Libtard Finally Admits to Raping A Child...Then Declares The Matter Is OVER...Because He Says So.

[JoeB131]

So you think that anyone who has ever sued anyone- and got a payment- is a "Grifter"

Both Sandusky's victims and Hastert's victims were likely driven by their parents to meet with their future rapists also.

You are an apologist for a rapist- and you lie about his victims.

Sorry this was a shakedown from day one. And there's big difference between driving your kid to a sports meet sponsored by a school and driving your kid to a wild Hollywood Party at Jack Nicholson's house.

So how about instead of comparing them to other cases, you talk about the facts of this case, hmmmmm....

The facts that a Prosecutor reviewed, and said, "Meh, we'll let this guy off with probation".

 

[hadit]

He's a pedophile and a rapist. It's irrelevant what she did before he raped her because he was the adult and it was his responsibility to avoid her. He is a pedophile, a rapist, and belongs and the sex offenders list.

Maybe we should excuse the Charlottesville driver for ramming the crowd on the grounds that someone hit his car. That's the kind of stretch you're making.

Uh, here's the thing. In Charlottesville, someone died. [\quote]

And in this case, a child was raped.

No one died here. No one really had their fundamental nature changed. Samantha Geilly was a slut before she slept with Polanski and she was still a slut afterwards. I guess she found Jesus at some point in her messed up life, but Polanski isn't the guy who messed up her life. She did that all on her own, along with her Grifter Mom.

There won't be a retrail because the rest of the civilized world knows "American Justice" is an oxymoron.

Then he should stay where he is.

Blame the victim. That's all you have left. He drugged and raped an underage girl. You can't avoid that, no matter how feverish your fantasy. It simply doesn't matter how she behaved before or after the rape, he knew what he was doing, he was the adult and had the responsibility for the situation. He is a child rapist and should not be allowed anywhere near children again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hadit]

I think the real point is that JoeB131 thinks that it is no big deal for an old man to rape a young girl, after giving her drugs.

No, I don't think it's cool to violate someone's fifth and sixth amendment rights because you want to get a celebrity for something you let people get away with every day if they aren't famous.

The rest of your post has been reported for violating the rules.

Then why have you condemned the girl and her mother but have not condemned Polanski? Regardless of their actions, he made the decision to rape an underage girl. That's worthy of condemnation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ame®icano]

That article was published yesterday. It's time to get over it.

That's funny. When a liberal like Polanski or Hillary commits heinous crimes, the Left can't get away from them fast enough, but 25 years from now, they will still be ripping on Trump for things he never even said or did.

That should have been the title of Hillary's book: "It's Time To Get Over It."

It's not just Polanski, or Weinstein...

If you are liberal and you take advantage of many women and your wife then trashes them, for other liberals it's OK. If you're liberal and you talk a teenage girl into doing adult things over the phone for you, it's OK. If you are liberal and you trade sex for an income and acting career, its OK. If you are liberal and run your girlfriend off a bridge, then run home while she drowns, its OK,... well, you get elected to the Senate.

But if you're conservative and you hold the door open for a woman, your a sexist and misogynist pig.

 

[Ame®icano]

After raping a child he fled the country to avoid prosecution...
He now admits to raping the child...
'It is over now', he claims...because he says so...
His lawyers want him to be allowed to come back to the US without being charged for his crime...

Um, he was prosecuted and agreed to a plea. Then a judge reneged on the deal 40 years ago, and imposed a sentence that even the prosecutor thought was uncalled for.

Even the so-called "victim" (not really) has said, "enough, already".

Samantha Geimer, Victim In Roman Polanski Sex Case, Strongly Defends Him Inside And Outside Of Court

Under fierce questioning by several dozen reporters, she steadfastly refused to claim that she had been damaged by Polanski, who was charged was raping her in 1977 when she was 13. Instead she said the legal system had abused both her and Polanski almost from the beginning of the case.

“I was a young and sexually active teenager,” Geimer told reporters, insisting that she had not been deeply scarred by her sex and drug encounter with Polanski. She said both she and her mother had suffered more harm from those who focused attention on her from the beginning.

You do know what statutory rape is, do ya?

 

[ChrisL]

Well, you can certainly see from some men's views of girls who come from troubled backgrounds why these girls are the ones most often taken advantage of. Sad that people don't understand that these children are victims, not criminals.

 

[JoeB131]

Then why have you condemned the girl and her mother but have not condemned Polanski? Regardless of their actions, he made the decision to rape an underage girl. That's worthy of condemnation.

Meh,not really. Just can't get worked up over it.

I'm actually more pissed about the end of Rosemary's Baby than whatever he did to Baby Grifter. Jesus fucking Christ, a two hour film and we don't even get to see the baby!

