Lauren Boebert

30,394 Views | 256 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by Teslag
TaxLawAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TXAGFAN said:

AgBandsman said:

Fear InoculAg said:

blacksox said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Boebert has a GED education level and a husband with a criminal record. Not the kind of people we should want to represent us in congress.
Out of curiosity, what relevance do you believe her husband's criminal record has?
Elected officials are public figures. There personal lives become relevant to the public just like celebrities and athletes.
That wasn't my question. I don't disagree that it's relevant. I'm asking you what the relevance is. WHY is it relevant?


Because this women decided it was a good idea to marry a man carrying a criminal record for flashing his pecker at children. That shows poor decision making. She married a groomer.

Nancy Pelosi married somebody who drives drunk and commits insider trading.

Joe Biden is an actual pedophile who touches and sniffs young children.


High moral standing only matters to Republican voters. It's incomparable to what the loons on the left do. They vote for anyone willing to sell their soul to satan.
One party holds themselves up as the moral authority…
Uh…we actually believe in God.
sam callahan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"when they go low, we go high"
sam callahan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"deplorables"
sam callahan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"roaches"
Urban Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
blacksox said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Boebert has a GED education level and a husband with a criminal record. Not the kind of people we should want to represent us in congress.
Out of curiosity, what relevance do you believe her husband's criminal record has?
Elected officials are public figures. There personal lives become relevant to the public just like celebrities and athletes.
That wasn't my question. I don't disagree that it's relevant. I'm asking you what the relevance is. WHY is it relevant?


Because this women decided it was a good idea to marry a man carrying a criminal record for flashing his pecker at children. That shows poor decision making. She married a groomer.
To be fair.

He was accused of dropping his deek out at a bowling alley. He claimed he did the finger out the zipper trick. I'm not a snowflake millenial. Dudes did that for laughs (and worse) in the 70's, 80, 90's. The "kids" you cite were 16-17 year old girls. Everyone was apparently drunk.

None of it is acceptable. None of it is good. And, you have no proof he isn't telling the truth. And on a scale of Bill Clinton and Al Franken, it's on the lower end. He didn't molest a child or rape a girl and you know it.

Dude is likely a complete dumbass but quit acting the white knight when your party is literally full of pervs, rapists, groomers, and sex offenders.
sam callahan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
which party puts yard signs out to show their purity and virtue?
OverSeas AG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Listening to the party of KKK Joe try to find moral high ground is rich.

joey boy and those voting for him are racist. Period end of story. He is a well known racist, not to mention a known pedo.

That's just the truth. Repugnant.
I am not friends with people that want to tare down the Republic.
Claverack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sam callahan said:

which party puts yard signs out to show their purity and virtue?


Absolute frauds and hypocrites.

Tolerant and saintly...until "those people" show up on their lawns.
AGHouston11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
blacksox said:

CDUB98 said:

LOL

Number of degrees does not necessarily reflect the intelligence of a person.


But there is often times a correlation, no?


No not with democrats - too many examples
Also many were gained via affirmative action type measures
Waffledynamics
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Back on track: I don't see how Boebert wins. Every time she gains, her opponent gains just a little to stay ahead.

She's lost. I'm pretty sure the House is lost. This country is lost. I'm massively depressed and angry, and I am so, so ****ing done with this whole stupid country.
Rockdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Waffledynamics said:

Back on track: I don't see how Boebert wins. Every time she gains, her opponent gains just a little to stay ahead.

She's lost. I'm pretty sure the House is lost. This country is lost. I'm massively depressed and angry, and I am so, so ****ing done with this whole stupid country.

Why do you think the house is lost? Just hang in there.
blacksox
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Urban Ag said:

blacksox said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Boebert has a GED education level and a husband with a criminal record. Not the kind of people we should want to represent us in congress.
Out of curiosity, what relevance do you believe her husband's criminal record has?
Elected officials are public figures. There personal lives become relevant to the public just like celebrities and athletes.
That wasn't my question. I don't disagree that it's relevant. I'm asking you what the relevance is. WHY is it relevant?


