I don’t think that people were somehow woke by the old sexual assault charges. Trump is associated with Putin. Assange is associated with Putin. So now Assange is a bad bad man. Makes sense in an insane way.
Strange narrative you have there, maybe it makes sense to you...I guess if you leave all common sense and evidence out of the conversation.
There have already been calls for Assange to be locked up with Trump’s lackeys in this thread. I don’t try to make stuff up out of the blue.
Maybe they have wanted Assange locked up from before Trump ever arrived on the scene. If your going to call out their hypocrisy, show proof of their hypocrisy. Go and find their comments.
Counter proposal: You go find them and prove me wrong.
No way man.
You don’t want to use a band’s website search function that is powered by a Netscape browser from the year 1997? Neither do I. Even if it worked I have some gardening to do this afternoon.
I for one have never flipped or flopped when it came to Wikileaks and Julian Asstrange. But yea, facts.
I have no problem with anyone that has been consistent on this, i may disagree but i respect it... but you are definitely an outlier from the left side of the poltical spectrum
I’ll add it to the list of things I’ve been called.
So apparently peoples perceptions of others has to stay static forever, no matter what comes to light.
I guess none of you liked Bill Cosby, Louis C.K, Kevin Spacey, OJ Simpson or anyone like that at any period of time. I guess you always knew deep down inside something was wrong.
Twilight Zone indeed.
the difference is people applauded what Assange was doing when it suited their needs. no one every applauded Cosby, Louis C.K or Kevin Spacey for sexual assault and no one applauded OJ for being a murderer. Assange from the beginning was being applauded for dealing with stolen documents.
Maybe some people departed the Assange bandwagon when he was accused of rape.
Raises hand. I've changed my opinion on Assange for 2 reasons 1) he's a fucking rapist; 2) he worked with the Russians to interfere with 2016 US elections. Prior to that I had more good than bad to say about him, and appreciated his exposing government corruption and secrets. So I have changed my tune on him and will admit it.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
So apparently peoples perceptions of others has to stay static forever, no matter what comes to light.
I guess none of you liked Bill Cosby, Louis C.K, Kevin Spacey, OJ Simpson or anyone like that at any period of time. I guess you always knew deep down inside something was wrong.
Twilight Zone indeed.
the difference is people applauded what Assange was doing when it suited their needs. no one every applauded Cosby, Louis C.K or Kevin Spacey for sexual assault and no one applauded OJ for being a murderer. Assange from the beginning was being applauded for dealing with stolen documents.
Maybe some people departed the Assange bandwagon when he was accused of rape.
Raises hand. I've changed my opinion on Assange for 2 reasons 1) he's a fucking rapist; 2) he worked with the Russians to interfere with 2016 US elections. Prior to that I had more good than bad to say about him, and appreciated his exposing government corruption and secrets. So I have changed my tune on him and will admit it.
I'm pretty much right where you are.
I'm also pretty sure either you or I wasn't here on the AMT singing his praises, but apparently that still makes us hypocrites.
I for one have never flipped or flopped when it came to Wikileaks and Julian Asstrange. But yea, facts.
I have no problem with anyone that has been consistent on this, i may disagree but i respect it... but you are definitely an outlier from the left side of the poltical spectrum
I’ll add it to the list of things I’ve been called.
I for one have never flipped or flopped when it came to Wikileaks and Julian Asstrange. But yea, facts.
I have no problem with anyone that has been consistent on this, i may disagree but i respect it... but you are definitely an outlier from the left side of the poltical spectrum
I’ll add it to the list of things I’ve been called.
He deserves what ever happenes to him , he knew the game he was in so let him deal with the consequences I for one never paid to much attention on what he was up too ..
He should answer to the Swedish charges. The US charges are just political charges and he’s about to become a political prisoner. The US is one corrupt country that this guy, Chelsea Manning and Snowden has exposed them as...
anyone who exposes corruption within government is fine with me...
No, they’re criminal charges. But I’d be fine with having him stand trial in Sweden, serve his time if convicted and then face extradition to the US to face trial.
Bullshit...they are political charges. The US is getting Just as corrupt as the banana republics you go to war with every few years...take of your star spangled glasses. You like your government spying on you...home of the free my ass. Home of the corrupt is more like it.
Seems you know something the rest of us don't. What are the US charges levied against Assange?
Because I haven't seen that published anywhere. Do tell....
LMFAO....The fact that US prosecutors would reveal the charges should tell you something. You like most Americans are blind if you cannot see the corrupt ness within your government that was exposed.
wtf are you even on about?
when people are arrested, the charges become public knowledge
how do you suggest this should have been handled? charges should have been kept a secret? tRUmper's would have an aneurysm going on about the deep state. Transparency is necessary.
see my thumb?
