Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Donald Trump running for president

He was charged, but It'll be interesting to see where this goes. Also interesting to see Republicans "care" about abuse all of the sudden.
 
youngandfree said:
No, Republicans care about karma. That dude has a truckload of if coming to him.
Click to expand...

I wonder what they think is coming to them being that they have dropped little love bombs on 10s of thousands of little children?

Nah, doesnt matter, the only karma they care about is at the voting booth :)
 
ax1 said:
I wonder what they think is coming to them being that they have dropped little love bombs on 10s of thousands of little children?

Nah, doesnt matter, the only karma they care about is at the voting booth :)
Click to expand...

There's that. There's doing absolutely nothing to help US school kids to not get shot except suggesting the schools be guarded by vets and then ignoring stories about vets who shoot up places because then they would actually have to admit that they're not doing enough to help vets. There's ignoring sexual assault on adults unless it helps their story and then it's only to point and say, look Democrats do it too. There's ignoring sexual assault on children by the religion that they keep promoting as the only good religion. Yeah, their hands are clean.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Karma doesn't only mean bad. That's not how karma works. And since it looks like this is just the same douche who attempted to frame Mueller, I think I'll wait to see the actual facts.
Click to expand...

I saw avenatti's presser, he sounded a whole lot like Kavanaugh....didn't he represent a Kavanaugh accuser?
 
justhere4comm said:
*Avenatti wasn't charged, and the story from TMZ is not correct. His ex and current wife both say it's not about them as they stated he's never laid a hand on either of them, nor would he. This would appear to be a nice setup much like what happened to Stormy Daniels. So, who filed the complaint? We'll have to wait and see.

I'd also like to know how my spell check new to correct my misspelling of his name... lol.
Click to expand...

fact check???
 
Aleksandar37 said:
He did. And if there is evidence, he should be tried in a court. There wasn't enough evidence for Kavanaugh's accusers.
Click to expand...


in all honesty I think charges against avenatti will more than likely be dropped, but if he is innocent it seems like karma for him to be accused after agreeing with the chant-believe the woman....I think that the most dangerous part of the metoo movement is believing the woman regardless of evidence[proof].
 
thebigt said:
in all honesty I think charges against avenatti will more than likely be dropped, but if he is innocent it seems like karma for him to be accused after agreeing with the chant-believe the woman....I think that the most dangerous part of the metoo movement is believing the woman regardless of evidence[proof].
Click to expand...

I just hope for proper due process, everyone deserves their day in court.
 
ax1 said:
I just hope for proper due process, everyone deserves their day in court.
Click to expand...

exactly...avenatti included, even though he condemned Kavanaugh I won't condemn avenatti until he is proven guilty...imo, this is bigger than ANY individual.
 
thebigt said:
in all honesty I think charges against avenatti will more than likely be dropped, but if he is innocent it seems like karma for him to be accused after agreeing with the chant-believe the woman....I think that the most dangerous part of the metoo movement is believing the woman regardless of evidence[proof].
Click to expand...

Misinformation and misunderstanding are the most dangerous parts of any movement. Believe the woman isn't about saying there shouldn't be evidence. I'm sure there are some people who want it that way, but that isn't what most want and isn't what that movement is about. However, people and the media cling onto a few and present it as a whole. Believe the woman means for there to be charges and a hearing at all, which was not always the case and sometimes still isn't.

Avenatti is an attorney. I don't argue that he isn't an ambulance chaser looking for the spotlight, but if you believe even a percentage of what you claim to believe about the Constitution and rights in this country, then you SHOULD believe that everybody gets this: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed." If somebody comes to him with a case, he has the ability to take it.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Misinformation and misunderstanding are the most dangerous parts of any movement. Believe the woman isn't about saying there shouldn't be evidence. I'm sure there are some people who want it that way, but that isn't what most want and isn't what that movement is about. However, people and the media cling onto a few and present it as a whole. Believe the woman means for there to be charges and a hearing at all, which was not always the case and sometimes still isn't.

Avenatti is an attorney. I don't argue that he isn't an ambulance chaser looking for the spotlight, but if you believe even a percentage of what you claim to believe about the Constitution and rights in this country, then you SHOULD believe that everybody gets this: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed." If somebody comes to him with a case, he has the ability to take it.
Click to expand...

I believe he has the right to take any case and represent any person...sometimes I have issue with how he represents but never the representing.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Misinformation and misunderstanding are the most dangerous parts of any movement. Believe the woman isn't about saying there shouldn't be evidence. I'm sure there are some people who want it that way, but that isn't what most want and isn't what that movement is about. However, people and the media cling onto a few and present it as a whole. Believe the woman means for there to be charges and a hearing at all, which was not always the case and sometimes still isn't.

