4
4
0
"WASHINGTON — The woman who has accused President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee of sexual assault all but ruled out appearing at an extraordinary Senate hearing scheduled for next week to hear her allegations, insisting on Tuesday that the F.B.I. investigate first.
Speaking through her lawyers, Christine Blasey Ford did not explicitly rule out appearing Monday before the Senate Judiciary Committee to testify along with Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh. But echoing Senate Democrats, she said that an investigation should be “the first step” before she is put “on national television to relive this traumatic and harrowing incident".
When she came forward I believed it was a brave step in reconciling an incident in her past. Timing was questionable, but a perceived wrong deserves a chance to be aired out, discussed, and resolved. I did not believe an indictment/arrest or conviction should/would happen due to statute of limitations, but the grievance should still be aired out and heard. THIS is now just a political game. Not from her I believe. The article reads as a "step by step" of stalling for time. As the person wronged she has every right to look for satisfaction no matter how long ago it happened. As the accused, he has every right to hear her complaints and respond in kind. What neither need to have happen is exactly what this has turned out to be which is a complete disservice to each other via BOTH political parties. Feinstein the FBI isn't going to touch this unless there is something else that wasn't revealed.
Speaking through her lawyers, Christine Blasey Ford did not explicitly rule out appearing Monday before the Senate Judiciary Committee to testify along with Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh. But echoing Senate Democrats, she said that an investigation should be “the first step” before she is put “on national television to relive this traumatic and harrowing incident".
When she came forward I believed it was a brave step in reconciling an incident in her past. Timing was questionable, but a perceived wrong deserves a chance to be aired out, discussed, and resolved. I did not believe an indictment/arrest or conviction should/would happen due to statute of limitations, but the grievance should still be aired out and heard. THIS is now just a political game. Not from her I believe. The article reads as a "step by step" of stalling for time. As the person wronged she has every right to look for satisfaction no matter how long ago it happened. As the accused, he has every right to hear her complaints and respond in kind. What neither need to have happen is exactly what this has turned out to be which is a complete disservice to each other via BOTH political parties. Feinstein the FBI isn't going to touch this unless there is something else that wasn't revealed.
ar-BBNwoXl
Posted from msn.com
Justice
FBI
Sexual Assault
Democrats
Republicans
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 4
5
5
0
Where do I begin... "Her timing was questionable" Really? I believe that her timing, actually the timing of the Democratic Senators was impeccable. We know with absolute certainty that they sat on this "evidence" and only released it after all other political ploys had failed and Judge Kavanaugh was about to be confirmed. They released it at the last minute to delay the confirmation until after the midterms hoping against hope that they will regain control of the Senate. Like I said, impeccable timing. Next "... insisting on Tuesday that the F.B.I. investigate first" That's a good one. The FBI has already properly declined to investigate inasmuch as there is no federal crime to be investigated. They have already satisfied their obligations in running multiple background investigations and Judge Kavanaugh declared fit to serve on the Supreme Court. Finally, "...the grievance should still be aired out and heard." Justice is a rare commodity and I believe everyone deserves their fair share. Everyone! That includes the accused as well as the accuser. Sadly, this accusation doesn't pass the smell test, not by a long shot. It smells distinctly of political shenanigans. "He said/she said" conflicts are hard enough to prove when they occur. A couple or three decades later, all hope of justice has vanished. The Democrats in the Senate know this full well and have orchestrated this political theater very crudely. But then, they are desperate. All other ploys have failed and anyone who is surprised by this is playing the fool...
(5)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
CPT Jack Durish Jack, your response is succinct and spot on. When the circular argument starts, it's time to walk away.
(2)
(0)
SSG Warren Swan
CPT Jack Durish - I disagree. I admit timing was weird, but to be heard is her right. From what I've read, she was not the one pushing to get the FBI involved, that belongs to Feinstein. You haven't seen Harris or Booker come out fanning the coals on this one. I wonder if privately they believe Feinstein made a rather deep hole she's stuck in with this one. If she can come forward to drop a manhole of an accusation on Kav, she deserves to be heard. Once done, Kav has every right to go and give his side of the story, and we move on from there.
Anyone who believes he'll be convicted is a damn fool, thanks to the statute of limitations. In todays society we cannot even convict a Catholic Priest who molests kids, and someone possibly thinks the FBI will come up on him? Please I'm crazy not stupid. I'd rather see the FBI go after the chomo fake priests.
Anyone who believes he'll be convicted is a damn fool, thanks to the statute of limitations. In todays society we cannot even convict a Catholic Priest who molests kids, and someone possibly thinks the FBI will come up on him? Please I'm crazy not stupid. I'd rather see the FBI go after the chomo fake priests.
