“Ribs & (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)”, core American value?

/thread

Such desperate attempts to explain trumps misogyny and advocacy of sexual assault. Pathetic.

 

There are at least 4 independent corroborating victims of Clinton's sexual assaults.
Does Bill " I never had sex with that woman" Clinton have any credibility left to deny their charges against him?

 

The absurd October "surprise" is becoming a very old stale act.

 

That's the beauty of the United States, you are free to believe what you want.

 

No, that's not why people are offended. They're offended because even in a locker room between guys, that's pretty coarse language. It's alpha male stuff, is all, and that upsets betas.

 

The 'belief' you harbor within your own mind is indeed a freedom, wherever one might live. So, that goes without saying.

What is beautiful about the U.S.A. (or should be), is that our system allows for deliberation and related compromises which seek to ensure the greatest amounts of freedom, liberty and justice (for all). And 'restrictions' upon individual rights are primarily applied, when/where one person's right to do or practice something, would likely infringe upon the rights of another individual. We have a judicial branch which does its best to parse and provide rulings to address such situations.

So ultimately, it is fine that we don't all 'agree'; what matters most, is that those things we believe (or don't) are dealt with in ways which best protect us individually. That is why compelling others to embrace religious or other beliefs is frowned upon or prohibited (by law).

That's the real "beauty" of living under the United States Constitution.

 

And what sexual assault was that?

 

Do you know what defense counsel is obliged to do, to remain an officer of the court and a lawyer in good standing with the Bar association? It was her job to 'vigorously' defend her client regardless of whether she feels he is guilty or not. The adversarial system does not work unless both sides the state and the defendant have lawyers who work very hard for their client. And no, they are not supposed to be miserably guilty while they do their job. If you dislike the idea of guilty parties getting access to lawyers, who may then do their job well, try advocating that we change the adversarial system, but do not blame public defenders or private practice defense counsel for doing exactly what we demand they do to keep their license to practice in the field of criminal law.

 

Alpha males brag about sexual assault?

- - - Updated - - -

Grabbing women without their consent.

 

I watched the vid. Honestly a very optimistic view of the possibility of racial harmony. I hope more people watch the whole thing.

But chances are some idiot will clip out those three words from it and make a looping video. You can't cure stupid.

 

Nonsense, lawyers are not permitted to present false evidence in court. They may not even call a defendant they know is guilty to the stand. Beyond that lawyers may not be forced to defend anyone.

Hillary Clinton's decision to put the rapist of a 12 year old girl back on the street is consistent with her pattern of abusing the sexual abuse and rape victims of her husband.

Hillary Clinton is a misogynist.

 

LOL! What do you think happens next when a male grabs a woman's crotch without her consent? Think!

- - - Updated - - -

It is very clear now that there was no "sexual assault".

 

I think that heavily depends on the woman in question and the man in question.

 

More partisan agenda posting and trolling. Now people accused of crimes deserve no vigorous defense, and have no control over their own defense strategy, because you want Hillary to win an election.

 

Are you seriously defending Bill Cosby in an attempt to defend Trump? We have a new low.

 

No, sorry it's actually worse than that, they don't care how or what ordinary Americans think.

 

1) he didn't indicate lack of consent. He indicated they were willing because he was rich and famous.
2) the context and inflection make the grab the puss comment hyperbole most likely. Never gotten hyperbolic in a just between us chickens bull(*)(*)(*)(*)ting session?
3) he said he tried to kiss a woman and she shot him down. He did not say he grabbed her puss. If going for a kiss and getting shot down is sexually assault most men are guilty of sexual assault. Never gone in for one and been rejected?
Which statute are you using anyway? You ARE citing to a statute yes?

- - - Updated - - -

No (*)(*)(*)(*). I was being facetious

 

No, he indicated he can "do anything" because he is rich and famous.

If this was a single incident, your argument would have merit, but Donald Trump has been accused of sexual harassment and assault numerous times in the past. He's admitted to using his personal power for voyeurism. He's settled out of court against assault charges.

But let me guess, those are "just allegations", but the allegations against Bill Clinton get their own special standard of evidence, right?

 

New York Penal Law § 130.52 Forcible touching

It is not bragging if he has actually done and there are plenty of accusations to that effect.

Yeah, yeah I know they are just accusations right? That seems to be the level of proof standard that Trump's Chumps use against the Clinton's but I guess it is OK to have a double standard when dealing with the Clinton's right?

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/tur...-who-accused-him-of-sexual-assault-this-year/

 

They get the same. Pull a statute and fit the facts in his statement to the elements.
Do it like this:
Conclusion: yes x happened (no x didnt)
Rule: cite statutes cases etc that support your argument
analysis: apply rule to fact
Conclusion:restate

- - - Updated - - -

I don't recall bill getting docked for his accusations do you? Other than an out of court settlement.... gee it's like they're even and yall don't give a (*)(*)(*)(*) about bill but you do about trump.

Forcible touching does not equal sexual assault. http://codes.findlaw.com/ny/penal-law/pen-sect-130-52.html

See above fit your argument to facts. And if you're using that story you might want to use Florida law since the contact alleged allegedly occurred at Mar a lago.

 

You are aware that no where in your link does it say that forcible touching is not sexual assault, yes?

 

You are wrong. Forcible touching is considered 3rd Degree Sexual Assault.

They are not even. You are talking about Bill Clinton's history. To make it even we would have to be blaming Melania for Trump's remarks. We are not. You are blaming HRC for Bill's actions. Sad and pathetic.

 

No it doesn't. It says forcible touching is considered 3rd Degree Sexual Abuse.

 

Nonsense. Bad things happen fast - and everyone knows it. All this affected outrage is absurd.
There was clearly no sexual assault involved.

 

How is touching someone without their consent not sexual assault?