Using the Democrat high school rule, Booker must resign

Kavanaugh forcibly pinned a 15 year old girl down attempting to undress her while covering her mouth to prevent her screams from being heard...what exactly are you comparing that to?

 

No. Kavanaugh would have been guilty in every courtroom if the jury found his accusor credible. What Booker wtote about was never sexual assault.

Reaching for boob a second time when the girl initiated and continued relations is different than BK pinning his victim down and covering her mouth.

 

Got it. A Democratic Party senator who sexually assaults a teen girl is OK, but a Republican who is nominated for SCOTUS who is alleged to have sexually assaulted a teen girl is not OK.

And your excuse is, the senator is elected. That's the only reason you can provide.

And we're to believe Team Blue partisanship has nothing to do with this...

 

Booker grabbing a drunk, teen girl's breast, she pushed his hand away in an effort to make him stop, and he forcibly grabbed her breast again.

Under Democratic Party rules, this is an unforgivable sexual assault...

 

In this post and another, I have said that Booker's behavior isn't okay - but the situations ARE different.

 

Nope. She pushed his hand away when he grabbed her breast. And he powered through her resistance, finding his 'mark,' as he put it.

And you are actually saying it was OK for Booker to do this because the teen girl wanted it? Really?

Under Democratic Party rules, this is an unforgivable sexual assault. Right?

And please don't lie here to simply win a debate, it's quite unbecoming...

 

But you have obviously have forgiven Booker for his actions.

Why? And why shouldn't Booker be held to the same standard rule the Democrats have invented for the recent SCOTUS hearings?

How do normal Americans not see this as simply partisan nonsense on your part?

 

This is the first time I'm reading that he tried a second time. His original article only mentioned trying once. And yes, maybe ha should resign over this, but it is quite a bit different from what Kavanaugh is accused of.

 

You may call it nonsense but it won't change the fact that I see the two very differently. I see a SCOTUS appointment as being very different from a Senate position. Don't you?

If Booker's victim came forward, I would want to see a trial and have him face his accuser and the consequences as decided.

I have never stated that BK should resign from his current bench because he has not been accused in a court of law.

 

Of course you see it differently; one is a guy you root for, the other is a guy you detest.

You are aware that Booker admitted his actions? In writing?

Democrats have invented the rule that men should be held responsible for their actions while in high school. Yet once again, as they are prone to do, they will ignore the same standards they hold Republicans to...

 

So then, you don't see the difference between SCOTUS and Senator?

 

From the Washington Post link in my OP:

“After having my hand pushed away once, I reached my ‘mark,'” he wrote.

Even though the Democratic Party operatives posing as journalists at the Post wrote this article to come to Booker's aid, it still contains the facts as I have provided.

 

It takes exteme partisanship to be willingly blind to the fact that the two are the same.

 

Of course not.

Using your logic, a president in his second term would be 'safe' under the Democratic Party High School rule, as he would never run for election again.

You are seriously grasping at straws if this is the reason for your bias...

 

I have no idea what the "mark" means and neither do you. But even assuming that is what it means, these are very different situations. One involves a guy who owns, admit to, and openly regrets his actions, actions which occurred during a consensual make out session and after which the two remained friends, that he used to identify his mistakes and to implore other young men to change their ways. He didn't hold her against her will, he didn't prevent her escape, and he didn't cover her screams for help. Most importantly, he admits to it and owns it. What Kavanaugh has been accused of would involve holding Ford down against her will, forcefully stripping her, preventing her escape, covering her screams for help, and lying about it later to cover it up while smearing the victim's reputation. It takes a special kind of willing self-deception to pretend those are the same thing.

 

Did you finally get your facts correct after seeing the link?

Tell me how they are different.

A high school boy grabs a drunk girl's breast, refuses to stop when she attempts to end the assault, and grabs her breast again.

A high school boy grabs a drunk girl's , covers her mouth when she attempts to yell to make him stop.

Both boys then ended their assault.

We KNOW Booker did this. We are far from certain Kavanaugh did so.

Personally, I think it is ludicrous to have made the issue of a teen boy grabbing a teen girl's breast into a national issue. But you guys are the ones who usually make these rules...

 

Sure, 'mark' means umm, let's say, upper arm so we don't rattle leftist sensibilities. Yeah, that's it, he grabbed her upper arm.

And how do we know Booker is telling the entire truth? Heck, I think he actually raped the girl.

See how this works?

The quest for power from the left, the butthurt over losing an election, the way an entire political party has become unhinged doesn't bode well for our republic...

 

It was a typo that I corrected. And you can refer to my previous post to see how they are different. Trying to play off what Kavanaugh is accused of as just "grabbing a teen girl's breast" and nothing more is intellectually dishonest. Not believing Ford is one thing, and understandable, but the "even if it happened, it is no big deal" wing of the Republican party has gone completely off of the deep end and has decided that their party loyalty is worth resorting to assault apologistics.

 

It, unfortunately, does not surprise me that you blatantly ignored everything about these two situations that make them different, despite them being spelled out for you. I don't imagine that will change anytime soon. And no one had accused Booker of rape.

 

Did you watch the hearings? Democrats have become the new puritans.

"You played beer pong in high school? Diana, pass me the smelling salts."

 

We don't even know who his victim is.

He's a man, shouldn't we assume his evil intentions?

The Puritan Party demands this...

 

And that makes assault apologistics okay how?

 

You are apologizing for Booker, so you tell me.

 

Another predictable dodge, unfortunately.

 

If that is what you think, you haven't read my posts. Not once did I claim his actions were justifiable. Yet we have a wing of the Republican party claiming that, even if Ford's account is true, it is no big deal and not disqualifying to hold a woman down against her will, prevent her attempts to escape, forcefully strip and grope her, and prevent her attempts to scream for help. I've seen lot of lunacy on the left, but not much that can match that. It isn't "Puritan" to have a problem with attempted rape.