Make the best choices for your Medicare needs with AARP’s Medicare Made Easy. Try it today!

Reply
Silver Conversationalist
0
Kudos
235
Views

Re: Ford Lawyer Michael Bromwich

235 Views
Message 1 of 6

I don't understand your response. To clearify, the constitution should be applied to everyone as it was intended by the framers. If it does not fit the times for some reason then it should be amended. You can't have a "living document" because it will be manipulated to fit whatever dictator is in charge as is done in third world countries.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
235
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
253
Views

Re: Ford Lawyer Michael Bromwich

253 Views
Message 2 of 6

@RichardC305214 wrote:

I support any judge from any party who adheres to the constitution and the left leaning judges think they can make law rather than  doing their jobs which is to interpret the constitution. You either have laws set in stone for everyone the same or you don't.

Curious Richard, is each and every Amendment  "for everyone", should never have been enacted?  Personally I find your "set in stone" comment hard to believe.

 

List of Constitutional Amendments to the United States Constitution https://www.einvestigator.com/list-of-constitutional-amendments/
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
253
Views
Silver Conversationalist
0
Kudos
264
Views

Re: Ford Lawyer Michael Bromwich

264 Views
Message 3 of 6

How about ignoring the far right and left and just use facts. No one from either side is questioning Kavanaugh's history of decisions. So, he is qualified the problem for the left is they want a judge who believes the constitution is a living document and the right wants the constitution strictly adhered to. That is fact. And that is why I support any judge from any party who adheres to the constitution and the left leaning judges think they can make law rather than  doing their jobs which is to interpret the constitution. You either have laws set in stone for everyone the same or you don't. How can you support anyone who makes judgements based upon party and not the constitution?

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
264
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
288
Views

Re: Ford Lawyer Michael Bromwich

288 Views
Message 4 of 6

@RichardC305214 wrote:

There is no question there is a constant battle between DNC and RNC because there is massive money and power to be gained or lost. Unfortunately, the public is manipulated to join sides even against their best interest. It should be obvious to all that this issue came about to stop a non liberal judge from being confirmed to the supreme court due to the possibility that the dems can win the mid-term elections. Whether dem or repub what is happening hurts everyone.

Ford clearly lied about her fear of flying - this is undeniable - just watch her testimony. If she lied about that then it is likely she lied about all of it. The BIG problem is that she has no evidence, so anyone who picks sides based upon a performance rather than evidence is setting themselves up for the same treatment.

It makes no sense that Ford can not know what party she was at or when. If the party happened then there must be others who were there especially the one who threw the party should know where and when it was. Why was this not investigated by Ford to prove her allegation? If you allow corruption to win then it will grow. If it can be proven that Kavanaugh did this then I would put him in jail, but until then no one should be convicted based upon a liars statement with zero evidence and Ford's lawyers should have been gathering evidence, but maybe their efforts yielded no evidence, because there isn't any.


Your answer is straight from the far right leaders to try and make people think it is a real answer that should be looked at seriously. Sadly a lot of your thoughts make no sense in light of every thing that has come out. The only true part is that this started out to block a far right Conservative from being seated on the SC and it is just a follow on to what was done to a middle of the road person who was nominated by the previous President. The big difference is the current Far Right person gave all real good reasons based on his flawed past to work with which a lot of has been proven true. Lets see what happens but this is what you get from the far right all the time. Flawed people, laws, and a path to Dictatorship.

Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
288
Views
Silver Conversationalist
0
Kudos
299
Views

Re: Ford Lawyer Michael Bromwich

299 Views
Message 5 of 6

There is no question there is a constant battle between DNC and RNC because there is massive money and power to be gained or lost. Unfortunately, the public is manipulated to join sides even against their best interest. It should be obvious to all that this issue came about to stop a non liberal judge from being confirmed to the supreme court due to the possibility that the dems can win the mid-term elections. Whether dem or repub what is happening hurts everyone.

Ford clearly lied about her fear of flying - this is undeniable - just watch her testimony. If she lied about that then it is likely she lied about all of it. The BIG problem is that she has no evidence, so anyone who picks sides based upon a performance rather than evidence is setting themselves up for the same treatment.

It makes no sense that Ford can not know what party she was at or when. If the party happened then there must be others who were there especially the one who threw the party should know where and when it was. Why was this not investigated by Ford to prove her allegation? If you allow corruption to win then it will grow. If it can be proven that Kavanaugh did this then I would put him in jail, but until then no one should be convicted based upon a liars statement with zero evidence and Ford's lawyers should have been gathering evidence, but maybe their efforts yielded no evidence, because there isn't any.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
299
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
309
Views
5
Replies

Ford Lawyer Michael Bromwich

309 Views
Message 6 of 6

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/christine-blasey-ford-lawyer-michael-bromwich.html

 

Christine Blasey Ford Lawyer Michael Bromwich Resigned From His Law Firm Because Partners Objected to His Decision to Represent Her

 

 

During Thursday’s hearing, Rachel Mitchell, the Arizona prosecutor employed by the committee, pressed Ford on the nature of her legal representation, possibly in an attempt to portray her as being guided by more powerful Democrats looking out for the interest of the party. As Ford attempted to address the key points of Mitchell’s questions, one of her lawyers jumped in. “Both of her counsel are doing this pro bono,” Michael Bromwich told the committee. “We are not being paid. We have no expectation of being paid.”

 

What Bromwich did not mention was that he not only was not being paid for his time representing Ford—he also left his job at a Washington law firm where he served as senior counsel.

According to Bloomberg, Bromwich, 64, resigned from Robbins, Russell, Englert, Orseck, Untereiner & Sauber LLP, as some of the partners at the firm had objected to his decision to represent Ford.

 

Bromwich, a Harvard Law graduate and former federal prosecutor, was known before this hearing for assisting the investigation of the Iran-Contra affair and, more recently, for representing former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who was fired in March by Jeff Sessions two days before his scheduled retirement and for whom Bromwich helped crowdfund legal fees. According to Bloomberg, President Obama picked Bromwich to reform the offshore drilling regulations after the Deepwater Horizon spill in 2010.

 

Bromwich joined Ford’s legal team late. The attorney sitting to her right at the hearing, Debra Katz, is known for her work representing sexual harassment and abuse victims.

 

Ford’s appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee ended Thursday afternoon after Ford endured more than four hours of questioning about her allegation of being sexually assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh in the 1980s and the subsequent trauma. During the hearing, Democrats complained about Mark Judge’s absence in the hearing, emphasized that the hearing should be seen as a job application rather than a trial, and praised Ford’s bravery. Mitchell pressed Ford for details related to Ford’s fear of flying, the logistics surrounding the party, her contacts with the press, and who paid for the polygraph test.

 

Ford, for her part, tried to clarify her account and correct any small errors she might have made in any previous statements. She also emphasized that she had come forward in an attempt to be helpful and at a time before Kavanaugh’s nomination, when Trump could have chosen from other conservative judges.

 

Comments :

 

In another thread I said it was time for women to speak up, and for men to stand behind them.

 

These lawyers who represent Ford put me to shame.

Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
309
Views
5
Replies