition something that you have even if the majority or the govenrment do NOT wish you to have it.

        Few disagree that women have the absolute right to their own bodies.

        The fundamental issue with abortion is that a fetus is NOT a womans body any more than it is the fathers.

        It is inarguable a different creature.

        For 9 months it is dependent on the woman for life, it is IN her body, but it is NOT her body – any more than it is the fathers body.

        Put simply a woman’s rights extend to and include the removal of the fetus from her body – even if that might result in the fetus’s death. That right exists from fertilization through to birth.

        But the right to remove a a separate being from inside and dependence on her body is NOT the same as a right to kill it.

      2. 20% of americans think abortion shoudl be illegal under all circumstances.
        32% think it should be legal under all circumstances.

        48% think it should be legal under some circumstances and illegal under others.

  5. When is Christine Blasey Ford being charged with Perjury since all she did was lie about everything

  6. So we’re back to investigating Brett Kavanaugh Yale University gang rapes

    There was a party. Nobody knows how they got there, or when they left. No reports were filed with Yale University security or local police.

    A lucky Yale student was found not guilty in a rape trial 2018:

    A Yale student who had been suspended by the university was found not guilty on of sexually assaulting a fellow student, in a rare college rape accusation to be tried in the courts. The verdict laid bare seemingly gaping divides in the national reckoning around sexual consent and assault.
    Over several grueling days on the witness stand in a New Haven courtroom, the woman described what she said was her rape by the accused student, Saifullah Khan, 25, on Halloween night 2015. The testimony, in open court, offered a glimpse into the kinds of encounters that are more often described behind closed doors, to university panels or among friends.

    Mr. Khan’s lawyers worked relentlessly to discredit the account of the woman, who was not identified by name in the arrest warrant application. They asked repeatedly how much she had to drink, and how she could claim not to remember certain details, such as how she arrived back at her dorm room, but remembered others, such as the alleged assault itself. They parsed her text messages with Mr. Khan, asking if she had not been flirting with him in the days before the incident. They showed off her Halloween costume, a black cat outfit, and asked her why she had not chosen a more modest one, such as “Cinderella in a long flowing gown.”

    1. That is an incredibly long winded way of trying to claim Kavanaugh was guilty of anything without a single shred of evidence.

      Innuendo is clever.

  7. (OT)

    The Case of the Seditious Sheep

    “The fluffy white sheep were constantly harassed by wolves, who tore down their houses, ate their food and even sprayed poison gas. It became too much, and 12 sheep who had tried to defend their village were forced to flee by boat. But they were captured and sent to prison.

    “That story was told in a children’s book published last year in Hong Kong. The sheep represented 12 activists arrested at sea while trying to escape to Taiwan. The wolves were the Hong Kong police.

    “On Thursday, the police arrested five leaders of the group behind the book, a speech therapists’ union, accusing them of instilling hatred of the government in children.”

    “Hours later, in another move against opposing voices, four senior editors and executives of Apple Daily, a pro-democracy newspaper that was forced to close last month, were arraigned and denied bail. They are accused of colluding with foreign powers under a sweeping national security law that Beijing imposed on Hong Kong last year.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/22/world/asia/hong-kong-children-book-arrests.html

    Every single American corporation doing business with China, every single politician and pundit who kowtows to China — they all have this blood on their hands.

  8. The worst part of all of the hyperventilating is that all 4500 tips were provided to the senators at the time of the hearings. How can there be a cover up, when they timely had what they allege to be the cover up? This is pure kabuki theater, to distract from something else.
    From CNN, “A Democratic Senate staffer affiliated with Judiciary Committee acknowledged that the entire universe of tips was provided to senators at the time . . .”

  9. This all about Sheldon Whitehouse getting caught belonging to racist and exclusionary clubs. Whenever a Democrat (or even republicans sometimes) get into trouble they tack hard to the left. Think about Gov Northum in VA or Cuomo in NY. Leftism is a vaccine against being tossed for bad behavior.

  10. If anything demands a corruption investigation, it’s this:

    “China Initiative Cases Dismissed”

    “The federal government filed motions to dismiss charges against five Chinese researchers accused of lying on their visa applications about affiliations with the Chinese military last week.”

    “The government claims that more than 1,000 researchers affiliated with the Chinese military left the U.S. shortly after the charges were filed last summer, according to The Wall Street Journal.:

    https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/07/26/prosecutors-drop-cases-against-scientists-accused-hiding-military-ties

    And that is how the kleptocratic Biden family repays its debts.

  11. Here we go again…he said she said…and who’s lying?…and nobody gives a damn…just a total waste of tax payer money…instead of doing their job like adding a balanced budget and a term limits amendments they just keep showing the world how much they HATE each other…every person I know has a checkered background if you dig deep enough…not one human lives a perfect life…do you think the founding fathers were perfect?…far from it…at 72 I know a ton of people and not one young person today would go into law enforcement or politics…they stay away from corrupt social media, government, police…they don’t even want to have kids…they have dogs and cats instead…they would never send their kids to law school…medicine yes…very very sad to watch the USA fall apart…self-destruction/government suicide…can it be fixed???…God only knows!!!…but I have serious doubts…

      1. Opposing Kavanaugh politically – and the nonsensical character assassination done by the left are two different things.

        I would not have nominated, voted for nor am i happy with Kavanaugh.

        But the lunatic behavior of the left regarding his nomination completely discredits them.

  12. Seems our friends on the Left care not to address the Obama MOU and its results.

    I wish the Good Professor had instructed us on the change the Obama MOU contained compared to the previous arrangement between the FBI and the Presidents before Obama.

    Having done several Background Checks in the past….one is verifying the information given by the Nominee or Applicant and also developing additional persons to be interviewed as well as for any information that would rise to criminal conduct or other conduct that would be a reason for comment.

    What the Professor fails to remind us in detail is how useless the vast majority of the “Tips” were…..as without any way of identifying people with direct knowledge of activities mentioned in the Tips….and no way to discover documentary evidence….how is the Investigator supposed to report any findings?

    A side note….if that same MOU is in effect…..then Republicans must now use the same tactic on Biden Nominees….get on the Tip Line (does it still exist I wonder) and levy all manner of allegations against every Nominee….go low folks….make every baseless accusation possible.

    Then when the FBI does the right thing (as they always do….right?) then when they merely forward them to the White House….we can say the same thing about their Confirmed appointments.

    What say we begin with Merrick Garland the Attorney General…..and Austin the SecDef….and each of the Cabinet Members….and demand Impeachment of all. of them.

    Sounds fair to me!

    1. Garland has been AG for a very short time.

      In that time he has destroyed any sympathy that I ever had regarding his nomination to the supreme court.

