|
Aruan posted:edit: to add, i always have felt kind of i guess 'gross' about how people use any accusation in this context because it always feels to be kind of exploitative - that we can't just reject someone for bad politics, so instead you have to use the worst moment in someone's life as the 'proof' that someone who is objectively bad is bad. does anyone else feel this way? you see it on both sides, too: look at franken, it was like 'aha! we found something we can use to force him out!' - just ignoring the tragedy and trauma and jumping to how to use it. it feels seedy. even this conversation is always within the implicit context of "joe biden: good or bad", which again just feels wrong. uh what, do you think people were sitting around jonesing to get rid of Franken and said "yay he abused his powerful position to get access to women so he could sexually assault them and intimidate them into silence, now we finally get to force him out!" ? Does it not occur to you that he got forced out of his influential and powerful job, not because people "exploited" him sexually assaulting women, but because he was sexually assaulting women?
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2021 00:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 22:31 |
|
|
nobody is talking about pressuring anyone to come forward, and it's weird that you're saying "well he's a bad politician anyway so he should go for other reasons", what if he's a great politician he should still go if he raped someone right?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2021 02:49
|
|
|
I just started reading this thread today and when I got to the post I was like "uh what", I didn't realize there was a statute of limitations on your takes. Yeah Biden should have been kicked to the curb long before Reade accused him, but I don't get why you seem to think wanting to get rid of creeps like Biden or Franken is "exploiting" anything, I think most people who want there to be consequences for sexual assault want that because they abhor sexual assault, not because they are "exploiting" something
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2021 02:58
|
|
|
Franken was the example you used about people "exploiting" assault though, why do you think that's what was happening
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2021 03:01
|
|
|
Aruan posted:yes i think franken should've resigned, but i think the gop people calling him to resign while supporting other rapists are ghouls, and don't give a gently caress about sexual violence, yes. Oh I agree they are, I'm just not sure why that's a major concern. Like, clearly the ghouls aren't the majority of the people who forced him to resign (because if all those people were ghouls who hated him no matter what they would have made him resign already), most of the people who said "ok this guy needs to go" after the assaults came out were people disgusted by the assaults, that's just common sense. If Franken shot someone on 5th Avenue, the Republican ghouls would call on him to resign while supporting other mass shooters, but surely we wouldn't go "ugh why is everyone politicizing this" because most people calling on him to resign for committing murder are probably not politicizing this
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2021 03:22
|
|
|
I think the people who are fine with 6 figure death counts are bad for sure, and while it's farcical to be cool with starting a pointless war that will bring mass murder (and mass rape!) but draw the line at one of the butchers who started it personally raping a woman himself, I'd still rather those people have a line somewhere than have no line at all. Like if someone says "I don't care about war or I don't care about a woman's right to choose, but I think Biden and Kavanaugh raped those women and I want them out", then I think that person is really dumb and evil for not caring about other horrible things, but I'll still take their support to get rapists out of power and if those rapists are also war criminals or fundies well hey then getting some of that out of power at the same time is even better. I think it'd be silly to accuse someone like me of "exploiting" the assaults in those situations, because I want assaulters out of power even if they don't start wars, and I also want war criminals out of power even if they don't commit assault but I can't make that happen unilaterally. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 06:53 on Feb 22, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2021 06:51
|
|
|
Kalit posted:I think I might have to disagree with you on that. First of all, you gave a strict definition earlier, pushing for a 6/7 figure death count in a war. Okay, so can we extrapolate that out at all to what would still fall under that definition? 6/7 figure death count if not even in a war? A war with a 4 figure death count? A non-war intervention with a 4 figure death count? Any death? What about voting in favor of a war that ended up failing? On top of that, does "pushing" mean speaking out on the senate/house floor in favor of it? Or does casting a vote in favor of it count? I would guess casting a vote in favor of it counts, but I do not want to put words in your mouth. Yeah now you're getting it!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2021 15:06
|
|
|
Kalit posted:
Only if you honestly believe Arnie didn't support the AUMF, and if that's your claim I'm going to need a citation of that
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2021 15:17
|
|
not quite. Using that logic, you can claim that Arnold Schwarzenegger is more qualified for political office in 2003 than Bernie Sanders. Which, I mean, if you honestly believe that than 
|
OK the flaw in your logic is that you think "replace people who vote for insane destructive wars" means "replace them with random people whose opinion on insane destructive wars I don't even know" I suggest instead, we vote for people who openly oppose those wars and promise not to start more of them, not just pick an actor and say "I don't know what he thinks, so by your logic he's better than Bernie" because that's not my logic that's yours.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2021 15:27
|
|
|
