No, I’m saying attempts at misdirection are fundamentally dishonest. I don’t really think you’re interested in debate, you’re just interested in attacking anyone who thinks Roy Moore is a questionable candidate by throwing up completely unrelated claims, some clearly intending to be outrageously inflammatory.niceatheist:
Are you telling me you’re not as concerned about sexual assault when Muslims are accused?
Nine women publicly accusing someone of sexually assaulting or harassing them is not gossip.
You said that to be a criminal, one needs to be convicted. I explained to you that a person is a criminal when they actually commit a crime. My husband was the victim of armed robbery. That is a fact. The person who robbed him committed a crime. I didn’t need to witness it because my husband is honest. His money was taken, and the police took his statement.
Time for a drink!
I’m having a hard time squaring anything you’re writing with reality, or really even coherency. If you want to throw a bunch of women under the bus so you can preserve the notion that Roy Moore wasn’t a sexual predator, well good for you. And I’ll remember it, too. I’ll remember how quickly all those morality warriors dispense with morality entire when it’s their boy in the hot seat.
The one thing you should remember is that you would not allow a man due process because you have a political agenda.
There are ways that can happen.
Exactly what due process do you expect in a case past the statute of limitations. He will be judged by the voters who hear the information and make a decision about whether they can justify their vote for a child molester or not.
The most likely way it can happen is that Moore did all he was accused of.
Harvey Weinstein will be relieved. So will Cosby.
I forget. Are you talking about Roy Moore or Bill Cosby? The defenses look so similar.
Both situations are different, but both are innocent until proven guilty.