U.S. Capitol Police is reportedly investigating the shocking videotape of two men having sex in public in what appears the Senate large hearing room in the Hart Senate Office Building. The room is familiar to many citizens from Supreme Court confirmations to impeachment proceedings. Indeed, I have testified repeatedly in the room and argued much of the Porteous impeachment case in that space. First reported on a conservative site, the video of two men having sex led to reports that one of the individuals was a staffer for Sen. Ben Cardin (D., Md.). Update: Cardin aide Aidan Maese-Czeropski, 24, has now been reportedly fired.
The video shows one of the men hunched over the dais at the center of the seating for senators in Senate room Hart 216.
The video was reportedly shared on the Internet on gay sites.
Obviously, the videotape will result in the termination of any staffers involved. However, the question is any possible criminal charge. We have previously discussed porn videos shot in churches or other locations. Such porn shoots in church have also raised calls for prosecutions in other countries.
Staffers have access into such rooms, but the question is whether this unofficial use would constitute trespass. It also uses an official area for personal purposes, though it is not clear if there were any commercial benefits garnered from the video found on various sites.
One obvious criminal provision under the D.C. code is Section 22-1312 for lewd, indecent, or obscene acts:
“It is unlawful for a person, in public, to make an obscene or indecent exposure of his or her genitalia or anus, to engage in masturbation, or to engage in a sexual act as defined in § 22-3001(8). It is unlawful for a person to make an obscene or indecent sexual proposal to a minor. A person who violates any provision of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, shall be fined not more than the amount set forth in § 22-3571.01, imprisoned for not more than 90 days, or both.”
The question is whether this is “in public” in a locked committee room — any more than sex in a congressional office after hours would be viewed as “in public.”
There are also provisions concerning the misuse or damaging of government property such as Section 1361, which protects “any property” of the United States from willful depredation or attempted depredation. “Depredation” is defined as the act of plundering, robbing, pillaging or laying waste. However, mere possession of such property is not viewed as depredation. United States v. Jenkins, 554 F.2d 783, 786 (6th Cir. 1977).
There is also 18 U.S.C. 641 on the misuse of public money, property, or records:
“Whoever embezzles, steals, purloins, or knowingly converts to his use or the use of another, or without authority, sells, conveys or disposes of any record, voucher, money, or thing of value of the United States or of any department or agency thereof, or any property made or being made under contract for the United States or any department or agency thereof; or
Whoever receives, conceals, or retains the same with intent to convert it to his use or gain, knowing it to have been embezzled, stolen, purloined or converted—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; but if the value of such property in the aggregate, combining amounts from all the counts for which the defendant is convicted in a single case, does not exceed the sum of $1,000, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”
The Capitol police could argue that this constitutes purloining or using government property for personal purposes.
The key factor is the fact that this videotape was made with the apparent intent to publish or to distribute. Sex in congressional offices — by both members and staff — have long been known to occur on Capitol Hill. Yet, this was a public hearing room, albeit closed at the time, and a tape made for what appears public viewing.
That brings us back to trespass. The question may be whether this was access under legal authority for a staffer. The Capitol police can argue that access to a staff position does not mean a license for entry for any purpose. Under 18 U.S.C. 1752, trespass covers anyone who “knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so.”
Does a staffer have legal authority to enter any hearing room for any purpose? That could be a defense raised by counsel, but it would seem likely that any access is premised on an official function.
The pressure on the Capitol police is likely to be considerable in the coming days. Only recently, House members Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Rep. Jamie Raskin claimed that house rules were broken by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene showing Hunter Biden and a woman in a revealing picture, though he was purportedly wearing a swimsuit. Raskin objected that it would constitute “pornographic exhibits that might not be suitable for children watching.”
While this was not a public hearing, those objections now seem almost puritanical in light what just occurred over in the Senate hearing room.
Maese-Czeropski was named in an earlier incident in Congress when he was accused of confronting Ohio Republican Congressman Max Miller over his support for Israel. He has categorically denied that accusation.
He is listed working of Cardin since October 2021, and previously worked as a field organizer for the Democratic Party in Virginia. He also lists work as a climate researcher for charity Friends of the Earth.
What is likely to get the most attention, however, is that he also reportedly appeared in a campaign ad in 2020 with President Biden with the words “thank you for teaching.”
Maese-Czeropski went on to social media to issue a statement of regret but to say that “[t]his has been a difficult time for me, as I have been attacked for who I love to pursue a political agenda.” When one films a porn scene in a Senate hearing room, the resulting anger is likely focused on the conduct rather than the identity of the parties. A heterosexual tryst would produce the same obvious objections.
The spin on the controversy is similar to the effort of Susanna Gibson in a Politico article. In a bizarre piece on Gibson’s scandal involving sex acts on the Internet, Politico was mocked for leaving out key details as Gibson claimed that she was shocked that other people saw the intimate videos with her husband.
