Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Which none were under the penalty of perjury for lying.
all of them gave under oath statements, with the threat of committing felony perjury if they lied.
Mark Judge should have been subpoenaed to appear in front of the Judiciary Committee since he was named in the issue and wrote a book about being a Gen X drunk. How they didn't include it proves how much of a Republican ramrod this has been.
Mark Judge has already submitted to the Senate Committee and gave statement under oath.
I have something to submit for the record. We received three statements under penalty of felony from three witnesses identified by Dr. Ford: Mark Judge, Leland Keyser and Patrick Smyth. All three denied any knowledge of the incident, or a gathering described by Dr. Ford. Without objection, I'll enter in the record.
New York didn't vote for Trump because they are majority nanny state liberal Democrats...……..had nothing to do with who Trump is or isn't.
See what I mean? Trump ripping people off: Fine. Trump lying: Fine. Trump assaulting women: Fine. Trump saying he and the NK dictator are "in love": Not a problem. Trump adoring Putin (ex-KGB who still murders his opponents): Fine.
What problem? I don't see a problem. It's just you "nanny state liberal Democrats." (And just for the record: it's those "nanny state liberal Democrats" who keep some of the red states from collapsing).
Cult.
Gotta hand it to FOX, though: all these many years of brainwashing their viewers to despise all Democrats and "liberals" has really paid off.
The New York Times couldn't find a single witness that Ramirez named in that accusation and they announced that as the reason they would not print the story. You will be happy to know that the Ramirez accusation is on the list that the FBI was specifically tasked to investigate.
You may be unhappy (Ramirez even more unhappy) that Senator Grassley has tasked the FBI to open Criminal Investigations into anyone who provided false information to the Judicial Committee and quoted the Statute for prosecution.
If the Demcrats take the house and senate, i hope they open full investigations into the whole process used to try to put Kavanaugh on on SC. Even if Kavanaugh fails they need to chase this down to stop future abuses of power like we have seen from Repubs over the last 8 years.
But you aren't a nominee for the Supreme Court; he is. His demeanor should represent grace under fire, and should show no partisanship, and he should tell no lies. He failed on all counts.
Kavanaugh's judicial demeanor has been on full display for 15 years as a Federal circuit Court judge.
there is no need for you to damn his entire career for how he reacted when he was being falsely accused of being a serial gang raper.
The New York Times couldn't find a single witness that Ramirez named in that accusation and they announced that as the reason they would not print the story. You will be happy to know that the Ramirez accusation is on the list that the FBI was specifically tasked to investigate.
You may be unhappy (Ramirez even more unhappy) that Senator Grassley has tasked the FBI to open Criminal Investigations into anyone who provided false information to the Judicial Committee and quoted the Statute for prosecution.
I have no pony in this show. Yes, its true, I would rather a ultra conservative judge not sit on the SC because I do not agree with his social platforms. I also have stated that I do not believe anything has proven so far that he should not be given the seat. Listen, I voted for DJT (because I hated HRC more than life itself admittedly to an unhealthy degree). I voted for both Republicans and Democrats in the last local election. I really do not side with either party. In my mind, both are mostly rotten to the core.
All that said, I am not unhappy Grassley has tasked the FBI to open criminal investigations into anyone who provided false information. Good. It should start with Swetnick and end with Kavanuagh. If the FBI finds any of them provided false information they should be punished.
All I have is rabbit ears out here in the desert. I haven't seen CNN, FOX or MSNBC in at least 20 years since I moved.
Wrong again.
Perhaps, what is really happening is many, like myself, are independently coming to the same conclusion about Kavanaugh.
Yes of course. lol
Whether you got it from the internet or TV doesn't matter. You've all decided you're not going to take him down with these unsubstantiated allegations so you have to move to the next item on your list. All at the same time though.
Stop him, any way you can, no matter what. The allegations were full of crap and so is this new talking point regarding stoicism in the face of public and brutal unsubstantiated destruction of your reputation. It's not a logical argument it's just all you have left.
He lied. Period. Either deal with it or ignore it, but deflection makes you look dishonest.
bull. he didn't lie. you seem to think if he didn't stand up strip down to a toga and chug a keg on live TV he told a lie.
both what you just said here and that article I just read are less honest than BK was. BY FAR
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
