The would be AG was a child sex predator

I can't believe that any conservatives on this forum are defending the right of men in their 40s to pursue 17 year old girls for sex.

Maybe that's because there aren't any, sex pest.
Cypress still has yet to make an honest post. Contributing in a value-added way to a conversation just isn't what he sign up for.
 
This is what Democrat's are "worried" about.... while Joe commutes the death sentences of many child killers...

Commuting a death sentence still means they stay in prison. They just don't get killed by a lethal injection. They still die in prison if that helps.

Unlike Matt Gaetz who was about to become Attorney General.

I don't know if you can think very hard about this but the two are NOT the same. Just not.

If you are OK with and WANT a sex predator like Matt Gaetz as attorney general you will have to wait until Trump pardons Ghislane M. and gives her a cabinet post.
 
Commuting a death sentence still means they stay in prison. They just don't get killed by a lethal injection. They still die in prison if that helps.

Unlike Matt Gaetz who was about to become Attorney General.

I don't know if you can think very hard about this but the two are NOT the same. Just not.

If you are OK with and WANT a sex predator like Matt Gaetz as attorney general you will have to wait until Trump pardons Ghislane M. and gives her a cabinet post.
They wanted him, until trump moved on.
 
You are mistaken. Any appeal to authority must be to an authoritative source, otherwise the appeal is summarily dismissed.

I disagree.


We can keep this up all day.

I'll cite a source, and you'll dismiss it?
 
You spent four years claiming Gaetz didnt do anything wrong.
I did? I'd like to see some quotes of that. Start them back 4 years ago then work forward so I can review each one. Provide context as well. Thanks in advance...... :)
 
I disagree.
I see that, but you are mistaken.

[misunderstood article deleted]
I'll explain. One can appeal to an agreed-upon authoritative source. That's not a problem. If the appeal is to a non-authoritative source, then it becomes an "appeal to authority" fallacy.

You appealed to Wikipedia. I summarily dismiss Wikipedia; it is a non-authoritative source.

We can keep this up all day.
Nope. It should end here with the above explanation.

I'll cite a source, and you'll dismiss it?
Correct. You can cite any authority that I recognize and I'll recognize it. Otherwise, your "appeal to authority" fallacy is discarded.
 
No. I think she'll wait until someone on the leftist news tells her what to think about it and then tell us all about it.

So I shouldn't bother reading the 37 page report that you linked for me, because you'll believe that my conclusions are just regurgitated LW media stuff? How disappointing. I thought better of you, kiddo. I won't bother giving them then, since I'd hate to fuck up your predictions -- and your classic projection -- here. :laugh:

PS -- I looked at Fox on line for their take. Interesting how light on details and heavy on excuses they are. Maybe you all should try better shources -- like the document you linked for me.
 
I cannot believe so many conservatives on this forum are defending the right of men in their 40s to pursue 17 year old girls for sex. None of them have daughters?

It's what Reichwingers do. There apparently is no depraved or sexual or violent or financial or stolen classified documents crime so heinous that they can't find a way to minimize and/or excuse it -- as long as the accused is one of theirs, of course.
 
Back
Top