GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   2nd accuser for Kavanaugh (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1303819)

dyna mo 09-24-2018 09:53 AM

that's what grain of salt means, to view something with skepticism, if he views all rape cases with skepticism, then he is pre-judging rape cases.

k0nr4d 09-24-2018 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 22339657)
that's what grain of salt means, to view something with skepticism, if he views all rape cases with skepticism, then he is pre-judging rape cases.

So in your opinion a judge should not be skeptical of everything said to him? How would court cases look?

Her: He raped me!
Judge: I believe you.
Him: I didn't rape her!
Judge: I also believe you.

dyna mo 09-24-2018 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k0nr4d (Post 22339660)
So in your opinion a judge should not be skeptical of everything said to him? How would court cases look?

Her: He raped me!
Judge: I believe you.
Him: I didn't rape her!
Judge: I also believe you.

Of course not. Due process is how the system works. But the system requires impartial juries, you know that. the entire task of selecting a jury is to find unbiased, impartial jurors to weigh the evidence. Judges are assigned their seats because they are supposed to have the same value system.

But again, specifically, we are talking about an SC appointment here, not a criminal court case. while the same standards should be maintained, the fact that this is one of the most powerful positions in America, and a life long appointment, it's extremely important to properly vet kavanaugh. it's simply too powerful a position to handle willy nilly.

k0nr4d 09-24-2018 10:08 AM

Right, so when I say he takes it with a grain of salt - I mean "she says he raped her, but maybe he didn't.". This is impartiality.

onwebcam 09-24-2018 10:25 AM

Dem senator says 'we're not in a court of law' when asked about presumption of innocence for Kavanaugh
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/...presumption-of


Democrats Go Full Authoritarian To Stop Brett Kavanaugh
If you're a fan of the Constitution, you're guilty before proven innocent.

Democrats Go Full Authoritarian To Stop Brett Kavanaugh

Rochard 09-24-2018 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k0nr4d (Post 22339645)
OK - So how? How is she going to prove anything? She SAYS he ripped off her cloths and tried to rape her. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. Maybe she invited it. The burden of proof is on her. What are they going to investigate exactly? Character witnesses? It's out of character for me to rape someone too, but I could of course easily overpower some random woman on the street if I wanted to. Let's for argument's sake assume he did do it. Any investigation will be inconclusive and ultimately dropped. He is not going to go to jail based on here-say on an incident from that long ago.

Are you kidding?

A woman is accusing a man of a very serious crime. It would be handled just like any other accusation. Investigators would try to pinpoint the date, time, and place of the party, and then try to determine if both of them were there. Then they would interview other people that were there. Maybe some of them saw the three of them in a room alone. Maybe directly after the incident she told someone about it. It seems she also told her husband about this incident, her shrink, and it also seems it was common knowledge at the school - one other classmate came forward and said she had heard rumors about the incident in school.

The problem is we aren't even investigating.

This is insane. If your local school board was considering a new high school principal and someone came forward saying twenty years ago this person raped them, would you be okay with the school board hiring this person without any kind of an investigation?

Now three other woman have come forward with other stories.

This man was the most unpopular Supreme Court Justice nominee ever before these accusations came out. Why are Republicans pushing so hard for this nominee? Oh, that's right... They want to rig the Supreme Court in their favor in the event there is a legal issue with the Mueller investigation and it becomes a legal manner.

onwebcam 09-24-2018 10:38 AM

Hatch puts Democrats to bed

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn3zaDDXkAMzYvY.jpg

dyna mo 09-24-2018 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k0nr4d (Post 22339664)
Right, so when I say he takes it with a grain of salt - I mean "she says he raped her, but maybe he didn't.". This is impartiality.

That makes sense. thx for the clarification.

Acepimp 09-24-2018 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 22339566)

Why isn't Congress stopping everything and putting all of this on hold until we are sure a rapist isn't getting a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land? Is that too much to ask for?

Because it's clearly a PLOY by dumb Democrats?? Where were these people during the confirmation hearings? Where were these people when JudgeK was put on the DC circuit court of appeals? Where were these people when the FBI investigated JudgeK 6 times??

You leftists are so gullible :1orglaugh

VRPdommy 09-25-2018 03:25 PM

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...hite_House.jpg

Anyone remember this guy...

His nomination sat in front of the republican senate for 293 days and never was put up for a vote...
How soon most forget what is dirty politics.
For those that can't count well, that's 80% of a year.
1/5th of a presidential term.
And NOT EVEN A VOTE

What does this say about ? DEMOCRACY ?
where a few people in leadership roles take the total power of changing the balance of power by just not for-filling their constitutional duty and allowing a vote mandated by the constitution.