Gibson and her husband posted more than a dozen videos that were archived on a site called Chaturbate in September 2022 shortly before she announced her candidacy for office. Viewers were told that they could pay for her to perform specific sex acts “for tips.” While the scandal was revealed by the Washington Post, the article suggests it was skullduggery by conservatives and that her privacy was shattered.
Gibson has made dubious threats to sue over the disclosures of the videos and even alleged that the disclosures constituted a sex crime. She attempted to portray the controversy as an attack on all women. It seemed to work. Gibson came close to winning the recent election despite the scandal as the Democratic candidate for the state legislature.
In the controversy involving Maese-Czeropski, the video was posted to a private group for gay men and the owner identified himself as a “twink” engaging in sex acts with his older “bear” partner. The group posting does not suggest a private intimate video shared between a couple.
The site does not appear to generate revenue, which could have bearing on potential charges discussed above. Using the congressional space for commercial purposes can factor into possible charges.
The resignation of Maese-Czeropski will not necessarily end any Capitol Police investigation. Given the possibilities of charges, further public statements are unwise until the former aide speaks with counsel.
Could be charged?!?
Lol! What a joke
I thought Bidung said this was going to be the presidency of Decency.. you know like Sam Brinton, Demetre Daskalakis, ” rachel” levine, hunter biden, Menendez etc. etc.
Don’t forget Rose Montoya, a special tranny guest at the White House, who exposed herself on the South Lawn right after the Bidim told her she was “inspiring”. I guess he knew more than we did.
Professor Turley continues to depict Marjorie Greene Taylor’s graphic photo of Hunter Biden getting oral sex with a woman as “Hunter BIden in a swimsuit.” The video of the televised CSPAN House hearing is readily available on YouTube. Turley seems quite confident his most loyal defenders will never question his depiction of events & bother to check out the video for themselves. JT keeps proving himself to be an especially unreliable witness.
For anyone interested, Google “Marjorie Taylor Greene holds up censored photo of Hunter Biden and a prostitute” on the Fox News website.
You cannot say. There is not mental illness with these types of people. They put sex above everything else. Including common sense.
Exercism is needed in the Senate n Congress, it is infested with demonic spirits.
LIAR!!!
THAT WAS NOT HUNTER BIDEN!!!
YOU HAVE NO PROOF!!
PUTIN STOOGE!!!!
GiGi….You don’t have to yell! You’re coming in loud and queer.
She always does. You even have to screech it out loud when you read it.
Wow. I believe some of the comments are as odd as the subject of the article. Bye world. What a mess.
Mary, you have made the mistake before of missing Tom’s parody of the lefty idiots like Gigi.
To what extent was this episode inspired by the example of Gerry Studds, a member of the House of Representatives who engaged in a homosexual relationship with a 17 year old Congressional page to standing ovations from Studds’ supporters?
Probably more like Harvey Milk who sodomized a 17 year old who was in rehab… then the military names a navy hospital ship after the pervert
Wouldn’t it be grand if we could ask for anything and rest confidently in the assurance that G-D is our errand boy, granting us whatever we wish. Don’t work that way. Grow up before u r swallowed up in the pending Holocaust.
Would these human beings have believed it was ‘OK’ to do this very risky filming of sex acts in this Senate location in a Trump Administration? The answer is a clear 100% NO.
Did they believe they could get away with it in a Joe Biden Administration: clearly, the did the filming when Joe is POTUS —
Reminds me of that very weird character who stole luggage containing women’s clothing who worked in the Biden administration — the guy with the lipstick wearing female clothing who was in the news not long ago……would THAT have been tolerated, would that have remotely occurred, in a Trump administration — would that have occurred in ANY administration in US history, other than the Biden administration —- NO.
Joe Biden’s administration has soiled this country in many more ways than one —
Its funny. We are this close to total annihilation and as usual we receive what is all too common: word of lewd sex acts caught on tape perpetrated in symbols of hope and good and decency. Over and over mankind forgets the vital role of morality as we wind our way inexorably to the end of civilization.
Many bloodthirsty maniacs, like those who raped elderly women and chopped off the heads of newborns a few days ago, and steal airliners with child passengers, to race them into iron fortresses, shout out to each of us every moment that the time is nigh upon us.
This is the end. This is that Time predicted long ago when man would encounter such dreadful destruction, like that never seen before. Here we are amidst the ruin and rubble of debauchery reminiscent of Sodom and Gomorrah, and we have no idea what is about to befall us. Dear GOD
‘tis a queer thing when screwing us over privately in that room is more newsworthy than doing so publicly, as is usually the case.
Oh and a big welcome to Sodom. Stay for the light show!
LOLZ. Sodom is for the Jews. Jesus can and gave us Gentiles a better way. Sorry! We homosexuals are saved by the blood of Christ, who is God come to earth. God loves us, y’all. Don’t get your panties in a bunch!
