Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| wishing we were congress |
https://www.judicialwatch.org/...aign=press%20release Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a complaint to the Board of Professional Responsibility of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals of Debra S. Katz, Lisa J. Banks, and Michael R. Bromwich for violating the rules of professional responsibility in their representation of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford According to the Judicial Watch complaint, by not informing their client Dr. Ford that Sen. Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee offered in a letter to “fly female staff investigators to meet Dr. Ford… in California, or anywhere else, to obtain (her) testimony,” Katz, Banks, and Bromwich violated the following District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct: Rule l.4(a) – A lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information. Rule 1.4(b) – A lawyer shall explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation. When the hearing finally took place on September 27, 2018, however, the following exchange took place between Dr. Ford, under oath, and counsel for the Committee, Rachel Mitchell: “MITCHELL: May I ask, Dr. Ford, how did you get to Washington? FORD: In an airplane. MITCHELL: OK. It’s – I ask that, because it’s been reported by the press that you would not submit to an interview with the committee because of your fear of flying. Is – is that true? FORD: Well, I was willing – I was hoping that they would come to me, but then I realized that was an unrealistic request. MITCHELL: It would’ve been a quicker trip for me. FORD: Yes. So that was certainly what I was hoping, was to avoid having to get on an airplane, but I eventually was able to get up the gumption with the help of some friends, and get on the plane.” Mitchell’s questioning at the hearing continued: “MITCHELL: Was it communicated to you by your counsel or someone else, that the committee had asked to interview you and that – that they offered to come out to California to do so? BROMWICH: We’re going to object, Mr. Chairman, to any call for privileged conversations between counsel and Dr. Ford. It’s a privileged conversation … (CROSSTALK) GRASSLEY: Would – could – could we – could you validate the fact that the offer was made without her saying a word? BROMWICH: (OFF-MIKE) GRASSLEY: Is it possible for that question to be answered without violating any counsel relationships? FORD: Can I say something to you – do you mind if I say something to you directly? GRASSLEY: Yes. FORD: I just appreciate that you did offer that. I wasn’t clear on what the offer was. If you were going to come out to see me, I would have happily hosted you and had you – had been happy to speak with you out there. I just did not – it wasn’t clear to me that that was the case. | |||
|
Baroque Bloke |
^^^^^^ I make annual contributions to Judicial Watch. Serious about crackers | |||
|
| Gracie Allen is my personal savior! |
I'm sorry, I wasn't sure if you were asking me or someone else. If it was me, here ya go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_ricin_letters | |||
|
Festina Lente |
Hopefully the whole flock of chickens is going to come home to roost and shit all over creepy porn lawyer and his client... Swetnick, Avenatti Referred for Criminal Investigation - Providing False Statements, Obstructing Congressional Investigations, and Conspiracy All Violate Federal Law WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley today referred Julie Swetnick and her attorney Michael Avenatti to the Justice Department for criminal investigation relating to a potential conspiracy to provide materially false statements to Congress and obstruct a congressional committee investigation, three separate crimes, in the course of considering Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States. While the Committee was in the middle of its extensive investigation of the late-breaking sexual-assault allegations made