TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/seduction
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

      • Artful Prudence
      • A Voice for Men
      • Alpha Game
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Good Looking Loser
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • In Mala Fide
      • KillToParty
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • Married Man Sex Life
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • RooshV
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Power Moves
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • The Spearhead
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Georgia legislator: Adopt due process protections or forget about your budget

H-4350

January 26, 2016
413 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/georgia-legislator-adopt-due-process-protections-or-forget-about-your-budget/article/2581395
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Georgia legislator: Adopt due process protections or forget about your budget
Author

H-4350

Upvotes 413
Comments 70
Date January 26, 2016 1:50 PM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/42rj7y/georgia_legislator_adopt_due_process_protections/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/georgia-legislator-adopt-due-process-protections.957653
https://theredarchive.com/post/957653
Top posts by H-4350

So women handle pain better than men huh? Mmm hmm...

1 upvotes
April 30, 2016
/r/MGTOW

Comments

[–]eaton80 90 points91 points92 points 10 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Now finaly someone with balls.

[–]chavelah 65 points66 points67 points 10 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

I love this guy. That's how you get action. No pandering to either side, no explaining how deeply you are opposed to sexual violence (because that goes without saying), just "You're fucking up at the Constitutional level. Unfuck yourselves or we'll hurt your pocketbooks for sure, this year rather than the Feds hurting them maybe, years from now."

[–]vtschoir 37 points38 points39 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Unfuck yourselves

Yes, Drill Sergeant?

[–]chavelah 18 points19 points20 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Constitutional Boot Camp for college presidents, deans and ombudspeople. Mmmmmmm.

[–]captain_craptain 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

You best unfuck yourself or I will unscrew your head and shit down your neck!

[+]kehlder 10 years ago* [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

That's no Drill Sergeant.

[–]FeierInMeinHose 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Actually he was a drill sergeant.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]datcarguy 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Proof? (As far as being choked)

[+]kehlder 10 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Marines cannot be Drill Sergeants.

[–]FeierInMeinHose 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Fine, he was a drill instructor.

[–]Revorob 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Damn right! You can't afford to fuck about with these left-wing idiots.

[–]roharareddit 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A rarity indeed.

[–]secv808 69 points70 points71 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Email Representative Earl Ehrhart ([email protected]) to let him know you agree with his statements. I'm sure the "victim advocates" are typing away already.

[–]babno 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I just sent an email of support to him, and I hope many of you do as well.

[–]DualVoidTrident 40 points41 points42 points 10 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

The mother of the student accused of sexual misconduct also spoke. She told a story of her son helping a drunk woman home when she had lost her key. The accused student let the woman wait at his apartment until her roommate returned home to let her in, so that the woman wouldn't be alone outside in the cold. Sometime later, another young woman accused the student of holding the alleged victim against her will, despite text messages from the drunk woman thanking the accused student for his help. The text messages were not allowed as evidence in the hearing. Even the alleged victim didn't even believe she was the victim of anything. Yet on the word of a third party, the accused student was suspended.

That's just absolutely insane, seriously how does stuff like this even fly? How can you even defend yourself in a system like this?

Then we wonder why men are refusing to marry...this toxic feminism stuff has completely messed up the male/female interaction and relationships. A man interacting with a woman is practically a mine field at this point.

[–]Ovendice 26 points27 points28 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Well, male college students are getting a taste of what divorce court/child support court is going to be like. Like these college 'courts' - the 'family' courts are ALSO kangaroo courts.

But most people don't know about the horrors and insanity of them until your standing in one in the hot seat, because the news NEVER reports any of it and/or how corrupt and unconstitutional they are, nor do men usually tell you about it- your co-workers don't bounce in the door saying, "Hey everybody! I just got court order to pay 500 dollars a month or go to jail!" Not something to brag about.

BUT the Feminists fucked up this time because these kangaroo courts are a HUGE news item around the whole world and everyone is now getting a glimpse into the insane world where Feminists are running things.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

500 is usually a "bargain" sorry to say that, but most men I know are are paying 700 at minimum per child.