Repent less worse things come upon you. Weeping and gnashing of teeth, first to the Jew and then to the greek.
outreachmagazine.com
https://outreachmagazine.com/interviews/56692…
Christopher Yuan: Human Sexuality and the Gospel
Now this is a man
“Sodom is for the Jews.”
**************************
Actually the five “Cities of the Plain” (of which Sodom is just one) were chock full of were Canaanites.
mespo!! 🙂
This is a good editorial which if fully grasped explains why the left Will fail.
https://glennloury.substack.com/p/black-dei-director-fired-for-whitesplaining
The core issue is NOT conforming to a schedule.
It is not setting an agenda.
It is consistently producing ever more value.
Arriving on time.
Making an agenda are some of the tools to accomplish that.
We most produce more of what we value every year.
If we do not do so – standard of living does not rise.
If we produce less – standard of living declines.
Loury talks of common sense – but there is little agreement on what common sense is.
I focus on producing value – because even though that is subjective.
It is still objectively measureable.
Standard of living is measurable. GDP is measurable.
The value of what we produce is determined by us – when we chose to pay for what we produced.
If we can not consistently produce ever more that we value – our standard of living declines – GDP PPP declines.
We are poorer.
We have all kinds of numbers floating arround now. We can look at jobs, inflation, wages, ….
All measure that contribute to standard of living.
But we all KNOW we are worse off.
That is because the values of the left have made us less productive.
If we do not meet schedules, if we do not produce and deliver on agenda’s
We are worse off – and we know it.
We can argue about why – but we know who is at fault, because we know what changed – Biden and Democrats and the woke agenda
There should be consequences – those involved should be fired – that appears to have occured. They should be showered in disapproval. They should be mocked publicly
They should find it difficult to get a job.
And that is the end of it.
Prof. Turley’s long discussion of the possible crimes here just makes clear all that is wrong with our laws – way too many of them.
His discussion of efforts to force one to fit – makes clear that we have warp crime from punishment of those that harm others to punishment of those that offend others. And that we will attempt to make the law as elastic as possible to do so.
It is near certain this is not the only time someone has had sex in the capitol. More prestigious people than these two likely did so.
This is a moral offence and the punishment should be moral.
It is not a criminal offense.
In the unfortunate event that there is a law that fits well – that law should not exist.
Regardless we should not bend spindle fold and mutilate existing law to make a crime out of personal offense and bad morals.
And we have had far too much of this nonsense of tresspassing on the capitol – this is not tresspassing – though it is more so than Most of those charged on J6.
“It is near certain this is not the only time someone has had sex in the capitol. More prestigious people than these two likely did so.”
Joe Biden had digital sex with an unwilling aide there.
+100
We need a Holy Spirit led revival like John Wesley helped to inspire in England. She likely would have dissolved under the weight of her own filth otherwise. We are too modern to see the One Who hung on a cross to set us all free.
Steaming turd vvvvvvvvvvvb
The mystery is why this god forsaken website allows trash like YOU to post your rubbish. Is that supposed to be an intelligent remark? You’ve repeatedly post that junk, adding to the ridiulousness of Turley’s “Civility Rule.” I know for a fact that the webmaster constantly blocks comments based upon his own personal preferences, so I’m baffled about what it is with your repeated “Steaming turd” comments that makes them not only acceptable but preferable to comments that get blocked.
Steaming turd^^^^^^^
And operator error.
There is no more monitor, you dunce.
How sick. r these perverts? At least they didnt obstruct an official hearing. J6 But it’s pretty sick 4 star generals use their draft box to screw around joni 3o year wives; yet here they just blanantlty use the room for gay sex. Hmm. If I were an Intel agency I would look at the whiskey 47 Bruce left for me. Hat. He knew his kid was Re. Fag. And he’d meow around. Bee. Bruce is late but he left a log.t whilz for the cats boys. That. Fag. Draft box or just Re Mike’s in the hall at the front and back door. 45. Yeah that’s us. 45. Mossad. 45. No index finger just a name and nose that sees gold diggers smiles away.
Steaming turd^^^^^
+100
48
Trump, 4 of whose 5 children were born of immigrant mothers, echoes Hitler, saying that immigrants are “poisoning the blood of our country.”
Steaming turd ^^^^^^
Indeed he is, as are you.
No, he isn’t
Sure he is. Anyone who echoes Hitler is.
Do you think that Trump believes that Ivana and Melania poisoned the blood of his kids since they’re immigrants?
Steaming turd^^^^^^
Another anti -Trump hoax. Trump was referring to unvetted migrants (not “immigrants”, a term which implies legal admission) bringing diseases into the country. He was merely stating current and traditional law, which bars entry to applicants with certain diseases. For example, in January 2016, the CDC published in the Federal Register a Final Rule identifying certain diseases that would block admission.
