Darc Knight
Investor not Trader
- Joined
- 28 February 2015
- Posts
- 1,211
- Reactions
- 607
You're an ex Police Officer are you? I'm assuming from your name.
Goodness, she's reading her script, using a croaky voice to intimate mental impacts. From my professional experience appears to be lying through her teeth. I'm no right winger but can see the Clinton Illuminati all over this.
And when it happened they were kids and no real evidence that Kavanaugh was even there.
US absolutely corrupt and stuffed. Just party and save somer silver coins.
Kavanaugh nomination in a nutshell
Imagine you’re on the committee to hire the next CEO of a Fortune 500 company. You’ve got a stack of impressive resumes, but one is a standout.
Then you hear this:
- A woman says your top pick tried to sexually assault her, pinning her down on a bed at a party when they were in high school, a story she told a therapist years ago.
-A second woman says he exposed himself to her as a student at Yale. Classmates gossiped about it for decades.
-A third woman says your applicant was a bystander when she was, in her words, “gang raped” at a high school party. She says that she saw him once in a line of boys preparing to gang rape another student.
-She also said that he and his friends spiked drinks with drugs and alcohol to make women unable fight off unwanted sexual advances.
-In response to all of this, your top pick presents himself as a virgin choirboy. Half a dozen of his old friends gasp, telling the Washington Post that, in fact, he was an aggressive “sloppy drunk” for years.
Do you hire him, anyway?
No, but here's what *really concerns me - One of the basic tenets of our system is the principle of the assumption of innocence unless proven guilty.
I don't know whether Kav did these these things, and neither do y'all. But it seems that if one's political affiliations are of the left, you are happy to assume his guilt. (with the exception of Lindsey Stewart... Bravo, that man)
That is wrong, disgusting, and profoundly ####ing stupid. Yes, you clowns truly disgust me and you have no idea if the can of worms you have opened.
If he is guilty, fine, let those cards fall where they will. If he is proved innocent, then you deserve the shame... that you probably don't have the sociological capacity of feeling.
You're an ex Police Officer are you? I'm assuming from your name.
How did you get that from his name?
Goodness, she's reading her script, using a croaky voice to intimate mental impacts. From my professional experience appears to be lying through her teeth. I'm no right winger but can see the Clinton Illuminati all over this.
Due process, brah. It's how we do it in the West, Grasshopper. (unless your brownshirts manage to destroy that)I guess it depends on what you want in your Justice.
You really haven't followed proceedings outside the egregious Vox, Gaurdian et al, have you?Did they bothered to do an investigation? No.
She offered names, witnesses, crime scenes. She asks for an FBI investigation.
The FBI can't be trusted? Too political? It's not important enough?
Ex Plod, plod being colloquial for Cop.
Anyone who was involved with Starr is the enemy of the Dems. Kavanaugh authored the Starr report so the Dems went fishing to see what they'd find. It's not a courtroom so innocent until proven guilty blah blah doesn't mean anything. It's no different to the usual muck that gets hurled around in a US election campaign, so I don't know why there's so much handwringing about it. And yes, a SC nomination is an election campaign; the system has been so heavily politicised.
Both parties need to stop putting forward partisan candidates who are selected first and foremost because they are ideological brethren.
Ain't gonna happen.
They investigated 6 times into his character. There was no crime scene because she "can't remember " all her witnesses said "no never there" or it didn't happen. I like how all the muck starts becoming the truth.Did they bothered to do an investigation? No.
She offered names, witnesses, crime scenes. She asks for an FBI investigation.
The FBI can't be trusted? Too political? It's not important enough?
Arfy's nomination in a nutshell
Then you hear this:
- A woman says your top pick tried to sexually assault her, pinning her down on a bed at a party when and locking her in a room for a day they were in college frat house , .
-A second woman says he himself did the same to her as a student at IVY League college. Classmates gossiped about it for decades. And bragged about it.
-A third woman says your applicant was a bystander when she was, in her words, “gang raped” at a high school party. She says that she saw him once in a line of boys preparing to gang rape another student.
-She also said that he and his friends spiked drinks with drugs and alcohol to make women unable fight off unwanted sexual advances. (this one can go basically unaltered)
-In response to all of this, your top pick presents himself as a virgin choirboy. Half a dozen of his old friends gasp, telling the Washington Post that, in fact, he was an aggressive “sloppy drunk” for years.
Do you hire him, anyway?
Not Dear old Arfy ....If you've got any brains.
They investigated 6 times into his character. There was no crime scene because she "can't remember " all her witnesses said "no never there" or it didn't happen. I like how all the muck starts becoming the truth.
There is no knockout punch. Its his word against hers. As of this morning she was up $380 thousand dollars. Theres a long line of stink on the dems after this.
Did it happen?
Unless more evidence comes out, its down to which side you back.
Oh well. Not my country, not my worry.
You really haven't followed proceedings outside the egregious Vox, Gaurdian et al, have you?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?