Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

SCOTUS: No longer content with stacking, they're now dealing from the bottom of the deck


Burgold

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, twa said:

I'm not a lawyer , but when everyone has a different story than you  tis not good.

 

Ben Domenech Retweeted Gabriel Malor

This remains a very important point as I reiterated on @WNYC - the witness denials have all been on the record and subject to penalty. Only the accuser has declined to make such a statement to the Senate.

Ben Domenech added,

Gabriel Malor @gabrielmalor
As others have noted, Dr. Ford is the only person in her account who hasn't made a statement to the committee that is subject to penalties for false communications. https://twitter.com/ShannonBream/status/1043676938487955456 

 

 

Um, no one has testified, all that's happened is people have sent lawyered up letters all saying "I don't recall."

 

Does some committee guy calling you up and talking to you on the phone count or sending a letter in count as far as false statements go?

 

Even if it does, this isn't a standard the GOP wants to set, that willingness to make a statement on the record = credibility.

 

Because by that standard, Ford, who is asking the FBI to be involved, is more credible than Brett, who is not.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

the man is flying up the list of disgusting pieces of **** floating around that party

 

 

its a really ****ing stupid thing to say beforehand on so many levels

 

also the notion that voting No on Kavanaugh will somehow "ruin his life" is bull****. The man will still have his life of luxury and freedom,  he just wont do it while sitting on the highest court in the land. 

Edited by StillUnknown
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, DogofWar1 said:

 

 

 

Does some committee guy calling you up and talking to you on the phone count or sending a letter in count as far as false statements go?

 

 

 

yes it does, and false statements are punishable

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody else find it weird that GOP operatives knew she was an accuser before anyone besides Feinstein was supposed to know about it?

 

This is what makes me think there are strong legs here and that's why everyone on the right doesn't want this investigated.  They had 65 women ready to go, Ed Whelan knew who was making the accusation before the name went public, etc.

 

It feels like they knew this was coming.  And there is no way to have known this was coming except for them to have been told by Brett himself, or to have gotten a tip off from some other investigatory body (like if the FBI included a little blurb in their background checks that this allegation was floating around but there wasn't enough evidence for them to fully investigate criminally and/or it wasn't their jurisdiction).

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely but by all accounts the list of 65 women was legit. It's weird since he went to all boys school..but a lot of these families are interconnected and it does make sense they would all know each other. 

 

Although...at least 1 lady has said she didn't know him personally but signed the letter anyways so that does make me question how many actually did know O'Kavanaugh personally. I'm sure the answer lays somewhere in between.

Edited by The Evil Genius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

haven't posted on this as a whole, but the litany of fake crap fox heads have been putting out since monday is amazing

 

one good example---they had no less than 5 of their morning and primetime ****-sacks using derogatory material from a site where you rate your professor---like yelp---calling ford everything from troubling to dark to undependable and more....'cept it was a different professor ford as other media had to follow-up on to bust them for and they never did do retractions, they just dropped the line....

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Innocent until proven guilty.  Is this a basic human right or not?

 

Our laws are under fire by the far left liberalism/socialism so prevalent in the Democrat party today.

 

Law is interpreted by these people, and many on this board, as whatever is necessary to support their political views.  Or their hatred of the President.

 

Neither women nor men have a gene for honesty.  They both lie, contrary to the belief by Democrats that ALL claims by women are presumed to be legitimate even in the face of evidence to the contrary.

 

This current far left brand of liberalism is a blight upon the land and the law.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, B&G said:

Innocent until proven guilty.  Is this a basic human right or not?

 

Our laws are under fire by the far left liberalism/socialism so prevalent in the Democrat party today.

 

Law is interpreted by these people, and many on this board, as whatever is necessary to support their political views.  Or their hatred of the President.

 

Neither women nor men have a gene for honesty.  They both lie, contrary to the belief by Democrats that ALL claims by women are presumed to be legitimate even in the face of evidence to the contrary.

 

This current far left brand of liberalism is a blight upon the land and the law.

LOL, I seem to remember unproven allegations of sexual misconduct being used against a Democrat in the past. Politics is dirty business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...