      This man is not qualified to be a partisan AG much less a supreme court justice.

      Garland is also making obvious AG Barr’s failure.

      Barr was determined to depoliticize the DOJ and FBI.

      That was an abject failure and ultimately all he did was politically harm his boss and republicans.

      Does anyone expect that Garland will stand up to the children running the whitehouse ?

      Does anyone expect that he will not actually anticipate the political prosecutions they want and go after them BEFORE he is asked ?

      the DOJ has just ended the prosecution of Chinese spies on the eve of the start of trial.

      Yet under Trump they prosecuted a Russian college student for being pro-gun and sleeping with someone in the NRA.

      1. John say, Barr actually politizied the DOJ. He ran it as Trump’s personal law firm.

        Let’s not forget that it was the White House that pressured the FBI to a limited investigation of Kavanaugh. It was not done as a criminal investigation, but a limited expansion of his background check.

        Turley conveniently leaves out this import fact.

        “ Yet under Trump they prosecuted a Russian college student for being pro-gun and sleeping with someone in the NRA.”

        They prosecuted a Russian intelligence agent who was seeking to influence the NRA. Maria Butina was not a Russian college student.

        1. “Barr actually politizied the DOJ. He ran it as Trump’s personal law firm.”

          For example….???

          1. O do not agree with Barr on many issues. But i admire his attempts to restore integrity in DOJ and FBI
            But he FAILED.

            When republicans take back the executive in 2024 – the entire top tier of the federal government MUST be fired.

            Integrity and those running the government today are entirely incompatible.

            1. Joe Biden. Kamala Harris. Tony Blinken. Jake Sullivan. Susan Rice. Merrick Garland. Tony Fauci….yikes, yikes, yikes, and god help us.

              THESE are the beyond awful people currently in charge who are all in WAY over their heads. The country cannot ‘rest assured’ about ANYTHING with such incompetence running the White House.

        2. “Barr actually politizied the DOJ. He ran it as Trump’s personal law firm.”

          Svelaz – BS from you as usual.

          Barr was more independent as an AG than he actually should have been – the DOJ is NOT an independent branch of government.
          The constitution vests ALL executive powers in the president. So long as the president seeks action from the AG consistent with the political objectives that he was elected on – and those objectives are constitutional, the AG is obligated to follow or resign.

          Barr did neither. In investigation after investigation claims that Barr was Trump’s toady have proven false.

          More recently it turns out that every single action regarding Laffeyette park in June was exactly as Barr testified.

          Only the DC police used tear gas and the clearing of the park had nothing to do with Trump.

          Further Barr refused to involve the DOJ in allegations of election fraud – allegations which are proving increasingly TRUE.

          Where was the DOJ regarding the hundreds – and likely thousands of duplicate ballots that were counted in GA ?
          Where was the DOJ regarding the almost 100,000 more ballots in AZ than there were voters ?
          Where was the DOJ on the completely fraudulent recanvass in GA were 60% of tallies were significantly off ?

          “Let’s not forget that it was the White House that pressured the FBI to a limited investigation of Kavanaugh. It was not done as a criminal investigation, but a limited expansion of his background check.”

          This is something like the 5th FBI background check Kavanaugh had undergone. He previously had a top secret code word clearance,
          this claim is ludicrous.

          Why exactly do you think that the FBI should have found an allegation that was never made publicly (or privately) over 35 years ?

          Is it the job of the FBI to find people from 35 years before that Kavanaugh had no known relationship to, who themselves never previously disclosed a relationship too ?

          I have had an FBI investigation for a top secret security clearance.

          Kavanaugh was vetted extremely well.

          The fact that the FBI did not investigate what is essentially decades old gossip that did not even circulate prior to just before he was likely to get approved is only troubling to left wing nuts.

          Swalwell was sleeping with a Chinese spy – he still holds not only his office, but security clearances and membership of committees that sleeping with chinese spys should preclude.

          With Swalwell at BEST we have proven poor judgement in the immediate past.

          With Kavanaugh you have gossip about what MIGHT be poor judgement by a drunken teen almost 4 decades ago.

          I do not expect much of an FBI investigation into that.

          “They prosecuted a Russian intelligence agent who was seeking to influence the NRA. Maria Butina was not a Russian college student.”

          Both false and irrelevant. Butina WAS a college student. She was NOT a russian agent, she WAS however a russian gun enthusiast and a gun enthusiast – even a foreign one seeking to “influence” a US private corporation is perfectly legal.

          John Oliver seeks to influence americans all the time.

          You keep trying to sell this total idiocy that foreigners are not allowed to voice oppinions on anything in the US.

          That is just complete and total idiocy.

          While we now know that Putin actually wanted Clinton to defeat Trump. Had Putin sought to run actually good campaign adds supporting Trump – that is called PERSUASION – and the US both can not and should not attempt to constrain ANYONE’s efforts to persuade private actors – including voters. Again John Oliver seeks to do that all the time.

          Butina was even free to attempt to influence actual lawmakers – so long as she did not bribe them or blackmail them.

          The current DHS secretary was litterally BORN in Cuba and now determines US policy towards Cuba – telling freedom loving Cubans to NOT do as he did and escape. While many of us think that is hypocritical – the FBI is not hunting him down.

          You conflate political disagreement with criminality.

          There is absolutely nothing wrong with anyone trying to persuade others to a position that YOU are at odds with.
          Nor is there something wrong – if that person is a foreigner, nor is there something wrong even if that person is an actual agent of a foreign government.

          1. John Say,

            “ Further Barr refused to involve the DOJ in allegations of election fraud – allegations which are proving increasingly TRUE.”

            That’s patently false.

            The allegations you use as proof have already been debunked long ago. All that is being brought up is more unfounded conspiracy theories based on ignorance of the process.

            “ Why exactly do you think that the FBI should have found an allegation that was never made publicly (or privately) over 35 years ?”

            John, you’re falling victim to your own ignorance. Back then it was extremely difficult for women to accuse someone of rape or sexual abuse, especially involving a well liked student. The trauma of the alleged incident is being brushed aside as if it was only a simple matter of lodging a complaint, in a time when women were not taken seriously, for such accusations. This was made clear during the debate surrounding her allegations and why it took so long.

            There WERE people who could directly corroborate her allegations that were not interviewed. People who had first hand knowledge of the incident were ignored.

            “ Both false and irrelevant. Butina WAS a college student. She was NOT a russian agent, she WAS however a russian gun enthusiast and a gun enthusiast – even a foreign one seeking to “influence” a US private corporation is perfectly legal.”

            You are correct Butina was a university student. However, merely being a student is not proof that she was not an agent for the Russian government. For years, countries including Russia and China have used their citizens who study in the U.S. as an intelligence-gathering resource.

