They call Dramanauts, Autists. Autists... easily duped, will believe anything, and by the time the destruction is upon them, one or more of their family has been captured and turned against the team. "/r/Drama has served us well...," one captor gloated.
Brett Kavanaugh must also be asked about this entry in his yearbook: "FFFFFFFourth of July." We believe that this stands for: Find them, French them, Feel them, Finger them, F*ck them, Forget them. As well as the term "Devil's Triangle." Perhaps Sen. Grassley can ask him. #Basta
There's gangrape, flashing and dick slapping with this new gal coming forward, It looks sketchy.. Idk whats best for drama, if it's false and it helps the midterms and make the dems look even more foolish, if its true, we get a the gigantic spergout from the trumpsters
I wasn't happy about the Kavanaugh nomination, but I was pretty much like "Whelp this is my life now". I was amused by this shit at first, but I'm worried it might work, and that he might be innocent. In my mind, it would be less dishonorable to just wait a couple of years and expand the court by a seat to avoid these political consequences, than to shoot it down using false accusations.
I mean, maybe they're correct. Who knows. There's not enough evidence to prove they're lying, and there's not enough to prove he's guilty.
I really doubt he is innocent. It's pretty well established that Kavanaugh was a drunken lech with dirtbag friends and has tons of super sketchy financial dealings. It would honestly be more out of character for him not to have mushroom stamped some drunk bimbo in college.
I’m still not sure whether you’re referring to the pizza place’s basement or Alefantis’ basement, but either way I find it hilarious that you think that details related to that are what makes or breaks this case
does it matter if he is? if his supposed pedophile basement is in another building than the pizza parlor?
he talks about storing sauce there after a tomato harvest. you would think that means the restaurant, but it could be somewhere by whatever tomato farm.
Alefantis contradicting himself about the existence of a basement is definitely a leg to stand on. Why would he do that?
and do I have to link the type of art John and Tony Podesta put in their homes? I don't care where you're from, that's not something a normal person is into.
but I have no interest in debating the entire thing. The fact is if you don't think the above two instances are fucking weird, you're fucking weird.
He probably gets voted in, and this becomes something conservatives site for decades to prove, 1) a liberally biased media out to get conservatives, and 2) that Democrats are the party of false accusations.
Avenatti, who made a name for himself as porn star Stormy Daniels’ lawyer, aired the allegations Sunday night as another allegation against Kavanaugh emerged in The New Yorker.
Damn, as a European I cannot BELIEVE how smear campaigns are taking place in the US right now, it's shocking how much you have let MeToo erode civil liberties.
It's also embarrassing to see this sub trying desperately to find a centrist perspective on this. How about the obvious truth? This is a character assassination with zero proof and zero hope of producing proof.
Lack of proof beyond a reasonable doubt that accusations are true does not imply proof beyond a reasonable doubt that they are false. To convict the accuser should require the same standard of burden of proof as to convict the accused. Obviously it's problematic if you place an incredibly high standard of burden of proof to convict the accused, but then entirely reverse that standard to convict the accuser when that fails. It's the fallacy of the undistributed middle, it is possible in both cases for there to not be proof either way.
Plus for criminal law like this, it is the state that is required to furnish proof. Not the victim. The victim is under no requirement to build their own case, in fact it is sometimes possible to pursue a case without their consent.
proof beyond a reasonable doubt that they are false.
You need it for a conviction of libel. Just like you need to prove allegations beyond reasonable doubt for the "main" conviction.
Anyway, not sure about the merit of such a discussion, I don't know much about common law and my legal system doesn't operate under the "beyond reasonable doubt" principle being an inquisitorial system.
What proof do you have that she's wrong? Can I sue you for character assassination unless you produce proof beyond a reasonable doubt that she's lying?
I have no obligation to take her seriously. So far she's proven nothing and given no reasons to believe this is anything but a shameless smear campaign.
Thats more evidence than youll get about Old Bretty Boy.
So, now I ask. Is Joe Biden a creepy sex offender based on nothing but the video above? Then I ask you is Kavanaugh a sex offender based on even less evidence than that?
I didn't say hate. And I don't hate Trump, as a pretty detached observer, I think he was very necessary for the US because Hillary really is disgusting. I do despise the Trumpists tho (well, those I have interacted with, at T_D, because that's a tribe and only a slightly less annoying one than a SJWs tribe.
Nah it's just that the Republicans had it coming. they thrive on conspiracy theories, accusing everybody of being degenerate/child rapists without any proof and believing allegations when it suits their political agenda. And as always, they don't give a shit about victims when it goes against their political interest.
