VakAttack

Before he puts me on ignore like a coward: @TitleIX is ripe for reform have you ever, as an adult, had a sexual relationship with someone who is underage by American law? The fact that you think the key premise is South America is...well, it's par for the course. See the above question, creepo.

So...to be clear...he denied going to South America, but not the crux of the comment. Weird.

I will note a I made a joke on the NWT forums about @TitleIX is ripe for reform being (allegedly) the type of guy who would (reputedly) want to explain to you how "everything he did in South America was morally ok because the age of consent is lower there." Notably, he never denied it, and I'm starting to believe that it's possible that this is (allegedly) true.

Clearly she was so desirous of Jordan Holm's oral skills, she basically tried to force him, a stranger, to perform for her.

There's a Jordan Holm cult?!?!

Numbers are factually approximate but spiritually exact.

Woof. Tough break for the most popular Republican in the caucus.

Damn it, this was the best bit on these forums, maybe since it started. Why ruin it so fast? Well done, Bob.

Zero chance he wants anything to do with this particular job. More sitting around than the presidency, way less visible power/prestige.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump is having a #VeryNormal time over on Truth Social.

My understanding is he actually can only lose three.

Just read the Holm appeal ruling, and lol at all the wasted time in this thread on that.

@TitleIX is ripe for reformdefinitely seems like the kind of guy who really wants you to understand that 'everything he did in South America is morally ok, because the age of consent is lower there.' I'm sorry, "it's been said that @TitleIX is ripe for reform definitely seems like the kind of guy who really wants you to understand that 'everything he did in South America is morally ok, because the age of consent is lower there.' Reputedly."

Can't be seen to look "weak". Which with the controlling part of the modern Republican party means "compromise anything at all."

Fair point, that was overly dismissive of me. Wong is a (mediocre) political comedian who is openly liberal in all of her posts, it was clearly (again, mediocre) satire if you watch the video. Mackey/Ricky Vaughn was part of a mutliperson conspiracy who discussed openly the plan to trick people, arguing it was key to a Trump victory, and he (and the others) disguised who they were completely to pull off the deception. Other members of the conspiracy testified against him. It wasn't just one post it was aa series of posts and other actions, along with documented statements about the intent. Note to criminals, don't discuss your intent to commit crimes in writing.

Sure, if you completely ignore any contextual facts, it's the same thing.

Jfc you're something.

Ranking: 1. Cosby 2. The Juice 3. Giuliani 4. Armstrong 5. Weinstein (he's a worse person than Armstrong and Giuliani, but his profile is lower, so the fall isn't quite as bad).

I would imagine they will continue to vote for the candidate they think is the best candidate,Hakeem Jeffries. I actually see it as him trying to show he can make deals and compromise, undercutting the most major criticism of him right now, and then he'll have the votes in January. He might have even cut a deal with centrists for their votes...if Rs still have the house.

Twitter is ablaze with people on conservative Twitter LOSING THEIR MINDS in hilarious fashion.

Certainly possible, but very dangerous. According to the video at sentencing, she's already given a proffer of what her testimony will be. If she deviates from that, it would likely void her deal and she's back to facing the seven felonies or whatever it was she has. So, in theory, the prosecutors already know what she's going to say, and if she doesn't, she's f.u.c.k.e.d.

And is expected to be a prosecution witness against Trump and other co-defendants. Who knew the real Kraken was the friends we made along the way?

No, it isn't. See how that works? I just made a declarative statement without backing it up, too. I mean, there's more evidence on my side, but still!

This is, of course, not a thing that can actually be found anywhere in Ben Franklin's work, writings, or speeches. Most commonly this is (without a source) attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville or Alexander Fraser Tytler.