Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Tommy_Carcetti

(43,079 posts)
6. But should a person who willingly refuses to go under oath be viewed more skeptically?
Thu Apr 30, 2020, 01:17 PM
Apr 2020

For over twenty years, Juanita Broaddrick has openly refused to go under oath to either claim that a) Bill Clinton did sexually assault her or b) she was coerced into testifying earlier that Bill Clinton did not sexually assault her.

She has had ample opportunity during that long time to do so--in fact she once filed a open records lawsuit against the Clinton administration alleging they were hiding evidence against the alleged assault, but then refused to prosecute her case or offer herself up for deposition.

To me, that suggests a willingness to lie or at least distort the truth--that where there are little or no legal consequences, one can say what they want, but if forced into a corner where there may be repercussions for lying, they shy away.

For all we know, Christine Blasey Ford could have lied under oath in her testimony to Congress. (I never said I thought what she said was the definite truth, only that I found her testimony credible) But at the very least, she allowed us the opportunity to consider her credibility.

Reade and Broaddrick don't seem to want that.

To be fair, Reade's allegations are in their infancy. So perhaps she might decide to go under oath after all. And if that happens, we can try to objectively and without bias judge her credibility for what it's worth.

But there's no excuse for Broaddrick.

Kick. nt Tommy_Carcetti Apr 2020 #1
If I were to be completely honest, I just don't know Marrah_Goodman Apr 2020 #2
It's far more common for people to lie under oath for defensive purposes, not offensive purposes. Tommy_Carcetti May 2020 #17
I appreciate the careful consideration of the allegation and issues involved. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #3
Don't get me wrong. People do lie under oath all the time. Tommy_Carcetti Apr 2020 #4
That's the premise I reject. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #5
But should a person who willingly refuses to go under oath be viewed more skeptically? Tommy_Carcetti Apr 2020 #6
As I noted - I "willingly refuse to go under oath," Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #7
But you have a religious belief system that factors into your decision. Tommy_Carcetti Apr 2020 #8
I don't hold others to a different standard than I hold myself. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #9
Again, I'm not casting any aspersions on your own personal standards. But... Tommy_Carcetti Apr 2020 #10
I didn't assert that people dont' lie. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #11
But how then do you explain someone like Juanita Broaddrick? Tommy_Carcetti Apr 2020 #12
I don't distinguish between sworn statements or unsworn statements. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #14
Again, you're not understanding what I'm saying. Tommy_Carcetti May 2020 #15
I'm a Quaker, as well, but ... moriah May 2020 #20
I give Blasey-Ford's testimony the most credibility Retrograde Apr 2020 #13
Agreed. nt Tommy_Carcetti May 2020 #16
Reade does claim to have reported it at the time... JHB May 2020 #18
We can only see how that will pan out. nt Tommy_Carcetti May 2020 #19
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Question about instances ...»Reply #6