Current Events > Place your bets: Will the FBI find anything on Kavanaugh?

(+) Yeah! (+)

It a tough call, Kavanaugh seems guilty, but the FBI only has a week. If I were a betting man, I would bet they dont find anything too significant.
---

"anything?"

Yes.

Enough to stop the appointment, I don't know.
---

No lol
---

It's really easy to get him on lying.

I don't know if the FBI is interested in going down that road though.
---

If they interrogate Judge, which it appears is going to happen, they've got him on perjury at the very least.
---

Tyranthraxus posted...

"anything?"

Yes.

Enough to stop the appointment, I don't know.

This. They could get proof he committed perjury and it wouldn't mean a thing. Heck, last year the white house made it clear that their judge appointments didn't take the BAR association in to account in any capacity
---

theres nothing that they'll find that will change the senate's mind

Let's see the FBI didnt do shit to Clinton...Trump well hes still the big man in charge...
---

I dont think it will matter, but at least they are doing an investigation. Its the right thing to do
---

They'll probably turn up at least a couple of other people he partied with, but who knows
---

Whats interesting is how the Pubs will use this if they dont turn up anything significant against Kavanaugh. I can see it already, Trump will talk about how the Dems tried to slander a good mans name.
---

No. As usual with these types of cases there is no evidence outside of witness testimony and it seems to be a he said, she said deal. Nothing conclusive.
---

Anything they could have possibly found would have come to light, by now. Theyre basically just on damage control, pretending to investigate something that the vast majority of us agree is not worth their time. Even the democrats on he Supreme Court are realizing this is a witch hunt and its making THEM look bad.

Theres an official deadline, now, and the dems plan to stall has been overruled. They can sniff around for a week, but no more, and we all know that they would have found anything worth finding by now.
---

Kazi1212 posted...

Whats interesting is how the Pubs will use this if they dont turn up anything significant against Kavanaugh. I can see it already, Trump will talk about how the Dems tried to slander a good mans name.

Nah, attempting to look at this without bias, the ship has sailed. It's much, much harder to convince people you're innocent than to convince them of guilt.

If, again, speaking objectively, Kavanaugh is innocent, his life is done. No college will want him to speak, his peers and fellow judges will avoid him and not seek his opinions. Even if he gets confirmed, he's basically Clarence Thomas 2, most likely never to get a landmark case and simply a yes or no man. Trump's words will convince no one but his followers.
---

southcoast09 posted...

Anything they could have possibly found would have come to light, by now. Theyre basically just on damage control, pretending to investigate something that the vast majority of us agree is not worth their time. Even the democrats on he Supreme Court are realizing this is a witch hunt and its making THEM look bad.

Theres an official deadline, now, and the dems plan to stall has been overruled. They can sniff around for a week, but no more, and we all know that they would have found anything worth finding by now.

can't wait for another round of symbolic shit posting.
---

It's not unlikely. Chadabrah sure didn't want it and Mark Judge's behavior sure doesn't convey innocence.
---

southcoast09 posted...

Anything they could have possibly found would have come to light, by now. Theyre basically just on damage control, pretending to investigate something that the vast majority of us agree is not worth their time. Even the democrats on he Supreme Court are realizing this is a witch hunt and its making THEM look bad.

Theres an official deadline, now, and the dems plan to stall has been overruled. They can sniff around for a week, but no more, and we all know that they would have found anything worth finding by now.

Thank you for your support for child molesters and rapists. You're doing your country proud.
---

WaffIeElite posted...

southcoast09 posted...

Anything they could have possibly found would have come to light, by now. Theyre basically just on damage control, pretending to investigate something that the vast majority of us agree is not worth their time. Even the democrats on he Supreme Court are realizing this is a witch hunt and its making THEM look bad.

Theres an official deadline, now, and the dems plan to stall has been overruled. They can sniff around for a week, but no more, and we all know that they would have found anything worth finding by now.

Thank you for your support for child molesters and rapists. You're doing your country proud.

Fucking hell southcoast. You are being lectured about this shit from WaffleElite.

I'm not sure you understand the implications of that.

But it's bad.
---

Certainly not in a check "with a limited scope" that can take "no more than a week"

That's why Flake called for it. Him and his Dem buddy called the Rosenstein and he told them you can't find shit in a week. So he called for in the hopes that it would stop chicks from screaming at him in the elevator and he can go back to voting in a conservative majority for the next 40 years and set this country back to 1960.
---

Tyranthraxus posted...

"anything?"

Yes.

Enough to stop the appointment, I don't know.

---

How can they find anything that's not circumstantial? It's literally he said / she said. And that's not enough to make somebody guilty.
---

And by no means am I a Kavanaugh fan.
---

It's all he said, she said.
There is literally nothing and no one to investigate beyond what the two of them said.
Maybe those witnesses of hers but they already said they know nothing of any party much less the supposed assault.

It's all asinine.
The FBI is going to investigate what happened in a room between two people at a high school party 36 years ago. A party no one can even attest to having been held. Or where. There's no witnesses.
Do people honestly believe something conclusive is going to be discovered out of that absence of substance?
I mean by all means conduct it. It's just not going to come up with anything because of course it won't. Because it's impossible to.
---

Fam_Fam posted...

theres nothing that they'll find that will change the senate's mind

This. They could find out that he runs a pedo ring out of a pizza shop, and Republicans will still vote for him. On the other hand, they could find out that he's never broken the law, ever, and every accusation is all part of a huge Dem conspiracy, and Dems would still call him a rapist and vote against him.

As for the question at hand, I doubt they'll find anything at all, one way or another - they have no leads to go on in the first place.
---

Kazi1212 posted...

Whats interesting is how the Pubs will use this if they dont turn up anything significant against Kavanaugh. I can see it already, Trump will talk about how the Dems tried to slander a good mans name.

From the perspective that he's innocent, what makes you think that isn't exactly what Dems did?
---

EternalDivide posted...

what happened in a room between two people

3 people.
---

Nope.

Prosecutor Reportedly Said She Wouldnt Charge Kavanaugh
http://dailycaller.com/2018/09/28/rachel-mitchell-not-prosecute-kavanaugh-blasey-ford/

The sex crimes prosecutor tasked with questioning Christine Blasey Ford during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Judge Brett Kavanaugh told Republican senators on Thursday that Fords claims and the lack of corroborative evidence were not strong enough to take the case to a courtroom.

Arizona prosecutor Rachel Mitchell spoke at a late-night Thursday meeting with the Republican caucus, where she briefed all 51 GOP members, according to The Washington Post. Based on the evidence presented during the hearing, Mitchell reportedly said that she would not have prosecuted Kavanaugh. (RELATED: Kavanaugh Breaks Down While Talking About His Dad)

Mitchell spelled it out and was clear with senators that she could not take this anywhere near a courtroom, a source told Fox News. In fact, Mitchell reportedly said she would not even pursue a search warrant.
---

SauI_Goodman posted...

How can they find anything that's not circumstantial? It's literally he said / she said. And that's not enough to make somebody guilty.

Exactly. Theres nothing that could come from this. At this point, you either see things logically or you want to believe that the man is guilty of literally anything.
---

Yes.
---

he'll probably fail the polygraph
---