Not sure what you mean.@aloha-hoosier, did you turn over a new leaf? You were pretty adamant about this kind of stuff at Rivals.Trying to defend your vote for a pedophile is even more difficult..for most anyway.
@zeke4ahs You’ll be dead & long forgotten before the history books come out to tell the story of a Pres that was controversial but put American citizens first & got us back on track. If Trump is guilty of a crime, he’ll be found as such if proven, but until then you’re just telling stories like the folks claiming Obama killed his chef. Most politicians are scoundrels, & I don’t care about which stories you believe, or about women that followed him into a dressing room 30 years ago (what did she think was going on?😆) I’m sure being childless & no family is bad enough on its own & you do have my pity, but filling that giant void in your life with hate & contempt makes for a pathetic existence, & many of us with a real stake in the future are getting what we voted for, the rest is just noise & red meat for lonely spinsters, the mentally ill, & those willing to be subjugated by criminals, radicals, & freaks.
^^^ What a "jet" sized POS post.
.
Trump hired girls for his "modeling agency". He then had the teenage models work for him at his "spa", frequented by pervs such as Epstein, who enjoyed the "modeling" going on at the "spa". These pervs then hired their favorite "models" to apply their skills at other locations with VIP pervs, with no monetary kickbacks to Trump. This absence of kickbacks was of course unacceptable to Trump, the head pimp. Relationship ended. Well, not until after he described Epstein as a wonderful friend who is a lot of fun to be around.
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
I'm not sure the media coverage by the relevant left-leaning news sources is relevant to my analogy about how partisans defend their own based on how definitive the evidence is regarding their own leader's alleged malfeasance.Ah, yes, great analogy. Now just link me 2 years worth of stories from ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, NYT, LAT, Tribune, etc. And the interviews they did with Bobolinski.
But I read quite a few news stories over the Biden presidency about the laptop, Chinese connections, Ukrainian boards, Hunter, etc. Surely you remember those? And I thought it looked very suspicious. But alas, nothing ever really came of it. Same thing applies here--Dems will play politics with the issue, but nothing is going to happen to Trump regarding it.
@aloha-hoosierTrump hired girls for his “modeling agency”. He then had the teenage models work for him at his “spa”, frequented by pervs such as Epstein, who enjoyed the “modeling” going on at the “spa”. These pervs then hired their favorite “models” to apply their skills at other locations with VIP pervs, with no monetary kickbacks to Trump. This absence of kickbacks was of course unacceptable to Trump, the head pimp. Relationship ended. Well, not until after he described Epstein as a wonderful friend who is a lot of fun to be around.
Trump Model Management, also known as T Models and later shortened to T Management, was a New York City-based modeling agency founded by Donald Trump. It was established in 1999 and closed in April 2017, shortly after Trump became president
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
You attacked TDHoosier at every turn because he labeled Tim Walz a pedophile wihtout concrete evidence to back it up, just innuendo. I called him out on it, too.Not sure what you mean.@aloha-hoosier, did you turn over a new leaf? You were pretty adamant about this kind of stuff at Rivals.Trying to defend your vote for a pedophile is even more difficult..for most anyway.
Did you stop thinking that kind of conduct was dishonorable or just decided to not bring it up on this site?
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/trump-model-management-barbara-boxer-227830
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
What about it? I’ve made it clear that I think he’s extremely low character. I’d guess he registers about a zero on the morals meter. Do I need to reaffirm this? I don’t think so. This will play out.@aloha-hoosierTrump hired girls for his “modeling agency”. He then had the teenage models work for him at his “spa”, frequented by pervs such as Epstein, who enjoyed the “modeling” going on at the “spa”. These pervs then hired their favorite “models” to apply their skills at other locations with VIP pervs, with no monetary kickbacks to Trump. This absence of kickbacks was of course unacceptable to Trump, the head pimp. Relationship ended. Well, not until after he described Epstein as a wonderful friend who is a lot of fun to be around.
You attacked TDHoosier at every turn because he labeled Tim Walz a pedophile wihtout concrete evidence to back it up, just innuendo. I called him out on it, too.Not sure what you mean.@aloha-hoosier, did you turn over a new leaf? You were pretty adamant about this kind of stuff at Rivals.Trying to defend your vote for a pedophile is even more difficult..for most anyway.
Did you stop thinking that kind of conduct was dishonorable or just decided to not bring it up on this site?
Stop acting like you don’t want to moderate this board.
.
What about it?
There were a lot of posts the past few days about how there was nothing wrong at all about Trump or anyone else giving a 15-year-old a "summer job".
People making those posts seem blissfully unaware (or probably more likely, in complete denial) about the nature of the businesses being run by Trump during his buddy-buddy days with Epstein
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
That was TyWebb. It was also about diddling young boys and zero evidence. Seems most people are saying that they don’t know if Trump is a pedo, and we don’t know. There’s ample evidence he’s a perv, but don’t know that he’s a pedo.You attacked TDHoosier at every turn because he labeled Tim Walz a pedophile wihtout concrete evidence to back it up, just innuendo. I called him out on it, too.Not sure what you mean.@aloha-hoosier, did you turn over a new leaf? You were pretty adamant about this kind of stuff at Rivals.Trying to defend your vote for a pedophile is even more difficult..for most anyway.
Did you stop thinking that kind of conduct was dishonorable or just decided to not bring it up on this site?
Yep, TyWebb.That was TyWebb. It was also about diddling young boys and zero evidence. Seems most people are saying that they don’t know if Trump is a pedo, and we don’t know. There’s ample evidence he’s a perv, but don’t know that he’s a pedo.You attacked TDHoosier at every turn because he labeled Tim Walz a pedophile wihtout concrete evidence to back it up, just innuendo. I called him out on it, too.Not sure what you mean.@aloha-hoosier, did you turn over a new leaf? You were pretty adamant about this kind of stuff at Rivals.Trying to defend your vote for a pedophile is even more difficult..for most anyway.
Did you stop thinking that kind of conduct was dishonorable or just decided to not bring it up on this site?
What's the difference between that situation and hickory or Shooter's posts I @ you on? Because it's Trump, it's OK?
It is irresponsible to call Trump a pedophile.
Let's be precise and call him a man widely suspected of being a pedophile, based upon his words, actions, inactions, and credible accounts of others (including, perhaps, the multi-hour 2017 interview with Epstein, the tapes and transcripts of which are soon to emerge!).
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
Yep, TyWebb.
What’s the difference between that situation and hickory or Shooter’s posts I @ you on? Because it’s Trump, it’s OK?
If they actually called him a pedo, I missed it. I haven’t paid close attention to this thread. There’s plenty of evidence the guy has been a womanizer, adulterer, looked at naked underaged girls, and was found civilly responsible for a sexual assault, etc.. There’s a lot of smoke and demonstrated sexual misbehavior but nothing that says he’s an actual pedophile. If I missed it and someone called him an actual pedo, they were out of line. However, accusing someone of sexual misconduct when the person has no record at all of sexual misconduct is higher on the scale of “out of line” than accusing someone who has a demonstrated history of such behavior, right?