Trump's SCOTUS

User avatar
clubgop
Posts: 7978
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:47 pm

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by clubgop » Sun Sep 30, 2018 4:53 pm

Speaker to Animals wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 2:00 pm
clubgop wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 1:56 pm
Speaker to Animals wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 12:40 pm


Oh, so you agree that this was all a plot by Christian republicans to burn Kavennaugh and replace him with a pro-life judge as Martin was claiming, or perhaps the exact fucking opposite where pro-abortion democrats lied about being sexually assaulted to save their precious abortion industry?
ah wot? I would say the former over the latter but it's about naked power all the same.

Dude, this was 100% democrats hoaxing rapes because they are terrified of Roe v. Wade getting reversed. That's all it is. Trying to make it about Christians was fucking laughable.

This who fucking farce was about the abortion industry. All of it.
No, they really believe this bullshit about indicting a sitting president. They really think it is a good idea. Or that it will actually happen. Both delusional.

User avatar
clubgop
Posts: 7978
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:47 pm

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by clubgop » Sun Sep 30, 2018 4:59 pm

Martin Hash wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 2:53 pm
It's a race between the false accussers and the debunkers. Who will be ahead at the end of 7 days?
It wont matter, only the percieved losers will get an airing. The winners will be dismissed as "piling on."

Ph64
Posts: 2434
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:34 pm

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by Ph64 » Sun Sep 30, 2018 6:52 pm

Speaker to Animals wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 12:42 pm
Millennials are really living up to their reputation.

I shit you not, there are millennial articles all over the Internet claiming the "devil's triangle" couldn't possibly be a drinking game these boys made up in 1982 because they cannot find sources for it on the Internet.

Let that sink in.
Hey, I was a geek in 1982 and I had "internet"...

...well, ok, Compuserve. And it was (iirc) $8/hr to use, plus the only local dial-up I could get (I think I had 1200 baud by then) was TymNet (TymShare?) which was an additional $2/hr, so $10/hr total. Mind you at that point I was lucky to be earning minimum wage of like $3.25/hr, so let's just say I wasn't using it much. For $10 back then I could buy a 12pack and still have enough for couple slices of pizza.

Yeah, millennials have no clue the "privilege" they have today with multi-megabit to your home internet, even to a device that fits in your pocket, that's 100,000 times faster than my old 1.78mhz TRS-80 with a modem.

User avatar
pineapplemike
Posts: 4650
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:34 pm

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by pineapplemike » Sun Sep 30, 2018 9:53 pm

Image

User avatar
TheReal_ND
Posts: 26035
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:23 pm

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by TheReal_ND » Sun Sep 30, 2018 9:59 pm

pineapplemike wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 9:53 pm
Image
Image

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by Speaker to Animals » Mon Oct 01, 2018 5:26 am

Mitchell’s points out several points, including:

“Dr. Ford has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened.”

“Dr. Ford struggled to identify Judge Kavanaugh as the assailant by name.”

“When speaking with her husband, Dr. Ford changed her description of the incident to become less specific.”
“Dr. Ford has no memory of key details of the night in question—details that could help corroborate her account.”

“She does not remember in what house the alleged assault took place or where that house was located with any specificity.”

“Perhaps most importantly, she does not remember how she got from the party back to her house.”
Rachel Mitchell reaches the conclusion that ““A ‘he said, she said’ case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that.”

In perhaps her most damning finding, Rachel Mitchell writes that “The activities of congressional Democrats and Dr. Ford’s attorney’s likely affected her account”. Mitchell ostensibly alleges that the maneuvering of congressional Democrats, and the actions of her attorneys, who acted more like handlers, influenced her account of events, and perhaps even her truthfulness. This may have come out as Mitchell’s lines of questioning were repeatedly interrupted by her attorneys, namely Michael Bromwich, who also represents Andrew McCabe.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/0 ... ew-report/

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by Speaker to Animals » Mon Oct 01, 2018 5:35 am

If she does not face charges for this, all men are in for a very tough time going forward

Never forget that the left projects. Their shrill screeching about a war on women is what they are waging against us men.

Men have a right to due process. They have a right to challenge their accusers, and when their accusers make false claims, they have a right to equal protections under the law -- which means the false accuser should be charged and punished.

What this woman did to that man was worse than what she falsely accused him of doing to her, and yet the left does not want women like her punished.

A man would be better off literally raped than suffer the consequences of a false rape accusation. This crime she committed is far worse than rape, and yet these liberal women think so little of the humanity of men, or men's human rights, that they really believe destroying however many innocent men is worth the cost to "protect" women.

PartyOf5
Posts: 3657
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2016 11:15 am

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by PartyOf5 » Mon Oct 01, 2018 5:45 am

Speaker to Animals wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 5:35 am
If she does not face charges for this, all men are in for a very tough time going forward
She won't and we are.

White? Guilty strike 1.
Male? Guilty strike 2.
Hetero? Guilty strike 3.
Well off? Guilty strike 4.

This is how truth and justice are determined by today's left and the Democrats in charge. The only facts that matter are the ones selected by them to justify their pre-determined truth based on the strikes listed above.

User avatar
Martin Hash
Posts: 18665
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 2:02 pm

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by Martin Hash » Mon Oct 01, 2018 6:05 am

It's Patriarchy vs. Matriarchy in full display now. People are actually saying it out loud. About time the battle lines were drawn.

I'd say look to Europe but Europe has split, Eastern Europe is re-establishing The Patriarchy, and Western Europe is turning into something that's neither, and will fail. Basic Income is the end game.
Shamedia, Shamdemic, Shamucation, Shamlection, Shamconomy & Shamate Change

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by Speaker to Animals » Mon Oct 01, 2018 6:20 am

I think this time they made a strategic mistake. A big one. Lots of us don't even like this guy, but now everything changed. I want to see him confirmed out of spite. I am forced to defend a swamp creature I loathe out of a sense of justice and fairness the left does not themselves possess.

Men are starting to see the problem for what it is now. This thing red pilled so many blue pill cucks, I'd imagine. It's going to hurt them.

For instance, what asshole would vote for democrats in the midterm elections after this farce? You want to live in a society where you are less than human on account of your sex, and you possess no basic human rights? Do you want to live in a society where any woman can utterly destroy your life, your career, and even your family with lies, and the more you defend yourself against those lies, the more these hateful leftists will claim you are guilty?

No man should vote for this party. You are a fucking idiot if you vote democrat anything.