[–]Treeclimber3 45 points46 points47 points 10 years ago (40 children) | Copy Link

I'm sorry, I'm still new to Men's Rights. Why do schools have any say in the investigation of sexual assault or rape cases? These are criminal matters, aren't they, for the police and courts?

[–]manganga13 36 points37 points38 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

To protect their image and reputation

[–]Treeclimber3 11 points12 points13 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

I think I see why, but how? Has the government in the U.S. officially, legally, on-the-books given universities the authority to do this? It seems so strange. The accused lack due process, false claimants have protection and in cases of genuine rape or assault, what power does the school have to punish appropriately? If it's a real rape or assault, expulsion seems like the most they could do, and that doesn't seem like enough.

[–]carrutstick 37 points38 points39 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

The government has actually required that schools take action on sexual assault, under an interpretation of the Title IX equal opportunity statute. Note that a university investigation does not preclude a criminal investigation, it's a parallel process with lower standard of evidence and lesser potential punishments.

[–]Lethn 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

They didn't necessarily require it, but they basically put out a vaguely threatening letter citing Title IX I believe it was some big shot at the education department who suddenly decided there was a sexual assault and rape crisis at University campuses.

Of course, this was all bullshit and the universities had every option of ignoring it, but if there's one thing I've learned is that educational institutes only ever care about their reputations. Even if it means smearing innocent people and painting them as rapists they'll go ahead and do it to make themselves look good.

Under normal circumstances Treeclimber3 you'd be absolutely right, but politics, specifically an extremist authoritarian brand of gender politics has decided to invade education right now and the people who don't play along with it are instantly eviscerated in public if they speak out against it.

I really hope any institution that has taken part in this crashes and burns, I don't give a fuck about them, students will be better off without their influence.

[–]prybarn 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Unless you're talking about California or New York where the government kind of does require it. In California they will withhold financial aid, and I imagine New York is the same way.

[–]hugolp 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That is the fucked up thing. Colleges have done what they have done because of federal government pressure and now are being pressured the other way by the local government. I am sure some crazies in colleges loved the federal gov mandate, but the people just following orders must be between confused and really fed up of the whole show.

[–]sharfpang 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nope, they were told "pursue these cases", so instead of pursuing them with due process they implemented a half-assed process where the defense has no voice.

If you tell a kid to clean up his room, and the kid grabs a flamethrower, you are justified in not being happy about the very thorough approach to the clean-up.

[–]coke501 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

lesser potential punishments

yeah. ruin a live AND put him in jail (after a whole lot of things you have to get right) vs. just ruin a live (without doing any work whatsoever)

It's beautyful and really just.

[–]manganga13 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Hey, I never said it makes sense. Its ridiculous. One would the public safety and, I dunno, justice would be a priority, but nah

[–]secv808 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's being argued that the Department of Education actually overstepped their authority and submitted their guidance in violation of government rules regarding creating new regulations.

So to answer your question of how they were able to assert authority, they just did it. They acted improperly and students are the victims of that action.

[–]roharareddit 35 points36 points37 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The whole thing started with the "Dear Colleague Letter" released by the Department of Education in 2011 which stated that schools receiving title IX moneys were to adopt a new set of guidelines in relations to disciplining students for misconduct. When it came to sexual misconduct (a term who's definition has become all but recognizable now) schools were to adopt a standard of evidence different from the criminal standard of "clear and convincing" to a "preponderance" of evidence. The schools were also required to set up tribunals made up of students, faculty and administrators to deal with complaints of sexual misconduct.

This did away with a professional police involvement in cases of serious criminal allegations. In fact, guidelines for schools instruct that the police only get involved if the accuser allows it. This does away with these pesky things called facts and this messy stuff called evidence and this thing called due process that comes with a professional police investigation.

You see, the end game here is to do away with due process altogether as well as distributing money to a whole new feminist bureaucracy in higher education.

If you want more info I would suggest you read more of Ashe Schow's articles or go to http://boysmeneducation.com/ or http://www.cotwa.info/.

[–]Treeclimber3 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Thank you for the links. That's really eye-opening, and a little scary.

[–]roharareddit 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Be afraid, be very very afraid.

[+]FRedington 10 years ago* [recovered] (9 children) | Copy Link

Obama appointed a militant FemiNazi to the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights. She issued a "Dear Colleague Letter" that gave the militant FemiNazi interpretation of Title IX of equality. That interpretation included provisions that stripped an accused person in sexual conduct charges of constitutionally guaranteed civil rights.

In effect, if a sexual abuse allegation gets to the civil authorities (police, district attorney) and the civil authorities decide there was no crime committed or that there was no evidence that the accused did it, then the college gets to pursue its own charges. Because the constitutional protections for the accused have been stripped by the effects of the "Dear Colleague Letter", a student can be declared "responsible" then expelled. The expulsion is often carried on the students transcript making it impossible to transfer to a different school, thus ruining career opportunities.

Right now there is a strong push/pull going on between feminists and civil rights proponents. The feminists want the Dear Colleague shit to stand and the civil rights proponents want due process restored to the accused, preferably by removing colleges jurisdiction over criminal cases and remanding those cases directly to the civil authorities.

See: http://www.cotwa.info

[–]Ovendice 12 points13 points14 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

And don't forget that the Obama White House is ALSO threatening to stop funding colleges that don't expel some quota of male students every year over false accusations. To 'crack down' on rape that is 'so rampant' on college campuses, but is really an epidemic of FALSE ACCUSATIONS or regret over a drunken night of sex or women saying someone they don't like merely asking them on a date was a 'sexual assault' or 'harassment.'

So the colleges are between a rock and a hard place. BUT I don't feel sorry for them because no college has even so much as contested these insane new guidelines and just got straight to expelling male students falsely accused of rape like it's perfectly normal, sane and legal. No surprise, our colleges and universities are all ran by Feminists who are literally uneducated and male hating.

[–]iehava 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

And don't forget that the Obama White House is ALSO threatening to stop funding colleges that don't expel some quota of male students every year over false accusations.

Can you link this?

[–]Ovendice -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

This article talks about it http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/apr/29/college-sexual-assault-white-house-proposals

..and here is the actual site https://www.notalone.gov/

But of course obviously it's not going to say, "A quota needs to be filled of male students to be expelled over false accusations," but we all know exactly that's what it means. It's up to the Federal government to decide subjectively if a college is expelling enough men over false rape accusations without due process and the involvement of the police.

Not wanting to go to the police is a massive statement; you might as well scream from the mountain top you are making a false accusation of rape. Why else wouldn't you go the police? If you were actually raped, there's going to be evidence and your story is going to add up and make sense. This is simply out of hatred for men in general.

I say GREAT! But let's not just stop there! Let's make sure women are 100% COMPLETELY safe from 'rape;' let's start completely segregating men and women in college and in high schools and grade schools while we're at it.

Boys and men will do 100% better with all male teachers, be free of the constant threat of being falsely accused by women with clearly nothing else better to do than to make false accusations of rape to get attention.

[–]iehava 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I'm sorry, but if you're claiming that there is an actual quota, I want to see the direct evidence for that claim. Let's not do what feminists do and simply circle-jerk and believe things without commensurate evidence.

[–]Ovendice -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

GTFOH. Let's not be intellectually dishonest and creepy like Feminists are, demanding an official statement put out by the government that they know damn well isn't going to exist because colleges and the government would never put out a politically incorrect statement.

Things aren't what they tell you on the surface, Dumbo. The Patriot Act isn't about patriotism, it's the opposite; stripping you of the Bill of Rights.

Obamacare isn't free or vastly reduced healthcare coverage like they told you it was; it is the opposite; tripling the cost of healthcare. If you can't figure out that everything Feminists, colleges and the government does is a con game and the exact opposite of what they're telling you, then you're simply not even intelligent enough to even get the plot, much less an effective MRA. You're just another sheep. Good luck!

[–]iehava 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

So someone asking for evidence is now dumb. Got it.

[–]Ovendice -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

No, a direct statement you already know doesn't exist. And it's also creepy.

