you probably did not read it elsewhere but im starting a magazine that will start in 19.....it will be in english.

Posted by tangplay on 9/30/2018 1:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/30/2018 8:23:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/29/2018 11:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/29/2018 11:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/29/2018 6:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/29/2018 4:16:00 PM (view original):
Are they all that is required to prove guilt these days or do we need corroboration and is the burden of proof still on the accuser or the accused?

Guilt should be proven. Lack of proof should not mean dismissal.

????

I agree that guilt needs to be proven, not assumed. However, if someone does not have proof when they come forward, it is still possible for them to be a credible/valid source.

How is that fair to the accused?

How is it not fair?

Because it is impossible to prove something didn't happen. You are asking him to prove a negative which is impossible.

It may take 3 days for some guys in this thread to understand that post. Others never will.

Posted by strikeout26 on 10/1/2018 6:56:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/30/2018 1:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/30/2018 8:23:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/29/2018 11:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/29/2018 11:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/29/2018 6:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/29/2018 4:16:00 PM (view original):
Are they all that is required to prove guilt these days or do we need corroboration and is the burden of proof still on the accuser or the accused?

Guilt should be proven. Lack of proof should not mean dismissal.

????

I agree that guilt needs to be proven, not assumed. However, if someone does not have proof when they come forward, it is still possible for them to be a credible/valid source.

How is that fair to the accused?

How is it not fair?

Because it is impossible to prove something didn't happen. You are asking him to prove a negative which is impossible.

When did I ever say that the burden of proof is on the accused?

Posted by tangplay on 10/1/2018 9:09:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 10/1/2018 6:56:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/30/2018 1:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/30/2018 8:23:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/29/2018 11:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/29/2018 11:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/29/2018 6:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/29/2018 4:16:00 PM (view original):
Are they all that is required to prove guilt these days or do we need corroboration and is the burden of proof still on the accuser or the accused?

Guilt should be proven. Lack of proof should not mean dismissal.

????

I agree that guilt needs to be proven, not assumed. However, if someone does not have proof when they come forward, it is still possible for them to be a credible/valid source.

How is that fair to the accused?

How is it not fair?

Because it is impossible to prove something didn't happen. You are asking him to prove a negative which is impossible.

When did I ever say that the burden of proof is on the accused?

When you voted Democrat.

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/1/2018 9:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by dino27 on 9/30/2018 11:09:00 PM (view original):
they are tools considered so reliable in the federal law enforcement array that the FBI could compel kavenaugh to take one in a matter of criminal inquiry or national security.....maybe mayberry lie detectors are not reliable but the FBI and CIA are experts and it is considered to be a reliable science with them......and the federal courts including kavenaugh specifically have held it to be......if he refuses the test and he will that is extremely telling....fbi agents and cia agents take them routinely.

WTF go away. You and your fake news is not welcome here. You redlined everyone in your thread. Get Lost, dino. I don't want your bias anywhere around here.

THIS!

Tang, I reckon that you never did say the burden of proof is on the accused. My apologies. Please forgive me.

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/1/2018 9:22:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 10/1/2018 9:09:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 10/1/2018 6:56:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/30/2018 1:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/30/2018 8:23:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/29/2018 11:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/29/2018 11:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/29/2018 6:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/29/2018 4:16:00 PM (view original):
Are they all that is required to prove guilt these days or do we need corroboration and is the burden of proof still on the accuser or the accused?

Guilt should be proven. Lack of proof should not mean dismissal.

????

I agree that guilt needs to be proven, not assumed. However, if someone does not have proof when they come forward, it is still possible for them to be a credible/valid source.

How is that fair to the accused?

How is it not fair?

Because it is impossible to prove something didn't happen. You are asking him to prove a negative which is impossible.

When did I ever say that the burden of proof is on the accused?

When you voted Democrat.

?

Posted by strikeout26 on 10/1/2018 9:50:00 AM (view original):
Tang, I reckon that you never did say the burden of proof is on the accused. My apologies. Please forgive me.

No problem.

Posted by all3 on 10/1/2018 8:49:00 AM (view original):
It may take 3 days for some guys in this thread to understand that post. Others never will.

"Because it is impossible to prove something didn't happen. You are asking him to prove a negative which is impossible."

Absolutely correct. BOTH statements.

I get that!
But,
It isn't about (for ME) the alleged Dr. Ford event.
It's that HE clearly is a liar.

He CLEARLY lied when HE claimed HE has never drank to excess enough to have suffered from "memory loss".

And THAT proves beyond any doubt that HE lied when HE said HE never could have done such an act, however silly and unimportant to most (except Dr. Ford, apparently) because HE clearly doesn't actually KNOW that he didn't because HE sometimes behaved like a drunken teen-ager.
And HE, with his legal and judicial experience, clearly KNOWS that he actually can't swear to NEVER, because HE knows he doesn't remember her (alleged) event, or any of the other (alleged) events. In short HE's a liar and has forfeited his opportunity to serve as a S.C. justice.

