Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I still can't understand how any reasonable person doesn't agree that a formal FBI investigation is the best and only way to truly find the truth, or at least find out who is lying.
For about the bazillionth time... , the alleged "crimes" are under local/state jurisdiction. The FBI has no jurisdiction in these cases.
And, no, Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill doesn't create a precedent. Both were federal employees at the time of the alleged incidents, which actually then makes them fall under FBI jurisdiction.
Ford's word is much more powerful than a lack of documentation.
The right needs to pretend that NOT DOCUMENTING YOUR CRIME is proof you did not do it. Hell if that is all one needs then i should be free to rob a bank just as long as i don't put it in my calendar....
Kavanaugh's statements are also evidence and his words are equally powerful. Thus, tell me, why is her statements somehow more powerful as you so obviously allude to in this post?
And by the way, you completely missed the point. I already said they had statements. But having evidence showing where you were during the time in question, especially since he spent much of that time out of the area would be quite the positive defense. In fact, if she can pinpoint a time, it could even exonerate him completely. You have a pretty poor understanding of what does and does not constitute evidence.
Kavanaugh is made of some sturdy stock, as is his family even as their physical safety has been threatened during this grotesque spectacle.
Excellent letter and I hope he sticks to his guns. He is right, we cannot allow this "grotesque and obvious character assassination - if allowed to succeed -will dissuade competent and good people of all political persuasions from service."
The only reason the left wants FBI investigations in to these allegations is because FBI investigations tend to take a really long time. Probably until after the mid terms, which is what all of this is really about. Yes it's a last minute hail Mary pass, but democrats are really, REALLY good at last minute hail Mary passes.
So... Let's say you're applying for a job, or a promotion. Would it be OK for a rivals's friend, etc., to go to the company and accuse you of committing a crime (let's say embezzlement, or vandalizing a school or former employer, etc.) with no evidence whatsoever just to give his/her friend etc., a better chance at the job/promotion? Should the company just believe the accusation even if there's no corroborating evidence?
If that's the new standard, some people are going to have a LOT of fun with that! It'll make the after college job search all that much more interesting... LIE about your rivals before THEY lie about you!
here ya go.
It is one of the highest jobs in the land, thus the applicant is held to a much higher standard than normal. So you can relax the standard for an applicant to the SCOTUS is much higher than a member of the public will ever have to face for a normal job.
also worth noting your question presumes these people are lying , when in fact their claims are very credible.
The witnesses said they didn't recall, not that it never happened.
technically you are right, but if that many: all they talked to so not remember, shouldn't that be a clue to you? The same as Ms Ford giving all the details but she doesn't remember when or where? I can't believe how many of you are actually ready to hang a man when there is absolutely not a shade of evidence this every happened and certainly not the way it has been claimed to have happened.
It is one of the highest jobs in the land, thus the applicant is held to a much higher standard than normal. So you can relax the standard for an applicant to the SCOTUS is much higher than a member of the public will ever have to face for a normal job.
also worth noting your question presumes these people are lying , when in fact their claims are very credible.
Why would you presume Kavanaugh is willing to lie under oath? What makes his claims less credible?
Kavanaugh's statements are also evidence and his words are equally powerful. Thus, tell me, why is her statements somehow more powerful as you so obviously allude to in this post?
And by the way, you completely missed the point. I already said they had statements. But having evidence showing where you were during the time in question, especially since he spent much of that time out of the area would be quite the positive defense. In fact, if she can pinpoint a time, it could even exonerate him completely. You have a pretty poor understanding of what does and does not constitute evidence.
balls.
i said his not documenting the crime is proof of nothing. I never said his word means less.
But if the dems get in they will of course be investigating his perjury... and that would in fact debase the value of his statements...
it does look like Bret perjured himself ...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
, the alleged "crimes" are under local/state jurisdiction. The FBI has no jurisdiction in these cases. 
It'll make the after college job search all that much more interesting... LIE about your rivals before THEY lie about you!
