I answered and you deleted it. Coward.

Stop. Stop with the nonsense. Do you really have that much trouble understanding that a lot of people don’t like Clinton because of her policies?

Hillary isn’t playing up the fact that she’s a woman. Nope. No sireee! Meanwhile, anyone who doesn’t support her is a racist, sexist bro. Can anyone imagine how ridiculous it would be if Sanders said Clinton supporters hate him because they are anti-Semites?

There are worse ways to earn cash.

I explained in the comment you are responding to

She said the physical abuse makes her want to fuck him. You can talk all you want about the psychology of abuse but that letter is highly problematic for the prosecution.

Ghomeshi won’t testify.

Have I said otherwise?

How, exactly, do you expect the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, when the accusers are unreliable? I’m very curious.

We’re talking about a conviction. You also have no idea if an assault took place. It looks likely that it did, but you weren’t there.

Good luck trying to secure a conviction with unreliable accusers in a sexual assault trial.

I’ve already given you the legal argument: the two accusers have been shown to not be reliable or credible. If you claim you never contacted Ghomeshi again and it’s shown that’s not true, or if you claim to have not consented but you wrote an email that asks for more abuse, then you can’t convict.

The email and her other behavior is a huge problem. She doesn’t give the impression of an abused woman. We’ll have to see what the judge decides but it looks pretty good for Ghomeshi right now.

Okay. Would you see him again? Would you send him flirtatious emails? Would you send an email days later that said: “You kicked my ass last night and that makes me want to f—- your brain out. Tonight.”?

Chill. “Enthusiastic consent” isn’t part of Canadian law, as far as I know.

That’s true but that’s an outdated law that isn’t enforced. Otherwise the entire bdsm community would be in prison. Ghomeshi showed a tape of him beating a woman to his employers but claimed it was consensual. The entire trial deals with the issue of consent.

It does when conviction requires evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

If you act like nothing is wrong when he hits you, and then you email him later talking about how great the beating was, and how you look forward to it happening again, doesn’t that get pretty close to consent?

We will have to disagree on this one. I consider an email that basically consents to more abuse to be a major problem for the prosecution.

How do you expect to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accuser didn’t consent when she sent an email asking for more abuse?