Welcome, Guest! - or
Easy to remember!  »  VinNews.com

Washington - FBI Chief Says 'Usual Process Met In Kavanaugh Probe

Published on: October 10, 2018 11:39 AM
By: AP
Change text size Text Size  
FBI Director Christopher Wray testifies during the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on 'Threats to the Homeland'on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, USA, 10 October 2018.  EPAFBI Director Christopher Wray testifies during the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on 'Threats to the Homeland'on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, USA, 10 October 2018.  EPA

Washington - FBI Director Chris Wray said Wednesday that the FBI’s background investigation of new Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh was limited in scope but that the “usual process” was followed.

Wray’s comments a Senate committee hearing on national security threats were his first public statements about the bureau’s investigation into Kavanaugh’s past and allegations of sexual misconduct dating from Kavanaugh’s high school and college years.

Advertisement:

Democrats have complained that the White House constrained the FBI and worked with Senate Republicans to narrowly define the parameters of the investigation, which lasted just a week and did not include interviews with people who said they had relevant information to share about Kavanaugh’s past. The Senate confirmed Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court on Saturday.

Wray, responding to questions from Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., said that unlike criminal investigations, the FBI’s authority in background investigations is determined by the agency that requested it — the White House in this case.

“I think I would say that our investigation here, our supplemental update to the previous background investigation, was limited in scope and that that is consistent with the standard process for such investigations going back quite a long ways,” Wray said.

He said at another point that there had been communication between the FBI’s Security Division, which runs the background investigation process, and the White House Office of Security. Wray said he had spoken with “our background investigation specialists and they have assured me that this was handled in the way that is consistent with their experience and the standard process,” he said.

Wray declined to answer a question from Harris about whether the FBI had investigated whether Kavanaugh had lied to Congress under oath.



More of today's headlines

Jerusalem - More than 3,000 acres of forest in the Northern and Western Negev desert have been damaged by arson attacks from Gaza. Marking six months since... New York - U.S. stock indexes dropped sharply Wednesday, and the S&P 500 was on pace for its worst day since June, as interest rates resumed their climb. Treasury...

 

Total13

Read Comments (13)  —  Post Yours »

1

 Oct 10, 2018 at 12:01 PM Educated Archy Says:

Hey dems , this is the same FBI that cleared Hillary and same FBI who is vigoursly investigating Trump. Are they credible or not?

2

 Oct 10, 2018 at 12:48 PM Anonymous Says:

If you listen to the questioning in the clip, it is obvious that the senator is grandstanding, doing the usual thing the Dems did throughout the K hearings. They ask suggestive questions, get their negative answers, and then behave as if their assumptions are correct. This is blatantly dishonest, and should be portrayed to the public as the manipulation of public opinion.

There is zero indication that the WH dictated the scope of the investigation, and the senator knows that. But she is desperate to make us all believe that Trump tied the hands of the FBI. Other senators stated that openly, and they, too, should be disgraced for this dishonesty.

3

 Oct 10, 2018 at 02:33 PM Teddybear Says:

Kamala Harris go fly a kite Smell de coffee

4

 Oct 10, 2018 at 04:12 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #1  
Educated Archy Says:

Hey dems , this is the same FBI that cleared Hillary and same FBI who is vigoursly investigating Trump. Are they credible or not?

No one is questioning the credibility of the FBI here (the only ones I recall questioning it recently are Trump and the GOP), rather the issue lies with the White House which limits the scope of the investigation. All Wray said was the FBI followed protocol which is to investigate per the limitations placed on it by the White House. With the investigations into Hillary, there were no such scope limitations placed. Kind of a significant difference between the type of investigations.

But then why would anyone expect folks who blanket support Trump and the GOP and buy into antisemitic global jew theories (e.g. Soros is paying protestors...) to actually understand nuances.

5

 Oct 10, 2018 at 04:16 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #2  
Anonymous Says:

If you listen to the questioning in the clip, it is obvious that the senator is grandstanding, doing the usual thing the Dems did throughout the K hearings. They ask suggestive questions, get their negative answers, and then behave as if their assumptions are correct. This is blatantly dishonest, and should be portrayed to the public as the manipulation of public opinion.

There is zero indication that the WH dictated the scope of the investigation, and the senator knows that. But she is desperate to make us all believe that Trump tied the hands of the FBI. Other senators stated that openly, and they, too, should be disgraced for this dishonesty.

You say there is zero indication the WH dictated the scope of the investigation... Strange, Wray said exactly the opposite (read the article!). He said the WH determines scope for these investigations and the FBI limits its investigation accordingly, which has always been the protocol.

Does anyone here have the ability to read or comprehend anything other then their preconceived notions?

6

 Oct 10, 2018 at 04:21 PM Anonymous Says:

Hey! How about if Christine Blasey Ford lied under Oath? Did that even occur to liberal Lyer Democrat?? She should be charged for false accusations and slander etc.

7

 Oct 10, 2018 at 06:55 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #5  
Anonymous Says:

You say there is zero indication the WH dictated the scope of the investigation... Strange, Wray said exactly the opposite (read the article!). He said the WH determines scope for these investigations and the FBI limits its investigation accordingly, which has always been the protocol.

Does anyone here have the ability to read or comprehend anything other then their preconceived notions?

That's not what he said. He stated that they followed procedure that has been in place for many years in terms of this investigation. There was no specific set of limitations in the request from the WH. The senator was trying to trap Wray into saying that, but he didn't. She did request a copy of the instruction from the WH ordering the investigation. You, among others, have decided that Trump did something sneaky here. You are wrong.