            She did plead guilty to being a foreign agent and her attempts at influence was not limited to the NRA.

            https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/582532/

            “ John Oliver seeks to influence americans all the time.”

            John Oliver is an American citizen. Oliver was naturalized as a US citizen on 13 December 2019.

            It’s one thing to discus issues on tv. It’s another to seek to influence government officials as a foreign agent.

            “ You keep trying to sell this total idiocy that foreigners are not allowed to voice oppinions on anything in the US.”

            No John I have not been saying that at all. Seeking to influence policies and offering opinions are two very different things. You’re trying to put words in my mouth.

            Butina was in a position to blackmail a conservative political activist who had access to higher leadership individuals.

            “ While we now know that Putin actually wanted Clinton to defeat Trump.”

            What is the proof of this claim?

            1. Obviously they were not debunked “long ago” – nearly everything I have cited was uncovered recently – in the last few weeks.

              While there is much more to go – there will with near certainty be an audit in PA, The GA audit is barely started – but it is already exposing real fraud. There are differences between the AZ and GA audits – the AZ audit is in many ways more thorough – the GA audit is a private party audit as a result of an election lawsuit and is being supervised by the court which is NOT allowing direct access to ballots which the AZ audit had. That said the GA audit is of Fulton county – which even Raffensberger is now moving to decertify as Fulton county has a long history of corrupt elections. While Maricopa county is in many ways a political mess, but does not have a history of election corruption that I am aware of.

              Regardless the AZ preliminary results are not only the results of an actual audit, but the auditors have testified to their findings under oath.

              Further the entire AZ audit was live streamed while it was going on.
              Review the video yourself and see if you can find anything wrong with the audit.

              The AZ audit is now in the analysis stage – numerous significant problems have been found, but sufficient analysis has not be done to assert fraud – rather than incompetence or error.
              Many of the problems found are highly likely fraud, and significant fraud will likely be eventually proven.

              But while the GA audit is not very far along – they have found clear evidence of fraud.
              They have found hundreds of identical ballots from the approximately 60,000 they have reviewed so far,
              So that you are clear – they are working with very high resolution scans – the court would not allow them direct access to ballots,
              and they are finding exact matches between scans that have no possible explanation aside from fraud.

            2. To be clear I have NOT repeated claims from 2020 and early 2021 – though you are incorrect those have NOT been debunked,
              Until the past 4 months those have not been actually investigated at all.

              AZ started its audit before anyone else. The completed the initial portion just a few weeks ago.
              And they have testified under oath to preliminary findings.

              72,400 more ballots than people who actually voted according to state records.

              The AZ state department has been forced to admit that the AZ voter registration system was HACKED shortly before the election.
              This is why there is a big fight in AZ to get the Maricopa county routers – before someone destroys the evidence.

              If the State registration system was hacked – the actual election systems could have been.

              The audit demonstrated they were 18 months out of date in security updates and they could have been hacked in 10 minutes by a novice hacker and less than a minute by a black hat.

              There are also 10’s of thousands of ballots that were not printed by the state – they are either photocopies or forgeries.

              Whether you like it or not these problems are REAL. They are FACTS.

            3. If you think ANY of the claims of election problems as “debunked” then you can cite the actual evidence of that.

              In 2020 – there were thousands of sworn afadavits of election anomoalies and misconduct.
              Contra your claims these were not debunked. They were just not taken seriously.

              What is going on now is NOT afadavits. It is independent auditing.

              The audits are being conducted by experts in bank fraud. They were live streamed as well as observed by democrats and other interest groups and the findings I have cited are from testimony given under oath within the last two weeks.

            4. “John, you’re falling victim to your own ignorance. Back then it was extremely difficult for women to accuse someone of rape or sexual abuse, especially involving a well liked student.”

              Svelaz my wife was raped in 1983, approximately the same time Ford claims to have been groped by Kavanaugh.

              I strongly suspect I know 1000 times as much about sexual assault as you do. I have read “against our will”, as well as numerous other feminist tracts about rape. I was a rape counselor for a while.

              But absolutely none of that or anything you said has any bearing on what I asked.

              You are correct that an allegation of rape by a college student would have gotten far less attention in 1983 than today.
              You are incorrect that they were never made. Further weather they were made or not – most rape victims find someone to talk to about what happened to them. They may not report anything to the police but they find someone to confide in. They rarely keep it secret – even from their counselors and psychologists for decades.

              But even all that is irrelevant. The FACT is the FBI had nothing to investigate beyond what the actually did.
              There is no physical evidence 35 years later. All the FBI can do is try to corroborate Ford’s story.
              They could not. Every single detail that ford provided – and she provided very few could not be corroborated.

              Ford could not remember the day or the location – and she was not even sure of the year.

              I can tell you the exact date, place, hour, of my wife’s rape. That is not something you ever forget.
              I can remember even today every single detail of that day.

              But I will say that each person does NOT respond exactly the same. Ford’s lack of clarity and recollection does not prove she is lying.
              But it makes it impossible to investigate.

              Further Ford identified several people who were purportedly present at this party – aside from Kavanaugh.
              Every single one of them denied not just the events at the party – but that the party itself had ever taken place.

              Again this was 35 years ago. It is entirely possible that all of these people have forgotten – though they all claim to be certain.
              But it still leaves the FBI with nothing to investigate.

              The limits on the investigation did not come from the whitehouse – but from Ford herself – she gave the FBI nothing to investigate.

              Investigations are not magic. They stop when there is nothing more to investigate.
              Many allege crimes are never solved – some never happened. When dealing with the distant past it is extremely rare to be able to make a case.

              “The trauma of the alleged incident is being brushed aside as if it was only a simple matter of lodging a complaint, in a time when women were not taken seriously, for such accusations. This was made clear during the debate surrounding her allegations and why it took so long.”

              Again all this is irrelevant to the allegations you are making. While it is relevant to evauations of Fords veracity – and you are correct – sometimes wome block it out. Though you are wrong in presuming that is unifromly what occurs. I can confirm from personal experience that is NOT the norm.

              You can decide you beleive Ford despite the inconsistancies and errors in here story and the lack of corroberation.
              And you could be right. But just as there are women who actually experiance what ford claim to and block it out and do not remember details – there are also women who lie. That is unfortunate – but neither human sex is unversally trustworthy.

              But what you can not do is investigate further – because there is nothing further to investigate.

              “”there WERE people who could directly corroborate her allegations that were not interviewed. People who had first hand knowledge of the incident were ignored.”

              that is false. Ford identifies every single person she claimed was at the party and every one of them was interviewed and everyone of them claimed there was no party at all. That is the entirety of all first hand witnesses.

