You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Bias against Trump
April 25 2024 6.58pm

Bias against Trump

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 423 of 573 < 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 >

 

View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 05 May 20 1.40pm Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

Originally posted by Penge Eagle

The lack of investigation into Joe Biden will probably end up killing the whole Me Too movement. We knew all along that the leftist elites didn't actually care about feminism, fighting for the truth or about "believing all women". They only wanted to attack Donald Trump and Republicans. This now proves it.

When the accusations about the judge first emerged there were all sorts of protests and he was even ambushed in a lift. The attitude of the protestors was he was guilty before the hearings even started.

Some prominent people jumped on the bandwagon and said some really shameful things without any evidence something I hope they now regret.

It is this lack of public concern over Biden the silence of the democrats and the muted response of the media that is the real issue rather than the actual legal process.

Edited by Badger11 (05 May 2020 1.41pm)

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag The garden of England 05 May 20 2.06pm Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

There is properly structured, trustworthy investigation into allegations of substance, and then there are unsubstantiated smears.

Which do you think we are dealing with here?

Of course you give everyone, including "all women" the benefit of the doubt but you also give those accused the right to defend themselves. Should you not do that the doors are open wide to endless scurrilous allegations. As could be the case here.

Those involved in the "Me Too" movement understand that very well. These things need to be tested under oath, with both parties being cross examined. For most that means a Court. In this case a Senate committee hearing will be appropriate. For both Biden AND Trump.

Cant you separate for one minute. You pulled me up for crossing over and mixing, now you are doing it.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View BeckenhamSteve's Profile BeckenhamSteve Flag beckenham 05 May 20 3.39pm Send a Private Message to BeckenhamSteve Add BeckenhamSteve as a friend

This makes interesting reading and may well explain why there is not more "action" being taken about it?

Why I'm skeptical about Reade's sexual assault claim against Biden: Ex-prosecutor


[Link]

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

There is properly structured, trustworthy investigation into allegations of substance, and then there are unsubstantiated smears.

Which do you think we are dealing with here?

Of course you give everyone, including "all women" the benefit of the doubt but you also give those accused the right to defend themselves. Should you not do that the doors are open wide to endless scurrilous allegations. As could be the case here.

Those involved in the "Me Too" movement understand that very well. These things need to be tested under oath, with both parties being cross examined. For most that means a Court. In this case a Senate committee hearing will be appropriate. For both Biden AND Trump.

Edited by BeckenhamSteve (05 May 2020 4.05pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 05 May 20 3.59pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by cryrst

Cant you separate for one minute. You pulled me up for crossing over and mixing, now you are doing it.

I really don't think so.

All I did in my comment was address the points raised by the poster I was answering. If there was a swerve perhaps you ought to address your complaint to him.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 05 May 20 4.10pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Badger11

When the accusations about the judge first emerged there were all sorts of protests and he was even ambushed in a lift. The attitude of the protestors was he was guilty before the hearings even started.

Some prominent people jumped on the bandwagon and said some really shameful things without any evidence something I hope they now regret.

It is this lack of public concern over Biden the silence of the democrats and the muted response of the media that is the real issue rather than the actual legal process.

Edited by Badger11 (05 May 2020 1.41pm)

The regret, so as far as I am concerned, was that the politics seemed to overtake the truth in the hearing and he was confirmed in spite of the totally convincing testimony of his accuser who stood up very well to some unrelenting cross examination. That sent a very poor message about the standards that the Senate will tolerate from those who sit in judgement on the highest court in their land.

The situation with Biden has already been dealt with in this thread and really doesn't require anything more. The MSM would be very unwise to get in too deep with unsubstantiated allegations. If a Police investigation results in an indictment they will be all over it like a rash. The Democrats are hardly going to make a big deal out of such allegations are they? If they progressed any further then I have no doubt they would respond then in a measured and responsible way.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Penge Eagle's Profile Penge Eagle Flag Beckenham 05 May 20 4.52pm Send a Private Message to Penge Eagle Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Penge Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

There is properly structured, trustworthy investigation into allegations of substance, and then there are unsubstantiated smears.


