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.

 

Stop Making Rape Political.

page: 5
7
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 02:26 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko


You said it. None of the rest of us did.


Fine, if you don't believe me, just ask The Don. He sees to it on a regular basis.




posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 02:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: CirqueDeTruth
a reply to: Agree2Disagree


Well that says a lot about our society... doesn't it?

It says a lot about certain segments of our society, certainly.



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Sorry, but the presumption of innocence far outweighs yours or anyone's fears regarding how someone might feel coming forward with an allegation. It's a human right.



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 02:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: underwerks

Just because I dont agree with the guy doesnt mean he's bad for the country. I've disagreed with loads of politicians and here we are...still the US of A....

I am not always right, but apparently you are.

A2D


As a general rule, I’m not going to support anyone having anything to do with the patriot act. Especially for a position on the Supreme Court.

It’s not like I just disagree with his positions on a few issues, his interpretation of the constitution has been shown over and over again to be anti-freedom and pro-government surveillance. The decisions he will make if confirmed will effect all of our lives, and it doesn’t sit well with me after I researched his past. It’s not a small thing.

Why anyone would be for a candidate with his track record is beyond me. He’s everything the Trump supporters here have been screaming about fighting against for the past two years.

Yet, here we are.



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: CirqueDeTruth

So what happens when every single justice from now on gets accused? We just get rid of the scotus? No one is qualified anymore...game over. Shows over. Go home. No refunds. No encores. (?)

A2D


How do you destroy a government?

Delegitimize it!

Our Congress is alread a farce, now they are destroying the SCOTUS. See a pattern? They are after the Constitution.



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Muninn

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: amazing

So then, oh enlightened one, what is the middle ground?


It's thinking for ourselves. Rachel Maddow is going to lie to you. Sean Hannity is going to lie to you. Rush Limbaugh is going to lie to you. Bill Maher is going to lie to you. Laura Ingraham is going to lie to you.

I don't have all the answers. I keep trying to sift through this Kavanaugh stuff. Yeah, of course the democrats are using it for political purposes. Of course the Republicans are going to say there's nothing to any of this. I don't know what the truth is yet, but I don't make my mind up because some Hack on Fox news or MSNBC tells me to.



What does your gut tell you?


My gut tells me that Ford was telling the Truth, and that Kavanaugh was a heavy drinker and was definitely not a virgin back then and that some other stuff doesn't ad up. My gut also tells me that the FBI investigation won't give us anything new.

That leads me back to where I was before....I just don't know. I'm not the one voting though.



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

I think Cory Booker said it best.

She was telling "her truth." That doesn't mean she's lying, but it also doesn't mean she's telling a truth that relates to any of the other people she named, either.



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 02:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: amazing

I think Cory Booker said it best.

She was telling "her truth." That doesn't mean she's lying, but it also doesn't mean she's telling a truth that relates to any of the other people she named, either.


But that's just it. Was she telling the complete truth about what Brett did at the time and does that tell us Brett was a bad person, or least not good enough for the supreme court?



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 02:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical
Innocent until proven guilty only applies in criminal cases. Civil matters do not have that burden of proof.


Not exactly. Even in civil cases, innocent until proven guilty is the law of the land, the only difference is what constitutes "proof." In criminal cases it is "beyond a reasonable doubt" whereas in a civil case it is "preponderance of the evidence." In BOTH cases there's a concept absent in the Kavanaugh case: evidence.



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: amazing

I think Cory Booker said it best.

She was telling "her truth." That doesn't mean she's lying, but it also doesn't mean she's telling a truth that relates to any of the other people she named, either.


But that's just it. Was she telling the complete truth about what Brett did at the time and does that tell us Brett was a bad person, or least not good enough for the supreme court?


This is "truth" in the post-truth, post-objective world. There is no more "the truth." There is only subjective truth. That's why it's very telling that Cory Booker said "her truth." In the subjective, post-modern world, there is no objective reality, no objective truth.

So it only matters whose truth you decide to believe, and that's what the show trial is all about for the Democrats along with all this overly dramatic theatre now.