8

 Oct 10, 2018 at 08:29 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #6  
Anonymous Says:

Hey! How about if Christine Blasey Ford lied under Oath? Did that even occur to liberal Lyer Democrat?? She should be charged for false accusations and slander etc.

There is no credible information out there that she lied under oath. Your incorrect theories about what she may have said about her fear of flying, notwithstanding (if you listened to the 2 sentences said after that comment you would understand what she actually said).

On the other hand Kavanaugh, under oath denied knowledge that he knew he received stolen information from the Democrats (if he really did not know, then he is not that smart and obviously not a good choice for a supreme court judge), he said he did not drink a lot, despite numerous accounts that he did, he gave incorrect meanings to words used in his yearbook, despite them clearly meaning something else...

So I wonder, who do you think really lied? Even if you think that Ford is not remembering the story correctly that is not lying or slander, rather it is a flaw in her memory.

8

 Oct 10, 2018 at 08:35 PM Educated Archy Says:

Reply to #4  
Anonymous Says:

No one is questioning the credibility of the FBI here (the only ones I recall questioning it recently are Trump and the GOP), rather the issue lies with the White House which limits the scope of the investigation. All Wray said was the FBI followed protocol which is to investigate per the limitations placed on it by the White House. With the investigations into Hillary, there were no such scope limitations placed. Kind of a significant difference between the type of investigations.

But then why would anyone expect folks who blanket support Trump and the GOP and buy into antisemitic global jew theories (e.g. Soros is paying protestors...) to actually understand nuances.

Baloney it wa sthe same scope as Hillary . Same as Clearance Thomas. There were no limits. Yes there was a time line which makes sense. They interviewed ten witnesses. Just because they didn't shlep their kishkas out doesn't mean it wasn't broad. Nonsense.

Anti semetic to be anti a self hating jew like Soros? You are completely wacky. I am anti Soros too. Am I an anti semtie too?

8

 Oct 10, 2018 at 08:47 PM Eduacted Archy Says:

Reply to #5  
Anonymous Says:

You say there is zero indication the WH dictated the scope of the investigation... Strange, Wray said exactly the opposite (read the article!). He said the WH determines scope for these investigations and the FBI limits its investigation accordingly, which has always been the protocol.

Does anyone here have the ability to read or comprehend anything other then their preconceived notions?

yes people can comprehend. But you can't comprehend. You see I am not #2 but its obvious that what he meant was that there is no indication that the WH "limited" the scope in any way shape or form. But of course as the fake news does. You nit pick till you find a goittcha moment in someone's words. Classic fake news lying tactic.

9

 Oct 11, 2018 at 09:37 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #8  
Eduacted Archy Says:

yes people can comprehend. But you can't comprehend. You see I am not #2 but its obvious that what he meant was that there is no indication that the WH "limited" the scope in any way shape or form. But of course as the fake news does. You nit pick till you find a goittcha moment in someone's words. Classic fake news lying tactic.

Archy:

Typo - screen name.

10

 Oct 11, 2018 at 10:52 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #7  
Anonymous Says:

That's not what he said. He stated that they followed procedure that has been in place for many years in terms of this investigation. There was no specific set of limitations in the request from the WH. The senator was trying to trap Wray into saying that, but he didn't. She did request a copy of the instruction from the WH ordering the investigation. You, among others, have decided that Trump did something sneaky here. You are wrong.

You are this "Educate Archy" really lack comprehension. Do your reading and listening skills go past 1rst grade?

First sentence in this article:

"FBI Director Chris Wray said Wednesday that the FBI’s background investigation of new Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh was limited in scope but that the “usual process” was followed."

You can also listen to the hearing or read transcripts and the above is an accurate assessment of what he said.

To help you out... "limited in scope" means that the FBI was not able to investigate as they would normally do, rather someone set limitations on what they can investigate.

He also said it followed the usual procedure. The usual procedure is the White House dictates the scope of Supreme Court background investigations.

As to Hillary, that was not a scope-limited investigation, so there is quite a difference between the 2 investigations.

Regarding Trump doing anything sneaky, I am concerned that Trump specifically limited the scope so he can brag about an investigation being done, while hopefully avoiding the investigation from finding anything.

Not so complicated.

10

 Oct 11, 2018 at 10:56 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #8  
Educated Archy Says:

Baloney it wa sthe same scope as Hillary . Same as Clearance Thomas. There were no limits. Yes there was a time line which makes sense. They interviewed ten witnesses. Just because they didn't shlep their kishkas out doesn't mean it wasn't broad. Nonsense.

Anti semetic to be anti a self hating jew like Soros? You are completely wacky. I am anti Soros too. Am I an anti semtie too?

Idk, I have met a few Satmar's who are pretty bigoted (not sure if antisemitic is the word, rather it is more like bigoted against those they disagree with. They hate Jews who don't kowtow to their view of things and blame all the world's ill on them).

As to Hillary, she was not subjected to a scope-limited background investigation as she was not being "investigated" to be on the supreme court, rather she was subject to a regular investigation, with no scope limitations.

An idea for you... Google what "scope" and "limitation" mean, so you actually understand the conversation, which you clearly don't.

11

Sign-in to post a comment

Click here to sign-in.

Scroll Up
Advertisements:
Sell your scrap gold and broken jewelry and earn hard cash sell gold today!