You do know what statutory rape is, do ya?

Yes, it's a bullshit charge that shouldn't be on our law books.

Here's the thing. Lots of minors are losing their virginity before age 18. In fact MOST of them do. and this girl wasn't even a virgin. But it's like you all grow amnesia about what it was like to be a teenager, and how any one of you would have taken a chance to get laid as a teen.

Well, you can certainly see from some men's views of girls who come from troubled backgrounds why these girls are the ones most often taken advantage of. Sad that people don't understand that these children are victims, not criminals.

I don't see them as either. Look, we are all responsible for our own choices. You can't charge 13 year olds as adults when they commit crimes, and then say, "Well, she had no idea what she was doing when she took drugs and had sex, even though she had sex and took drugs before that.

 

[JoeB131]

Then he should stay where he is.

Blame the victim. That's all you have left. He drugged and raped an underage girl. You can't avoid that, no matter how feverish your fantasy. It simply doesn't matter how she behaved before or after the rape, he knew what he was doing, he was the adult and had the responsibility for the situation. He is a child rapist and should not be allowed anywhere near children again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[/

Okay, let's look at that.

Did he Force her mouth open and shove drugs down her throat, or did he hand her a pill, tell her what is was, and she took it?

Did he pin her to a bed and force her, or did she agree to have sex below the age we think teens shouldn't be able to make those agreements.

It seems you want to prosecute him based on your morality,not what actually happened. It's the same kind of mentality that wants to tell gays they can't get married or women they have to have the babies if they have an unexpected pregnancy.

If you are grown up enough to go to a wild hollywood party at Jack Nicholson's house, you are old enough to be responsible for what you do.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Then he should stay where he is.

Blame the victim. That's all you have left. He drugged and raped an underage girl. You can't avoid that, no matter how feverish your fantasy. It simply doesn't matter how she behaved before or after the rape, he knew what he was doing, he was the adult and had the responsibility for the situation. He is a child rapist and should not be allowed anywhere near children again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[/

Okay, let's look at that.

Did he Force her mouth open and shove drugs down her throat, or did he hand her a pill, tell her what is was, and she took it?

Did he pin her to a bed and force her, or did she agree to have sex below the age we think teens shouldn't be able to make those agreements.

It seems you want to prosecute him based on your morality,not what actually happened. It's the same kind of mentality that wants to tell gays they can't get married or women they have to have the babies if they have an unexpected pregnancy.

If you are grown up enough to go to a wild hollywood party at Jack Nicholson's house, you are old enough to be responsible for what you do.

It has been well established that he made advances. She said no. Stop that. He then put quaaludes in a glass of champagne and gave it to her. She didn't go to a party. She was told it would be to a photo shoot.


Those are the facts no matter how you want to change them.

What Polanski did would be a crime is the girl was a full grown woman.

 

[PoliticalChic]

After raping a child he fled the country to avoid prosecution...
He now admits to raping the child...
'It is over now', he claims...because he says so...
His lawyers want him to be allowed to come back to the US without being charged for his crime...

Um, he was prosecuted and agreed to a plea. Then a judge reneged on the deal 40 years ago, and imposed a sentence that even the prosecutor thought was uncalled for.

Even the so-called "victim" (not really) has said, "enough, already".

Samantha Geimer, Victim In Roman Polanski Sex Case, Strongly Defends Him Inside And Outside Of Court

Under fierce questioning by several dozen reporters, she steadfastly refused to claim that she had been damaged by Polanski, who was charged was raping her in 1977 when she was 13. Instead she said the legal system had abused both her and Polanski almost from the beginning of the case.

“I was a young and sexually active teenager,” Geimer told reporters, insisting that she had not been deeply scarred by her sex and drug encounter with Polanski. She said both she and her mother had suffered more harm from those who focused attention on her from the beginning.

You do know what statutory rape is, do ya?

Just as Moynihan predicted.....Liberals work tirelessly to 'define deviancy downward.'

I suspect a hidden desire to commit what they are ready to claim is not a crime....

 

[JoeB131]

It has been well established that he made advances. She said no. Stop that. He then put quaaludes in a glass of champagne and gave it to her. She didn't go to a party. She was told it would be to a photo shoot.

Okay, since you can't get any of the details right, there's really no point discussing it with you.

What Polanski did would be a crime is the girl was a full grown woman.

Except that the prosecutor didn't consider her a reliable witness and plead Polanski down to a misdemeanor.

Now maybe that wouldn't happen today because we are all more "sensitive" now.

My problem is that if the prosecutor felt a great wrong was done, charge all six charges, and then put it in front of a jury. Don't plead down to a misdemeanor, and then try to get a judge to do your dirty work for you by presenting evidence that would have never been admitted in a trial.

