Libtard Finally Admits to Raping A Child...Then Declares The Matter Is OVER...Because He Says So.

[hadit]

One, where is the evidence he paid her what he was obligated to pay? Remember,w don't take anyone's private word in this case, so him claiming he did isn't sufficient.

Okay, if you want to write your own narrative about this, you can... you've been doing that all along.

Two, Trump talked about being allowed to grab adult women who knew better, not a confused 13 year old girl who had a penis shoved into her anus.

I don't think little Grifter was confused at all.

Three, you just reduced Hillary Clinton's value and impact on the election to nothing more than her body parts. Why am I not surprised?

I think you can try to keep reversing this, but your side voted for Trump knowing what he was, knowing he was a guy who bragged about assaulting women.... and you didn't care.

Four, a convicted criminal doesn't get to decide his punishment is wrong and flee the country to avoid it, then announce that it should all be over because reasons.

Well, I think he totally did. The thing was, he agreed to a punishment, then the state decided to change it because they looked bad.

Five, it's not just my morality. Have you tried the experiment yet?

Guy, you can keep obsessing about your expirament all day. The point is, Little Grifter was there by her own choice. [\quote]

IOW, you know EXACTLY what would happen to you if you were to do what Polanski did, because you don't have his connections to the glitterati..

Go down to a bar and announce that you intend to lure a 13 year old girl to a party under the pretense of a photo shoot, that you will give her a Quaalude, then close the doors, get in the hot tub naked with her and sodomize her. I would say I'll visit you in the hospital, but I won't.

But here was the thing. Mama Grifter took her daughter to that party, knowing all those things were true. [\quote]

Which does precisely zero to mitigate Polanski's responsibility, because it doesn't matter HOW she got her or WHY she was there . Again, you will NEVER attempt to even announce that you are going to do what Polanski did, because you know what would happen to you, and your carefully constructed fantasy that "she was asking for it" wouldn't project you at all.

In short, you hold the minority opinion on this one.

Good thing we don't decide morality by poll, then.

We decide things like what constitutes statutory rape by electing officials who agree with our understanding, and if they fall in the polls, they usually don't get elected. Another experiment, run for public office on the platform that what Polanski did is no big deal and girls who did what she did deserve to be sodomized because they are asking for it. See how far you get.

 

[Syriusly]

And just for comparison- I just checked- remember Dennis Hastert- the Conservative, Republican, former Speaker of the House- who confessed to raping boys and got a slap on the wrist- and was sentenced just last year?

Neither easyt65 or toobfreak ever once condemned Dennis Hastert- or his actions. Neither ever applauded his conviction or sentencing.

Just pointing out the obvious- neither gives a damn about child rape.

Both just are looking for something to use in their partisan attacks on liberals and Democrats.

Donald Trump could screw a 12 year old on national TV and easy would start a thread about Obama and Benghazi.

And, apparently you give no shits whatsoever about libtard attacks on women and children. Good show of faux outrage!

And apparently you are an idiot. I don't know who 'libtard's' are- but...

Since in this very thread I have condemned Polansky's rape of a 13 year old girl- at the same time I have condemned Hastert's rape of boys- I don't use child molestation for partisan politics like contards do.

 

[Syriusly]

And just for comparison- I just checked- remember Dennis Hastert- the Conservative, Republican, former Speaker of the House- who confessed to raping boys and got a slap on the wrist- and was sentenced just last year?

Neither easyt65 or toobfreak ever once condemned Dennis Hastert- or his actions. Neither ever applauded his conviction or sentencing.

Just pointing out the obvious- neither gives a damn about child rape.

Both just are looking for something to use in their partisan attacks on liberals and Democrats.

Donald Trump could screw a 12 year old on national TV and easy would start a thread about Obama and Benghazi.

And, apparently you give no shits whatsoever about libtard attacks on women and children. Good show of faux outrage!

By the way- apparently you give no shits whatsoever about Conservative attacks on women and children- note how you have never once condemned here at USMB Hastert's sexual assault on boys.

Even when you actually commented about Hastert's crime.

 

[WillowTree]

And just for comparison- I just checked- remember Dennis Hastert- the Conservative, Republican, former Speaker of the House- who confessed to raping boys and got a slap on the wrist- and was sentenced just last year?

Neither easyt65 or toobfreak ever once condemned Dennis Hastert- or his actions. Neither ever applauded his conviction or sentencing.

Just pointing out the obvious- neither gives a damn about child rape.

Both just are looking for something to use in their partisan attacks on liberals and Democrats.