              Ford DID eventually tell people. but not for more than 20 years. Further when she finally started talking – she was extremely vague.
              It was not until Kavanaugh was nominated for the supreme court that she identified him as the person who purportedly attacked her to anyone.

              And these 2nd had witnesses were all interviewed.

              I would further note that beyond with the FBI did, the press had a field day with this – they ultimately interviewed everyone the FBI interviewed and then some. There is not some secret evidence that was not uncovered. There is nothing new, and there will not be anything new.

            5. ““ John Oliver seeks to influence americans all the time.”

              John Oliver is an American citizen. Oliver was naturalized as a US citizen on 13 December 2019.”

              Trump was elected in 2016 and was president for almost 3 years before Oliver was naturalized.

              I do find it interesting that Oliver decided to become a citizen of a country whose president he found so loathsome.

              Regardless prior to the end of 2018 Oliver was a foreigner who sought to influence american elections and politics – just like you claim Putin did.

              I have no problem with Oliver.

              My problem is with hypocrits who think that Olivers conduct was laudable but that other foreigners can not work equally hard to elect trump.

              My problem is with your hypocracy.

            6. “It’s one thing to discus issues on tv. It’s another to seek to influence government officials as a foreign agent”

              No it is not. It is exactly the same thing. Oliv er sought to influence voters. YOU claim Putin tried to influence voters.

              Same thing.

              I would note that the US government meddles in foreign elections all the time.
              And has for eons and most of us think that is GOOD.

            7. “No John I have not been saying that at all. Seeking to influence policies and offering opinions are two very different things. You’re trying to put words in my mouth.”

              No they are quite literally NOT.

              I am not trying to put words into your mouth. You are trying to make a distinction that does not exist.

              Would it help if I noted that the Ukrainian ambassador to the US posted anti Trump papers on the official Ukrianian embassy web site ?
              And there was ACTUAL contact between the clinton campaign and the ukrainian embassy.

            8. “Butina was in a position to blackmail a conservative political activist who had access to higher leadership individuals.”

              any woman who has sex with a man is in the same position.

              Is sex now illegal ? As has been noted before Swalwell has actually been cavorting with REAL Chinese spies.

              There is no crime of “being in a position to blackmail”

              There is an actual crime of blackmail.

              Butina did not attempt to blackmail anyone.

              She ultimately plead guilty to a very minor offense to get out of jail where Mueller had locked her up for nearly 2 years.
              But by that time it was obvious that if Mueller proceeded he would lose the case.
              But that would take another 6 months.

              What would you do – stay in jail for 6 months and fight or return home to your country and forget the mess.

            9. “” While we now know that Putin actually wanted Clinton to defeat Trump.”

              What is the proof of this claim?”

              Actual assesements by the intelligence community – as opposed to the bogus ICA that Brennan practically wrote himself that was supoposed to reflect the concensus of 17 agfencies and only reflected the views of 3 Brennan alcolytes.

              Even Comey refused to sign on.

              You really are unfamiliar with the facts.

              It has often taken years to pry out of the hands of the deep state the evidence of their malfeasance – but eventually we usually get it.

        3. Foriegn oligarchs and leaders – including Russians litterally paid Hunter Biden millions.

          Why did Butina end up in jail and Biden end up in the white house ?

          The allegation against Butina is that she slept with members of the NRA.

          Whoopdeedoo – If NRA members wished to sleep with an attractive russian gun nut – that is their business – not yours.

          But when the son of the vice president of the united states is being paid to have his father interfere in criminal investigations in foriegn countries that is ACTUALLY criminal.

          I would further note that the crime was NOT by burisma, or Hunter. The crime is that the vice president of the united states was for sale.

          Nearly all REAL corruption MUST be in the public sphere – government.

          1. John say,

            “ Foriegn oligarchs and leaders – including Russians litterally paid Hunter Biden millions.

            Why did Butina end up in jail and Biden end up in the white house ?”

            “ According to the affidavit in support of the complaint, from as early as 2015 and continuing through at least February 2017, Butina worked at the direction of a high-level official in the Russian government who was previously a member of the legislature of the Russian Federation and later became a top official at the Russian Central Bank. This Russian official was sanctioned by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control in April 2018.”

            https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/russian-national-charged-conspiracy-act-agent-russian-federation-within-united-states

            Hunter Biden was on the board of a Ukrainian gas company Burisma was not a crime nor was it illegal to be paid for being on the board. He wasn’t paid by the Russians.

            “ But when the son of the vice president of the united states is being paid to have his father interfere in criminal investigations in foriegn countries that is ACTUALLY criminal.”

            That was not true at all. It was an allegation pushed by Trump in order to undermine Biden. It didn’t work, because it was not true. It’s what led to trump withholding military funding from Ukraine in exchange for investigating Biden on the false allegations that Trump was peddling.

            “ I would further note that the crime was NOT by burisma, or Hunter. The crime is that the vice president of the united states was for sale.”

            Problem with that is none of it was true. Biden was doing his job in an official capacity backed by the entire EU and Congress. The whole Hunter Biden involvement was manufactured.

            1. According to thousands of affadavits there was massive fraud in the 2020 election.

              Lets presume you are correct and Butina had some type of working relationship with someone in a bank in russia.

              Is every foreign student with a relationship to someone back in their homeland a spy ?

              You conflate inuendo with evidence.

            2. “Hunter Biden was on the board of a Ukrainian gas company Burisma was not a crime nor was it illegal to be paid for being on the board.”

              That is correct. the problem is NOT with hunter Biden it is with Joe.

              “He wasn’t paid by the Russians.” That is incorrect aside fromt he fact that there are ties between Burisma and russia. Hunter received a multimillon collar diamond from a russian oligarch associated with Putin.

            3. “That was not true at all.”
              You are completely unfamiliar with the real world.

              Not only is it true but Joe Biden was recorded bragging about it – you can find the video on youtube.

              Further Hillary used that information to nudge Biden out of the 2016 race – Sydney Blumenthal leaked the story to an New York times reporter and there ere several NYT stories regarding this in 2015

              Trump did not start this.

              Further there were memos from the state department to the vice presidents office telling Biden to stop Hunter as he was selling the vice president’s influence in Ukraine.

              “It was an allegation pushed by Trump in order to undermine Biden. It didn’t work, because it was not true. It’s what led to trump withholding military funding from Ukraine in exchange for investigating Biden on the false allegations that Trump was peddling.”

              Trump did not withold funding. Trump did not threaten to withhold funding.

              Biden actually openly and publicly threatened to withold funding if the prosecutor investigating Burisma was not fired.
              And then he was.

              You are remarkably ignorant of non-controversial facts.

              You read some talking head somewhere claim that something was “:debunked” and you beleive it, and inquire no further.

