Serious question - is an $850K "settlement" more credible evidence than a 40 year old accusation???

[g5000]

The answer is obvious and that's what's keeping the leftists away in droves.

Ever since 147 democrats turned out to be real perverts and predators, they hate to bring Roy up for fear they'll get pig piled with their own hypocrisy some more.

Lawmaker behind secret $84K sexual harassment settlement unmasked

Lauren Greene, the Texas Republican’s former communications director, sued her boss in December 2014 over allegations of gender discrimination, sexual harassment and creating a hostile work environment.

Greene said another Farenthold aide told her the lawmaker said he had “sexual fantasies” and “wet dreams” about Greene. She also claimed that Farenthold “regularly drank to excess” and told her in February 2014 that he was “estranged from his wife and had not had sex with her in years.”

 

[g5000]

Treasury fund paid for Rep. Farenthold’s $84,000 sexual harassment settlement

Farenthold is the first member of Congress confirmed to have benefited from a little-known Treasury Department fund created to cover workplace settlements involving lawmakers. The congressional Office of Compliance (OOC) disclosed Friday that the fund paid for only one sexual harassment settlement involving a House lawmaker’s office in the past five years, but did not name Farenthold.

 

[Siete]

No. The case was under appeal. Get your facts straight!

You get your facts straight. The case was dismissed with prejudice. The judge all but labelled it “malicious prosecution”, which it was. The dismissal was under appeal because that was the only way of keeping it alive because they could not refile.

I am sure you don't have a link to that, or you wouldn't be trying to hard to hide it.

Since you’re too lazy use google:

Paula Jones - Wikipedia

Paula Jones Case Is Dismissed; Judge Says Even If Tale Is True, Incident Was Not Harassment

washingtonpost.com: Jones v. Clinton Special Report

Lazy, right wing and stupid is no way to go through life.

No, you were the one too lazy to provide a link.

Now, where do those links back up the "dismissed with prejudice" claim you made?

They do not. The case was appealed.

Also, when the appeal was heard, it appeared two members of the three judge panel were sympathetic.

Having been trained on the subject of what is and what is not sexual harassment as the result of the Tailhook incident and many years of training by various schools systems, the judge in that case was blatantly wrong and would have been overturned on appeal.

What do you have to say for the fact that Jones sued for $700,000 but Clinton agreed to pay her $850,000? They wanted it to go away as quickly as possible before he was dragged through the mud of a trial in addition to his impeachment proceedings.

You didn’t even bother to read the links. Both the Wikipedia link and the second link said the case was dismissed with prejudice and the judge said it was without merit.

No appeal was ever heard, only filed. So that part of your post was a complete fabrication.

Seaman Recruit Brickhead lies so much he can't keep from it.

 

[FA_Q2]

Imagine that...has Allred released the yearbook?

Why should she?

So it can be tested...what kind of fricken question is that.

What’s the point in testing it? No matter what it would show, you yahoo’s would be crying, fake, anyway. No doubt Allred has learned after watching rightards bitch about every pixel on Obama’s birth certificate. Twice.

And yahoos on the other side simply take it as fact.

It should be tested because many of us are NOT yahoos and are actually interested in truth. Weird, right.

Nope, we’ve been through that circus with Obama over his birth certificate. As an attorney, she’d be crazy to put her client through that.

And what is sad is that you are the same as the yahoos that outright dismiss the yearbook and do not even realize it.

 

[FA_Q2]

A settlement is an admission isn't it? It's a shame that taxpayers have to pay for it.

No, a settlement is not an admission. And how did tax payers pay for it?

Unless it is Trump U....

 

[FA_Q2]

...I will stand by an alleged child molestor before any confirmed liberal Democrat!

Saved for public scrutiny and future reference. God forgive you. America will not.

Reported. That is not a quote of what I said.

You do realize that there is a little arrow on the quote that takes you straight to your post where...

It says exactly what he posted.

Are you high?

 

[Kondor3]

...I will stand by an alleged child molestor before any confirmed liberal Democrat!

Saved for public scrutiny and future reference. God forgive you. America will not.

Reported. That is not a quote of what I said.

You do realize that there is a little arrow on the quote that takes you straight to your post where...

It says exactly what he posted.

Are you high?

Yes, I do, indeed, realize that.

And, given that it is possible to edit or delete a post, after the fact, both I and another poster took partial screen snapshots (previous page or two), designed to serve as evidence of the original post, before it could be taken down.

People who stand with an alleged Child Molester (multiple accusations, from multiple, unsolicited, disconnected victims) for no better reason than partisan politics, are not to be trusted to tell the Truth; consequently, more honest folk, knowing such editing and deletions are possible in the face of an original denial, do well to secure the evidence.

Amoral partisan hacks who manifest sympathy or support for an alleged Child Molester can expect such contempt and mistrust - righteous, and well-earned.

Was there anything else on your mind, related to the topic?

 

[FA_Q2]

...I will stand by an alleged child molestor before any confirmed liberal Democrat!

Saved for public scrutiny and future reference. God forgive you. America will not.

Reported. That is not a quote of what I said.

You do realize that there is a little arrow on the quote that takes you straight to your post where...

It says exactly what he posted.

Are you high?

Yes, I do, indeed, realize that.

And, given that it is possible to edit or delete a post, after the fact, both I and another poster took partial screen snapshots (previous page or two), designed to serve as evidence of the original post, before it could be taken down.

People who stand with an alleged Child Molester (multiple accusations, from multiple, unsolicited, disconnected victims) for no better reason than partisan politics, are not to be trusted to tell the Truth; consequently, more honest folk, knowing such editing and deletions are possible in the face of an original denial, do well to secure the evidence.

Amoral partisan hacks who manifest sympathy or support for an alleged Child Molester can expect such contempt and mistrust - righteous, and well-earned.

Was there anything else on your mind, related to the topic?

?

You do realize I was commenting on Rockwell's denial right?

Not sure how your comment relates to mine. The screenshots are a nice touch though - cant change those.