Who, exactly?
and
Physical evidence
From 36 years ago, at an unknown address
hahahahahaha
billvon
you seem to have an odd sense of humor
hahahahahaha
Why are you dodging the question?
If it was proven to you that her claim of atempted rape was true... do you thank that shoud disqualify Kavanaugh from bein on the surpreme court.???
How would you prove that?
I mean, it's pretty much a yes or no type of question.
Yet you cannot even say in the affirmative or the negative that his attempting to rape a woman should disqualify him from the Supreme Court.
Instead,
you chose to troll.
Billvon attempted to drag you back to the question at hand by pointing out the obvious. You know, the obvious you deliberately chose to ignore so you could troll. It is either that, or you are functionally stupid. Having seen you post, however, I don't think this can be put down to mental retardation.
Witnesses. Physical evidence. The usual.
Still dodging the question by trolling, you chose to troll some more:
Who, exactly?
and
Physical evidence
From 36 years ago, at an unknown address
hahahahahaha
billvon
you seem to have an odd sense of humor
Billvon, repeated the question:
Unlikely in this case.
But that wasn't the question. The question was - "If it was proven to you that her claim of atempted rape was true... do you thank that shoud disqualify Kavanaugh from bein on the surpreme court.???"
Do you answer it?
Let's see:
Hell dad, absent more knowledge, I ain't made up my mind yet.
ergo
If you can prove it, go ahead and do that
then, we'll revisit that question.
Which is an astonishing dodge, really.
You are literally admitting that you do not know if sexually assaulting someone and attempting to rape them should exclude them from sitting on the Supreme Court.
I mean, for most people, the answer would be an instant no.
If someone has sexually assaulted another person or tried to rape them, then it would be a foregone conclusion that they should not be sitting anywhere on a Supreme Court bench, let alone any judicial bench.
So no, you do not get to complain:
And, there is another of your mistakes.
You assume that I would have a position, based on ignorance, in this trivial pseudo combat that you imagine.
.............................................................
I am constantly amazed that some people will establish a "position" based on nothing but their attitudes and profound ignorance,
You stated your position that you cannot even be sure if having committed sexual assault or attempted to rape someone should exclude them from the bench.
The utterly ridiculous thing about the little game you are trying to play here is that it is not new, nor is it original. Stupid? Yes. But not original.