              You are having the same problem with the 2020 election.

              The left wing nut media is not reporting the results from AZ and GA – but those results are still real.

            4. “Problem with that is none of it was true. Biden was doing his job in an official capacity backed by the entire EU and Congress. The whole Hunter Biden involvement was manufactured.”

              False US ethics laws prohibited Biden from having dealings in Ukraine particularly on matters tha in anyway might effect or even appeear to effect his son.

              It is called a conflict of interest. there are two cures – Hunter gets out of his Ukraine business, or Joe Biden ceases to involve himself in policy in ukriane – particularly policy involving Burisma.

              I know that ethics is a foreign concept to left wing nuts – but there are actual laws barring this.
              And the state department was sending memos to the vice presidents office throughout this raising alarm bells.

              As tot he rest – the EU was not involved. This was entirely a US/Soros lead cabal with Biden managing the FBI task force that purportedly was looking into corruption in Ukriane.

              There is real corruption in Ukriane – but there has never been any actual evidence of corruption by the prosecutor Biden fired.

              However there was an interview of Hunter Biden by that prosecutor scheduled for the day after he was fired.

              There is lots of documentation on this. There is correspondence from ukraine and there is correspondence from Hunter Biden’s law firm, and there was state department correspondence. You can find it all on John Solomon’s web site – I beleive there are over 400 documents regarding Burisma, hunter biden, joe biden the state department, hunters law firm and the prosecutor that was fired.
              Not to mention Joe on video bragging.

      2. “This man is not qualified to be a partisan AG much less a supreme court justice.”

        Ain’t that the truth. Mitch McConnell did the country a great service by blocking Garland’s nomination.

        1. Taking the position as AG and acting as he has was an enormous mistake.

          Garland could have died as the supreme court justice who wasn’t because of politics.

          Instead he has proven why he never should have been nominated.

          He is a partisan hack who is clueless about the constitution.

          If you can not follow the constitution as AG why would anyone trust you to rule on its meaning.

          1. John say,

            “ He is a partisan hack who is clueless about the constitution.

            If you can not follow the constitution as AG why would anyone trust you to rule on its meaning.”

            What exactly has he done to deserve this allegation?

            You said it yourself, “ The constitution vests ALL executive powers in the president. So long as the president seeks action from the AG consistent with the political objectives that he was elected on – and those objectives are constitutional, the AG is obligated to follow or resign.”

            Garland is doing exactly what you state he’s allowed to do. He’s doing what the president’s political objectives are.

            1. What has he not done ?

              He has failed to prosecute confessed spies.

              He seeks to abridge free speech rights.

              Ge seeks to go after not just politicians of the opposing party but ordinary americans merely for opposing political views.

              He has redefined domestic terrorism as beleif in a meaningful constitution and limited government.

              He has ended the prosecutions of arsonists and rioters accress the country while locking people who he can not successfully convict of tresspassing up for months in solitary.

              Democrats weaponized the “deep state” under Obama, but under Biden they are going overboard.

              Unfortunately Republicans are not smart enough to grasp that when they reach power again these agencies need castrated.

              Even Truman who created the CIA publicly came out calling it a huge mistake. NSA is worse. There is little or no purpose to the FBI, and frankly not much for DOJ.

              END them.

            2. Not within the constraints of the constitution he is not.

              It is within the powers of the federal government to assure election integrity.

              It is not within the powers of the federal govenrment to prosecute political dissent.

              I would further note that Garland swore an oath to uphold the constitution and the laws of the land – as Did biden.

              While they are free to seek to change those laws – through the legitimate constitional process – in the meantime they are obligate to follow them.

              Yet, we do not even have Biden, Garland, democrats following their own executive orders or mandates.

              You make it up as you go along – that is just lawless.

              We have immigration law – it was mostly enforced under Trump.

              While I would like to see some aspects of it changed – we enforce it until we can change it.

              Obama went lawless on immigration and Biden has doubled down.

              This is typical of the left – do not enforce laws you do not like.

              Absolutely Garland is free to do the political bidding of Biden – when that is inside the law and constitution.

              But we are not merely back to the nonsense that occured under Obama – we have doubled down.

              Barr actually tried to depoliticize the DOJ and FBI – he failed, and Garland is making it worse than ever.

            3. The constitution vests all EXECUTIVE powers in the president.

              It does NOT vest limitless powers in the president.

              Logic, reason, facts, elude you.

              When the president seeks political objectives that are at odds with the constitution or the law – those are barred.

              Neither the president nor anyone in the executive is free to disregard the constitution or laws that have not been found unconstitutional.

              Neither the president nor the AG can violate individual rights, or the constitution or the law – for political gain.

              You make these stupid arguments all the time.

              When you are told that acting for political benefit is not inherently unconstitutional or unlawful – you presume that it is ALWAYS constitutional.

              This is a stupid binary fallacy.

              All killing is not illegal. But MOST killing is.

              All political acts are not unlawful or unconstitutional.

              But acts that are unconstitutional or unlawful are not justified because they are politically consistent with the goals of the president.

              And just as Yates should have resigned when she “felt” Trump’s actions were unconstitutional – which they were not. Garland should resign when Biden directs him to act outside the law or constitution.

              Though few of us beleive Biden is directing anything.

              The lunatics are running the asylum.

            4. Just to be clear – I am happy with the idiotic conduct of this administration. The more egregious the conduct, the greater the incompetence the shorter lived this nonsense will be.

              We are already seeing Democrats promises regarding Covid going down the $hitter.

              It is summer much of the country is vaccinated – and Covid is spiking.

              Covid did not spike during the summer under Trump – it declined.

              It is a seasonal virus sensitive to temperature and humidity.

              And now in July under suboptimal condidtions it is spiking.

              And of course according to the left and Biden – it is everyone else’s fault.

              NO IT IS YOURS.

              Virus variants that are more contageous are a natural evolution that occurs automatically given enough time.

              All the leftist statist nonsense that I told you for the past years would not work – has actually made things worse.

              Had we eschewed these idiotic policies we would likely be past Covid by now.

              Instead we “flattened the curve” i.e. made the duration of the epidemic much longer, and now we are getting new varieants – which was always only a function of time.

              The FACT is you, the left, democrats are clearly CLUELESS – you do not know what you are doing.

              There are threats to lock down the country again – except this time – no one is near so tolerant.

              Most of the country KNOWS you do not know what you are doing.

              We have an epidemic, and it is bad. But YOU do not have a clue what to do about it.

              You made promises you could not keep.

              You have sewn the wind – no you can reap the whirlwind.