Because the charges from the US are bogus political charges because the US was exposed as corrupt...and you cannot handle that many of us know your government is corrupt no matter who the president. You will essentially bully the UK or Sweden to extradite him...because that's what the US has become.
He should face the charges in Sweden though. That's up to them to extradite.
Extradition is a law already on the books. Like saying Mnuchin is being bullied into turning over tRUmp's tax returns - it's simply not true. The law is already in place. UK & Sweden sign on to extradition treaties bc it's mutually beneficial for all countries to maintain international rule of law.
Also, fuck off with that both sides are bad shit. It's simply not true either.
WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020AT 07/07/2020
He should answer to the Swedish charges. The US charges are just political charges and he’s about to become a political prisoner. The US is one corrupt country that this guy, Chelsea Manning and Snowden has exposed them as...
anyone who exposes corruption within government is fine with me...
No, they’re criminal charges. But I’d be fine with having him stand trial in Sweden, serve his time if convicted and then face extradition to the US to face trial.
Bullshit...they are political charges. The US is getting Just as corrupt as the banana republics you go to war with every few years...take of your star spangled glasses. You like your government spying on you...home of the free my ass. Home of the corrupt is more like it.
Seems you know something the rest of us don't. What are the US charges levied against Assange?
Because I haven't seen that published anywhere. Do tell....
LMFAO....The fact that US prosecutors would reveal the charges should tell you something. You like most Americans are blind if you cannot see the corrupt ness within your government that was exposed.
wtf are you even on about?
when people are arrested, the charges become public knowledge
how do you suggest this should have been handled? charges should have been kept a secret? tRUmper's would have an aneurysm going on about the deep state. Transparency is necessary.
see my thumb?
Because the charges from the US are bogus political charges because the US was exposed as corrupt...and you cannot handle that many of us know your government is corrupt no matter who the president. You will essentially bully the UK or Sweden to extradite him...because that's what the US has become.
He should face the charges in Sweden though. That's up to them to extradite.
Extradition is a law already on the books. Like saying Mnuchin is being bullied into turning over tRUmp's tax returns - it's simply not true. The law is already in place. UK & Sweden sign on to extradition treaties bc it's mutually beneficial for all countries to maintain international rule of law.
Also, fuck off with that both sides are bad shit. It's simply not true either.
Oh sweet baby Jebus and your facts. Put those away already. Facts have no bearing in reality.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange will be punished for embarrassing the DC establishment
The key to the prosecution of Assange has always been to punish him without again embarrassing the powerful figures he made mockeries of.
JONATHAN TURLEY | OPINION COLUMNIST|
“He is our property.” Those celebratory words of Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., came on CNN soon after the news of the arrest of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.
It was a sentiment shared by virtually everyone in Washington from Congress to the intelligence services. Assange committed the unpardonable sins of embarrassing the establishment — from members of Congress to intelligence officials to the news media. And he will now be punished for our sins. Despite having significant constitutional arguments to be made, it is likely that he will be stripped of those defenses and even barred from raising the overall context of his actions in federal court. What could be the most important free speech and free press case in our history could well be reduced to the scope and substance of an unauthorized computer access case.
For years, the public has debated what Assange is: journalist, whistleblower, foreign agent, dupe. The problem is that Assange is first and foremost a publisher.
Moreover, he was doing something that is usually heralded in the news media. WikiLeaks disclosed a massive and arguably unconstitutional surveillance program by the United States impacting virtually every citizen. It later published emails that showed that the Democratic National Committee and the campaign of Hillary Clinton lied in various statements to the public, including the rigging of the primary for her nomination. No one has argued that any of these emails were false. They were embarrassing. Of course, there is not crime of embarrassing the establishment, but that is merely a technicality.
The criminal charge against Assange filed in a federal court was crafted to circumvent the obvious constitutional problems in prosecuting him. The charge is revealing. He is charged with a single count for his alleged involvement in the hacking operation of Chelsea Manning in 2010.
By alleging that Assange actively played a role in the hacking operation, the government is seeking to portray him as part of the theft rather than the distribution of the information. The prosecutors say Assange helped Manning secure a password to gain access to additional information. If true, that would be a step that most news organizations would not take.
It's likely there will be a superseding indictment once Assange is successfully extradited to the United States. Moreover, the Justice Department is likely to move aggressively to strip Assange of his core defenses. Through what is called a motion in limine, the government will ask the court to declare that the disclosure of the arguably unconstitutional surveillance program is immaterial.
This would leave Assange with only the ability to challenge whether he helped with passwords and little or no opportunity to present evidence of his motivations or the threat to privacy. For the jurors, they could simply be faced with some Australian guy who helped with passwords in hacking national security information. It would be like trying a man for breaking and entering while barring evidence that the house was on fire and he thought he was rescuing people instead.
They will punish Assange for their sins
The key to prosecuting Assange has always been to punish him without again embarrassing the powerful figures made mockeries by his disclosures. That means to keep him from discussing how the U.S. government launched an unprecedented surveillance program that scooped up the emails and communications of citizens without a warrant or probable cause. He cannot discuss how Democratic and Republican members either were complicit or incompetent in their oversight. He cannot discuss how the public was lied to about the program.
A glimpse of that artificial scope was seen within minutes of the arrest. CNN brought on its national security analyst, James Clapper, former director of national intelligence. CNN never mentioned that Clapper was accused of perjury in denying the existence of the National Security Agency surveillance program and was personally implicated in the scandal that WikiLeaks triggered.
Clapper was asked directly before Congress, “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?”
Clapper responded, “No, sir. … Not wittingly.” Later, Clapper said his testimony was “the least untruthful” statement he could make.
That would still make it a lie, of course, but this is Washington and people like Clapper are untouchable. In the view of the establishment, Assange is the problem.
Washington needs to silence Assange
So on CNN, Clapper was allowed to explain (without any hint of self-awareness or contradiction) that Assange has “caused us all kinds of grief in the intelligence community.” Indeed, few people seriously believe that the government is aggrieved about password protection. The grief was the disclosure of an abusive surveillance program and a long record of lies to the American people. Assange will be convicted of the felony of causing embarrassment in the first degree.
Notably, no one went to jail or was fired for the surveillance programs. Those in charge of failed congressional oversight were reelected. Clapper was never charged with perjury. Even figures shown to have lied in the Clinton emails, like former CNN commentator Donna Brazile (who lied about giving Clinton’s campaign questions in advance of the presidential debates), are now back on television. Assange, however, could well do time.
With Assange’s extradition, all will be well again in Washington. As Sen. Manchin declared, Assange is their “property” and will be punished for his sins. Once he is hoisted as a wretch, few will again entertain such hubris in the future.
Jonathan Turley, a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors, is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Follow him on Twitter: @JonathanTurley
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,720
Exposing corruption- good. Molestation/ sexual crimes- bad. What a drag when someone does both.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020AT 07/07/2020
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,720
Exposing corruption- good. Molestation/ sexual crimes- bad. What a drag when someone does both.
We assume guilt now based on an accusation? I thought we liked the rule of law. He has never been tried, or convicted, and i believe Swedem dropped the investigation a few years ago. If he did it, burn him, but i see people acting like the man is definitely a rapist when he hasnt even been charged. I guess we just assume guilt now, interesting time.
Exposing corruption- good. Molestation/ sexual crimes- bad. What a drag when someone does both.
We assume guilt now based on an accusation? I thought we liked the rule of law. He has never been tried, or convicted, and i believe Swedem dropped the investigation a few years ago. If he did it, burn him, but i see people acting like the man is definitely a rapist when he hasnt even been charged. I guess we just assume guilt now, interesting time.
One set of charges was dropped because of the years passed and the limit of whatever its called had been reached. That is not saying he is not guilty.
The other investigation was dropped because they assumed he would not leave his cowardly asylum-bullshit. That is not saying he is not guilty.
And a message board is not a court, common sense and your own thinking of the matter plays in and can play in to your opinion/conclusion. And not a strict "innocent until proven guilty" that is used in the courts for a reason in that context. Do you consider Cosby innocent of 999 cases of rape because he was just charged for 1? Would you consider that kid on the playground your child said hit him/her innocent because he had not been found guilty in a court of law? Weird that has to be explained to someone not being Tucker Carlson.
Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Exposing corruption- good. Molestation/ sexual crimes- bad. What a drag when someone does both.
We assume guilt now based on an accusation? I thought we liked the rule of law. He has never been tried, or convicted, and i believe Swedem dropped the investigation a few years ago. If he did it, burn him, but i see people acting like the man is definitely a rapist when he hasnt even been charged. I guess we just assume guilt now, interesting time.
One set of charges was dropped because of the years passed and the limit of whatever its called had been reached. That is not saying he is not guilty.
The other investigation was dropped because they assumed he would not leave his cowardly asylum-bullshit. That is not saying he is not guilty.
And a message board is not a court, common sense and your own thinking of the matter plays in and can play in to your opinion/conclusion. And not a strict "innocent until proven guilty" that is used in the courts for a reason in that context. Do you consider Cosby innocent of 999 cases of rape because he was just charged for 1? Would you consider that kid on the playground your child said hit him/her innocent because he had not been found guilty in a court of law? Weird that has to be explained to someone not being Tucker Carlson.
You don't have to explain shit to me Swede... you keep saying "that is not saying he is not guilty"...... it also isn't saying he IS guilty.... and I've seen several on here say they hate him because he's a rapist or refer to.him as a rapist...... call me when he's tried and convicted, and if he is let him rot in a cell for it, but until then none of us knows if he did anything at all
Exposing corruption- good. Molestation/ sexual crimes- bad. What a drag when someone does both.
We assume guilt now based on an accusation? I thought we liked the rule of law. He has never been tried, or convicted, and i believe Swedem dropped the investigation a few years ago. If he did it, burn him, but i see people acting like the man is definitely a rapist when he hasnt even been charged. I guess we just assume guilt now, interesting time.
One set of charges was dropped because of the years passed and the limit of whatever its called had been reached. That is not saying he is not guilty.
The other investigation was dropped because they assumed he would not leave his cowardly asylum-bullshit. That is not saying he is not guilty.
And a message board is not a court, common sense and your own thinking of the matter plays in and can play in to your opinion/conclusion. And not a strict "innocent until proven guilty" that is used in the courts for a reason in that context. Do you consider Cosby innocent of 999 cases of rape because he was just charged for 1? Would you consider that kid on the playground your child said hit him/her innocent because he had not been found guilty in a court of law? Weird that has to be explained to someone not being Tucker Carlson.
You don't have to explain shit to me Swede... you keep saying "that is not saying he is not guilty"...... it also isn't saying he IS guilty.... and I've seen several on here say they hate him because he's a rapist or refer to.him as a rapist...... call me when he's tried and convicted, and if he is let him rot in a cell for it, but until then none of us knows if he did anything at all
Point out anyone saying he has been found guilty in court?
Or, re-read my post. You don't seem to grasp it, so maybe "bother" some more. lol
Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Exposing corruption- good. Molestation/ sexual crimes- bad. What a drag when someone does both.
We assume guilt now based on an accusation? I thought we liked the rule of law. He has never been tried, or convicted, and i believe Swedem dropped the investigation a few years ago. If he did it, burn him, but i see people acting like the man is definitely a rapist when he hasnt even been charged. I guess we just assume guilt now, interesting time.
One set of charges was dropped because of the years passed and the limit of whatever its called had been reached. That is not saying he is not guilty.
The other investigation was dropped because they assumed he would not leave his cowardly asylum-bullshit. That is not saying he is not guilty.
And a message board is not a court, common sense and your own thinking of the matter plays in and can play in to your opinion/conclusion. And not a strict "innocent until proven guilty" that is used in the courts for a reason in that context. Do you consider Cosby innocent of 999 cases of rape because he was just charged for 1? Would you consider that kid on the playground your child said hit him/her innocent because he had not been found guilty in a court of law? Weird that has to be explained to someone not being Tucker Carlson.
You don't have to explain shit to me Swede... you keep saying "that is not saying he is not guilty"...... it also isn't saying he IS guilty.... and I've seen several on here say they hate him because he's a rapist or refer to.him as a rapist...... call me when he's tried and convicted, and if he is let him rot in a cell for it, but until then none of us knows if he did anything at all
Point out anyone saying he has been found guilty in court?
Or, re-read my post. You don't seem to grasp it, so maybe "bother" some more. lol
Maybe you haven't seen them on here, but I'm 100% certain that in the past few days, at least one member has stated definitively something along the lines of changing opinions upon learning that he's a rapist. I don't think that means the collective "we" feel that way as m2h implies (I certainly don't and am all for due process), but there's some truth behind it.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Comments
I'm also pretty sure either you or I wasn't here on the AMT singing his praises, but apparently that still makes us hypocrites.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Also, fuck off with that both sides are bad shit. It's simply not true either.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
A-F'ing-Men!!!
“He is our property.” Those celebratory words of Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., came on CNN soon after the news of the arrest of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.
It was a sentiment shared by virtually everyone in Washington from Congress to the intelligence services. Assange committed the unpardonable sins of embarrassing the establishment — from members of Congress to intelligence officials to the news media. And he will now be punished for our sins. Despite having significant constitutional arguments to be made, it is likely that he will be stripped of those defenses and even barred from raising the overall context of his actions in federal court. What could be the most important free speech and free press case in our history could well be reduced to the scope and substance of an unauthorized computer access case.