Donald trump could rape kids on national TV that they would still complain about pizzagate
Dems could make up shit about daddy and russia for 20 years straight and they still wouldn't catch up to the republican conspiracies in terms of retardedness
Yeah I'm not a conservatard and really don't want an anti-abortion guy on Supreme Court buuut....it's so fucking obvious this is character assassination and planned out to a T by (((((((certain people))))))))))
1.) Libel is a civil offense, you can't go to prison for it.
2.) In criminal law, the standard is always that the state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Just as the rapist does not have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did not commit the rape, the accuser does not have to produce proof beyond a reasonable doubt the they are not lying. It is the states job to prove that they are lying to send them to prison. False accusations does not have a reversed burden of proof, it's the same as any other crime.
America is the only major country with absolute free speech. You can't get in trouble for saying anything unless it is proven that you knew it was false and that it would cause significant damage
So let me get this straight. Because I may have commented once or twice on T_D, this, in your view, disqualifies my opinion as someone who isn't even American?
Don’t straw-man me. Who told you to automatically dismiss anything? Use your brain and common sense.
Two women came forward and both their accusations were not corroborated by people who were supposed to have been there. And we’re talking here about friends of the alleged victims that wouldn’t corroborate not just friends of Kavanaugh. Also, the political colours of the alleged first victim are more than obvious so there’s clearly a motive there.
The letter was sent much earlier, apparently, but same reason it happens to someone like Roy Moore or other 'famous' people.
Victim sees the person in the news, it has been 30 some years, they finally feel that someone needs to know what type of person they are.
If you were raped, kept it secret for 30 years and tried to put it behind you, then you saw your rapist in on TV about to get one of the most powerful positions in the country... would you not at least think about telling someone, trying to let someone know what type of monster that person is?
I'm not saying he did it or that he is guilty, I'm just trying to put a reason why someone may wait this long or do it now.
Oh really? What about dragging her feet over the hearing? What about all the delay tactics? She can’t fly all of a sudden, she needs to drive. The Feinstein said the Republicans should literally wait until she feels ready to testify.
Tell me, do you at least remember the last time when you were an intellectually honest person or were you always this way?
How can any man vote for the Republicans after all of the terrible shit they've done? Look, the Democrats aren't perfect, but I'd take them over the party of Trump any day.
What "shit" are you talking about, precisely? Because last time I checked the Democrats are responsible for pretty much every low point in American history. The Indian Removal Act, Trail of Tears, slavery, Jim Crow laws, opposing woman's suffrage, KKK, opposing the Civil Rights Acts.
They have yet to actually be on "The Right Side of History". That idea seems to be based on some vague claim that the parties switched, and therefore we're supposed to pretend like they were actually the republicans prior to 1964.
What "shit" are you talking about, precisely? Because last time I checked the Democrats are responsible for pretty much every low point in American history. The Indian Removal Act, Trail of Tears, slavery, Jim Crow laws, opposing woman's suffrage, KKK, opposing the Civil Rights Acts, and so on.
Those democrats are not the same as the democrats today, just as the republicans of the past are the same as the republican Of today. If Lincoln was around today he would almost certainly be a Democrat.
This is most definitely true. When we are talking about the party's switching, we are talking about the values of the party. Republicans used to be more progressive, and Democrats used to be more conservative.
The conservative" and "liberal" labels started with FDR and the New Deal, so republicans were already known as the "conservatives" when the civil rights movement took place. As far as the values themselves, republicans never stopped supporting the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The issues of today are entirely different those which were debated in the past, which is why the previous reference to Lincoln is so ridiculous. Both parties agree with him now on the issues of his day. Just because he opposed slavery doesn't mean we can assume he'd support transgender bathrooms too.
Your latter bit is a fair point, but pretending that significant portions of the party platforms didn't change that now coincide with the contemporary platforms is a bit asinine.
The platforms of the parties switched. Republicans were generally pro-big federal government, particularly during the civil war, and after that fact Democrats of the time followed suit. It wasn't until around the 1930s that there was a sizable shift wherein the Republicans started to push for smaller government.
Democrats seized upon a way of ingratiating themselves to western voters: Republican federal expansions in the 1860s and 1870s had turned out favorable to big businesses based in the northeast, such as banks, railroads and manufacturers, while small-time farmers like those who had gone west received very little. Both parties tried to exploit the discontent this generated, by promising the little guy some of the federal largesse that had hitherto gone to the business sector. From this point on, Democrats stuck with this stance — favoring federally funded social programs and benefits — while Republicans were gradually driven to the counterposition of hands-off government.
From a business perspective, Rauchway pointed out, the loyalties of the parties did not really switch. "Although the rhetoric and to a degree the policies of the parties do switch places," he wrote, "their core supporters don't — which is to say, the Republicans remain, throughout, the party of bigger businesses; it's just that in the earlier era bigger businesses want bigger government and in the later era they don't."
People have been mostly voting in what confirms their best interests, and the politicians themselves conform to the shifting demographics to get elected.
Let's forget about the party that created Pizzagate, kept masturbating about Bill Clinton's alleged rapes and accuses everybody in the left of being child rapists.
The Republican party literally thrives off false allegations and fabricated fear 🤠
Libs chimp out because she will criminalize gay abortions
Hey, what if I appoint that other guy then leak his #metoo past and I will be forced to fire him, and while cucks are busy throwing tantrums about him, I'll silently appointthis woman and they can't do anything.
195 comments
1 BussyShillBot 2018-09-24
They call Dramanauts, Autists. Autists... easily duped, will believe anything, and by the time the destruction is upon them, one or more of their family has been captured and turned against the team. "/r/Drama has served us well...," one captor gloated.
Outlines:
I am a bot for posting Outline.com links. github / Contact for info or issues
1 SnapshillBot 2018-09-24
I can take a 9-inch dildo up my butt, because I'm an adult and I solve my own problems
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
1 Ghdust2 2018-09-24
I mainly wanted to play this hear because, well, this: https://twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti/status/1044056219084828672?s=19
1 -Mopsus- 2018-09-24
lol where did he get this information
1 YouGuysAreNazisMan 2018-09-24
Urban. Fucking. Dictionary.
1 -Mopsus- 2018-09-24
lol seriously?
1 YouGuysAreNazisMan 2018-09-24
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=F.F.F.F.
Obviously saw it had seven F's and had to invent a few new ones.
1 -Mopsus- 2018-09-24
Your linking is working for me.
1 Alexlincoln2 2018-09-24
Same
1 YouGuysAreNazisMan 2018-09-24
I don't know why either. Just search FFFF on the website's search bar.
1 -4x- 2018-09-24
here
1 DICKS_IN_MY_BUM 2018-09-24
like this
1 Power_Incarnate 2018-09-24
I feel like C-P probably doesn't stand for sleepy
1 Wraith_GraveSpell 2018-09-24
Looks like Kavanaugh is a big fan of zergling rush
1 GetHisWallet 2018-09-24
IWSN - I Want Sex Now
The term so nice they listed it twice!
1 Alexlincoln2 2018-09-24
The next candidate for president from the democratic party ladies and gentlemen
1 TehAlpacalypse 2018-09-24
there's a bullet with my name on it if he ever does
1 CATS_in_a_car 2018-09-24
So you're getting shot if he runs?
1 niggerpenis 2018-09-24
What the shit? He's just making a joke that's going over my head right?
1 Dildokin 2018-09-24
There's gangrape, flashing and dick slapping with this new gal coming forward, It looks sketchy.. Idk whats best for drama, if it's false and it helps the midterms and make the dems look even more foolish, if its true, we get a the gigantic spergout from the trumpsters
1 Zeriell 2018-09-24
Its false, but everyone believes it is a possible outcome and definitely the most dramatic.
1 watermark02 2018-09-24
I wasn't happy about the Kavanaugh nomination, but I was pretty much like "Whelp this is my life now". I was amused by this shit at first, but I'm worried it might work, and that he might be innocent. In my mind, it would be less dishonorable to just wait a couple of years and expand the court by a seat to avoid these political consequences, than to shoot it down using false accusations.
I mean, maybe they're correct. Who knows. There's not enough evidence to prove they're lying, and there's not enough to prove he's guilty.
1 JamesRobotoMD 2018-09-24
I really doubt he is innocent. It's pretty well established that Kavanaugh was a drunken lech with dirtbag friends and has tons of super sketchy financial dealings. It would honestly be more out of character for him not to have mushroom stamped some drunk bimbo in college.
1 Punished_Eva 2018-09-24
lol where is this established? In your agenda?
https://www.vox.com/2018/9/14/17860488/brett-kavanaugh-sexual-assault-georgetown-prep-defense
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2018/09/19/us/ap-us-supreme-court-kavanaugh-65-women.html
here, from what are probably your go-to news sites
1 JamesRobotoMD 2018-09-24
He a gud boy he dindu nuttin.
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-09-24
Say it with me folks!
DINDU NUFFIN REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
1 Punished_Eva 2018-09-24
Ed, this ain't some mama claiming her niglet pointing a gun in all his facebook photos is innocent of starting shit with a cop
sorry
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-09-24
Take me to your sex dungeon, daddy! 🍕🍕🍕😩💦
1 Punished_Eva 2018-09-24
my entire apartment is in the basement now.
okay wait, like half-way.