  13. The most important technique I learned in the studies to obtain my degree, was that when dealing with negative attention seeking behaviors, do not engage. The more feedback given to the behavior, the more the behavior is reinforced. Unfortunately, the media are enablers. I refuse to do so…I hear that the American swimmers are doing great at the Olympics. That is what a behaviorist calls a redirection.

    1. All well and good. But we sort out truth by argument. If you just ignore those you disagree with you are essentially self censoring them and depriving yourself of truth.

      As John Stuart Mill noted – if all you know is your own side, then you do not even know that very well.

  14. If these ” tips”: have the same amount of credibility of Ford, Swetnick et.al. This is another gigantic waste of time and money.

    1. This is an idiotic idea.

      The odds that republicans do not win back one or both of the chambers of congress in 2022 are miniscule.

      If Democrats are going to engage in this kind of nonsense – then republicans can too.

      How about an investigation into Swallwell’s daliances with chinese spies ?

      Or Feinstiens chauffer ?

      Or AOC;s campaign funding her boy friend.

      John Kerry has been a walking talking Logan Act Violation for decades – he is only saved from spending the rest of his life in orange pajama’s because the Logan Act is unconstitutional and most of us know it.

      Why not investigate Pelosi and Schumer and Watters for all their “inciting” and “violent” rhetoric ?

      It is really really bad when 70 years later Drunken Sen. McCarthy appears to have been right. Allowing marxists into our education system has torn the country apart.

  15. Democrats are the most shameless of liars and their propaganda and lies are magnified by an equally ignomious Press.

    Sens. Schiff, Coons, Whitehouse, Schumer, Pelosi, Susan Rice, Waters, AOC, Kamala, Christine Blasey Ford (whose father and BFF thinks she’s a liar), and Joe Biden (though he isn’t always aware of the lies he reads) will do any thing to maintain their power and wealth and lying and smears are their primary tools. And any tip line was just a place for the agitated, deluded, and gaslit Democrat populace to vent.

    How sad that normal Democrats have been so cruelly manipulated and hoodwinked by their leaders. It’s time for any good Democrat leave their Democrat leaders.

    1. The Democrats complaining about Brett are obviously socialists. I mean, who other than a socialist would even question brother Brett’s alleged credit card debts,
      fraternity sexual escapades etc.?

      1. Kavanaugh’s “credit card debt”! You mean when he fronted his friends when purchasing season tickets and then paid of the “credit card debt” once reimbursed? Is this the scandal you are looking at?

        Let’s bring back Michael Avenati and watch the Dems implode again.

        1. Is Kavanaugh being hounded by debt collectors ?

          Did he go bankrupt ?

          Did he fail to pay off any debts ?

          Unless the answers to any of these are yes, this is a snipe hunt.

          I do not like Kavanaugh. I think he was a poor choice on Trump’s part. I have not been happy with many of his decisions.

          But he was nominated and confirmed legitimately and the attacks on him are spurious.

          Those on the left oppose people on ideological grounds – which is fine.
          But then they manufacture personal attacks to take them down.

          Vote against Kavanaugh if you think he will be a poor jurist.
          Vote against him if you ACTUALLY find appalling conduct.

          But if you smear people because you oppose them ideologically – YOU are the moral degenerate.

          And if you beleive every vile claim about someone merely because you disagree on issues – YOU are the moral degenerate.

      2. Bill – Your smears, fed to you by the Press, are entirely specious. We all know it’s easy to be deluded by smear campaigns and lurid narratives. We just encourage you to try harder to be smarter and logical. Emotional rage ginned up by the Press you read is unproductive.

  16. “They were driven beyond all bounds of moderation by the apprehension of the return of power …” (Edmund Burke)

  17. Lefty. Rights. Most humans have two arms.
    Most boxers will punch with both fists. If you get in a street fight don’t wear boxing gloves.
    Punch a Democrat in the left cheek. A RepubliCon in the right cheek.
    Don’t ask me I don’t give a damn. Next stop is Viet Nam!

    1. Marines staged for Nam out of Camp Pendleton CA used to have this commentary amongst ourselves: “What’s the worse that could happen? Why they cut your hair off, fill you with GG antibodies then send you off to RVN

  18. Lefties are malevolent people, just look at the Lefty posters here.

    Mendacious, controlling, and mostly wrong.

    I refer to the local posters, because their behavior is the same behavior of the Washington Lefties, just writ small.

    If Lefties behave badly when the stakes are so small, there is no limit what they will do for real stakes.

    1. Monumentcolorado. How easily conservatives seem to forget the constant investigations on Benghazi, emails, real estate deals, etc all about one individual. Democrats seem to have taken a page or two from republicans on investigations. Turley acknowledges that there ARE legitimate questions about how the FBI handled these claims and most importantly there’s the fact that Turley conveniently leaves out, the limitations placed on the FBI on how it could conduct its investigations. Republicans made it an point to limit the FBI’s investigations in order to not dig too deeply into potentially incriminating evidence. Republicans were very keen on making sure Kavanaugh was nominated to the bench and that includes trying to limit as much as possible any new evidence from being exposed.

      Turley’s mention of the Obama administration memorandum is irrelevant, it’s a deflection from the fact that republicans deliberately limited the FBI’s scope of their investigations.

      1. “…Ignore Both Key Facts and Law”

        When have either impeded the Dems in their quest to gain and hold onto absolute power? If they can’t pack the Court, they will do what they can to dismantle it.

      2. “How easily conservatives seem to forget the constant investigations on Benghazi, emails, real estate deals,”
        Who forgets ?

        I expect full transparency from Biden, Trump, and Obama with regard to the executive actions of the federal government.
        Benghazi was an absolute failure by the us state department and others.
        Regardless americans – including a US ambassador serving this country were murdered in an act of terrorism that the Obama administration repeatedly lied about.

        Just as we saw the same lying by the DOJ and FBI regarding crossfire Huricane – which was the EXECUTIVE – i.e. Federal government investigating PRIVATE parties without sufficient constitutional justificiation.

        The “Email” investigations AGAIN an investigation into the abuse of power of those in GOVERNMENT.

        The emails of the Secretary of State of the United states are the property of the US government – it is illegal to convert them into private property and it is further a CRIME if they are classified.

        “etc all about one individual.”
        Nope, these were about the abuse of power of a member of the executive branch.

        “Democrats seem to have taken a page or two from republicans on investigations.”
        Nope, Democrats have expanded probes into government misconduct into personal vendettas and witch hunts.

        I would further note that the Democratic investigations have pretty universally borne no Fruit.
        While Republican ones have.

        The Benghazi failings were primarily incompetence and political posturing – not Criminal. But the coverup was Criminal.
        And why the coverup ? Because there was an election approaching and the incompetence of the current administration tends to get people to vote them out.

