XPost: talk.politics.guns, alt.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.misc   
   XPost: alt.politics.republicans   
   From: klausschadenfreude@null.net   
      
   On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 15:26:43 +0000 (UTC), bks@panix.com (Bradley K.   
   Sherman) wrote:   
      
   >Klaus Schadenfreude   wrote:   
   >>On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 15:21:06 +0000 (UTC), bks@panix.com (Bradley K.   
   >>Sherman) wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>Klaus Schadenfreude   wrote:   
   >>>> ...   
   >>>>Presumption of innocence is widely held to follow from the 5th, 6th,   
   >>>>and 14th amendments.   
   >>>> ...   
   >>>   
   >>>"Widely held"?  So you're admitting that it's *not* in the   
   >>>Constitution.   
   >>   
   >>It's a right protected by the Constitution.   
   >> ...   
   >   
   >Just admit that you were wrong and I was right.   
      
   If that was the case it might be possible.   
      
   But the fact is that I am right, as I have proven with verifiable   
   cites, which you've snipped because you can't stand to look at them.   
      
   You have offered NOTHING to support your claim that innocence before   
   being proven guilty is NOT a Constitutionally protected right.   
      
   That's because you can't.   
      
   Just because you WANT to condemn your political enemies with the   
   benefit of due process doesn't mean you can.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)