Vaughan Spa

Trump loses 6% in the polls since his fake ear injury

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
6,416
3,527
113
You said she lied.
Now you're backing down again.

As usual.
She did lie. Why would you twist my words and say the opposite of what I've been saying again?

It's chronic with you.

The Failfooter Circle Jerk of Dysfunction and Failure proven once again.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
90,587
21,793
113
She did lie. Why would you twist my words and say the opposite of what I've been saying again?

It's chronic with you.

The Failfooter Circle Jerk of Dysfunction and Failure proven once again.
You failed to prove she lied.
Which means you are just slandering her to defend rape.
 

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
6,416
3,527
113
You failed to prove she lied.
Which means you are just slandering her to defend rape.
How did I fail to prove she lied if she said he used his penis but the jury didn't believe her?
How did I fail to prove she lied if she couldn't remember the year it happened?

Why are you saying anyone is guilty when there is an appeal in progress? You are quick to use the "they will appeal" reasoning when it supports your narrative but for people you just don't like, you quickly say they're guilty.

Can to walk us through your hypocrisy on that once you take some time to figure out a way to tap dance around it?
 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
32,546
60,131
113
How did I fail to prove she lied if she said he used his penis but the jury didn't believe her?
How did I fail to prove she lied if she couldn't remember the year it happened?
Because none of that proves she lied.
It doesn't even prove that the jury didn't believe her.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frankfooter

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
32,546
60,131
113
You're saying that if the jury believed her they still would have left the rape checkbox blank?
Yes.
Because you can believe someone and still think they didn't prove it sufficiently as a matter of law.
But that's not what you claimed.

More importantly to what you wrote, you can be unsure if what they say is true without believing the person lied.
That's simple logic.

Them not thinking rape was proven doesn't in any way prove they think she lied, which is what you claimed.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
90,587
21,793
113
How did I fail to prove she lied if she said he used his penis but the jury didn't believe her?
How did I fail to prove she lied if she couldn't remember the year it happened?

Why are you saying anyone is guilty when there is an appeal in progress? You are quick to use the "they will appeal" reasoning when it supports your narrative but for people you just don't like, you quickly say they're guilty.

Can to walk us through your hypocrisy on that once you take some time to figure out a way to tap dance around it?
The judge and jury found that they believed her but there wasn't enough evidence to identify if it was rump's tiny fingers or his fingers and his mushroom shaped dick that he used to rape E Jean Carroll.

They did not believe your rapist hero.

You failed to prove anything.
 

squeezer

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2010
20,420
14,928
113
Facts and a little fiction from Crenshaw. Although as a Repug he isn't as bad as the full-blown Maga Twats, he's only a baby twat.

Overtime: James Carville, Rep. Dan Crenshaw, Kaitlan Collins | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO)

 
  • Like
Reactions: bver_hunter

Insidious Von

My head is my home
Sep 12, 2007
39,712
7,249
113
Dan Krenshaw is a retired Navy SEAL who fought in The Battle of Fallujah and lost an eye in Kandahar.


On the flipside, JD Vance was campaigning in Philadelphia, he went to Geno's Cheesesteak and complained, he couldn't get Swiss Cheese.
 
Last edited:

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
6,416
3,527
113
Yes.
Because you can believe someone and still think they didn't prove it sufficiently as a matter of law.
But that's not what you claimed.

More importantly to what you wrote, you can be unsure if what they say is true without believing the person lied.
That's simple logic.

Them not thinking rape was proven doesn't in any way prove they think she lied, which is what you claimed.
If you and I are alone with no one else around, and you claim after the fact that I stole money from your wallet, and I say I didn't, and you can't prove that I did, that would lean more towards you lying than telling the truth. Or at best, 50%.

In criminal court that wouldn't stand a chance.

However, in civil court, you have a greater probability of being successful needing only 51% (or something close to that).

That is my point that you keep missing.
 

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
6,416
3,527
113
The judge and jury found that they believed her but there wasn't enough evidence to identify if it was rump's tiny fingers or his fingers and his mushroom shaped dick that he used to rape E Jean Carroll.

They did not believe your rapist hero.

You failed to prove anything.
The jury didn't believe her otherwise they would have checked off rape on their report.

Civil court requires significantly less proof so she tried her luck and hoped some of it would stick.

Anyway, we can put all of this on pause including saying he's guilty of anything because an appeal is in progress right?
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
90,587
21,793
113
The jury didn't believe her otherwise they would have checked off rape on their report.

Civil court requires significantly less proof so she tried her luck and hoped some of it would stick.

Anyway, we can put all of this on pause including saying he's guilty of anything because an appeal is in progress right?
If they didn't believe her they wouldn't have awarded her $83 million, skoob.
that's an idiotic claim.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
90,587
21,793
113
That wasn't for rape.
Anyway, it's being appealed so you should reserve judgement right?
Three trials and every time they believed Carroll, rump is a notorious liar who bragged about the exact form of rape he committed.
Yet you still defend him.

You know he did and are just mad he has to pay for it.

Do you think rump is a bright person?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bver_hunter

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
6,416
3,527
113
Three trials and every time they believed Carroll, rump is a notorious liar who bragged about the exact form of rape he committed.
Yet you still defend him.

You know he did and are just mad he has to pay for it.
Why aren't you waiting for the appeal before declaring judgement?
Did you conveniently put your hypocrisy on pause perhaps?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: bver_hunter

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
28,930
6,896
113
Three trials and every time they believed Carroll, rump is a notorious liar who bragged about the exact form of rape he committed.
Yet you still defend him.

You know he did and are just mad he has to pay for it.

Do you think rump is a bright person?
He repeats several times that Kamala Harris is "not a bright person". He stated that he is more "smart than her". Only the righties will take that as his Gospel Truth.
They are really brainwashed by this dummy of an individual who is really a laughing stock around the Globe!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frankfooter

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
90,587
21,793
113
Why aren't you waiting for the appeal before declaring judgement?
Did you conveniently put your hypocrisy on pause perhaps?
The verdicts stand until and if they are over ruled, skoob.
3 judges think that rump is a rapist so far.

Why would you believe anything rump says?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bver_hunter

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
32,546
60,131
113
If you and I are alone with no one else around, and you claim after the fact that I stole money from your wallet, and I say I didn't, and you can't prove that I did, that would lean more towards you lying than telling the truth. Or at best, 50%.

In criminal court that wouldn't stand a chance.

However, in civil court, you have a greater probability of being successful needing only 51% (or something close to that).

That is my point that you keep missing.
But that's not the point you made.

You said that them not voting for rape proved they think she lied.

That's just obviously not true as a matter of simple logic.
 

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
6,416
3,527
113
The verdicts stand until and if they are over ruled, skoob.
Just like the Federal Libs that violated the charter of rights also sit with that standing verdict then?

Just want to clarify your hypocrisy here.
 
Toronto Escorts