Rodney Whitlock, Ph D | The National Law Review
natlawreview.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from natlawreview.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
not something you recommend that your client do? i wouldn trecommend she do that, no. if it s just a matter of her disclosing information to them, that would be one thing. but if they re intending to have grilling from the senators or grilling from some other individual, that kind of cross-examination cannot be a replacement for a meaningful investigation. as you know, senator grassley has again raised the idea that talking to the new yorker you can lie to reporters, talking to senate investigators is under oath. the implication obviously being that your client doesn t want to talk to investigators because it s under oath. well, that s belied by the fact that she has stated very publicly that she s willing to be investigated and actually tell her information to the fbi, which is also something that is punishable by the penalty of perjury. so an fbi individual, somebody who is a trained law enforcement investigator, somebody who
no republican staffers were on tonight s conference call. we asked chairman grassley s office to respond. we received a chachb e-mails. this chachb e-mails here which goes back several days. got no direct answer to our question about no republicans being on the call. we have just been going through this while we were playing that interview and it seems like they re talking past each other. mike davis a number of times asks over the last several days mr. clune saying before we discuss a phone call or any other next steps we need to have the following information. one, does ms. ramirez have any other evidence including other statements in addition to those that are contained in the new yorker article. and two, is ms. ramirez willing to provide her evidence including her testimony to committee investigators. they say they want that before they discuss having a call and repeatedly also mr. clune in response is basically saying in response to the first question, there are certainly more w
thursday s testimony from judge kavanaugh and his first accuser, christine blasey ford. now, we should note just a few minutes ago they added a caveat. they re only potentially going to vote. but nonetheless, it s been added to the schedule, and it certainly tracks with what many republicans have been saying about the need to vote and the refusal to hear public testimony on thursday from anyone beyond those two witnesses. i m glad we ll be able to hear testimony from both. and then i look forward to an up or down vote on this nomination right here on the senate floor. late today in a letter to ranking democrat dianne feinstein senate judiciary committee chairman chuck grassley declined to postpone thursday s hearing in light of allegations from the second accuser debra ramirez. also late today senator lindsey graham told cnn s manu raju he s got zero patience, his words, for democratic demands that others testify. again, the committee s first vote is now set for friday with furth
vimarsana © 2020. All Rights Reserved.