Posted on 05/02/2024 2:42:51 AM PDT by Libloather
Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke admitted Wednesday that she was arrested and chose not to disclose the legal matter during her Senate confirmation process because it had been expunged from her record.
During her 2021 confirmation process, Clarke, who now heads the Justice Department’s civil rights division, was asked by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) in a questionnaire if she’d “ever been arrested for or accused of committing a violent crime against any person.”
To which Clarke responded, “No.”
The Daily Signal reported on Tuesday that Clarke was arrested in Maryland in relation to a domestic violence complaint back in 2006.
The outlet cited court documents, her ex-husband Reginald Avery and text messages between Avery and the head of the American Accountability Foundation (a conservative nonprofit group).
Avery told the outlet that his finger was “sliced to the bone” after Clarke allegedly came at him with a knife after he revealed that he was cheating on her.
Charges against Clarke were dropped, and more than a year later, she filed paperwork that would wipe the arrest from her record.
“Nearly 2 decades ago, I was subjected to years-long abuse and domestic violence at the hands of my ex-husband,” Clarke said in a statement to CNN on Wednesday.
“This was a terrorizing and traumatizing period that I have sought to put behind me to promote my personal health, healing and well-being,” she added. “The physical and emotional scars, the emotional abuse and exploitation, and the lying are things that no woman or mother should ever have to endure.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
A different standard exists for certain people.
It was a confirmation hearing where she testified under oath and decided to falsely answer a simple and clear question. A person unwilling to truthfully answer the questions should either decline to answer or not put herself out there for the position. This is not some small position. This DOJ division goes after “hate crimes” and this is in a position to persecute pro-lifers and other dissidents from the ruling (uni)party’s Marxist ideology. She’s also a lawyer, which used to mean something. Having a charge expunged does not somehow mean one was never arrested. Instead, it should be the basis for a very simple explanation, such as ‘yes, I was arrested on false charges; there was nothing to them and they were dropped and expunged’ - not that difficult.
Here’s a preview of Evans’ Introduction to to her 2010 Expanded Third Edition.
The book is written with consistent pronouns with he/him as the abuser and she/her as the victim. Evans says this is done for clarity, not to imply that females don’t abuse males, because they clearly do.
Unfortunately the last two pages of the Introduction are not shown. That’s where Evans says that in her clinical experience as a life coach, she has never even once seen a female abuser reform herself.
That introduction was written in 2010, but Evans more recently (2020) said she’s still never seen a female abuser reform (once again, in her clinical experience).
The Google preview (sorry, left it out of the earlier comment):
https://books.google.com/books?id=mrKSDgAAQBAJ&pg=PA15&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=1#v=onepage&q&f=false
Well, were you arrested?
Unless you can jump into a time machine and go back and prevent your earlier self from being arrested, you were arrested.
So, yes, you do.
And if you can get a word edgewise, you can add, "But that arrest was later expunged."
Regards,
Absolutely correct!
Now, the Streisand Effect comes into play.
Regards,
She lied under oath during a hearing for a job position - the question included “or been accused”...different than you as a regular citizen having to come clean about a deal that was straightened out - if there was nothing there, she should have been happy to speak the truth and then clear it up.
Now, this liar gets to go after folks who protest the killing of babies...
My Dad taught me two valuable lessons.
1. Learn to laugh at yourself.
2. It’s not all about me.
We have to stick to the question Cotton asked. When we do, we find out she lied.
Her act may have been dropped, but the fact is that, as many other RATs, she has that trait of a being a liar.
That, unless they made her stronger. Though I disagree on lying, generally, because expungement - depending by state, and internet records - means that what was expunged simply didn't happen, meaning her answer was accurate.
But if she was genuinely a victim at the hands of her ex, it was a valid discussion in her Senate process, expungement or not. As it stands now, she has painted herself of poor moral character with severe judgement deficit and the consequences of her choice to not disclose is now an order of magnitude worse than what would have been a short Senate process discussing lessons learned and, in theory, how it made her stronger (the correct tack, if accurate).
Under normal circumstances I'd be impressed that one of a protected class did NOT play the victim card to help her confirmation process.
However, the bottom line: She is too STUPID to hold her position (she should have verified that the records wouldn't turn up due to her state's apparent 'incomplete' process, let alone that her ex might talk to the media) and obviously has extremely poor judgement, perhaps resulting from her "mental scars."
Obviously being a protected class in this era has different values and she should be removed for her actions...and be made an example.
But I won't hold my breath for reasons we all know too well...
Kristen is just a protege’ of Garland.
This dishonest loser fits right into the government. It is a hive of Citizen-despising hacks with no integrity.
Is there corroboration for her claims of “years of abuse”?
Maybe she is telling the more or less truth THIS TIME, or maybe she is not. She has just ben proven to lie when it is to her advantage. I’d be astounded if the situation under discussion is the only instance.
Does she/will she lie in the future whenever she thinks it is justified by circumstances?
Verbally abusive relationships are not “two-way”. There’s an abuser and a victim. The roles don’t swap. Or switch back and forth.
She’s the one who elevated the abuse to physical violence.
There doesn’t appear to be a history of violence or threats of violence toward her, perpetrated by Avery. Rather it appears his infidelity was discovered or admitted to by Avery, and then, out came the knife. The fact that the injury was to one of his fingers means that Avery must have been injured in the process of defending himself against the knife attack.
She’s non-specifically claiming “years of abuse” AFTER having been caught lying to Congress. He almost lost a finger (can’t get much more specific than that) and yet still refrained from pressing charges.
This Guy thinks he knows who the abuser is or was in this relationship, and who the victim.
That, with 20/20 hindsight.
I believe my comment parallels your own, though I meandered to why expungement might have been valid (apparently not in her case, but SHE chose not to raise the topic in confirmation hearings for actions which are questionable at face value).
Most importantly: Stupid.
We know that true victims of “years of abuse” have resorted and will resort to violence against their abusers. Up to and including homicide. It’s sad and tragic, but true.
Some of these acts are seen as understandable and possibly justified, some not. It obviously depends of the unique facts of each case.
This woman has just (conveniently?) placed herself in that category. The rest of us can be forgiven for withholding judgment until more facts are revealed.
That said, it’s not looking good for her.
What if you shot a man in the back, spent two years in prison and on release found a technicality that got it overturned and expunged?
That is not an expungement.
Unfit
She was convicted.
Adultery is wrong but NOT a crime.
Attacking someone with a knife and cutting them is a CRIME.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.