Due Process. Maybe you've heard of it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

That article was published yesterday. It's time to get over it.

That's funny. When a liberal like Polanski or Hillary commits heinous crimes, the Left can't get away from them fast enough, but 25 years from now, they will still be ripping on Trump for things he never even said or did.

That should have been the title of Hillary's book: "It's Time To Get Over It."

It's not just Polanski, or Weinstein...

If you are liberal and you take advantage of many women and your wife then trashes them, for other liberals it's OK. If you're liberal and you talk a teenage girl into doing adult things over the phone for you, it's OK. If you are liberal and you trade sex for an income and acting career, its OK. If you are liberal and run your girlfriend off a bridge, then run home while she drowns, its OK,... well, you get elected to the Senate.

But if you're conservative and you hold the door open for a woman, your a sexist and misogynist pig.

"It's not just Polanski, or Weinstein... "

Can we add Bill 'the rapist' Clinton to that duo?

 

[JoeB131]

Just as Moynihan predicted.....Liberals work tirelessly to 'define deviancy downward.'

I suspect a hidden desire to commit what they are ready to claim is not a crime....

Right, because clearly, EVERYONE was waiting until they were 18 to get their cherries popped before 1972. NO REALLY! Life really was like Leave it to Beaver!

I find it amusing that the same people who will fight for the right of crazy people to have guns, are the ones who have no problem running roughshod over this man's Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights.

 

[JoeB131]

"It's not just Polanski, or Weinstein... "

Can we add Bill 'the rapist' Clinton to that duo?

And Donald Trump. And Ted Nugent.

The Shameful Record of Republican Sexual Misconduct:

• Senator John Ensign (R-NV.) confessed to serious cheating on his wife with a staffer and caught paying hush money to the husband, his chief of staff.

• Gov. Mark Sanford (R-S.C.), confessed to serious cheating on his wife after leaving his state unsupervised for a week.

• Senator Larry Craig (R-ID.), caught in a gay sex sting operation in a Minn. bathroom.

• Senator David Vitter (R-LA), found to have been a client of prostitutes in D.C. & Louisiana.

• Rep. Mark Foley, (R-Fl.) forced to resign when he was found to be having inappropriate communications with male pages.

• 
  In Connecticut, the holier-than-thou Republican party chose the mayor of one of the state's largest cities as its candidate for the U.S. Senate. If Joe Lieberman had caved in to Republican demands in the year 2000 that he not run for relection to the senate at the same time that he was running for the vice presidency,
  
  then our nation would have had a Republican Senator from Conn., named Philip Giordano at least until he was sentenced to serve his 37 year sentence in Federal prison as a result of the FBI investigating him for financial shenanigans and discovering in the process that this crooked, disgusting Republican office holderhad been repeatedly molesting two pre-teen little girls related to his prostitute-mistress (in the mayor's office among other places).

• • Bob Packwood, Senator (R-Ore.), resigned in 1995 under a threat of public senate hearings related to 10 female ex-staffers accusing him of sexual harassment.
  • William "Wild Bill" Janklow was promoted to many high offices in very conservative South Dakota, including the 27th and 30th Governor, 25th Attorney General, and the United States Congress. He was only removed from office when he was forced to after being convicted of killing someone with his car while speedy through a stop sign. ( The superintendent of the state highway patrol, reported at his trial that Janklow had 16 traffic stops by troopers during his last term as governor, but was not ticketed due to "respect for his authority" and out of a "fear of retribution.")
    But why did the Republican Party select this man to run for so many high offices in its name? In 1955, at the age of 16, he was convicted of the sexual assault of a 17-year old woman. As a juvenile offense, this conviction carried little weight under U.S. law.

 

[JoeB131]

BUt wait, there's more...

