- Joined
- Jun 7, 2012
- Messages
- 12,706
- Reaction score
- 4,191
- Location
- Republic of Texas
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
When I see the way stories are all presented in unison by the media even using the same wording, then yes I do see a conspiracy there.
Go ahead and smack a cop on his buttocks the next time you pass one. Let me know how it works out.
E. Jean Carroll was. Read her account.
The jocular festive environment likely wouldn't be the same as with the reporter.
But there could be such an environment. I can see a team getting the winning score in a Super Bowl with time expired, ebullient players running onto the field and one of them smacking the butt of a security cop, and the cop going along with it. It's all about context.
Of course you do. The majority of people see the same sources quoted such as a Trump tweet or a politicians speech.
Guy is a liar as well. He knew exactly what he did and it wasn't touching her back. IMO he doesn't deserve criminal prosecution however there has to be some interesting and appropriate punishment we can think of. He has been banned from future events at least. Be interesting to hear what his daughters and wife have to say.
So? Do it while you're jogging in a 5K.
I don't think he'll have a wife much longer.
That's silly. His wife will defend him as the great family man and community volunteer he is. She's not going to fall into that leftist claptrap and condemn her husband. Most people are not outraged by this. Most people agree with me on the topic.
That's silly. His wife will defend him as the great family man and community volunteer he is. She's not going to fall into that leftist claptrap and condemn her husband. Most people are not outraged by this. Most people agree with me on the topic.
No they don't. Not only that, the law doesn't agree with you.
Who are these "most people" who you imagine agree with you? Your posting history suggests that very, very few people ever do. But of course it's their problem, not yours, right? Because you're always right and everyone else is always wrong.
No, I'm right. Along with majority in the real world.
Why should truth and honesty cause you grief?
:shrug:
And that means what? All feminists are angry? Hate men? You should always let doors close in peoples faces? What exactly? You call other people sensitive but someone said something mean to you in the 70's and you seem to have let it poison you to simple social courtesies.
Should he lose his job as a youth minister and scout leader? Probably. Unless you think sexual assaulters should be ministering to youths. I don't but opinions may vary. As for prison that seems a bit extreme for the crime. A few months in jail, a fine and community service wouldn't be inappropriate.
No you're not; except in your fevered imagination. You never are right, about anything whatsoever.
No, I'm right. Along with majority in the real world.
Prime example of over reaction to a prank. No wonder this country is in a mess.
Prime example of over reaction to a prank. No wonder this country is in a mess.
You don't even have the majority of this thread.
:roll:
:yes:
This country is a mess because a guy who assaulted a female reporter on live tv might spend a month in jail, pay a fine and do community service. Talk about over reaction...
This reporter girl has all these angry leftwing groups in her ear, telling her what a victim she is. Now she refuses his apology and demands his prosecution. She wants to ruin him. I've always said the atheist left lacks compassion. They have a hard-heartedness about them. As I said, a girl who had grown up in a church environment would have accepted the guy's apology and let it go.
If he's ruined, it will be solely the result of his own actions. He made the choice to touch her. If he faces prosecution, he has no one to blame but himself.
No, he has the insane left to blame if these things happen to him. It's really shameful how they destroy people.
The left won't be the ones trying him. If that happens, it'll be the local court, and he'll have the chance to defend himself before a judge. That's the way it's supposed to work. If he didn't want that, why did he break the law?
ROFL! Another good one! Thanks.No, i'm talking about the same wording or words in a story. I remember in 2000 when George W Bush announced Dick Cheney as his running mate. Every single story in the leftwing media used the word 'gravitas'. They all said "Bush hoped to gain 'gravitas' by putting the older Cheney on the ticket. The implication of course was Bush didn't have it on his own.
Let's hope he gets a sensible judge and not a Democrat.
How about "let justice prevail"?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?