Avenatti is an attorney. I don't argue that he isn't an ambulance chaser looking for the spotlight, but if you believe even a percentage of what you claim to believe about the Constitution and rights in this country, then you SHOULD believe that everybody gets this: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed." If somebody comes to him with a case, he has the ability to take it.
Click to expand...




let us revisit what many in the metoo movement were saying during the Kavanaugh hearings...there were many in the metoo movement saying accusation was enough, actually I believe this is where the slogan the woman must be believed came from.

if the metoo movement is now revising the meaning I am all in for it, but it set a dangerous precedent that I am sure the republicans are going to try to use against liberals. it was a can of worms that should never have been opened-just like harry reid setting precedent for the 'nuclear option'.
 
thebigt said:
let us revisit what many in the metoo movement were saying during the Kavanaugh hearings...there were many in the metoo movement saying accusation was enough, actually I believe this is where the slogan the woman must be believed came from.

if the metoo movement is now revising the meaning I am all in for it, but it set a dangerous precedent that I am sure the republicans are going to try to use against liberals. it was a can of worms that should never have been opened-just like harry reid setting precedent for the 'nuclear option'.
Click to expand...

Yeah, he's a complete scumbag. Whether he is lying or not will be seen.

Metoo isn't revising. That's been the message the entire time. The best way to bring down a message is to distort it and use it against them which is exactly what happened. You convince a bunch of guys that they're going to be sent to jail without a trial and release them on twitter. And they point to some kid who went to jail because a cheerleader at his high school falsely accused him of rape and they say see, it's happening. But of course that happens because it's not a perfect system and there are some innocent people sitting in prison for **** they didn't do, but that is far from the norm. As usual, the loudest ones screaming about it are the ones with the most to hide. Lawyers protect them, but smart lawyers know to walk when the perjury starts happening. It's also happening because people never want to meet in the middle, they just push from extremes and cry like a victim when it's not their turn to push.
 
thebigt said:
let us revisit what many in the metoo movement were saying during the Kavanaugh hearings...there were many in the metoo movement saying accusation was enough, actually I believe this is where the slogan the woman must be believed came from.

if the metoo movement is now revising the meaning I am all in for it, but it set a dangerous precedent that I am sure the republicans are going to try to use against liberals. it was a can of worms that should never have been opened-just like harry reid setting precedent for the 'nuclear option'.
Click to expand...

Hillary Clinton said all women deserve to be believed if they are making accusations about being assaulted. :)
 
thebigt said:
let us revisit what many in the metoo movement were saying during the Kavanaugh hearings...there were many in the metoo movement saying accusation was enough, actually I believe this is where the slogan the woman must be believed came from.

if the metoo movement is now revising the meaning I am all in for it, but it set a dangerous precedent that I am sure the republicans are going to try to use against liberals. it was a can of worms that should never have been opened-just like harry reid setting precedent for the 'nuclear option'.
Click to expand...

Who? Celebrities and college kids on twitter? Anybody that wants to go around the law and the system we have set can piss off. This is exactly what the media and government has been doing for a while now on all sides. You take a few to fit the message and you ignore the masses. Whoever told you that was the core and original intent of metoo, told you wrong. It's the same thing as saying there are some horrible, racist cops out there. That's fact. I can name several that I grew up with. But that doesn't mean they speak for all cops. Ford got her day in front of the committee and she had nothing except he said/she said, not even enough for an actual trial. I honestly don't think she really even wanted to do it, but the Democrats who screwed it up put her in an impossible spot.
 
youngandfree said:
Hillary Clinton said all women deserve to be believed if they are making accusations about being assaulted. :)
Click to expand...

Yes, she did. Did she say that means no trial? She's a hypocrite for saying that after what she said about the people screwing her husband, but what are you not understanding about people not being believed. They're not being believed by their own families and local communities. It never even makes it to a trial.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Oh jesus, here we go again. So she should have just went against the constitution?
Click to expand...

Was she constitutionally required to knowingly defend a child rapist? What part of the constitution would she have broke? As far as she said, she did it only as a favor. And since when did she ever care anything about the Constitution anyways????
 
ax1 said:
Was she constitutionally required to knowingly defend a child rapist? What part of the constitution would she have broke? As far as she said, she did it only as a favor.
Click to expand...

