XPost: talk.politics.guns, alt.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.misc   
   XPost: alt.politics.republicans   
   From: me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net   
      
   "Governor Swill"  wrote in message   
   news:kv611dpu07f14r6apgj8chr5u1337iriu6@4ax.com...   
   > On Wed, 15 Nov 2017 20:08:24 -0500, "Scout"   
   >  wrote:   
   >   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>"Governor Swill"  wrote in message   
   >>news:kjop0dh6305uaatnav7ef4vkpcvsrqda4v@4ax.com...   
   >>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 00:23:46 -0500, "Scout"   
   >>>  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>"Governor Swill"  wrote in message   
   >>>>news:thqk0dl1me5ua9fadelg92c7dm8m87qg52@4ax.com...   
   >>>>> On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 04:28:28 -0800, Klaus  Schadenfreude   
   >>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 05:16:35 +0000 (UTC), bks@panix.com (Bradley K.   
   >>>>>>Sherman) wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>Scout  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>"Bradley K. Sherman"  wrote in message   
   >>>>>>>>news:ou3296$pm2$1@reader2.panix.com...   
   >>>>>>>>> Scout  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> ...   
   >>>>>>>>>>Agreed. Why is it that it seems like all sorts of crimes now have   
   >>>>>>>>>>no   
   >>>>>>>>>>statute   
   >>>>>>>>>>of limitations on them?   
   >>>>>>>>>> ...   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Another right-wing nutjob supporting child molestation.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>No, explain to me why for 7 long years this fully legal adult said   
   >>>>>>>>NOTHING.....   
   >>>>>>>> ...   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>Four women, 26 corroborating witnesses.  No statute   
   >>>>>>>of limitation in child molesting.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>If it was important to them, they'd have reported it immediately. They   
   >>>>>>didn't. They're most likely lying.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Which is a bullshit statement and you know it.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>Well, if they wait too long...then it couldn't have really been that   
   >>>>important, could it?   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Another bullshit statement.  Sexual misbehavior is extremely hard to   
   >>> prove.  Trying to prove it against a relatively high government   
   >>> official isn't worth the trouble, especially as you know going in that   
   >>> a jury as likely to acquit him.   
   >>   
   >>So, when a slander suit is filed against them and they end up having to   
   >>pay   
   >>him hundreds of thousands, or even millions in damages....that's going to   
   >>be   
   >>better for them?   
   >   
   >   
   > You assume the allegations are false and not provable to a jury.   
      
   If they were provable to a jury, then she would have long since filed a   
   civil suit for damages, even if a criminal suit can no longer be brought.   
      
   If she can't prove it in court, then her allegations could well be false and   
   without such evidence should be dismissed as such.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)