Can you point me to the threads created by Republicans here saying the opposite?
No… there’s very little risk to men in general.
Nowhere close to the same risk as women being assaulted. Which is why the narrative of men at risk that some are trying to construct is ludicrous and insulting.
And no I believe in due process. But due process starts with the charge being leveled and there is pr fallout when that happens…for both parties. There’s no way to prevent that…only minimize it.
What?
Two part answer.
-
Convoluted conditions. It doesn’t matter what thread contains where you’ve been corrected on that lie.
-
I don’t do links for duplicitous libs.
Yeah, I didn’t think you could.
Nowhere did I say anything about SAME risks.
I’ve never even tried to imply that it was. I agree that there are way more risks to women being assaulted than men being falsely accused. No question about it. So now that I’ve made that clear to you, if you EVER attempt to say that I suggest even a close approximation of equal risk again, it would be a deliberate lie on your part.
I have been making the point – and only making this one point – that due process exists to prevent the chance of a false accusation destroying a man. We saw how the absence of it nearly destroyed Kavanaugh, and we see that his accusations were not an isolated example.
Do it. We can count.
So go ahead.
What’s the threshold where there is a presumption if innocence? If 1 in 10 alleged cases are lies? 1 in 50?
Libs are all over capital punishment because of the occasional false convictions. So maybe we should use that criteria.
So libs would be lacking integrity in their logic and arguments if 4% or more of sexual assault accusations are proven false.
Go ahead… post the cases that have been adjudicated and found valid.
You know that’s a lie too.
Then do it.
I already answered your demand. Please try to keep up.
No. You didn’t.
The 4% or close to number gets thrown out a lot but is utterly BS. That number comes from the % of cases where people are actually charged and then later found innocent. Like with Brian Banks, the college football player who did six years in prison and lost his chance at an NFL career on a made up accusation.
Whats not accounted for is the huge number of cases reported to police where they quickly determine no rape sexual assault happened so no arrest is ever made. Those cases are far harder to track because it varies widely on how departments keep track of them? Are they filed as unfounded sexual assaults? Are they filed as suspicious incidents? Is a report even written? At least two department specific studies that I know have been done on the matter where they tracked each and every call over the course of a year or two to find every such false accusation. One showed that roughly 25% of allegations were false and the other was around 45%.
I agree. I was being generous to libs, knowing that the number of false accusations is huge and would easily beat numbers like 4%. But you are also correct… hard to track.
Of course I did. Here. Let me repeat it:
The fact that I would not do it does not make your assertion that I COULD not do it truthful.
Oh. So you copped out.
It doesn’t matter if it’s 4% or .004%. The fact that false accusations occur (and not just in sexual assault cases) is the reason why we have due process, and why the absence of due process in the Kavanaugh hearings was a profound travesty of justice.
If you insist.
I refused to cede to a duplicitous lib making insincere demands. If calling it copping out makes you feel better, call it that. You still know the truth.
I’m just calling it what it is.
There was no absence of due process. That was another lie…but this is one you have to research real hard to find out, so I’m not surprised people fell for it.
Ford didn’t want her charge to come as a bolt out of the blue. The reason she was meeting with the FBI and took the lie detector test in the first place is she wanted the FBI to investigate as part of their INITIAL background check into Kavanaugh.
In short, she did what you would expect someone to do who wasn’t trying to get someone tried in the court of public opinion…she worked quietly behind the scenes to get it investigated and then when it wasn’t, asked Feinstein not to share anything.
The reason there was no due process after that was not her fault but the fault of the GOP that put artificial restrictions on everything related to the case.
And what due process was Trump serving when he mocked Ford’s testimony at his rally? Or those who pushed the “mistaken identity” hypothesis?
1 Like
Absurd.
He was convicted by 48 Senators without a trial.
And yet a carefully choreographed and carefully timed “leak” from a high-ranking Dem Senator resulted in precisely that. And the trial-by-media began. It’s not about Ms. Ford. It’s about the tactics – sleazy and dangerous – by the very leaders of the party you support. It happened – without due process – just as the Dem leadership wanted it to happen.
Then you DO recognize the absence of due process – which you called a lie, but now admit existed.
You can’t even keep your own argument straight in a single reply. And trying to spin blame for the lack of due process isn’t my point. (I disagree with our argument anyway.) The point is that it did NOT exist. Ditto for the example that precipitated this thread.
2 Likes
That girl has mental issues and needs to get help. It’s a shame that the guy had to go through that but at least his bunny didn’t end up in a pot of boiling water.
If I were the one that paid the legal fees I’d sue her for the $$.