As to your slur that Trump was “echoing” Hitler, I previously pointed out that the only time Hitler used the phrase “poisoning blood” was in Mein Kampf, where he was denouncing intermarriage between Aryans and non-Aryans. His discussion had nothing to do with immigrants or diseases. If you disagree with that assertion, perhaps you would like to source your implicit claim that Hitler used similar language in a similar context.
Trump didn’t say that he was referring solely to “unvetted migrants.” He never used the phrase “legal immigrants” either. But he did claim that he was referring to “15, 16 million people.” How do you get to that number without including legal immigrants?
He didn’t refer to “current and traditional law, which bars entry to applicants with certain diseases.” He spoke of “mental institutions and prisons all over the world.” Tell us: do our laws bar entry to people with mental illnesses?
You claim that “the only time Hitler used the phrase “poisoning blood” was in Mein Kampf, where he was denouncing intermarriage between Aryans and non-Aryans.” That’s what I said: he’s echoing what Hitler said. And don’t be coy. He wasn’t referring to “non-Aryans.” He was explicitly referring to Jews.
Hitler wrote a lot about blood being pure or adulterated. The passage you’re likely referring to is “He [‘the Jew’] poisons the blood of others but preserves his own blood unadulterated. The Jew scarcely ever marries a Christian girl, but the Christian takes a Jewess to wife. The mongrels that are a result of this latter union always declare themselves on the Jewish side. Thus a part of the higher nobility in particular became completely degenerate.” But he didn’t stop there. Some other excerpts: “He [‘the Jew’] is a real leech who clings to the body of his unfortunate victims and cannot be removed; so that when the princes found themselves in need once again they took the blood from his swollen veins with their own hand. … It is not however by the tie of language, but exclusively by the tie of blood that the members of a race are bound together. And the Jew himself knows this better than any other, seeing that he attaches so little importance to the preservation of his own language while at the same time he strives his utmost to maintain his blood free from intermixture with that of other races. … The black-haired Jewish youth lies in wait for hours on end, satanically glaring at and spying on the unsuspicious girl whom he plans to seduce, adulterating her blood and removing her from the bosom of her own people. … For as long as a people remain racially pure and are conscious of the treasure of their blood, they can never be overcome by the Jew. That is why the Jew systematically endeavours to lower the racial quality of a people by permanently adulterating the blood of the individuals who make up that people. … And out of every oppression those forces can develop which bring about a new re-birth of the national soul–provided always that the racial blood is kept pure. … [T]he problem of the maintenance or loss of the purity of the racial blood will last as long as man himself lasts.”
So do tell us how Trump’s statement about immigrants “poisoning the blood of our country” refers to anything good. Trump also chose to have dinner with Nick Fuentes, who has called for the genocide of Jews.
And Trump continues to praise dictators like Kim Jong Un and President Xi Jinping. He did that last night too.
He is a dangerous man.
Steaming turd
BTW, you’re simply wrong that “the only time Hitler used the phrase “poisoning blood” was in Mein Kampf, where he was denouncing intermarriage between Aryans and non-Aryans.”
Non-intermarriage examples where he referred to poisoning blood:
“It seemed as if some all-pervading poisonous fluid had been injected by some mysterious hand into the bloodstream of this once heroic body, bringing about a creeping paralysis that affected the reason and the elementary instinct of self-preservation.”
“And so this poison [of ‘the public mind’] was allowed to enter the national bloodstream and infect public life without the Government taking any effectual measures to master the course of the disease.”
“[T]he poison which has invaded the national body, especially since the Thirty Years’ War, has destroyed the uniform constitution not only of our blood but also of our national soul. The open frontiers of our native country, the association with non-German foreign elements in the territories that lie all along those frontiers, and especially the strong influx of foreign blood into the interior of the Reich itself, has prevented any complete assimilation of those various elements, because the influx has continued steadily.”
BugAnon – the Washington Examiner story to which you directed John Say below expressly states in its headline that Trump was talking about immigration, not intermarriage. This, it is clear that Trump’s quote and the lengthy quote from Hitler have nothing to do with one another. The words “blood” and “poison” were not patented by Hitler. Anyone can use them. Indeed, it was said that AIDS had poisoned the American blood supply. See T Murray, The Poisoned Gift: AIDS and Blood, 68 The Milbank Quarterly, pp 205-225. When unusual diseases invade a populace, it is accurate to say that the blood of that populace is poisoned. The fact that Trump is willing to say things other are afraid to say is a testament to his courage. Further, as to your statement that Trump was not differentiating illegal from legal immigration, this is nitpicking. Where immigration is controlled, applicants can be vetted. Before my children were legally allowed to enter this country they needed to submit health cards attesting to their health. The people streaming into this country over our Southern border are not similarly vetted. And, finally, as to your attempt to smear Trump by referring to people he has MET, I will point out that you have not, and would not, use a similar measuring stick to the dozens, if not hundreds, of Democrats who frequently met with Jeffrey Epstein or Sam Bankman-Fried.
I’m not Bug, and I, too, “was talking about immigration, not intermarriage.” I said nothing about intermarriage until you brought it up.
“it is clear that Trump’s quote and the lengthy quote from Hitler have nothing to do with one another.”
Nonsense. As I pointed out to you, and gave you evidence of, you’re wrong that “the only time Hitler used the phrase “poisoning blood” was … where he was denouncing intermarriage between Aryans and non-Aryans.” You and I agree that he used it in Mein Kampf. I have no way of knowing whether that’s the only place he used it, and I don’t see how it would matter whether that’s the only place. The fact is that he used it repeatedly, and he didn’t limit the reference to intermarriage. Given that Trump spoke of “poisoning the blood of our country,” the references in Mein Kampf to non-intermarriage examples of poisoning blood are much more relevant.
“it was said that AIDS had poisoned the American blood supply”
Trump wasn’t referring to the literal blood supply. He was using it figuratively when he said “poisoning the blood of our country.”
FWIW, you (and perhaps your author) are also confused about AIDS versus HIV. HIV infects blood. AIDS does not. AIDS is the disease that may result from HIV, just like Covid is the disease may result from SARS-CoV2.
“When unusual diseases invade a populace, it is accurate to say that the blood of that populace is poisoned.”
What “unusual diseases” are you referring to? Trump certainly didn’t speak about “unusual diseases.” He did say “They poison mental institutions and prisons all over the world,” but if you’re talking about mental illnesses, they’re not “unusual.” The National Institute of Mental Health notes that “It is estimated that more than one in five U.S. adults live with a mental illness (57.8 million in 2021).” Mental illnesses include things depression, eating disorders, PTSD, etc. Trump has a mental illness: malignant narcissism.
“The fact that Trump is willing to say things other are afraid to say is a testament to his courage.”
He isn’t courageous. He’s sick. And dangerous.
“as to your statement that Trump was not differentiating illegal from legal immigration, this is nitpicking”
You’re the one who introduced the distinction, not me, when you said “Trump was referring to unvetted migrants (not “immigrants” …).”
“as to your attempt to smear Trump by referring to people he has MET, I will point out that you have not, and would not, use a similar measuring stick to the dozens, if not hundreds, of Democrats who frequently met with Jeffrey Epstein or Sam Bankman-Fried.”
Trump chose to have a private dinner with Fuentes and Ye. That’s not just “meeting” either of them. And Fuentes was already known to be a rabid anti-Semite when they privately dined together. You can be damned sure that if any Democrats socialized at a personal dinner with Epstein after it became known that he was a pedophile, or with SBF after it became known that he was known to have committed fraud and other crimes, I’d condemn it. If you know of such Democrats, please do name them and say when these dinners occurred, and I’ll condemn them here.
I had to go through 3 pages of google links before I could find a source – MSN surprisingly that “sort off” provided the quote in context.
MSN was atleast honest enough to state that Trump’s remarks were specific to illegal immigrants.
Probably 60 different news outlets tried to connect the quote to hitler.
Before one of them told PART of the truth – that this was about illegal immigration and the open southern border.
I still can not get anyone to provide the ACTUAL full quote rather than something clearly edited surgically to MISINFORM.
You being among those who are LYING – because that is what it is when you deliberately edit a quote to change its meaning.
With respect to Trump we KNOW what he has ACTUALLY promised to do.
WE KNOW that he will NOT be able to accomplish what he peromises.
But we have excellent reason to beleive that President Trump in 2025 will accomplish atleast as much regarding securing our borders as he did during his first term.
That means a 4fold atleast reduction in illegal immigration. Restoration of remain in mexico, Significant reduction in the quantity of Fentanyl crossing the border and “poisoning the blood of our country” Oops.
The one quasi controversial aspect of Trumps 2025 policies is regarding his plans for the between 2-4 million additional illegal immigrants that crossed the bordered Under Biden.
The FACT is that regardless of what he might promise -= absent the support of congress, Trump can do little more than Obama did
While the left credits Obama with being pro=immigrant, the FACT is that he engaged in more deportations than any prior president.
I have not checked the Data – but I beleive he engaged in more deportations that Trump.
Trump focused on stemming the flow of illegals. Not deportation.
Deporting people is expensive and requires the cooperation of congress.
“I still can not get anyone to provide the ACTUAL full quote”
Then you’re bad at searching. You can watch the video with some of it transcribed — including what I originally quoted — here: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/immigration/donald-trump-rehashes-poisoning-the-blood
What does PDJT got to do w this article?? Nothing, you just have severe case of TDA, Trump Derangement Syndrome, brought on by nonstop watching of cnnlol, mslsd & rest of FAKE NEWS. Too bad it aint fatal, just gives you a sad & pathetic life.
And you’re too dense to get the nuance of his accurate comment.
Sex Scandals In The News:
Mom’s For Liberty Tainted By Ziegler’s
A Florida school board has formally called for prominent Republican Bridget Ziegler to resign from her seat after a sex scandal involving her husband.
