jillio
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2006
- Messages
- 60,213
- Reaction score
- 22
The burden of proof is on the accuser....
The women that were paid hush money already served their burden of proof.

The burden of proof is on the accuser....

No one has said that.![]()
You have implied it, and you know very well that was exactly the implication you were attempting. You are not as sophisticated in your implications as you believe you are.
Cain's supposed make a live news conference any minute. Maybe we'll find out something, one way or another.
. Guess no one will call him cool and collected. I don't envy his PR handlers if he does get the candidacy.
Of course not.It states an openness to waiting for facts/evidence
BTW We linked court cases but you still haven't linked "formal complaints" or "formal charges"
Like I said, making an assumption that he is innocent, and they have something to hide.
The women that were paid hush money already served their burden of proof.![]()
It's not an "assumption".... it's a "presumption"..It's the American way. Presumed innocent until proven guilty. He very well may be proven guilty....but that hasn't happened yet.
That makes it an assumption.Proof?
I suspect they will have a tougher job than McCain's handlers did.
I had forgotten about that!People slip and sask in the stores all the time and try to sue. Some are paid off to go away.
Being paid off means dilly.
No, he isn't. He is running for the Republican candidacy to run for President. You are putting the cart before the horse.
Was the use of the word "lynching" a well planned attempt at an implication, or just another racial slip on your part? I am pretty sure it was the slip.
This has virtually nothing to do with the topic at hand. If you just want to vent your generalized anger at the world, create a thread to do so.
You have implied it, and you know very well that was exactly the implication you were attempting. .
You are wrong.
The fact that they were paid off.
Um .... Yeah the candidacy ha nothing at all to do with running for president :roll:
I am sure that was an intentional slip on your part.
The fact that they were paid off.
Another lie. That isn't even remotely close to the truth. There is absolutely nothing to indicate that is proof of anything. Ask any attorney.
Again, Proof?