by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford against Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh, Avenatti publicized his client’s allegations of drug- and alcohol-fueled gang rapes in the 1980s. The obvious, subsequent contradictions along with the suspicious timing of the allegations necessitate a criminal investigation by the Justice Department. “When a well-meaning citizen comes forward with information relevant to the committee’s work, I take it seriously. It takes courage to come forward, especially with allegations of sexual misconduct or personal trauma. I’m grateful for those who find that courage,” Grassley said. “But in the heat of partisan moments, some do try to knowingly mislead the committee. That’s unfair to my colleagues, the nominees and others providing information who are seeking the truth. It stifles our ability to work on legitimate lines of inquiry. It also wastes time and resources for destructive reasons. Thankfully, the law prohibits such false statements to Congress and obstruction of congressional committee investigations. For the law to work, we can’t just brush aside potential violations. I don’t take lightly making a referral of this nature, but ignoring this behavior will just invite more of it in the future.” Grassley referred Swetnick and Avenatti for investigation in a letter sent today to the Attorney General of the United States and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The letter notes potential violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 1001 and 1505, which respectively define the federal criminal offenses of conspiracy, false statements and obstruction of Congress. The referral seeks further investigation only, and is not intended to be an allegation of a crime. The referral methodically details the issues with Swetnick’s allegations as relayed by Avenatti, the immediate diversion of committee resources to investigate those allegations, the subsequent contradictions by both Swetnick and Avenatti, the lack of substantiating or corroborating evidence, and the overarching and serious credibility problems pervading the presentation of these allegations. Swetnick made her allegations in a sworn statement to the committee on September 26. In an October 1 interview with NBC News, however, Swetnick specifically and explicitly back-tracked or contradicted key parts of her sworn statement on these and other allegations. In subsequent interviews, Avenatti likewise cast serious doubt on or contradicted the allegations while insisting that he had thoroughly vetted his client. Last month, Grassley referred for criminal investigation an individual who made false sexual-assault allegations against Justice Kavanaugh, which were then investigated by committee staff before the individual recanted the claims on social media. The full letter of referral of Swetnick and Avenatti can be found HERE: https://www.judiciary.senate.g...ferral)_Redacted.pdf . https://www.judiciary.senate.g...iminal-investigation NRA Life Member - "Fear God and Dreadnaught" | |||
|
Peripheral Visionary |
   | |||
|
| wishing we were congress |
The letter linked in feersum's post above is worth a read 29 pages but it reads fast. The letter nails Swetnick and Avenatti. Grassley has a great staff. They are very thorough. | |||
|
| Lawyers, Guns and Money  |
I'm proud of Chuck Grassley! "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." -- Justice Janice Rogers Brown "The United States government is the largest criminal enterprise on earth." -rduckwor | |||
|
| I believe in the principle of Due Process  |
Yep, and yep. Grassley writes good letters, doesn’t he? Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me. When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown | |||
|
| Donate Blood, Save a Life!  |
Excellent letter on the chairman's part and a great read. I skimmed through it pretty quickly as sdy noted. Lots of this has been issued piecemeal before, but if you want to see it all in one easy to follow compilation, this is highly recommended. *** "Aut viam inveniam aut faciam (I will either find a way or make one)." -- Hannibal Barca | |||
