Is it Time to Change the Rule of Law in America?

[RealDave]

You're claiming there is no evidence that Russia attacked the US to aid Trump? I want you on record.

I am already on record. You can not claim to know WHY anyone did anything, moron. You aren't psychic ... But you might be a Russian.

You are already on record as well for being an admitted moron who gmhas no idea what 'Counter-Intelligence' is or what its goals are.

For example, your pea-sized brain and over-grown HATRED can not comprehend that the Russians benefit way more by helping both and in the end manipulating half the country into claiming whoever won is not legitimate, thereby dividing the country and burying whoever wins in obstruction, division, and hate.

THAT was the real objective from the start...

...and the LOSER Democrats who refused to accept the out one of the election have been more than happy to help the Russians divide this country the last w years

Sp, you love the idea that they helped elect Trump.

You know it. I know it.

So, why did Russia want Trump?

Let me know when you grow a fucking brain & can think about that.

 

[RealDave]

So he never molested those boys until after the trial?

'How the fuck did you get so stupid.

Sandusky WAS guilty. From his first molestation he was guilty.

You assume innocence in a court of law. It is the starting point of a trial.

This is not a court pf law.

Sandusky was a child molester the first time he did it.

His accusers did not have witnesses. They did not have proof, Yet Sandusky WAS indeed guilty..

I believe Ford. I did not believe Kavanuagh. So I think Kavanaugh did indeed assault Ford. Is it provable in court? Maybe. But to me he is guilty based on what I heard.

I would not have hired Kavanaugh with his testimony. Not so much for something he did when he was in high school but for his lies, dishonesty, & demeanor.

Certainly we have better options in this country.

Go back and reread what he stated, your comprehension skills seem to be turned off today.

I know what you wrote. You can't seem to distinguish the presumption of innocence for a court case & innocence in real life.

You think Sandusky was innocent until found iiulty in court but in reality he was guilty before the trial even started.

He did it., He molested those kids. He did it whether or not some court said so.

Kavanaugh was NOT on trial. There can be no proof. That does not make Kavanaugh innocent.

According to you every murderer, rapist, theif never ever committed those crimes because they were never caught. That is pretty damn stupid.

you're right, Sandusky did it, we know he did, there is evidence he did it. he did go to court, and we did find out what everyone knew. apples and submarines to the kavanaugh discussion.

so try again. tell us where someone was proven to be guilty without evidence. please, post it up for us all. come now junior, you've got it all and know it all. let's see it.

BTW, I can show where evidence said a man was guilty and 12 jurors said not guilty. Want to know that name?

Wow, you are dense.

You claim Kavanaugh was innocent because there was no court case.

If I murder someone & I don't get caught, am I innocent?

Haha post that quote genius

My God, You are so fucking stupid that you don't even know what you are posting.

 

[RealDave]

Your'e the one making the claims, you're the one who is going to back them up. What is your evidence that the investigation wasn't impartial? It better be far better than the IG's findings that the FBI's findings were reasonable, based on law and precedent.

Which of course, you ignored.

And you've abandoned even a semblance of defending 'the presumption of innocence' when it comes to Trump's political opponents, demonstrating the disdain that Trump supporters have for the concept.

So you're admitting that there wasn't an independent investigation. Good for you.
Yes, there is a difference between an IG and an independent investigation.
Yeah, the FBI's investigation was impartial when they investigated Hillary, the evidence backed that up.

8 Benghazi investigations including her emails by the Congress, and one investigation by the Inspector general, which lead to 1 investigation on the emails by the FBI, and then another investigation by the FBI on the new found emails, and then an overall investigation by the Inspector General requested by Trump and the Republicans....

And YOU are still stuck on Hillary?

While ROME BURNS and not one single investigation by the Republican congress on Trump and his administration's improprieties in 2 years.

Hillary really needs to sue the Republicans in government for HARASSMENT.... enough is enough of you two faced bastards trying to ruin her life...

not one impartial investigation in to Kavanaugh for his alleged improprieties either.... not a one....

All A-OK with you eh?

