- 主题发起人 susann
- 发布时间 2018-09-28
美国是一个令很多美国华人始料不及的高比例墨黑穆杂居社会，也是一个只纳税无保障，生活水平低下的二三流发达国家。
一定会让少数美国华人对美国社会产生严重的落差和不满，他们自认为自己就是美国人，但又不认为自己应该是墨黑穆杂居融合的美国人。
所以，一些美国华人会站队到美国白人民粹一边，他们觉得白人民粹那一套才有可能打破美国墨黑穆杂居的混乱局面，实现自己千辛万苦，孤注一掷移民美国的最初期待。手段极端并不代表真实力量，美国黑人4000万，墨西哥裔8000万，白人又至少半数归属于英欧意识形态之下，美国华人只有区区350万。相当于少数川粉骂了半天街，实际上最终一统计70%美国华人把选票投给了民主党，人家也就散了。
BREAKING: After a careful review of all of the evidence put fourth by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford in her accusations of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh, sex crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell has released a report which completely exonerates the judge.
Sex crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell, a non-partisan third-party with more than 25 years’ experience prosecuting sex crimes in the state of Arizona, carefully reviewed the allegations made by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, including hours of testimony, and has released a report on the matter. In the report, Mitchell points out more than a dozen glaring inconsistencies in Dr. Ford’s account and paints the accusations as potentially fraudulent.
Mitchell’s points out several points, including:
In perhaps her most damning finding, Rachel Mitchell writes that “The activities of congressional Democrats and Dr. Ford’s attorney’s likely affected her account”. Mitchell ostensibly alleges that the maneuvering of congressional Democrats, and the actions of her attorneys, who acted more like handlers, influenced her account of events, and perhaps even her truthfulness. This may have come out as Mitchell’s lines of questioning were repeatedly interrupted by her attorneys, namely Michael Bromwich, who also represents Andrew McCabe.
Rachel Mitchell sums up her report on Page 2, in saying “I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard.”
Sex crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell, a non-partisan third-party with more than 25 years’ experience prosecuting sex crimes in the state of Arizona, carefully reviewed the allegations made by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, including hours of testimony, and has released a report on the matter. In the report, Mitchell points out more than a dozen glaring inconsistencies in Dr. Ford’s account and paints the accusations as potentially fraudulent.
Mitchell’s points out several points, including:
- “Dr. Ford has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened.”
- “Dr. Ford struggled to identify Judge Kavanaugh as the assailant by name.”
- “When speaking with her husband, Dr. Ford changed her description of the incident to become less specific.”
- “Dr. Ford has no memory of key details of the night in question—details that could help corroborate her account.”
- “She does not remember in what house the alleged assault took place or where that house was located with any specificity.”
- “Perhaps most importantly, she does not remember how she got from the party back to her house.”
In perhaps her most damning finding, Rachel Mitchell writes that “The activities of congressional Democrats and Dr. Ford’s attorney’s likely affected her account”. Mitchell ostensibly alleges that the maneuvering of congressional Democrats, and the actions of her attorneys, who acted more like handlers, influenced her account of events, and perhaps even her truthfulness. This may have come out as Mitchell’s lines of questioning were repeatedly interrupted by her attorneys, namely Michael Bromwich, who also represents Andrew McCabe.
Rachel Mitchell sums up her report on Page 2, in saying “I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard.”
来闻一下这空气中的火药味，再拦不住是不是就该动手了。。。
刚才试了一下，已经窜至搜索排名第一位了。
刚才试了一下，已经窜至搜索排名第一位了。
