- Dec 27, 2014
- 35,508
- 78,084
White supremacists protected the white supremacist mother ship.
***Official Political Discussion Thread***
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by rico x hood,
- Start date
SpittaJetLife
Banned
- Feb 14, 2019
- 12,218
- 8,898
CWO Coal Gang World Order. Our president beat these charges like a 16 year old beats their meat.
- Dec 23, 2009
- 30,339
- 21,889
Trump abused the Dems and Libs like Roy Moore abused children. GOP defends OUR PRESIDENT like
dwalk31
defends Roy Moore. Happy days, happy days!
1
130122
Guest
You too old to be making posts like this dawg
- Mar 27, 2004
- 18,386
- 34,061
Last edited:
- Jul 10, 2015
- 33,527
- 27,229
And this what he tweeting now...
SpittaJetLife
Banned
- Feb 14, 2019
- 12,218
- 8,898
Da Don skated like Kristie Yamaguchi
SpittaJetLife
Banned
- Feb 14, 2019
- 12,218
- 8,898
Losercrats wasted a whole bunch of time.
elpablo21
Supporter
- Feb 11, 2008
- 106,405
- 195,821
elpablo21
Supporter
- Feb 11, 2008
- 106,405
- 195,821
The cluster**** continues
- May 25, 2004
- 30,337
- 40,881
^hater
- Apr 27, 2014
- 10,930
- 9,250
Eh? Where did you get "scared" from that post?
- Aug 5, 2007
- 16,550
- 21,149
timid out here posting like
- Mar 30, 2007
- 151,223
- 202,658
- Mar 30, 2007
- 151,223
- 202,658
who going bring the potato salad WITH raisins now?!
- Jan 16, 2011
- 14,974
- 36,341
The news are definitely not talking about what Trump had to say last night. She stole his thunder. I don't see how you see that as weak.
- Apr 27, 2014
- 10,930
- 9,250
Ok which "news" are you referring to, specifically?
I've seen reporting on everything that went down during the SOTU, from the speech tear to Limbaugh getting the same medal as Rosa Parks. The whole thing was a circus.
- Oct 30, 2009
- 4,151
- 2,495
Well, now that that nonsense is over...
Bernie 2020!!
Bernie 2020!!
- May 25, 2004
- 30,337
- 40,881
Looking like it’s gonna be that way.
the trump boys are gonna be MAD if he wins.
the trump boys are gonna be MAD if he wins.
aepps20
Supporter
- Feb 8, 2004
- 42,557
- 90,821
CALL YOUR SPONSOR NOW.
- Feb 21, 2006
- 2,270
- 2,702
So in any and all matters related to criminal conduct, the one and only source of information that you consider legitimate and upon which you base your opinions is the determination of a criminal court of law? Yeah... no. Again, even within this extremely limited scope, that's literally not even possible. If you are the victim of a crime and you see the person who committed said crime but that person has yet to be tried and convicted, are they innocent in your eyes? If an old crime comes to light after the statute of limitation has passed so the person cannot be tried for said crime but there is a video of them committing the act, are they innocent in your eyes?
As to your last question, based on your standard, you couldn't agree that you believe Roy Moore did what he's accused of unless he had been tried in a criminal court. Right? So the entire premise of your question is inapplicable. Right?
I can't believe I got sucked in. Kudos, dwalk
- Dec 30, 2006
- 12,011
- 3,294
Well, now that that nonsense is over...
Bernie 2020!!
Bernie easily has the best chance to win. But I doubt he wins the Democratic primary
- Jul 10, 2015
- 33,527
- 27,229
Trump acquitted and now he putting out feelers about staying in office longer than two terms. We not headed down a good path. This election just took on even more importance
- Dec 30, 2006
- 12,011
- 3,294
So in any and all matters related to criminal conduct, the one and only source of information that you consider legitimate and upon which you base your opinions is the determination of a criminal court of law? Yeah... no. Again, even within this extremely limited scope, that's literally not even possible. If you are the victim of a crime and you see the person who committed said crime but that person has yet to be tried and convicted, are they innocent in your eyes? If an old crime comes to light after the statute of limitation has passed so the person cannot be tried for said crime but there is a video of them committing the act, are they innocent in your eyes?
As to your last question, based on your standard, you couldn't agree that you believe Roy Moore did what he's accused of unless he had been tried in a criminal court. Right? So the entire premise of your question is inapplicable. Right?
I can't believe I got sucked in. Kudos, dwalk
No, I’m not saying that at all.
Obviously, if I witness a crime then I don’t need any additional information.
The obvious (or at least I thought) caveat in my standard was for an alleged crime that I did not personally witness.
Absent a video, picture, etc. then no I would not generally take an accuser’s word for it. If you would, that’s fine.
That would be different if a family member/personal acquaintance made the accusation as I have a personal gauge of their credibility.
But no I wouldn’t blindly believe something happened merely because one, or multiple, people (that I don’t know) alleged it.
This is especially true when allegations are involving politicians and/or celebrities where it doesn’t take a genius to realize mixed-motives and agendas.
That doesn’t mean that the allegations aren’t true. But I think the innocent until proven guilty standard is a good one.
If you want to deem people guilty based on whatever your personal standard is, that’s fine. But that’s not what I choose to do.
The innocent until proven guilty standard allows me to avoid the bias of believing some accused based on my politics and disbelieving others for the same.
Ya kno. How others on here seem willing to do.
No one answered my question about Kobe, OJ, Michael Jackson or Justin Fairfax.
- Dec 15, 2017
- 17,811
- 43,327
Similar threads
