EXCLUSIVE OFFER: 60% Off VIP Membership. Today Only!
Is Donald Trump Going to Get Convicted? Of Course, He Is.
Will Chinese Athletes Get Away With Doping at the Paris Olympics?
Secretary Blinken Confronted Over Biden Admin's Withholding of Military Aid to Israel
U.S. Forced to Take Action As Hamas Continues Attacking Gaza Pier
The Latest Climate Grift: ‘Carbon-Free’ Human Composting
A New National Poll With Key Data on the Trump Trial Just Dropped
Germany Would 'Of Course' Arrest Netanyahu If ICC Issues Warrant. Israel Responds.
In 'Stunning Rebuke,' Chicago City Council Backs Effort to Block Mayor From Canceling...
This Axios Headline on the Economy Is Something Else
This State Enacted a Law Allowing Cops to Arrest Illegal Aliens. Here's How...
ICJ Issues Ruling in Case Against Israel
Republican Governor Banned From All Tribal Lands in Her State
Someone Needs to Go to Jail
What Do We Make of These Latest Battleground State Polls?

Wrong, Democrats: There Was No FBI "Cover Up." They Played It By The Book.

A follow-up to yesterday's post on Democrats' new, disgraceful line that the FBI either doesn't know how to do its job, or is actively engaged in a pro-Kavanaugh "cover-up."  The cynicism and hypocrisy is breathtaking: They careened from insisting that only the FBI was capable of doing this job, to impugning the Bureau's professionalism and integrity.  What caused this whiplash?  A political outcome Democrats don't like.  They're upset about the lack of new evidence that could corroborate unsubstantiated, decades-old allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.  It's that simple.  An op/ed in the New York Post systematically demolishes these claims, explaining that the FBI -- whose agents were instructed to interview whomever they saw fit -- adhered to normal operating procedure:


Frustrated that the bureau hasn’t helped them bring down a nomination they otherwise oppose, Democrats have pivoted to attacking the FBI — specifically, claiming that the inquiry was curtailed to prejudice the outcome by limiting the pool of interviewees. They’re wrong: The FBI followed procedure precisely. Indeed, the FBI followed the standard background investigation process the Senate uses for the hundreds of nominations it considers. And it’s exactly the process that Democrats were demanding only days ago...In rare cases, information or allegations arise after the file is complete. When this happens, the FBI may be asked to conduct an additional, supplemental investigation, narrowly targeted to those matters. That’s what the Senate requested and that’s what it got with respect to recent allegations against Kavanaugh. This supplemental investigation adds to an already thick file. 

The FBI has now conducted six thorough investigations of Judge Kavanaugh, both in connection with his nomination to the Supreme Court and in prior government service. All of those investigations demonstrated the judge’s character and fitness...Democrats now portray the FBI supplementary investigation, which followed standard procedures they deemed essential just days ago, as a mere smokescreen...This spin can be explained in only one of two ways: Either Senate Democrats piously demanding an FBI investigation had no understanding of what such an investigation entails or, much more likely, they have been cynically playing for delays all along.


The piece also tells this crucial truth, which must be repeated every single time any Democrat complains about the timeline or thoroughness of the FBI's approach: "This supplemental FBI investigation of new claims against Kavanaugh would’ve happened two months ago had Senate Democrats followed standard procedures and shared the letter they received from Ford, detailing her allegations against Kavanaugh, with their Republican colleagues and the FBI."  Correct. It also accurately notes that committee Democrats instructed their staffers to boycott internally-conducted investigations (which are also standard procedure) after the Democrats leaked Dr. Ford's accusations, against her explicitly-stated wishes.  Separately, for all their disgusting shouting about a "whitewash" or "cover-up" here, might Democrats be eager to quickly pivot away from what's apparently in the newly-compiled file?  Matt mentioned this earlier, but today's Wall Street Journal report is not a good look for Ford's teaml:


My admonition from the other day about uncorroborated allegations that confirm your priors remains firmly in place, but it's...quite interesting that the woman who purports to back up Ford's denial of her longtime boyfriend's assertions about polygraph coaching is the very same woman who apparently texted Leland Keyser to urge her to alter her original public statement.  That original statement both failed to corroborate Ford's recollection of the party, and went further to say that Keyser didn't know Kavanaugh.  That's effectively a form of witness tampering, and it may be the only real piece of news to come out of the FBI's latest work on this matter (and for the record, I think we should see that report, with limited redactions, as necessary).  Relatedly, check out the deeply-connected DC Democratic lawyers who are involved in this mess, and recall that while Sen. Feinstein was doing nothing on Ford's allegations vis-a-vis the committee and Kavanaugh, she was connecting Ford with partisan lawyers.  I'm not sure any of this proves a conspiracy or malicious impropriety, but the stench of impropriety is thick.  


I'll leave you with a list of the fact witnesses -- not character or hearsay witnesses -- that the FBI chose to interview this week.  As you peruse the following roster, please remember the single most important piece of information we have in connection with the allegations against Kavanaugh.  Namely, of all the fact witnesses placed at the two incidents by the accusers, none of them have corroborated their accounts.  Zero of them, including the woman who says she was pressured by Ford's team to  her account.  And in the case of the Yale accusation, the accuser herself isn't even confident of her own story, by her own admission:

One more stray thought, via a friend: There is now literally more contemporaneous and current evidence bolstering Kavanaugh's testimony that "the Devil's triangle" reference in his high school yearbook entry was about a drinking game than there is to support either of the actual allegations against Kavanaugh. Think about that.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Videos