President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is facing an accusation of sexual assault, threatening to derail his lifetime nomination to the highest court in the land. See the latest.
Clarence Thomas underwent his initial hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee in early September 1991.
Anita Hill says she spoke with the Judiciary Committee in “early September,” and that an FBI investigation was suggested to her on Sept. 20, 1991 .
On Sept. 23, 1991 , allegations of harassment were brought to the attention of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which immediately informed the White House, according to a statement from then-deputy press secretary Judy Smith.
Upon learning of the allegations , the White House “promptly directed the FBI to conduct a full, thorough and expeditious investigation,” according to the statement.
Three days later, on Sept. 26, 1991 , the FBI completed its investigation, and a report was submitted to the White House and the Judiciary Committee. The White House deemed the allegations “unfounded.”
On Oct. 6, 1991 , Nina Totenberg of NPR obtained a copy of the FBI report and reported on the allegations, the first time the public became aware of the story.
On Oct. 11, 1991, Hill begins her testimony during Thomas’ Senate confirmation hearing.
There judiciary committee will not be holding a trial. There is no presumption of anything, there will be no convictions or acquittals. This is a political battle.
The result of the battle will either be he gets confirmed, or he doesn’t.
Again, you’re addressing this as though the FBI has never done a background investigation. Do you understand what that is, what the FBI does for one of these?
They don’t need to. They just need to reopen the background investigation that they already did. Put it to rest, or determine if it happened. I don’t think they can charge him based on 30 plus years passing. But the FBI is not just investigating crimes. They investigate appointments, high security clearance jobs for both the government and the military and etc. They don’t have to look at this from the standpoint of a criminal investigation, they only need to re open the Kavanaugh background investigation.
So really all the FBI can do here is to interview both Ford and Kavanaugh under oath and put their statements in his current file and then pass that off to the Senate, correct? I suppose they could see if anyone else would like to testify but that likely would not happen. Whatever role they would potentially play would have little or nothing to do with guilt or innocence.
Isn’t it misleading to imply that the FBI can investigate this matter, whereas all they can really do is interview people under oath and then simply put those testimonies in his current file?
No you still don’t understand what I am saying. The FBI already conducted a background Investigation on Kavanaugh. All they are really doing is opening this investigation back up, and then asking him his side asking Ford her side. Does she remember names of people there, names of the home owners. Who through the party? All these things. If she can’t give them anything…then they go on from there. Close it back up…pass on reports to the White House, and the judiciary committee and let them figure it out. Now if something comes up…leads…then they FBI investigates further.
Even if she had filed a complaint back in 1982, or whenever this incident occurred, nothing would have happened. Underage kids drinking at a party, one kid gets fresh with a girl, she thinks he may have wanted to get her clothes off, she gets away and she leaves the party.
What would happen to the boy, even if he admitted to everything she says happened?
I read her letter to Fienstien, it sounded like nothing happened.
Most that could be done is to question the person(s) alleged to have been there when the incident was alleged to have happened, but I think there is no legitimate reason or statute to allow for that.
My wife and I had an opposed discussion about that this morning. She thinks it is necessary for an “investigation” before Ford testifies and I was of the opinion that it would be wrong to even have Ford testify at all, with or without any investigation.
That certainly doesn’t mean I think it was impossible that Kavanaugh did such a thing, not by any means, it just means the time to have brought this to the light of day was back then, not now.
I want to know. I want to know if his denials are true or not. If he’s lying…i don’t want him to be a Justice on the SCOTUS. Shouldn’t they be beyond reproach.
