Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Their line is whatever dear leader tells them it is.
The pedophilia thing should be dropped though, that’s for 13 and younger.
Maybe “child sexual exploiter” or “predatory criminal sexual assaulter of children” would be more accurate.
But then they’ll just twist themselves into knots explaining away why children that age cannot obtain gender affirming care but can 100% consent to being diddled by old men.
Virginia Guilfier (sic) testified that she saw girls as young as eleven on the island. So why should the pedophilia accusations be dropped, and frankly thirteen, fourteen and maybe fifteen is also pedophilia territory. At least for my children.
Did she see Trump on the island?
No. Because he was never there.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Come on OP.
While it is gross and inappropriate that old men used to openly slaver over young women, that does not equate to being actual pedophiles (who are attracted pre-pubescent children) and when you conflate the two, you dilute the meaning of the word.
I’ve been watching movies from the 80s. We have forgotten what things used to be like. Yes it is gross when men of any age ogle and leer at women, but it used to be accepted as par for the course. Trump is just a dinosaur.
Epstein was literally running a pedophile mill. Do you not get this?
DP
While it's possible that Trump was an accessory to 95% of Epstien's crimes, that doesn't mean he's attracted to young girls.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On immigration - are you ok with ICE rounding up all brown people and holding them/deporting them with no due process?
Yes, in fact, the less due process they receive the better. Trump has not gone nearly far enough. Remittances should be taxed at 90% and illegals should all be deported to the Congo.
How about the ones who are here legally on green cards, and get deported anyway (yes it’s happening)? How about the ones who show up to their immigration hearings and are snatched away before any ruling can occur?
What about Trump’s desire to arrest and “deport” US born citizens (like Rosie O’Donnell) who disagree with him politically?
If eggs are broken to make an omelette, so be it. I think deporting all communists is an excellent start.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Their line is whatever dear leader tells them it is.
The pedophilia thing should be dropped though, that’s for 13 and younger.
Maybe “child sexual exploiter” or “predatory criminal sexual assaulter of children” would be more accurate.
But then they’ll just twist themselves into knots explaining away why children that age cannot obtain gender affirming care but can 100% consent to being diddled by old men.
Virginia Guilfier (sic) testified that she saw girls as young as eleven on the island. So why should the pedophilia accusations be dropped, and frankly thirteen, fourteen and maybe fifteen is also pedophilia territory. At least for my children.
Did she see Trump on the island?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Their line is whatever dear leader tells them it is.
The pedophilia thing should be dropped though, that’s for 13 and younger.
Maybe “child sexual exploiter” or “predatory criminal sexual assaulter of children” would be more accurate.
But then they’ll just twist themselves into knots explaining away why children that age cannot obtain gender affirming care but can 100% consent to being diddled by old men.
Virginia Guilfier (sic) testified that she saw girls as young as eleven on the island. So why should the pedophilia accusations be dropped, and frankly thirteen, fourteen and maybe fifteen is also pedophilia territory. At least for my children.
Did she see Trump on the island?
No. Because he was never there.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Their line is whatever dear leader tells them it is.
The pedophilia thing should be dropped though, that’s for 13 and younger.
Maybe “child sexual exploiter” or “predatory criminal sexual assaulter of children” would be more accurate.
But then they’ll just twist themselves into knots explaining away why children that age cannot obtain gender affirming care but can 100% consent to being diddled by old men.
Virginia Guilfier (sic) testified that she saw girls as young as eleven on the island. So why should the pedophilia accusations be dropped, and frankly thirteen, fourteen and maybe fifteen is also pedophilia territory. At least for my children.
Did she see Trump on the island?
No. Because he was never there.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Their line is whatever dear leader tells them it is.
The pedophilia thing should be dropped though, that’s for 13 and younger.
Maybe “child sexual exploiter” or “predatory criminal sexual assaulter of children” would be more accurate.
But then they’ll just twist themselves into knots explaining away why children that age cannot obtain gender affirming care but can 100% consent to being diddled by old men.
