- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Have any Republican women accused Roy Moore of improprieties?
Posted on 11/14/17 at 8:57 am to Vacherie Saint
Posted on 11/14/17 at 8:57 am to Vacherie Saint
True enough, even D. C. Stephenson and Woodrow Wilson were Democrats.
0
Posted on 11/14/17 at 8:58 am to The Boat
Maybe this is proof democrat women are sluts
Posted on 11/14/17 at 9:02 am to AU34
quote:
Are you simple? This is north Alabama, white democrats are as rare as hens teeth.
So it makes perfect sense to provide the 'victims' with their revenge factor by stealing a Senate Seat in favor of DEMOCRATs.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 9:04 am to The Boat
An anonymous police officer quoted in this LINK ]New Yorker piece on Roy's misadventures at the mall is pretty much a Republican:
The second officer went further. “A friend of mine told me he was banned from there,” he said. He added, “I actually voted for Moore. I liked him at one time. But I’m basically disgusted now, to be honest with you. Some of the things he’s said recently, I’ve changed my tune completely about this guy.” He went on, explaining why Moore no longer appeals to him. “When I heard what he said on ‘Hannity’ the other night,” he said, referring to an appearance Moore made on Sean Hannity’s radio show last Friday, “I almost stood straight up. The thing about how he’s never dated anybody without their mother’s permission, that appalled me. That made me want to throw up. Why would you need someone’s permission to date somebody? I’m probably gonna write in Luther Strange.”
The second officer went further. “A friend of mine told me he was banned from there,” he said. He added, “I actually voted for Moore. I liked him at one time. But I’m basically disgusted now, to be honest with you. Some of the things he’s said recently, I’ve changed my tune completely about this guy.” He went on, explaining why Moore no longer appeals to him. “When I heard what he said on ‘Hannity’ the other night,” he said, referring to an appearance Moore made on Sean Hannity’s radio show last Friday, “I almost stood straight up. The thing about how he’s never dated anybody without their mother’s permission, that appalled me. That made me want to throw up. Why would you need someone’s permission to date somebody? I’m probably gonna write in Luther Strange.”
Posted on 11/15/17 at 9:27 am to Quarterite
The statements from the officers do read like heresay so far; but, here is a cut and paste on what LEOs do when making a disposition judgement:
To resolve credibility issues, the trier of fact identifies the factual questions in dispute, summarizes the evidence on each disputed question, states which version she believes, and explains in detail why she found the chosen version more credible, considering such factors as: (1) The witness’ opportunity and capacity to observe the event or act in question; (2) the witness’ character; (3) any prior inconsistent statement by the witness; (4) a witness’ bias, or lack of bias; (5) the contradiction of the witness’ version of events by other evidence or its consistency with other evidence; (6) the inherent improbability of the witness’ version of events; and (7) the witness’ demeanor.
However, O*fi*e* **d*l** may overturn her demeanor-based credibility findings when she has sufficiently sound reasons for doing so, such as when her credibility findings are incomplete, inconsistent with the weight of the evidence, and they do not reflect the record as a whole.
--
Sent from my BlackBerry KEYone®
To resolve credibility issues, the trier of fact identifies the factual questions in dispute, summarizes the evidence on each disputed question, states which version she believes, and explains in detail why she found the chosen version more credible, considering such factors as: (1) The witness’ opportunity and capacity to observe the event or act in question; (2) the witness’ character; (3) any prior inconsistent statement by the witness; (4) a witness’ bias, or lack of bias; (5) the contradiction of the witness’ version of events by other evidence or its consistency with other evidence; (6) the inherent improbability of the witness’ version of events; and (7) the witness’ demeanor.
However, O*fi*e* **d*l** may overturn her demeanor-based credibility findings when she has sufficiently sound reasons for doing so, such as when her credibility findings are incomplete, inconsistent with the weight of the evidence, and they do not reflect the record as a whole.
--
Sent from my BlackBerry KEYone®
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News