Feinstein: ‘I Had To Leave’ – Did Not Read Entire Report

Maybe she read enough?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Maybe she knows there is nothing to leak that is damaging to Kavanaugh in the report. I think if there was something there it would have been leaked by someones (staff/sacrificial lamb) by now.

a reply to: Pyle

Curious if you can source the FBI saying what it's limits were? The only thing I heard was Ford and Kavanaugh due to their testimony already taking place. And that was anonymous sources.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Pyle

Because the Democrats pushed it and Republicans backed it because to do otherwise would have the msm attack them costing them midterm votes.

Democrats pushed it but had NO power to force it nor did they have ANY control over how the investigation was done. Both of those things rest on GOP hands. Anyone able to view it from outside the "pro-Trump thought free zone" can see the investigation was not done in good faith but done to give a appearance of giving a #.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04


How can an FBI investigation be considered complete when they didn't even interview the alleged victim, Ford, and the accused perpetrator, Kavanaugh? The Republicans claim that the report shows no new corroborating evidence, but the FBI didn't interview any witnesses that could potentially corroborate the alleged victims' stories, and/or shed light on the character of the accused, like Kavanaugh's Yale roommate.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
So she demands an investigation then can't be bothered to read it.

How much more evidence do we need the investigation demand was never about evidence and Democrats didn't actually care beyond it being a tool for obstruction.

She also slammed the investigation that she couldn't be bothered to read as incomplete despite not knowing what's actually in it.

ilovemyfreedom.org...

That seems to epitomize the Democratic party at this time. Cause an uproar to get your way and then loose interest if it doesn't go the way you want it. You would think she could pretend to be interested in seeing the report, but it really goes to show that there is absolutely no interest in the facts. In fact, she probably couldn't stomach the facts. She had something else to do, like whine and snivel with her peers.

I can't believe I used to identify with that party, thank goodness that they have become so obvious that even a thick skull like me can see the blaring truth. Shame on them for making the US look idiotic, wasting time and the taxpayers money as well as trying to ruin someone's career.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Pyle

Curious if you can source the FBI saying what it's limits were? The only thing I heard was Ford and Kavanaugh due to their testimony already taking place. And that was anonymous sources.

I do this more then I should for "curious" people.

LTMGFY

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: OccamsRazor04


How can an FBI investigation be considered complete when they didn't even interview the alleged victim, Ford, and the accused perpetrator, Kavanaugh? The Republicans claim that the report shows no new corroborating evidence, but the FBI didn't interview any witnesses that could potentially corroborate the alleged victims' stories, and/or shed light on the character of the accused, like Kavanaugh's Yale roommate.

They had everything they needed or was going to get from Ford, written, and testimony with questions from a prosecutor. Trying to schedule an interview with her would have been a waste of time and money. Besides, the FBI would probably have to wait until the planets were properly aligned so Ford could feel safe. Like months from now.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Pyle

I agree why bother to read when it was a Democrat led sham about obstruction all along.

I would think even the democrats would want her to at least pretend to be interested in the outcome, but I'm probably giving them way too much credit. In general, they seem to be way, way beyond wanting to seek out the truth.

a reply to: Pyle

They did not investigate his drinking habit. What's that got to do with Ford and assault?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

the FBI didn't interview any witnesses that could potentially corroborate the alleged victims' stories, and/or shed light on the character of the accused, like Kavanaugh's Yale roommate.

NPR has confirmed the identities of six people whom the FBI interviewed as part of its investigation:

- Kavanaugh's high school friends P.J. Smyth, Mark Judge, Tim Gaudette, Chris Garrett
- Ford's friend Leland Keyser
- A second Kavanaugh accuser, Deborah Ramirez.

No one corroborated the story because it is bull #.

Please catch up.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Are you claiming there is no testimony from Ford about the event?

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Are you claiming his Yale roommate was at the party Ford alleges happened

a reply to: OccamsRazor04


Was the FBI limited only to only interview witnesses who could testify to what occurred at that specific party?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Are you claiming there is no testimony from Ford about the event?

Not from the FBI.

a reply to: vinifalou

No one corroborated the story because it is bull #.

Why didn't the FBI interview Kavanaugh about the new allegations and his lack of candor about his drinking habits at the time? Several of his friends and roommates came forward to say that he lied about his drinking habits during the hearing. Kavanaugh refused to answer Democrats questions during the hearing, and Republicans didn't ask him hardly anything at all, and most of them used their time to praise Kavanaugh and condemn Democrats.

It's one thing to deflect committee hearing questions, it's quite another to do that to the FBI.

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

What is the point of reading 1000 pages in 1 hour if the summery tells you it was a sham?

Well done, you've exactly proved the point of the OP.

Reading the entire report and slamming it as incomplete is one thing. Not reading the entire report and slamming it as incomplete, based only on the outcome in the summary, is a whole other thing.

A report or investigation isn't incomplete just because the outcome isn't what you want.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: OccamsRazor04


How can an FBI investigation be considered complete when they didn't even interview the alleged victim, Ford, and the accused perpetrator, Kavanaugh? The Republicans claim that the report shows no new corroborating evidence, but the FBI didn't interview any witnesses that could potentially corroborate the alleged victims' stories, and/or shed light on the character of the accused, like Kavanaugh's Yale roommate.

Because they'd already made written and verbal statements.

Also, the 'character of the accused' is irrelevant. The FBI were trying to find out if he sexually assaulted people. This search for whether he was a nice guy or not is just the lefties moving the goalposts when their original outlandish claims fall flat.

a reply to: Rewey

It is incomplete when it was set up that way by the people who ordered it.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

No since they talked to people about the 2nd accuser too. Who witnessed Kavanaugh do something that was not talked to?