Moonglow
Diamond Member
He is trying to slight Ms. Jackson in desperation to protect the character of the offender that was prosecuted.Why would this case go to the US Supreme court?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
He is trying to slight Ms. Jackson in desperation to protect the character of the offender that was prosecuted.Why would this case go to the US Supreme court?
It was a joke, obviously.Why would this case go to the US Supreme court?
Why? You tried to snark and failed.See post #42.
![]()
Ex-GOP Senate staffer sentenced to more than 12 years in child porn case
A former GOP Senate staffer has been sentenced to more than a decade in prison after pleading guilty in a case involving child pornography. A federal judge sentenced Ruben Verastigui, 29, of Washin…thehill.com
Former Trump Aid and current GOPer sentenced to 12 years of hard labor for loving children a little too much. Thoughts?
This thread is not about them, you can start a thread about how you want to expose all that do it.Yeah. My thought is that I don’t see your posts when Dem back benchers and staffers get caught up in such behaviors. And I wonder why. Well, “wonder” may not be quite accurate.
You run with that crowd?Why? You tried to snark and failed.
When someone says "D.C. is a sleazy place" he is referring to the people who live there.
My reply was on point and absolutely accurate. Comprehending the language is a key to living life.
The inhabitants of D.C. regardless of party, are all on the order of the POS that was just convicted. None of them are innocent and to think that it ONLY happens in the GOP is a sure sign of mental illness.
He is trying to slight Ms. Jackson in desperation to protect the character of the offender that was prosecuted.
I wasn’t addressing you. The OP asked a question. I replied to him. Not you. Your two-cents-worth aren’t worth that much.This thread is not about them, you can start a thread about how you want to expose all that do it.
What?You run with that crowd?
yeah, I started ignoring him. I don't have him on ignore, I just do.I wasn’t addressing you. The OP asked a question. I replied to him. Not you. Your two-cents-worth aren’t worth that much.
The heterosexuals do the same thing.yeah, I started ignoring him. I don't have him on ignore, I just do.
He has proven to be nothing but someone who disrupts when they start talking about things he wants to defend and the talk is a little to close to the truth. Like the trans crowd wanting to groom our children into thinking they want to change their gender.
But if I wanted to address the Dem side, it wouldn’t have to be on a separate thread. Given the “thoughts?” invitation in the OP, my comments about the Dim side of the equation would be perfectly on topic here.This thread is not about them, you can start a thread about how you want to expose all that do it.
It was sarcasm, dummy.I doubt seriously that the case ever makes it to the SC. Or, are you trying to say the majority conservative bench is all sympathetic to child porn?
Why are you people so stupid that you do not recognize sarcasm?Why would this case go to the US Supreme court?
Heterosexuals and homosexuals ignore you. So what? Maybe everyone should.The heterosexuals do the same thing.
Lol, he is likely worse off in prison than dead. The inmates are typically pretty rough on the old pedo. Good chance he ends up dead in there.Shoulda shot the son of a bitch
If he has money he will be fine. If he does not, it is dead man walking.Lol, he is likely worse off in prison than dead. The inmates are typically pretty rough on the old pedo. Good chance he ends up dead in there.
If he has money he will be fine. If he does not, it is dead man walking.