Because this women decided it was a good idea to marry a man carrying a criminal record for flashing his pecker at children. That shows poor decision making. She married a groomer.
To be fair.

He was accused of dropping his deek out at a bowling alley. He claimed he did the finger out the zipper trick. I'm not a snowflake millenial. Dudes did that for laughs (and worse) in the 70's, 80, 90's. The "kids" you cite were 16-17 year old girls. Everyone was apparently drunk.

None of it is acceptable. None of it is good. And, you have no proof he isn't telling the truth. And on a scale of Bill Clinton and Al Franken, it's on the lower end. He didn't molest a child or rape a girl and you know it.

Dude is likely a complete dumbass but quit acting the white knight when your party is literally full of pervs, rapists, groomers, and sex offenders.


He pled guilty to it. Would you plead guilty if you were having a laugh?
TXAGFAN
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
blacksox said:

Urban Ag said:

blacksox said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Boebert has a GED education level and a husband with a criminal record. Not the kind of people we should want to represent us in congress.
Out of curiosity, what relevance do you believe her husband's criminal record has?
Elected officials are public figures. There personal lives become relevant to the public just like celebrities and athletes.
That wasn't my question. I don't disagree that it's relevant. I'm asking you what the relevance is. WHY is it relevant?


Because this women decided it was a good idea to marry a man carrying a criminal record for flashing his pecker at children. That shows poor decision making. She married a groomer.
To be fair.

He was accused of dropping his deek out at a bowling alley. He claimed he did the finger out the zipper trick. I'm not a snowflake millenial. Dudes did that for laughs (and worse) in the 70's, 80, 90's. The "kids" you cite were 16-17 year old girls. Everyone was apparently drunk.

None of it is acceptable. None of it is good. And, you have no proof he isn't telling the truth. And on a scale of Bill Clinton and Al Franken, it's on the lower end. He didn't molest a child or rape a girl and you know it.

Dude is likely a complete dumbass but quit acting the white knight when your party is literally full of pervs, rapists, groomers, and sex offenders.


He pled guilty to it. Would you plead guilty if you were having a laugh?
If I posted anything that even looked like Urban Ag's post defending a pervert and person guilty of sex crimes what do you suppose the replies would look like?

Unbelievable.

ETA: Also convenient he didn't mention the pervert was in his MID 20's.
Pinochet11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
House is not lost good lord you people are insufferable
jeremy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Lots of people plead guilty to avoid the risk of trial for a more serious charge.

No way I'm defending this dude, because I know nothing about it.
ApachePilot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Is there an auto recount if the votes is this close? 100 or so votes out of 300+ thousand. Crazy.
TXAGFAN
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
jeremy said:

Lots of people plead guilty to avoid the risk of trial for a more serious charge.

No way I'm defending this dude, because I know nothing about it.
Guilty people, yes.
Ags4DaWin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
blacksox said:

Urban Ag said:

blacksox said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Boebert has a GED education level and a husband with a criminal record. Not the kind of people we should want to represent us in congress.
Out of curiosity, what relevance do you believe her husband's criminal record has?
Elected officials are public figures. There personal lives become relevant to the public just like celebrities and athletes.
That wasn't my question. I don't disagree that it's relevant. I'm asking you what the relevance is. WHY is it relevant?


Because this women decided it was a good idea to marry a man carrying a criminal record for flashing his pecker at children. That shows poor decision making. She married a groomer.
To be fair.

He was accused of dropping his deek out at a bowling alley. He claimed he did the finger out the zipper trick. I'm not a snowflake millenial. Dudes did that for laughs (and worse) in the 70's, 80, 90's. The "kids" you cite were 16-17 year old girls. Everyone was apparently drunk.

None of it is acceptable. None of it is good. And, you have no proof he isn't telling the truth. And on a scale of Bill Clinton and Al Franken, it's on the lower end. He didn't molest a child or rape a girl and you know it.

Dude is likely a complete dumbass but quit acting the white knight when your party is literally full of pervs, rapists, groomers, and sex offenders.


He pled guilty to it. Would you plead guilty if you were having a laugh?


People plead guilty to things when they are afraid of getting ridiculously punishing sentences.

What is really appalling is when people don't even get charged for what they do (Biden laptop) or they commit perjury to try to get out of it (Clinton's "it depends on your definition of the word is")

What is even more appalling is that your ilk try to eviscerate people who take responsibility for their actions and turn a blind eye to the horrible sociopaths who don't.
TXAGFAN
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ags4DaWin said:

blacksox said:

Urban Ag said:

blacksox said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Boebert has a GED education level and a husband with a criminal record. Not the kind of people we should want to represent us in congress.
Out of curiosity, what relevance do you believe her husband's criminal record has?
Elected officials are public figures. There personal lives become relevant to the public just like celebrities and athletes.
That wasn't my question. I don't disagree that it's relevant. I'm asking you what the relevance is. WHY is it relevant?


Because this women decided it was a good idea to marry a man carrying a criminal record for flashing his pecker at children. That shows poor decision making. She married a groomer.
To be fair.

He was accused of dropping his deek out at a bowling alley. He claimed he did the finger out the zipper trick. I'm not a snowflake millenial. Dudes did that for laughs (and worse) in the 70's, 80, 90's. The "kids" you cite were 16-17 year old girls. Everyone was apparently drunk.

None of it is acceptable. None of it is good. And, you have no proof he isn't telling the truth. And on a scale of Bill Clinton and Al Franken, it's on the lower end. He didn't molest a child or rape a girl and you know it.

Dude is likely a complete dumbass but quit acting the white knight when your party is literally full of pervs, rapists, groomers, and sex offenders.


He pled guilty to it. Would you plead guilty if you were having a laugh?


People plead guilty to things when they are afraid of getting ridiculously punishing sentences.

What is really appalling is when people don't even get charged for what they do (Biden laptop) or they commit perjury to try to get out of it (Clinton's "it depends on your definition of the word is")

What is even more appalling is that your ilk try to eviscerate people who take responsibility for their actions and turn a blind eye to the horrible sociopaths who don't.
So you're defending a mid 20's man who exposed his ***** to women, specifically minors? Just keeping a list for next time someone throws a groomer/pedophile accusation my way for simply existing.
Waffledynamics
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Rockdoc said:

Waffledynamics said:

Back on track: I don't see how Boebert wins. Every time she gains, her opponent gains just a little to stay ahead.

She's lost. I'm pretty sure the House is lost. This country is lost. I'm massively depressed and angry, and I am so, so ****ing done with this whole stupid country.

Why do you think the house is lost? Just hang in there.
Why do you think it's won?
TaxLawAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TXAGFAN said:

Ags4DaWin said:

blacksox said:

Urban Ag said:

blacksox said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Boebert has a GED education level and a husband with a criminal record. Not the kind of people we should want to represent us in congress.
Out of curiosity, what relevance do you believe her husband's criminal record has?
Elected officials are public figures. There personal lives become relevant to the public just like celebrities and athletes.
That wasn't my question. I don't disagree that it's relevant. I'm asking you what the relevance is. WHY is it relevant?


Because this women decided it was a good idea to marry a man carrying a criminal record for flashing his pecker at children. That shows poor decision making. She married a groomer.
To be fair.

He was accused of dropping his deek out at a bowling alley. He claimed he did the finger out the zipper trick. I'm not a snowflake millenial. Dudes did that for laughs (and worse) in the 70's, 80, 90's. The "kids" you cite were 16-17 year old girls. Everyone was apparently drunk.

None of it is acceptable. None of it is good. And, you have no proof he isn't telling the truth. And on a scale of Bill Clinton and Al Franken, it's on the lower end. He didn't molest a child or rape a girl and you know it.

Dude is likely a complete dumbass but quit acting the white knight when your party is literally full of pervs, rapists, groomers, and sex offenders.


He pled guilty to it. Would you plead guilty if you were having a laugh?


People plead guilty to things when they are afraid of getting ridiculously punishing sentences.

What is really appalling is when people don't even get charged for what they do (Biden laptop) or they commit perjury to try to get out of it (Clinton's "it depends on your definition of the word is")

What is even more appalling is that your ilk try to eviscerate people who take responsibility for their actions and turn a blind eye to the horrible sociopaths who don't.
So you're defending a mid 20's man who exposed his ***** to women, specifically minors? Just keeping a list for next time someone throws a groomer/pedophile accusation my way for simply existing.


ALWAYS the victim.
SpreadsheetAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
64 votes

This will be a recount


TaxLawAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TXAGFAN said:

jeremy said:

Lots of people plead guilty to avoid the risk of trial for a more serious charge.

No way I'm defending this dude, because I know nothing about it.
Guilty people, yes.


Oh , look who's dead ass wrong again but talks as if he has any clue wtf he's taking about.
File5
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What is the threshold for a recount?
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
1/2 % by law
TXAGFAN
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TaxLawAg said:

TXAGFAN said:

jeremy said:

Lots of people plead guilty to avoid the risk of trial for a more serious charge.

No way I'm defending this dude, because I know nothing about it.
Guilty people, yes.


Oh , look who's dead ass wrong again but talks as if he has any clue wtf he's taking about.
Oh he's innocent then? Help me out mr lawyer.

All signs, including his plea and time in jail, say guilty.
SpreadsheetAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
File5 said:

What is the threshold for a recount?


Quote:

In Colorado's case, state statute requires a recount "if the difference between the highest number of votes cast in that election contest and the next highest number of votes cast in that election contest is less than or equal to one-half of one percent of the highest vote cast in that election contest."

The recount only happens after a canvass board certifies the original count and must be requested within 35 days of the election.

Losing parties in any election may request a recount at their own expense, regardless of the results' margins. The recount must be requested within 37 days of the election.


In this case it'd be 780 or so votes
TXAGFAN
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TaxLawAg said:

TXAGFAN said:

Ags4DaWin said:

blacksox said:

Urban Ag said:

blacksox said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Boebert has a GED education level and a husband with a criminal record. Not the kind of people we should want to represent us in congress.
Out of curiosity, what relevance do you believe her husband's criminal record has?
Elected officials are public figures. There personal lives become relevant to the public just like celebrities and athletes.
That wasn't my question. I don't disagree that it's relevant. I'm asking you what the relevance is. WHY is it relevant?


Because this women decided it was a good idea to marry a man carrying a criminal record for flashing his pecker at children. That shows poor decision making. She married a groomer.
To be fair.

He was accused of dropping his deek out at a bowling alley. He claimed he did the finger out the zipper trick. I'm not a snowflake millenial. Dudes did that for laughs (and worse) in the 70's, 80, 90's. The "kids" you cite were 16-17 year old girls. Everyone was apparently drunk.

None of it is acceptable. None of it is good. And, you have no proof he isn't telling the truth. And on a scale of Bill Clinton and Al Franken, it's on the lower end. He didn't molest a child or rape a girl and you know it.

Dude is likely a complete dumbass but quit acting the white knight when your party is literally full of pervs, rapists, groomers, and sex offenders.


He pled guilty to it. Would you plead guilty if you were having a laugh?


People plead guilty to things when they are afraid of getting ridiculously punishing sentences.

What is really appalling is when people don't even get charged for what they do (Biden laptop) or they commit perjury to try to get out of it (Clinton's "it depends on your definition of the word is")

What is even more appalling is that your ilk try to eviscerate people who take responsibility for their actions and turn a blind eye to the horrible sociopaths who don't.
So you're defending a mid 20's man who exposed his ***** to women, specifically minors? Just keeping a list for next time someone throws a groomer/pedophile accusation my way for simply existing.


ALWAYS the victim.
Just can't believe the same sort of people who think I should make it my life goal to speak out about what they perceive as grooming and pedophilia by gay people are taking up for an adult man in his 20's who showed his ***** to teenage girls because his wife was a loud mouthed Republican and they liked her tweets.

What am I missing?
TaxLawAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TXAGFAN said:

TaxLawAg said:

TXAGFAN said:

jeremy said:

Lots of people plead guilty to avoid the risk of trial for a more serious charge.