[–]iehava 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What? You're like a youtube comment come to life.

[–]Treeclimber3 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks for the link. That explained a lot.

[–]Shadoe17 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Colleges have their own investigations and courts, in addition to the legal system. They call them "Academic Courts" usually. Regardless of the legal outcome, the college assigns it's own punishment as well. Oddly enough, if the legal outcome is guilty, the student is most often jailed, so they are expelled automatically, so the only real purpose of these courts and investigations is to punish the innocent. In the liberal mindset of most of the colleges, even to be accused of a crime makes you guilty, especially if the accuser is part of a special interest group. (female, black, Asian, etc.)

So even the innocent still get punished, and no one stops the accusers. But that mindset is in the process of changing, people have finally had enough.

[–]SchalaZeal01 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

especially if the accuser is part of a special interest group. (female, black, Asian, etc.)

In the legal system, there is a heavier penalty for killing or assaulting a woman, or a white person. Such that a black man killing a white woman even with a car accident will be taken much worse than a white woman doing it to a black man.

[–]Shadoe17 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

In the legal system, there is a heavier penalty

Can you please link that law.

[–]SchalaZeal01 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It's not a law, its a judge bias. Female victims make them give harsher penalties, and male perps too, and black perps too. There is also a bias for higher penalty for white victims than non-white.

[–]Shadoe17 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Female victims make them

How? Yes I know there is some bias, especially in either old school judges and newer "feminist" judges (opposite ends of the spectrum but both have similar outcomes), but how is it that they are "made" to give bias judgements? These individuals should be voted out and better people put in place.

[–]SchalaZeal01 -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

It's worse when it happens to an hypoagentic individual, and funny enough, black people are considered more hyperagentic (ie masculine) than white people.

When an hyperagent does something to an hypoagent, it's perceived as premeditated, calculated, definitely decided (not an accident), and since its against an hypoagent perceived to not even be able to defend themselves or avoid the action in question (ie car accident, yes its absurd), then it's seen as like killing children for the lulz.

The reverse, when a woman or white person (or both) does a crime on an hyperagent, it's seen as something not quite their fault against someone who should have avoided it.

Kinda like a police person not ducking in front of a drunkard's punches, should have seen it coming from a while away apparently. So this is why male victims of rape are told they should have escaped it, used their 'superior strength' to get out of the situation, or it's a definite sign they didn't hate it as much as they make it seem.

Edit: If it looks like I like the current state of things, I don't. Just explaining. So quit the downvotes.

[–]garglemesh42 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Read up on what happened after the "Dear colleague" letter and you'll find out.

[–]user1492 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The idea is that a college disciplinary hearing is a matter between two parties, and not a party and the government. The university has nearly unlimited authority to decide who can attend, so there is no liberty or property interest at stake for the accused.

On the basis that it is a civil proceeding, then there are no due process or constitutional limitations on the university's disciplinary powers.

To some extent this makes sense. If someone is accused of cheating there should be no need for a grand jury, indictment, formal pleading, and all of the other constitutional trappings.

The reason due process is such a big deal for MRAs is because it is (almost?) uniformly men who get the short end of the stick. And as others have said, this is made even worse by the "Dear Colleague" letter that heavily implied that Title IX complaints could be brought against universities that don't take such an aggressive stance towards men accused of sexual improprieties.

[–]GrimB0LD 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The problem is that sometimes the legal system returns a verdict of "not guilty".

[–]SchalaZeal01 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

In he-said she-said cases with no witness or other evidence it's likely to not reach the "clear and convincing" standard.

[–]sharfpang 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I wouldn't really mind a system, where instead of "beyond reasonable doubt" we're getting a plain "probably".

In normal legal system you must be fairly sure - not merely suspect the guilt. "My word against your word" if both sides present roughly the same quality of arguments is meant to result in "not guilty" because the result isn't clear.

In this case a "50% conviction" wouldn't really be that bad. In a plain "My word against your word" the one who is slightly more convincing would win.