1 trilateral1 2018-09-24
this is the left's pizzagate
1 JamesRobotoMD 2018-09-24
In that it is 100 percent true
1 trilateral1 2018-09-24
exactly
1 Yiin 2018-09-24
just like greitens
1 Mexagon 2018-09-24
He sounds fucking retarded. Of course democrats will be drawn to this.
1 Pol_Pots_Crockpot 2018-09-24
This is the pizzagate of the left
1 JamesRobotoMD 2018-09-24
Only with victims and reporting and not about child eating in a basement that didn't even exist.
1 solastsummer 2018-09-24
It’s literally the same thing. Both sides are the same and I’m smarter than both of them.
1 ToTheNintieth 2018-09-24
Spoken like a true Radical Centrist.
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-09-24
Based and redpilled
1 Punished_Eva 2018-09-24
https://pics.me.me/is-pizzagate-real-they-ignore-basic-truths-alefantis-tells-bbc-11191047.png
1 JamesRobotoMD 2018-09-24
Powerful stuff.
1 Punished_Eva 2018-09-24
your bussy = blasted
1 JamesRobotoMD 2018-09-24
Do you have any youtube videos I could watch to learn more? Preferably made by a guy in a guy fawkes mask.
1 Punished_Eva 2018-09-24
no, but if you or he himself can't even get the point about the basement right, it doesn't look good for you.
1 JamesRobotoMD 2018-09-24
Fuck, you got me. I ate the children. Now show your dick again.
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
lol
1 Punished_Eva 2018-09-24
i know, right?
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
what the fuck are you even talking about lol
1 Punished_Eva 2018-09-24
Aww, it's retarded
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
I’m still not sure whether you’re referring to the pizza place’s basement or Alefantis’ basement, but either way I find it hilarious that you think that details related to that are what makes or breaks this case
1 Punished_Eva 2018-09-24
did I say that? I just said Alefantis once said he had a basement before the shit started, then denied it after. I proved it, too.
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
this is what originally elicited the lol
1 Punished_Eva 2018-09-24
does it matter if he is? if his supposed pedophile basement is in another building than the pizza parlor?
he talks about storing sauce there after a tomato harvest. you would think that means the restaurant, but it could be somewhere by whatever tomato farm.
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
could be a different restaurant, could be an old location, could be his personal stash
1 Punished_Eva 2018-09-24
okay, but how does him having more properties with more basements for potential supposed child rape HURT the pizzagate theory?
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
Why would it need to hurt the Pizzagate theory lol? It needs a leg to stand on first.
1 Punished_Eva 2018-09-24
That's not a good answer.
Alefantis contradicting himself about the existence of a basement is definitely a leg to stand on. Why would he do that?
and do I have to link the type of art John and Tony Podesta put in their homes? I don't care where you're from, that's not something a normal person is into.
but I have no interest in debating the entire thing. The fact is if you don't think the above two instances are fucking weird, you're fucking weird.
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-09-24
Damn dude!!! Pizzagate was real and these people tried to cover it up!! Absolutely discusting! 🤢🤢🤮🤮
1 MildlyCat 2018-09-24
tbh pizzagate was more fun
1 saint2e 2018-09-24
The internet was a mistake.
1 Aivias 2018-09-24
This is actually also from The Inbetweeners....
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-09-24
*inhales*
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
1 SupaDupaFlyAccount 2018-09-24
He is the white Cosby.
1 Kaladin_MemeBlessed 2018-09-24
So many unironic ‘foogees in this thread Ed; whatever are we to do about this immigration problem
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-09-24
*checks out the dumpster fire of a thread*
YIKES!!
1 Kaladin_MemeBlessed 2018-09-24
They must be cleansed in All*hs flame; inshallah
1 trapmoneybenney 2018-09-24
It’s not looking too good for Judge Baseball Tickets.
1 Alexlincoln2 2018-09-24
I'm really bad at telling, but are you joking?
1 CherryKirsche 2018-09-24
Which really would be a genious move by the Republicans if you think about it.
1 trapmoneybenney 2018-09-24
Yeah I honestly was just looking for a reason to post my shitty excuse for a nickname
1 saint2e 2018-09-24
Have some Henney and chill, bro.
1 GandalftheChromatic 2018-09-24
Realistically, what's gonna happen to Frat Boy Genius over all this shit?
1 Alexlincoln2 2018-09-24
You dont know much apparently
1 YouGuysAreNazisMan 2018-09-24
KNOCK KNOCK
HE IS THE FRAT BOY GENIUS
HE JUST CAME OVER TO SAY HI
1 ThatDamnedImp 2018-09-24
He probably gets voted in, and this becomes something conservatives site for decades to prove, 1) a liberally biased media out to get conservatives, and 2) that Democrats are the party of false accusations.
1 DICKS_IN_MY_BUM 2018-09-24
🚂 CHOO CHOO ALL ABOARD 🚂
1 Alexlincoln2 2018-09-24
Satire?
1 Alexlincoln2 2018-09-24
And he gets two more votes. These jumped the gun, big time
1 Alexlincoln2 2018-09-24
The Ramirez woman accusing kavanaugh was obviously fake enough (what with 4 people denying it took 0lace right out of the gate) but this?
1 YouGuysAreNazisMan 2018-09-24
Ramirez is the new accuser. You're thinking of Ford.
1 Alexlincoln2 2018-09-24
I was referring to Ramirez and the gang rape accusation. Sorry for the confusion
1 TUMS_FESTIVAL 2018-09-24
My sides.
1 xXradical_centristXx 2018-09-24
👍😎👍
1 TUMS_FESTIVAL 2018-09-24
Uh...are you aware of what sub you're in?
What year is it, grandpa? Do you know your name?
1 xXradical_centristXx 2018-09-24
Uhh yeah, that’s why I gave it a thumbs up. Keep doing what you’re doing 👈😎👈
1 22333444455555666666 2018-09-24
1 xXradical_centristXx 2018-09-24
👌😎👌
1 MildlyCat 2018-09-24
boi
1 TUMS_FESTIVAL 2018-09-24
I guess we're just calling literally anything "trolling" nowadays.
1 MildlyCat 2018-09-24
Flat-earthers do their thing to get people like you to sperg out.
Which you did.
lol
1 TUMS_FESTIVAL 2018-09-24
I guess we're just calling literally anything "sperging" nowadays.
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
“i was only pretending to be retarded” is a dead meme, quit making it relevant
1 MildlyCat 2018-09-24
It's what they do. It's the people who can't help themselves but respond who keep them relevant.
1 Alexlincoln2 2018-09-24
I, do you know what the flat earth subreddit it? It's a place to laugh about flat earthers
1 TUMS_FESTIVAL 2018-09-24
I apologize for nothing!
1 moush 2018-09-24
Wonder how much he's getting paid by the DNC.
1 IVIaskerade 2018-09-24
He gets a go on Chelsea once a month.
1 OnlyRacistOnReddit 2018-09-24
He's putting way more effort in than he's being paid.
1 IVIaskerade 2018-09-24
It's only fifty without her, though.
1 OnlyRacistOnReddit 2018-09-24
You're saying he gets an extra $30k to slip Chelsea his slim jim?
1 IVIaskerade 2018-09-24
Yes.
1 theguyshetolduabout 2018-09-24
Damn, as a European I cannot BELIEVE how smear campaigns are taking place in the US right now, it's shocking how much you have let MeToo erode civil liberties.
Absolutely embarrassing.
1 Minimum_T-Giraff 2018-09-24
If this occurred in Sweden it might be so bad that somebody would go to prison for libel.
1 theguyshetolduabout 2018-09-24
It's also embarrassing to see this sub trying desperately to find a centrist perspective on this. How about the obvious truth? This is a character assassination with zero proof and zero hope of producing proof.
1 Minimum_T-Giraff 2018-09-24
Fun fact in Sweden even if the statement is true it can still be libel in Swedish law.
1 theguyshetolduabout 2018-09-24
Same in Romania. You get off the hook only if 1) it's true & 2) you made the allegation for the purpose of defending a legitimate interest.
1 watermark02 2018-09-24
Lack of proof beyond a reasonable doubt that accusations are true does not imply proof beyond a reasonable doubt that they are false. To convict the accuser should require the same standard of burden of proof as to convict the accused. Obviously it's problematic if you place an incredibly high standard of burden of proof to convict the accused, but then entirely reverse that standard to convict the accuser when that fails. It's the fallacy of the undistributed middle, it is possible in both cases for there to not be proof either way.
Plus for criminal law like this, it is the state that is required to furnish proof. Not the victim. The victim is under no requirement to build their own case, in fact it is sometimes possible to pursue a case without their consent.
1 theguyshetolduabout 2018-09-24
You need it for a conviction of libel. Just like you need to prove allegations beyond reasonable doubt for the "main" conviction.
Anyway, not sure about the merit of such a discussion, I don't know much about common law and my legal system doesn't operate under the "beyond reasonable doubt" principle being an inquisitorial system.
1 watermark02 2018-09-24
What proof do you have that she's wrong? Can I sue you for character assassination unless you produce proof beyond a reasonable doubt that she's lying?
1 theguyshetolduabout 2018-09-24
I have no obligation to take her seriously. So far she's proven nothing and given no reasons to believe this is anything but a shameless smear campaign.
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
what about the fact that the guy’s a creep
1 theguyshetolduabout 2018-09-24
Says who?
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
To which part?
He’s a creep because of that speech a couple years ago, his hiring practices for clerks, and just look at him speak
Creeps are rapists bc that’s just common sense
1 Alexlincoln2 2018-09-24
The hiring process for clerks thing by a yale professor was fake news, as said by that yale professor yesterday
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
already called fake news on that fake news call
1 Alexlincoln2 2018-09-24
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/20/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-yale-amy-chua
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
Why’d you post one from before the updates?
1 Aivias 2018-09-24
Hows Uncle Joe?
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
Biden or Stalin? They still alive?
1 Aivias 2018-09-24
The first one. And the fact that you got it the first time shows you know where this is going.
Wheres Brett touching up kids like a creepy fuck on national tv like Old Man Biden?
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
Nope lol
First I heard of it. Try pointing a camera at Brett and waiting a few minutes, shouldn’t take too long.
1 Aivias 2018-09-24
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3-IBEURyfk
Thats more evidence than youll get about Old Bretty Boy.
So, now I ask. Is Joe Biden a creepy sex offender based on nothing but the video above? Then I ask you is Kavanaugh a sex offender based on even less evidence than that?
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
Until he’s spent a little more time on camera, of course.
I didn’t even click the link and I can tell you the answer is without a doubt yes lol. Just look at the guy.
Probably! I’m less sure about him than Biden though.
1 ThatDamnedImp 2018-09-24
She has no proof. And we have reason to believe a long-time Democratic activist is lying. Because she's a long-time Democratic activist.
1 GetHisWallet 2018-09-24
The burden of proof is on the claimant, not the denier.
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
she spread her vagina, what more do you want?
1 trilateral1 2018-09-24
there's absolutely zero evidence for anything they're claiming.
the only reason this is even being entertained at all is that it's $CURRENTYEAR and we have to BELIEVE WAHMEN! no matter what.
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
I think you’re thinking of ($CURRENTYEAR - 4)
no one actually buys into that shit anymore
1 trilateral1 2018-09-24
The Democrats seem to think that people still buy it.
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
Not really, it just happens to be very convenient to believe them in this instance
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-09-24
You sound like a r/braincels poster lmaooooo
1 trilateral1 2018-09-24
YIKES!!
🤢🤢🤮🤮
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-09-24
I mean you went ahead and posted this out of spite for the people shitting on Kavanaugh lolololollol
You can't deny that you're s e e t h i n g rn 😂
1 trilateral1 2018-09-24
Today is the first time I saw this. And it's super creeeeepy.
1 ThatDamnedImp 2018-09-24
This sub is mostly partisan democrats as near as I can tell.
1 theguyshetolduabout 2018-09-24
Neah, it's just despise for Trumpists.
1 MildlyCat 2018-09-24
Nah, this sub "hates" trump like people "hate" Jersey Shore and the Kardashians.
As in, they fucking love him and bring him up all the time.
1 theguyshetolduabout 2018-09-24
I didn't say hate. And I don't hate Trump, as a pretty detached observer, I think he was very necessary for the US because Hillary really is disgusting. I do despise the Trumpists tho (well, those I have interacted with, at T_D, because that's a tribe and only a slightly less annoying one than a SJWs tribe.
1 Heydammit 2018-09-24
This obviously has nothing to do with all of the /r/drama trashy levels of drama that surround Trump.
1 ATissu 2018-09-24
Nah it's just that the Republicans had it coming. they thrive on conspiracy theories, accusing everybody of being degenerate/child rapists without any proof and believing allegations when it suits their political agenda. And as always, they don't give a shit about victims when it goes against their political interest.
Donald trump could rape kids on national TV that they would still complain about pizzagate
1 moush 2018-09-24
How many different shades of shit do libs throw daily? Do you remember the shit about Trump paying 2 hookers to piss on him. lmbo
1 ATissu 2018-09-24
Dems could make up shit about daddy and russia for 20 years straight and they still wouldn't catch up to the republican conspiracies in terms of retardedness
1 moush 2018-09-24
lemme guess, you consider 9/11 and holocaust deniers as republicans for some inane reason
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-09-24
Imagine coping this hard 😂😂😂
1 pitterpatterwater 2018-09-24
Please no, hating Trump doesn't mean you like Hillary.
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-09-24
But then how will i support my narrative?
1 I_love_racist_jokes 2018-09-24
Yeah I'm not a conservatard and really don't want an anti-abortion guy on Supreme Court buuut....it's so fucking obvious this is character assassination and planned out to a T by (((((((certain people))))))))))
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
lmao> This
1 watermark02 2018-09-24
1.) Libel is a civil offense, you can't go to prison for it.
2.) In criminal law, the standard is always that the state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Just as the rapist does not have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did not commit the rape, the accuser does not have to produce proof beyond a reasonable doubt the they are not lying. It is the states job to prove that they are lying to send them to prison. False accusations does not have a reversed burden of proof, it's the same as any other crime.
1 Minimum_T-Giraff 2018-09-24
In Sweden it is bit odd offense but it may result prison time. sometimes a Prosecutor may drive the case sometime not.
In Sweden they look at various factors. But false accusations is a different crimes of itself.
1 Zeriell 2018-09-24
Listen and believe, mmkay?
1 lemonfreedom 2018-09-24
America is the only major country with absolute free speech. You can't get in trouble for saying anything unless it is proven that you knew it was false and that it would cause significant damage
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
or if you threaten somebody
or if you provoke somebody
or you do it in a really loud and disruptive way
or if it’s in school
or if you alien & sedition acts
1 terminator755 2018-09-24
How do you know these are all lies?
1 theguyshetolduabout 2018-09-24
So let me get this straight. Because I may have commented once or twice on T_D, this, in your view, disqualifies my opinion as someone who isn't even American?
Why? Give me a good reason.
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
Because you may have commented once or twice on T_D.
If that’s not a good reason, then what is?
1 Alexlincoln2 2018-09-24
Being a foreigner is pretty disqualifying
1 theguyshetolduabout 2018-09-24
From objectivity?
1 theguyshetolduabout 2018-09-24
Sorry bud, can't do this level.
1 TruthPains 2018-09-24
IDK, after Cosby, I don't automatically dismiss this shit anymore.
1 theguyshetolduabout 2018-09-24
Don’t straw-man me. Who told you to automatically dismiss anything? Use your brain and common sense.
Two women came forward and both their accusations were not corroborated by people who were supposed to have been there. And we’re talking here about friends of the alleged victims that wouldn’t corroborate not just friends of Kavanaugh. Also, the political colours of the alleged first victim are more than obvious so there’s clearly a motive there.
How does this compare to Cosby?
1 TruthPains 2018-09-24
Some long time ago accusation ended up being true. When I first heard it about Cosby I thought it was bullshit, then it ended up being true.
So I don't just dismiss things like this.
Also Roy Moore.
1 theguyshetolduabout 2018-09-24
You’re trying to assign guilt to an innocent man. You’re just one of the mob.
1 TruthPains 2018-09-24
What does hearing out someone have to do with assigning guilt?
Sounds like you are doing the exact opposite.
1 theguyshetolduabout 2018-09-24
Hearing? I’m not against that. But why did they wait until now?
1 TruthPains 2018-09-24
The letter was sent much earlier, apparently, but same reason it happens to someone like Roy Moore or other 'famous' people.
Victim sees the person in the news, it has been 30 some years, they finally feel that someone needs to know what type of person they are.
If you were raped, kept it secret for 30 years and tried to put it behind you, then you saw your rapist in on TV about to get one of the most powerful positions in the country... would you not at least think about telling someone, trying to let someone know what type of monster that person is?
I'm not saying he did it or that he is guilty, I'm just trying to put a reason why someone may wait this long or do it now.
1 theguyshetolduabout 2018-09-24
Oh really? What about dragging her feet over the hearing? What about all the delay tactics? She can’t fly all of a sudden, she needs to drive. The Feinstein said the Republicans should literally wait until she feels ready to testify.
Tell me, do you at least remember the last time when you were an intellectually honest person or were you always this way?
1 TruthPains 2018-09-24
You sure got a lot of REEEEEEE in you.
1 ffbtaw 2018-09-24
Yeah, thank God I live in Canada where that NEVER happens.
godfuckingdammit
1 backltrack 2018-09-24
ITS NOT HARD TO NOT RAPE
1 trilateral1 2018-09-24
then why did you do it?
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
instructions unclear
1 ThatDamnedImp 2018-09-24
The party of false rape accusations strikes again.
Seriously, how can any man ever vote Democrat at this point?
1 Ghdust2 2018-09-24
How can any man vote for the Republicans after all of the terrible shit they've done? Look, the Democrats aren't perfect, but I'd take them over the party of Trump any day.
/serious post done
1 ___-III----III-___ 2018-09-24
"Serious" lmao
1 thebuscompany 2018-09-24
What "shit" are you talking about, precisely? Because last time I checked the Democrats are responsible for pretty much every low point in American history. The Indian Removal Act, Trail of Tears, slavery, Jim Crow laws, opposing woman's suffrage, KKK, opposing the Civil Rights Acts.