No way I'm defending this dude, because I know nothing about it.
Guilty people, yes.


Oh , look who's dead ass wrong again but talks as if he has any clue wtf he's taking about.
Oh he's innocent then? Help me out mr lawyer.

All signs, including his plea and time in jail, say guilty.


I don't know if he's innocent; nobody will ever know that because that's not a question in our legal system.

What I'm telling you is he could not have done it…but still pled guilty.
TaxLawAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TXAGFAN said:

TaxLawAg said:

TXAGFAN said:

Ags4DaWin said:

blacksox said:

Urban Ag said:

blacksox said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Boebert has a GED education level and a husband with a criminal record. Not the kind of people we should want to represent us in congress.
Out of curiosity, what relevance do you believe her husband's criminal record has?
Elected officials are public figures. There personal lives become relevant to the public just like celebrities and athletes.
That wasn't my question. I don't disagree that it's relevant. I'm asking you what the relevance is. WHY is it relevant?


Because this women decided it was a good idea to marry a man carrying a criminal record for flashing his pecker at children. That shows poor decision making. She married a groomer.
To be fair.

He was accused of dropping his deek out at a bowling alley. He claimed he did the finger out the zipper trick. I'm not a snowflake millenial. Dudes did that for laughs (and worse) in the 70's, 80, 90's. The "kids" you cite were 16-17 year old girls. Everyone was apparently drunk.

None of it is acceptable. None of it is good. And, you have no proof he isn't telling the truth. And on a scale of Bill Clinton and Al Franken, it's on the lower end. He didn't molest a child or rape a girl and you know it.

Dude is likely a complete dumbass but quit acting the white knight when your party is literally full of pervs, rapists, groomers, and sex offenders.


He pled guilty to it. Would you plead guilty if you were having a laugh?


People plead guilty to things when they are afraid of getting ridiculously punishing sentences.

What is really appalling is when people don't even get charged for what they do (Biden laptop) or they commit perjury to try to get out of it (Clinton's "it depends on your definition of the word is")

What is even more appalling is that your ilk try to eviscerate people who take responsibility for their actions and turn a blind eye to the horrible sociopaths who don't.
So you're defending a mid 20's man who exposed his ***** to women, specifically minors? Just keeping a list for next time someone throws a groomer/pedophile accusation my way for simply existing.


ALWAYS the victim.
Just can't believe the same sort of people who think I should make it my life goal to speak out about what they perceive as grooming and pedophilia by gay people are taking up for an adult man in his 20's who showed his ***** to teenage girls because his wife was a loud mouthed Republican and they liked her tweets.

What am I missing?


Everything.

Nobody's defending him.
TXAGFAN
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TaxLawAg said:

TXAGFAN said:

TaxLawAg said:

TXAGFAN said:

Ags4DaWin said:

blacksox said:

Urban Ag said:

blacksox said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Boebert has a GED education level and a husband with a criminal record. Not the kind of people we should want to represent us in congress.
Out of curiosity, what relevance do you believe her husband's criminal record has?
Elected officials are public figures. There personal lives become relevant to the public just like celebrities and athletes.
That wasn't my question. I don't disagree that it's relevant. I'm asking you what the relevance is. WHY is it relevant?


Because this women decided it was a good idea to marry a man carrying a criminal record for flashing his pecker at children. That shows poor decision making. She married a groomer.
To be fair.

He was accused of dropping his deek out at a bowling alley. He claimed he did the finger out the zipper trick. I'm not a snowflake millenial. Dudes did that for laughs (and worse) in the 70's, 80, 90's. The "kids" you cite were 16-17 year old girls. Everyone was apparently drunk.

None of it is acceptable. None of it is good. And, you have no proof he isn't telling the truth. And on a scale of Bill Clinton and Al Franken, it's on the lower end. He didn't molest a child or rape a girl and you know it.

Dude is likely a complete dumbass but quit acting the white knight when your party is literally full of pervs, rapists, groomers, and sex offenders.


He pled guilty to it. Would you plead guilty if you were having a laugh?


People plead guilty to things when they are afraid of getting ridiculously punishing sentences.