• Newt Gingrich (R-GA) According to L. H. Carter, reported to be one of Gingrich's closest friends until a falling-out in 1979, "Newt is amoral. There isn't any right or wrong, there isn't any conservative or liberal. There's only what will work best for Newt Gingrich."
  Mary Kahn, wife of Mr. Gingrich's Congressional campaign manager during the 1970s said, "Newt uses people and then discards them as useless. He really is a man with no conscience. He just doesn't seem to care who he hurts or why." Keep those to quotes in mind as you read what Mr. Gingrich told the Washington Post on January 3, 1995: "I have an enormous personal ambition. I want to shift the entire planet. And I am doing it."
• Bob Livingston (R-LA) was about to replace Newt Gingrich as Speaker of the House until he resigned in disgrace when it was revealed that he admitted to had been involved in several adulterous affairs, (while attempting to crucify Democratic President Clinton for having done much less)!
• Bob Barr (R-GA) the principal sponsor of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, has been married three (or is it now four) times. And at a party in 1992, Barr actually licked whipped cream off the breasts of two women, neither of them his current wife. Now that's family values!
• Bill Thomas (R-CA) This 11-term Republican is chairman of the Ways and Means subcommittee on Health. In June, (2003?) the Bakersfield Californian reported that Thomas, who is married, was having an affair with health care lobbyist Deborah Steelman, who steered huge campaign gifts to Thomas' war chest. In an "open letter to friends and neighbors" (voters), Thomas did not deny the relationship, but said during his legislative career, " . . . Any personal failures of commitment or responsibility to my wife, family, or friends are just that, personal. I have never traded a public responsibility for a personal one and I never will."
• Dan Burton (R-Indiana) was the Chairman of the House Government Reform & Oversight Committee. He hated President Clinton so much that he publicly called him a "scumbag". Following an expose, Burton was forced to admit that he fathered an out-of-wedlock child, a fact he denied for years.
  He has yet to admit, however, that during 38 years of marriage he has committed adultery with dozens of women, sexually assaulted others (including a lobbyist for Planned Parenthood), and kept mistresses on his campaign and public payrolls – to the tune of at least a half-million dollars.

 

[JoeB131]

So here's a crazy idea. If you don't like someone's politics, argue against their politics.

But sex should be your owned damned business.

 

[Ame®icano]

You do know what statutory rape is, do ya?

Yes, it's a bullshit charge that shouldn't be on our law books.

Should or shouldn't is matter of opinion. But It is in our law books. If you don't agree with it, it still doesn't mean you're allowed to do it.

Here's the thing. Lots of minors are losing their virginity before age 18. In fact MOST of them do. and this girl wasn't even a virgin. But it's like you all grow amnesia about what it was like to be a teenager, and how any one of you would have taken a chance to get laid as a teen.

True. It's also true that most of them lose virginity to other teens.
Even if consensual, sex with minor is a rape, period.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Just as Moynihan predicted.....Liberals work tirelessly to 'define deviancy downward.'

I suspect a hidden desire to commit what they are ready to claim is not a crime....

Right, because clearly, EVERYONE was waiting until they were 18 to get their cherries popped before 1972. NO REALLY! Life really was like Leave it to Beaver!

I find it amusing that the same people who will fight for the right of crazy people to have guns, are the ones who have no problem running roughshod over this man's Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights.

"Right, because clearly, EVERYONE was waiting until they were 18 blah blah blah...."


"Defining deviancy down," the catchy alliteration coined by Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D., N.Y.) is the 1990s equivalent of "permissiveness" in political rhetoric about crime and criminal justice. The term implies that the problem is public tolerance of intolerable behavior ...."
Andrew Karmen - "Defining Deviancy Down": How Senator Moynihan's Misleading Phrase About Criminal Justice Is Rapidly Being Incorporated Into Popular Culture - JCJPC - Volume 2, Issue 5



I don't know why you found it necessary to claim to be the poster child for my post,but it was unnecessary.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So here's a crazy idea. If you don't like someone's politics, argue against their politics.

But sex should be your owned damned business.

Did you just refer to child rape as "sex should be your owned (sic) damned business"?

Really?

Time for you to drag your knuckles back to your cave.

 

[Ame®icano]

That article was published yesterday. It's time to get over it.

That's funny. When a liberal like Polanski or Hillary commits heinous crimes, the Left can't get away from them fast enough, but 25 years from now, they will still be ripping on Trump for things he never even said or did.

That should have been the title of Hillary's book: "It's Time To Get Over It."

It's not just Polanski, or Weinstein...

If you are liberal and you take advantage of many women and your wife then trashes them, for other liberals it's OK. If you're liberal and you talk a teenage girl into doing adult things over the phone for you, it's OK. If you are liberal and you trade sex for an income and acting career, its OK. If you are liberal and run your girlfriend off a bridge, then run home while she drowns, its OK,... well, you get elected to the Senate.

But if you're conservative and you hold the door open for a woman, your a sexist and misogynist pig.

"It's not just Polanski, or Weinstein... "

Can we add Bill 'the rapist' Clinton to that duo?

It's not the duo, the list of leftist "heroes" and their enablers is long.

Clintons, Kennedys, Cosby, Weiner, majority of the Hollywood.

Yeah, only 20 years later Hollywood is speaking out against and disavow Weinstein and democrats returning money he donated. Why now? Because by playing victims, that's the only way they can get away from not saying or doing anything about it. I mean, what's the difference between Clinton and Weinstein? When will the Hollywood or the democrats disavow the Clintons?