White House blocking FBI from interviewing Kavanaugh, Ford: Report

[mystery-ak]

White House blocking FBI from interviewing Kavanaugh, Ford: Report
by Diana Stancy Correll
 | October 03, 2018 02:33 PM



The White House has not given the FBI permission to interview Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford, who has accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, as part of the FBI’s supplementary investigation into allegations against Kavanaugh, according to a report.

The White House has indicated to the FBI that testimonies from Kavanaugh and Ford last week before the Senate Judiciary Committee were adequate, although it’s uncertain if the FBI is putting pressure on the White House to receive outright approval to interview them.

Additionally, it’s uncertain why the FBI has not interviewed several witnesses listed by lawyers who may have information on the allegations, and if the White House needs to sign off on those individuals being interviewed in the first place, sources familiar with the matter told Bloomberg.

Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., told reporters Wednesday that the FBI was expected to deliver a supplementary background check to lawmakers later Wednesday afternoon.

more
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house-blocking-fbi-from-interviewing-brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford-report

[truth_seeker]

Weport, Weport. Who's got the weport?

When we gonna vote?

[Applewood]

Well, the whole world has heard from Ford and Judge Kavanaugh, plus the judge has been vetted several times already.  What else would the FBI have to ask?   And aren't those  witnesses all hearsay -- or at the very least, none of them are corroborative. 

This whole supplemental investigation was totally unnecesary anyway and should never happened.  Whether it had gone on any longer -- there will always be someone who will say it wasn't thorough enough.  Time to wrap this [expletive] up and take a vote.

[Fishrrman]

Applewood wrote:
"Time to wrap this [expletive] up and take a vote."

A direct question to Applewood:
Do you want "a vote", even if we don't "have the numbers" to win?

I don't.

If you've been reading my postings here, you know what I suggest:
A recess appointment by the president, with a followup up/down vote in the Senate as first order of business in January.

Like the smart lawyer who doesn't ask a question to which he doesn't already know the answer --- no vote unless we have "the votes"...

[Applewood]

@Fishrrman

I just want to get this dang thing over with.  You know that the Dems and a few allied Republicans are hoping to string this along for as long as possible.  Delay, delay, delay.  Remember that the Dems are still mad that Merrick Garland never was voted on and they are hoping that in November, they will have full control of the Senate, so they can get their man or woman in.  If Judge Kavanaugh is not approved, it won't matter who Trump nominates instead.  These people will find some way to reject the candidate or delay the nominating process. 

So let's get the voting done.  If the judge is rejected, Trump has the option of moving on to another candidate or going with the recess appointment as you suggested.  Now, if the Repubs lose big in November, I'm not sure a recess appointment will be an option. Can Trump make the appointment on a Saturday or Sunday following the vote on Judge Kavanaugh?