I think I got some berries from Dingle.![]()
this makes most sense from my spelling point of view. my phone is where that way.
I think I got some berries from Dingle.![]()
You must log in or register to see images
So Trumps ex lawyer recorded his phonecalls with client's
Oh dear.....![]()
Client confidentiality can be dismissed by a judge if they believe the lawyer was part of the crime.Surely it's inadmissible in a court of law?
Even if it's explosive politically we have seen that trump really doesn't care about that.
If it can't be used in court he will carry on regardless.
Client confidentiality can be dismissed by a judge if they believe the lawyer was part of the crime.
The special prosecutor goes before the judge who will order a panel not involved with the investigation to go through evidence collected in the raids and only hand over evidence of wrong doing directly related to Meullers or the New York AG cases.
Clinton on [HASHTAG]#MeToo[/HASHTAG]: Why I Never Said Sorry to Monica Lewinsky
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world...nica-lewinsky/ar-AAye2Pe?li=BBoPWjQ&ocid=iehp
Lewinsky wasn't raped, pressured, or sexually harassed. Like many women she had an attraction to a man in power and had consensual relations with him.
I don't know about the other women Bill was involved with, but it's ridiculous to say Lewinsky was a victim here.
The inclusion of sexual encounters you regret years later under the rape and sexual harassment umbrella is absurd and trivialises real rape and sexual harassment.
very gray area.
Anyone who is in a position of power theorectically shouldn't be doing anything to a subordinate.
I personally don't think theres anything wrong but in law it has always been a minefield and in this case, lewinsky is seen as the victim no two ways about it.
The Miss America beauty pageant is scrapping its swimwear segment and will no longer judge competitors on physical appearance

Sweden recently passed a law basically "yes means yes" instead of "no means no".
Two people have sex, but don't verbally consent... It's rape. Technically by this law I rape my wife multiple times a week. Of course she is willing, and of course I wouldn't touch her if it wasn't something she wanted... But by the Swedish definition I am raping her.
In most countries now, two people get drunk and have sex. Technically the man is a rapist (never the woman) because being drunk a woman cannot consent to sex. A man is still responsible for anything he does when drunk though.
I understand the reason for this law, to stop men praying on women by deliberately getting them drunk or taking advantage of drunk women. It's to let women feel safe drinking in public... It's still a dangerous law though and could make well intending people into rapists in the eye of the law.
Don't get me wrong. I agree women deserve protecting and sexual harrasment and rape are very bad and serious crimes... I'm just worried that too much is being called a crime that really isn't anything other than a woman regretting a previous encounter later.
Regretting a previous sexual encounter shouldn't be rape.

Yeah, right![]()
I agree no way is he getting it multiple times a week. he's married too long
