Rapist.
Liberals go home devastated.
Rapist.
Liberals go home devastated.
That's only because there are no consequences for him. they had the same information when he was President but then they chose to smear the accusers.
Yes, there are sexual abusers from both sides.
What's the difference?
Liberals condemn them
Republican's elect them as president and protest if anyone treats them anyone different.
1. An opinion expressed in an Op-Ed column--though I suspect this one is factual (I never voted for the guy either)--is NOT "the New York Times says." Another example: If the Times quotes Bannon on something, that is ALSO not "the Times says."
2. What WJClinton might have done, of course, has nothing whatever to do with what RMoore (or DJTrump, for that matter) might have done. "What about X" is no excuse for Y.
Humans are primal animals and have not evolved from their cave mentality yet. It sounds bad but sexual abuse is a social construct. Obviously Bill Clinton is a perv but I think people are afraid to even flirt at work these days.
stjstrjk wrote:
2. What WJClinton might have done, of course, has nothing whatever to do with what RMoore (or DJTrump, for that matter) might have done. "What about X" is no excuse for Y.
Clinton raped an assualted women, then, with his wife, threatened and intimidated the accusers.
Moore did none of that. Neither did Trump.
Journey to Elite wrote:
Yes, there are sexual abusers from both sides.
What's the difference?
Liberals condemn them
Republican's elect them as president and protest if anyone treats them anyone different.
Are you serious? You do realize Bill Clinton was elected president? (Can't tell if you are joking)
In all fairness to BC, the NYT would prefer that all white males just kill themselves. Even and especially the self-loathing white males working at the NYT.
At what point do they lose all credibility?
Journey to Elite wrote:
Yes, there are sexual abusers from both sides.
What's the difference?
Liberals condemn them
Republican's elect them as president and protest if anyone treats them anyone different.
Huh? Wasn't Bill Clinton President?
You should have just stopped after your first sentence.
"Weinstein is a big wig democratic supporter and he has assualted hundreds of women!"
"He has been removed from power."
"Trump has, admittedly, sexually assaulted women his whole life."
"Yeah, well, what about Clinton?"
"Uh, he was impeached?"
Why is it so hard for Trump supporters to realize that harping on sexual predators with liberal stripes is not a path that they should go down? The whataboutism spewing from this administration and its surrogates is mind numbing.
Fact vs Fiction wrote:
stjstrjk wrote:
2. What WJClinton might have done, of course, has nothing whatever to do with what RMoore (or DJTrump, for that matter) might have done. "What about X" is no excuse for Y.
Clinton raped [and assaulted] women, then, with his wife, threatened and intimidated the accusers.
Moore did none of that. Neither did Trump.
Moore also didn't kill 26 people in a church. Neither did Trump. It was a different person who did that.
AND? SO? Are we to conclude that, because Bill Clinton was (likely) guilty of a particular crime, that therefore Moore (and Trump) are perforce innocent of different ones?
STAY ON TOPIC. Judge Judge Moore on what *he* might or might not have done, not what others might have done.
In fact, judge Judge Moore on what is NOT in controversy: his REPEATED REFUSAL TO OBEY THE LAW OR FOLLOW THE CONSTITUTION.
I heard that John Quincy Adams was a rapist too.
kibitzer wrote:
STAY ON TOPIC. .
My topic was confirmation by liberal thought leaders that Bill Clinton is a rapist. My previous sources were written off by lefties as conspiracies but now none other than the New York Freaking Times confirms it.
Bottom line: Don't even look at a woman any more to avoid rape accusations. Heck, I'm afraid to touch my wife now.
John Utah wrote:
In all fairness to BC, the NYT would prefer that all white males just kill themselves. Even and especially the self-loathing white males working at the NYT.
At what point do they lose all credibility?
The point of the NYT loosing all credibility passed awhile ago.
Regarding all this Judge Moore stuff I found footage of him admitting to the accusations.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CJZV9kX8LQcelery wrote:
The point of the NYT loosing all credibility passed awhile ago.
And so did you, as soon as you provided proof of your complete lack of primary school English mastery.
Journey to Elite wrote:
Republican's elect them as president and protest if anyone treats them anyone different.
Republican's what?
loosing my cool wrote:
celery wrote:
The point of the NYT loosing all credibility passed awhile ago.
And so did you, as soon as you provided proof of your complete lack of primary school English mastery.
I misspelled a word. Thanks for pointing that out. Its super relevant to a message board conversation. So you think the NYT has credibility?
First of all the woman is gross. Secondly she's recanted and changed her story a dozen times.
Lastly, Clinton was punished. He paid out lawsuits and he also lost is law license and was impeached.
I’m a D2 female runner. Our coach explicitly told us not to visit LetsRun forums.
Great interview with Steve Cram - says Jakob has no chance of WRs this year
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
RENATO can you talk about the preparation of Emile Cairess 2:06
adizero Road to Records with Yomif Kejelcha, Agnes Ngetich, Hobbs Kessler & many more is Saturday