Why does it have to be the FBI?

[blackascoal]

Serve her up. Dems outed her letter to the media. She said she wanted to speak at a hearing...so SPEAK ALREADY! lol

You didn't answer.

What are you afraid of?

A Supreme Court nominee afraid of the FBI? :0) Ok

[Mason Michaels]

They you need to grow up; because you and the DNC are trying to force a false allegation thru, without any evidence.

<see how that works?>

I'm not a Democrat

[USFREEDOM911]

Or, conversely, she might just not want to testify in public.

I still think it's hilarious that you guys think all of this is a negative w/ potential backlash for Dems. I'm not sure if you can see how this looks to a good solid half of the voting public.

UH - didn't they give her several options, that have nothing to do with her testifying in front of the public??

Or are you just being obtuse, again??

[USFREEDOM911]

why do the republicans want to DO SPECIAL THINGS this time around instead of having the professionals investigate the issue

What issue??

Unless you mean the issue of her having a changing memory and no evidence.

Are you comfortable with her being investigated for lying??

[Stretch]

You didn't answer.

What are you afraid of?

A Supreme Court nominee afraid of the FBI? :0) Ok

He's had 6 background checks, not exactly a sign of fear. Let her speak, she's had me waiting for a week, I've got my popcorn.

[USFREEDOM911]

Let's see how it goes. Less then 2 months away now.

Can't wait.

[translation]
WHATEVER
[/translation]

[USFREEDOM911]

They haven't played me at all. Both sides do the same thing. I've been on record here saying that Kav will likely be confirmed, and frankly, unless something more compelling comes out on this, I think he should be. If Kav doesn't get confirmed, chances are someone as or more conservative will be ultimately. This isn't really a battle they should waste time on.

Outside of simply letting the process of this accusation play out. I'm not saying that if he's guilty, he should slide through. But there isn't enough there right now, without corroborating witnesses or other evidence, to create more than a he said/she said.

That must be why you've disagreed so passionately with other JPP liberals, over this.

OH, WAIT - YOU HAVEN'T.

[blackascoal]

He's had 6 background checks, not exactly a sign of fear. Let her speak, she's had me waiting for a week, I've got my popcorn.

:0) Just noticing that there aren't women on your side of the world here.

You know they made a movie about that. :0)

[Stretch]

So on Monday, Ford's lawyer categorically stated that her client would testify in front of the Judiciary Committee. She did not bring up any conditions whatsoever. In fact, she sounded confident and ready to go.

But, now the story has changed after the Judiciary Committee granter her her wish.

No, now she wants the FBI to investigate. Well, why does it have to be the FBI?

Why can't she just fly back home and file a complaint with the local police department and have them launch an investigation? Why leave her fate up to the FBI? She has other options if she really wants this investigated.

If Ford wanted a criminal investigation then she should have gone to the proper jurisdiction at local authorities. She came to politicians (ie DiFi) where it's advise and consent.

[USFREEDOM911]

Simple:

Lying to local law enforcement is not a felony. In fact, the penalties for lying to local PD vary depending on the jurisdiction, are at the local prosecutor's discretion, and could be just a fine.

However, lying to the in a Congressional Hearing is a felony. So it's pretty obvious why liberals don't want Ford talking to the Congressional Hearing; because liberals simply can't stop her from lying in the Congressional Hearing. They all saw what happened to when Ford was offered the ability to testify, and they don't want that to happen.

So there's a lot of bad faith posturing going on, like the DNC.

You obviously know that there's no federal statute when it comes to lying to local law enforcement; a cursory Google search would reveal that.

So that begs the obvious question; why is the DNC acting in bad faith?

The answer is because the DNC simply don't know how to act any other way.

FTFY

[USFREEDOM911]

typical bullshit by you

You throw out some unsubstantiated claim. When you are asked to back it up, you whine and move the goal posts. Why are you defending yourself against accusations I never made?

I asked you to provide proof of Fox and Talk Radio doing the things you claim they did. You simply said "I saw it on Full Frontal"

Maybe you should call for a full FBI investigation before you provide proof of what you say

Wait until he goes to his back up reply of:

"WHATEVER".

[blackascoal]

If Ford wanted a criminal investigation then she should have gone to the proper jurisdiction at local authorities. She came to politicians (ie DiFi) where it's advise and consent.

ANITA HILL

I recognize that truth, logic, and common sense aren't real popular on your side of the world .. but damn .. ANITA HILL disproves everything you've been told.

[Stretch]

:0) Just noticing that there aren't women on your side of the world here.

You know they made a movie about that. :0)

Actually there are quite a few women here who are also anxious for hear to speak.

[Cancel 2020.1]

Darn; I'm late. I forgot tonight was JPP's "triggered" clinic.

[Stretch]

ANITA HILL

I recognize that truth, logic, and common sense aren't real popular on your side of the world .. but damn .. ANITA HILL disproves everything you've been told.

She and Thomas weren't teenagers when he did what she claimed.