Brought To You By Democrat Teachers Unions

[SgtSpiderMan]

CREDIBLY ACCUSED??? He said she said from 30 years back. You need to look up the definition of credibly.

This case is also a he said, she said.

 

[icanhelp1]

This case is also a he said, she said.

Maybe so! What’s your point?

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Maybe so! What’s your point?

I’ve been asking what’s the point of this thread for over 24 hours.

You’re the one who said it’s not credible, you tell me.

 

[icanhelp1]

I’ve been asking what’s the point of this thread for over 24 hours.

You’re the one who said it’s not credible, you tell me.

You're confused. I wasn't responding to the OP, as much as you'd like to think that.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

You're confused. I wasn't responding to the OP, as much as you'd like to think that.

I’m aware of that. Still wondering what your point is.

 

[icanhelp1]

I’m aware of that. Still wondering what your point is.

Re-read it, it'll come to you.

 

[HisArpy]

Re-read it, it'll come to you.

Wanna bet?

 

[YDB95]

CREDIBLY ACCUSED??? He said she said from 30 years back. You need to look up the definition of credibly.

And you need to look up the literally volumes of evidence explaining why a victim might not speak up at the time. Google #WhyIdidntReport just for starters.

 

[icanhelp1]

And you need to look up the literally volumes of evidence explaining why a victim might not speak up at the time. Google #WhyIdidntReport just for starters.

Please don't try to sell me the bullshit that many of these allegations aren't politically motivated.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Re-read it, it'll come to you.

Nah, I read it and you didn’t have a point and made yourself look foolish. You went full HisArpy, never go full HisApry.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I'll tell you what's "odd."
It's that you somehow feel the need to deflect to Trump every time something like this pops up. (see what I did there?)
Or you seem to think that masturbating in front of a classroom of students is newsworthy ONLY BECAUSE there has to be a politically motivated basis for reporting/commenting on the event.
Despite what you keep trying to say, there's no "middle of the road" in your politics. You are far far left and digging it.
Unfortunately for you, the only thing you're really digging is a hole that keeps getting deeper under your feet.

Two questions for you, counselor:

1. Had the accused teacher been a registered Republican instead of a Democrat, how likely do you suppose Rightguide would have made a thread about this? My opinion is that there is not a chance in hell that Rightguide would have done so, and he posted this solely out of political motivation. Your hand wringing and manufactured outrage over someone replying in kind with a politically motivated reply to a politically motivated thread seems more than a bit disingenuous. Perhaps your keen insights can shed some light on your apparent double standard here?
2. Rightguide made sure to reference "teacher unions" in his thread title. He has been pressed repeatedly to explain why he felt compelled to do this. He continually refuses to address this issue. Would you care to speak on his behalf and explain to the class exactly what, if anything, "teachers unions" have to do with this sordid affair? I think it was a lack of impulse control on Rightguide's part, he sees "teacher in trouble" and reflexively barks "teachers unions!"....but I might be mistaken. As the Political Board's "gold standard" on lack of impulse control, perhaps you could explain this conundrum?

 

[TrailerHitch]

I did. I’m just pointing out that you’d unable to show that he’s a teacher. Should I keep waiting?

IT SAYS IN THE FIRST POST THAT HE IS A TEACHER.

 

[TrailerHitch]

I believe, if you do a crime, you should do your time. No two tiered system of law!!

Where did I say otherwise?

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

IT SAYS IN THE FIRST POST THAT HE IS A TEACHER.

Might want to check on that.

 

[TrailerHitch]

Might want to check on that.

No, I don't think I will. You are nothing more than an agitator troll and not worth anymore of my time.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

No, I don't think I will. You are nothing more than an agitator troll and not worth anymore of my time.

Sorry you were wrong and got triggered. Maybe you’ll have better luck next time.

 

[TrailerHitch]

Sorry you were wrong and got triggered. Maybe you’ll have better luck next time.

You don't trigger me at all. But just like I ignore an annoying child that won't shut up, I choose from this point on to ignore you.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

You don't trigger me at all. But just like I ignore an annoying child that won't shut up, I choose from this point on to ignore you.

Again, sorry you were shown to be wrong and will now hide.

 

[YDB95]

Please don't try to sell me the bullshit that many of these allegations aren't politically motivated.