For years, the public has debated what Assange is: journalist, whistleblower, foreign agent, dupe. The problem is that Assange is first and foremost a publisher.
Moreover, he was doing something that is usually heralded in the news media. WikiLeaks disclosed a massive and arguably unconstitutional surveillance program by the United States impacting virtually every citizen. It later published emails that showed that the Democratic National Committee and the campaign of Hillary Clinton lied in various statements to the public, including the rigging of the primary for her nomination. No one has argued that any of these emails were false. They were embarrassing. Of course, there is not crime of embarrassing the establishment, but that is merely a technicality.
The criminal charge against Assange filed in a federal court was crafted to circumvent the obvious constitutional problems in prosecuting him. The charge is revealing. He is charged with a single count for his alleged involvement in the hacking operation of Chelsea Manning in 2010.
By alleging that Assange actively played a role in the hacking operation, the government is seeking to portray him as part of the theft rather than the distribution of the information. The prosecutors say Assange helped Manning secure a password to gain access to additional information. If true, that would be a step that most news organizations would not take.
It's likely there will be a superseding indictment once Assange is successfully extradited to the United States. Moreover, the Justice Department is likely to move aggressively to strip Assange of his core defenses. Through what is called a motion in limine, the government will ask the court to declare that the disclosure of the arguably unconstitutional surveillance program is immaterial.
This would leave Assange with only the ability to challenge whether he helped with passwords and little or no opportunity to present evidence of his motivations or the threat to privacy. For the jurors, they could simply be faced with some Australian guy who helped with passwords in hacking national security information. It would be like trying a man for breaking and entering while barring evidence that the house was on fire and he thought he was rescuing people instead.
They will punish Assange for their sins
The key to prosecuting Assange has always been to punish him without again embarrassing the powerful figures made mockeries by his disclosures. That means to keep him from discussing how the U.S. government launched an unprecedented surveillance program that scooped up the emails and communications of citizens without a warrant or probable cause. He cannot discuss how Democratic and Republican members either were complicit or incompetent in their oversight. He cannot discuss how the public was lied to about the program.
A glimpse of that artificial scope was seen within minutes of the arrest. CNN brought on its national security analyst, James Clapper, former director of national intelligence. CNN never mentioned that Clapper was accused of perjury in denying the existence of the National Security Agency surveillance program and was personally implicated in the scandal that WikiLeaks triggered.
Clapper was asked directly before Congress, “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?”
Clapper responded, “No, sir. … Not wittingly.” Later, Clapper said his testimony was “the least untruthful” statement he could make.
That would still make it a lie, of course, but this is Washington and people like Clapper are untouchable. In the view of the establishment, Assange is the problem.
Washington needs to silence Assange
So on CNN, Clapper was allowed to explain (without any hint of self-awareness or contradiction) that Assange has “caused us all kinds of grief in the intelligence community.” Indeed, few people seriously believe that the government is aggrieved about password protection. The grief was the disclosure of an abusive surveillance program and a long record of lies to the American people. Assange will be convicted of the felony of causing embarrassment in the first degree.
Notably, no one went to jail or was fired for the surveillance programs. Those in charge of failed congressional oversight were reelected. Clapper was never charged with perjury. Even figures shown to have lied in the Clinton emails, like former CNN commentator Donna Brazile (who lied about giving Clinton’s campaign questions in advance of the presidential debates), are now back on television. Assange, however, could well do time.
With Assange’s extradition, all will be well again in Washington. As Sen. Manchin declared, Assange is their “property” and will be punished for his sins. Once he is hoisted as a wretch, few will again entertain such hubris in the future.
Jonathan Turley, a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors, is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Follow him on Twitter: @JonathanTurley
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not in London
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
The other investigation was dropped because they assumed he would not leave his cowardly asylum-bullshit. That is not saying he is not guilty.
And a message board is not a court, common sense and your own thinking of the matter plays in and can play in to your opinion/conclusion. And not a strict "innocent until proven guilty" that is used in the courts for a reason in that context. Do you consider Cosby innocent of 999 cases of rape because he was just charged for 1? Would you consider that kid on the playground your child said hit him/her innocent because he had not been found guilty in a court of law? Weird that has to be explained to someone not being Tucker Carlson.
https://apple.news/ADjPrQEsaQwGbRJO3HPAiMA
Why no criticism of Team Trump Treason?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Or, re-read my post. You don't seem to grasp it, so maybe "bother" some more. lol
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1