It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Avenatti releases name and account of accuser

page: 20
22
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

If her statement qualifies as a sworn testimony, then Swetnick is the plaintiff.

TheRedneck




posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Vasa Croe

You're right, they do. Mea culpa.

Irregardless, though no charges can be filed by all appearances of a criminal nature, I'd still have the investigation, as best as possible.

If he's innocent, as many of us suspect...then his character has been wrongfully impugned, and someone(s) need to be sued into the poor house, or go to jail, if they've perjured themselves by law.

If he's not innocent, as some suspect...then he shouldn't be on the bench at all, much less the highest court in the land.

MHO, of course. Your mileage may vary.


They have to get a sworn statement from the accusers to open an investigation.....they wont give them sworn statements. The attorneys know this is the process yet still haven't done it. They could literally give a sworn statement anywhere with a notary....they havent.

Why?



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: japhrimu

That would seem to automatically follow, wouldn't it?

All allegations, and denials, by everyone.



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

That just isn't how a criminal investigation would work. Vasa already answered you, and I work in contract law, not criminal law, but if any of these accusers were serious (or their lawyers were serious) there would be a sworn statement (and evidence or a list of witnesses) submitted to the appropriate jurisdiction, not a typed up, non-legally binding document that is not signed / stamped by a notary...



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: network dude

The timeline is also problematic for her - based on when she graduated (1980) and Kavenaugh graduated (1983) she is admitting to being an adult around minors that were allegedly drinking, drugging, assaulting, and raping minors, and she never filed any kind of police reports??

If she did indeed graduate in 1980, and claims she was at these parties from 1981 - 1983, that seems bizarre on the face of it. Who goes to high school parties for 2-3 years after graduating??


She graduated in 1980
Kavenaugh graduated in 1983
She claims to have attended these parties 1980-1981 (different than what you claim)



Avenatti said Swetnick is prepared to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee, but he charged that the committee had failed to respond to that offer or his offer that Swetnick submit to polygraph testing.

www.politico.com...

She also claims to know other witnesses (two at a minimum thus far).



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:32 PM
link   
i.imgur.com... apaprenly fords lawyers are not willing to release her medical reccords or therapists notes to the judiciary committee



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: SonOfThor

That's two corroborations. Thank you. I hereby retract my statements which were based on my (apparently false) assumption that the statement was legally binding.

I learned something today.


TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I have to admit, your explanations do make a lot of sense. As a federal judge, Kavanaugh surely knows the law, quite probably better than Avernatti. However, I think an easy way to establish this would be for the Senate to demand that Swetnick swear out an oath with the FBI. If she refuses, then she gets swept to the side. If she agrees, then and only then could I see another delay in the confirmation.

In other words, she needs to put up or shut up.

TheRedneck


Totally agree...they should request them if they want to go any further.



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: SonOfThor


originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: soberbacchus

That just isn't how a criminal investigation would work. Vasa already answered you, and I work in contract law, not criminal law, but if any of these accusers were serious (or their lawyers were serious) there would be a sworn statement (and evidence or a list of witnesses) submitted to the appropriate jurisdiction, not a typed up, non-legally binding document that is not signed / stamped by a notary...




Statement from the Montgomery County Police Department Regarding Victim Accusations of Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh

September 24, 2018

Statement from the Montgomery County Police Department Regarding Victim Accusations of Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh:

At this time, the Montgomery County Police Department has not received a request by any alleged victim nor a victim’s attorney to initiate a police report or a criminal investigation regarding Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

The Department recognizes that victims of sexual assault may not want to involve law enforcement and/or initiate a criminal investigation, and we respect that position. The Department, however, stands prepared to assist anyone who reports being the victim of a sexual assault.

Typically, in a sexual assault case, the cooperation of the victim or witnesses is necessary. As with any criminal investigation, a determination must be made as to the jurisdiction where the alleged offense occurred and the specific details of the event to establish a potential criminal charge.