Donald Trump could screw a 12 year old on national TV and easy would start a thread about Obama and Benghazi.

And, apparently you give no shits whatsoever about libtard attacks on women and children. Good show of faux outrage!

By the way- apparently you give no shits whatsoever about Conservative attacks on women and children- note how you have never once condemned here at USMB Hastert's sexual assault on boys.

Even when you actually commented about Hastert's crime.

Was I active here when that happened? I had a fairly long absence.

 

[JoeB131]

[

IOW, you know EXACTLY what would happen to you if you were to do what Polanski did, because you don't have his connections to the glitterati..

Given that Statutory rape is rarely prosecuted and rarely gets jail time, it strikes me that RP's connection to the "Glitterati" was probably more of a detriment than a help.

[

Which does precisely zero to mitigate Polanski's responsibility, because it doesn't matter HOW she got her or WHY she was there . Again, you will NEVER attempt to even announce that you are going to do what Polanski did, because you know what would happen to you, and your carefully constructed fantasy that "she was asking for it" wouldn't project you at all.

No one "announces" that sort of thing. But a lot right wingers like Denny Hastert and Ted Nugent do it in private.

I
We decide things like what constitutes statutory rape by electing officials who agree with our understanding, and if they fall in the polls, they usually don't get elected. Another experiment, run for public office on the platform that what Polanski did is no big deal and girls who did what she did deserve to be sodomized because they are asking for it. See how far you get.

[

And that's the problem here. The DA cut Polanski the same deal they probably cut everyone else who ever gets accused of this sort of thing. But because it was in the paper, they felt they had to do something because Polanski made a movie about Satan or something.

 

[hadit]

[

IOW, you know EXACTLY what would happen to you if you were to do what Polanski did, because you don't have his connections to the glitterati..

Given that Statutory rape is rarely prosecuted and rarely gets jail time, it strikes me that RP's connection to the "Glitterati" was probably more of a detriment than a help.

[

Which does precisely zero to mitigate Polanski's responsibility, because it doesn't matter HOW she got her or WHY she was there . Again, you will NEVER attempt to even announce that you are going to do what Polanski did, because you know what would happen to you, and your carefully constructed fantasy that "she was asking for it" wouldn't project you at all.

No one "announces" that sort of thing. But a lot right wingers like Denny Hastert and Ted Nugent do it in private.

I'll type slowly so you get it. Now pay attention, because here's the point. Why does no one announce that sort of thing? Think about it carefully, it'll come to you.

Oh, and I noticed the feeble attempt at deflection, but don't worry, it won't work.

I
We decide things like what constitutes statutory rape by electing officials who agree with our understanding, and if they fall in the polls, they usually don't get elected. Another experiment, run for public office on the platform that what Polanski did is no big deal and girls who did what she did deserve to be sodomized because they are asking for it. See how far you get.

[

And that's the problem here. The DA cut Polanski the same deal they probably cut everyone else who ever gets accused of this sort of thing. But because it was in the paper, they felt they had to do something because Polanski made a movie about Satan or something.

How far do you think you would get if you ran for office on the platform that what Polanski did was no big deal because the 13 year old was asking for it?

 

[JoeB131]

I'll type slowly so you get it. Now pay attention, because here's the point. Why does no one announce that sort of thing? Think about it carefully, it'll come to you.

Same people don't announce they masturbate...

But there's a whole lot of fucking going on.

How far do you think you would get if you ran for office on the platform that what Polanski did was no big deal because the 13 year old was asking for it?

Again, guy, in the real world, you can pass all the self-righteous laws you want, but when no one wastes their time enforcing them, it's like not having a law at all.

I remember having a conversation with a female acquaintance once who was freaked out her 14 year old sister just had sex with her boyfriend. Then I asked how old she was when she had her first time, and she admitted it was at 15.

But lets show our moral outrage by going after Polanski for something that happened 40 years ago!!! That'll show them.

 

[Ame®icano]

Did she chose to be 13, or was she chosen because she was 13?

guy, you are hung up on a number, I'm really not.

I'm hung up on a law.

Is it OK for you that adolescent have sex with 10 yo?

Newsflash, she was 13 at the time and easy pray for the pedophile.
Statutory rape is still a rape. Even if she consented, he should've known better.

No, statutory rape isn't 'rape'. Just like a horse with a party hat isn't a unicorn.

Otherwise, you should lock up every teen who has sex below the age of consent.

You're thicker than a bowl of oatmeal.

If both are teens within certain age difference, they're not breaking a law.

What's the difference between what Polanski did and Weinstein?

Well, to start with, Weinstein is years of behavior. Secondly, Weinstein abused his employees.[/QUOTE]

And Polanski don't have years of behavior?

Don't know if he abused the employees.

But I'll tell you what's similar between them? They both had sex with underaged girls and used position of power to achieve that. And they both were praised by Hollywood for decades, despite everyone knew what they did.

 

[JoeB131]

I'm hung up on a law.

Is it OK for you that adolescent have sex with 10 yo?

Since 10 year olds aren't 13 year old, it's a false argument.

And Polanski don't have years of behavior?

Sweet Evil Jesus, where did you learn to write English? "doesn't have years of behavior!"

There's really no evidence that Polanski has done this kind of thing since, and no credible evidence he did it before.

But I'll tell you what's similar between them? They both had sex with underaged girls and used position of power to achieve that. And they both were praised by Hollywood for decades, despite everyone knew what they did.

I'm sorry, I'm not obsessing over this Weinstein thing like you guys are. (I generally hate their movies). But I thought the complaint on him was that he was harassing his adult female employees, not underaged girls.

There's a joke in Hollywood. You know the difference between a hooker and an actress? You have to pay a hooker.

 

[hadit]

I'll type slowly so you get it. Now pay attention, because here's the point. Why does no one announce that sort of thing? Think about it carefully, it'll come to you.

Same people don't announce they masturbate...

But there's a whole lot of fucking going on.

How far do you think you would get if you ran for office on the platform that what Polanski did was no big deal because the 13 year old was asking for it?

Again, guy, in the real world, you can pass all the self-righteous laws you want, but when no one wastes their time enforcing them, it's like not having a law at all.

I remember having a conversation with a female acquaintance once who was freaked out her 14 year old sister just had sex with her boyfriend. Then I asked how old she was when she had her first time, and she admitted it was at 15.

But lets show our moral outrage by going after Polanski for something that happened 40 years ago!!! That'll show them.

IOW, you're admitting that most people find what Polanski did to be repugnant. If they didn't, you wouldn't have a problem with running for office on a platform that the 13 year old was asking for it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ame®icano]

I'm hung up on a law.

Is it OK for you that adolescent have sex with 10 yo?

Since 10 year olds aren't 13 year old, it's a false argument.

Didn't you just said that I am hung up on a number?

And Polanski don't have years of behavior?

Sweet Evil Jesus, where did you learn to write English? "doesn't have years of behavior!"

There's really no evidence that Polanski has done this kind of thing since, and no credible evidence he did it before.

Oops, grammar Nazi. I started writing one thing just to end up with another, haven't checked it.

No evidence. So the other two women that accused him of the rape are lying. There was, I believe a fourth victim, some German actress.

The only pattern of behavior here is, they're all liars, right? But Polanski is OK. Cool dude.

But I'll tell you what's similar between them? They both had sex with underaged girls and used position of power to achieve that. And they both were praised by Hollywood for decades, despite everyone knew what they did.

I'm sorry, I'm not obsessing over this Weinstein thing like you guys are. (I generally hate their movies). But I thought the complaint on him was that he was harassing his adult female employees, not underaged girls.

There's a joke in Hollywood. You know the difference between a hooker and an actress? You have to pay a hooker.

That's not a joke.

 

[JoeB131]

IOW, you're admitting that most people find what Polanski did to be repugnant. If they didn't, you wouldn't have a problem with running for office on a platform that the 13 year old was asking for it.

I admit we have a lot of hypocrisy in our views. The top one being is that we all forget what we were like when we were teenagers! If we werent' getting laid, it wasn't for a lack of trying.

 

[JoeB131]

No evidence. So the other two women that accused him of the rape are lying. There was, I believe a fourth victim, some German actress.

Yup, pretty much, since they all made those claims decades later.

The only pattern of behavior here is, they're all liars, right? But Polanski is OK. Cool dude.

I don't think Polanski is "okay", but obsession you guys have with him is a little weird.

 

[hadit]

IOW, you're admitting that most people find what Polanski did to be repugnant. If they didn't, you wouldn't have a problem with running for office on a platform that the 13 year old was asking for it.

I admit we have a lot of hypocrisy in our views. The top one being is that we all forget what we were like when we were teenagers! If we werent' getting laid, it wasn't for a lack of trying.

