Nope! they’re saying just because someone said you did something especially when your in the public eye doesn’t mean you did it! You know the whole due process thing but that’s probably inconvenient for your narrative
-
-
-
Why don't they push for an investigation then?
-
Don’t feed the BOT .. They are paid by number of responses!
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Actually, not a Kavanaugh defender. I don't know him from a rusty half empty can of paint. However, I am saying a random allegation that includes NO details of time, place, or context is NOT reason to destroy a reputation or hold an entire republic hostage in a political circus.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Exactly. The official position the GOP is conveying is "We don't think it happened but even if it did it was a long time ago and he's a good man." That's an indefensible position.
-
If there's no evidence of this occurring, why should he be kept from this position? If I accuse you of sexual harassment, should that accusation alone be all that's needed to ruin your reputation and get you fired?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
"He's guilty because of the color of his skin"
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
The accused has a right to face his accuser. The accuser should testify under oath. It's not about race, it's about the law.
-
Not even close. This isn’t a criminal court. I think too many cop shows have rotted people’s brains. If she were to accuse him in court & ask the court to take away his freedom or order him to make restitution (not that he could), then he would have the right to face his accuser.
-
Otherwise, she doesn’t have to face him if she doesn’t want to. Ever. It’s called choice. We women have it even if men don’t want to let us exercise it. Fuck Kavanaugh. If he wants the right to face his accuser, ask for an investigation and face her in court. Like a real man.
-
She doesn’t have to, you’re right. However, the burden is on her to prove her allegations if she wants this to be considered in his confirmation. We’re going to need more than, “In the early 80s, when we were both minors, he almost did something at a place & time I don’t recall.”
-
Tweet unavailable
-
Whether he was an asshole has nothing to do with proving her allegations. Unless she can do that, this has no bearing on his confirmation. You can curse all you want, but I’m not okay with a precedent of he said-she said ruining someone’s reputation and career.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This is a criminal headline
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
What is wrong with these people? Perhaps he should have waited, and actually raped adult women like bill clinton? He got away with all of them, and actually had help from his wife demonizing them.
-
They know the probabilities as well as we do and have invested in it. They built the "whataboutism" device to deal with Clinton. I suspect they'll use it for Spartacus too. There is no reason, consistency, law, morals, etc. We're going to head into "might makes right" soon.
-
This guy blocked me
@AmirTalai -
Gotta love the blue checks that can't defend their position and block anyone who challenges them.
-
I’m losing track of them all but I want some bigger fish than a buzzfeed staffer
-
I'm going to end up with another time out, I just have a feeling.

-
Just make sure to tweet a few attacks towards a few heterosexual, right leaning white dudes to build up a little goodwill from the Twitter gods and you should be safe.
- 8 more replies
New conversation
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.