The public trial of the evil rapist Kavanaugh

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: DBCowboy

people presumed innocent go on trial and give testimonies all the time do they not?

so lets be clear

do you think he is telling the truth and she is lying?
if so, why?

Presumption of innocence.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Kharron
a reply to: DBCowboy

Well, media sucks. He is innocent until proven otherwise. And she is speaking the truth until proven otherwise. That's why an investigation is a must -- they are both highly credible professionals, with a lot of support and letters about their characters.

Isn't Kavanaugh speaking the truth until proven otherwise?

Yes. That is the very reason I said he was innocent until proven otherwise.

How can that be taken any other way?

But she is equally credible, that's why an investigation is a necessity. They are both at the top of the pack in their professions, and both of their professions offer credibility.

They both need to be investigated and the truth needs to be found out.

Agreed? Or are we to assume one of them is wrong without all the facts and an investigation?

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: DBCowboy

people presumed innocent go on trial and give testimonies all the time do they not?

so lets be clear

do you think he is telling the truth and she is lying?
if so, why?

Presumption of innocence.

so you are just choosing to believe him and not her for no real reason?
got it

people presumed to be innocent do not go to trials
people presumed to be innocent do not give testimony?

i dont understand where you are coming from and your little 3 word answers really are not helping.

whatever i guess

you believe him. you dont believe her.
there must be a reason and you for for whatever reason are not willing to say.

a reply to: Kharron

He said he didn't do fit.


She said he did.


One of them is lying.

Presumption of innocence must conclude that she is, unless she has proof.

originally posted by: Kharron


Agreed? Or are we to assume one of them is wrong without all the facts and an investigation?

that sure is what it sounds like

she is wrong
he is presumed innocent so that must mean he is innocent

who needs to hear testimony?

i mean he is only going to serve for life

then again

what is 1 more potential piece of # in this administration?

a reply to: TinySickTears

He said he didn't do it.

Do you have proof that HE DID?

originally posted by: DBCowboy


Presumption of innocence must conclude that she is, unless she has proof.

so lets give her a chance to prove it

what do you say?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: TinySickTears

He said he didn't do it.

Do you have proof that HE DID?

i do not

i am not making claims though
she is
and she is going to be heard

that is how it should be

i am struggling to find out why you have a problem with this

This is the ultimate,

When are you going to stop beating your wife ?

Type of hearing.

It was 36 frickin years ago.

I would need a video at this point...

a reply to: whyamIhere

she might have an 8mm film of it as proof

hahahahahahahah

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: TinySickTears

He said he didn't do it.

Do you have proof that HE DID?

i do not

i am not making claims though
she is
and she is going to be heard

that is how it should be

i am struggling to find out why you have a problem with this

I don't have a problem with her accusing him.

I have a problem with the media believing her and dismissing him.

You cannot believe both at the same time.

Not unless you're a ####ing moron.


She needs to supply enough evidence to convince ANYONE that he is lying and she is telling the truth.

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: DBCowboy


Presumption of innocence must conclude that she is, unless she has proof.

so lets give her a chance to prove it

what do you say?

Why hasn't she already done so?

She had 36 years what was she waiting for?

a reply to: DBCowboy


This isn't about a presumption of innocence, it's about his fitness to serve on the highest court of the land.

Nobody is threatening to take Brett Kavanuagh's freedom away. But, put this on the street, where some random 15 year old girl accuses some random 17 year old boy of attempted rape. He'll get arrested, booked and finger printed and put in a jail cell until an arraignment before a judge. There's no presumption of innocence, really.

It's Kavanaugh's allies and the White House who have already decided that Ford is lying, or at best, confused. It's the Judicial Committee's response to Ford and her Attorney that are making Kavanaugh look guilty.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Kharron

He said he didn't do fit.


She said he did.


One of them is lying.

Presumption of innocence must conclude that she is, unless she has proof.

And that is why an investigation is needed. Either one could be telling the truth and either one could be lying.

Until it is proven he is lying, he is innocent. Until it proven she is lying, her allegations stand.

I don't know for a fact which one is lying and neither do you. Do you?

I'm not entirely getting your attempts here, DB. Are you saying you're sure he's innocent and she is lying and you have some proof of this?

Because if you don't, it would be normal to want to hear the testimony of both, or even better let the professionals who do this work, such as the FBI, dig into it deeper. I don't see another option, do you? Let me know if you do, please.


P.S. If your approach got applied to all politicians and not just favorites, there would never be an investigation into anyone. Imagine if ATS went all -- Hillary is innocent until all proof is presented! Well, she said she was and we have to go with her word!

I'm consistent in saying investigate it all.

a reply to: Sookiechacha


Bull.


It's all about whether he is lying or she is.

Because one of them is lying.


That is an indisputable fact.


Prove to me that he is lying.

Show me in his life, career, his work, his relationships that gives evidence to his lying.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Public Trials are tedious affairs with prima donnas on very street corner gossiping loudly for attention.

I prefer a nice Show Trial in an Kangaroo Court, complete with a large revolver loaded with only one bullet.

a reply to: Kharron

He is innocent.

Until.

Proven.

Otherwise.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: DBCowboy

Public Trials are tedious affairs with prima donnas on very street corner gossiping loudly for attention.

I prefer a nice Show Trial in an Kangaroo Court, complete with a large revolver loaded with only one bullet.

I say they should just hang him now and impeach Trump.

Maybe that'll satisfy the ####ing leftist bastards.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Crap. I just realized my description thats how the Russians do things.