🌟 Exclusive 2024 Prime Day Deals! 🌟

Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁

Suddenly Democrats Are OK With Sexual Predators Remaining In Office?!

Juanita Brodderick accused PREDATOR of RAPE

Yes, after she submitted TWO sworn statements saying she hadn't been.

She then changed her story after Ken Starr threatened her with Jail. Not an idle threat, as he had already thrown Susan McDougal and Julie Steele in jail for not testifying the way he wanted.

Kathleen Willey accused PREDATOR of GROPING IN THE OVAL OFFICE

But then she wrote him several letters asking him for a job later. so either she was lying or she really enjoyed the grope.

That was a CRIME SCENE until Foster was duly inspected. Instead, the "Park Police" immediately declared him a "suicide" despite total evidence to the contrary.

Except Ken Starr came to the exact same conclusion...
 
Yeah, Bill PREDATOR Clinton lied in the Paula Jones suit, perjuring himself....

only to find a ZIONIST BILLIONAIRE willing to pay Ms. Jones 7 figures to "go away..."


THAT didn't bother Nat4900 at all....

Just curious, how would compare the quantity of 'wrong' in that to Donald Trump having to pay back 25 MILLION DOLLARS to the people he scammed with Trump University?




You are changing the subject again.

Trump U settled

The AMERICAN PEOPLE knew that and still voted him over HILLARY.

Stop crying about that...

LOL!!!

No actually the PEOPLE voted for Hillary over Trump.

The other poster brought up Clinton, go cry to him for changing the subject.
 
So you believe the photo of Franken groping a sleeping woman was photoshopped?
Franken is a slimy fucking PIG!!!!!!
EVERYONE who has EVER worked for him says the same thing.

No, i think the photo clearly shows he is not making physical contact with the sleeping Stripper he was on a USO tour with. But it was still in really bad taste.
 
If the sexual predator, Trump can stay in office, then the "sexual predator" Franken can too.....................LOL
Once you can present any evidence - such as that against Franken along with his ADMISSION - feel free to show him the door, too.
Here's what we know. If you deny sexual harassment you can keep your job. If you admit it, it's over. So why ever not deny it? Look how nondenial worked out for Roy Moore! Look how it's working out for The Donald!
The actual way it works is if you deny, you are presumed innocent until such time as your guilt can be determined; if guilty you are.

Franken as much as much as admitted his bad conduct. We wee now that his speech to step down was really nothing more than a political ploy and they are hoping the people will forget about it, or be distracted enough to not notice he hasn't stepped down at all.

If he is innocent of the allegations he should remain in office.
 
Suddenly Democrats Are OK With Sexual Predators Remaining In Office?!


Nope. Trump needs to go!

Because......?

Got any evidence, like there is against Franken, Conyers, etc....?
- Of course not....

Got an admission of guilt, like with Franken?
- Of course not.

Still butt-hurt?
- Of course.
Yes. Trump's own words to Access Hollywood and Howard Stern.

Franken: No evidence.

Franken: No admission of guilt.
So you believe the photo of Franken groping a sleeping woman was photoshopped?
Franken is a slimy fucking PIG!!!!!!
EVERYONE who has EVER worked for him says the same thing.

The woman in that photograph said that Franken should NOT lose his job over this.

That has been conveniently forgotten by you people.
 
I said the first day that Franken should resign, and I still believe that. That is a political calculation. As the trouncing of Roy Moore proved,

the Democrats have sole ownership of the moral high ground here and it adds to the tremendous advantage they are building up against the GOP and their admitted sexual predator and generally incompetent buffoon fake president Donald Trump.

No need to dilute that advantage.
 

From you own link, lol:

Tweeden said later Thursday afternoon that “there's no reason why I shouldn't accept” Franken's apology, and that she was not calling for the senator to step down.
 
Tweeden said later Thursday afternoon that “there's no reason why I shouldn't accept” Franken's apology, and that she was not calling for the senator to step down.
As I stated again, sexual misconduct is now suddenly wiped away by an apology.... for Democrats.

And oh by the way....

Al Franken Admits In His New Book That He Faked Apologies To Save His Political Career

"And I wasn’t sorry ..."
 
AGAIN....

"Tweeden said later Thursday afternoon that “there's no reason why I shouldn't accept” Franken's apology, and that she was not calling for the senator to step down."

...except Franken admitted he didn't mean a damn word of his apology!


"And I wasn’t sorry ..."
 
Once you can present any evidence - such as that against Franken along with his ADMISSION - feel free to show him the door, too.

You're shitting us right? Trump has over a dozen accusers, and his admission on video tape.
 
You're shitting us right? Trump has over a dozen accusers, and his admission on video tape.

You have no evidence. ACCUSERS are not 'evidence', and 'Locker Room Talk' is not an admission of guilt for specific crimes, as Franken's admission was.

...and it is killing you. :p
 
You have no evidence. ACCUSERS are not 'evidence', and 'Locker Room Talk' is not an admission of guilt for specific crimes, as Franken's admission was.

Trumps admissions describe specific acts that match exactly those of his accusers. From pussy grabbing, to walking in on half naked teenagers, to forcefully kissing women without their permission.

I'm sure if OJ Simpsons "If I did it" was published before the trial was over, you would have called it 'locker room talk", and totally dismissed it.
 
I'm sure if OJ Simpsons "If I did it" was published before the trial was over, you would have called it 'locker room talk", and totally dismissed it.
I don't call his book 'evidence' of anything that could be considered 'evidence' in court.

You should really study law, specifically what can and can be legally considered 'evidence' in a court of law.
 
Seems to be a movement with some steam...

Analysis | Could Al Franken un-resign? Sure.


"Franken's decision not to set a date for his resignation is rare and may even be unprecedented in Senate history, said political historian Robert David Johnson with Brooklyn College. But because he doesn't have a date set, it means he doesn't have to resign. "The date is key,” Johnson said.


Now it seems Franken's vague language about when he would resign has opened the door for a handful of Democratic senators to urge him, publicly and privately, to stay on.

“I definitely think he should not resign,” said Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) in an interview on CNN, explaining he thinks his colleagues rushed to judge Franken."
 
Dem Senators: On second thought, maybe Franken should stay - Hot Air

'Over the weekend, it seems that some Democrats in the upper chamber have had second thoughts about calling for Al Franken’s resignation in the wake of sexual assault allegations made against him. Too little, too late? Or could Franken actually use this as an opportunity to at least “postpone” his departure and give the Ethics Committee another shot at his case as he’d originally intended? That might depend on how influential his colleagues are, now that they’re suggesting there’s a path to redemption which allows him to keep his job.'

In the wake of losing so many Democrats in Congress to consequences of their sexual misconduct Dems are back to potentially claiming 'Franken can be redeemed, will learn from his mistakes, etc....'

Bwuhaha......
They have always been okay with predators in office.
 
Of course we should ALL notice how this thread went from the LAME "defenses" of the orange fuck-up.................To Bill Clinton......

Here's an interesting tidbit


During the first day of impeachment hearings, Starr clears Clinton in relation to the firing of White House travel office workers in 1993 and the improper collection of FBI files revealed in 1996. He also says his office drafted an impeachment referral stemming from Whitewater in 1997, but decided not to send it because the evidence was insufficient.
 

Forum List

Back
Top