Our Department is ready to investigate any claim of sexual assault that is alleged to have occurred within our County.



Says much about these fake calls for an investigation and blaming the right for why it hasn't happened.
edit on 26-9-2018 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

On that point...

If she did withhold information pertaining to a crime, she is guilty of a felony under 18 U.S. Code § 4. Since her statement was not official, could she be investigated for that if she chose to refuse to file formal charges at this point?

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

No more games, indeed.

Because this life long Democrat, since I was 19, will #walktheactualFaway. I will, in no way, be associated with the Democratic Party as it's currently constructed, if the charges against this man are not substantiated.

I can be fairly certain, that many others will, as well.

So, Ms. Feinstein, et al, you'd best have all your ducks lined up in a row.



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:37 PM
link   
i.redd.it... this appears to clear up what vasa was talking about differences between an affidavit and a sworn statement



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

Avenatti Document of Allegations

"I attended well over 10 house parties in the Washington D.C. area in the years 1981 - 1983 where Mark Judge and Brett Kavenaugh were present"... Lines 3-5 of the document.



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:39 PM
link   
I wonder: if investigations start, and any allegation is disproven, will the scope of the investigation maybe include finding out what went on with the sourcing, reporting, not reporting, etc. of/from everyone involved in the whole chain of disseminating salacious stuff?
edit on 9/26/2018 by japhrimu because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:40 PM
link   

In the wake of the 3rd Kavanaugh accuser Julie Swetnick's identity becoming public through her lawyer, Michael Avenatti, The Kuhner Report received a call from a man who identified himself as "Thomas in Boston," whose family knew the Swetnicks "Well" in Maryland, and discussed the known "Issues of Substance abuse," and "Mental Issues from Julie." He detailed a phone call from his sister this morning, who still lives in Maryland, where she said "Can you imagine a more delusional whack job is the one that came forward against Kavanaugh?"

"Thomas" also went on to describe the are where they grew up in Montgomery Village, "Quite a distance from Bethesda" and that the "Social circles" would not have interacted. He refutes that during High School "No way that she would have encountered these same social circles, certainly not during High School."

He did say the information he received was "Second hand," as it came from family members, but, he also offered details of the Swetnicks and his own family that lend credence to his story.


wrko.iheart.com...



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: loam




At this time, the Montgomery County Police Department has not received a request by any alleged victim nor a victim’s attorney to initiate a police report or a criminal investigation regarding Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

Thanks for posting that.
Without a simple police report this is nothing but bs.



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I have to admit, your explanations do make a lot of sense. As a federal judge, Kavanaugh surely knows the law, quite probably better than Avernatti. However, I think an easy way to establish this would be for the Senate to demand that Swetnick swear out an oath with the FBI. If she refuses, then she gets swept to the side. If she agrees, then and only then could I see another delay in the confirmation.

In other words, she needs to put up or shut up.

TheRedneck


Totally agree...they should request them if they want to go any further.


Aren't the Republicans, a good majority of them lawyers? They why aren't we hearing this "what you are saying Vasa" from them??? I mean I don't just blindly believe what you told me but researched it and you are right! So why are the Republicans not nipping this in the bud? Force them to file charges in MD or the nomination goes thru!



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

Ducks? They see any opposition as 'sitting ducks' if it serves their purpose in the #metoo era.

Badly-Kept-Secret: THEY don't care if you walk away, when there is such fertile ground of low information voters who have been led to believe the right hates POC, women, gays, etc...



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

If she does disappear, there's a much deeper issue than a mere supreme court justice nominee. One that hints at, as some are beginning to suspect, a coup of sorts. Or events trending in that direction.



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: loam


Badly-Kept-Secret: THEY don't care if you walk away, when there is such fertile ground of low information voters who have been led to believe the right hates POC, women, gays, etc...


What does POC mean? Is that like SJW?




top topics



 
22
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join