Did you lose your mind on your hiatus away from here Meister?

Put her in front of a real court room and not the Circus Courts of Capital hill...............and press charges for the mishandling of Classified Information...........

The FBI found that no reasonable prosecutor would charge her with any crime. Nor was she charged. Nor has she been convicted of anything.

Yet your ilk still chant "LOCK HER UP!"

But tell us more the presumption of innocence.

That's what Comey found, and he's a lying Clinton hack.

You are a fucking hack. Comey is gone so where are those charges? You own party's committee found NOTHING.

 

[jc456]

Go back and reread what he stated, your comprehension skills seem to be turned off today.

I know what you wrote. You can't seem to distinguish the presumption of innocence for a court case & innocence in real life.

You think Sandusky was innocent until found iiulty in court but in reality he was guilty before the trial even started.

He did it., He molested those kids. He did it whether or not some court said so.

Kavanaugh was NOT on trial. There can be no proof. That does not make Kavanaugh innocent.

According to you every murderer, rapist, theif never ever committed those crimes because they were never caught. That is pretty damn stupid.

you're right, Sandusky did it, we know he did, there is evidence he did it. he did go to court, and we did find out what everyone knew. apples and submarines to the kavanaugh discussion.

so try again. tell us where someone was proven to be guilty without evidence. please, post it up for us all. come now junior, you've got it all and know it all. let's see it.

BTW, I can show where evidence said a man was guilty and 12 jurors said not guilty. Want to know that name?

Wow, you are dense.

You claim Kavanaugh was innocent because there was no court case.

If I murder someone & I don't get caught, am I innocent?

Haha post that quote genius

My God, You are so fucking stupid that you don't even know what you are posting.

So you can’t post it! You be a deflection liar

 

[jc456]

So you're admitting that there wasn't an independent investigation. Good for you.
Yes, there is a difference between an IG and an independent investigation.
Yeah, the FBI's investigation was impartial when they investigated Hillary, the evidence backed that up.

8 Benghazi investigations including her emails by the Congress, and one investigation by the Inspector general, which lead to 1 investigation on the emails by the FBI, and then another investigation by the FBI on the new found emails, and then an overall investigation by the Inspector General requested by Trump and the Republicans....

And YOU are still stuck on Hillary?

While ROME BURNS and not one single investigation by the Republican congress on Trump and his administration's improprieties in 2 years.

Hillary really needs to sue the Republicans in government for HARASSMENT.... enough is enough of you two faced bastards trying to ruin her life...

not one impartial investigation in to Kavanaugh for his alleged improprieties either.... not a one....

All A-OK with you eh?

Did you lose your mind on your hiatus away from here Meister?

Put her in front of a real court room and not the Circus Courts of Capital hill...............and press charges for the mishandling of Classified Information...........

The FBI found that no reasonable prosecutor would charge her with any crime. Nor was she charged. Nor has she been convicted of anything.

Yet your ilk still chant "LOCK HER UP!"

But tell us more the presumption of innocence.

That's what Comey found, and he's a lying Clinton hack.

You are a fucking hack. Comey is gone so where are those charges? You own party's committee found NOTHING.

Scrubbed by the deep state

 

[RealDave]

And show us what part of the constitution is violated by kicking someone out of school.

Specifically.

The Fifth Amendment, dumbass. You are entitled to due process of law from every branch of the government. That includes government subsidized universities.

Universities aren't a 'branch of the government'. Nixing your entire argument.

Here's the 5th amendment. Highlight the portions being ejected from a university violate:

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Are you claiming that someone can only be ejected from a university after they've been convicted of a crime?

"Universities aren't a 'branch of the government'. Nixing your entire argument."

Of course they are, you fucking dumbass. Your argument goes off the rails right there. No point in even reading any further.

No, Universities aren't any branch of government.

And of course you couldn't find any portion of the 5th amendment that is violated by kicking someone out of school.

Nor could you answer this cartoon simple question: Are you claiming that someone can only be ejected from a university after they've been convicted of a crime?

Run along.

Yes, they are a branch of government. They were created by the government, they are subsidized by the government, and they are run by the government.