Virginia Guilfier (sic) testified that she saw girls as young as eleven on the island. So why should the pedophilia accusations be dropped, and frankly thirteen, fourteen and maybe fifteen is also pedophilia territory. At least for my children.
Did she see Trump on the island?
No. Because he was never there.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Their line is whatever dear leader tells them it is.
The pedophilia thing should be dropped though, that’s for 13 and younger.
Maybe “child sexual exploiter” or “predatory criminal sexual assaulter of children” would be more accurate.
But then they’ll just twist themselves into knots explaining away why children that age cannot obtain gender affirming care but can 100% consent to being diddled by old men.
Virginia Guilfier (sic) testified that she saw girls as young as eleven on the island. So why should the pedophilia accusations be dropped, and frankly thirteen, fourteen and maybe fifteen is also pedophilia territory. At least for my children.
Did she see Trump on the island?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On immigration - are you ok with ICE rounding up all brown people and holding them/deporting them with no due process?
Yes, in fact, the less due process they receive the better. Trump has not gone nearly far enough. Remittances should be taxed at 90% and illegals should all be deported to the Congo.
How about the ones who are here legally on green cards, and get deported anyway (yes it’s happening)? How about the ones who show up to their immigration hearings and are snatched away before any ruling can occur?
What about Trump’s desire to arrest and “deport” US born citizens (like Rosie O’Donnell) who disagree with him politically?
If eggs are broken to make an omelette, so be it. I think deporting all communists is an excellent start.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On immigration - are you ok with ICE rounding up all brown people and holding them/deporting them with no due process?
Yes, in fact, the less due process they receive the better. Trump has not gone nearly far enough. Remittances should be taxed at 90% and illegals should all be deported to the Congo.
How about the ones who are here legally on green cards, and get deported anyway (yes it’s happening)? How about the ones who show up to their immigration hearings and are snatched away before any ruling can occur?
What about Trump’s desire to arrest and “deport” US born citizens (like Rosie O’Donnell) who disagree with him politically?
If eggs are broken to make an omelette, so be it. I think deporting all communists is an excellent start.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On immigration - are you ok with ICE rounding up all brown people and holding them/deporting them with no due process?
Yes, in fact, the less due process they receive the better. Trump has not gone nearly far enough. Remittances should be taxed at 90% and illegals should all be deported to the Congo.
How do you know they are here illegally without due process?
Don't care. Biden abandoned the law on the way in, so they don't get it on the way out. No one voted for tens of millions of illegal aliens.
And we lost due process long ago with things like civil forfeiture and Kelo. As a conservative, I'm tired of due process being used as a weapon against me and a shield to thwart me when there is no vote to do such things. My friends on the left don't realize that liberalism's failures are going to create a class of young men who are far more radical than I am.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On immigration - are you ok with ICE rounding up all brown people and holding them/deporting them with no due process?
Yes, in fact, the less due process they receive the better. Trump has not gone nearly far enough. Remittances should be taxed at 90% and illegals should all be deported to the Congo.
How do you know they are here illegally without due process?
Don't care. Biden abandoned the law on the way in, so they don't get it on the way out. No one voted for tens of millions of illegal aliens.
And we lost due process long ago with things like civil forfeiture and Kelo. As a conservative, I'm tired of due process being used as a weapon against me and a shield to thwart me when there is no vote to do such things. My friends on the left don't realize that liberalism's failures are going to create a class of young men who are far more radical than I am.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On immigration - are you ok with ICE rounding up all brown people and holding them/deporting them with no due process?
Yes, in fact, the less due process they receive the better. Trump has not gone nearly far enough. Remittances should be taxed at 90% and illegals should all be deported to the Congo.
How about the ones who are here legally on green cards, and get deported anyway (yes it’s happening)? How about the ones who show up to their immigration hearings and are snatched away before any ruling can occur?
What about Trump’s desire to arrest and “deport” US born citizens (like Rosie O’Donnell) who disagree with him politically?