Page 45 - Adjudication News Today

Thats why they do through mexico instead of applying for asylum there. they want to come to the united states for a better life, not because theyre coming out of fear theyre going to be killed, which is what asylum is supposed to be here. bottom line, this could be helpful, it could head people off, but everybody knows the goal is to get to the border. people are gonna continue to show up to the border. they dont want a careful adjudication of their claim. they want to get to the border, be paro...

They await their adjudication y letter. we have 13,000 unaccompanied children because of this broken immigration system that does drug use children to come into this country. they make this horrible journey to try to get them into this country and the common illegally they are given into our custody and we have to find a place to put them. >> bret: with their parents? >> no, they come unaccompanied. these 13,000 are kids who come in by themselves. we with the broken immigration system. >> bret: ...

Adjudicated. never judge ever passed on the validity of these allegations. they were mere allegations. anybody with $600 or 700 or $800 can file a lawsuit and claim any number of things. those cases were dismissed in their fantasy. none of that would ever even come into evidence. it would never be put before a jury or a fact finder, because there was no adjudication or determination as the to whether it was valid or not. >> all right, so that is what theyre going to look at in terms of the backg...

Thrown out, dismissed. there was no adjudication or determination relating to the validity of any of these claims. but let me back up, okay? last time i checked, its the fbis job, its law enforcements job to determine whether an allegation is credible. its not another gatekeepers job to tell the fbi who is credible or who is telling the truth. but thats what donald trump and the gop, the republican senators on the senate judiciary committee are attempting to pull off here. they want to tell the ...

Litigation and with the boyfriend, those are usual impeachable constructs. >> you know what, i disagree. none of that, and chris, you know this, none of that would ever come into evidence in any trial relating to these allegations. >> why not? >> because they would be found to be irrelevant. >> even to impeacher eer her credibility? >> absolutely not. its a mere allegation. its not an adjudication that goes to the voracity or truthfulness to her statements under oath. if i tried to bring any of ...

In-credible. >> or maybe the white house thinks that she is credible. maybe the white house and the republicans on the senate judiciary committee are really concerned about her allegations and they dont want the truth to come out. that is equally likely. i mean, we dent know. >> to be fair, michael, and i would say the same thing if i could interview miss swetnick. the dings on her with the litigation and with the boyfriend, those are usual impeachable constructs. >> you know what, i disagree. n...

Called her a liar? you know why? because its all about politics. >> did you know about the lawsuits? >> i was aware of the lawsuits. >> and you werent -- im not at all worried about it. look, a lot of people get sued for a lot of different things. it doesnt mean, all because somebody files a lawsuit, it doesnt mean theres any credibility to it, at all. anybody can file a lawsuit. its about the adjudication. if a jury had found that she had lied, if a judge had found that she had lied, that would...

That its a credibility thing. swetnick cant be trusted. i said it three times. are any of them impressive to you? >> no, chris, its ludicrous, first of all. one lawsuit was filed, it was almost immediately dismissed. the claims by her ex-boyfriend -- i mean, who doesnt have an ex-boyfriend or ex-girlfriend that might say bad things about them. this case was also immediately thrown out, dismissed. there was no adjudication or determination relating to the validity of any of these claims. but let ...

A search for the truth, they wouldnt be so quick to criticize my client and call her a liar. >> it was your attachment that bricked their purpose. >> how do they know? >> several of the senators named you. >> when we made the allegations, guess what? i had done significance due diligence in connection with this before we made the allegations. what had they done before they called her a liar? nothing you know why? because its all about politics. >> did you know about the lawsuits? >> i was aware ...

Evidence. none of that would come into evidence. in a million years. this is what i have been doing for 20 years. >> im saying that ordinarily, if you can say, hey, youre saying now in a legal setting, this happened. if a legal setting here, your employer says you werent being truthful. in a legal setting here, your boyfriend says youre not being truthful. >> no, because it was never adjudicated. never judge ever passed on the validity of these allegations. they were mere allegations. anybody wi...