He has a constitutional right to an attorney. She was appointed by the court to be his attorney. I'll say it yet again, I would love to see both Clintons in the ICC, but this system of law is what we have. I guess she could have personally judged him guilty before the trial and quit being a lawyer since she would be covering traffic court after that.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Who? Celebrities and college kids on twitter? Anybody that wants to go around the law and the system we have set can piss off. This is exactly what the media and government has been doing for a while now on all sides. You take a few to fit the message and you ignore the masses. Whoever told you that was the core and original intent of metoo, told you wrong. It's the same thing as saying there are some horrible, racist cops out there. That's fact. I can name several that I grew up with. But that doesn't mean they speak for all cops. Ford got her day in front of the committee and she had nothing except he said/she said, not even enough for an actual trial. I honestly don't think she really even wanted to do it, but the Democrats who screwed it up put her in an impossible spot.
Click to expand...

I think donnelly got beat because of white moms fearful of their sons being the next Kavanaugh, it may or may not be a legitimate reason but many I have talked to said this was why.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
He has a constitutional right to an attorney. She was appointed by the court to be his attorney. I'll say it yet again, I would love to see both Clintons in the ICC, but this system of law is what we have. I guess she could have personally judged him guilty before the trial and quit being a lawyer since she would be covering traffic court after that.
Click to expand...

She did it as a favor, thats her own admittance. Of course afterwards she was appointed, but thats not excactly the same as being straight appointed. She could have said no and it would not have been a issue in any way.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Yes, she did. Did she say that means no trial? She's a hypocrite for saying that after what she said about the people screwing her husband, but what are you not understanding about people not being believed. They're not being believed by their own families and local communities. It never even makes it to a trial.
Click to expand...

if you believe their story not all the women involved with her husband were 'screwing' her husband voluntarily.
 
ax1 said:
She did it as a favor, thats her own admittance. Of course afterwards she was appointed, but thats not excactly the same as being straight appointed. She could have said no and it would not have been a issue in any way.
Click to expand...

Where are you getting that she did it as a favor? Everything I've seen, including her book where most people get this from has her as being appointed. I'd have to look, but I thought the prosecutor has also said they remember her not wanting to do it.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Can you clarify that? I don't understand how those are connected.
Click to expand...

Donnelly's no vote on Kavanaugh cost him a lot of white moms with sons votes. i firmly believe a yes vote would have won the election for Donnelly.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Where are you getting that she did it as a favor? Everything I've seen, including her book where most people get this from has her as being appointed. I'd have to look, but I thought the prosecutor has also said they remember her not wanting to do it.
Click to expand...

She said it on the tape recording.
 
Im going to hand quote this right from the recording...I would go by the original recording over a edited book that tells the story.

"I had some really tough clients. I had one appear...a prosecuter called me years ago, said that he had a guy who was accused of rape....and the guy wanted a woman lawyer....Would I do it as a favor to him"

 
Yes, the prosecutor contacted her and asked her to do it as a favor (if we're picking and choosing when we believe her words), but that prosecutor had already recommended her to the judge. Between that and the fact that this guy already had an attorney, but wanted a female one should have got the judge booted for going along with this. You have a right to an attorney, not whatever one you want. It was the judge that put her on the case and wouldn't let her out of it.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Yes, the prosecutor contacted her and asked her to do it as a favor (if we're picking and choosing when we believe her words), but that prosecutor had already recommended her to the judge. Between that and the fact that this guy already had an attorney, but wanted a female one should have got the judge booted for going along with this. You have a right to an attorney, not whatever one you want. It was the judge that put her on the case and wouldn't let her out of it.
Click to expand...

So are you getting the rest of that information from the book? Specifically that the prosecutor already recommended her to the judge prior to asking her as a favor? Just wondering, it just doesnt sound like a typical order of doing things.

Regardless, as far as Im concerned she is worse than that rapist but thats going off topic on my part and another issue.
 
The Democratic Party is going all out trying to get votes. Empowering women, gays, minorities. Do you honestly think they give a Shyte about the people??? These grey haired rich bastards??? No!!! They want votes. So they prey on the insecurities of people. Don’t fall into their trap.
 
Cormaneye said:
I'm with you Rickeyblobby . Democratic Party wants all the scums, perverts and disfunctional people they can get votes.
Click to expand...

Yes! Do you see conservative propaganda around every corner? No! Why? Because this country is still full of intelligent people who can decide for themselves. Open your eyes people
 
ax1 said:
So are you getting the rest of that information from the book? Specifically that the prosecutor already recommended her to the judge prior to asking her as a favor? Just wondering, it just doesnt sound like a typical order of doing things.

