Posted on 09/30/2018 10:17:20 AM PDT by SpeedyInTexas
President Trump on Saturday evening clarified the parameters for an FBI investigation he ordered into the sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh.
Previous media reports said the FBI probe would be limited in how many accusers the agency would interview regarding Kavanaugh’s past – but the president wrote Saturday that he had placed no such barriers on investigators.
Trump’s message, tweeted after his “Make America Great Again” rally in Wheeling, W. Va., targeted a report by NBC News, though the Wall Street Journal had reported a similar story.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
How many people are going to book flights to non-extradition countries in the next 24 hours?
Good for President Trump. One more incidence of Fake News.
They need to investigate Dr. Ford. Especially the UNC Chapel Hill years.
Trump should specifically order them to investigate Fineswine, her staff and their significant others.
So the story then complains Trump didn’t address the time frame, which they know was set by the Senate.
Even the Ford defenders on this site, can now see that the FBI will also go back to accuser and any pertinent info that relates to the investigation.
This is not solely focused on Kavanaugh.......
Even the Ford defenders on this site, can now see that the FBI will also go back to accuser looking for any pertinent info that relates to the investigation.
This is not solely focused on Kavanaugh.......
“Even the Ford defenders on this site, can now see that the FBI will also go back to accuser “
There are Ford defenders on this site?
What? There are Ford defenders stupid enough to swallow her BS here?
I hope you are right and the FBI investigation will not be focused solely on Kavanaugh. Either he is innocent or he is not (I think he is) but fastest and easiest way to determine whether or not he might be innocent, is to take a long hard look at Ford. After all, one of these 2 people is a malignant sociopathic predator, and the other is the innocent victim. I think Ford defenders need to realize that Ford may very well be the psychopath and a liar. This is not a case of 2 innocent confused people, one of these people is demonically wicked. The FBI needs to establish which one.
Must mean the auto company?
Perhaps, bb was referring to trolls.
More than I ever thought possible here on this site. My own husband even thought she appeared credible! The only thing credible about her is her acting ability. How is a person who comes forward with a rape charge in the eleventh hour of a supreme court confirmation and remembers nothing deemed credible?
I was actually impressed by her credibility after my initial viewing of her testimony.
Later, however, something just didn't seem right. I realized that she reminded me of a very kooky neighbor I once had that would seem friendly to you as long as she was getting her way but would become a real snake if you opposed her.
Realizing this, I re-examined her testimony. There is an FR thread about a body language expert commenting about Ford. Most convincing was the expert's observation that Ford seemed to be reciting details from other than visual memory.
I had already noticed that her description upon entering the location of the party was that Brett and Mark were very inebriated. I would call that a conclusion more than a description.
A description might be, "Brett was lounging back in a chair with a beer can in his hand. He eyes looked vacant and his shirt was untucked." Such a description might be consistent with being inebriated, but Ford's recounting contains NO detail at all and is very uninformative.
Further, having decided that Ford's story lacks detail to an unacceptable level, I then realized that the interrogator seemed to purposely avoid any encouragement to add detail. I think that it was important to have Ford's story remain in its low detail form. Once you recognize this, Ford's credibility suffers greatly.
I meant to add that I would be interested in your husband's assessment of the particular detail I pointed out.
Does your husband have dementia?
No. He’s one of those who believes “something happened to her” that she repressed. I don’t get it. Totally out of character with his regular conservative programming.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.