All of Ziegler’s colleagues on the Sarasota County School Board, covering the Gulf Coast district south of Tampa, voted Tuesday in favor of a non-binding resolution calling for her resignation.
Bridget Ziegler’s husband and Florida GOP chairman Christian Ziegler was recently accused of sexual battery by a woman with whom the Zieglers previously had a consensual threesome.
Edited From:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/12/13/bridget-ziegler-resignation-demand-after-threesome/71903164007/
………………………………..
Bridget Ziegler is a co-founder of Moms For Liberty, a far-right parents’that group that aspired to take over school boards around the country. One suspects that Turley’s column today is supposed to assure us these sex scandals are happening to Democrats as well.
Steaming turd^^^^
Given the frequency of these comments, it says that you’re a coprophilic.
Fry ‘em. Next time they will be more careful selecting their sex partners. No more e jean carrol type libtards
Trump was found liable by a unanimous jury for both sexually assaulting and defaming Carroll. What good taste you have in politicians.
Steaming turd^^^^^^
Uncorroborated allegations based on an event that supposedly occurred 28 years ago. That persuades no one, except those who are already biased against Trump.
No, they were corroborated by testimony from someone who was told contemporaneously. All of the witnesses testified under oath. Trump refused to. In a civil trial, it’s legal for the jury to make an adverse inference when the accused refuses to testify. He was found liable by a unanimous jury. THEY were persuaded, and THEY were the ones who listened to the entirety of the testimony and took their charge seriously.
For the defamation portion, there are multiple videotapes of Trump’s defamatory statements. Go ahead and deny it.
I can get 3 women tomorrow to testify you raped a fourth years ago, and she told them about it. Plenty of hateful women out there looking for their chance to get back at scumbag men. Weak sauce. Compelling only to willing jurors. Ashley Biden wrote in her diary that her father took “inappropriate” showers with her. Tara Reade has contemporaneous “witnesses” too.
Her account of being penetrated was completely fantastic and implausible, borderline impossible. Do you even know what it was? So they couldn’t find that he could have possibly raped her, but they weren’t gonna let him off that easy.
By the way, did the contemporaneous “witness” say she was raped or just assaulted??? Yea, right.
So he was found liable. Reasoned people are not moved.
So he called her a liar. She is. So he said she’s ugly AF. She is.
“I can get 3 women tomorrow to testify you raped a fourth years ago, and she told them about it.”
You can’t. Though you can lie about it and pretend that you can.
I find your response naive, at best. Ignorant at worst.
My brother was accused of domestic violence by his ex wife. She was a bit of a psycopath, who’s violent outbursts thruout their marriage had been witnessed by us all, including her children. His version was self defense. The oldest son suggested they both take lie detector tests, for the kids sakes, not for court obviously. He took his and passed. One of the questions was “have you EVER commited an act of physical violence against your spouse?” She refused to go to hers after his result came back. He spent the night in jail for her crime.
When the police came to their house, she had a “witness”, who told the cop that although she had just gotten there, she had seen my brother be abusive to his wife before. We all knew this was a lie of course, but the cop put it in the report. My brother claimed he had only ever met the woman in passing before. When the witness list was being prepared, she refused to testify.
His wife later admitted to the kids by text that she had lied. The case was dropped. She told the kids she was just mad at him. She is a nurse practitioner. Evil walks among us in many forms.
I could get 3 women just with the offer of meth, let alone a promise of millions.
seekingarrangements, SA.com would be a good source, if you’re ever looking for someone who would.
So yea, I could. And I don’t lie.
No, you couldn’t. If you think you can, do it with a public personality, like Trump is. Your choice of the public personality you want accused. Name the person here, and tomorrow, I’ll look for the accusation of rape and the corroborating testimony under oath. Note that if the person is innocent, he or she will likely choose to testify, unlike Trump. Also note that your example doesn’t involve people testifying under oath — with questioning from both the accuser’s and defendant’s lawyers — where they could go to jail for perjury.
I just gave you a way to prove that you aren’t lying. You may think that you can do it, but I bet you won’t test that.
And why would I be dumb enough to commit a crime like solicitation to commit perjury, just to prove it to you? Idiot. More sea lioning and weak gaslighting from a small mind.
I’ll use the lefty tactic…it was rhetorical, fool. Obviously it would take more than a day. How long did it take her?
Furthermore, another low IQ tactic is to conflate could with would or should. you’ve proven nothing, but your low IQ.
This is bug, and he loves hypotheticals and sh!t that doesn’t involve facts, so not gonna feed that little swine anymore.
By the way, did you like your song?
“why would I be dumb enough to commit a crime like solicitation to commit perjury, just to prove it to you?”
You said you could. But not only won’t you, you cannot. You’re just not honest enough to admit it.
“Obviously it would take more than a day.”
You said “I can get 3 women TOMORROW to testify you raped a fourth years ago, and she told them about it.” Now you say you can’t, as it would “obviously” take more time.
You don’t even know how old I am and if I was alive when this “years ago” rape purportedly occurred, much less any other details you’d need (like my sex, and what country I lived in at the time), assuming that I’m old enough.
“it was rhetorical”
Ah, so it wasn’t said truthfully, only for effect. As I said, “fool,” you were lying: making a knowingly false statement meant to mislead.
And no, I’m not EB, as would be clear to anyone who knows his writing style.
I could. And you can’t prove otherwise.
That’s could and cant in a nutshell.
“And no, I’m not EB, as would be clear to anyone who knows his writing style.”
That’s what they all say. Then they post 3rd grade level posts and pretend they didn’t get the meaning of what was said, just like him.
Then they say, u oughta know who this is, just like him.
So let me apologize for my earlier hyperbole.
I’ll restate it for the low IQ among us. It’s not implausible that someone with a good deal of money or the offer of such, could entice someone to SWEAR to a contemporaneous conversation, 20 years earlier, for which there would be no way to disprove their assertion. Especially with a despised public figure. Most would have gotten the gist.
In fact I find it quite plausible. If you don’t, see the hyperbole above.
He doesn’t sniff little girls!
“these sex scandals”. A consensual threesome in a private home, even if an “assault” is involved ( a term which covers any kind of unconsented-to touching) is not a sex scandal of the magnitude discussed in Turley’s column. THAT sex scandal involves the desecration of a national symbol, an action that undermines the implicit respect that holds our voluntary institutions together.
It wasn’t a consensual threesome. There had previously been an exchange about a consensual threesome involving Bridget Ziegler, Christian Ziegler, and another woman, BUT Christian Ziegler then wanted to meet the woman for a twosome without Bridget, the woman refused, and she says that Christian Ziegler showed up anyway and raped her. Get your facts straight.
Funny, he hasn’t been charged as of Dec 15th, WTF?
Seems she told the cops he came in when she opened the door to walk her dog. The video from the apt shows him knocking and her opening the door. LIAR
The police recovered video of the sex from his phone. Oh, so he managed to record the rape….ahem…ok. Sure. Could that be why no charges???
Wonder how much this lady was offered? If you are a conservative in politics and EXTREMELY effective…beware, you are in the crosshairs.
Also,
According to the search warrant affidavit, the Zieglers, per NBC News, “had a longtime consensual sexual relationship with the accuser.”
Why don’t you get your facts straight, jacka$$?
The police got the video after a judge approved a search warrant. They have the text message where she said that she was unwilling to have sex if Bridget wasn’t there. They are still investigating. You seem to assume that if they haven’t already charged him, they won’t do so.
“The video from the apt shows him knocking and her opening the door. LIAR”
She said that she opened the door to walk her dog, not to let him in. You haven’t shown her to be a liar.
“According to the search warrant affidavit, the Zieglers, per NBC News, “had a longtime consensual sexual relationship with the accuser.””
If NBC said that, then they got it wrong. If you read the affidavit, it says “The victim and Christian Ziegler have known each other for twenty years. … The victim said that she, Christian and Bridget were sexually involved one time over a year ago at their house. … Detectives interviewed Bridget Ziegler. … Bridget confirmed having a sexual encounter with the victim and Christian over a year ago and that it only happened one time.” Go ahead, quote from the affidavit itself and prove that NBC got it right rather than wrong.
Moreover, as both the victim and Bridge Ziegler stated, the one-time consensual sex was with the ZieglerS, plural. Not that the victim agreed to a twosome with Christian. The police have the text message exchange between the victim and Christian where she said no to a twosome with him. The woman also told her sister she was raped, prior to any police involvement.
Can you link to the actual affidavit please?
Can you link to the actual affidavit please?
Never mind, I found it. nice cherry picking. On the third phone call…
“The victim asked Christian to acknowledge that he had been using her all these years”
WTF is that?? They’d f*cked before. Bridgett may not have been aware of it. My guess is they had a thing going behind Brigetts back. I’d also bet they met on an arrangement site.
Here’s a copy: https://flaglerlive.com/christian-ziegler-affidavit/
“The police have the text message exchange between the victim and Christian where she said no to a twosome with him.”
Oh, the police have it. Is it in the affidavit that you will link to?
I gave a link to the affidavit. You can look it up for yourself.
“She said that she opened the door to walk her dog, not to let him in. You haven’t shown her to be a liar.”
Oh, so she just happened to be walking her dog at the moment he knocked….errrr-ok
“The video shows her asking him to cum in her mouth rather than on her new shirt”—source below
Hmmmmm
Because rape victims frequently ask their assailants to come in their mouth
Wouldn’t we all like to see if she had a smile on her face when he stuck it in her mouth…..hmmmmm….no charges yet…..
Yep, i bet they wished they’d had that video before they issued a search warrant….
https://flcga.org/police-have-recovered-video-of-florida-gop-chair-and-alleged-victim-in-rape-investigation/
Lemme guess what happens next. She refuse to testify, says she just wants all the pain to “go away”. Never charged.
But mission accomplished by whomever paid her off.
“‘The video shows her asking him …’—source below”
Liar.
WTF I gave you think link, penis breath.. this has to be bug face
Ah, thanks for outing yourself as a troll. Bye.
you’re the troll.
I looked at the affidavit to confirm what you alleged was in it.
instead of looking at my link, you called me a liar.
Thats troll behavior. You’re outed.
Did you like your song?
awww, just mad because you didnt notice the rape kit was 2 days old, so not really a rape kit at all?
The fact a sworn affidavit would even call it that says all i need to know.
LMAO outed troll!!!!
Here it is again, d!ckhead
https://flcga.org/police-have-recovered-video-of-florida-gop-chair-and-alleged-victim-in-rape-investigation/
“The woman also told her sister she was raped, prior to any police involvement.”
Because oh yea, there is always a “contemporaneous” witness to nothing, in lieu of a rape kit.
“in lieu of a rape kit”
The affidavit said that she also did a rape kit. Try again.
“The affidavit said that she also did a rape kit. Try again.”
I saw that. But strangely, they dont say when or what it revealed.
Oh wait…there it is, Rape kit…..f*cking 2 days later. Like I said…in lieu of.
She’d been “drinking tequila all day” to the extent she was “incapacitated to consent”, is the complaint. She also told police that he “bent her over bar stool”. The video shows her “bent over a sofa”
Never mind, I found it. nice cherry picking. On the third phone call…
“The victim asked Christian to acknowledge that he had been using her all these years”
WTF is that?? They’d f*cked before. Bridgett may not have been aware of it. My guess is they had a thing going behind Brigetts back. I’d also bet they met on an arrangement site.
The police have the text message exchange between the victim and Christian where she said no to a twosome with him
Liar…not in the affidavit.
“Sorry, I was mostly in it for her” is what is in the affidavit. “She said no” is her statement.
“The police have the text message exchange between the victim and Christian where she said no to a twosome with him”
Just makin’ sh!t up….another troll trait
OT
Poll of Palestinians
75% support the Oct 7 Massacre
85.9% reject coexistence with israel
71% are committed to “historical palestine” as final resolution
74.7% support “from river to sea” as the end of the conflict
Sadly, Hamas is Palestine. The other 25% arguably value their own lives over Islam.
+100
88.6% believe that Hamas’ armed wing, the Al-Kassam Brigades, plays a somewhat to very positive function.
88.6% of Palestinians polled in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria
The % of Gazans who feel that way now is probably much lower.
And remember how Bill Clinton used government property, the desk in the Oval Office, with the young intern, Monica Lowinski.
It all depends on the context.
Probably want to sanitize those gavels and microphones thoroughly.
And the mood lighting.
Is is?
“CAR 54, WHERE ARE YOU?”
COME IN, SERGEANT AT ARMS, DARREN SMITH!
_____________________________________________________
Civility Rule
Civility and Decorum Policy:
This blog is committed to the principles of free speech and, as a consequence, we do not ban people simply because we disagree with them. Indeed, we value different perspectives and do not want to add another “echo chamber” to the Internet where we each repeat or amplify certain views. However, the Turley blog was created with a strong commitment to civility, a position that distinguishes us from many other sites.
…
– Professor Turley
“Contacted by DailyMail.com Saturday morning, shortly before his firing was confirmed, Maese-Czeropski’s mother Magdalena Rivera Maese implied her son had been left distraught by what had happened, saying: ‘You don’t want to know how he’s doing.'”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12871463/Aidan-Maese-Czeropski-sex-tape-ben-cardin.html
If I had his contact info, I would definitely top him, um, bottom for him, no wait, I would be on all fours comforting me, um him, um….us?
REGARDING ABOVE:
Wally does not have the staying power I do. I would have videos to prove it but Wally dumped me for that skank in Senator Cardin’s office
What??? I was just in Wally’s bung Monday night!!
That four flusher (pardon the pun)
The pitcher and the catcher and the filmmaker should all be arrested
I want a role in that film! What does a queen have to do to get an audition?
“What does a queen have to do to get an audition?”
Speak to Dennis. He is the producer.
Bug Anon is the director.
Svelaz will be your co-star.
Gigi does make-up (because bug anon is a closet misogynist)
Wally and fishwings are the key grips (Pardon the pun)
Bob and Larry are props and costumes.
Sammy gets a cameo, and is your understudy for lead
Turley is the brilliant stage manager, because there is NO WAY he didnt see this coming.
Estovir-Golden-Mayer is the Studio
+100
The title of this film will be…..drum roll….
Get Your Kicks From the Fili-buster-ed Sixty Six
Thought about *d!cks* instead of kicks, but didnt want to violate George’s civility policy.
+100
See the elvis bug turd below
vvvvvvvvvv