The Republican Party of Virginia mails out nude photos of a candidate

[Anonymous]

Not the best move but only sharing what is already in the public domain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol, the party of legalize marijuana, shrooms, virtually all drugs, sex work, prostitution, and unfettered crime all of the sudden is mad someone mails what everyone can easily Google and find online in about 29 seconds?

Hypocrisy is astounding.

You are OK with Republicans mailing EXPLICIT materials to thousands of people, many with young kids, straight to their home?

Your kids already look at porn behind your back. Don’t be dumb. Porn is everywhere.

So that's a yes, you are OK with Republicans mailing explicit content to families with young kids?

She’s the one generating explicit content that your kids can access online. You’re mad that someone is providing the same results as a 10 second google search. Your kids already watched her porn videos on pornhub or some other site their friends told them about.

Parents know that they have options to control access to screens/porn. Parents weren't expecting explicit content to come in the mail from the Republicans.

My kids love halloween and dig through the mail this time of year looking for various halloween costume catalogs.

If your kids are old enough to dig through the mail “looking for Halloween costume catalogs” (if that’s still a thing, since the internet exists ) then they’re also old enough to NOT confuse things like Halloween costume catalogs from political mailers in blank white envelopes. Because the two pieces of mail look exactly nothing alike. And it would be a very … inattentive…. child to confuse the two.

Is your child prone to such confusion? Is that the issue here?

Or are you just making up ridiculous hypotheticals that would never ever occur in real life?

You have kids? And you don’t receive these catalogs? Be thankful - some are crazy expensive.

If Republicans don’t want kids exposed to “explicit” material then maybe they should stop sending to their homes.

My kids are in college. But even in the dying days of mailed catalogs a decade ago, we never got any for Halloween. Lax and field hockey and dressage, absolutely (until they all went to online only) but no Halloween catalogs.

But again, I’ll ask because it’s relevant to this discussion you started: why would your kids mistake a white business sized envelope with nothing on it for a Halloween catalog, which presumably is larger, and plastered with pictures of Halloween stuff for sale on the front and back covers? How is it you think your kids will make that sort of mistake?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you’re a p*rn star you really can’t complain about that becoming an issue by your political opponents, WTH?

She isn’t a star. She is now notorious but in no world is she a “star.”

She starred in pornography ergo “porn star”

The word “Star” in commonly recognized nomenclature is synonymous with celebrity. She is no celebrity. She has some notoriety now due to the campaign. But you are carrying on like some Hollywood celebrity exposed her naughty bits in Playboy in 1989.

You’re really easily titillated too, aren’t you? I mean, wow. The pearl clutching…

DP. Let's all imagine for a second this woman was running as a Republican. There would be hundreds and hundreds of pages of LWNJs calling her a whore and worse. You know it, we all know it. Democrats are utter hypocrites.

Actually that seems like an incredibly unlikely scenario.

You really do lead an active fantasy life, don’t you?

Why do conservatives have such tenuous grips on reality? It’s weird

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kids love halloween and dig through the mail this time of year looking for various halloween costume catalogs.

There a lot more skin shown in Halloween costume catalogs than there was on this flier (which only showed a woman's face).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you’re a p*rn star you really can’t complain about that becoming an issue by your political opponents, WTH?

She isn’t a star. She is now notorious but in no world is she a “star.”

She starred in pornography ergo “porn star”

The word “Star” in commonly recognized nomenclature is synonymous with celebrity. She is no celebrity. She has some notoriety now due to the campaign. But you are carrying on like some Hollywood celebrity exposed her naughty bits in Playboy in 1989.

You’re really easily titillated too, aren’t you? I mean, wow. The pearl clutching…

DP. Let's

all imagine for a second this woman was running as a Republican. There would be hundreds and hundreds of pages of LWNJs calling her a whore and worse. You know it, we all know it. Democrats are utter hypocrites.

Actually that seems like an incredibly unlikely scenario.

You really do lead an active fantasy life, don’t you?

Why do conservatives have such tenuous grips on reality? It’s weird

DP
Actually I think that’s pretty much exactly what would be happening. The PP you quoted nailed it exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol, the party of legalize marijuana, shrooms, virtually all drugs, sex work, prostitution, and unfettered crime all of the sudden is mad someone mails what everyone can easily Google and find online in about 29 seconds?

Hypocrisy is astounding.

You are OK with Republicans mailing EXPLICIT materials to thousands of people, many with young kids, straight to their home?

Your kids already look at porn behind your back. Don’t be dumb. Porn is everywhere.

So that's a yes, you are OK with Republicans mailing explicit content to families with young kids?

She’s the one generating explicit content that your kids can access online. You’re mad that someone is providing the same results as a 10 second google search. Your kids already watched her porn videos on pornhub or some other site their friends told them about.

Parents know that they have options to control access to screens/porn. Parents weren't expecting explicit content to come in the mail from the Republicans.

My kids love halloween and dig through the mail this time of year looking for various halloween costume catalogs.