You're a fucking moron.

You are so fucking stupid thsat you think universities are a branch of government? My God. We have the Judicial Branch, The Legislative Branch, The Executive Branch, and the University Branch. What civics class taught you that bullshit?

Here is some help for you: Three Branches of Government - Branches of Government - Social Studies - Flocabulary

 

[RealDave]

This is part of what Liberals mean when they want to "transform America". Get rid of that old clunky Constitution, throw away that pesky innocent until proven guilty thing. That just gets in the way of "progress".

That isn't just hyperbole. You can see the truth of it when you look at what they do on college campuses. Male students accused of sex offenses are often not even allowed to defend themselves. They aren't allowed to question their accusers, and the standard of evidence is much lower than in a real trial. Obama supported these kangaroo courts.

Progs are the scum of the earth.

Lying fuck.

Colleges have their own rules of conduct. If you don't like them, go to another school,

I know of no college that listens only to one side. You are lying.

Public universities that are funded by the taxpayers are not entitled to establish their own rules of evidence that violate the Constitution. Anyone who says they can is a fascist piece of shit.

They certainly do set their own rules for student conduct.. Their decisions are not the same being prosecuted in court.
Furthermore, asswipe, people are convicted of sex crimes all the time based solely on verbal testimony from the accuser because there is no physical evidence or other witnesses.

If it were up to you, Jerry Sandusky would still be molesting little boys.

This stupid fucking idea that there must be physical proof or outside witnesses is a fucking myth you dumbasses just made up to protect weasels like Kavanaugh & women assaulters like Trump.

'

I know they set their own rules of evidence, and that needs to end. Public universities should be required to follow the Constitution, and under this president they are.

You'll have to prove that "people are convicted of sex crimes all the time based solely on verbal testimony from the accuser," That doesn't meet constitutional muster. The standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt," and convicting based solely on verbal testimony from the accuser doesn't meet that standard.

Your theory that you can be burned at the stake simply because someone points at you and shouts "witch!" is the mark of a barbarian.

Burning at the stake is against thel aw. In your case, it would be polluting the air with a huge cloud of stupidity.

 

[RealDave]

This is part of what Liberals mean when they want to "transform America". Get rid of that old clunky Constitution, throw away that pesky innocent until proven guilty thing. That just gets in the way of "progress".

That isn't just hyperbole. You can see the truth of it when you look at what they do on college campuses. Male students accused of sex offenses are often not even allowed to defend themselves. They aren't allowed to question their accusers, and the standard of evidence is much lower than in a real trial. Obama supported these kangaroo courts.

Progs are the scum of the earth.

Lying fuck.

Colleges have their own rules of conduct. If you don't like them, go to another school,

I know of no college that listens only to one side. You are lying.

Public universities that are funded by the taxpayers are not entitled to establish their own rules of evidence that violate the Constitution. Anyone who says they can is a fascist piece of shit.

They certainly do set their own rules for student conduct.. Their decisions are not the same being prosecuted in court.
Furthermore, asswipe, people are convicted of sex crimes all the time based solely on verbal testimony from the accuser because there is no physical evidence or other witnesses.

If it were up to you, Jerry Sandusky would still be molesting little boys.

This stupid fucking idea that there must be physical proof or outside witnesses is a fucking myth you dumbasses just made up to protect weasels like Kavanaugh & women assaulters like Trump.

'

I know they set their own rules of evidence, and that needs to end. Public universities should be required to follow the Constitution, and under this president they are.

You'll have to prove that "people are convicted of sex crimes all the time based solely on verbal testimony from the accuser," That doesn't meet constitutional muster. The standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt," and convicting based solely on verbal testimony from the accuser doesn't meet that standard.

Your theory that you can be burned at the stake simply because someone points at you and shouts "witch!" is the mark of a barbarian.

Ypu can indeed be convicted based on the testimony of the accuser.

 

[RealDave]

I said it because neither side accepted the outcome of a duly legitimate election.

Both elections were legitimate. Everyone knew the rules beforehand. If people don’t like the rules, change them.