        You impeached Trump for asking for a legitimate investigation into miscounduct of the vice president of the united states at the time of the misconduct. In what world would that be illegitimate while lying to the american people and congress about an act of terrorism would not be ?

        “Turley acknowledges that there ARE legitimate questions about how the FBI handled these claims and most importantly there’s the fact that Turley conveniently leaves out, the limitations placed on the FBI on how it could conduct its investigations. ”

        What are you even talking about ?

        The limits on one branch of government investigating the actions of another branch of government are almost non-existant.
        There are specific shields such as executive priviledge, national security, grand jury secrecy – that the courts must sort out on a case by case basis – but these constraints are NOT limits on WHAT or WHO can be investigated.

        The limits on the FBI – law enforcement in general are the constitutional limits on the investigations of private individuals.

        “Republicans made it an point to limit the FBI’s investigations in order to not dig too deeply into potentially incriminating evidence.”
        This is nonsense. The limits of law enforcement investigations into private individuals are determined by the constitution and the courts and they predate Kavanaugh. Regardless, there are almost never meaningful investigations of claims this old – because they are litterally impossible.

        “Republicans were very keen on making sure Kavanaugh was nominated to the bench and that includes trying to limit as much as possible any new evidence from being exposed.”
        Nope, While I am not republican, and not enamoroured of Kavanaugh – he appears to be far too much of another Roberts, and frankly he was a poor choice. At the same time the whole Ford nonsense was a stupid mistake by those on the left.
        It undermined the credibility of women. While there is substantial evidence that Ford’s claims are false – every person Ford claims was at this party has stated under penalty of prosecution that the party never took place. Ford can not even generally date the party, nor the location of the party. And finally her allegation ultimately is that a bunch of drunken teens fell onto a bed together and she may have gotten groped.

        Ultimately I would not have nominated or approved Kavanaugh. I am not sure whether Ford Beleives herself – maybe she does.
        But I have little doubt that what she claims did not happen as she claims – whether she beleives it or not.

        This was all a carnival and a disgrace to the senate.

        “Turley’s mention of the Obama administration memorandum is irrelevant, it’s a deflection from the fact that republicans deliberately limited the FBI’s scope of their investigations.”

        The scope of the investigations was limited by the fact that the allegation was 35 years old and NO ONE corroborated a single part of Ford’s claim.

        Do you think the FBI has a time machine ?

        1. John Say,

          “ Regardless americans – including a US ambassador serving this country were murdered in an act of terrorism that the Obama administration repeatedly lied about.”

          The “repeated lies” were one incident of a video purported to prove what happened at a time when the situation was still fluid. That’s all it was. Republicans who were keen on smearing secretary Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration used the incident to pursue an actual witch hunt. Investigation after investigation produced nothing criminal which was the intent. When nothing could be found another investigation was launched in search of a criminal charge. Hillary Clinton was already deemed guilty of crimes without being charged

          “ This is nonsense. The limits of law enforcement investigations into private individuals are determined by the constitution and the courts and they predate Kavanaugh. Regardless, there are almost never meaningful investigations of claims this old – because they are litterally impossible.”

          The FBI has investigated cases that have been just as old the age of the allegations is irrelevant. You say that the allegations were not corroborated. The only reason for that is because the FBI was limited by republicans and the White House from corroborating the allegations even when the very people willing to corroborate the allegations came forward. They were deliberately ignored because of the limitations being imposed on the FBI. The FBI is not prevented from investigating a private individual if there is probable cause to do so. Blasey Ford’s allegations were credible enough to warrant an investigation, but the White House pressured the FBI into limiting the investigation for the purpose of avoiding discovery of corroborating testimony.

          “ But I have little doubt that what she claims did not happen as she claims – whether she beleives it or not.”

          So you’re calling her a liar?

          Ultimately Kavanaugh shouldn’t have been seated given his dreadful performance in the hearings. It was pathetic to say the least.

          1. “So you’re calling her (Blasey-Ford) a liar?”

            Yes. Without question she is a bold, unscrupulous, activist liar who was not questioned properly by the Republicans. They took the gentle approach which was so wrong IMO. She was given the soft, ever-so-gentle coddling that was an utterly frustrating disgrace to watch as she used her sickening ‘baby talk’ voice and victim ‘act’ to garner sympathy. It was disgusting from start to finish. She is a vile human being who should have been directly questioned about her past and forced to respond to every single one of her lies.

          2. “As we reported in “Justice on Trial,” many of the so-called “tips” received were frequently about Blasey Ford’s personal history, from quacks and activists, irrelevant, etc. The main thing the FBI (and senators) learned was of witness tampering by Blasey Ford affiliates.”

            ~Mollie Hemingway

          3. You keep talking about lies by republicans – WHAT LIES ?

            You fail to grasp that the Obama administration KNEW the truth.
            IT is perfectly acceptable for republicans or anyone else to demand that government tell us the truth about the murder of a US ambassador.

            But worse still the Obama administration LIED for weeks, and in some instances months and years.

            It is not the duty of senators and congressmen to know the truth before they investigate.
            It is however the duty of the executive to provide the truth – especially when mistakes are made.

            You seem to think that republicans are guilty of something merely for persuing something for years because they CORRECTLY assumned they were being lied to.

            With a few hours of the attack Hillary Clinton in emails to Egyptian leaders informed them of the attack, identified it as a terrorist attack and correctly identified the terrorist group behind the attack.

            Clinton, and the Obama administration not merely lied about what happened – but they lied about what they knew and who they had told what they knew.

            Lets be CLEAR – before nearly all americans knew anything at all about this attack – before they were aware that it happened,
            Hillary Clinton had told foreign leaders correctly that it was a terrorist atytack and correctly identified the terrorist group responsible.

            And then for YEARS she and the obama administration LIED about not only what happened – but when they knew.

            It is the Clinton communiques that make it clear that what was said publicly was not merely WRONG, but a LIE.

            The claims made by the Obama administration in the weeks after were WRONG, but Plausible.
            It took months for the rest of us to learn they were WRONG.
            But it took YEARS to learn they were LIES.

            The fact that it took YEARS to pry the truth out of Clinton over something she KNEW before 99.99% of the american people even knew the event occured, is damning.

            If tomorow the mythical infamous russian pee tape miraculously emerged and it was clear that Trump had russian prostitutes pee on a bed that Obama had used and that he had lied about it for years – I would personally vote to impeach him.

            And that would be a LESS consequential lie. Clinton’s LIE was that of a public servant not a private actor. It was done to salvage and election, not for any legitimate public purpose.

          4. “The FBI has investigated cases that have been just as old”
            Then you would have examples. I would point out that there is actually no CASE here. There is no physical evidence – that is nearly always true after a few months much less decades. There are no corroborating witnesses and there is no clear recollection.

