Rubio fires chief of staff


First look at the laws on the books in the questioned time-frame.

Next look at motivations and associations of the accuser.


Well we know that the age of consent at the time was 16. And motivations and associations might get you an indictment which is a quite low bar. But it would be likely impossible to get a conviction. Also remember that there were something like 8 different women that brought accusations against Moore, corroborated by many others.


And did she have parental permission?


For which there is no proof provided.

Hearsay is a wonderful thing.


It has come down to “Prove you did not.” You can not prove a negative and that is why the courts were set up as they are. Presumption of innocence.


But we have changed with the SJW’s leading the charge. Isn’t PC wonderful? (Sarcasm to the extreme)


Permission to engage in sexual behavior with him??


There was no sex involved.


Courts had nothing to do with this. This was handled in the court of public opinion. And there were plenty of republicans who stated that they listened to the charges these eight women brought, and they listened to Moore’s denials and they found the women more credible. The same thing happened with the residents of Alabama, sufficiently disgusted with alogations they felt were true to turn a red state blue.


There was no intercourse involved, true. Did you not listen to what the woman said Moore did to her when she was 14?


Yes and the lemmings were given their opinions! They are weak minded and told what to believe!


A very unbiased kangaroo court headed by the leftist media.


So all the Alabama residents that believed the girls are lemmings?


Most, yes. The media owns people.


So what exactly, if anything, are you accusing Rubio of??


Well, that’s subjective. But the eight women that told their stories are not the media. And it’s THEIR stories that people listened to and voted accordingly.


The media pushed it and I am not saying anything other than Rubio is just a guilty as the SOB that burned people at the stake.


I’m not sure what this means???


Fire a man because he is accused! Burn a person for witchcraft.


I’m guessing that you didn’t open the link in the op so I’ll post from it for you here.

“By early this afternoon, I had sufficient EVIDENCE to conclude that while employed by this office, my chief of staff had violated office policies regarding proper relations between a supervisor and their subordinates. I further concluded that this led to actions which in my judgement amounted to threats to withhold employment benefits.”