Also you're wrong there are very public statements of him talking about it that were easy to find https://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Arnold_Schwarzenegger_War_+_Peace.htm Arnold at the loving 2004 convention lol posted:Bush didn’t go into Iraq because the polls told him it was popular. But leadership isn’t about polls. It’s about making decisions you think are right and then standing behind them. That’s why America is safer with Bush as President. He knows you don’t reason with terrorists, you defeat them. He knows you can’t reason with people blinded by hate. They hate the power of the individual. They hate the progress of women; the religious freedom of others. They hate the liberating breeze of democracy. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2021 15:29
|
|
|
Ok to answer your question: no I don't think you should have cast an anti-war vote for Arnold in 2003 without finding out what he thought about whether we should be doing more wars
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2021 15:36
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:It was a bit more complicated than that. Does just being around the troops turn you into Just A Kid Boys Will Be Boys by osmosis? Crosby B. Alfred posted:My take, while I think Franken resigning was the right decision it's nowhere near what it was played out to be. Franken might be very well be a lovely old dude but I'm not entirely confident this was the right outcome. He was grabbing young women at official party functions, how was it not the right outcome to force him out so he couldn't keep doing that? What was the alternative, just tell these ladies to take one for the team, Bill Clinton rules apply? His seat didn't even go to a Republican, there was no drawback to getting him out, even from a cynical realpolitik perspective. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 15:03 on Mar 22, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2021 14:57
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:And to top it off, Tweeden had done similar raunchy skits. How is this relevant?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2021 15:43
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:I feel as if this thread has run it's course. Everything already been addressed by myself and other posters. That is the best I am able to do. Why is "well to top it off she did some raunchy skits" important context for the sexual assault she suffered? How does making sexy jokes as part of her job contextualize getting assaulted by a coworker?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2021 04:43
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:I'm not sure how to explain there's a difference between a a governor sexually harassing a staff aide then outright admitting vs. someone acting inappropriately during lewd comedy skit that's then shared delivered via highly partisan conservative talk radio might generate some skepticism. There's a photo of Franken harassing Tweeden while she's unconscious and in his apology he admitted it wasn't part of a skit and she didn't consent to the photo. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sen-franken-embarassed-groping-claims-rebuild-trust/story?id=51394106 Al Franken posted:"I am ashamed of that photo. She didn’t have any ability to consent. She had every right to feel violated by that photo. I have apologized to her. I was very grateful that she accepted my apology. That is all I can say. My intent doesn’t matter. What matters is that she felt the way she felt from this photo and for that I am ashamed.” But even without the photo, I'm not sure why you're implying an actor in a lewd comedy skit is apparently not able to tell the difference between jokes and assault, isn't a professional in show business going to be more experienced at telling the difference between acting and real life? If she can't tell the difference between fantasy and reality, then she must have accused everyone on the USO tour of harassing or assaulting her yes? No? Just the guy who also assaulted a female soldier on the same tour who wasn't in a skit and also assaulted another dozen women over the course of his career (and that's only the ones we know of)? Hmmmm VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 16:41 on Mar 23, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2021 16:36
|
|
|
I just realized that even though I followed the Ford/Kavanaugh assault case closely both here and in the mainstream media, I have no idea what any of Dr Ford's political opinions are. I don't know her opinions of foreign policy; I don't know her opinions on domestic policy. I don't know her opinions on China; I don't know her opinions on Russia. I don't know her opinion of Xi Jinpeng; I don't know her opinion of Vladimir Putin. I don't know who she voted for. I don't even know what political party she belongs to, if any, although I assume she's probably a Democrat after how the Republicans treated her, if she wasn't before. But I don't know because it wasn't breathlessly reported on in the news or endlessly brought up in discussion. It's as though Dr. Ford's political opinions have nothing at all to do with what happened in that basement 40-odd years ago. I suppose if I followed conservative news sources and conservative forums, which were laser-focused on smearing and discrediting her in order to protect a powerful man, I would have heard about every politically unreliable thing she ever said or did, alongside a *wink* *wink* *nudge* *nudge* how can you trust someone with opinions like that, can we be sure she wasn't put up to it. It's a good thing that good liberals wouldn't do something like that tho
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2021 17:13
|
|
|
The problem with ignoring it is that other accusers may come forward and make the accusations impossible to ignore. This is why Cuomo's team retaliated against the first accuser immediately, but all they had was some weak stuff about interpersonal work issues. Like it's not paranoid or a conspiracy theory that Cuomo did this, the people who did it came out and said "yes we did this" now that it might be good for their careers to say they blew the whistle on him (anonymously of course, in case he survives and it becomes bad for their careers to have blown the whistle) You gotta go scorched earth on the accuser and completely destroy her professionally and publicly, drag her through the mud and ruin her career, as a warning to others. Fortunately for Biden he had the whole resources of the DNC, the corporate media, and the ruling class at his disposal to do it, if Cuomo had had that we might not be seeing other accusers come forward. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 22:39 on Mar 24, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2021 22:36
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:The things he supports and does aren't even at all a part of the parties platform. He should be expelled from the party and he does not live up to it's values. That's why you have so many Democrats asking for his resignation. Maybe he isn't being expelled from the party because its values aren't what you thought they were
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2021 19:25
|
|
|
How are u posted:I guess one could make the argument that it is worth shutting down the State of New York in order to ensure one individual is punished, but that seems like collective punishment for the tens of millions of citizens of the State of New York who didn't have anything to do with the harassment and would have their lives severely disrupted. Surely the fault here would be on the sexual harasser who would rather let the government grind to a halt than do the right thing and resign...no? Or...no.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2021 00:45
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:Right and while progressive might want him gone they simply don't have the votes to make it happen if an investigation pans out... maybe they will. Wait how can you believe both (1) Democrats do not tolerate sexual harassment in their ranks, and (2) there aren't enough Democratic votes to remove one from office The Republicans will obviously all cynically vote for it so if he doesn't get impeached or removed it's because Democrats protected him
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2021 12:40
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:Politicians need to be able to have their voters believe that they're doing a good job. Going back to the earlier example of Franken I'm strongly against the initial demands of removal without any investigation whatsoever   *Furrowed brow, blowing bubbles from a mahogany pipe* "By Jove, Watson, this case is an inscrutable mystery wrapped in an enigma locked in a riddle buried deep in Terra Incognita!! We may never know what the grinning man's hands are doing on the chest of a woman who complained he sexually assaulted her! Is it some sort of esoteric religious rite, or mind control, or a runaway clone created by that mad genius Doctor Moriarty? Summon the Baker Street Boys for the investigative endeavor of a lifetime!"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2021 19:13
|
|
|
So uhhh was it wrong to call for Trump to drop out after the access hollywood tape and a dozen accusers, there was no formal investigation, so no doubt you're just as incensed that the RADICAL LEFT DEMOCRATS didn't afford him the presumption of innocence on this, yes?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2021 19:19
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:And? The pictures didn't come out initially. Everything came out on right wing radio - that should generate skepticism. Incorrect, Tweeden shared the picture the same day as her initial accusation https://www.twincities.com/2017/12/07/al-franken-sexual-misconduct-allegations-timeline-senator-minnesota/
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2021 19:21
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:I don't think you understand my position nor am I alone in this line of thinking. I prefer justice that is orderly, not mob rule. How is demanding that a governor resign after abusing the power of his office to sexually harass and intimidate subordinates "mob rule"? How is it "just and orderly" for him to continue in power where he can abuse more women? Crosby B. Alfred posted:No, it was the correct call. How does this make sense. Why is sometime unqualified to remain as a candidate qualified to remain in power? Shouldn't it be the same standard, or even the reverse? It's obviously worse if a powerful man wants to abuse women because unlike a private citizen merely running for office, a president or governor can wield state power against his victims!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2021 20:40
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:I don't understand what you are trying to argue here? I am asking you why you think calling for a governor's resignation after he harasses 10 women is "mob rule" I'm also asking why you think calling for Trump's resignation without an investigation is somehow different.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2021 20:59
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:I already addressed this. Trump was a political candidate not a sitting senator. Franken did not have a history of inappropriate conduct. Trump did. The accusations against Franken initially came out on right wing radio hence skepticism is warranted. Cuomo has a history of harassing women. Ten women accused him and his staff leaked to the press that he ordered them to intimidate an accuser. Why do we have to "investigate" him to make sure all those women and his own staff aren't lying, but we can know Trump did it without any investigation at all? Is it the letter by their name or what's different
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2021 21:22
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:Because removing a sitting politician is a big deal because they are operating an entire government. Harassing women and abusing the office to intimidate victims is a much bigger deal than letting the lieutenant governor take over, how can you say otherwise. Crosby B. Alfred posted:Trump should have never, ever have been nominated in the first place let alone voted into office.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2021 22:27
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:
iirc Trump didn't admit it under oath, Ivana alleged it under oath and he denied it. He obviously did it but I don't think he ever admitted to it. But ok, so we don't need a formal investigation to demand Trump's resignation if we've seen enough evidence to say "ok yeah he did it, it can't all be fake news". I agree. So it's wrong to demand Cuomo's resignation in light of the evidence we've seen because??? An investigation might reveal all 10 women are lying and/or secret Republicans and [insert some crazy circumstances that justify him retaliating against and attempting to intimidate these women into shutting up]???