Regardless, as far as Im concerned she is worse than that rapist but thats going off topic on my part and another issue.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what is says in the book. I have no idea if he really asked it as a favor (I know that's what she said) or called as a courtesy and don't want to just guess. I'm just saying that both versions are coming from the same source, although I get your point about one being on the spot and one being edited. And dude, you know my feelings on her. I keep saying send her and Bill to the Hague because typing out what I really want may violate a few things. Would love to see them retire in Serbia.
 
RickyBlobby said:
The Democratic Party is going all out trying to get votes. Empowering women, gays, minorities. Do you honestly think they give a Shyte about the people??? These grey haired rich bastards??? No!!! They want votes. So they prey on the insecurities of people. Don’t fall into their trap.
Click to expand...

That was sarcasm right?
Empowering people to vote is bad? Women; Gays; Minorities... can legally vote (nobody is being preyed upon there)... and yes, they do give a shyte. You know who preys on people? Republicans. That giant caravan of thugs coming to attack us! Send 7k troops fast... Mid term trick for votes. "Middle Class Tax Cuts!!!!".. lie. I only see the GOP preying on fear.

Free Education and Healthcare. An educated and healthy public is more productive and happy with their lives.
The USA has spent 6 trillion dollars to kill 500,000 people. We can pay for it. Want stats? Look them up yourself.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Yeah, that's what is says in the book. I have no idea if he really asked it as a favor (I know that's what she said) or called as a courtesy and don't want to just guess. I'm just saying that both versions are coming from the same source, although I get your point about one being on the spot and one being edited. And dude, you know my feelings on her. I keep saying send her and Bill to the Hague because typing out what I really want may violate a few things. Would love to see them retire in Serbia.
Click to expand...

I understand, your trying to call this specific incident as it is. And the truth is, a recording of her isnt always indicative of fact. Besides of issues of 3rd party editing or audio (although that doesnt appear to be the case here but always possible,) I know I myself and most likely anyone who is casually talking isnt talking from the point of view of saying everything perfect and factual. So we dont know excactly 100% for sure what is fact here we can confidently assume at most. I have to acknowledge that although I may bring this up on the forum again in the future again as it shows her hypocrisy pretending to be the defender and champion of women rights and anti-domestic violence when she is clearly not.

RickyBlobby said:
The Democratic Party is going all out trying to get votes. Empowering women, gays, minorities. Do you honestly think they give a Shyte about the people??? These grey haired rich bastards??? No!!! They want votes. So they prey on the insecurities of people. Don’t fall into their trap.
Click to expand...

Insecurities of people? And Republicrats didnt get their voters bloodthirsty for wars and genocide along with exchanging their Constitutional privacy to secure their insecurities?

Come on man....Republicrats manipulate their people just in the same was as Demicans but caters to different tastes to get them with the duopoly program and hold them hostage to BOTH their system(singular.)
 
ax1 said:
I understand, your trying to call this specific incident as it is. And the truth is, a recording of her isnt always indicative of fact. Besides of issues of 3rd party editing or audio (although that doesnt appear to be the case here but always possible,) I know I myself and most likely anyone who is casually talking isnt talking from the point of view of saying everything perfect and factual. So we dont know excactly 100% for sure what is fact here we can confidently assume at most. I have to acknowledge that although I may bring this up on the forum again in the future again as it shows her hypocrisy pretending to be the defender and champion of women rights and anti-domestic violence when she is clearly not.
Click to expand...

I completely agree that she's about herself and nobody else. And she's only gotten more delusional as the years go on. I just see her as the type of person saying she "did a favor" rather than admitting that she was made to her job.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
I completely agree that she's about herself and nobody else. And she's only gotten more delusional as the years go on. I just see her as the type of person saying she "did a favor" rather than admitting that she was made to her job.
Click to expand...

Omg that last sentence I wrote just came out edited to sound ridiculous...need to finish my coffee in the morning before I post next time lol
 
man, as if the cali fires weren't bad enough now i'm hearing that the Woolsey fire burnt thru a nuclear waste site...anyone have more info about this?
 
thebigt said:
man, as if the cali fires weren't bad enough now i'm hearing that the Woolsey fire burnt thru a nuclear waste site...anyone have more info about this?
Click to expand...

I dunno, still trying to figure out where those stolen nukes went a few years ago, lol
 
Aleksandar37 said:
I was working on a project until 3am last night, yet somehow my fried brain understood it lol
Click to expand...
Unrelated to quoted post, just grabbed it so you knew I was addressing you here.

Which of her books have you read? Was it a decent read? I've been considering reading one of her memoirs (I have her husband's), but I'm not sure if it's worth it. I'm not a Hillary fan; I like Bill ok (to read about, not necessarily as a "great" dude), but I've never really liked Hillary. She has always seemed really fake to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top