Too bad. He should have just said, Gaw'd I done me some dumb teen-age things and I apologize IF anything I ever did to Dr. Ford caused her harm, BUT I was only foolin' around."

He'd have been confirmed.

Now. He's toast.
Finished.
The FBI investigation will seal the deal!
Patience.

Trump gets a do-over.

While it is plausible that you're right, Bob. It's hard to accuse a guy of something or find her testimony credible when she has no witnesses and no evidence. Even Leland couldn't confirm a thing. I know she said that she believes Ford, but her opinion doesn't matter to me. Nobody remembers the events. I went to a fairly prestigious prep school. If something like this had happened, the news of it would have spread like wildfire, even if the alleged victim went to a different prep school within the community. That's how it works in that world.

Also once again, watching the truth come out after Herman Cain withdrew his name has made sceptical of these claims.

Posted by strikeout26 on 10/1/2018 10:42:00 AM (view original):
While it is plausible that you're right, Bob. It's hard to accuse a guy of something or find her testimony credible when she has no witnesses and no evidence. Even Leland couldn't confirm a thing. I know she said that she believes Ford, but her opinion doesn't matter to me. Nobody remembers the events. I went to a fairly prestigious prep school. If something like this had happened, the news of it would have spread like wildfire, even if the alleged victim went to a different prep school within the community. That's how it works in that world.

Also once again, watching the truth come out after Herman Cain withdrew his name has made sceptical of these claims.

Once Avenatti got involved I knew all this was a sham. I want an FBI investigation to reveal how many times Ford voted Democrat. I think this is behind the accusation not some non-event that took place 36 yrs ago.

Posted by laramiebob on 10/1/2018 10:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 10/1/2018 8:49:00 AM (view original):
It may take 3 days for some guys in this thread to understand that post. Others never will.

"Because it is impossible to prove something didn't happen. You are asking him to prove a negative which is impossible."

Absolutely correct. BOTH statements.

I get that!
But,
It isn't about (for ME) the alleged Dr. Ford event.
It's that HE clearly is a liar.

He CLEARLY lied when HE claimed HE has never drank to excess enough to have suffered from "memory loss".

And THAT proves beyond any doubt that HE lied when HE said HE never could have done such an act, however silly and unimportant to most (except Dr. Ford, apparently) because HE clearly doesn't actually KNOW that he didn't because HE sometimes behaved like a drunken teen-ager.
And HE, with his legal and judicial experience, clearly KNOWS that he actually can't swear to NEVER, because HE knows he doesn't remember her (alleged) event, or any of the other (alleged) events. In short HE's a liar and has forfeited his opportunity to serve as a S.C. justice.

Too bad. He should have just said, Gaw'd I done me some dumb teen-age things and I apologize IF anything I ever did to Dr. Ford caused her harm, BUT I was only foolin' around."

He'd have been confirmed.

Now. He's toast.
Finished.
The FBI investigation will seal the deal!
Patience.

Trump gets a do-over.

For a smart guy Bob, you totally missed the point here. So I am going to make it for you and tang.

#1) bad luck is an idiot

#2) Bottom line --- only one person to blame here ---- DIANE FEINSTEIN!!!!

She could have easily shared the letter with the FBI and had them investigate the verasity. Instead she went to the press knowing that she could win in the court of public opinion but not in a court of law. What an underhanded and evil person she is. Because of this if Kav is innocent she ruined his rep and and his life 4ever. He is not allowed to coach his girls in hoops anymore, his daughters and wife are in shambles. If Ford is innocent (correct) she will forever be labeled by many as a tramp and a liar.

Ford asked for anonymity. Feinstein could have shared the letter with the authorities and done a behind the scene background check (like the Feds are doing now). It could have been discrete and confidential. Instead she leaked it at the last second and LIED about it. What a snake.

We can distpute Ford/Kav all day but there is ZERO dispute that Feinstein is a snake.

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/1/2018 10:45:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 10/1/2018 10:42:00 AM (view original):
While it is plausible that you're right, Bob. It's hard to accuse a guy of something or find her testimony credible when she has no witnesses and no evidence. Even Leland couldn't confirm a thing. I know she said that she believes Ford, but her opinion doesn't matter to me. Nobody remembers the events. I went to a fairly prestigious prep school. If something like this had happened, the news of it would have spread like wildfire, even if the alleged victim went to a different prep school within the community. That's how it works in that world.

Also once again, watching the truth come out after Herman Cain withdrew his name has made sceptical of these claims.

Once Avenatti got involved I knew all this was a sham. I want an FBI investigation to reveal how many times Ford voted Democrat. I think this is behind the accusation not some non-event that took place 36 yrs ago.

I don't believe Avenatti but that has nothing to do with Ford... Who cares about her political ideology?

Dude assault is assault.