Crime Minnesota senator who sponsored bill declaring criticism of Trump a mental illness, arrested for soliciting child for sex

nostradumbass said:
Did you read your own link? None of those conditions apply to this. It wasn't a person under 14, there was no force, and he wasn't in any position of authority of her, and we know that for sure because she didn't even exist.

If you're going to post a source for something, maybe don't pick one that says the opposite of what you're claiming
Click to expand...
He's a senator in her state engaging in prostitution of a minor. He's in a position of authority over her and engaging in additional criminal acts. You're fighting so hard to deny blatant :eek::eek::eek::eek:philia
 
Last edited:
nostradumbass said:
Did you read your own link? None of those conditions apply to this. It wasn't a person under 14, there was no force, and he wasn't in any position of authority of her, and we know that for sure because she didn't even exist.

If you're going to post a source for something, maybe don't pick one that says the opposite of what you're claiming
Click to expand...
https://mncasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Sexual-Consent-Law-One-Pager-1.pdf

People between the ages of 16-18 may only consent to sexual conduct with someone less than 36 months (3 years) older than them. This means that even if someone between the ages of 16-18 intends to consent to sexual conduct with someone who is more than 36 months older than them, that sexual conduct is not legally allowed. 11 The older person can be charged with crimes.

https://arechigo-stokka.com/blog/age-of-consent-minnesota/

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.344
 
Last edited:
terrapin said:
i mean... they voted for rapist trump and support a cabinet filled with sexual degenerates....


I dont think these people have a bottom man.
Click to expand...
I don’t think so either but every once in a while a thread like this comes along and really emphasizes the fact they’ll defend quite literally anyone as long as it’s someone they deem one of their own. I just hope one day, years from now or maybe a decade, they’ll look back at what they were and at least be embarrassed by their behavior. But even that’s probably giving them too much credit as that would require having basic introspection.
 
GreatSaintGuillotine said:
Bro how is it so hard for them to just call ot what it is and admonish the :eek::eek::eek::eek:phile? How is this even a fucking thing?
Click to expand...
we are witnessing a cult in action led by a malignant narcissist. that's not hyperbole. its just the way it is.

I think things could get way worse for us and that we are in real trouble in this country.
 
Siver! said:
17 year olds have always been children when it comes to prostitution and pornography, at least as long as I've been alive.

You know, to protect them from exploitation from fully grown adults?

It's not a left-right issue.
Click to expand...

Well, remember Republicans are all for doing away with child labor protections.
 
GreatSaintGuillotine said:
Bro how is it so hard for them to just call ot what it is and admonish the :eek::eek::eek::eek:phile? How is this even a fucking thing?
Click to expand...
It's partisan politics at its very worst. Although there are a lot of right wing posters in this thread who aren't defending it.

So it mostly just makes these particular posters look really terrible.
 
nostradumbass said:
Did you read your own link? None of those conditions apply to this. It wasn't a person under 14, there was no force, and he wasn't in any position of authority of her, and we know that for sure because she didn't even exist.

If you're going to post a source for something, maybe don't pick one that says the opposite of what you're claiming
Click to expand...

Lol@a Senator isnt in any position of authority over a citizen.
 
GreatSaintGuillotine said:
Bro how is it so hard for them to just call ot what it is and admonish the :eek::eek::eek::eek:phile? How is this even a fucking thing?
Click to expand...
Theres literally zero people not admonished him.

Look, if this were a homicide, and somebody says "this is murder"

And then a second person says "this would be more like manslaughter"

It would be stupid to start saying "Oh, well I guess you're a closet murderer. Why are you defending murder? I think we know why".

Huh?

Even assuming the second person were wrong and it was in fact legally murder over manslaughter, it's still a stupid position to start thinking classifying it as manslaughter is being somehow pro-murder and pro-murderer. Nevertheless, thats where we are.
 
Bob Gray said:
Theres literally zero people not admonished him.

Look, if this were a homicide, and somebody says "this is murder"

And then a second person says "this would be more like manslaughter"

It would be stupid to start saying "Oh, well I guess you're a closet murderer. Why are you defending murder? I think we know why".

Huh?

Even assuming the second person were wrong and it was in fact legally murder over manslaughter, it's still a stupid position to start thinking classifying it as manslaughter is being somehow pro-murder and pro-murderer. Nevertheless, thats where we are.
Click to expand...
Holy shit dude
 
GreatSaintGuillotine said:
He's a senator in her state engaging in prostitution of a minor. He's in a position of authority over her and engaging in additional criminal acts. You're lighting so hard to deny blatant :eek::eek::eek::eek:philia
Click to expand...
WTF? That's not a position of authority over her. It's a grooming law, and gives specific examples of personal authority like a teacher or coach, not someone who didn't know the person existed because it's a matter of fact that she didn't.

I could support changing the laws to state that it's a crime for anyone to have sex with anyone under 18, and to apply that to all decisions having to do with sex, stop giving kids condoms and birth control, and implement abstinence only education and prosecute any adult who in any way encourages or condones anyone under 18 having sex. Would you?
 
Bob Gray said:
Theres literally zero people not admonished him.

Look, if this were a homicide, and somebody says "this is murder"

And then a second person says "this would be more like manslaughter"

It would be stupid to start saying "Oh, well I guess you're a closet murderer. Why are you defending murder? I think we know why".

Huh?

Even assuming the second person were wrong and it was in fact legally murder over manslaughter, it's still a stupid position to start thinking classifying it as manslaughter is being somehow pro-murder and pro-murderer. Nevertheless, thats where we are.
Click to expand...
When your response to a 40 trying to soliciate a minor for sex is "oh well I wouldn't call him a :eek::eek::eek::eek:phile" you have problems. Especially after being corrected on age of consent laws multiple times. He is a :eek::eek::eek::eek:phile. Point blank, period. Refusing to call him that is defending him. You're attempting to diminish the awful nature of what he is doing.

Now, I have not once said that defending him makes anyone a closet :eek::eek::eek::eek:. But I'll go on record saying that you and others are far too tolerant of this and are absolutely a big part of the problem. Refusing to call this what it clearly reflects very poorly on your character.

But hey, clearly y'all don't give a fuck. Pointing out the law has made no difference, so I doubt this post will either. I sincerely hope y'all reflect on what you're arguing for. Peace
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,261,704
Messages
57,113,072
Members
175,546
Latest member
Couch_Gambler

Share this page

Back
Top