(2)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
SSG Warren Swan she has a right to be heard and she's been heard. Really heard. Sadly, that's not the issue here. The issue is whether or not Judge Kavanaugh should be confirmed as a Supreme Court Justice. The Democrats are using this woman to delay or, better yet, prevent his confirmation. In this context there will never be justice for the accuser nor the accused.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
Of course this should be investigated. Just having one side come in and say "this happened" and the other say "no it didn't" absent any investigation is worthless if ones goal is actually to try and determine if the event happened. And that should be the goal. Because if it did happen, then we have a SCOTUS nominee who lied to the Senate, and should be voted down unanimously. And the FBI routinely investigates matters in the course of background checks even if there is no federal crime involved. Because they are tasked with investigating to see if there are matters that indicated unsuitability for office, which is not the same as criminal activity. We already have republican senators on the committee publicly stating that the woman is "mixed up" and "confused" absent any evidence whatsoever. Without an investigation by the FBI, no facts will be determined. It will simply be an excercise in 'who do you believe' which will break down by party line, due to the politics involved.
So if you really want to take the politics out of it, have the FBI investigate the facts and report back to the committee. Then have the two people testify under oath. That's the surest way to get as close to the truth as possible. But if the goal isn't actually getting to the truth, then just rush this thing through, check the block, and move on. Of course the accusation must be heard; but then the accusation must be investigated; otherwise there is no point in it at all. it is clear that the republicans have no interest in finding out the truth. Otherwise they would not be banning the presence and questioning of other witnesses who could have information about the event in question. They don't want the truth. THEY CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
https://www.yahoo.com/news/brett-kavanaugh-2015-apos-happens-212341696.html
So if you really want to take the politics out of it, have the FBI investigate the facts and report back to the committee. Then have the two people testify under oath. That's the surest way to get as close to the truth as possible. But if the goal isn't actually getting to the truth, then just rush this thing through, check the block, and move on. Of course the accusation must be heard; but then the accusation must be investigated; otherwise there is no point in it at all. it is clear that the republicans have no interest in finding out the truth. Otherwise they would not be banning the presence and questioning of other witnesses who could have information about the event in question. They don't want the truth. THEY CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
https://www.yahoo.com/news/brett-kavanaugh-2015-apos-happens-212341696.html
Brett Kavanaugh In 2015: 'What Happens At Georgetown Prep Stays At Georgetown Prep'
Brett Kavanaugh, the president's Supreme Court pick being accused of sexual
(3)
(0)
SSG Warren Swan
Sie when I say it won't be investigated, it's because some would take this investigation as a possible means to indict/arrest/convict. That is not going to happen when the SOL having to have expired in MD long ago. IF the FBI were to take this on, there literally is no way to go back and recreate this. There were three people in the room. She named all three and the third person admitted he was there, but doesn't remember what she does. The fact that last night he said he wasn't going to get involved to help his "friend", makes him kind of a blue falcon, but that's like with "friends". This is a bad he said/she said moment.
There has to be a clear division between what folks think should happen, wish could happen and what will happen. The first one is completely different from the last, and makes the world of difference. I do not believe she was the one who came forward and even asked for this to be done (ONLY the FBI investigating it) not the deed itself. With that demand, she's being used as a "stop gap" measure politically. I don't like the way she and other women are done in that way by either party, but it happens.
The Professor is going to find out just how ugly congress can be in short order. Anita Hill was beat the hell up in her testimony, and it's already been said that Ford will see the committee come out with both barrels blazing. I STILL applaud her for coming forward. I wish more sexual assault/rape victims would/could do the same. No woman should suffer in silence. At the same time no woman's past should be discounted over politics especially the petty partisan politics the congress we've had has gone to great lengths over the last 12yrs to do to the other. Remember this is the same body who made a big stink over members sexually harassing staff or others, rallied to make policies that were to hold them responsible when proven, and where is that proposal now? DOA
There has to be a clear division between what folks think should happen, wish could happen and what will happen. The first one is completely different from the last, and makes the world of difference. I do not believe she was the one who came forward and even asked for this to be done (ONLY the FBI investigating it) not the deed itself. With that demand, she's being used as a "stop gap" measure politically. I don't like the way she and other women are done in that way by either party, but it happens.
The Professor is going to find out just how ugly congress can be in short order. Anita Hill was beat the hell up in her testimony, and it's already been said that Ford will see the committee come out with both barrels blazing. I STILL applaud her for coming forward. I wish more sexual assault/rape victims would/could do the same. No woman should suffer in silence. At the same time no woman's past should be discounted over politics especially the petty partisan politics the congress we've had has gone to great lengths over the last 12yrs to do to the other. Remember this is the same body who made a big stink over members sexually harassing staff or others, rallied to make policies that were to hold them responsible when proven, and where is that proposal now? DOA
(3)
(0)
1
1
0
Great points by everyone. I will add that maybe all the senators need to background checked back to their HS friends and have at least 65 females friends vet them as good men.
(1)
(0)
SSG Warren Swan
We wouldn't have anyone up there from either party. Not sure at the moment if that'd be a bad thing.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google