***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[junglejim]

The alleged victim initially pointed to the yearbook as evidence of the accusation. And later admitted to altering it.

This was not a random yearbook alteration. The yearbook was central to the initial evidence the alleged victim brought forward. That’s how the comment came forward. Like I said that’s not dispositive, but it was relevant.

Did you think this was a random comment about an unrelated yearbook the alleged victim altered?

No, I think this was used by you to establish a clear pattern of lying to defend Moore.

You claim you never defended Moore, but in the thirty pages I went through there was not a single person who tried to post evidence to attack the accusers credibility other than you. Don't you find that a little bit odd for someone who didn't defend Moore and does not condone his actions?

Don't you find it odd that you posted more "evidence" absolving Moore of rape than anyone else in this thread combined for someone who never defended Moore or Moore's actions?

Don't you find it odd that you posted more evidence that holds Roy Moore in a favorable light than evidence that makes him look like a ****bag?

Don't you find it a little odd that you were the only person in here posting things to make the accuser look like she was not a credible witness?

I find it a little odd but continue doing you.

 

[RustyShackleford]

dwalk31 is trying to convince us he is not full of it, even though observable reality says otherwise.

 

[-Red-]

I posted it because there was a discussion surrounding the facts related to the alleged rape.

Facts were posted about Moore and the alleged rape.

Obviously, one can be raped if they altered a yearbook. That’s not a question.

The issue, often, comes down to credibility. During trial, people impeach testimony by showing that people said one thing on one occasion and another thing later. This is why cross examination is such a powerful technique.

Like I said then, and I’ll reiterate now, if he did what he is accused of it is truly disgusting. But I don’t have any idea whether he did or not. Do you?

In this country, the presumption is innocent until proven guilty. Not the other way around.

I would just point out that there’s a pretty huge ******* disconnect between saying that someone who hasn't been convicted beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law should not be thrown in prison and saying that since that threshold has not been met that no one “has any idea whether he did it or not.”

The former I think everyone in here would agree with—but that was never the issue at hand. And the latter, which is what you’ve been staking your case on in here, is preposterous on its face.

 

[junglejim]

dwalk31 is trying to convince us he is not full of it, even though observable reality says otherwise.

The funny thing is, he spent hours typing up how he hasn't defended Roy Moore then one day he randomly goes into a thread where NO ONE is talking about the Roy Moore evidence and posts some **** that holds the accuser and an unfavorable light then wonders why people think he is defending Roy Moore. Its quite the juxtaposition

 

[2163O1baller90]

Im just now watching the SOU speech from last night, Trump is pandering for the black vote

 

[whywesteppin]

dwalk31 is trying to convince us he is not full of it, even though observable reality says otherwise.

Due process hasn't always been afforded to posters who look like dwalk31 . if he really did defend a pedo, then that is truly disgusting. but he is innocent until proven guilty.

 

[Methodical Management]

But, he (like many in here) seems to want to adopt a guilty until proven innocent standard.

And that's why you'll continue to vote for him and will soon spend the day crowing about his acquittal, right?

Due process matters - almost as much as tax breaks.

Pretty sure Epstein was a convicted pedophile/sex offender.

Epstein pleaded not guilty to charges of child sex trafficking and conspiracy. He died in jail while awaiting trial.

Are you of the belief that his previous conviction does not entitle him to the presumption of innocence in this most recent case? I thought you spoke up for the sake of the principle, not for the alleged perpetrator.

It was for this reason, and no other, that the case of Roy Moore so pricked your conscience, correct? You couldn't bear to witness such a wild rush to judgment, no matter the circumstances, and so broke your long silence on the matter. Or was there another factor there I've omitted?

Hillary Clinton is innocent until proven guilty of any crime.

This would've had more impact if posted unprompted in 2016.

But to say that supporting an innocent until proven guilty standard makes someone a supporter of individual people that are accused belies reason.

Who has said this?

dwalk31 is trying to convince us he is not full of it, even though observable reality says otherwise.

Some might agree to disagree with observable reality.

 

[dwalk31]

No, I think this was used by you to establish a clear pattern of lying to defend Moore.

You claim you never defended Moore, but in the thirty pages I went through there was not a single person who tried to post evidence to attack the accusers credibility other than you. Don't you find that a little bit odd for someone who didn't defend Moore and does not condone his actions?

Don't you find it odd that you posted more "evidence" absolving Moore of rape than anyone else in this thread combined for someone who never defended Moore or Moore's actions?

Don't you find it odd that you posted more evidence that holds Roy Moore in a favorable light than evidence that makes him look like a ****bag?

Don't you find it a little odd that you were the only person in here posting things to make the accuser look like she was not a credible witness?

I find it a little odd but continue doing you.

I did not absolve Roy Moore of anything. I said that I had no idea if he did what he was accused of. Further, I said if he did do it, it was disgusting. Her altering the yearbook doesn’t absolve him nor does it confirm his guilt.

I also said that there were several reasons to not support Roy Moore outside of the pedophilia accusations.

My input in that conversation was related to due process and the tendency to want to adopt a guilty until proven innocent standard for people we dislike. Not Roy Moore.