But the problem is when the court refuses to hear one side, refuses witnesses, rejects evidence. The sentence is handed out based on testimony of one side and the court prevents appearance of any proofs to the contrary. It's denying the right to defense. The defense COULD be "clear and convicting" and win the case even if the standard was utterly reversed, "innocent beyond reasonable doubt", the "victim's" word taken as true unless clearly proven a lie. But the defense can't, because presentation of any proofs is declined.

This is a total kangaroo court. Not the standard where innocence is assumed, but just making proving innocence impossible by fiat!

[–]GenderNeutralLanguag 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There are two versions of schools investigating sexual assault or rape.

The first version, one I actually support, is for mitigation. When an accusation is made it may or may not be true. It is perfectly reasonably for a school to do a coursary investigation to see if it's an outright fabrication or not. If substance is found it's then perfectly reasonable to take minor administrative steps in the interum while police and courts deal with the case properly. By minor administrative steps I'm talking changing dorm buildings or class sections, not suspensions or expulsions.

The second version of campus investigations are based on the assumption that not enough rapists are being punished, that criminal standards are too high. This version says that since campus courts can use much lower standards, these are the courts we should use in sexual assault cases. While these courts can't have boys locked in prision they can derail their futures.

[–]xNOM 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

These are criminal matters, aren't they, for the police and courts?

OH....... no really these are tears of joy, not laughter. :-)

[–]Juan_Golt 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It was pushed by feminists under Title IX. Basically schools aren't required to afford the same protections for the accused in their process. They aren't a court of law, so they can do things like refuse right to counsel, or a right to question your accuser. Another big limitation is that colleges do not have subpoena power. So they have no means to compel the production of evidence.

Here is an in depth review of the situation by KC Johnson at the George Washington Forum last year. An exceptionally well explained survey of the issue. It is not a rant or polemic. Just a well read guy going over the current methods and their limitations.

https://youtu.be/KH26HU7JldA?t=5m29s

[–]modern_rabbit 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Bahaha excellent question, now try pointing that fact out to the progressives...

[–]Unenjoyed -5 points-4 points-3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Silly answers so far...

We use universities to learn facts and skills but also to mold character.

Every institution has some form of code of conduct. In keeping with a code of conduct, institutions build systems to contend and adjudicate issues that will arise when a lot of people get together in a stressful place.

Perhaps mistakes were made in the building of systems to handle issues when other mistakes are made.

[–]thalos3D 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

49 states to go.

[–]coke501 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Now that was a nice read

[–]Wargame4life 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

who would have thought Georgia as the voice of reason/sanity

[–]secv808 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I live there and I'm just as surprised.

[–]AloysiusC 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Watch the video too. It's great. He really wipes the floor with those monkeys.

[–]H-4350 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

President Peterson was clearly shaken. He's trying not to show it, but his hands tremble throughout. Nice to see him in the hot seat squirming.

[–]PJteleman 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm going to move to the Great State of Georgia just so I can vote for this guy!

[–]BigBlue615 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I was wondering why more people on the state side weren't pushing back against these schools. Sure, the DOE is pushing these ridiculous standards on the universities on the threat of pulling federal funding, but the schools have to be getting money from the states too. We need more people in charge of state budget committees to get involved in this.

[–]autotldr 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 81%. (I'm a bot)


A Georgia legislator responsible for appropriating state funds to colleges and universities is threatening to halt budget discussions with his state's schools unless they adopt basic due process protections for accused students.

This is the clearest declaration by any legislator in the country regarding the protection of due process rights for students accused of misconduct on college campuses.

Another young woman accused the student of holding the alleged victim against her will, despite text messages from the drunk woman thanking the accused student for his help.


Extended Summary | FAQ | Theory | Feedback | Top keywords: student#1 accused#2 process#3 due#4 college#5

[–]DillipFayKick 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Go Ehrhart! Go Ehrhart! It's your birthday!

[–]Penuno 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This guy's a hero. Anyone have a link to his donation page? We should inundate him with donations. Maybe the rest of the crowd would finally catch on.

[–]youhatetruth -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Baby steps...2 steps back, 3 steps forward....little by little...The Facts are Winning.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter