yep everybody's up in arms over an 11 yr old tape.
-
Comment -
Yep I've cheated. Yep I've been cheated on. Yep I've talked sexually about women. What I haven't done nor would I do is go after the other person and definitely wouldn't stay with a rapist or honestly anyone who cheats repetitively. My view on that is like ibtold my wife from the get go....if either of us is going to cheat we are going to do it...it can't be stopped so I'm not going to spend my time stalking you or questioning you on anything...we're both grown so know the consequences....if I cheat...I deserve to be left and if you cheat expect the same. I've been married 12 years now and goin strong.
Clintons are a different beast. It's been a power agreement from day one. Both are on record for years pretty much acknowledging it....like a real life House of Cards Frank Underwood scenario. Convenience. Defending someone is one thing...continuously allowing it and using it to further your own ambitions is another snd goes to character and integrity. To Trump...maybe he is secretly in it for Hillary but I doubt it. Either way I hate her enough to look over his words in hopes he is a true Outsider and shakes up the govt.Comment -
So you think the man should have had a defense attorney, just not Hillary?? Or who ever was his defense attorney should never be allowed to be president? I really don't understand what you are arguing, because at the end of the day the man was entitled to an attorney, by law.Last edited by Greget; 10-09-16, 03:37 PM.Comment -
I'm saying my morals make it impossible for me to support someone who defended a client she felt was guilty of rapping a 12 year old little girl.....and tells it in a story with little to no remorse and is laughing in telling the story it's ok because she was doing her job and had asked to get off the case instead of simply refusing to defend him it's ok.....these people have to be defended yes it's the law and the job to defend a person you believed rapped a 12 year old is a immoral job you don't think it is you have no problem throwing your support behind people who defend a person they feel rapped a young girl quit bringing up the law and the fact it was her job speak only to the issue you support a women who defended a man she felt rapped a 12 year old girl....but hey that is fine with you....you support people who do there job and defend men they felt rapped little girls and are able to go on with there life like it's no big deal hell even tell stories about it and have a few laughs of well life goes on I just got a man I felt rapped a 12 year old 2 months time served county jail no big deal life goes on.....I'm not saying there is any way around defense attorneys what I'm saying is I can't support a person morally who defends a rape of a child when they feel there guilty you can your a piece of work....and only defend this because you can't wrap your small mind around maybe saying yah your right there both evil and morally corrupt no you stick to your side like a robot...it's agreed she was doing her job and her job was to defend a man she felt rapped a child and she was ok with it and so are youLast edited by pilebuck13; 10-09-16, 03:54 PM.Comment -
There is a dark place in defense lawyers hearts I believe.. When you are defending someone that you know is guilty of an horrific crime and still defend that person then you are no better then that person you are defending..
Hillary Guilty as Charged!!! She knew...
Hillary deflected and lied about Bengazi where people died.. That was bad too.. Hillary is no Saint..Last edited by JIBBBY; 10-09-16, 04:30 PM.Comment -
Comment -
Comment -
Time line means nothing she defended a man she felt rapped a child trump he groped women and more then likely sexually assaulted them tells me there is no side to stand on but whatever I have a soul and don't just vote because I feel I have to pick a side in 2 evil people.....this is why we're in this mess in the first place but defend her for doing her job which was to defend a man she felt rapped a child go ahead be that personComment -
So do you think it was ok for trump to not pay taxes or sue small contractors with big lawyers and not pay them? It was the law? It's ok to disagree with laws but obviously not when we're speaking of the person you support then it's just she was doing her job even though her job was to defend a man she felt rapped a small child but hey it's the law so no big deal right?Comment -
I backed every single one of you into a corner and your all down for the count let me end with this...under every one of your guys arguments she was doing her job and it's the law and she was following the constitution and the guilty need to be defended....and your fine supporting her because it was her job even if it was to defend a man she felt was guilty of rape....then the trump tape and allegations stand absolutely 0 ground he said something disgusting but had every right due to free speech which is constitutional and has never been convicted of a crime under our justice system which you support as well as our constitution and amendments so if we're speaking on morals purely and not law then we're do you have a ground to stand? unless your a sick Fuk who morally is ok with a person defending a person they felt rapped a child....remember he never broke the law or was convicted so were just speaking morals here......ko right there you guys are doneLast edited by pilebuck13; 10-09-16, 05:03 PM.Comment -
Call me crazy, but I would vote in Hitler if he was a republican this year because of the SCOTUS decisions that will come up in the next few years.
SCOTUS needs to stay conservative, and never go liberal.Comment -
There's nothing wrong with not voting if you don't feel informed enough to make a choice; however, there are more than those 2 terrible candidates, and voting for one of the better ones sends the message that terrible candidates aren't acceptable. Otherwise, we're just perpetuating the 'lesser of two evils' schtick
Comment -
groping women is protected by the constitution?? wow. news to me. Yea trump wasn't convicted, neither was the guy who raped the 12 year old.
You never even answered a single question, you keep saying the same thing over and over. Meaning you lost the argument. You are daft if you can't tell the difference between a person who is a rapist and who was the attorney of a rapist, as if any criminal shouldn't have doctors, therapists, mechanic, someone to grow their food, or anyone assisting them in any way, they are all guilty in your eyes. But just answer the question.
Should the guy have had an attorney or not? Yes or no. It's a simple question.Last edited by Greget; 10-09-16, 05:17 PM.Comment -
I'll answer the question under our laws he has the right to a attorney. Now answer mine what law did Donald trump break?what crime has he been convicted of answer it...I will be the first to state I don't feel just because something's a law it is right.....and if you do then what ground do you stand to feel someone (trump) has done wrong by using free speech and our justice system to be expelled from any wrong doing? I mean if we're just talking laws neither one broke the law right? But morally most are not ok with what trump said as I'm not okay with Hillary defending someone she felt rapped a child but you are because it was her job and legal well he didn't break the law either but it's still not ok what he said and still not ok with who she defended...if he groped women then he would have been convicted right? And the fella she defended was not convicted but she felt he was guilty so once again this comes down to morals not law and morally they are both wrong. How can you disagree with thatLast edited by pilebuck13; 10-09-16, 05:28 PM.Comment -
I didn't ask about the law, I asked if YOU think he should have had an attorney? If yes, then why is it ok if someone else was his attorney, but just not Hillary? I really don't understand your position.
On Trump, he admitted to "grabbing her pussy", that is more than words. That is rape. Just like his ex wife accused him of rape, you have to look at the whole situation in context, I believe the man is a rapist, but has high priced lawyers, who the rich often have, to keep themselves out of trouble. It's a bit different than free speech, not to mention the man is running for President, I would expect a bit more out of someone running for office.Comment -
The reason you can't answer my question is because by typing the words, "Yes this man should been entitled to an attorney" You are admonishing all guilt by Clinton, affirming my position, and ipso facto admitting that you lost the argument.Comment -
[QUOTE=Greget;26367692]I didn't ask about the law, I asked if YOU think he should have had an attorney? If yes, then why is it ok if someone else was his attorney, but just not Hillary? I really don't understand your position.
On Trump, he admitted to "grabbing her pussy", that is more than words. That is rape. Just like his ex wife accused him of rape, you have to look at the whole situation in context, I believe the man is a rapist, but has high priced lawyers, who the rich often have, to keep themselves out of trouble. It's a bit different than free speech, not to mention the man is running for President, I would expect a bit more out of someone running for office.[/
Why were you continuously bringing up the fact she was doing her job? And it was the law? If trump broke the law he would have been convicted right? No he probably would not be convicted because as you stated he has high powered lawyers...just as bill Clinton who has been convicted of rape what 4 times and never convicted? Hmmmmm I'm simply stating I don't support a man who gropes women and does not pay taxes and I don't support a women who is a defense attorney for a man she felt rapped a little girl.
Greg I'm on neither side I just want you to open your eyes in how ridiculous your being thinking your right and the other side is wrong......
Speak to this directly: she said her defendant passsed the lie detector test and she then lost all faith in the lie detector test.....this means she felt the person she was defending was a child rapist right?
So pick a side a rapist or a person who defended a child rapist?
Is there a clear choice there? Do you need to back either side or can you just maybe agree there both terrible and we need some major change in who our leaders are?Comment -
Greget, she was rather cavalier about this case. You would think even in doing her duty as a lawyer, she would have some remorse as a human being.Comment -
Oh no grease it was her job she was just doing her job and her job in that case was to defend a person she felt rapped a girl but it's ok because it's her job....that makes it ok so morally if a defense attorney feels someone is guilty but also feels there is not enough eveidence they can walk away from the case and find some sleaze ball attorney to defend them but he didn't need to do that Clinton defended him.......which in case makes her morally unfit to run the country just as trump is morally unfit to run the presidencyComment -
[QUOTE=pilebuck13;26367718]Not really, I don't think having defense attorneys for murders, rapists, whoever is a reason to tear down the country and start over, and I don't think its the same as supporting an actual rapist. Mrs. Clinton has spent her entire life helping children, including spearheading S-Chip which now insurers 8 million children. Her first job out of college was pro bono work as an attorney for the children's defense fund. More than any of us have done for kids in America, so I'm not so judgemental and self righteous.Comment -
Well... I think right now we have the best chance we have in a long time.
Tonight's debate could be really ugly, casting both candidates in a majorly negative light...
What if... then there is a big push for Johnson? Like what if Mark Cuban got all over CNBC promoting him? Something like that?Comment
