Rapier108 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Just heard Hirono refer to the newest accuser, Ramirez, as a "survivor." What's next? T-shirts saying "I survived the Weenie Wiggle of 1984!!"

---

Once a liberal woman is labeled a "survivor" they are no longer allowed to be criticized.

---

Men (and the occasional woman) who is falsely accused of rape should be called a survivor as well.

Rapier108 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Just heard Hirono refer to the newest accuser, Ramirez, as a "survivor." What's next? T-shirts saying "I survived the Weenie Wiggle of 1984!!"

---

Once a liberal woman is labeled a "survivor" they are no longer allowed to be criticized.

---

So once again, a highly educated professional woman is so traumatized by allegedly seeing a male organ while in college and are reduced to a puddle of tears thirty years later?

I'd wager her parents were naked for three days at Woodstock but raised her to be a Puritan?

aggiehawg said:

---

Just heard Hirono refer to the newest accuser, Ramirez, as a "survivor." What's next? T-shirts saying "I survived what I now recall after six days of consultation with an attorney to be sure that I'm not setting myself up on an actionable libel or slander cause of action may have been the Weenie Wiggle of 1984 even though I was highly intoxicated and no one can corroborate the story!!"

---

FIFY

VaultingChemist said:

---

Ramirez asking for a lineup of "members" so she can identify the culprit......

---

For those that haven't been lucky enough to watch this movie / scene, here you go.

Here's my hopefull theory as far as Grassley continuing to delay over the weekend...

I heard last week that the FBI could do background interviews with witnesses fairly quickly. I was listening to Fox News and somebody mentioned it.

My dream scenario would be hat Grassley called the FBI to have them investigate by interviewing witnesses and they've been updating him on their timeline for completion, hence the delays.

I'm hoping he shows up Thursday with a file that shows that the FBI could not find any corroboration.

This all assumes that he wouldn't have to alert the committee that he would be doing so. I'm not sure of the rules here. You wouldn't want to notify the dems because they'd try to block that or dig up even more "dirt".

I don't think the Senate can order an FBI investigation. It has to come from the White House. Unless its a federal matter where the FBI has jurisdiction and opens an investigation on it's own. No idea if I'm making that up, but that is my understanding.

You might be right, maybe Trump has done it and he's told Grassley to hang on for a bit.

Anyway, I can hope...

FroWins said:

---

Here's my hopefull theory as far as Grassley continuing to delay over the weekend...

I heard last week that the FBI could do background interviews with witnesses fairly quickly. I was listening to Fox News and somebody mentioned it.

My dream scenario would be hat Grassley called the FBI to have them investigate by interviewing witnesses and they've been updating him on their timeline for completion, hence the delays.

I'm hoping he shows up Thursday with a file that shows that the FBI could not find any corroboration.

This all assumes that he wouldn't have to alert the committee that he would be doing so. I'm not sure of the rules here. You wouldn't want to notify the dems because they'd try to block that or dig up even more "dirt".

---

The rules are that the SJC does joint (Dems and Republicans) investigations on their own and in conjunction with the FBI's background checks. All on a confidential basis.

Feinstein secretly using her staff to investigate this Ramirez woman's questionable story without telling Grassley is the second time she has blatantly violated the committee rules and procedures.

Grassley doesn't need the FBI to do that. He has his own investigators. But Ford refused to meet with them.

Woof

WelchAg said:

---

I don't think the Senate can order an FBI investigation. It has to come from the White House. Unless its a federal matter where the FBI has jurisdiction and opens an investigation on it's own. No idea if I'm making that up, but that is my understanding.

---

No, you are correct. FBI has no jurisdiction on its own to investigate this and has stated so. Now the White House could request the FBI reopen their background check but what would be the point? All of the supposed witnesses have already issued statements to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Guarandamntee you she has had a makeover and won't be near that plain if and when she finally resurfaces.

1978 - Animal House released

Just thought I'd drop that fact

John Blutarsky In a final voice-over a shot of the White House, Landis remarks that the viewers all know what happened to Bluto and Mandy Pepperidge: they became the President of the United States and First Lady of the United States.

Class of '82 - Whoop!

I guess if I was Trump, I would have been on the phone with the FBI to see how fast they could get a background check done. My hope is that he did and the FBI said give us a week and a couple of days.