What is really appalling is when people don't even get charged for what they do (Biden laptop) or they commit perjury to try to get out of it (Clinton's "it depends on your definition of the word is")

What is even more appalling is that your ilk try to eviscerate people who take responsibility for their actions and turn a blind eye to the horrible sociopaths who don't.
So you're defending a mid 20's man who exposed his ***** to women, specifically minors? Just keeping a list for next time someone throws a groomer/pedophile accusation my way for simply existing.


ALWAYS the victim.
Just can't believe the same sort of people who think I should make it my life goal to speak out about what they perceive as grooming and pedophilia by gay people are taking up for an adult man in his 20's who showed his ***** to teenage girls because his wife was a loud mouthed Republican and they liked her tweets.

What am I missing?


Everything.

Nobody's defending him.

Go read Urban Ag's post, lot of excuses.
AggieVictor10
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
usmcbrooks said:

Urban Ag said:

usmcbrooks said:





She'd ruin your life but man would it be a ride
Already ruined...she could give it her best shot though.


Double tap.
WHOOP!'91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TXAGFAN said:

TaxLawAg said:

TXAGFAN said:

Ags4DaWin said:

blacksox said:

Urban Ag said:

blacksox said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Fear InoculAg said:

Grapesoda2525 said:

Boebert has a GED education level and a husband with a criminal record. Not the kind of people we should want to represent us in congress.
Out of curiosity, what relevance do you believe her husband's criminal record has?
Elected officials are public figures. There personal lives become relevant to the public just like celebrities and athletes.
That wasn't my question. I don't disagree that it's relevant. I'm asking you what the relevance is. WHY is it relevant?


Because this women decided it was a good idea to marry a man carrying a criminal record for flashing his pecker at children. That shows poor decision making. She married a groomer.
To be fair.

He was accused of dropping his deek out at a bowling alley. He claimed he did the finger out the zipper trick. I'm not a snowflake millenial. Dudes did that for laughs (and worse) in the 70's, 80, 90's. The "kids" you cite were 16-17 year old girls. Everyone was apparently drunk.

None of it is acceptable. None of it is good. And, you have no proof he isn't telling the truth. And on a scale of Bill Clinton and Al Franken, it's on the lower end. He didn't molest a child or rape a girl and you know it.

Dude is likely a complete dumbass but quit acting the white knight when your party is literally full of pervs, rapists, groomers, and sex offenders.


He pled guilty to it. Would you plead guilty if you were having a laugh?


People plead guilty to things when they are afraid of getting ridiculously punishing sentences.

What is really appalling is when people don't even get charged for what they do (Biden laptop) or they commit perjury to try to get out of it (Clinton's "it depends on your definition of the word is")

What is even more appalling is that your ilk try to eviscerate people who take responsibility for their actions and turn a blind eye to the horrible sociopaths who don't.
So you're defending a mid 20's man who exposed his ***** to women, specifically minors? Just keeping a list for next time someone throws a groomer/pedophile accusation my way for simply existing.


ALWAYS the victim.
Just can't believe the same sort of people who think I should make it my life goal to speak out about what they perceive as grooming and pedophilia by gay people are taking up for an adult man in his 20's who showed his ***** to teenage girls because his wife was a loud mouthed Republican and they liked her tweets.

What am I missing?
Are there behaviors in the LGBTQ+ community and allies (like Disney) that we COULD call grooming, like Disney producers saying "I was just, wherever I could, adding queerness. No one would stop me, and no one was trying to stop me." In support of her "not-at-all-secret gay agenda"? Putting on drag and burlesque shows to little children? Behaving lewdly with children at "pride" parades?

Whatever Boebert's husband did doesn't erase those things, right?

TXAGFAN
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It's weird, I've been gay for decades and never got an agenda.

You want to defend Boebert's husband too or just derail?
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TXAGFAN said:

jeremy said:

Lots of people plead guilty to avoid the risk of trial for a more serious charge.

No way I'm defending this dude, because I know nothing about it.
Guilty people, yes.
The Innocence Project would like a talk with you...
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.