They have yet to actually be on "The Right Side of History". That idea seems to be based on some vague claim that the parties switched, and therefore we're supposed to pretend like they were actually the republicans prior to 1964.
1 Ghdust2 2018-09-24
Those democrats are not the same as the democrats today, just as the republicans of the past are the same as the republican Of today. If Lincoln was around today he would almost certainly be a Democrat.
1 thebuscompany 2018-09-24
ok
1 Heydammit 2018-09-24
This is most definitely true. When we are talking about the party's switching, we are talking about the values of the party. Republicans used to be more progressive, and Democrats used to be more conservative.
1 thebuscompany 2018-09-24
The conservative" and "liberal" labels started with FDR and the New Deal, so republicans were already known as the "conservatives" when the civil rights movement took place. As far as the values themselves, republicans never stopped supporting the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The issues of today are entirely different those which were debated in the past, which is why the previous reference to Lincoln is so ridiculous. Both parties agree with him now on the issues of his day. Just because he opposed slavery doesn't mean we can assume he'd support transgender bathrooms too.
1 Heydammit 2018-09-24
Your latter bit is a fair point, but pretending that significant portions of the party platforms didn't change that now coincide with the contemporary platforms is a bit asinine.
1 Wraith_GraveSpell 2018-09-24
Lol southern strategy dont real
1 Heydammit 2018-09-24
What, in your mind, is vague about the claim?
1 thebuscompany 2018-09-24
Who switched? The politicians? Strom Thurmond is literally the only one; every other democratic senator who voted against the Civil Rights Act stayed solid blue (along with their districts). The voters? The southern states didn't start voting republican at the federal level until the Gingrich Revolution, and continued to vote solidly democrat at the state level all the way into the 2000s.
1 Heydammit 2018-09-24
The platforms of the parties switched. Republicans were generally pro-big federal government, particularly during the civil war, and after that fact Democrats of the time followed suit. It wasn't until around the 1930s that there was a sizable shift wherein the Republicans started to push for smaller government.
https://www.livescience.com/34241-democratic-republican-parties-switch-platforms.html
People have been mostly voting in what confirms their best interests, and the politicians themselves conform to the shifting demographics to get elected.
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
environmental shit, upper-bracket tax shit, disenfranchisement shit, gay marriage shit, drug war shit, plus basically all the shit Dems do too
Like, you can’t be serious with that shit right?
You know Trump’s idol as president is a 19th century Democrat right? He loves himself some Jackson (you know, the Indian Removal Act guy).
Nigga do you even know who Strom Thurmond is?
1 thebuscompany 2018-09-24
You make a great point. The democrats were founded by a dude best known genociding native americans. I forgot to mention that.
Do you know who the other 26 senators who voted against the civil right act were?
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
Yep! And check out which party is taking cues from the guy.
19 other Strom Thurmonds, 5 northern Republicans, John Tower and Robert Byrd
1 mcslibbin 2018-09-24
Lmao this fucking guy
1 CommonThroat 2018-09-24
Democrats are fags and nigger lovers
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-09-24
No dem love *you* though
1 pepperouchau 2018-09-24
And so am I!
1 ATissu 2018-09-24
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Holy shit that's a hooot take.
Let's forget about the party that created Pizzagate, kept masturbating about Bill Clinton's alleged rapes and accuses everybody in the left of being child rapists.
The Republican party literally thrives off false allegations and fabricated fear 🤠
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
by having less of a victim complex, or more, depending on the color of the man.
1 terminator755 2018-09-24
Fuck Trump posters.
1 Sober_Sloth 2018-09-24
Lol this sub really doesn’t like women. I thought all the loser red pilled virgins weren’t welcome?
1 moush 2018-09-24
???
​
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
what? of course they’re welcome.
the only ones who aren’t are the ones who like Sam Hyde
1 IVIaskerade 2018-09-24
Remember when the left was having a meltdown about republicans obstructing the supreme court pick?
At least they were right when they said that the left wouldn't do the same. They just neglected to mention it would be much worse.
1 grungebot5000 2018-09-24
Uh... yeah?
Lol you know that’s why they’re obstructing the supreme court pick, right?
1 drift_summary 2018-09-24
Pepperidge Farm remembers!
1 OnlyRacistOnReddit 2018-09-24
There has to be a thread on /r/politics about the Keith Ellison's domestic abuse issues that can be salt mined, right?
1 mukumukum9 2018-09-24
Trump wants to appoint Amy Coney Barrett
Libs chimp out because she will criminalize gay abortions
Hey, what if I appoint that other guy then leak his #metoo past and I will be forced to fire him, and while cucks are busy throwing tantrums about him, I'll silently appointthis woman and they can't do anything.
Q.