Roe v. Wade and the new SC Justice

[mtangelsfan]

5 hours ago, RallyMo said:

Nah.

You seemed to indicate that it was.

[Taylor]

What wonderful political figures we have, that we're now debating whose perjury was less bad. 

[mtangelsfan]

4 hours ago, Taylor said:

What wonderful political figures we have, that we're now debating whose perjury was less bad. 

Hey, it's just politics 

[RallyMo]

45 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

You seemed to indicate that it was.

Ok.

[mtangelsfan]

Ok

[Lou]

not ok 

[RallyMo]

7 hours ago, Lou said:

not ok 

Contrarian!

[Lou]

23 minutes ago, RallyMo said:

Contrarian!

am not

[mtangelsfan]

I agree

[Tank]

18 hours ago, Rico said:

Here is a good breakdown of what happened.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/the-ghosts-of-memogate-are-haunting-brett-kavanaugh-720152/

But I'll try to summarize a bit for you.

In the early 2000 a GOP senate aid named Manual Miranda used a glitch on a shared server to gain access to thousands of confidential Democrat files.  Plain and simple, he stole them.  At the time Kavanaugh was working for the Bush administration.  

In 2003 Bush nominated Kavanaugh to be a US Circuit judge.  He had to go through two senate hearings before being confirmed.  Once in 2004 and again 2006.  Both times he was asked specifically about the documents stolen by Miranda.

Kavanaugh claimed he has never even seen the memos.  Well, now we know from the emails that not only did he receive the memos from Miranda, he also forwarded them to other people.

So in short.  He received stolen cyber material (a crime), he forwarded stolen cyber material (also a crime), and then lied under oath not once, but twice. (felonies)

thank you, rico.

[Thomas]

On 9/7/2018 at 9:06 PM, RallyMo said:

I felt like Clinton was being railroaded, but I also realized that he lied about having an affair under oath. It's not cool to lie under oath.

Presently we're dealing with a situation where a man is up for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. He lied about receiving illegally obtained documents under oath. That's a pretty big deal.

 

On 9/8/2018 at 3:29 AM, Rico said:

Here is a good breakdown of what happened.

And essentially no one is paying attention because of Nike-gate and the million memes and an "anonymous" op-ed. Funny how these things always seem to pop up and the most inconvenient times...

[RallyMo]

On 9/8/2018 at 4:29 AM, Rico said:

Here is a good breakdown of what happened.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/the-ghosts-of-memogate-are-haunting-brett-kavanaugh-720152/

But I'll try to summarize a bit for you.

In the early 2000 a GOP senate aid named Manual Miranda used a glitch on a shared server to gain access to thousands of confidential Democrat files.  Plain and simple, he stole them.  At the time Kavanaugh was working for the Bush administration.  

In 2003 Bush nominated Kavanaugh to be a US Circuit judge.  He had to go through two senate hearings before being confirmed.  Once in 2004 and again 2006.  Both times he was asked specifically about the documents stolen by Miranda.

 

 

Kavanaugh claimed he has never even seen the memos.  Well, now we know from the emails that not only did he receive the memos from Miranda, he also forwarded them to other people.

So in short.  He received stolen cyber material (a crime), he forwarded stolen cyber material (also a crime), and then lied under oath not once, but twice. (felonies)

 

22 hours ago, Tank said:

thank you, rico.

 

1 hour ago, Thomas said:

 

And essentially no one is paying attention because of Nike-gate and the million memes and an "anonymous" op-ed. Funny how these things always seem to pop up and the most inconvenient times...

Kavanaugh didn't just claim that he didn't see the material.

He testified under oath that he didn't even know the material existed.

This guy lied under oath and he's going to get a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land.

Crickets.

 

[Taylor]

19 hours ago, RallyMo said:

Kavanaugh didn't just claim that he didn't see the material.

He testified under oath that he didn't even know the material existed.

This guy lied under oath and he's going to get a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land.

Crickets.

But Obama said something about keeping your doctor. And Hillary's a murderer!

[mtangelsfan]

2 minutes ago, Taylor said:

But Obama said something about keeping your doctor. And Hillary's a murderer!

I agree.  Obama was a great liar too

and Hillary is probably a murderer.

[Lou]

40 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

I agree.  Obama was a great liar too

and Hillary is probably a murderer.

lol @ probably. 

you're adorable. 

[Jason]

https://www.vox.com/2018/9/7/17829320/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-hearing-perjury

FWIW here's an article from a liberal site and their take on the perjury situation

[Blarg]

So, he didn't pujure himself. Your opinion @RallyMo on these law professors viewpoints? 

[RallyMo]

3 minutes ago, Blarg said:

So, he didn't pujure himself. Your opinion @RallyMo on these law professors viewpoints? 

Well, I clearly know more than these people, so they must be wrong.

PERJURY!

[Blarg]

Sound. I'm with you in spirit. 

[RallyMo]

3 minutes ago, Blarg said:

Sound. I'm with you in spirit. 

It's notable that I don't think he'll ever get hit with a perjury case.

It sure seems to me that he lied about those documents and whether he knew they existed or not.

Also, I never used the term perjury until responding to you just now.

Go Rams!

[Rico]

The excuse that he "wasn't aware those documents were stolen" is pure bullshit. At the time he was questioned in 2004 and 2006 it was already known that Miranda had stolen the documents. One of them even had "spying" as the subject line.  He claimed he never saw the documents, but he had them the entire time.  He lied to cover up the fact he was in possession of stolen property. 

[Blarg]

According to the law professors that read the entire question and answers, not the abrieviated news clips, none of what you are saying is true. 

[Lou]

wait, so if a dem receives an email titled: " Russians Were Spying For Trump" it was stolen? 

interesting. 

[Rico]

15 minutes ago, Lou said:

wait, so if a dem receives an email titled: " Russians Were Spying For Trump" it was stolen? 

interesting. 

If the material you have is something you shouldn't have, yes.

[Rico]

Possession is nine-tenths of the law.  Kav had stolen property.