|
| Member |
Great news, I would like to also see a thorough investigation of 2 door Ford. _________________________ "Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it." Mark Twain | |||
|
| Peace through superior firepower  |
Yeah, and this is no surprise. You barely have to read between the lines on this one: Planned Parenthood Still Believes Julie Swetnick It's a puzzler, ain't it? I tell ya- the more I read about this Swetnick whore, the more pissed off I become. As best as I can tell, she is representative of the worst that the female of the species has to offer, and I mean that. This twat has made a lifetime of trying to use her precious little hole to intimidate and manipulate people, and baby, I hope they throw your lying, shameless ass under the jail. GRRRRRRRRRRR  ____________________________________________________ "I am your retribution." - Donald Trump, speech at CPAC, March 4, 2023 | |||
|
| Too old to run, too mean to quit! |
Yeah, I find it somewhat puzzling that so many crooks at such high levels are still walking around, consuming our oxygen. Elk There has never been an occasion where a people gave up their weapons in the interest of peace that didn't end in their massacre. (Louis L'Amour) "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical. " -Thomas Jefferson "America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great." Alexis de Tocqueville FBHO!!! The Idaho Elk Hunter | |||
|
| Member |
Planned Parenthood is a non-profit, I believe. If they push a political agenda, would that not violate the rules that a non-profit has to follow? They are obviously politically involved: https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...t-kavanaugh-n2525591 -c1steve | |||
|
| Member |
https://www.opensecrets.org/pa...t.php?cmte=C00314617 House Total to Democrats: $323,630 Total to Republicans: $0Recipient Total Adams, Alma (D-NC) $2,500 Aguilar, Pete (D-CA) $1,500 Allred, Colin (D-TX) $1,500 Axne, Cindy (D-IA) $3,000 Baer, Lauren (D-FL) $1,000 Barragan, Nanette (D-CA) $1,000 Bass, Karen (D-CA) $2,500 Bera, Ami (D-CA) $3,000 Bonamici, Suzanne (D-OR) $1,000 Boyle, Brendan (D-PA) $1,000 Brindisi, Anthony (D-NY) $3,504 Brown, Lisa (D-WA) $2,500 Brownley, Julia (D-CA) $1,500 Bustos, Cheri (D-IL) $5,000 Carbajal, Salud (D-CA) $3,000 Cardenas, Tony (D-CA) $1,000 Carroll, Morgan (D-CO) ($2,500) Cartwright, Matt (D-PA) $1,500 Casten, Sean (D-IL) $1,508 Castor, Kathy (D-FL) $1,000 Castro, Joaquin (D-TX) $1,000 Chu, Judy (D-CA) $1,500 Cicilline, David (D-RI) $5,000 Clark, Katherine (D-MA) $1,000 Clay, William L Jr (D-MO) $1,000 Clyburn, James E (D-SC) $5,000 Cockburn, Leslie (D-VA) $1,000 Coleman, Bonnie (D-NJ) $1,000 Cox, TJ (D-CA) $2,500 Craig, Angie (D-MN) $5,000 Crist, Charlie (D-FL) $1,500 Crow, Jason (D-CO) $2,500 Crowley, Joseph (D-NY) $5,000 Cummings, Elijah E (D-MD) $1,000 Davis, Paul (D-KS) $2,500 Dean, Madeleine (D-PA) $1,000 DeGette, Diana (D-CO) $2,500 DeLauro, Rosa L (D-CT) $2,000 DelBene, Suzan (D-WA) $1,000 Delgado, Antonio (D-NY) $4,500 Dingell, Debbie (D-MI) $1,000 Driskell, Gretchen (D-MI) $3,500 Eastman, Kara (D-NE) $1,500 Engel, Eliot L (D-NY) $2,000 Escobar, Veronica (D-TX) $0 Esty, Elizabeth (D-CT) $6,000 Feehan, Daniel (D-MN) $3,000 Finkenauer, Abby (D-IA) $5,500 Fletcher, Lizzie (D-TX) $2,268 Frankel, Lois J (D-FL) $1,000 Gallego, Ruben (D-AZ) $5,000 Garcia, Sylvia (D-TX) $2,500 Golden, Jared (D-ME) $2,500 Gomez, Jimmy (D-CA) $2,500 Gottheimer, Josh (D-NJ) $3,000 Haaland, Debra (D-NM) $3,500 Harder, Josh (D-CA) $2,500 Hayes, Jahana (D-CT) $1,000 Hill, Katie (D-CA) $8,999 Horsford, Steven (D-NV) $1,500 Houlahan, Chrissy (D-PA) $5,000 Hoyer, Steny H (D-MD) $5,000 Jayapal, Pramila (D-WA) $2,500 Jeffries, Hakeem (D-NY) $5,000 Jones, Gina (D-TX) $3,000 Kelly, Brendan (D-IL) $1,000 Kelly, Robin (D-IL) $1,000 Kennedy, Joe III (D-MA) $1,000 Kihuen, Ruben (D-NV) $1,500 Kilmer, Derek (D-WA) $1,000 Kim, Andy (D-NJ) $6,000 Kirkpatrick, Ann (D-AZ) $2,500 Kopser, Joseph (D-TX) $1,500 Kuster, Ann (D-NH) $5,000 Lawrence, Brenda (D-MI) $1,500 Lee, Barbara (D-CA) $1,000 Lee, Susie (D-NV) $8,000 Levin, Mike (D-CA) $4,000 Loebsack, David (D-IA) $4,000 Lofgren, Zoe (D-CA) ($1,000) Londrigan, Betsy Dirksen (D-IL) $1,500 Lowey, Nita M (D-NY) $1,077 Lujan, Ben R (D-NM) $5,000 Luria, Elaine (D-VA) $1,000 Malinowski, Tom (D-NJ) $2,500 Maloney, Carolyn B (D-NY) $1,000 Maloney, Sean Patrick (D-NY) $1,500 Manning, Kathy (D-NC) $2,500 McBath, Lucy (D-GA) $1,000 Meng, Grace (D-NY) $2,500 Moore, Gwen (D-WI) $2,000 Moulton, Seth (D-MA) $1,000 Mucarsel-Powell, Debbie (D-FL) $4,500 Murphy, Stephanie (D-FL) $3,000 Neguse, Joseph (D-CO) $2,500 Newman, Marie (D-IL) $5,000 Nolan, Rick (D-MN) $1,500 Norcross, Don (D-NJ) $1,000 Norton, Eleanor Holmes (D-DC) $1,000 O'Connor, Danny (D-OH) $0 O'Halleran, Tom (D-AZ) $3,000 Ossoff, Jon (D-GA) $6,509 Pelosi, Nancy (D-CA) $5,000 Perkins, Randy (D-FL) ($2,500) Peters, Scott (D-CA) $1,500 Pingree, Chellie (D-ME) $1,000 Porter, Katie (D-CA) $2,500 Pureval, Aftab (D-OH) $6,000 Quigley, Mike (D-IL) $1,000 Quist, Robert E. (D-MT) $3,265 Rose, Max (D-NY) $4,000 Rouda, Harley (D-CA) $2,500 Ruiz, Raul (D-CA) $3,000 Rush, Bobby L (D-IL) ($1,000) Sanchez, Linda (D-CA) $1,000 Scanlon, Mary Gay (D-PA) $1,500 Schakowsky, Jan (D-IL) $4,000 Schneider, Brad (D-IL) $3,000 Schrier, Kim (D-WA) $2,500 Schultz, Debbie Wasserman (D-FL) $1,000 Serrano, Jose E (D-NY) ($1,000) Shalala, Donna (D-FL) $1,000 Sherrill, Mikie (D-NJ) $2,500 Slaughter, Louise M (D-NY) $2,500 Slotkin, Elissa (D-MI) $3,500 Soto, Darren (D-FL) $2,000 Spanberger, Abigail (D-VA) $1,500 Stanton, Greg (D-AZ) $2,500 Stevens, Haley (D-MI) $1,500 Thompson, Bennie G (D-MS) $0 Tipirneni, Hiral (D-AZ) $2,500 Titus, Dina (D-NV) $1,000 Torres, Norma (D-CA) $1,000 Underwood, Lauren A (D-IL) $1,500 Wallace, Scott (D-PA) $2,000 Watson, Liz (D-IN) $1,500 Welle, Josh (D-NJ) $1,000 Wild, Susan (D-PA) $3,500 Williams, Kathleen (D-MT) $1,000 Yarmuth, John A (D-KY) $2,000 Senate Total to Democrats: $88,136 Total to Republicans: $0Recipient Total Baldwin, Tammy (D-WI) $4,999 Brown, Sherrod (D-OH) $2,959 Cardin, Ben (D-MD) $3,000 Carper, Tom (D-DE) $2,000 Feinstein, Dianne (D-CA) $5,000 Gillibrand, Kirsten (D-NY) $3,008 Heinrich, Martin (D-NM) $3,000 Hirono, Mazie K (D-HI) $2,000 Kaine, Tim (D-VA) $5,034 King, Angus (I-ME) $2,000 Klobuchar, Amy (D-MN) $5,000 Masto, Catherine Cortez (D-NV) ($370) McCaskill, Claire (D-MO) $5,000 Menendez, Robert (D-NJ) $5,000 Murphy, Christopher S (D-CT) $1,000 Nelson, Bill (D-FL) $5,000 Raybould, Jane (D-NE) $2,500 Rosen, Jacky (D-NV) $7,499 Sanders, Bernie (I-VT) $3,000 Sinema, Kyrsten (D-AZ) $5,000 Smith, Tina (D-MN) $5,000 Stabenow, Debbie (D-MI) $5,000 Tester, Jon (D-MT) $7,500 Warren, Elizabeth (D-MA) $7 Whitehouse, Sheldon (D-RI) $4,000 _________________________ "Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it." Mark Twain | |||
|
| wishing we were congress |
More Avenatti BS revealed https://dailycaller.com/2018/1...ing-words-kavanaugh/ A woman who Michael Avenatti claimed backed his client Julie Swetnick’s allegations against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh has recanted her story and is accusing Avenatti, a potential 2020 presidential hopeful, of “twisting” her words. In an effort to bolster Swetnick’s allegations, Avenatti put NBC reporters in touch with the second woman for a phone interview on Sept. 30. He published her sworn declaration on Twitter on Oct. 2. But according to NBC, the woman’s statements during the Sept. 30 interview were inconsistent with the declaration published by Avenatti. Swetnick and Avenatti claimed that witnesses would back up her allegations. Under pressure to produce those witnesses, Avenatti put NBC in contact with the second woman. In her Oct. 2 declaration, the woman said: “During the years 1981-82, I witnessed firsthand Brett Kavanaugh, together with others, ‘spike’ the ‘punch’ at house parties I attended with Quaaludes and/or grain alcohol. I understood this was being done for the purpose of making girls more likely to engage in sexual acts and less likely to say ‘No.'” She also