Sen. Bill Cassidy: FBI Probe Must Investigate Dems’ Collusion to Smear Kavanaugh

Breitbart: Just like their other tactics throughout this confirmation process, Senate Democrats’ demands for an FBI investigation have never been about getting the facts or finding the truth.

If they were, they would have alerted law enforcement months ago, as soon as they learned of the claims. Instead, they waited until the last minute to leak them in order to delay the vote.

That is why any FBI investigation of the allegations against Judge Brett Kavanaugh should include potential coordination between the Democrat operatives and lawyers that assisted in bringing them forth.

What Senate Democrats really want is more time to smear Judge Kavanaugh, regardless of the toll it takes on his wife, his daughters, and our country.

Democrats will not suddenly require evidence to declare Judge Kavanaugh guilty of being the worst kind of criminal. They will not suddenly abandon their assumption that all accusations against Republicans are credible and to be believed.

If the FBI turns up nothing significant, they will say what Joe Biden said in 1991, that the FBI does not reach conclusions. They will say the FBI did not have enough time to conduct a thorough investigation.

What they will not do is admit they were wrong to accuse Judge Kavanaugh of being a gang rapist, or a rapist, or a sexual assaulter, or a drunk, or a perjurer, or a hothead unfit for the bench.  read more

16 Comments on Sen. Bill Cassidy: FBI Probe Must Investigate Dems’ Collusion to Smear Kavanaugh

  1. One cannot investigate a nullity.
    Ask Michelson and Morely.

    The FBI is complicit in the anti-American, anti-Constitutional Treasons of the Nihilistic/Totalitarian (Socialist) schemes of the Demonrat Partei.

    The Demonrats could just have easily demanded the FBI capture a Unicorn and the Republicans would have agreed – they are a pusillanimous lot.

    Axe y’seff: “Why is the United States Senate bowing to the “demands” of some political party hack lawyer?”

    izlamo delenda est …

  2. If Judge Kavanaugh is investigated by the FBI, then Dr. Ford and her democrat promoters need to be investigated as well.

  3. At this point, in consideration of these past years, who would trust or believe anything the FBI could provide as legitimate?

  4. I agree that she should be investigated. I also think she should be sued. But this FBI thing is not the place. It is a contrived piece of political theater and will never deliver satisfaction. Get her out of the spotlight and give her some real litigation to spend her GoFundMe loot on.

  5. Why leave the Bush Never Trumper Republicans out of the investigation? The chance that they were not in on it shrinks closer to insignificance with ever act of treachery they pull.

  6. The FBI begins every interview with “we know were your kids go to school, it would be a shame if something happened to them”.

  7. Dems want to stall because they think like to think they’re going to take every seat in the house and senate. Because that’s what CNN and them keep saying.

    But if they really believed that, why don’t they just seat him and start their phony investigations of Kavanaugh in December? No, I think they know that they will be losing seats and they’ll be stuck with Kavanaugh for eternity.

  8. Now the journos are stroking their chins and pointing out the Establishment connection between Chris Wray and Kavanaugh. Next thing you know, they’ll be telling us there’s a conservative deep state.

  9. Maybe the FBI can recover her scrubbed social media history and show what a rabid lying political activist she really is

  10. Rumor has it that Dir Wray has requested Peter Strzok & Lisa Page to come out of retirement to conduct the special investigation. And to assure a completely unbiased investigation Jim Comey will be the special supervisor of the task force.

  11. My guess, since it happened in the HRC “investigation,” is that the results are being written up BEFORE the first question is asked.

    That would be more true-to-form FBI than anything remotely “investigative.”
    You cannot “investigate” something which did not happen.
    Particularly something which did not happen 35 years ago.

    They should release their “findings” now and do their “investigation” at their leisure.

    izlamo delenda est …

  12. Gregg Jarrett: In Kavanaugh battle, are Ford’s lawyers representing her, or the Democrats? .

    The committee wrote to the attorneys: “We are committed to providing a secure and respectful setting for her testimony. The Chairman fully agrees with Dr. Ford that we cannot have another ‘media circus.’ The Chairman has offered the ability for Dr. Ford to testify in an open session, a closed session, a public staff interview, and a private staff interview. The Chairman is even willing to fly female staff investigators to meet Dr. Ford and you in California, or anywhere else, to obtain Dr. Ford’s testimony.”

    But the private interview never happened. When Ford finally testified at Thursday’s Judiciary Committee public hearing, she seemed surprised that she could have avoided the public spectacle.

    Here is Ford’s exchange with counsel for the committee Rachel Mitchell at the Thursday hearing. Importantly, note how Ford’s attorney objected in an effort to stop her from answering:

    Mitchell: Was it communicated to you by your counsel or someone else that the committee had asked to interview you, and that they offered to come out to California to do so?

    Ford Attorney: I’m going to object, Mr. Chairman, to any call for privileged conversation between counsel and Dr. Ford………….

    Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., suspects that Ford’s lawyers manipulated and exploited their own client for the purpose of achieving their political goal of destroying Kavanaugh, even if it meant victimizing Ford. ……

    The fact that the very senator who Ford trusted to keep her story confidential encouraged the professor to hire Democratic-activist lawyers who may have been motivated to push for a public hearing in defiance of their client’s wishes is extraordinarily significant.

    The Rules of Professional Conduct that govern lawyers prohibit conflicts of interest and require that all offers must be fully, honestly, and promptly conveyed to the client (American Bar Association Rule 1.4).

    In Washington, where Katz and Banks practice law, Rule 1.3 states: “A lawyer should always act in a manner consistent with the best interests of the client.” There are now serious and legitimate questions as to whether this rule was violated.


Comments are closed.