Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

Ford’s Lying Legal Team In Deep Trouble – Senate Committee Just Made Announcement

Published

on

Sounds like Christine Blasey Ford’s legal team might have gotten themselves into deep doo-doo.

The Senate Judiciary Committee issued a statement on Tuesday that points to the possibility that her legal team violated the ABA’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct. How? Well, apparently it was by withholding key information from their client.

During her hearing on Thursday, Ford made it really obvious that she did not have a clue that the Senate Judiciary Committee supposedly offered more than once to come to her to get her testimony in a more private setting as she had wanted.

“I was hoping that they would come to me, but then I realized that was an unrealistic request,” Ford said at one point during her testimony.

Trending: After Years of Shady Clinton Behavior, News Breaks On Biden Family That Destroy His Political Career

But she was wrong. It wasn’t unrealistic, it was an option all along, and that option was clearly not disclosed to her, despite her asking for it. The court directly asked her if her attorneys had informed her about the committee offering to meet her in California, Michael Bromwich, one of her attorneys was quick to interject. He interjected just to say she didn’t need to answer the question, claiming attorney-client privilege.

Ford responded anyway.

“I just appreciate that you did offer that,” she said. “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.”

How about that folks? Not suspicious at all right? Wrong. It’s very suspicious.

“As detailed in the committee’s letter Tuesday, their offer to come to Ford was made repeatedly, unequivocally, and even publicly. The committee provides the following summary of the three times it offered to Ford’s Democrat activist attorneys, Bromwich and Debora Katz, to come to Ford to avoid prolonging the difficult process and the spectacle of a public hearing, which Ford insisted she wanted to do:

“On three occasions, Grassley and Judiciary Committee staff told Dr. Ford’s lawyers that committee investigators were willing to come to her.”

“· On September 19, Chairman Grassley sent a letter to Dr. Ford’s attorney Debra Katz informing her that committee staff “would still welcome the opportunity to speak with Dr. Ford at a time and place convenient to her.”

“· On September 21, committee staff sent an email to Ms. Katz saying that “[t]he Chairman has offered the ability for Dr. Ford to testify in an open session, a closed session, a public staff interview, and a private staff interview. The Chairman is even willing to fly female staff investigators to meet Dr. Ford and you in California, or anywhere else, to obtain Dr. Ford’s testimony.”

“· On September 22, committee staff again wrote an email to Dr. Ford’s lawyers, reminding them that “committee investigators are available to meet with Dr. Ford, anywhere and anytime, if she would prefer to provide her testimony outside of a hearing setting.”

“The committee suggests that Ford’s lawyers have some major questions to answer regarding their apparent attempt to block their own client from knowing about the offer, which would be a clear violation of the ABA code of professional conduct.”

“Clearly, Dr. Ford’s attorneys did not tell her that we could protect her privacy and speak to her in California,” the committee concludes. “The ABA’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct require a lawyer to consult with his or her client about the means to be used to accomplish the client’s objectives—including informing the client of settlement offers.

“It is deeply unfortunate that Dr. Ford’s Democratic-activist lawyers appear to have used Dr. Ford in order to advance their own political agenda. A lot of pain and hardship could have been avoided had Dr. Ford’s attorneys informed her of the committee’s offer to meet her in California to receive her testimony.”

Here is what we know:

– Christine Blasey Ford ‘wasn’t clear’ that the Committee had offered to come to her in California for a private interview instead of it being public at a Washington hearing.

– Christine Blasey Ford made it obvious that she wanted to avoid the media craze of a public hearing, but had no clue it was an option offered by the committee.

Why does any of this matter? It matters because of the delay that was caused due to Ford having to travel to Washington for the interview. The timeline played in favor for the Democrats and their agenda against Kavanaugh.

What you will find below is the full statement that was issued by the Senate Judiciary Committee:

“During the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Thursday, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford indicated that she had not been made aware of multiple offers made by Chairman Chuck Grassley to send staff to California to interview her, a format that she said she would have preferred. Those offers were made in public statements and in statements directly to Dr. Ford’s attorneys in the days leading up to her public testimony. Here’s a summary of those offers:”

“On three occasions, Grassley and Judiciary Committee staff told Dr. Ford’s lawyers that committee investigators were willing to come to her.”

“· On September 19, Chairman Grassley sent a letter to Dr. Ford’s attorney Debra Katz informing her that committee staff “would still welcome the opportunity to speak with Dr. Ford at a time and place convenient to her.”

“· On September 21, committee staff sent an email to Ms. Katz saying that “[t]he Chairman has offered the ability for Dr. Ford to testify in an open session, a closed session, a public staff interview, and a private staff interview. The Chairman is even willing to fly female staff investigators to meet Dr. Ford and you in California, or anywhere else, to obtain Dr. Ford’s testimony.”

“· On September 22, committee staff again wrote an email to Dr. Ford’s lawyers, reminding them that “committee investigators are available to meet with Dr. Ford, anywhere and anytime, if she would prefer to provide her testimony outside of a hearing setting.”

“In a September 21 tweet, Grassley invited Dr. Ford to share her story, saying, “[come to us or we to [you].”

“However, despite those offers, at the September 27 hearing, Dr. Ford told the committee that she was not aware of the committee’s willingness to meet her anywhere to take her testimony.”

“· Dr. Ford said, “I was hoping that they would come to me, but then I realized that was an unrealistic request.”

“· When Dr. Ford was asked if her attorneys had told her about the committee’s offer to meet her in California, her lawyers objected to her answering the question. She answered anyway, saying “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.’”

Knowing this, doesn’t it seem like Ford’s attorneys were manipulating her by withholding the fact that the Committee could come to her for the interview? It is their job to make her aware of her rights and options. What do you think about this circus of attorneys? Do you suspect that there was a hidden agenda behind all of this, or do you think it’s a mere mistake with no harm intended?

We want to hear from you! Let us know your thoughts in the comments.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Trending Now on Right Wing News


Meghan McCain Cold-Cocks Trump While Explaining Her Break From ‘The View’

Published

on

...

* By

Perhaps Meghan McCain moving to The View from Fox was a better fit than anyone knew at the time. She’s carrying forward her late father’s criticism of President Trump. This time she’s slapping at Trump for not going after Russia and Putin harder.

McCain took advantage of the fact that she is traveling to Britain to accept the Magnitsky award on behalf of her father. Her charges against President Trump are unfounded. He has aggressively fought against both Russia and China while in office. The Daily Caller has more on McCain’s bitter vitriol:

Meghan McCain criticized President Donald Trump on Wednesday for failing to “fight against [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s global expansion and murderous regime.”

“I will be gone from @TheView tomorrow and Friday. I am going to London to speak @HouseofCommons and then to accept the Magnitsky award on behalf of my father and all who continue the fight against Putin’s tyrannous KGB dictatorship,” the co-host of the ABC talk show tweeted ahead of accepting the award for the late Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain.

“While the Trump’s and their administration continue to be too ignorant or too unscrupulous to fight against Putin’s global expansion and murderous regime -I promise on behalf of my father to spend the rest of my life doing all that I can to help fight and speak out against it,” she added.

McCain’s father passed away in August following a year-long battle with brain cancer. During her father’s eulogy, she appeared to use the opportunity to call out Trump over his “Make America Great” slogan.

“The America of John McCain has no need to be made great again because America was always great,” McCain shared. “We gather here to mourn the passing of American greatness, the real thing, not cheap rhetoric from men who will never come near the sacrifice he gave so willingly, nor the opportunistic appropriation of those who lived lives of comfort and privilege while he suffered and served.”

Daniel Vajdich, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, and others have shared their beliefs that Trump’s been tougher on Russia than his predecessors.

“When you actually look at the substance of what this administration has done, not the rhetoric but the substance, this administration has been much tougher on Russia than any in the post-Cold War era,” Vajdich explained.

Under Trump’s administration, “some of the toughest sanctions in years” have been brought against Russia’s elite, according to a CNBC report. The president also approved the sale of weapons to Ukraine, something former President Barack Obama declined to do. He has also openly targeted Russia’s allies and strategic operations by ordering missiles to be fired at Syrian military sites.