If your kids are old enough to dig through the mail “looking for Halloween costume catalogs” (if that’s still a thing, since the internet exists ) then they’re also old enough to NOT confuse things like Halloween costume catalogs from political mailers in blank white envelopes. Because the two pieces of mail look exactly nothing alike. And it would be a very … inattentive…. child to confuse the two.

Is your child prone to such confusion? Is that the issue here?

Or are you just making up ridiculous hypotheticals that would never ever occur in real life?

You have kids? And you don’t receive these catalogs? Be thankful - some are crazy expensive.

If Republicans don’t want kids exposed to “explicit” material then maybe they should stop sending to their homes.

My kids are in college. But even in the dying days of mailed catalogs a decade ago, we never got any for Halloween. Lax and field hockey and dressage, absolutely (until they all went to online only) but no Halloween catalogs.

But again, I’ll ask because it’s relevant to this discussion you started: why would your kids mistake a white business sized envelope with nothing on it for a Halloween catalog, which presumably is larger, and plastered with pictures of Halloween stuff for sale on the front and back covers? How is it you think your kids will make that sort of mistake?

This year, we got PBK kids halloween, chasing fireflies, and one other cheapie one.

Why do think my kids would mistake the envelope for anything?

Why should I have to worry about them sorting through the mail and coming across explicit content that the Republicans sent to our home?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids love halloween and dig through the mail this time of year looking for various halloween costume catalogs.

There a lot more skin shown in Halloween costume catalogs than there was on this flier (which only showed a woman's face).

There is zero skin shown in kid Halloween costumes.

It was a screen grab from her private, nude adult chat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol, the party of legalize marijuana, shrooms, virtually all drugs, sex work, prostitution, and unfettered crime all of the sudden is mad someone mails what everyone can easily Google and find online in about 29 seconds?

Hypocrisy is astounding.

You are OK with Republicans mailing EXPLICIT materials to thousands of people, many with young kids, straight to their home?

Your kids already look at porn behind your back. Don’t be dumb. Porn is everywhere.

So that's a yes, you are OK with Republicans mailing explicit content to families with young kids?

She’s the one generating explicit content that your kids can access online. You’re mad that someone is providing the same results as a 10 second google search. Your kids already watched her porn videos on pornhub or some other site their friends told them about.

Parents know that they have options to control access to screens/porn. Parents weren't expecting explicit content to come in the mail from the Republicans.

My kids love halloween and dig through the mail this time of year looking for various halloween costume catalogs.

If your kids are old enough to dig through the mail “looking for Halloween costume catalogs” (if that’s still a thing, since the internet exists ) then they’re also old enough to NOT confuse things like Halloween costume catalogs from political mailers in blank white envelopes. Because the two pieces of mail look exactly nothing alike. And it would be a very … inattentive…. child to confuse the two.

Is your child prone to such confusion? Is that the issue here?

Or are you just making up ridiculous hypotheticals that would never ever occur in real life?

You have kids? And you don’t receive these catalogs? Be thankful - some are crazy expensive.

If Republicans don’t want kids exposed to “explicit” material then maybe they should stop sending to their homes.

My kids are in college. But even in the dying days of mailed catalogs a decade ago, we never got any for Halloween. Lax and field hockey and dressage, absolutely (until they all went to online only) but no Halloween catalogs.

But again, I’ll ask because it’s relevant to this discussion you started: why would your kids mistake a white business sized envelope with nothing on it for a Halloween catalog, which presumably is larger, and plastered with pictures of Halloween stuff for sale on the front and back covers? How is it you think your kids will make that sort of mistake?

This year, we got PBK kids halloween, chasing fireflies, and one other cheapie one.

Why do think my kids would mistake the envelope for anything?

Why should I have to worry about them sorting through the mail and coming across explicit content that the Republicans sent to our home?

You shouldn't! Those who sent out these mailings have judgment that's equal to the porn star's morals (or lack of).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol, the party of legalize marijuana, shrooms, virtually all drugs, sex work, prostitution, and unfettered crime all of the sudden is mad someone mails what everyone can easily Google and find online in about 29 seconds?

Hypocrisy is astounding.

EXACTLY. And don't forget, they have insisted that kids have access to graphically sexual images in school libraries. Dems and their faux outrage... so predictable.

Kids didn’t have explicit material sent directly to their homes until the Republicans sent it.

And the goalposts have moved all the way back from Youngkin sent nude pictures, to the GOP sent nude pictures, to the GOP mailed explicit material. If those goalposts didn't have wheels, you wouldn't have an argument.

The Republicans (led by Youngkin) sent out explicit mailings of a nude woman in an adult private chat room.

It's indefensible which is why you're deflecting.

[Anonymous]

Brilliant way to get people to sign up for their mailing list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the family values party who is so concerned about porn in libraries is literally mailing out porn to VA voters?

Yup.

So the pictured person does engage in porn?

Yes. She is a porn star.

So is her husband. She stated that even though they have an open marriage, he doesn’t like to share her, but that the money they get from having sex online for people to masturbate to is really good, so he allows and participates in it.

