Roe v. Wade and the new SC Justice

[Lou]

1 minute ago, Rico said:

On the flip side.  Some people seem sad that Judge Rapey McDrunken might not get to sit on the supreme court. 

 

So about that budget...

I don't care if he does or not. I know nothing about the guy.

I just think all of these women conveniently appearing out of nowhere is ridiculous.

[Rico]

2 minutes ago, Lou said:

I don't care if he does or not. I know nothing about the guy.

I just think all of these women conveniently appearing out of nowhere is ridiculous.

Same thing happened with Bill Cosby. 

[Jason]

Just now, Rico said:

Same thing happened with Bill Cosby. 

 Except he did admit to it in a deposition.  I also believe they had evidence 

[the dude abides]

3 minutes ago, Rico said:

Same thing happened with Bill Cosby. 

And Harvey Weinstein.

[Lou]

3 minutes ago, Rico said:

Same thing happened with Bill Cosby. 

"Cosby admitted to acquiring Qualuudes, a powerful sedative, to give to women with whom he wanted to have sex."

 

[the dude abides]

The conservative butthurt in this thread is priceless.

 

[Jason]

6 minutes ago, the dude abides said:

The conservative butthurt in this thread is priceless.

 

The Dems not understanding presumption of innocence is priceless

[Taylor]

https://www.vox.com/2018/9/26/17907462/christine-blasey-ford-testimony-brett-kavanaugh-hearing

Quote

“I did not want to tell my parents that I, at age 15, was in a house without any parents present, drinking beer with boys,” Ford says. “I tried to convince myself that because Brett did not rape me, I should be able to move on and just pretend that it had never happened.”

 

[the dude abides]

3 minutes ago, calscuf said:

Judge Rapey McDrunken.

Ha.

Much better than Judge Brock Turner.

[Rico]

7 minutes ago, Jason said:

The Dems not understanding presumption of innocence is priceless

This is not a criminal trial. It's a confirmation hearing for the highest court in the land. Different standards. 

[Jason]

Just now, Rico said:

This is not a criminal trial. It's a confirmation hearing for the highest court in the land. Different standards. 

So you’re perfectly fine with labeling a man a sexual predator and rapist without proof or evidence? Putting political opinions aside, why should he not get the seat if there’s no proof? 

[Lou]

8 minutes ago, Jason said:

So you’re perfectly fine with labeling a man a sexual predator and rapist without proof or evidence? Putting political opinions aside, why should he not get the seat if there’s no proof? 

lol you're adorable 

[Rico]

11 minutes ago, Jason said:

So you’re perfectly fine with labeling a man a sexual predator and rapist without proof or evidence? Putting political opinions aside, why should he not get the seat if there’s no proof? 

The three women that have come forward are all credible in my opinion. They are well educated professionals. They have nothing to gain. In fact coming forward could put their careers in jeopardy. 

All three women have witnesses that claim they knew of these incidents years ago.  All three women have called for an FBI investigation and have said they are willing to talk to the FBI under threat of perjury. 

Kavanaugh on the other hand probably already lied under oath and absolutely doesn't want the FBI asking questions. 

Who is more credible in your eyes?

[RallyMo]

Why can't they just find another equally qualified (in terms of profession) person to be placed on the bench? How is this guy preferable at this point to other conservative options? 

[Jason]

13 minutes ago, RallyMo said:

Why can't they just find another equally qualified (in terms of profession) person to be placed on the bench? How is this guy preferable at this point to other conservative options? 

They can and I'm fine with that but the same shit will happen to the next nominee that Trump submits. It may not be sexual related but they'll find something. Anyways, this is just the Dems stalling the process for as long as possible. 

[Jason]

22 minutes ago, Rico said:

The three women that have come forward are all credible in my opinion. They are well educated professionals. They have nothing to gain. In fact coming forward could put their careers in jeopardy. 

All three women have witnesses that claim they knew of these incidents years ago.  All three women have called for an FBI investigation and have said they are willing to talk to the FBI under threat of perjury. 

Kavanaugh on the other hand probably already lied under oath and absolutely doesn't want the FBI asking questions. 

Who is more credible in your eyes?

Neither really. It's he said, she said. There is no evidence to support any of them. I think any person being accused should be presumed innocent unless evidence says otherwise. 

[Spirit]

Here we go.  (refills popcorn)

 

 

[Rico]

27 minutes ago, Jason said:

Neither really. It's he said, she said. There is no evidence to support any of them. I think any person being accused should be presumed innocent unless evidence says otherwise. 

How would one go about gathering evidence?  Through an FBI investigation perhaps?

[Spirit]

LOL

 

 

[Jason]

3 minutes ago, Rico said:

How would one go about gathering evidence?  Through an FBI investigation perhaps?

Lol, not after 35 years have passed

[Tank]

2 hours ago, calscuf said:

Judge Rapey McDrunken.

Ha.

he's friends with clyde mcbigbat.

[Tank]

37 minutes ago, Rico said:

How would one go about gathering evidence?  Through an FBI investigation perhaps?

if they can find evidence 35 years later, i'll be duly impressed.

[full circle]

8 hours ago, nate said:

You really discredit yourself by posting anything from the Daily Caller

But of course your news sources are creditable right? 

[Rico]

You guys seem to have a low opinion of law enforcement. Physical evidence isn't the only evidence they can look into. There are witnesses they can question. Someone needs to ask Mark Judge some hard questions under oath. 

[full circle]

1 hour ago, RallyMo said:

Why can't they just find another equally qualified (in terms of profession) person to be placed on the bench? How is this guy preferable at this point to other conservative options? 

Because there is no evidence that he did anything like what they are accusing him of.  You don’t reward disgusting smear campaigns.