I can agree with your feelings about Putin. It's interesting that a nice chunk of the far right causing this mess in the House also seem to be pro-Putin. I'll leave it to you to decide if there's any significance to that little factoid.
Pyrrhic
- Thread starter hodad
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
- Status
The pro-molestation candidate. Might as well put Matt Gaetz up there.
fallout
Well-known member
Interesting tactic.. Adjourn the house until 10pm when it's likely that fewer dems will be present to lower the threshold need to win. Gotta love DC.
fallout
Well-known member
Don't kid yourself, both parties are filled with sexual miscreants. Too many to list.
pucho812
Well-known member
I would ask about Jim Jordan but already got details. Being accused of something is far different then being found guilty in a court of law.
From the looks of it all, there is claim someone working with him in his life before public service committed sexual assault on college kids. Jim Jordan claims he knew nothing about it.
So not only is your claim of pro molestation false, it’s also possible he knew nothing about it.
If your litmus test for guilty is not knowing about a crime, I would imagine those below were all burned at the stake.
Democratic Illinois Congressman, Mel Reynolds resigned from Congress after he was convicted of statutory rape of a 16-year-old campaign volunteer.
Democratic New York Congressman, Fred Richmond, was arrested in Washington D.C. for soliciting sex from a 16-year-old boy.
Democratic Illinois Congressman, Gus Savage was investigated by the Democrat-controlled House Committee on Ethics for attempting to rape an underage female Peace Corps volunteer in Zaire. The Committee concluded that while the events did occur his apology was sufficient and took no further action.
As I have said previously I think you will find wrongdoing and evil on both sides. Jim Jordan in your eyes is both evil and committed wrongdoing even though there was no evidence beyond reasonable doubt to prove it.
AnalogPackrat
Well-known member
Proof? Or are you confusing opposition to entanglements in another European conflict with "support for Putin." Not everyone thinks unwavering support for Ukraine is justified after the UN, NATO, and the Biden administration failed to employ diplomatic means to avert open conflict. But nice false dichotomy strawman.
Sure, but is being convicted of a crime the bar you want to set for your elected politicians? That's pretty dang low. You, and all of us, should expect and even demand better.
pucho812
Well-known member
You’re changing your argument stance now. Ok I’ll bite, yes that is the bar I want set for politicians, no different than you or I living in the u.s.a. It’s one component of many that make up the corner stone that is the contract between us and the government.
I do demand better and expect better. Whatever you seem to think that is, is different than me. But, I also expect the law of the land to be upheld which is innocent until proven otherwise.
Last edited:
AnalogPackrat
Well-known member
Presumption of innocence is the bar for everyone. But maybe you also think that cornerstone needs to go just like freedom of speech.
Tell that to Al Franken.
(Just to be clear, this is not an issue of criminal justice but politics. You may discover that in politics--at least if you're a Democrat-- and in many other walks of life, getting convicted of a crime is not the only thing that will cost you a job. The contrary example to Al Franken would be Diaper Dave Vitter, a Republican whoremonger who continued to serve in the Senate long after his illegal visits with the ladies of ill repute were revealed. Democrat Eliot Spitzer on the other hand....)
Matador
Well-known member
As I've mentioned before, this isn't the standard you held Hillary Clinton to....
pucho812
Well-known member
Al chose to resign. Onus is on him. I won’t defend Dave vitter but, again accusation is not a crime. While it doesn’t look good showing up in the phone logs of the d.c. madam and it doesn’t look good to be accused by someone that you were their sex client, it still is just an accusation. While I am sure it’s good fodder for you, until proven guilty in a court of law, I don’t care.
AnalogPackrat
Well-known member
Franken was mobbed by the #metoo morons in his own party. Maybe he should have stood up for himself at the time. Vitter should have resigned or been removed from office. These examples do not change my position on presumption of innocence.
Last edited:
AnalogPackrat
Well-known member
From the people who went after Trump, Kavanaugh, etc. while believing charlatans like Michael Avenatti, Christopher Steele, and the rest.
Be the magic....
JR
JR
pucho812
Well-known member
Me personally or the party you think I support? Hillary never had her day in court but there was enough evidence to prove that she should have. The outcome of that who knows.
living sounds
Well-known member
Just watched the procedures for a while. They are talking about "the car key" an awful lot... Has it been lost? 
pucho812
Well-known member
The suspense in the house is terrible, I hope it will last.
Matador
Well-known member
You personally (or at least based on what you've said previously).
So again, why the two standards? Why is it "she's guilty" on one hand, and repeatedly telling Hodad "innocent until proven in a court of law" on the other?
#magicthebee
pucho812
Well-known member
Was vitter charged with solicitation? If not then I don’t care. Again, innocent until proven guilty.
Al got the “me too“ crowd After him, that’s what got him.
As for santos,
a politician lied for votes. It’s not illegal- Status