She and her husband performed live sex shows on the website Chaturbate for “tips.”

It isn’t revenge porn. It’s information about a candidate asking the public to vote for her and trust her as an elected official. She wants to represent people in a position of trust. She says she is honest and accountable, etc.

I don’t know how this candidate expected to run for public office without this information becoming public. She tried to hide this information and when people hide things, it isn’t good.

People have a right to know who they are voting for. If the candidate won’t be honest, and truthful, and disclose their live streamed sex shows, everyone should just keep her secret? No, we don’t have the responsibility to hide information for people seeking elected office. That’s the opposite of what should be done.

The information contained in the mailers was not stolen or leaked. It was simply available online because the candidate sold the image for cash.

So are people mad she wasn’t allowed to lie to the voting public? That she was exposed for having sex on camera for money?

It’s like an abusive relationship. The act, hidden. It’s either lied about or the truth is omitted. Then, when the truth comes out, and it almost always does, the person or people who shone a light into the lie gets attacked for having the nerve to expose the scumbag.

Her husband is an attorney. They didn’t need to do porn online because they needed the money.

tl;dr- the candidate having sex online for money and hiding it is not the porn peddler- it’s the people who informed voters that she peddles porn. they are the jerks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol, the party of legalize marijuana, shrooms, virtually all drugs, sex work, prostitution, and unfettered crime all of the sudden is mad someone mails what everyone can easily Google and find online in about 29 seconds?

Hypocrisy is astounding.

EXACTLY. And don't forget, they have insisted that kids have access to graphically sexual images in school libraries. Dems and their faux outrage... so predictable.

Kids didn’t have explicit material sent directly to their homes until the Republicans sent it.

And the goalposts have moved all the way back from Youngkin sent nude pictures, to the GOP sent nude pictures, to the GOP mailed explicit material. If those goalposts didn't have wheels, you wouldn't have an argument.

The Republicans (led by Youngkin) sent out explicit mailings of a nude woman in an adult private chat room.

It's indefensible which is why you're deflecting.

Chaturbate (chat and masturbate) is divided into six categories: female cams, male cams, couple cams, transgender cams, private shows and spy shows. The gender-specific categories are free to watch but viewers have to pay to join a private show. Spy shows are private shows where viewers do not interact, and hence they are cheaper to view than private shows. As of April 2022, Chaturbate was the 57th most popular website in the world and the fifth most popular pornographic site.

Viewers are allowed to watch for free (with the exception of private shows), but pay money in the form of "tips" in order to see certain sex acts performed.

(which is what this candidate and her husband were doing)

The site itself earns revenues by taking roughly 40% to 50% from the model's earnings. Chaturbate generates revenue from the audience when they purchase tokens using their credit cards. Each Chaturbate token is worth $0.05 to a model and they need to earn at least $50.00 to receive the payment. However, when purchased by viewers, tokens cost about $0.10, depending on the amount bought in a single transaction.

Chaturbate was the presenting sponsor for the 33rd AVN Awards in 2016, as well as an exhibitor at the AVN Adult Entertainment Expo that year and in 2017. AVN are adult movie awards, where the pornography industry gives out awards for various categories in porn.

Definitely not a private chat room and the candidate and her husband are both crazy to think they could do this and then enter the public arena of politics and hide it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you’re a p*rn star you really can’t complain about that becoming an issue by your political opponents, WTH?

She isn’t a star. She is now notorious but in no world is she a “star.”

She starred in pornography ergo “porn star”

The word “Star” in commonly recognized nomenclature is synonymous with celebrity. She is no celebrity. She has some notoriety now due to the campaign. But you are carrying on like some Hollywood celebrity exposed her naughty bits in Playboy in 1989.

You’re really easily titillated too, aren’t you? I mean, wow. The pearl clutching…

DP. Let's all imagine for a second this woman was running as a Republican. There would be hundreds and hundreds of pages of LWNJs calling her a whore and worse. You know it, we all know it. Democrats are utter hypocrites.

Democrats certainly like to talk about Melania Trump taking nude and semi-nude photos and imply she was an escort-even though she has won lawsuits with media outlets that have had to pay her money and publish apologies to her for printing those accusations.

Discussing Melania’s “bolt-ons,” a classy euphemism for breast implants, and comparing her unfavorably to refined and elegant political wives, is a great hobby of democrats.

Remember when Melania had a medical problem with her kidneys and everyone here went nuts discussing that she either had plastic surgery and was hiding, or Don beat her up and she was hiding while she recovered?

Visit the Trump women fashion thread in the Beauty forum. It’s ridiculous. People posting there adore making fun of every woman with the last name of Trump.

Total hypocrisy.

[Anonymous]

So just as a review:

1. There were no nude pictures in the mailing

2. The non-nude pictures were from a public/non pay wall porn site

Got it. 🤣

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids love halloween and dig through the mail this time of year looking for various halloween costume catalogs.

There a lot more skin shown in Halloween costume catalogs than there was on this flier (which only showed a woman's face).

A nude woman's face? Quelle horreur!