What about the allegations against her from the likes of you?

 

[icanhelp1]

What about the allegations against her from the likes of you?

Your TDS leave you without any sense of objectivity. What if your old girl friend pressed charges against you from 30 years ago? It’s not by coincidence that charges and political timing marry up.

 

[YDB95]

Your TDS leave you without any sense of objectivity.

Right back atcha, my friend.

What if your old girl friend pressed charges against you from 30 years ago?

She wouldn't, because I never tried to rape her. False accusations of rape (attempted or successful) are extremely rare. Strange how you seem to think every last one ever made against a prominent right-winger is false. (And to head off the rebuttal I'm nearly certain you're planning to give, no, I am not convinced Juanita Broaddrick was lying.)

It’s not by coincidence that charges and political timing marry up.

Of course it's not by coincidence. America had a right to know, and she knew that.

 

[icanhelp1]

Right back atcha, my friend.

She wouldn't, because I never tried to rape her. False accusations of rape (attempted or successful) are extremely rare. Strange how you seem to think every last one ever made against a prominent right-winger is false. (And to head off the rebuttal I'm nearly certain you're planning to give, no, I am not convinced Juanita Broaddrick was lying.)

Of course it's not by coincidence. America had a right to know, and she knew that.

Right back atcha, my friend.

She wouldn't, because I never tried to rape her. False accusations of rape (attempted or successful) are extremely rare. Strange how you seem to think every last one ever made against a prominent right-winger is false. (And to head off the rebuttal I'm nearly certain you're planning to give, no, I am not convinced Juanita Broaddrick was lying.)

Rumors had circulated about such an event for years and it had been recorded in a letter prepared by a Republican rival of Clinton's around 1991, but Broaddrick refused to speak to news media until 1999. In a sworn statement in 1997 with the placeholder name "Jane Doe #5",[3] Broaddrick filed an affidavit with Paula Jones's lawyers stating there were unfounded rumors and stories circulating "that Mr. Clinton had made unwelcome sexual advances toward me in the late seventies. ... These allegations are untrue".[4] She then recanted that statement to investigators of potential misconduct by Clinton led by Kenneth Starr, while insisting at the time that Clinton had not pressured or bribed her in any way. Starr declined to further investigate the issue, and mentioned it only in a footnote of his final report.

Of course it's not by coincidence. America had a right to know, and she knew that.

I fail to see the similarities.

 

[YDB95]

Rumors had circulated about such an event for years and it had been recorded in a letter prepared by a Republican rival of Clinton's around 1991, but Broaddrick refused to speak to news media until 1999. In a sworn statement in 1997 with the placeholder name "Jane Doe #5",[3] Broaddrick filed an affidavit with Paula Jones's lawyers stating there were unfounded rumors and stories circulating "that Mr. Clinton had made unwelcome sexual advances toward me in the late seventies. ... These allegations are untrue".[4] She then recanted that statement to investigators of potential misconduct by Clinton led by Kenneth Starr, while insisting at the time that Clinton had not pressured or bribed her in any way. Starr declined to further investigate the issue, and mentioned it only in a footnote of his final report.

Like a Pavlov's dog...

I fail to see the similarities.

Of course you do. Or really, I think you probably choose not to see them.

 

[icanhelp1]

Like a Pavlov's dog...

Of course you do. Or really, I think you probably choose not to see them.

One filed charges and one didn't, completely different situations. Pavlov's dog? Democrats are conditioned to seize any opportunity to use unethical behavior to win, even using people to further their agenda. Stop trying to be clever, you're not good at it either.

 

[YDB95]

One filed charges and one didn't, completely different situations.

Oh, they're different all right. Maybe not in the way you think, though.

Pavlov's dog?

Yes. I acknowledged upfront that the most famous accusation of sexual impropriety against a Democrat, well, exists, and you pounced on that as if I had said the opposite (which, knowing you, you probably thought I had said).

Democrats are conditioned to seize any opportunity to use unethical behavior to win, even using people to further their agenda.

You know, there are days when I wish your silly caricatures of us were true. Desperate times, desperate measures. But there is nothing unethical about bringing to light an attempted rape, no matter how long ago it was.

Stop trying to be clever, you're not good at it either.

Not what I've heard elsewhere.