So, getting help from a foreign entity is legal?

Take that to the conspiracy theory forum and start a thread on it.

It is a fact that the Russians interfered in the 20126 election in the favor of Trump.

Are you talking about the democrat dossier?

Here we go again. OMG OMG OMG the diossier!!!.

 

[Montrovant]

A man elected by both the electoral college and the people....twice....was 'illegitimate'?

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

He's as illegitimate as Trump is, Skylar......using the democrats definition of the word.

Obama won the popular vote in both of his elections.

Presidents are not elected by popular vote.

No, they aren't. But you can't claim to have the 'will of the people' behind you when far more of them voted for the other person than yourself.

Mob rule is no way to elect an president... We are supposed to be a republic not a shit eating democracy. The electoral college is genius

This again...if that's the case, why isn't the electoral college (or something similar) used for all elections?

 

[RealDave]

This is part of what Liberals mean when they want to "transform America". Get rid of that old clunky Constitution, throw away that pesky innocent until proven guilty thing. That just gets in the way of "progress".

That isn't just hyperbole. You can see the truth of it when you look at what they do on college campuses. Male students accused of sex offenses are often not even allowed to defend themselves. They aren't allowed to question their accusers, and the standard of evidence is much lower than in a real trial. Obama supported these kangaroo courts.

Progs are the scum of the earth.

LYING FUCK

They get to tell their story. Quit lying. Quit being such an asshole.

 

[RealDave]

8 Benghazi investigations including her emails by the Congress, and one investigation by the Inspector general, which lead to 1 investigation on the emails by the FBI, and then another investigation by the FBI on the new found emails, and then an overall investigation by the Inspector General requested by Trump and the Republicans....

And YOU are still stuck on Hillary?

While ROME BURNS and not one single investigation by the Republican congress on Trump and his administration's improprieties in 2 years.

Hillary really needs to sue the Republicans in government for HARASSMENT.... enough is enough of you two faced bastards trying to ruin her life...

not one impartial investigation in to Kavanaugh for his alleged improprieties either.... not a one....

All A-OK with you eh?

Did you lose your mind on your hiatus away from here Meister?

Put her in front of a real court room and not the Circus Courts of Capital hill...............and press charges for the mishandling of Classified Information...........

The FBI found that no reasonable prosecutor would charge her with any crime. Nor was she charged. Nor has she been convicted of anything.

Yet your ilk still chant "LOCK HER UP!"

But tell us more the presumption of innocence.

That's what Comey found, and he's a lying Clinton hack.

You are a fucking hack. Comey is gone so where are those charges? You own party's committee found NOTHING.

Scrubbed by the deep state

Oh My God


The "deepstate" OMG OMG OMG OMG

hahahahaahahahahaha

 

[RealDave]

I know what you wrote. You can't seem to distinguish the presumption of innocence for a court case & innocence in real life.

You think Sandusky was innocent until found iiulty in court but in reality he was guilty before the trial even started.

He did it., He molested those kids. He did it whether or not some court said so.

Kavanaugh was NOT on trial. There can be no proof. That does not make Kavanaugh innocent.

According to you every murderer, rapist, theif never ever committed those crimes because they were never caught. That is pretty damn stupid.

you're right, Sandusky did it, we know he did, there is evidence he did it. he did go to court, and we did find out what everyone knew. apples and submarines to the kavanaugh discussion.

so try again. tell us where someone was proven to be guilty without evidence. please, post it up for us all. come now junior, you've got it all and know it all. let's see it.

BTW, I can show where evidence said a man was guilty and 12 jurors said not guilty. Want to know that name?

Wow, you are dense.

You claim Kavanaugh was innocent because there was no court case.

If I murder someone & I don't get caught, am I innocent?

Haha post that quote genius

My God, You are so fucking stupid that you don't even know what you are posting.

So you can’t post it! You be a deflection liar

So now you are claiming that Kavanaugh was innocent because there was no proof?

Really/. I mean I know you're a fucking dick but I thought had to be a limit to how big a dick you really are.

 

[MarathonMike]

Dave seems upset. Hey Dave, do you understand what presumption of innocence means? It's kind of what our justice system is based upon. You don't presume guilt based on body language or facial expressions or tone or if someone talks like a scared little girl.

 

[easyt65]

The DNC did not rig their nomination process..

I stopped reading your ignorant, delusional, hate-driven bullshit at this point since DONNA BRAZILE, THE DNC CHAIRWOMAN, PUBLICLY ADMITTED IN INTERVIEWS AND WROTE IN HER BOOK THAT:

HILLARY AND THE DNC RIGGED PRIMARIES...

HILLARY AND THE DNC CHEATED IN DEBATES...

HILLARY AND THE DNC STACKED THE DECK AGAINST SANDERS, GIVING HILLARY HIS EARNED NOMINATION...

AFTER OBAMA LEFT THE DNC $24 MILLION IN DEBT HILLARY 'BOUGHT' THE DNC AND USED DONATIONS MEANT FOR OTHER DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES ON HER OWN CAMPAIGN...

EVEN WHEN THE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP PUBLICLY TELLS YOU / ADMITS WHAT THEY DID YOU ARE STILL TOO STUPID TO TAKE THEIR WORD ON IT....


Donna Brazile Says She Has “Proof” Clinton Rigged the Primary

Warren says DNC system was rigged in Hillary Clinton's favor - CNNPolitics

Hillary Clinton rigged DNC against Bernie Sanders, Brazile Claims

Clinton Campaign Had Additional Signed Agreement With DNC In 2015



.

 

[bripat9643]

The Fifth Amendment, dumbass. You are entitled to due process of law from every branch of the government. That includes government subsidized universities.

Universities aren't a 'branch of the government'. Nixing your entire argument.

Here's the 5th amendment. Highlight the portions being ejected from a university violate:

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Are you claiming that someone can only be ejected from a university after they've been convicted of a crime?

"Universities aren't a 'branch of the government'. Nixing your entire argument."

Of course they are, you fucking dumbass. Your argument goes off the rails right there. No point in even reading any further.

No, Universities aren't any branch of government.

And of course you couldn't find any portion of the 5th amendment that is violated by kicking someone out of school.

Nor could you answer this cartoon simple question: Are you claiming that someone can only be ejected from a university after they've been convicted of a crime?

Run along.

Yes, they are a branch of government. They were created by the government, they are subsidized by the government, and they are run by the government.

You're a fucking moron.

You are so fucking stupid thsat you think universities are a branch of government? My God. We have the Judicial Branch, The Legislative Branch, The Executive Branch, and the University Branch. What civics class taught you that bullshit?

Here is some help for you: Three Branches of Government - Branches of Government - Social Studies - Flocabulary

They are a branch of state governments, dumbass. State governments are also subject to the Constitution,

You're obviously a fucking moron. Anyone who claims a PUBLIC university is not part of the state government has to be a fucking moron. You may as well claim the sun doesn't come up in the East.

 

[bripat9643]

That isn't just hyperbole. You can see the truth of it when you look at what they do on college campuses. Male students accused of sex offenses are often not even allowed to defend themselves. They aren't allowed to question their accusers, and the standard of evidence is much lower than in a real trial. Obama supported these kangaroo courts.

Progs are the scum of the earth.

Lying fuck.

Colleges have their own rules of conduct. If you don't like them, go to another school,

I know of no college that listens only to one side. You are lying.

Public universities that are funded by the taxpayers are not entitled to establish their own rules of evidence that violate the Constitution. Anyone who says they can is a fascist piece of shit.

They certainly do set their own rules for student conduct.. Their decisions are not the same being prosecuted in court.
Furthermore, asswipe, people are convicted of sex crimes all the time based solely on verbal testimony from the accuser because there is no physical evidence or other witnesses.

If it were up to you, Jerry Sandusky would still be molesting little boys.

This stupid fucking idea that there must be physical proof or outside witnesses is a fucking myth you dumbasses just made up to protect weasels like Kavanaugh & women assaulters like Trump.

