here's kamala's nasty questioning of kavanaugh
| appetizing grizzly property | 08/13/20 | | appetizing grizzly property | 08/13/20 | | talented nubile crotch | 08/13/20 | | excitant range | 08/13/20 | | Concupiscible Learning Disabled Quadroon Pocket Flask | 08/13/20 | | Sickened titillating toilet seat stage | 08/13/20 | | Blue misanthropic prole | 08/13/20 | | Misunderstood cuckold | 08/13/20 | | hairraiser faggot firefighter | 08/13/20 | | Racy bossy wagecucks | 08/13/20 | | Electric church tattoo | 08/13/20 | | Racy bossy wagecucks | 08/13/20 | | Razzle-dazzle bipolar point police squad | 08/13/20 | | Electric church tattoo | 08/13/20 | | fighting potus associate | 08/13/20 | | big unholy office | 08/13/20 | | Electric church tattoo | 08/13/20 | | big unholy office | 08/13/20 | | comical legend | 08/13/20 | | Razzle-dazzle bipolar point police squad | 08/13/20 | | big unholy office | 08/13/20 | | Electric church tattoo | 08/13/20 | | Razzle-dazzle bipolar point police squad | 08/13/20 | | Peach corner | 08/13/20 | | Blue misanthropic prole | 08/13/20 | | charcoal territorial temple knife | 08/13/20 | | Bistre House | 08/13/20 | | fuchsia goyim ticket booth | 08/13/20 | | fighting potus associate | 08/13/20 | | Contagious space famous landscape painting | 08/13/20 | | Lilac stock car coffee pot | 08/13/20 | | Peach corner | 08/13/20 | | Peach corner | 08/13/20 | | Trip locale | 08/13/20 | | Dead Sex Offender | 08/13/20 | | Trip locale | 08/13/20 | | Stimulating Stag Film | 08/13/20 | | Trip locale | 08/13/20 | | Stimulating Stag Film | 08/13/20 | | Trip locale | 08/13/20 | | Useless laughsome halford | 08/13/20 | | Electric church tattoo | 08/13/20 | | Zombie-like hall | 08/13/20 | | Navy bespoke multi-billionaire degenerate | 08/13/20 | | fuchsia goyim ticket booth | 08/13/20 | | Multi-colored low-t brunch jewess | 08/13/20 | | Fantasy-prone shimmering ratface | 08/13/20 | | Contagious space famous landscape painting | 08/13/20 | | Multi-colored low-t brunch jewess | 08/13/20 | | Flesh Really Tough Guy | 08/13/20 | | Multi-colored low-t brunch jewess | 08/13/20 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: August 13th, 2020 3:20 PM Author: hairraiser faggot firefighter
this is way more ridiculous than you're assuming it's going to be
definitely worth a watch
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4603120&forum_id=2#40751105) |
|
Date: August 13th, 2020 3:54 PM Author: Electric church tattoo
she was SF's LEAD prosecutor??
God, prosecutors really can't cross. Just like defense attorneys can't direct.
1. you testified you did not speak to anyone on Trump's legal team about the Mueller investigation
2. a legal team involves an entire firm, right
3. you know this because you are a judge
4. and you have presided over cases where issues of lawyer-client relationships come up
5. so the president's legal team includes everyone from firm X
6. and your testimony, rightly understood, means you didnt talk to anyone from firm X about the Mueller investigation
7. But on Aug 12, 2018, you talked to Rachmiel, who works for firm X.
8. and you talked about the mueller investigation.
9. So your testimony two hours ago was that you did not, but your testimony now is that you did.
/fin
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4603120&forum_id=2#40751311) |
|
Date: August 13th, 2020 3:57 PM Author: big unholy office
except at #2 and #5 the answer is obviously "no"
this is like how a non-lawyer thinks it works, you can't assume a hostile (and very smart) witness is just going to agree with everything you say
plus #6 is waving a huge red flag at him about what's coming up
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4603120&forum_id=2#40751335) |
|
Date: August 13th, 2020 4:00 PM Author: Electric church tattoo
presuming the facts are: he testified "i never talked to anyone on trump's team about the MI" and he did talk to person X at the same firm about the MI, the red flag doesnt matter.
crossing in court isnt math, or computer logic, its just scoring points with the jury (here the tv audience and 3 cuck republicans). you just nail him on the difference, allowing him to sputter about person X wasn't on the specific team, doesnt really count, etc
She could use all her sass and eye-rolls then. "Oh that person receiving paychecks from the same firm 'doesnt count', got it."
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4603120&forum_id=2#40751352) |
|
Date: August 13th, 2020 4:06 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle bipolar point police squad
And if he had actually talked to the guy then he would have been finished. Except he didn’t and they had no proof he did.
When asked the question again on Thursday, Kavanaugh’s response marked a stark difference from the answer he gave on Wednesday. “I will ask you again, and for the last time. Have you ever been part of a conversation with lawyers at the firm of Kasowitz Benson Torres about Special Counsel Mueller or his investigation?,” said Harris.
Kavanaugh ultimately answered plainly with a definitive, “No.”
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4603120&forum_id=2#40751389) |
|
Date: August 13th, 2020 4:03 PM Author: Peach corner
"a legal team involves an entire firm, right"
"no"
/fin
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4603120&forum_id=2#40751372) |
Date: August 13th, 2020 4:09 PM Author: Dead Sex Offender
Lol, wtf is xo talking about? She destroyed him when he's like, "wait, what individual are you talking about?"
Obv this dude has never been a trial lolyer (of course this goes the same for 93% of xo the website). Any trial judge in the country would order him to answer the damn question.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4603120&forum_id=2#40751399) |
|
Date: August 13th, 2020 8:29 PM Author: fuchsia goyim ticket booth
She was referring to Edward McNally, who worked in the Bush White House when kavanaugh did. His name was in documents kavanaugh turned over to the committee and they just made an assumption when they saw it was the same firm representing trump.
Once someone told him later, he came back and said no he hadn’t talked to him about it. He probably didn’t know or forgot the guy was with the law firm.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/06/brett-kavanaugh-kamala-harris-law-firm-questions-809140
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4603120&forum_id=2#40752593) |
|
Date: August 13th, 2020 8:52 PM Author: Fantasy-prone shimmering ratface
Her questioning is such shit. If she had knowledge of a specific name, she should have secured the admission that he talked to that person. THEN develop the fact that he was a member of Trump's legal team. Even if Kav says he didn't know, she can still score points.
Instead she sputtered around with a fishing expedition HOPING he would name the specific person she apparently had in mind, I guess, apparently, on the off chance she would be able to catch someone much smarter than her in a contrived perjury trap. Even if she wanted to proceed that way with open-ended questions, she didn't even ask basic follow-up questions like "what lawyers other than judges did you speak with?"
A trial judge would have completely pushed her shit in because the objective of examination is to develop facts, not manufacture perjury, and the only reason not to ask about a specific person was to manufacture perjury. This video could be a demonstrative for a cross examination class on why not to ask open-ended questions outside of a depo.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4603120&forum_id=2#40752671) |
Date: August 13th, 2020 8:31 PM Author: Multi-colored low-t brunch jewess
watching again but i don't even have to because i remember being repulsed at the disrespect and poor line of questioning when this initially aired
shameful tbh
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4603120&forum_id=2#40752602)
|
|
|