This is the filth that is Jr.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

outriding

Diamond Member
Feb 20, 2002
4,449
3,884
136
Sorry fellas there’s no winning on either side. Moral corruption is deeply rooted in both parties.

You are exactly right both sides do it...

DErHNdGUwAAaKyJ.jpg
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,013
55,452
136
Your argument has been reduced to "the alleged victim says it happened but cannot remember any pertinent details so that's that".

lol

No, it isn't. I haven't taken a position where I said I was confident her story was true. It's more likely than not that she's telling the truth but it's far from certain.

You on the other hand took a position that you were confident it was false, based on basically nothing. Perfect example of motivated reasoning.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
37,391
33,048
136
Do you actually believe that? You’ve bought into this good vrs evil way to much. Neither party has your best interest in at heart.

Trump is such as vile and wretched beast yet he still is leader of the United States. You must ask yourself if you believe that to be true how your party of righteous allows him to lead...



It seems to be common practice to lump one or two bad apples into a heard. It’s almost as if you guys are tone deaf to your own party’s transgressions.

Your party should be dealing with this, not me. No one does anything though so nothing must be wrong, right?
What mechanism do you suggest Democrats should use to stop Trump?
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
327
126
No, it isn't. I haven't taken a position where I said I was confident her story was true. It's more likely than not that she's telling the truth but it's far from certain.

You on the other hand took a position that you were confident it was false, based on basically nothing. Perfect example of motivated reasoning.
Rather, I take the presumption of innocence rather than the presumption of guilt. The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. To date, there has been no proof or independent confirmation. When and if that changes, then so will I. That is the fundamental strength and fairness of our justice system. The other way leads to tyranny.
 
  • Like
Reactions: imported_tajmahal
Jul 9, 2009
10,759
2,086
136
What mechanism do you suggest Democrats should use to stop Trump?
This is just my conservative observation and of course it's biased by my political alignment with the Republican Party. Maybe, just maybe they could actually vote for change? You know in actual elections?
That's what we did to get President Trump elected in the first place.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
72,948
34,120
136
Rather, I take the presumption of innocence rather than the presumption of guilt. The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. To date, there has been no proof or independent confirmation. When and if that changes, then so will I. That is the fundamental strength and fairness of our justice system. The other way leads to tyranny.
The Senate is not tasked with assigning guilt or rendering any judgement at all on the matter between Ford and Kavanaugh. Their only job is determining if Kavanaugh is qualified and suited to membership on the Supreme Court and the answer to that question is clearly, "no."
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,013
55,452
136
Rather, I take the presumption of innocence rather than the presumption of guilt. The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. To date, there has been no proof or independent confirmation. When and if that changes, then so will I. That is the fundamental strength and fairness of our justice system. The other way leads to tyranny.

This isn’t a trial, this is a job interview.

Do you guys really not know how this works?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,013
55,452
136
This is just my conservative observation and of course it's biased by my political alignment with the Republican Party. Maybe, just maybe they could actually vote for change? You know in actual elections?
That's what we did to get President Trump elected in the first place.

Hey Taj, waiting on your ideas about how this guy isn’t an employee of the citizens. Any thoughts there?

Take your time.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,013
55,452
136
You mean the President? President Trump?

Nope, you made a claim about him not being an employee of the citizens earlier. Anyone who knows the constitution knows that was dumb, but I think we both know conservatives don’t understand the constitution well.

Do you want to admit you were wrong? If not, are you going to make some other excuse I will find even funnier?
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,759
2,086
136
Nope, you made a claim about him not being an employee of the citizens earlier. Anyone who knows the constitution knows that was dumb, but I think we both know conservatives don’t understand the constitution well.

Do you want to admit you were wrong? If not, are you going to make some other excuse I will find even funnier?
I'm pretty sure my claim was a Supreme Court Justice isn't an employee of citizens. Do I have to send in a 1099? Do his payroll taxes?

https://www.oshaeducationcenter.com/articles/employee-lunch-breaks.aspx
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,013
55,452
136
I'm pretty sure my claim was a Supreme Court Justice isn't an employee of citizens. Do I have to send in a 1099? Do his payroll taxes?

Right, and that claim is wrong if you understand the constitution. A Supreme Court justice is an employee of the citizens under every legal definition that exists in America. I genuinely wish conservatives understood the constitution better. They would have many fewer dumb ideas if they did.

If you would like some lessons on how the constitution works let me know! I’m totally here for you.
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,759
2,086
136
Right, and that claim is wrong if you understand the constitution. A Supreme Court justice is an employee of the citizens under every legal definition that exists in America. I genuinely wish conservatives understood the constitution better. They would have many fewer dumb ideas if they did.

If you would like some lessons on how the constitution works let me know! I’m totally here for you.

It's why you remind me so much of the smirking, simpering and smug Strzok in his hearing before he was fired. It's exactly who you are and who i always see when responding to your yapping little comments.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEIx9EAcMl8
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,013
55,452
136
It's why you remind me so much of the smirking, simpering and smug Strzok in his hearing before he was fired. It's exactly who you are and who i always see when responding to your yapping little comments.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEIx9EAcMl8

I don’t care who I remind you of. I just find it amusing that you have so little knowledge of the constitution while constantly yapping about how much you love it. That’s pretty common for conservatives though, I’m sure you agree. You guys are simply too lazy to actually put in the work to know what you’re talking about.

You have so, so much to learn from liberals about what our country is actually about but you’re too proud and too partisan to actually do it. It’s sad.
 

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
21,100
16,314
136
I think it's quite sad to observe the 'presumption of innocence' people ignore or strongly reject that principle when the alleged victim becomes the focus of discussion.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Victorian Gray

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,866
31,364
146
And Democrats don’t cheat on their wives or lie or do anything else indecent....

One party owns it. The other just hides in the corner all the while lying about it and claiming moral superiority, supporting their people and "their transgressions" and continuing to rail against "the others" that actually talk about the problems and deal with them.
 

paperfist

Diamond Member
Nov 30, 2000
6,539
287
126
www.the-teh.com
One party owns it. The other just hides in the corner all the while lying about it and claiming moral superiority, supporting their people and "their transgressions" and continuing to rail against "the others" that actually talk about the problems and deal with them.

I’m not sure I could identify the party that owns up to it. I don’t recall Edwards or Clinton owning up to anything. Trump you have to give a pass to, he’s like a special cousin that doesn’t know any better and his whole family is a bunch of enablers.

Seriously, even if any politician started out with no skeletons in their closet it wouldn’t be long until they started piling up.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Do you actually believe that? You’ve bought into this good vrs evil way to much. Neither party has your best interest in at heart.

Trump is such as vile and wretched beast yet he still is leader of the United States. You must ask yourself if you believe that to be true how your party of righteous allows him to lead...



It seems to be common practice to lump one or two bad apples into a heard. It’s almost as if you guys are tone deaf to your own party’s transgressions.

Your party should be dealing with this, not me. No one does anything though so nothing must be wrong, right?

I'm not the one arguing that 2 wrongs make a right, nor do I have a party.
Nihilism is for cowards. Sitting back and smugly remarking that it's all screwed up so why bother? is not morally superior, it's just chickenshit. Saying the other side is just as bad doesn't make your side better. Demanding that others fix their houses before you'll fix your own is not pointing out hypocriscy, it's being hypocritical.
 
Last edited: