09-17-2019, 02:06 PM
(09-17-2019, 12:02 PM)GMDino Wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong but we are talking about the FBI.
We are indeed. The same FBI that has done a thorough investigation on Kavanaugh on several occasions.
(09-17-2019, 12:45 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: This is completely irrelevant to the FBI failing to contact those people and a really bad attempt at deflecting away from the point that the investigation is the actual controversy.
I'm not deflecting from anything. The FBI performed the investigation they believed was appropriate. Indeed, they have thoroughly vetted Kavanaugh on several occasions.
Quote:I get that you're going with the narrative that the report was just about a new allegation, hence you derailing any mention of the criticism of the investigation and dropping that silly opinion piece from some super conservative radio host who finds it necessary to add "Roe v Wade is an abomination" randomly into tweets about Brett Kavanaugh and the NYTs.
There were several google items about this rather pertinent omission from the NYT article. They were all absolutely from right leaning sites. I can't force more moderate or left leaning sources to actually report the news, hence I provided what was available. The pertinent facts from the cited article aren't in dispute though so I'm not sure what the source has to do with anything.
Quote:But, to answer the question, they only have so many staffers and have been focused on the wide range of issues stemming from Trump directly. Not to mention the information on the inadequacy of the FBI investigation is new and they are now addressing whether or not they have the resources to investigate it.
Let's focus on the real narrative, not fake ones.
We are focusing on the real narrative. The FBI conducted the investigation they felt was appropriate. If the House Judiciary Committee felt this was inadequate they could absolutely follow up. The fact that they did not is rather telling. I get it, you believe the FBI investigation was inadequate. Apparently the House Dems disagree with you as they haven't verifiably followed up on this at all. Your assertion that they have bigger fish to fry doesn't exactly hold water as getting Kavanaugh has been a primary goal of the Dems since his confirmation. If they had anything of substance on him they would pursue it. If you choose not to believe this that is, of course, your prerogative.
(09-17-2019, 12:47 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It's increasingly apparent that those criticizing the NYT didn't read more than a sentence of the article.
Or maybe we just don't agree with the conclusion you came to? They either deliberately or incompetently left out a key piece of information from their article. Neither option is a good one. You complained about condescension previously, please practice what you preach.
