Question of the Day

Why is it that cops continue to be judged using benefit of the doubt when their victims continue to be judged using reasonable doubt?

Isn't it strange that we never read about a wrongfully convicted police officer being exonerated after serving 20 plus years in prison for a crime he didn't commit?

Maybe, just maybe, we ought to either start to treat civilians accused of committing a crime with the same rights and benefits we offer cops, or, hey here's a thought, start treating cops accused of committing a crime like we do civilians.

Just thoughts and questions

Do you know a good Dominatrix?

A question for my 50th post

Just reading about lawsuit against Wal-Mart by an employee of the Virginia store that had the recent shooting and it struck me.
Is it too far fetched to believe that Wal-Mart, after the old man died, figured out that they were driving other businesses out of town wherever they built and therefore as a business model, adapted their plans to ensure a low wage environment in the communities they "serve"? If the answer was yes, could they be held liable for knowingly causing the destruction of entire communities?
As a second question, has anyone ever done a population count effect that Wal-Mart has on, say, a 50 mile radius of their stores over years and decades?

The real reason TFG needs to be indicted

I haven't seen any posts addressing this angle.

The most important reason TFG needs to be indicted, (assuming evidence supports indictment), is that whoever comes after him, as a Magat, would trample all over the laws of our land knowing he/she has precedent in the DOJ hands off policy.

TFG has to be indicted to make it easier to indict the next one without the years of hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth that we've suffered through.
If there is no indictment, we are all massively screwed as a country and as a democracy.

I Feel Like I Just Won The Lottery

My stepsons girlfriend found a roll of toilet paper with Chump er uhm Trumps face on every sheet.
I feel a sudden urge to take a healthy shit and come as close to an orgasmic experience as possible knowing that I get to flush a ahit-faced former president down the toilet.
YAHHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOO
🤣

Suicide prevention and Crisis Intervention teams are needed nore than ever now

Thought of the day

It makes me want to vomit that tonight, in every state in this country, people will be raising champagne glasses to toast the thought of rape and incest victims having to carry their unwanted and forced pregnancies to full term.

😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢

My dream scenario for the hearings.

I would absolutely love it if in the middle of each publuc hearing, the committee played a video montage lasting a good five to ten minutes of any witness pleading the fifth in regards to pertinent testimony that day.
No better way to connect the dolts uhm I mean dots. All these people were so proud to do the deeds, full well knowing that they were committing crimes against the United States.
Oh, and for good measure, play the tape of TFG saying no need to plead the fifth if you haven't done anything wrong at the start of each montage.

Why isn't anyone extrapolating this situation out to its obvious conclusion?

If anyone tries to pass a law that prohibited a man from having sex for pleasure, they would be drawn and quartered. Essentially, that is a aide effect of this ruling.
I have two suggestions:
1. Women go on sex strike effective immediately and do not relent until abortion is codified into law.
2. A state legislature should introduce a bill that allows any man who either supports or participates in sex for any reason other than procreation can be sued with the penalty being a minimum of $10,000 to be paid to the plaintiff.
Why not fight fire with fire?

Imagine if the information or tweet so carelessly posted was about you?

I'm usually a lurker, but this post really hit home. I believe the main reason or discourse has diminished in quality so much in the last 20 years and more so in the last 5 or so is that the golden rule is all but extinct.
Best intentions or unquestionable motives never give me the right to publish rumor/attacks/disparaging posts about others without either identifying that I'm expressing an opinion or getting my facts straight. To do less is more lazy, heartless and cruel. I know that if we listen to our conscience, we will all do better.
Would you be defending that carelessness if the post lied about you?