American Thinker/ Ed Timperlake: I’ve been through the process of Senate advise and consent confirmation, including an FBI background investigation, and must warn Professor Christine Blasey to be careful what she wishes for:
A woman who has accused President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, of sexual assault decades ago wants her allegations to be investigated by the FBI before she appears at a U.S. Senate hearing, her lawyers said on Tuesday.
As President Trump noted, Judge Kavanaugh has been through the FBI wringer six times:
“He is one of the great intellects and one of the finest people that anybody has known. You look at his references — I’ve never seen anything quite like it,” he said. “The FBI has I think gone through a process six times with him over the years where he went to higher and higher positions. He is somebody very special.”
Because Senator Feinstein waited until the very last minute to bring up this serious charge, the FBI would be faced with what is called “raw” information in the FBI advise and consent vetting process.
I suspect Senator Feinstein wanted to trigger a full FBI field investigation on this “raw” information, which could then have tied up the process for some time, but she thankfully failed. Professor Ford, Senator Feinstein and all associated with this had better understand the potential power of what they were and still are trying to bring down on themselves by calling in the FBI for an investigation.
If the FBI ends up engaged, then the awesome 21st century surveillance state technology can be employed. The ability to capture all electronic information can bring the disinfectant of sunshine to the issue.
Having been through the Senate’s advise and consent process in much kinder and gentler times, I learned a lot. I was confirmed in 1989, but today’s FBI vetting has been updated with 21st Century technological advances that I previously identified and warned about.
In going through the FBI “full field,” I was assigned a Special Agent who was a first rate individual with a good sense of humor. He explained the process: everything I put down on my “clearance form” would be gone over by their very capable “forensic auditors” and he would concurrently do my “field” investigation.
He quipped that he would first interview the five references that I put down and, expecting them to say good things about me, would ask at the end: “Now, who doesn’t like him?” He then added: “We like ex-wives.” And so it went. MORE
Her parents would not believe her because she didn’t look as though someone had attacked her? What parents will not believe their 15-year-old daughter who runs home to tell them drunken boys tried to rape her?