            That does not inherently mean Ford is lying – thought the odds of truthfulness are actually quite low.

            But it does mean that there is nothing to “investigate”.

            “the age of the allegations is irrelevant.”
            False. We have statutes of limitations on the prosecution (and therefore the investigation) of crimes specifically because age is extremely relevant.

            Tara read has made far more specific and damning allegations regarding then Senator Biden.
            Allegations that occured a decade ago – not almost 4.

            Yet Read got nowhere – she may be lying, she may be telling the truth – but investigation is impossible because the passage of time has destroyed the evidence. Bot the physical evidence if any and even the recollections of other witnesses.

            Ford mad a number of claims that could be indenepndently corraborated by others.
            ZERO were. It is still possible Ford is correct and the other witnesses recollections are faulty.
            But the odds are small and regardless the truth can not be established.

            “You say that the allegations were not corroborated.”
            Correct.
            “The only reason for that is because the FBI was limited by republicans and the White House from corroborating the allegations even when the very people willing to corroborate the allegations came forward.”
            False. Every single person that Ford names as having first person knowledge of the actual incident was interviewed by the FBI and denied every single claim ford made. They all eventually did the same PUBLICLY – because idiots like you were hounding them.

            “They were deliberately ignored because of the limitations being imposed on the FBI. The FBI is not prevented from investigating a private individual if there is probable cause to do so.”
            That is correct – the standard is actually slightly lower than that – reasonable suspicion.

            The whole debacle of the past 5 years hsould have taught you the standards the FBI must meet for each step in an investigation.

            Ford’s allegation BARELY meets the reasonable suspicion standard – MAYBE. The fact that Ford took 4 decades to come forward makes reaching reasonable suspicion HARD.

            Regardless reasonable suspicion left when every single person she claimed was at the party denied that any such party ever took place much less that the alleged conduct took place.

            I would further note that Ford’s allegation is “subjective” – all we KNOW is that 35 years later she CLAIMS that it constituted an unwanted assault. Nearly everything she claims could actually be true and STILL have no actual crime – all that would be necescary was sufficient consent or a lack of intent.

            So you have an event that likely did not happen and no way to prove otherwise and a subjective allegation that probably was not an actual assault.

            “Blasey Ford’s allegations were credible enough to warrant an investigation,”
            And there was the investigation that those allegations justified.

            Prior to the interviews of the other people Ford claimed were at the party their MIGHT have been “reasonable suspicion”.
            There never was probable cause. After the interviews there was no longer reasonable suspicion and the ivestigation could not continue.

            Much the same is true of Crossfire huricane. The initial claim passed third party to the FBI purportedly from Downer constituted reasonable suspicion. But the FBI interviewer Downer (and Papadoulous) and both confirmed that “emails” were not discussed in the meeting between Downer and papadoulous. That ended reasonable suspicion.
            But the FBI got lucky and the Steele Dossier showed up – again reasonable suspicion – BARELY, but as the FBI learned about the Steele Dossier and was not able to corroborate anything of consequence – that reasonable suspicion evaporated.
            Horowitz concluded it was gone by jan 2017. Horowitz was wrong, Reasonable suspicion was lost earlier.

            Regardless, the FBI interview of the primary subsource ended reassonable suspicion and should have ended the entire investigation.

            You can not investigate the conduct of private people without reasonable suspicion, and you can not get a warrant without probable cause.

            Yet, both warrants were issued – though probable cause was NEVER acheived, and the investigation continued though reasonable suspicion was lost at the latest by Jan 4. 2017

            And yet Mueller continued for two years – without either reasonable suspicion or probable cause.

          5. You seem to be under the delusion the FBI can investigate whatever it pleases.

            That is not true. First US law enforcement investigates crimes not people.
            In both the Ford allegation and XFH we never really had a crime.

            And we certainly never had reasonable suspicion that the alleged perpitrator of the alleged crime committed it.

            This is neither magic not ideological.

            Ford claims she was assualted almost 4 decades ago.
            Maybe she was. But:
            There is no other recollection by anyone of any of the facts she alleges – not of the crime itself, not of the events leading to the crime.

            You say the FBI did not thoroughly investigate. But they interviewed EVERYONE that Ford claimed might have knowledge.
            All fo them contradicated the entirety of her story. All said the party never took place – much less the assault.

            I would further note that Kavanaugh kept a diary. He was able to document where he was every day of the summer Ford alleges.

            no party with Ford or any of the others. Ford can not even with cetrtainty place the YEAR in which the alleged event occured.

            None of this proves that Ford is lying – though it is likely. But whether you like it or not there is nothing here to investigate.

            What is it you expected of the FBI – to consult a ouija board ?

            Further at the time of the allegation both Kavanaugh and Ford were private persons, and the allegation is about private conduct.

            You can not investigate private parties merely because you want to.

          6. You say the investigation was limited – this was major news for a month.
            Not only was the FBI investigating but every news outlet in the country was.

            The media and people like Avantti brought for absolutely stupid allegations that did not pass the laugh test.

            What is it that you think would have been found that has not been found ?

            All people that FORD says might have had direct knowledge were interviewed.

            Every person Ford claimed to have told anything to subsequently – and she had not spoken to anyone about this for almost 30 years, was interviewed – both by the FBI and the media.

            If you can produce the security camera video from 1981 from Ford’s room – go for it.

            You want to claim the FBI’s investigation was limited – but you can not provide any limit – beyond that of the constitution that was imposed.
            You claim the FBI was limited – but the press was not.

            No one found anything.

            I will be happy to change my mind when you produce the security camera video.
            I am not happy with Kavanaugh and never was.
            I do not think Trump should have nominated him, and he should not have been confirmed.

            But the Ford nonsense was and remains a debacle for DEMOCRATS.

            And if you wish to keep persuing it – by all means frack yourselves.

          7. “So you’re calling her a liar?”

            There are several possibilities:

            She is lying.
            Her recollection is faulty
            she is telling the truth and everyone else is lying.

            Those possibilities are from most likely to least likely.

            Are you saying no one ever lies ?

            We have had innumerable high profile true allegations of this nature recently.
            And we have had a few egregiously false ones.

            Mist such allegations are true.
            But all are not.

            Tara Read is far more credible than Ford. She recalls much more detail, and the incendient was more recent and some of her facts have corroborated.

            But I would not prosecute or further investigate Biden based on Read.

            And Read could be lying.

          8. Kavanaugh did fine at the hearings – Democrats forked themselves.

            But I would neither have nominated nor approved Kavanaugh.
            We do not need another Roberts on the court.
            Republicans could have put whoever they want on the court.
            There must be another Gorsuch out there.

Leave a Reply