It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dems support accused pedophile senator

page: 5
58
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 03:47 PM
link   
They are so corrupt in Washington D.C. they cannot indict a proven liar with crimes named Hillary Clinton.




posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 05:04 PM
link   
So...what do you want to happen and when?

Menendez was investigated for the very specific allegation of hiring underage hookers in the Dominican Republic. That investigation showed nothing of that allegation but did find potential corruption charges which led to a mistrial.

So again, given that Menendez's alleged pedophilia was already investigated and found to not be real, what do you want?

Edit: Scrolling through another thread I found this post from you:


originally posted by: Grambler
Well I have no idea if Moore is innocent or not of these allgations.

I will continue to advocate for the presumption of innocence for him like i have with Franken, Trump, conyers, and bill clinton, and the rest.

But let me say, although we may never know, and I dont like the idea of elections turning of unproven allegations, if Moore is guilty of the things he is accused of, thank god he lost.



Emphasis added...what changed?
edit on 13-12-2017 by links234 because: New data



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: links234

Nothing has changed. Thanks for pointing out I have been consistent.

I don't want to see Menendez forced out before a fair trial.

I am pointing out the hypocrisy of people saying not calling for Moore to step out meant they were supporting pedophilia, and yet having no problem supporting Menendez and not calling for him to step down.

You argument here seems to be menendez should have been allowed to defend himself in court and he was successful.

Why shouldn't that same courtesy he given to moore, franken and Conyers?

As the op showed, it is because calling out Menendez would cost the dems a seat, and the others didn't.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler that's illegal its called sexual tourism .



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

NOPE

Difference is that Menendez was actually investigated by the FBI and the charges were found to be unsubstantiated.

So much so that the PROSECUTORS demanded the talk about under-age prostitutes not be part of his trial





NEWARK — Lawyers want unsubstantiated allegations that U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez used prostitutes while vacationing in the Dominican Republic mentioned in court during his federal corruption trial.

The argument isn't coming from the lawyers you would expect.


In a lengthy debate Tuesday outside of the jury's presence, attorneys for Menendez and his co-defendant, Salomon Melgen, sought to keep references to those allegations in the proceedings, while prosecutors sought to redact them.

Judge William Walls sided with prosecutors.

The allegations were made in right-wing media during the run-up to Menendez’s 2012 re-election. They were investigated but never corroborated by the FBI. And one of the purported prostitutes later recanted her claim.

www.politico.com...

* The right wing inventing a story that is proved false vs. 8 women from Roy Moore's home town?

Why again should Democrats decide Menendez is a Pedophile? Cuz Right Wing media says so?





edit on 13-12-2017 by soberbacchus because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 05:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: links234

Nothing has changed. Thanks for pointing out I have been consistent.

I don't want to see Menendez forced out before a fair trial.



Again, he had an FBI investigation and trial.

The underage prostitutes claim was so bogus that Menendez's attorneys actually fought to keep the claim in the trial to show how bogus it was. The PROSECUTORS actually asked for all prostitution claims to be redacted, the judge agreed.

The claim originated with Right Wing Media and was investigated and proven bunk.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

See the link on page three.

Menendez said the charges were trumped up, Obama's doj people said the accusations were not easily deiscredited and credible.

Again, you prove that Menendez should be allowed to defend himself from the accusations, but not Moore or others.

So is it your interpretation that accusations from the recent past should mean that the accused can defend himself in court and we shouldn't call for resignation.

But accusations from 40 years ago must be taken at face value?

Ridiculous.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 05:54 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

And your link only says the prosecutors wanted menedezs claims about it being a right wing hit piece redacted, not the actual allegations of his engaging in that behaviour.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 05:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: links234
You argument here seems to be menendez should have been allowed to defend himself in court and he was successful.


No, in doing some research (whoa, what a concept) before I posted a reply I found that there was an allegation, an investigation and nothing came of the pedophilia claims.

You're calling it hypocrisy but the allegation came from an anonymous source to the FBI. It wasn't an anonymous source to the Washington Post or to the New York Times or even Breitbart, it was to the FBI. We only found out about the initial allegation because of the subsequent charges levied against Menendez after the investigation.

There's no hypocrisy here because no one, seemingly, outside of the FBI knew about the allegation so there was no one to demand he step down. You're grasping at straws trying to find a parallel between this and Moore. It almost feels like you just punched in 'democrat accused of pedophilia' into Google and just went with the first thing that came up without reading more than the headline.

I expected better from you.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 05:59 PM
link   
a reply to: links234

So you are telling me that I will not be able to find public details from years before the trial with the accusations of pedophilia?

I just want to get you in record be for I post it.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 05:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: AboveBoard


But in a motion Monday asking the judge to ignore the defense arguments, Justice Department lawyers say the hooker allegations "were not so easily disprovable as the defendants suggest."


Prosecutors used the defense claims to highlight previously undisclosed tidbits on Menendez's pursuit of younger woman.

The lawyers say their investigation resulted from "specific, corroborated allegations that defendants Menendez and Melgen had sex with underage prostitutes in the Dominican Republic."

Menendez’s camp said Monday that the Justice Department filing is a smear tactic designed to use the exchange of motions to dump dirt on the senator.



www.google.com...

So justice department lawyers under Obama thought the allegations of sex with undrragwrs was credible.



