Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
Home Repair (alt.home.repair) For all homeowners and DIYers with many experienced tradesmen. Solve your toughest home fix-it problems. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
![]()
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#2
![]()
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 14:21:40 -0400, Tekkie®
wrote: posted for all of us... On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 22:01:11 -0400, Clare Snyder wrote: On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 10:25:38 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 9/25/2018 9:37 AM, Unquestionably Confused wrote: No, why don't YOU get it straight? It doesn't make any real difference if the intent is to prosecute for a crime that MAY have occurred or whether it's to show a person's past transgressions with the hope of ruining their career. If you wish to do either you do so with proof.* Not with innuendo and hearsay such as we see going on in this instance.* It such were the case, there would likely not be a single soul in either the House or Senate who would be fit to serve on the basis of stink alone. Proof is not needed in the Court of Public Opinion, just a good story. We now have to believe everything women say too. No matter the outcome, there will always be a dark shadow. Which is why he should DEMAND an FBI investigation to clear his name if he is CERTAIN he's innocent. Investigate what? The girl can't even remember where this happened or when. What do you expect them to find? Hair, fibers, DNA? There don't seem to be any witnesses who remember anything. In 48 hours this will be over in all likelihood and you folks can find another windmill to tilt. I hope so but the Dems really seem to have some crafty people that outsmart the Pubs every turn. The Dems will do ANYTHING to retain power. ANd the Repiublicans won't (and aren't)?????? |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|