• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why are people upset about moore but not this guy? MSM barely covers, no one seems interested.

[SUB][/SUB]
ReverendHellh0und said:
the deadlock is over corruption, not the corroborated evidence he ****ed little underage girls forced into prostitution
Click to expand...

And again that link is from 2015. Got anything more recent about the "corroborated evidence" from the prostitution?
 
Praxas said:
[SUB][/SUB]

And again that link is from 2015. Got anything more recent about the "corroborated evidence" from the prostitution?
Click to expand...



More was 30+ years ago. Are you saying ****ing children forced into prostitution if the evidence is more than two years old?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
More was 30+ years ago. Are you saying ****ing children forced into prostitution if the evidence is more than two years old?
Click to expand...

Moore actually has accusers that have come forward. Who has come forward in the Menendez case about prostitution? Answer? Noone.
 
cpwill said:
.... No, I don't think we necessarily would be. Moore being a sexual abuser fits a narrative the national media likes to tell. Melendez being corrupt and probably also sexually problematic does not.

Moore's defenders are wrong to claim the evidence against him is all some kind of massive Conspiracy. But they are correct to point to a large double standard in the media when it comes to this kind of scandal.
Click to expand...

Well, that's your opinion but I disagree. It's kinda like how Clinton's accusers only seem to be important when Hillary is running for office or when a Republican does something ****ed up. The biggest spotlight mot politicians ever see is when they are running for office, and even more so when it's a special election like this where there aren't many other elections going on, and then it's for the senate which is obviously high stakes right now in terms of politics. And then it has the added story of an uber conservative Christian that is out to preach morality to all the heathens when in reality he was approaching teen girls when he was in his 30's. It's juicy **** in terms of politics. But I think the same story on a democrat in a contested election would elicit just as much news coverage.
 
Praxas said:
Moore actually has accusers that have come forward. Who has come forward in the Menendez case about prostitution? Answer? Noone.
Click to expand...


Making excuses for sexually abusing children forced into prostitution much?

maybe you should read some of my links, understand the evidence against him, realize these victims were children in the dominican republic.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2299124-sheehyamendedaffidavitformelgenwarant.html



here ya go, read it yourself, then defend him some more.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Well, that's your opinion but I disagree. It's kinda like how Clinton's accusers only seem to be important when Hillary is running for office or when a Republican does something ****ed up.
Click to expand...

Huh?

Do, do you remember the 90s? It was a massive deal because he was President. Menendez is a sitting Senator. He actually has power, unlike Moore, who is merely seeking it.

then it has the added story of an uber conservative Christian that is out to preach morality to all the heathens when in reality he was approaching teen girls when he was in his 30's.
Click to expand...

That's the story the national media likes to tell, and that's a big part of why it rushes to do so. Democrat malfeasance, much less so.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Making excuses for sexually abusing children forced into prostitution much?
Click to expand...

Asking for evidence from you is making excuses? Only in Libertarian dumb dumb land maybe.

maybe you should read some of my links, understand the evidence against him, realize these victims were children in the dominican republic.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2299124-sheehyamendedaffidavitformelgenwarant.html



here ya go, read it yourself, then defend him some more.
Click to expand...

Typical dishonsety from you, nowhere did I defend him. I asked for evidence which you just NOW provided even though I've asked you twice. Also, you keep pointed to evidence that has since been refuted as unsubstantiated.

NEWARK — Lawyers want unsubstantiated allegations that U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez used prostitutes while vacationing in the Dominican Republic mentioned in court during his federal corruption trial.

The argument isn't coming from the lawyers you would expect.

In a lengthy debate Tuesday outside of the jury's presence, attorneys for Menendez and his co-defendant, Salomon Melgen, sought to keep references to those allegations in the proceedings, while prosecutors sought to redact them.
Click to expand...

https://www.politico.com/states/new...menendez-legal-team-wins-small-victory-114572

The prosecutors didn't want the evidence so it was most likely FALSE or unsubstantiated. Let's see you get out of this one. Again, ask yourself why the prosecution doesn't want the evidence allowed?
 
Praxas said:
Asking for evidence from you is making excuses? Only in Libertarian dumb dumb land maybe.



Typical dishonsety from you, nowhere did I defend him. I asked for evidence which you just NOW provided even though I've asked you twice. Also, you keep pointed to evidence that has since been refuted as unsubstantiated.



https://www.politico.com/states/new...menendez-legal-team-wins-small-victory-114572

The prosecutors didn't want the evidence so it was most likely FALSE or unsubstantiated. Let's see you get out of this one. Again, ask yourself why the prosecution doesn't want the evidence allowed?
Click to expand...



asking for evidence is, coming to the conclusion that the prosecutors didn't want the evidence because (as you capitalized) claimed is "FALSE".


Prosecution didn't want the evidence because hauling up slave trade victims from the dominican republic would be an issue, and therefore being able to prosecute the sick **** you are defending would be hard. Just like prosecuting moore would be hard. does it mean he didnt do it?


I find it funny you get all triggered that I said you defended him then you do just that again in the very same post.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
asking for evidence is, coming to the conclusion that the prosecutors didn't want the evidence because (as you capitalized) claimed is "FALSE".


Prosecution didn't want the evidence because hauling up slave trade victims from the dominican republic would be an issue, and therefore being able to prosecute the sick **** you are defending would be hard. Just like prosecuting moore would be hard. does it mean he didnt do it?


I find it funny you get all triggered that I said you defended him then you do just that again in the very same post.
Click to expand...

LOL I find it funny that your evidence is unsubstantiated and it is not a problem to get witness testimony or video from those women. Face facts, the evidence is bunk and you fell for it. :lamo All to deflect from Moore you brought up a 2 year old article.

I love Libertarian "special folk" that try to deflect from an ACTUAL sexual assaulter of underage teens like Moore.

If Menendez did what you claim, the government would NAIL his ass to the wall. even the PROSECUTORS didn't want the evidence presented. And last but not least, questioning your false evidence is NOT defending the guy.
 
Praxas said:
LOL I find it funny that your evidence is unsubstantiated and it is not a problem to get witness testimony or video from those women. Face facts, the evidence is bunk and you fell for it. :lamo All to deflect from Moore you brought up a 2 year old article.

I love Libertarian "special folk" that try to deflect from an ACTUAL sexual assaulter of underage teens like Moore.


If Menendez did what you claim, the government would NAIL his ass to the wall. even the PROSECUTORS didn't want the evidence presented. And last but not least, questioning your false evidence is NOT defending the guy.
Click to expand...




Moores a scumbag. so is menendez. only one of us is defending a person who likes to **** minors who were forced into prostitution.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Moores a scumbag. so is menendez. only one of us is defending a person who likes to **** minors who were forced into prostitution.
Click to expand...

Again, calling into question your evidence, which even the prosecutors don't want allowed, is not defending him. Sad that you can't see that, but then you are libertarian.
 
Praxas said:
Again, calling into question your evidence, which even the prosecutors don't want allowed, is not defending him. Sad that you can't see that, but then you are libertarian.
Click to expand...


What's sad is that there is more evidence that Menendez hit up minors forced into prostitution than there is russian collusion, but you pick and choose what you believe.


There is also a funny post of yours where you are arguing the opposite position on more in another thread where your claiming that evidence is not needed as there is no one video taping themselves so we got to go on accusations. hypocrite much?
 
cpwill said:
Huh?

Do, do you remember the 90s? It was a massive deal because he was President. Menendez is a sitting Senator. He actually has power, unlike Moore, who is merely seeking it.



That's the story the national media likes to tell, and that's a big part of why it rushes to do so. Democrat malfeasance, much less so.
Click to expand...

Well, the president having women accuse him is quite different than a senator being kinda sorta accused. It makes for better TV and drama when an actual victim stands up and makes accusations. Sad to say, and it probably shouldn't be that way, but it's true. And like I said, Menendez is going through trials, and the accusations aren't 30 years old so there should be actual evidence that can be gathered. If he's guilty of anything at all, or if there are credible accusations of sexual abuse, get rid of his ass. You won't hear us screaming fake news or insisting the accusers are just out for money etc.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
What's sad is that there is more evidence that Menendez hit up minors forced into prostitution than there is russian collusion, but you pick and choose what you believe.
Click to expand...

Nope since even the Prsoecutors don't want that evidence allowed. Its obviously bunk.

There is also a funny post of yours where you are arguing the opposite position on more in another thread where your claiming that evidence is not needed as there is no one video taping themselves so we got to go on accusations. hypocrite much?
Click to expand...

Again it shows your lack of reading comprehension of my comments since even the prosecutors don't want the evidence allowed. Face facts, you thought you had a "Gotcha" article and instead it proves you don't even know what the trial is about nor why even the prosecutors don't want the prostitution evidence allowed. You've just been schooled son, better to back away now that you've been debunked as usual.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Well, for starters if this guy was in an election right now I'm pretty sure we'd be discussing it. But he's not. Also, if you can tell me who is accusing him of being a predator and what their story is that might would help out your case. If he's convicted of any kind of corruption charges or if there are any substantial allegations in terms of sex crimes I'd love to see him thrown out on his ass.

If people can't understand why people focus a bit more on people who are currently in a contested election than the guy who is in government but is accused of wrong doing and is currently going through the legal process it's cause they don't want to see the difference.
Click to expand...
Wow. So...the excuse as to why democrats dont give a **** about Menendez and yet have been in a non stop meltdown mode over Moore is that Moore is running for office, while Menendez...well...he's just an already elected congressman currently in office. THATS why its not important to dems.

Yep...I would say you actually very clearly made a true statement. Add to it the fact that one has an R next to his name and one has a D, and the statement is truly complete. Leftists dont give a **** about the crimes of their elected officials.

If true...Moore is accused of grabbing teenagers 38 years ago (Bad enough...dont get me wrong. Im not minimizing it at all). Menendez is accused of ****ing underage teenage victims forced into prostitution. So obviously...**** that Roy Moore guy, huh?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
What say you? Why is this predator who is currently waiting a jury verdict on corruption charges not having to face expuslion threats like moore? what is the cause for the double standard? [/FONT]
[/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

Probably because Menendez is on his way out while Moore is trying to weasel his way in.

There have been threads in here about Menendez before so acting like no one has said anything is well... not true.
 
Last edited:
Praxas said:
Nope since even the Prsoecutors don't want that evidence allowed. Its obviously bunk.
Click to expand...


Did you just ignore my post to you explaining that?


Again it shows your lack of reading comprehension of my comments since even the prosecutors don't want the evidence allowed. Face facts, you thought you had a "Gotcha" article and instead it proves you don't even know what the trial is about nor why even the prosecutors don't want the prostitution evidence allowed. You've just been schooled son, better to back away now that you've been debunked as usual.
Click to expand...



"son"? :lol:


anyway, keep defending your child ****er guy.



Because prosecutors felt that they should only persue corruption charges does not mean your kid ****er didn't do what has been claimed. Aren't you at least a bit curious to find out if he did?
 
poweRob said:
Probably because Menendez is on his way out while Moore is trying to weasel his way in.

Tehre have been threads in here about Menendez before so acting like no one has said anything is well... not true.
Click to expand...




Jury is deadlocked. this should add to, not be ingored because of the reasons you give.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Did you just ignore my post to you explaining that?
Click to expand...

Yep and it was pretty idiotic explanation. They are still able to get voice and video testimony from them if they wanted to. The reason they don't is because the evidence is bunk.

"son"? :lol:

anyway, keep defending your child ****er guy.
Click to expand...

Again, the only defending anyone is you with your idiotic deflections.

Because prosecutors felt that they should only persue corruption charges does not mean your kid ****er didn't do what has been claimed. Aren't you at least a bit curious to find out if he did?
Click to expand...

No, it means the evidence they had is bunk or they would have charged him with that as well. Underage prostitution would have nailed the guy to the wall but since the evidence is bunk they wouldn't even allow it. Have fun with your make believe :lamo
 
Praxas said:
Yep and it was pretty idiotic explanation. They are still able to get voice and video testimony from them if they wanted to. The reason they don't is because the evidence is bunk.



Again, the only defending anyone is you with your idiotic deflections.



No, it means the evidence they had is bunk or they would have charged him with that as well. Underage prostitution would have nailed the guy to the wall but since the evidence is bunk they wouldn't even allow it. Have fun with your make believe :lamo
Click to expand...






cool man, they were brown underage girls anyway so who cares, right?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Jury is deadlocked. this should add to, not be ingored because of the reasons you give.
Click to expand...

I don't think it should be ignored at all. I think he's a PoS and shoud be run out on a rail. Always thought this. I didn't delve into defense mode of fabricating conspiracy theories to protect him just because he has a D next to his name.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
cool man, they were brown underage girls anyway so who cares, right?
Click to expand...

You mean the bunk evidence that even the Prosecutors wouldn't allow? Yeah, the prosecutors don't submit evidence they know to be bunk and untrue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom