General Discussion

Laura PourMeADrink

(42,770 posts)

20. You are right. And I got false hope from former FBI on TV. I remember one saying

Tue Oct 2, 2018, 07:23 PM

Oct 2018

like it was proof certain that, the FBI would pick Dr Ford up and literally drive her around neighborhoods to spur recollections. HA.

Phillip Mudd (ex FBI Branch Head) initially was very skeptical about the short time - but then later that evening he was optimistic - like this is what the FBI thrives on - a massive search for the truth in a short amount of time. Like it would be a challenge they would take on and do well.

Little did they know their arms would be tied.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

61 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Well, we got played again. If we hadn't been so excited and immediately jumped in glee [View all] Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 OP

Just heard on Michelangelo Signorile MontanaMama Oct 2018 #1

Yup and no Dr Ford. I would give anything Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #11

There is a WSJ report that says IT COULD BE finished tonight or tomorrow morning according Hoyt Oct 2018 #32

If by "we" you mean democrats...we didn't have any say it it. Merlot Oct 2018 #2

Right its called MATH--51-3 Equals 48 Which is less than 50 Stallion Oct 2018 #4

well, I thought (foolishly) that a FBI investigation would mean an actual CharleyDog Oct 2018 #6

Yes, when will you learn. Kaleva Oct 2018 #9

Yes...it's hard to think re-thug when a natural Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #13

I know, we have no power....but millions were watching that moment - and DiFi Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #21

Hot damn, you are good at what you do! ZZenith Oct 2018 #3

Sorry didn't mean to do that. But you are 100% Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #16

the FBI gets bdamomma Oct 2018 #5

So is the vote tomorrow? torius Oct 2018 #7

Can't happen that fast unless Democrats play along FBaggins Oct 2018 #15

Are you referring to committee or floor? Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #18

Floor FBaggins Oct 2018 #29

Oh - just assumed that the committee would reconvene to examine FBI Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #36

Oh. The FBI knows and can prove he lied under oath many times Freethinker65 Oct 2018 #8

But was that in their scope? proving he lied? Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #22

It is absolutely provable that he took an oath to tell the truth, and he did NOT tell the truth. Cracklin Charlie Oct 2018 #10

In a sane world... Garrett78 Oct 2018 #34

And, it has never been clearer - clear like mud - we are playing fair and they Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #37

That was the plan all along! We really aren't being played. We just don't have the Kajun Gal Oct 2018 #12

You are probably right - it was incredibly odd that after announced (the weak week investigation) Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #19

Saw a lady on Ari Melber, republican back in 2015, email got hacked. People forget that Kajun Gal Oct 2018 #24

I work from home with the news on in the background all day. I hear everything Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #39

Not sure if Trump was originally behind the hack. He isn't that smart. I think Russia Kajun Gal Oct 2018 #43

But, he likely was the recipient, right? This is totally under-reported - what happened Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #45

Not from NOLA. NOLA isn't NOLA anymore since Katrina. But all these hacks on both Kajun Gal Oct 2018 #49

And yes, Trump most definitely was a recipient! Kajun Gal Oct 2018 #50

Yes, Trump was a recipient, I'm quite sure. Kajun Gal Oct 2018 #51

Read NancyGregg latest post... Kajun Gal Oct 2018 #53

There are many on the Left who are prone to irrational exuberance elocs Oct 2018 #14

Good points..it just gets old - and tiresome always doing contortions - like Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #23

In 2016 the election in the Senate was just the opposite of what it is now elocs Oct 2018 #26

Yup. Nate's got us at only 30% chance. Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #27

Schmidt of the NYT helped with the misleading news that the scope was expanded. triron Oct 2018 #17

You are right. And I got false hope from former FBI on TV. I remember one saying Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #20

The FBI is signalling they were handcuffed by the WH SuprstitionAintthWay Oct 2018 #25

Know for a fact the NYC FBI loves Trump. They were the ones who did not respond Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #40

NYC FBI agents' role in 2016 SuprstitionAintthWay Oct 2018 #47

I have been meaning to dig back to find the interview - maybe you have heard Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #61

Nobody I know Codeine Oct 2018 #28

It is far from over and out vlyons Oct 2018 #30

you guys are still on a learning curve... jodymarie aimee Oct 2018 #31

Is it that we got played sarisataka Oct 2018 #33

The three "eyewitnesses" pintobean Oct 2018 #35

I don't remember small gatherings from 36 years ago that were uneventful for me, either. SuprstitionAintthWay Oct 2018 #38

And she said it wasn't even a party - but a "pre-party" gathering - so no - you likely Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #42

The bottom line is the same pintobean Oct 2018 #56

You're probably right. Hard to squelch "autopilot" optimism and belief that things Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #41

Not so much cynical sarisataka Oct 2018 #54

I never heard anyone "immediately, when it was announced it was criticized and Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #58

Didn't fool me Sugarcoated Oct 2018 #44

sometimes it's not good to know so much. Maybe it would be better to be one Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #46

The FBI is investigating Trump directly so I would not say so at all. Fred Sanders Oct 2018 #52

Was the WH going to listen to the demands of Democrats though? JHan Oct 2018 #48

it was always a long shot to stop the nomination bigtree Oct 2018 #55

I agree - but I always look at things like - things could be better - we could be in Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #59

This is all on you... lame54 Oct 2018 #57

???? Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2018 #60