You don't know that! You seem to have had full access to her detailed account and witness statements held by her lawyer... and Biden's?

We have to wait and see once the full details emerge, which may unravel in a trial. This is what tends to happen. But you've already made your mind up, calling a woman who may have been sexually assaulted a liar. Disgraceful.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 05 May 20 5.15pm Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

The regret, so as far as I am concerned, was that the politics seemed to overtake the truth in the hearing and he was confirmed in spite of the totally convincing testimony of his accuser who stood up very well to some unrelenting cross examination. That sent a very poor message about the standards that the Senate will tolerate from those who sit in judgement on the highest court in their land.

The situation with Biden has already been dealt with in this thread and really doesn't require anything more. The MSM would be very unwise to get in too deep with unsubstantiated allegations. If a Police investigation results in an indictment they will be all over it like a rash. The Democrats are hardly going to make a big deal out of such allegations are they? If they progressed any further then I have no doubt they would respond then in a measured and responsible way.

We are not going to know the truth but a couple of points about the witness:

- Her best friend had no knowledge of the incident and knew nothing until she disclosed decades later. No one else came forward and confirmed her story from that era.
- She decided to disclose after undergoing therapy in the last few years. The Senate was not allowed to ask anything about the therapy including and most importantly what type of therapy did she undergo.
- The witness co-authored a paper on the benefits of retrieving repressed memories through hypnotherapy a type of therapy that has fallen into disrepute with the medical profession owing to a number of false accusations in the 1980's and 90's. So I submit that she should have disclosed what type of therapy she underwent (not the details) because if it was hypnotherapy that puts a doubt on her credibility.

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 05 May 20 6.14pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Penge Eagle

You don't know that! You seem to have had full access to her detailed account and witness statements held by her lawyer... and Biden's?

We have to wait and see once the full details emerge, which may unravel in a trial. This is what tends to happen. But you've already made your mind up, calling a woman who may have been sexually assaulted a liar. Disgraceful.



Show me where I have said she is a liar!

Unsubstantiated doesn't mean untrue. It just means unproven.

And that's all I have said. That I have heard rumours about doesn't mean they are true either, as they are also unsubstantiated. Let's indeed wait and see if they do get substantiated. The Police taking action would at least show that they feel there is a case to answer.

This wasn't about her. It was why the MSM are shy of reporting it too strongly and that is also because it's unsubstantiated and no trial imminent.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View silvertop's Profile silvertop Flag Portishead 05 May 20 8.34pm Send a Private Message to silvertop Add silvertop as a friend

Originally posted by Badger11

She has made a formal complaint to the police so if untrue presumably this is perjury.

I don't see any differences between the cases both happened a long time ago and there is no independent evidence so likely this will come down to the court of public opinion and peoples own prejudices.

If the police decide there is sufficient evidence to carry out a proper investigation and the matter moves into the formal stage the press are free to report that and it will receive intense attention from all angles.

BTW this is an accusation of sexual harassment by a woman against a white heterosexual man. Are you honestly saying the liberal press would take his side? They'll destroy him if there is substance albeit in a way different to the right.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 05 May 20 9.17pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Badger11

We are not going to know the truth but a couple of points about the witness:

- Her best friend had no knowledge of the incident and knew nothing until she disclosed decades later. No one else came forward and confirmed her story from that era.
- She decided to disclose after undergoing therapy in the last few years. The Senate was not allowed to ask anything about the therapy including and most importantly what type of therapy did she undergo.
- The witness co-authored a paper on the benefits of retrieving repressed memories through hypnotherapy a type of therapy that has fallen into disrepute with the medical profession owing to a number of false accusations in the 1980's and 90's. So I submit that she should have disclosed what type of therapy she underwent (not the details) because if it was hypnotherapy that puts a doubt on her credibility.

