Well if "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply when jail time is not involved then what's the problem with the accusations? I don't recall jail time being on the table for Kavanaugh. Don't believe the hearing was "supreme court or prison". So you should have had no issue with Kavanaugh's name being dragged through the mud considering you want to do the same to Ford now. 

Also, I read through the thread, but how was I meant to realize that the person who quoted a response to your statement was actually trying to respond to the response of the further clarified intent of that quote? Don't see why you would assume that to be the case. 

Finally, this whole argument has been about how these kind of proceedings should have innocent until proven guilty regardless of whether or not there's a criminal proceeding, but now you hope that others get punished without giving them the same benefit of the doubt. Sounds pretty hypocritical to me. 

Again, where you to read the previous coments I said that I Ford would be off the hook, or more pressice, it would look bad to go after her. But feinstein is not. The entire point of it was that she had the letter since july. She decided not to come foward untill the last moment. Because of her the fbi did not have all the time to do the full investigations as democrats complain now. Feinstein and ford both claim that ford was meant to be keped off the public attention wich could have been done, had feinstein released the letter as soon as she got it and then ford would not have had to testify or even had her name exposed. While she denies it, EVIDENCE points to this being a political move.

So this time there is enough to discredit feinsteiin, while there was nothing at all to discredit kavanagh. 

I dont really get what your trying to say in the middle section.

PS.  have no idea how to spell anybodys name :P

If you are backing off the idea of trying to punish Ford in some way then we have no disagreements. Your initial post definitely included Ford though and the realization that it would look bad to go after her does not mean you have decided you wouldn't want it, just that it wouldn't be politically expedient. I'm arguing that wanting to punish Ford without proof is just as bad as what so many on the right are taking issue with with the Ford proceedings. Again, I read through the thread, but there is a difference between "aw shit I guess we can't go after her because it would look bad" and "actually it would be super hypocritical to go after Ford without proof that she was putting out false accusations so I redact my previous statement". 

Thats fine and your right, nobody can change your mind. But understand that its the same for the other side. And it should be your concern since its the majority thats against you, specially the majority in power. If the majority sees something wrong but you don't, then you probably have to start thinking if the problem is you.

wrong, the majority of the country voted against trump he did not win the popular vote and his popularity has been declining heavily ever since that day.

Thank God we're a REPUBLIC.

Thank God we're a REPUBLIC.

Zeus or another imaginary one that never was proven to exist with science? All jokes aside and with respect I am out of this argument since you are just baiting at this point even using bold letters on republic... have a nice day

Republic =/= Mob rule.  This is good. No jokes here.  And since invoking a three-letter word draws so much ire from you, you're proving that's it's not science but conviction.  How or why fight of be irate with something or someone who doesn't exist?  Sounds very intolerant.  Hmmmm...