Convenient

its does. legally.
either you believe they are both innocent until proven guilty, or both guilty until proven innocent.

Weinstein's accusers had a video of him.

this.

There's audiotapes and proof that Weinstein did what was said he did. There's no proof for Kavanaugh.

kavanaugh's allegation are made up
weinstein is a creepy kike but didn't rape anybody.
didn't even have to sweat.

sauce?
would like to see

youtube.com/watch?v=wEu7quzUsDk
oh shit
mods delete thread lol

vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/10/harvey-weinstein-audio-tape

youtube.com/watch?v=wEu7quzUsDk

you are corrupting that phrase.
innocent until proven guilty gives people the benefit of the doubt so as to open up the door for a fair trial.
if people were guilty until proven innocent then punishments would be handed down at the whim of a judge or a society. and what society would allow someone to prove innocence after already being in jail and fined?
innocent to proven guilty is also not prejudicial. meaning you are not pre-judging someone as innocent. a person is not legally innocent. they are innocent in theory so the process of representation in court and due process will make sense.
going through the process of a trial, representing some in court, and due process is pointless for someone who is legally guilty already.
in order to allow someone to even have the opportunity to have a trial, be represented by a lawyer and enjoy due process you have to have a foundational belief in place, and that belief is found in the "innocent until proven guilty" concept.

None of your posts so far have mentioned anything about legal presumption of innocence and even if you had, this Algerian sugar-beet forum isn't required to adhere to legalities when forming opinions.

I dont believe Weinstein did anything illegal...unethical, sure. But not illegal

Jow Forums mostly called Weinstein's prostitutes prostitutes for being prostitutes

we just laughed at Weinstein because they metoo'd one of their own

I actually don't think Weinstein's shit warranted the backlash it got. It was accusations. Hollywood strumpets hitting the wall, not getting roles/being replaced, all of a sudden were "assaulted" by Weinstein. I am sure he got his dick wet in quid pro quo, but the audio of one of his "victims" just shows me a pathetic tribe member pleading with a girl. The way the women tell it, he practically held them down and violently raped their assholes. All those women knew sucking his dick and swallowing his cum meant big careers, which they all had.

Same shit with Cosby. The guy partied with girls, did drugs, etc and 30+ years later, he is a "monster" because he think actually blacks shouldn't get away with "dindu nuffin". Once media consensus settles that you are a "bad person", that's it. You are done. All based on nothing more than repeated messages on social media and slick produced news reports.

All of this is about creating a new norm where if women don't like you, your past sexual activities are retroactively deemed assault and you lose your present status and are condemned to a fucked future. Listen and believe is antithetical to any judicial process, which creates stability and consistency in society.

If Harvey's accusations had suddenly appeared the moment he chose to run for public office, you'd officially have my skepticism
Hell, in many cases a lot of us are skeptical already, and assert that many of the actresses knew damn well what they were doing and why
So fuck you OP

>harvey weinstein is guilty

The man has not had his trial yet.

and if you are an observer of current society you will see that current trends are going toward the guilty until proven innocent concept. we see this primarily in social justice and feminism.
those who are deemed guilty immediately, never enjoy acceptance in society even after proving their innocence. take a look at the OJ simpson trial, the george zimmerman trial, or any high profile case where the accused was found innocent or acquitted, against popular demand.
when the circumstances are in favor of a worldview, innocence or guilt will be embedded forever in the public conscience, regardless of a trial result.

This.
OP is a faggot.

He is guilty of being a jew what more do you want?

it's pretty easy to stay safe by not raping people

>one allegation 35 years ago
>multiple allegations with a shown business infrastructure with lawyers and businessmen to keep the rape game going

Fuck off, you illiterate nigger

Weinstein didn't even deny shit you dumb fak

It doesn't mean the charges brought against him are legitimate.

fucking starlets in exchange for roles is historically the norm throughout most of hollywood, you don't need to go very far to find examples of it.

This poster raped 12 women. Anyone who says otherwise is sexist

>Confederate meme flags
>Defending jew rapist
...really?

the rule of law does not only apply to obeying law and the concept of order.
rule of law also applies to the citizens accepting the results of legal and lawful court proceedings.
this is why social justice and popular demand are so dangerous to the american republic. people reject and riot against jury verdicts they dislike, that are legally and lawfully given.
this is in violation of the concept of rule of law, just as much as rioting during a hurricane is in opposition to the concept of the rule of law.
it is why we use the word "ruling" with regard to how judges speak on legal matters.
rule (reign) of law
rule (determination) of law

It is impossible to have a criminal trial for kavanaugh due to how old the allegations are, not so much for wienstein. KYS faggot.

fuck off, ahmed

My position is consistent. Women deserve to be raped and then laughed at when they cry.

>Degenerate dirty kike vs clean Irish catholic

Not even a coin toss faggot

This one!

Defending the right to a fair trial and presumption of innocence, faggot.

If only there was some sort of system with a judge and jury, where people could present facts and evidence so we could figure out if someone accused of a crime really did it.

But that's impossible. If somebody accuses you of a crime, you should universally either be let go or shot. There's no grey area.

I don't think OP knows what evidence is...

>proven and recent accusations that came out to stop an old pervert
>allegations where every witness denies the story from 35 years ago on something that wasnt rape

Totally the same thing

These faggots don’t understand context lad

Fixed it for you.

Attached: 1537802556557.png (460x696, 328K)

There's no question Harvey "did it"; the only question is whether any of it was wrong. And seeing how all the cases he's not currently engaged in legal proceedings over were essentially quid pro quos, it's unlikely it was.