True enough. Polanski, however, was not a teenager. There is a difference between a 19 year old boy having sex with his 17 year old girlfriend and a man in his 40s sodomizing a 13 year old girl.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JoeB131]

True enough. Polanski, however, was not a teenager. There is a difference between a 19 year old boy having sex with his 17 year old girlfriend and a man in his 40s sodomizing a 13 year old girl.

But the problem is, they'll both end up getting the same sentence, and they'll both end up on the registry you seem to think is such a sweet deal.

And will you stop saying "Sodomizing" like that's a real thing? It's like saying 'Fishmonger" or "Haberdasher" .

 

[Ame®icano]

No evidence. So the other two women that accused him of the rape are lying. There was, I believe a fourth victim, some German actress.

Yup, pretty much, since they all made those claims decades later.

The only pattern of behavior here is, they're all liars, right? But Polanski is OK. Cool dude.

I don't think Polanski is "okay", but obsession you guys have with him is a little weird.

In few words, it's not obsession with Polanski, I'll rather say it's obsession with whole Hollywood that claims high(er) morals on everyone else, while doing all that weird shit in the background.

 

[JoeB131]

In few words, it's not obsession with Polanski, I'll rather say it's obsession with whole Hollywood that claims high(er) morals on everyone else, while doing all that weird shit in the background.

Okay, that's in interesting concept.

Are they really doing "weird shit" compared to the rest of us?

Or is it that in our celebrity based culture, where we pay money for candid pictures of celebrities at the beach, that we pay more attention to something when a celebrity says it, that they can't do things in private at all?

We all got upset when Ben dumped Jennifer for Angelina, but we really didn't care all that much when Bob started banging Sally from Accounting.

Personally, i wish we'd pay more attention when a Scientist tells us Global Warming is a problem than when a Hollywood star tells us that it is.

But given that we just elected a guy whose primary qualification was that he ran a fake game show with D-List celebrities, I'm not sure we're up for it.

 

[hadit]

True enough. Polanski, however, was not a teenager. There is a difference between a 19 year old boy having sex with his 17 year old girlfriend and a man in his 40s sodomizing a 13 year old girl.

But the problem is, they'll both end up getting the same sentence, and they'll both end up on the registry you seem to think is such a sweet deal. [\quote]

I agree that the list is abused and there are people on it that don't belong there, but it is tailor made for Polnaski. He raped a minor. She wasn't 2 months from her 18th birthday and he 2 months after his. He belongs on the list.

And will you stop saying "Sodomizing" like that's a real thing? It's like saying 'Fishmonger" or "Haberdasher" .

It is a real thing. I don't care if you like the word or not, it accurately describes what Polanski did and I will continue using it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JoeB131]

I agree that the list is abused and there are people on it that don't belong there, but it is tailor made for Polnaski. He raped a minor. She wasn't 2 months from her 18th birthday and he 2 months after his. He belongs on the list.

Um...no. If you are saying that it's a crime to bop a minor, then it should apply to everyone, right. Even other minors.

Or maybe you can actually accept people make their own decisions, even young people.

The purpose of such a list is to warn a community, "Hey, this guy lives down the block and he's a real danger'.

A guy who had consensual sex 40 years ago isn't a danger to anyone.

It is a real thing. I don't care if you like the word or not, it accurately describes what Polanski did and I will continue using it.
]

The problem is the word is homophobic. sorry you don't get that.

 

[hadit]

I agree that the list is abused and there are people on it that don't belong there, but it is tailor made for Polnaski. He raped a minor. She wasn't 2 months from her 18th birthday and he 2 months after his. He belongs on the list.

Um...no. If you are saying that it's a crime to bop a minor, then it should apply to everyone, right. Even other minors.

Or maybe you can actually accept people make their own decisions, even young people.

The purpose of such a list is to warn a community, "Hey, this guy lives down the block and he's a real danger'.

A guy who had consensual sex 40 years ago isn't a danger to anyone. [\quote]

You're certain that Polanski hasn't done anything similar in the years since? I mean, no one over there cares, right, so why would they bother to complain if he did?

It is a real thing. I don't care if you like the word or not, it accurately describes what Polanski did and I will continue using it.
]

The problem is the word is homophobic. sorry you don't get that.

No, it is not. It defines a sexual act, one that Pokanski performed on a 13 year old girl. There's nothing homophobic in this case, unless you're upset that Polanski did it to a girl and not a boy.

Would you prefer I say he buggered her, or that he shoved his dick into her rectum? Sorry, homosexual men apparently don't have a monopoly on the practice. He sodomized her, and that's what I'll say he did.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk