• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

She Had an Abortion With Herschel Walker. She Also Had a Child With Him.

Walkers mistake was becoming a conservative. Had he stayed on the liberal plantation, he could impregnate as many women as he pleased and have as many abortions as he wanted and be hailed as a leftist hero.
He can be a part of as many abortions as he wants. He cannot simultaneously rail against abortion. How very "conservative" of him.
 
So let's see the image
Let's see the receipt

Perhaps you will see it, but in the meantime why do you ignore the fact that Walker's claim that her does NOT know her does not hold water? If he really thinks that she tricked him somehow, why does not he come out to say so? What exactly makes Walker's conduct worth of having your trust while you are so dismissive of the woman's claims?
 
Give your head a shake! This happened years ago before cheques were electronically deposited. If you deposit a cheque in the traditional manner the cancelled paper cheque goes back to the owner of the account it is written on or is kept by the bank it was written on. When you deposit a cheque in your account you do not get to keep it!
Do we know when this allegedly took place?

I have not seen any dates.

I personally have been depositing checks electronically for year's now.
 
....as you coming into the thread prepared to debate it?
No.....thats the point, you never come into a debate prepared, it is much easier to NOT do any prep and then proceed with argument from ignorance. Your method is a lazy assed way, where you then get to go off on all sorts of stupid comments that never require you to correct yourself. It is your MO.
No, I question you because I have found you to post bullshit just like you did here. You cant back it up, so you attack me for asking. If you had an answer you would have posted it. Period. Yet you will spend the next ten posts deflecting and accusing and squirming your way out of it. Thats how you operate and thats why I ask you to back up your claims.
 
Perhaps you will see it but in the meantime why do you ignore the fact that Walker's claim that her does NOT know her does not hold water? If he thought that she tricked him somehow, why does not he come out to say so?
He has not claimed he does not know her. He claims he does not know who is accusing him.
 
Maybe she didnt tell him what it was for. Maybe she just told him she was sick and couldnt afford to go to the doctor so he gave her money. We dont know who this woman is or her motives or her veracity. Anyone can come out a month before an election and make claims. She needs to come forward.
Like I said, coincidence, or he's calling this woman a liar, which is certainly evidence of a man turning his life around. I mean what "true Christian" hasn't thrown a mother of one of his children under the bus?
 
Do we know when this allegedly took place?

I have not seen any dates.


I personally have been depositing checks electronically for year's now.
(OK, by your posts I thought you were following this. The dates have been published multiple times...it was in 2009.
 
He can be a part of as many abortions as he wants. He cannot simultaneously rail against abortion. How very "conservative" of him.
Perhaps between 2009 and today he has seen the error of his ways.
 
He has not claimed he does not know her. He claims he does not know who is accusing him.

Hannity mentioned the details of the story SHOWED him the get-well card, mentioned the check and Walker tried to claim that he does not know her identity because he gives money to many people! Are you seriously willing to accept this claim as credible?
 
Like I said, coincidence, or he's calling this woman a liar, which is certainly evidence of a man turning his life around. I mean what "true Christian" hasn't thrown a mother of one of his children under the bus?
We have seen her supposed evidence yet. And we do not know for certain that she is the mother of his child. We dont even know who this woman is. She needs to come forward.
 
Hannity mentioned the details of the story SHOWED him the get-well card, mentioned the check and Walker tried to claim that he does not know her identity because he gives money to many people! Are you seriously willing to accept this claim as credible?
You are willing to believe an anonymous accuser but not him. Why is that?
 
Perhaps between 2009 and today he has seen the error of his ways.

You have used the word "perhaps: too many times in order to claim that voters should somehow trust Walker's honesty!
 
You are willing to believe an anonymous accuser but not him. Why is that?

But Walker ALSO did not dispute the anonymous accuser's claims of an existed get-well card and an existed cheque that was deposited in the accuser's account! Walker's response was not denying these pieces of evidence!
 
That, ladies and gentlemen, is naked misogyny.
American's post was vile. Some people seem determined to make the internet a sewer.
 
American's post was vile. Some people seem determined to make the internet a sewer.

Misogyny exists. You know that, right?
 
You have used the word "perhaps: too many times in order to claim that voters should somehow trust Walker's honesty!
Thats because all we have is unconfirmed, anonymous allegations.
 
Thats because all we have is unconfirmed, anonymous allegations.

But we also have pieces of evidence which are not denied even by the accused . And in any case, Walker's response that he supposedly does not know her makes NO sense UNLESS you are willing to assume too many "perhaps." We are not in a court of law, so right now, decent voters should put the burden of proof on Walker, and his story up until now does not hold up!
 
Last edited:
Perhaps between 2009 and today he has seen the error of his ways.
It's convenient that when he's an older man (now 60) and not screwing as many women as back in the day that he changes his stance on abortion.

But what would show a legitimate change in his ways is acknowledging the error of his old ways. Instead he lies. I mean, that is the "Christian" thing to do, right? And about those lies, we don't have to believe the unnamed woman in this case, whose name no doubt will come out soon. We can listen to his own kid, who recount the abuse, running from him, having to move 6 times in as many months out of fear.
 
I don't understand the basis of this pointless message. Of course I do.

Let's not act like the post was some kind of troll intended to offend people and drag the website down. It was misogyny. Real misogyny. And it should not be masked as some sort of "just trolling".
 
Back
Top Bottom