The London event titled, “The McCain Legacy and the Magnitsky Act” will involve discussions about McCain’s role in passing the 2012 human rights act named after Sergei Magnitsky, who exposed money laundering and corruption in Putin’s regime, according to Newsweek.

The legislation promises to impose sanctions against countries found to have committed human rights abuses.

Continue Reading

Melania Fired Them ALL! ‘That Is Not Acceptable Here – I Won’t Allow It!’

Published

on

...

* By

First lady Melania Trump just sent them all packing! She released multiple people from their positions as she would not allow taxpayers to be ripped off for jobs that were simply not needed – quite contrary to the former first lady, Michelle Obama. While Melania Trump takes on bigger roles and a more active schedule, she has proven herself to spend a lot less than what Obama did. This news comes about as Melania Trump runs one of the lightest East Wings in recent history.

Michelle Obama was reported to have 16 people working under her, being paid a combined $1.24 million. Melania Trump’s staff is only four people who earn a combined $486,700, much less in comparison to Obama. Knowing that Melania Trump refuses to hire 12 extra people to do jobs that can be handled by herself and four others is a wonderful bit of information as it reduces wasteful spending of the taxpayer money.

Not carrying the extra staff for jobs that can be handled by fewer people is a step in the right direction towards reducing the amount of money spent by the administration and shows that Melania cares to be mindful in her position as the first lady. That’s an enjoyable quality for a first lady to have as it spreads a message about being responsible and not overspending.

Fox News reported more on Melania’s smaller staff: “The details are contained in an annual report the White House sends to Congress showing the names, positions and salaries of all its personnel. Both the Obama and Trump administrations acknowledged several additional staffers beyond those listed in the report with the term “first lady” in their titles. But even counting all those employees — 24 for Michelle Obama and nine for the current first lady — Melania Trump’s office is relatively small.

It’s an approach her spokeswoman says is intentional.

“As with all things that she does, she is being very deliberate in her hiring, focusing on quality over quantity,” communications director Stephanie Grisham said in an email. “It is important to her that the team is a good fit for what she wants to accomplish as first lady, and that everyone works well together. She also wants to be mindful and responsible when it comes to taxpayer money.”

While the 2009 annual report listed 16 staffers for Michelle Obama, her press secretary said at the time the staff actually included 24 people. A 2009 FactCheck.org story said Obama’s 24 aides might have broken records.

“That may indeed be the largest of any first lady, but Hillary Clinton, with 19 staffers, and Laura Bush with at least 18 and perhaps more, weren’t far behind,” FactCheck.org said.

Grisham told Fox News this week there are nine people working in the East Wing under Melania Trump, a few more than listed in the annual report.

According to those personnel reports, Melania Trump’s staffers include a chief of staff, a communications director, a deputy chief of staff and a deputy director of advance.

Michelle Obama’s staff included those same positions and a slew of others: additional press aides, a director of policy and projects, a personal aide, a traveling aide and a director of correspondence.

Michelle Obama’s office did not return a request for comment.”

Melania and Donald Trump will surely be criticized for this one way or another. The critics will say that Melania fired people instead of being resourceful and saving money for the White House and their Presidency. While every President and first lady face critics, there has surely been an insufferable and increased amount of criticism has been levied towards the Trump family, with even Barron facing his own fierce barrage of harsh commentary from spiteful people who dislike the Trump family living in the White House.

Donald and Melania work through the criticism, doing things to make many Americans in hopes that they’re constantly doing right by the citizens. They will always face criticism from those who oppose their leadership, even though Trump won the Presidency in a fair election well over one year ago.

What do you think of Melania having a smaller staff? Is she saving money for taxpayers? Is it a smart move for her to be more resourceful in her spending?

Will Michelle Obama respond to Fox News to talk about why she had so many people working under her?

Please share this on Facebook to spread the good news about Melania Trump and her resourceful behavior.

Continue Reading




Latest Articles

Become an insider!

Thank you for your interest in receiving the Right Wing News newsletter. To subscribe, please submit your email address below.

Send this to a friend