No, a justice lawyer said literally "the hooker allegations "were not so easily disprovable as the defendants suggest."


Meanwhile

Three women who made the prostitution allegations later recanted and said they were paid to level the charges.



The suggestion that Dems should condemn a man for accusation the Justice Department investigated and found unsubstantiated and originating with the right wing media, complete with PAID false witnesse..so embarrassing that they fought to keep it out of their prosecution of Menendez?

That makes ZERO sense.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

No your argument is that there should be an investigation for menedez, and you believe that this was all just a right wing conspiracy, even when Obama's doj says they accusations were not easily dismissed is telling.

You want a fair investigation for menedez, but not for Moore.

Was the charges against him investigated?

Nope, but you know he is guilty based on the accusations.

But when a dem is accused, we need to look into it and he shouldn't resign.

In other words, hypocrisy.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 06:03 PM
link   
So this is how they paid her to get Moore. A seat in the Senate.




edit on 13-12-2017 by thepixelpusher because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

You picked a bad choice with this because it's already been investigated.

Go ahead, give us all the evidence you have and then tell us that he's guilty of what he's accused of.

This is a watershed moment we're in. 'Well they didn't do it a few years ago!' isn't a good enough argument. If this were to break today, I'm fairly confident we would hear a lot of people saying he should step down because of it.

Here's what I understand about Menendez: An anonymous source told the FBI that Menendez was travelling to the Dominican Republic to have sex with underage hookers, the FBI investigated this allegation and pulled bank records etc., the FBI found the original allegation to not be true or not have enough evidence to further pursue, they did find that Menendez may have been involved in some quid pro quo with a major donor and the DOJ then brought charges against him for it.

Do more for it though, if you genuinely believe these allegations, then write to some friendly editors (Breitbart, Washington Times, etc.) demanding they remind the world about this. You'll get a better response. Hell, incorporate yourself and write a medium article on it. Include all your evidence and why you think this really happened and how that equates to hypocrisy from Democrats.

Edit: Better hurry though, Chris Christie is out of office in about a month and being replaced by a Democrat.
edit on 13-12-2017 by links234 because: one more thing about the NJ gov



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: links234

O don't believe these allegations.

He was accused, the doj said the accusations were not easily written off, no one called for him to step down.

The dems still don't call for that.

Now with moore, there is no investigation, no proof of allegations, yet these same dems that wanted Menendez to be able to defend himself and were unwilling to just beileive the allegations day the accusation alone is not only enough to call for him to be out, but to call anyone that wants to see him have a fair hearing a immoral person or pedophile supporter.

My claim is that both people should be allowed to defend themselves in a fair setting.

You are saying only Menendez should have that right.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


You are saying only Menendez should have that right.


That's literally not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying Menendez had that before I even heard about it so there's no comparison to Moore.

Also, you need to be a lot more specific about this case. Are Democrats defending Menendez from the pedo accusation or the quid pro quo allegation? There are two separate things going on with this case. One was already found to be false (the underage hookers), the other came out in a mistrial (the quid pro quo). McConnel has already called for a senate ethics investigation only into the quid pro quo allegation though, so be very specific with your examples.

Are people saying Menendez should have the benefit of the doubt about one thing or the other? Be specific.
edit on 13-12-2017 by links234 because: Mmmmm's



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: links234

People are not demanding Menendez step down although he was accused of sex with underagers.

So was Moore.

Dems have demanded Moore step down, and any said anyone not suggesting that was immoral.

With Menendez, they want to look in to the accusations.

This is hypocritical.

I, along with many others, were saying that the alkgations should be proven before accepted in both caees, but I was called a pedophile supporter.

Although charged of sex with minors weren't brought to trial with menedez, they did include that he cohorted with underage girls that were paid large sums of money by melgen.

www.politico.com...

Much like there is no proof whatsoever that Moore has sex with an underager, but he was supposedly hanging out with underage girls which was gross and made him a pervert.

But for menedez, we should not rush to judgement and allow him to defend himself.

I feel both should be presumed innocent until shown otherwise.

Many dems feel Menendez should be able to defend himself, but not Moore.

This is disgusting politicization of accusations and hypocritical.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 07:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: links234
People are not demanding Menendez step down although he was accused of sex with underagers.


No. That's not what people are not demanding he step down for. The pedo accusation is baseless and has already been investigated, there's no reason to demand he step down if there's already been an investigation. Moore hasn't had an investigation but has had many women come forward, publicly, with their claims.

These are different cases. Again, you're not being specific of who's not demanding what.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 07:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus

And your link only says the prosecutors wanted menedezs claims about it being a right wing hit piece redacted, not the actual allegations of his engaging in that behaviour.


Not at all. You are fully incorrect. Read the link or my excerpt above.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 07:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: links234

Although charged of sex with minors weren't brought to trial with menedez, they did include that he cohorted with underage girls that were paid large sums of money by melgen.

www.politico.com...



This is what you are spinning:


Prosecutors said in a court filing Menendez was sometimes in the physician’s company while “young women who received substantial sums of money from defendant Melgen” were also around.


Where does it say underage? And this seems a reach and the prosecution agreed asking all references to the disproven claim be stricken from court discussions.

This is Chickens to Apples and a fail of comparison.



new topics




 
58
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join