This is supposed to be about the lack of media coverage on Biden and not about Brett Kavanaugh, but I'll bite.

I watched a great deal of the Kavanaugh confirmation hearing live, including all the testimony from Christine Blasey Ford and from Kavanaugh himself. I watched and listened to them and also watched each one's reaction to the other. Not the edited highlights on the MSM, where statements and face pulls are edited out if they don't fit the picture they want to paint.

The contrast was stark. Blasey Ford was one of the most compelling witnesses I have ever seen. I am usually a good judge of character and I would put a lot of money on that what she said was true. I said at the time that if she wasn't telling the truth then she had missed her vocation, as she could have been a great actress. Indeed if she managed to be that convincing as a consequence of hypnotherapy then more actors need to start using the technique.

Kavanaugh was completely different. He had clearly been thoroughly rehearsed, knew what questions the friendly Senators would ask and how to answer. Knew what questions were expected from the unfriendly ones and how to repeat the same, short denials. During her testimony he had been told to keep his eyes down and make no reactions but he couldn't help himself sometimes. If Blasey Ford was a great actress then Kavanaugh wouldn't get cast in an amataur pantamime chorus. His crocodile tears and appeals to the "effect on his family" were the icing on a very poor cake. It was awful. Not that you would believe that from the reaction on Fox!

Blasey Ford had nothing at all to gain from speaking as she did and was clearly terrified at doing so. She has gone to ground since, rarely gives interviews and, so far as I know, is not writing a book about her experience. As she herself said, she was just doing her duty as a citizen. It might come as a big surprise to some people but there still are decent people who believe in a civic duty imperative.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View dannyboy1978's Profile dannyboy1978 Flag 05 May 20 9.53pm Send a Private Message to dannyboy1978 Add dannyboy1978 as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

This is supposed to be about the lack of media coverage on Biden and not about Brett Kavanaugh, but I'll bite.

I watched a great deal of the Kavanaugh confirmation hearing live, including all the testimony from Christine Blasey Ford and from Kavanaugh himself. I watched and listened to them and also watched each one's reaction to the other. Not the edited highlights on the MSM, where statements and face pulls are edited out if they don't fit the picture they want to paint.

The contrast was stark. Blasey Ford was one of the most compelling witnesses I have ever seen. I am usually a good judge of character and I would put a lot of money on that what she said was true. I said at the time that if she wasn't telling the truth then she had missed her vocation, as she could have been a great actress. Indeed if she managed to be that convincing as a consequence of hypnotherapy then more actors need to start using the technique.

Kavanaugh was completely different. He had clearly been thoroughly rehearsed, knew what questions the friendly Senators would ask and how to answer. Knew what questions were expected from the unfriendly ones and how to repeat the same, short denials. During her testimony he had been told to keep his eyes down and make no reactions but he couldn't help himself sometimes. If Blasey Ford was a great actress then Kavanaugh wouldn't get cast in an amataur pantamime chorus. His crocodile tears and appeals to the "effect on his family" were the icing on a very poor cake. It was awful. Not that you would believe that from the reaction on Fox!

Blasey Ford had nothing at all to gain from speaking as she did and was clearly terrified at doing so. She has gone to ground since, rarely gives interviews and, so far as I know, is not writing a book about her experience. As she herself said, she was just doing her duty as a citizen. It might come as a big surprise to some people but there still are decent people who believe in a civic duty imperative.

Wasn't there a bloke in the UK that recently fooled the police and half our political establishment. Political peodophile ring if I remember

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 06 May 20 6.59am Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

Originally posted by dannyboy1978

Wasn't there a bloke in the UK that recently fooled the police and half our political establishment. Political peodophile ring if I remember

I am not calling her a liar simply because I do not know it is perfectly possible for her to believe these events occurred when they didn't especially if she has had mental health issues.

Anyway I have said my piece this is about the lack of media and political reaction rather than the justice system.

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 423 of 573 < 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Bias against Trump