Trump claimed Brett Kavanaugh was 'proven innocent' of claims he sexually assaulted Christine Blasey

No he was not.

Sadly no points for being tenaciously incorrect as you are.

 

Maybe because his level if logic is well beyond elementary school.

 

Yep. Proven innocent.

 

Good boy. Keep trolling. I expect nothing less than for you to follow me around, hoping, praying, maybe that one day you will be right and I will be wrong.

Must ****ing eat you up, considering your singular obsession with me.

 

How is it any poster that responds to you is obsessed with you?

By your "logic", if you respond to this YOU are obsessed with me.

Derp!

 

Says the goofball who doesn't understand that just because a claim can't be proved true doesn't make the claim false.
It is absolutely impossible for kavanaugh to prove that he didn't assault Ford based on the details that she gave. Impossible.
Of course, it's not necessary for him to prove such a claim for him to be presumed innocent.

This is elementary logic. It's pathetically sad that American adults can't think.

 

I know you are, but what am I...

Right out of the schoolyard, the seemingly intellectual pinnacle of your posts.

Note you engaged me. You came onto the site and started you string of insults. I did not seek you out. You stalked me. Own it. Own your failure, own your jealousy, as it defines your very being.

 

Keep on derpin'!

 

Your obsession with me is duly noted.

 

Ah, just can't quit me, can you? Must attempt to have the last word.

Well, I have come to expect so little from your posts, nothing more than shitty personal attacks in defense of the idiocy and lies of Trump, I am not surprised.

 

More of your obsession with me.....

 

He isn't "most likely" he is...in the United States of America we have something called Due Process, and the presumption of innocence.....which means the person is innocent...until proven otherwise. The evidence we have is Dr. Ford, who was paid $600K, make an accusation, that could not at all be supported, in fact the people she named, said they don't recall any sort of party, he own girlfriend said she didn't even know Judge K, and later exposed how she was pressured by Dem lawyers representing Dr. Ford to change her story.

What is greatly concerning to me, is that someone like yourself doesn't understand the basic concepts our nation was founded on, and would rather go back to the Star Chamber practice which was used in England, and is used by horrible regimes still today.

Why is he "potentially bad?" Either you think he is bad based on his opinions....or you don't think he is bad. I don't support them all, but I certainly think his reasoning is sound, and he logically get to his conclusion even on cases I might come to a different result.

 

We are discussing logic here not US law. He absolutely fvcking is MOST LIKELY innocent. You cannot say he is proven innocent simply because Ford can't prove her allegations. Are you all freaking *****?
Considered innocent? Sure. Presumed Innocent? Yep. Innocent based on preponderance of the evidence (note the qualifier)? Yessir. Proven innocent? no - and probably not possible to do so.

Do you understand now?

 

He is innocent until proven otherwise...the burden isn't on him, it's never on someone being accused. However, in this case it's not just that....we have witnesses, she provided, that say it never happened, and one that says they never meet Kavenaugh....one that later pressured to change her story. He is innocent....and frankly, the evidence suggest that Dr. Ford made the entire thing up. I'm not gonna say she si guilty, but the evidence supports that more then anything suggesting Juctice Kavenaugh did anything,

 

Well that's fine. I agree about what the evidence says. However, that doesn't mean that it isn't possible that kavanaugh is guilty. It is possible and therefore his innocence is not proved. C'mon stop being stupidly obtuse like the other clowns around here.

 

That's just turning everything on it's head. The evidence suggest otherwise. The evidence proves he is innocent.

 

It is also possible Kavanaugh is really Sasquatch and rides a unicorn on the weekend.

After all, he has not proven he isn't.

 

At least those would be falsifiable claims. You're almost getting it.

 

No actually it's not. Us adults call it language. You see, it's necessary for grown ups to attach meaning to words so that we can communicate reliably.

 

By your logic nobody ever accused of something can be innocent because there it is possible they did it. It's not language, words have meaning for sure, but words are used together to explain something, like logic.

 

Maybe you don't understand what it means to prove something?
It's a good thing US law doesn't require people to prove their innocence, right?

 

LMAO! You think that's just a made up saying I suppose that's the type of misinformation that comes from thinking for ones self when all you know is misinformation!

Not that it doesn't have it's comedic value LOL

 

Kav is the topic, Silly!

 

You obviously don't understand what the presumption of innocence is. The man is innocent until proven guilty. When, for a moment, someone accuses him, and it turns out to be a false alarm, since there is no proof, we return to his being innocent. The proof is the accuser's lack of proof. Did you know that a 'lack of proof' can be proof?

No, you hadn't figured that out yet.

 

Winning