They don't care about the objective truth. They're constructing a world where "her truth" is the only truth that matters, the only truth that will be believed. Who cares about evidence? Who cares about what other witnesses say? All that matters is that you believe her. We all hear them. We all see them.

BELIEVE HER

That's the message being pounded into us. That's the truth we're being told is the only one that matters whether it's real or not doesn't matter.

This is devolving into a world where perception of truth is more important than actual reality.
edit on 2-10-2018 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 02:55 PM
link   
Stop democrats from making false allegations of rape a political weapon.

Coming in November, everywhere!




posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6




I assure you, if my neighbor accused me of something and the first investigation found no evidence, the case would be dropped. Kavanaugh has had 6 investigations already, now we're in the midst of number 7... all so far producing zero evidence of wrongdoing. As I said, when will it be enough?


How many investigations has Hillary Clinton been through? and yet you will still call to "lock her up" i bet. So much for innocent until proven guilty eh? And if do not shout lock her up I apologize and if you do I'm sure you can justify it right?

You said many of us on the right are satisfied he is innocent.... How so?... Hell you were all calling her a liar before she even testified. Most of you thought she would not even show up. You were all wrong there.

Seriously though, how the F do you all know she is lying before even hearing her story? Answer that...



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 03:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: CirqueDeTruth
He's accused of a crime.


A police report was filed finally? WOW! (Little tip here, he's yet to be accused of any manner of crime. For one to be accused of a crime, a criminal report must be filed with some manner of law enforcement... this has never happened to this man.)


So then "innocent until proven guilty" isn't in play here. You guys are all over the place trying to justify this.

It's simple, he lied. Under oath. He doesn't get the job, and should probably be charged with perjury.



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: tinner07

Look! Up in the sky!!!
It's a bird!
No, wait... it's a plane!!!
Nope, it's....
WHATABOUTISM
Slower than molasses running downhill in January...
Not strong enough to pull a greased string from a cat's asshole...
It's the man of flab's favorite superhero: WHATABOUTISM....

Goddamn, does Hillary Clinton have so much as a single thing to do with the current discussion?



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

because she, herself, has made rape political?



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko




They don't care about the objective truth. They're constructing a world where "her truth" is the only truth that matters, the only truth that will be believed. Who cares about evidence? Who cares about what other witnesses say? All that matters is that you believe her. We all hear them. We all see them.


I think that is where are wrong... Because that actually goes for your side as well.

How many people here on the multitude of threads have said that Dr. Ford was lying before she even showed up and testified. How many??? I would guess 90+% of Trump supporters said she was lying. Not thought she was lying, but flat out lying.

Your side does not want to know the truth, your minds were made up as soon as the story broke. Any thing Anti-Trump is lies from the left.

If you don't believe me, go back and read the threads.

And when you speak of the Dems and say they don't want the Truth are you lumping every Dem in the country into that statement??? Sure sounds like it.



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: tinner07

What else would you think of someone whose official story had changed three or four times before she even got in to testify before Congress and then I think it even changed again once she was there?



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 03:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: whargoul

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: CirqueDeTruth
He's accused of a crime.


A police report was filed finally? WOW! (Little tip here, he's yet to be accused of any manner of crime. For one to be accused of a crime, a criminal report must be filed with some manner of law enforcement... this has never happened to this man.)


So then "innocent until proven guilty" isn't in play here. You guys are all over the place trying to justify this.

It's simple, he lied. Under oath. He doesn't get the job, and should probably be charged with perjury.


You *think* he lied, for it to be perjury, that would need to be proven before a judge (AKA, innocent until PROVEN guilty.) Furthermore, due process is formed on the concept of innocence until guilt is proven. It doesn't require an accusation of crime, per se, as any interaction the government has during any manner of committee, investigation, or confirmation process is governed by due process.



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: whargoul

presumption of innocence is a legal right of the accused in a criminal trial, and it is an international human right under the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 11.......


INTERNATIONAL. HUMAN. RIGHT.

A2D



posted on Oct, 2 2018 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Agree2Disagree

...which explains the left's attempts to dehumanize a previously spotless, upstanding man.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join