It would make sense to keep it secret from the dems so they could continue to shoot themselves in the foot and the then the republicans could continue to point out how accommodating they are being to Ford.

Again, totally theory on my part but it's be terrific if Trump asked the FBI "when can you have the report on my desk?" And they told him Wednesday afternoon. Then Thursday the Republicans show up with their own bombshell.

FroWins said:

---

I guess if I was Trump, I would have been on the phone with the FBI to see how fast they could get a background check done. My hope is that he did and the FBI said give us a week and a couple of days.


It would make sense to keep it secret from the dems so they could continue to shoot themselves in the foot and the then the republicans could continue to point out how accommodating they are being to Ford.

Again, totally theory on my part but it's be terrific if Trump asked the FBI "when can you have the report on my desk?" And they told him Wednesday afternoon. Then Thursday the Republicans show up with their own bombshell.

---

You might be correct. I'm doubtful because the first thing the FBI would want to see would be the complete notes of the therapist. And interviewing the therapist. There would be howls of protest over that.

One thing I found interesting is that lots of left twitter is saying people should not ignore Farrow's coauthor, Jane Mayer. I agree. She has a longer record at the NewYorker and IMO the questionable aspects of the piece fit her previous hatchet jobs on other Rs going back to Clarence Thomas and the Kochs.

As we say in science, coauthors are all supposed to be equally responsible for the correctness of what we publish. But that's ideal theory not reality in science. I wonder what the dynamic was between Farrow and Mayer.

biobioprof said:

---

As we say in science, coauthors are all supposed to be equally responsible for the correctness of what we publish. But that's ideal theory not reality in science. I wonder what the dynamic was between Farrow and Mayer.

---

Interesting. In law when you write a scholarly paper, the top-line author is the senior partner/career subject matter expert and the second line is the 4th year associate that actually did all the research and wrote the paper.

biobioprof said:

---

One thing I found interesting is that lots of left twitter is saying people should not ignore Farrow's coauthor, Jane Mayer. I agree. She has a longer record at the NewYorker and IMO the questionable aspects of the piece fit her previous hatchet jobs on other Rs going back to Clarence Thomas and the Kochs.

As we say in science, coauthors are all supposed to be equally responsible for the correctness of what we publish. But that's ideal theory not reality in science. I wonder what the dynamic was between Farrow and Mayer.

---

Better: What was the dynamic between Jane Mayer & Chris Steele of the dossier fame? She met with Steele and wrote a major puff piece about him. Was she on the payroll for Fusion GPS at the time? Perhaps someday we will find out. But if she played for pay in the past...

aggiehawg said:

---

Just heard Hirono refer to the newest accuser, Ramirez, as a "survivor."

---

KInd of like me saying I survived the Vietnam War. Sure, I was only in grade school at the time, but I did live through it.

Quote:

---

BREAKING: Maryland police aren't reviewing second Brett Kavanaugh high school allegation, chief says, contradicting local news report

---

Am I wrong, or has the alleged "2nd accuser" angle received very little fanfare to this point?

Quote:

---

contradicting local news report

---

That's SOP for the media. Better to be first than right.

FireAg said:

---

Am I wrong, or has the alleged "2nd accuser" angle received very little fanfare to this point?

---

You're not wrong. Some normal MSM are even questioning it.

I just checked out the MSNBC website and there is no mention of the 2nd accuser anywhere on their page. It could be mentioned in one of the stories they have up concerning the Kavanaugh fiasco but it is definitely not front and center. Even the left has to admit this 2nd story is total BS.

The left may have overplayed their hand with this 2nd accusation. Gives the right ammo to play this whole thing as nothing more than a liberal feeding frenzy that is without merit. And the porn lawyer releasing the questions he wants asked really skyrocketed the sleaze factor of this thing. He wanted to hurt Kavanaugh but, in the end, he very well could have helped the right.

Anyone analyze on the cut and paste job on Ford's letter.

The girls on NPR this morning were absolutely enamored with the 2nd accusation. As they described Mrs Ramirez accusation, her admittedly sketchy memory, and that she can't find anyone that can recall her account, I was like what? You have someone who admits she can't recall and can't find anyone that can confirm and this is news?

SIAP