I really do not want to hear about fairness from them now. No matter any allegations.

Oh.. why would they do such a thing...
Because if they allowed a vote, he would have been confirmed !
And that being a republican majority senate !

onwebcam 09-26-2018 05:58 AM

1st accuser and WHO DAT?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn-PCEuXoAA0dNi.jpg:large

VRPdommy 09-26-2018 09:17 AM

Drugged and raped ?
https://nypost.com/2018/09/26/brett-...en-gang-raped/


I still say the guy is a bit creepy from surrounding himself with women clerks trying to move up the ladder to the supreme court positions.
I can imagine none of those women wish to speak and ruin there dreams.

And the rush is on before more details surface.

Bladewire 09-27-2018 03:33 PM

Two of his male college roommates admit that he was a nasty drunk. he admitted in writing in college about stumbling out of the bus drunk at 4:30 in the morning and not remembering what happened the night before.

VRPdommy 09-28-2018 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bladewire (Post 22341316)
Two of his male college roommates admit that he was a nasty drunk. he admitted in writing in college about stumbling out of the bus drunk at 4:30 in the morning and not remembering what happened the night before.

Ya know, originally when the first allegation came up, I was not seriously concerned.
We all do stupid things when we are young without the realization of how that might effect our future. We live in the moment for the most part. As long as there was not pattern of behavior afterwards.

Then, a pattern emerged that can not be tested. While I am thankful for Senator Flake to do the right thing and hold his vote unless a FBI investigation moved forward. Of course, only Trump can order that.

All this talk of fairness and the hearings are not a trial but the Judiciary committee is somewhat a jury. The FBI will gather facts and they (the committee) will discern them and make a decision.
That is their job.

One has to be suspicious on the rush to put this through. Especially when Obama's nominee was denied a floor vote for 293 days after passing through all of this stuff.
His nomination expired with his presidency.
McConell should have to eat his own words on that 'cause "there is a election coming and we should let the voters decide".

But I say, just let him in and also proceed with the investigations and remove him from office when found guilty. Seems to be the less political and non-argumentative path for now.

But, for each day, more information may spring-up on other behaviors.
I think he is doomed in the full house vote.


But I am getting restless for all the deception of process in a way that angers me and a bit of distaste for who we have become as a nation.
I do not aspire for this. We are no role model for anyone anymore.
Does anyone care about that. The big picture. I am embarrassed as a citizen.

Nobody will cure what ill's themselves until they stop pointing fingers at each other.

If nobody demands better from their government, it will get worse.

BTW...
If Kavanaugh showed anything of himself at those hearings, he showed he is not a non-partisan impartial judge.
"WHAT COMES AROUND GOES AROUND" so he says in disgust for democrats.
Hey, I'm not exactly happy with them either but he just showed me the number one reason I don't want him to make it.

VRPdommy 09-30-2018 08:15 AM

Fair?

impartial?

VRPdommy 10-01-2018 11:02 AM

I find it suspicious that Trump keeps delaying his 'chat' with Rosenstein.

It almost appears that he intends to 'fire him' based on the outcome of the Kavanaugh confirmation.
He keeps delaying this chat until this confirmation is complete.

It looks bad because Kavanaugh believes in presidential immunity
Nobody knows for sure but this looks very suspicious.

BaldBastard 10-03-2018 08:57 AM

https://twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti/...47758993547265

Yet another accuser has come forward with sworn statement. She's prepared to meet with the FBI today and disclose multiple facts and witnesses.

Bladewire 10-03-2018 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VRPdommy (Post 22343028)
I find it suspicious that Trump keeps delaying his 'chat' with Rosenstein.

It almost appears that he intends to 'fire him' based on the outcome of the Kavanaugh confirmation.
He keeps delaying this chat until this confirmation is complete.

It looks bad because Kavanaugh believes in presidential immunity
Nobody knows for sure but this looks very suspicious.

Presidential immunity works for a Democrat president as well. It's stupid to allow any president to have immunity.

OneHungLo 10-03-2018 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VRPdommy (Post 22343028)
I find it suspicious that Trump keeps delaying his 'chat' with Rosenstein.

It almost appears that he intends to 'fire him' based on the outcome of the Kavanaugh confirmation.
He keeps delaying this chat until this confirmation is complete.

It looks bad because Kavanaugh believes in presidential immunity
Nobody knows for sure but this looks very suspicious.

Seriously? If he fired him you guys would say it was a distraction from Kavanaugh. Can't win with you guys. Be honest for once when it comes to Trump.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:32 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123