 

[dwalk31]

The funny thing is, he spent hours typing up how he hasn't defended Roy Moore then one day he randomly goes into a thread where NO ONE is talking about the Roy Moore evidence and posts some **** that holds the accuser and an unfavorable light then wonders why people think he is defending Roy Moore. Its quite the juxtaposition

It wasn’t random. The discussion was being had about Roy Moore. Others in this thread post about him. For instance, you did today which is why it is being brought up.

 

[dwalk31]

I would just point out that there’s a pretty huge ****ing disconnect between saying that someone who hasn't been convicted beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law should not be thrown in prison and saying that since that threshold has not been met that no one “has any idea whether he did it or not.”

The former I think everyone in here would agree with—but that was never the issue at hand. And the latter, which is what you’ve been staking your case on in here, is preposterous on its face.

I think that you are innocent until proven guilty. And I don’t think you can presume to know what happened if you weren’t there and you haven’t seen all of the evidence (absent some clear video/recording of the event). Do you disagree with what I just said?

 

[plansb]

DWALK CARES ABOUT MONEY MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE.

No point in even arguing with him about anything.

 

[deleted]

Reminder that dwalk's alleged dedication to due process totally evaporates when the discussion turns to the mistreatment of migrant families

 

[aepps20]

Reminder that dwalk's alleged dedication to due process totally evaporates when the discussion turns to the mistreatment of migrant families

It evaporates for everyone other than people like Roy Moore. Disgusting

 

[RustyShackleford]

I would also like to point out another trick dwalk31 does.

When people in here take issue with a political matter, like Roy Moore's election. He somehow spins it into a legal matter and makes these convoluted arguments about protecting due process and legal standards.

When we take issue with a legal matter, like him withholding evidence for an investigation, obstruction of justice, criminalizing refugees, or Trump's illegal action in with Ukraine. For Dwalk it is all political, how it will play in the polls.

He is not a principled objector, he is a blatant hypocrite.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Reminder that dwalk's alleged dedication to due process totally evaporates when the discussion turns to the mistreatment of migrant families

This

He only cares about "due process" for rich white conservatives

But he doesn't give a real damn about cruel and unusual punishment against refugees and their children.

White sexual deviant being called a pedo, problem.

Poor Latino toddlers in cages, cool.

 

[dwalk31]

I would also like to point out another trick dwalk31 does.

When people in here take issue with a political matter, like Roy Moore's election. He somehow spins it into a legal matter and makes these convoluted arguments about protecting due process and legal standards.

When we take issue with a legal matter, like him withholding evidence for an investigation, obstruction of justice, criminalizing refugees, or Trump's illegal action in with Ukraine. For Dwalk it is all political, how it will play in the polls.

He is not a principled objector, he is a blatant hypocrite.

Saying that a subpoena is unlawful is not obstruction or justice. Impeachment is a political process. Child rape is not. I mentioned with Roy Moore that there are valid reasons not to support him outside of the allegations. But you are ignoring that.

 

[dwalk31]

This

He only cares about "due process" for rich white conservatives

But he doesn't give a real damn about cruel and unusual punishment against refugees and their children.

White sexual deviant being called a pedo, problem.

Poor Latino toddlers in cages, cool.

This is untrue and you can’t find a single post where I said anything like that was cool.

You straight up made that up.

 

[dwalk31]

Reminder that dwalk's alleged dedication to due process totally evaporates when the discussion turns to the mistreatment of migrant families

It does not.

 

[dacomeup]

He somehow spins it into a legal matter and makes these convoluted arguments about protecting due process and legal standards.

Convoluted and poor legal arguments most of the time .

 

[getback]

 

[130122]

This is untrue and you can’t find a single post where I said anything like that was cool.

You straight up made that up.

You've expressed your indifference to immigrants being put into internment camps, also pedophiles with political power backing them by not speaking out against it. The argument of "due process" should have been null an void after nearly a dozen women, with half of them being minors came out to speak against Moore. They burnt Al Franken at the stakes over his allegations yet he had no credible victims come after him. You didn't say one thing about "due process". You're "Trump should do better" is also asinine at this point. You said yourself you pride yourself in calling out Donald Trump when he's wrong yet he lied to millions of people viewing his SOTU last night and we haven't heard you be critical of that. To be honest we've never heard you be critical a Trump, instead you pay more attention to NT'ers post and leave snide remarks towards people calling you on your BS.

 

[sonoftony]

came in when Meth posted hoping the sea lion is banned...and y'all still engaging with him

 

[130122]

came in when Meth posted hoping the sea lion is banned...and y'all still engaging with him

I'd be surprised if he ever gets banned as his trolling doesn't meet the TOS. Just how Westboro Baptist Church can go to colleges and berate kids for learning more about their selves.

 

[AEA18]

I'd be surprised if he ever gets banned as his trolling doesn't meet the TOS. Just how Westboro Baptist Church can go to colleges and berate kids for learning more about their selves.

He knows how to toe the line. Block button works fine though.

 

[sonoftony]