'

I know they set their own rules of evidence, and that needs to end. Public universities should be required to follow the Constitution, and under this president they are.

You'll have to prove that "people are convicted of sex crimes all the time based solely on verbal testimony from the accuser," That doesn't meet constitutional muster. The standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt," and convicting based solely on verbal testimony from the accuser doesn't meet that standard.

Your theory that you can be burned at the stake simply because someone points at you and shouts "witch!" is the mark of a barbarian.

Ypu can indeed be convicted based on the testimony of the accuser.

Only in a sham trial, not if you follow the Constitution.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Are you talking about the democrat dossier?

Or the findings of 16 US intellegence agencies and the Senate Intel Committee report.

Much like what the Democrats had on Kavanaugh, no evidence ... After 2 years ... Except criminal evidence against Hillary, Democrats, and the investigators....

You're claiming there is no evidence that Russia attacked the US to aid Trump?

I want you on record.

Russia didn't attack the USA, what's this propganda? Russia told the American public about Hillary's and the DNC shenanigans by rigging the DNC nomination.

The DNC did not rig their nomination process.

Russia did interfere in the favor of Trump.

You can lie, stomp your feet, call people names, assault more women. It will not change that fact.

Of course they did Donna even said so.. I don't know why it's so hard for you to comprehend it and for the millionth time Russia did the job what our press is supposed to do, inform us

 

[Wyatt earp]

You're claiming there is no evidence that Russia attacked the US to aid Trump? I want you on record.

I am already on record. You can not claim to know WHY anyone did anything, moron. You aren't psychic ... But you might be a Russian.

You are already on record as well for being an admitted moron who gmhas no idea what 'Counter-Intelligence' is or what its goals are.

For example, your pea-sized brain and over-grown HATRED can not comprehend that the Russians benefit way more by helping both and in the end manipulating half the country into claiming whoever won is not legitimate, thereby dividing the country and burying whoever wins in obstruction, division, and hate.

THAT was the real objective from the start...

...and the LOSER Democrats who refused to accept the out one of the election have been more than happy to help the Russians divide this country the last w years

Sp, you love the idea that they helped elect Trump.

You know it. I know it.

So, why did Russia want Trump?

Let me know when you grow a fucking brain & can think about that.

*Sigh* for the billionth time Hillary messed in Russia's election and Putin paid her back .


Wouldn't you?


.

 

[bripat9643]

That isn't just hyperbole. You can see the truth of it when you look at what they do on college campuses. Male students accused of sex offenses are often not even allowed to defend themselves. They aren't allowed to question their accusers, and the standard of evidence is much lower than in a real trial. Obama supported these kangaroo courts.

Progs are the scum of the earth.

Lying fuck.

Colleges have their own rules of conduct. If you don't like them, go to another school,

I know of no college that listens only to one side. You are lying.

Public universities that are funded by the taxpayers are not entitled to establish their own rules of evidence that violate the Constitution. Anyone who says they can is a fascist piece of shit.

They certainly do set their own rules for student conduct.. Their decisions are not the same being prosecuted in court.
Furthermore, asswipe, people are convicted of sex crimes all the time based solely on verbal testimony from the accuser because there is no physical evidence or other witnesses.

If it were up to you, Jerry Sandusky would still be molesting little boys.

This stupid fucking idea that there must be physical proof or outside witnesses is a fucking myth you dumbasses just made up to protect weasels like Kavanaugh & women assaulters like Trump.

'

I know they set their own rules of evidence, and that needs to end. Public universities should be required to follow the Constitution, and under this president they are.

You'll have to prove that "people are convicted of sex crimes all the time based solely on verbal testimony from the accuser," That doesn't meet constitutional muster. The standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt," and convicting based solely on verbal testimony from the accuser doesn't meet that standard.

Your theory that you can be burned at the stake simply because someone points at you and shouts "witch!" is the mark of a barbarian.

Burning at the stake is against thel aw. In your case, it would be polluting the air with a huge cloud of stupidity.

It won't be once lefties like you get complete control of the government. The Constitution is the law of the land, but you insist government universities aren't required to follow it.