claimed that Kavanaugh was “overly aggressive and verbally abusive to girls. This conduct included inappropriate physical contact with girls of a sexual nature.” But according to NBC News, the woman said in her Sept. 30 phone interview that she “didn’t ever think it was Brett” who spiked punch at parties. The woman also told reporters that she did not know Swetnick in high school. They became friends when they were in their 30s, she said. The woman also said that, though she knew who Kavanaugh was in high school, she never saw him behave inappropriate towards girls. Two days after Avenatti published the woman’s declaration, she told NBC that “it is incorrect that I saw Brett spike the punch. I didn’t see anyone spike the punch…I was very clear with Michael Avenatti from day one.” Asked about the discrepancy, Avenatti lashed out at NBC’s reporters, saying that he was “disgusted” by their questions. NBC also reports that Avenatti made inconsistent statements about the second woman after he released her declaration on Oct. 2. Avenatti initially confirmed to the network that the woman who issued the declaration was the same who spoke to reporters on Sept. 30. But when asked about discrepancies in her stories, Avenatti told the reporters: “How about this, on background, it’s not the same woman. What are you going to do with that?” But on Oct. 5, the woman told NBC News that she would no longer be communicating with Avenatti. “I will definitely talk to you again and no longer Avenatti. I do not like that he twisted my words,” she said It is unclear why NBC News did not report the discrepancies earlier. It is also unclear why Swetnick identified the second woman as a potential witness to Kavanaugh’s behavior. | |||
|
| Staring back from the abyss  |
The rules will not apply to PP because the commies have no morals and the Republicans have no spine. ________________________________________________________ "Great danger lies in the notion that we can reason with evil." Doug Patton. | |||
|
safe & sound |
A huge mystery indeed. | |||
|
| wishing we were congress |
On the previous page, in a post by feersum, there was a link to a Sen Grassley letter of 25 Oct 2018. The letter was to Jeff Sessions and Christopher Wray to investigate lawyer Michael Avenatti and Julie Swetnick. Then NBC revealed that Avenatti had another witness who would corrobate Swetnick, except when NBC contacted her, she said Avenatti had twisted her words. So, Sen Grassley wrote a second letter, dated 26 Oct 2018 link: https://redirect.viglink.com/?...r&txt=The%20referral and he asked Sessions and Wray to further investigate Avenatti about the "corroborating" witness (who actually denied what Avenatti said about her "sworn" statement) "Simply put, the sworn statement Mr. Avenatti provided the Committee on October 2 appears to be an outright fraud." Note: in the above link to the pdf, especially read pdf pages 9 and 10. That is what Avenatti submitted to the Judiciary Comm on 2 Oct. "outright fraud" It would be interesting to know if the redacted part of pdf page 10 is a signature or typed name. This unidentified "corroborating" witness may not be so innocent either. When NBC contacted her on 3 Oct, she said she had only "skimmed" the declaration. | |||
|
| Peripheral Visionary |
https://www.foxnews.com/politi...-about-kavanaugh.amp I like at the end of this article how Avenatti is taunting Sen. Grassley. Doesn't seem too bright after what we've seen from Sen. Grassley over the past several months.
| |||
|
| Go ahead punk, make my day |
Creepy Porn Lawyer is an attention whore, plain and simple. He think's he can copy Trump's style of outlandish speech, but he forgets (1) Trump is successful (2) Trump was very very well known already before he entered the political fray, and (3) he represents whores. Try as you like, whores / porn / pimps will never be attractive to main stream America (left, center, or right). | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 ... 234 235 236 237 238 239 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
© SIGforum 2024