Whiny BitchX Contributor
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by triple
Are you confused about what being under oath entails? You can issue all the statements you want. They don't hold any legal weight until you say it under penalty of perjury.
|
Go ahead and subpeona him then. He's not required to voluntarily appear as a witness for an alleged crime he has said he did not witness.
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fool
Go ahead and subpeona him then. He's not required to voluntarily appear as a witness for an alleged crime he has said he did not witness.
|
I would love for the JC to subpeona him, they refuse to do so because truth is not the objective. Putting on a show trial with a predetermined verdict is the objective.
|
|
|
VeteranXX Contributor
|
triple is probably constantly masturbating to the possibility of this upcoming trial.
TDS - seek help.
|
|
|
Whiny BitchX Contributor
|
Or because he's already said he is not a witness to a crime.
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fool
Or because he's already said he is not a witness to a crime.
|
Let him say that under oath, then. What are you scared of?
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
she could just be filling in the blanks of a real encounter
either way I believe this is an opportunistic lie
and even if it were true he should be confirmed.
|
|
|
Whiny BitchX Contributor
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by triple
Let him say that under oath, then. What are you scared of?
|
Absolutely nothing. It's just a waste of time. It's just bizarre that you want people who deny being a witness to a crime to testify that they did not see a crime for a crime you can't prove even happened because it's only based on the word of a person who refuses to say a crime happened under oath. It's ****ing bizarre.
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
You seem weirdly defensive about his potential testimony for someone who is not concerned at all.
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
i believe without question any of the allegations against celebrities but dont believe any of the allegations about politicians as long as they share my political leanings
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
what difference would testifying under oath make?
is he going to buckle and confess out of fear of a ****ing 35 yr old video tape from the room?
maybe there was a vhs nanny cam in the cabbage patch doll lol
|
|
|
VeteranXX Contributor
|
Triple, do you believe a subpoena is warranted for Judge? It's a case of he said she said over 30 years ago. So the under oath bs is meaningless, not that somehow being under oath would compel him to all of a sudden change his tune anyway.
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groove
i believe without question any of the allegations against celebrities but dont believe any of the allegations about politicians as long as they share my political leanings
|
yes and all women have a "only tell the truth" gene and all men have a "never tell the truth" gene
|
|
|
VeteranXV Contributor
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groove
i believe without question any of the allegations against celebrities but dont believe any of the allegations about politicians as long as they share my political leanings
|
that's about the gist of it with keith Ellison and the democrats
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jimmy Pop
Triple, do you believe a subpoena is warranted for Judge? It's a case of he said she said over 30 years ago. So the under oath bs is meaningless, not that somehow being under oath would compel him to all of a sudden change his tune anyway.
|
If being under oath is meaningless one way or the other, why are all the conservatives on this board against it?
If it doesn't matter, why do you care?
If you think he'll tell the same story under oath, that would only bolster Kavanaugh's side.
The only reason to be against this is because you think he'll back up Ford, or he'll be inconsistent and **** up.
If you think he's telling the truth though.. which I assume most of you do.. you have absolutely nothing to worry about.
|
|
|
VeteranXV Contributor
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by triple
If being under oath is meaningless one way or the other, why are all the conservatives on this board against it?
If it doesn't matter, why do you care?
If you think he'll tell the same story under oath, that would only bolster Kavanaugh's side.
The only reason to be against this is because you think he'll back up Ford, or he'll be inconsistent and **** up.
If you think he's telling the truth though.. which I assume most of you do.. you have absolutely nothing to worry about.
|
not only is it meaningless, it's a waste of ****ing time. that's why we are against it.
it doesn't matter, so why do YOU care so much?
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Your premise is flawed, I do think interviewing the only other named person in the room matters.
|
|
|
Whiny BitchX Contributor
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by triple
You seem weirdly defensive about his potential testimony for someone who is not concerned at all.
|
Excellent deflection. I've not said anything of the sort. In fact, quite the opposite. There's nothing to be defensive about. He said he didn't see anything. Why should I not take him at his word? Why are you so adamant that a man who claims he did not witness a crime do so under oath, but I've yet to see you demand that she testify under oath that a crime transpired?
|
|
|
Veteran³ Immigrant
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by havax
not only is it meaningless, it's a waste of ****ing time. that's why we are against it.
it doesn't matter, so why do YOU care so much?
|
what if i told you that wasting time
instead of getting other things done
was triple's only point and purpose
and that this is the entire point of the DNC right now?
burning up the clock is their goal
GOP better get with the game already
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Quote:
Why should I not take him at his word?
|
Well he's being accused of watching while his friend tried to **** a minor. For one.
Quote:
I've yet to see you demand that she testify under oath that a crime transpired?
|
Probably because she's already offered to, and in addition wants to go to the FBI and talk to them as well about it.
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Tele
what if i told you that wasting time
instead of getting other things done
was triple's only point and purpose
and that this is the entire point of the DNC right now?
burning up the clock is their goal
GOP better get with the game already
|
hey remember when your party obstructed scotus for 400+ days? no?
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
AGENT: claudebot / Y
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:12.
|