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2021 03:23
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:No, it's not wrong to demand his resignation and as far as I am aware NY State Democrats haven't ceased this either. But you just said he shouldn't be pressured into resigning without a formal investigation??? You called that "mob rule" So have you changed your mind, or is there some third option here where it's only ok to say he should resign as long as the pressure is unsuccessful?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2021 03:31
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:No, I highlighted earlier how there's a difference between the circumstances of Trump, Cuomo and Franken. The circumstances aren't the same, but they all easily meet the threshold of "yeah he definitely did it", which is my point. I mean, are all ten women lying? Is that remotely reasonable to believe, obviously not. But I don't understand your position, you say it's fine to pressure Cuomo to resign without an investigation, but you also said if he's pressured to resign before a formal investigation it's "mob rule" and you oppose it, so which is it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2021 03:43
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:No, the circumstances aren't the same. You are contradicting your earlier post as well where you said that "we didn't need a formal investigation for Trump." No I'm not contradicting myself, I agree that we didn't need a formal investigation for Trump because we don't think his accusers might be lying, and likewise we don't need one for Cuomo because Crosby B. Alfred posted:No, I do not think they are lying. Seems pretty straightforward to me! Crosby B. Alfred posted:I think it's fine to pressure Cuomo to resign for multiple reasons beyond the number of accusers but if there's a investigation then so be it! I responded to another poster I don't care for mob rule and I don't. What does mob rule have to do with anything if you agree that pressuring Cuomo to resign isn't mob rule after all?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2021 04:28
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:Disagree, I think the #metoo movement is great and commendable. It means that we should listen to women no longer dismiss claims of sexual harassment as "boys will be boys" or whatever lovely excuses no matter how common they are even in the the present day. Crosby B. Alfred posted:Franken was in tour in Iraq motivating the troops and this was supposed to have been joke. Granted, it's still harassment, poor taste, etc. but remember this the perfect combination of young men, a former comedian and in the early 2000s. And to top it off, Tweeden had done similar raunchy skits. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2021 04:31
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:What's your point? Let me break it down for you real slow like Crosby B. Alfred posted:Disagree, I think the #metoo movement is great and commendable. It means that we should listen to women no longer dismiss claims of sexual harassment as "boys will be boys" or whatever lovely excuses Crosby B. Alfred posted:Franken was in tour in Iraq motivating the troops and this was supposed to have been joke. Granted, it's still harassment, poor taste, etc. but remember this the perfect combination of young men, a former comedian and in the early 2000s. It was harassment but [boys will be boys] I am saying you should reread your posts with a critical eye and ask yourself why it is so many of them sound like the excuses for abusers that the MeToo movement is fighting against VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Apr 11, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2021 19:34
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:There's a difference between actual sexual harassment vs. actors participating a raunchy skit that went past someone's personal boundaries. That is not what Franken did and you know this. Please stop dancing around and making all these nasty implications, Tweeden was not too sensitive about a raunchy skit, she was sexually assaulted by a serial sexual assaulter who went on to assault multiple other women. I can't tell if you're doing this on purpose to rile people up so they get punished by the mods for "impoliteness" or if you're so thick you're just repeating things you heard somewhere without grasping what you're saying, but survivors of sexual assault read this thread and can see you downplaying these assaults and making insinuations about women like Tweeden and I would appreciate it very much if you'd cut it out, even if you're not doing it on purpose. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Apr 11, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2021 20:28
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:Well, I think it's wrong to accuse someone of criminal sex acts if that isn't the case. He sexually assaulted at least half a dozen women, stop acting like Tweeden is complaining about an innocent skit that went too far, Franken has a pattern of groping women and then gaslighting them about it and claiming they don't know when they've been assaulted. Tweeden is not lying or confused or mistaken about his actions or intentions, and we know that because he did it to a bunch more women! I know the mods aren't going to make you stop these sly insinuations about Tweeden because you've been doing it for pages and the only mod action was to punish someone who got fed up with your behavior, so I'm just going to ask you nicely to stop doing it, it's gross. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 21:44 on Apr 11, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2021 21:42
|
|
|
Franken was not accused of writing the "Baby It's Cold Outside" lyrics, he was accused of shoving his tongue down a coworker's throat at a rehearsal without her consentquote:Tweeden stated that Franken, who in 2008 had been elected to the Senate from Minnesota, insisted that they rehearse the kiss that appeared in the script for a skit in the USO show "I said 'OK' so he would stop badgering me. We did the line leading up to the kiss and then he came at me, put his hand on the back of my head, mashed his lips against mine and aggressively stuck his tongue in my mouth." E: Crosby B. Alfred posted:I'm not making any insinuations but simply repeating the facts of the case. No you are not and your misrepresentation of the facts has been corrected by multiple people. And yet you keep repeating the same falsehoods about what happened. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 21:59 on Apr 11, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2021 21:53
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:I'm making analogy how morality is viewed throughout the ages. You seem to have trouble understanding basic analogies and different threads of conversation. That analogy has nothing to do with what happened and you continue to misrepresent (lie?) about what did happen. She did not complain about a skit she agreed to that she regretted afterwards, she complained that he shoved his tongue in her mouth without her consent during a rehearsal. Sticking your tongue down another actor's throat while you grab her head so she can't get away is not part of a skit. E: Crosby B. Alfred posted:If we can't tell the difference between an actual criminal sex act vs. someone crossing another persons personal boundaries with something like a inappropriate lewd joke we are in a ton of trouble as a society. Grabbing someone and shoving his tongue in her is not "a lewd joke", stop lying about what happened VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 22:02 on Apr 11, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2021 22:00
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:Not true. Kissing was a part of the skit but I will say that Franken took it way too far but again is it a a criminal sexual act? I don't believe so. He grabbed her by the back of the head and shoved his tongue down her throat in a rehearsal. idk if that's criminal but why do you keep eliding that accusation and claiming it was just lewd jokes, that's not what the victim alleged I have quoted her own words to you already
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2021 22:27
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:Kissing was a part of the skit to which Tweeden choose to participate. I don't know if anyone has ever kissed you before sometimes people kiss with tongue and grab their partners head. Obviously, Franken took this way too far and but it doesn't appear he was intentionally trying to violate her boundaries but made a really stupid mistake one that he should have absolutely have known better especially for such an experienced actor. They literally teach "Sex Consent Courses" in acting school for this very reason so they everyone is aware of other people's boundaries. I don't believe accidentally crossing those boundaries rises to a criminal sex act but it still isn't acceptable conduct. Sticking your tongue in another actor's mouth is not part of a stage kiss, and of course it's intentional! This is actually a big problem in film and theater, where actresses are assaulted during scenes and the response is pretty much what you're doing here: by agreeing to take part in a kissing/sex scene she was basically asking to be tongued or groped because that's what people do in real sex blah blah blah. I will give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you're just not familiar with the difference between stage kissing and a real-life hot and heavy petting session, but think about what you're saying here and what it means for women in the business who have to worry a male costar will just start tongueing them while they're working together. This logic would never apply to say, a man, whose co-actor deliberately kicked him in the balls during a choreographed fight scene. You never hear "oh well that happens in fights, shouldn't have agreed to do a stage fight if you didn't want the other guy to take advantage of the opportunity to beat you up for real"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2021 23:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 22:31 |
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I know the mods aren't going to make you stop these sly insinuations about Tweeden because you've been doing it for pages and the only mod action was to punish someone who got fed up with your behavior, so I'm just going to ask you nicely to stop doing it, it's gross. Glad I was wrong about this, thanks Herstory Crosby B. Alfred posted:No, for the dozenth time that is not what I am arguing. She didn't consent to kiss Franken in this way and he violated her but it doesn't rise to level of a criminal sex act. At this point I feel like your purposefully dis-interrupting my argument. Idk if what she alleged is a criminal sex act or not because I'm not a lawyer, or if it's even still within the statute of limitations. My problem with what you're saying is that you're downplaying what actually happened, claiming it wasn't intentional on his part (it was), or that it's somehow relevant that she took the job (it isn't) It seems like the problem is that you think what she alleged is criminal behavior, but instead of making a legal argument why it isn't (or, idk accepting it), you're trying to make it into something it wasn't and making a bunch of insinuations about her (she's a Republican, she's an actress, she's sexual herself, he didn't do it on purpose, etc) E: let me put it another way. If you think Franken shouldn't be in prison (although I don't think anyone has argued that he should, so not sure why you're fixating on it), you should make a legal or moral argument for why his actions aren't or shouldn't be a crime even if everything Tweeden alleged is completely accurate*, not try to cast doubt on her credibility or mitigate what he did by appealing to the behavior of young men (he was in his 40s) etc *(because let's face it, it is. half a dozen other women confirmed he groped them too, he didn't do it to only them and not Tweeden and Tweeded is coincidentally somehow mistaken). VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 02:01 on Apr 12, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2021 00:03
|
|