Epstein victims speak about Trump sexual abuse

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
8,630
2,903
113
Yes, which is why the entire world agrees with me.
Which is also why you come here and squirm on a daily basis trying to act all cool while absolutely hating the fact that you have to live your entire life vicariously.
Welcome to a 4th liberal term and get ready for a 5th! lmfao.
Huh?
What brings you here?

I find it interesting that a guy who made the comment above has locked their profile from the membership. I kind of like to see what threads the more prolific members are participating in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: optimusprime69

Shaquille Oatmeal

Well-known member
Jun 2, 2023
7,278
7,778
113
Trans atheltes are few and far between but dominate the women's sport...any man would...LoL
Tariffs aren't paid by American taxpyers...lol...
Borders are close now... LoL

Recent Trends (Fiscal Year 2022-2024) Joe Biden

  • FY 2022:Over 2 million encounters occurred at the U.S. Southern Border.
  • FY 2023:Encounters rose to approximately 2.4 million.
  • FY 2024:Encounters dropped to about 1.7 million.
Recent Changes (2024-2025) Donald Trump

  • May 2024:117,905 illegal aliens were encountered.
  • May 2025:The number of encounters at the U.S. Southern Border between ports of entry fell by 93% to just 8,725
Encounters are legal immigration procedures.
Encounters refer to people showing up at the border and asking for entry/asylum. That is legal to do.
These encounters are also not unique encounters - the same person may come again and again asking for entry.
Such a massive fail for you on this. lmfao.
 
  • Like
Reactions: squeezer

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
8,630
2,903
113
Whether that is true or not, this is for the respective sporting administrative bodies to address. Not for the president to push a culture war.
That's not exactly true. You can disagree with the Trump Administration's action on transgender athletes in women's sports. However, the Federal government has a fifty year plus history of involvement in college sports.

Per Google AI:
Section IX refers to Title IX, a U.S. federal law prohibiting sex-based discrimination in any federally funded education program or activity, including collegiate athletics. For athletic programs, Title IX requires institutions to provide equal opportunities and benefits, which is assessed through a three-part test focusing on proportional participation, a history of program expansion for the underrepresented sex, and full accommodation of interests and abilities.

This gets us to whether one thinks transgender women are women under Title IX.
Or does Title IX protect and provide equal opportunities exclusively for biological women.
This debate is taking place in our courts right now.
 

squeezer

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2010
23,523
18,793
113
I don't necessarily like it.

You might think it's a message to the rest of the world. It's not.
It's a message to the military brass to not lose sight of their mission. Under Obama and Biden, political objectives interfered with their main objective of maintaining a lethal and ready fighting force.
LMAO, I suspect the military was much better off under Obama and Biden because they didn't fire the folks who knew how to manage a military and it's intel. If you believe the military under Segeth is better, you sir are going to pretzel yourself into an embarrassing position. LOL

ps...you didn't answer one of my questions, here you go. I highlighted it for you.

TIP: Stretch before you pretzel! Just looking after your well-being.

You actually believe Trump knows what he's doing??

What do you think of peace-loving Trump wanting to rename the Department of Defense to the Department of War?? Man, he's just so peaceful and thoughtful in everything he does.

One more thing, how are the job numbers down there??? I'm just asking for a friend named Justin.
 

squeezer

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2010
23,523
18,793
113
Huh?
What brings you here?

I find it interesting that a guy who made the comment above has locked their profile from the membership. I kind of like to see what threads the more prolific members are participating in.
@optimusprime69, just curious, why are you liking this post? I only ask because your profile is also locked up, just like Jimmy's was. LOL

Feel free to like and lock as you wish, just curiosity on my part. :unsure::whistle:
 
  • Sad
Reactions: optimusprime69

SchlongConery

License to Shill
Jan 28, 2013
14,560
8,976
113
Of all the huge issues facing Canada, the USA and the rest of the world, @WyattEarp, @richaceg and the righteous righties sure get really lathered up over this trans issue. Like they ever watched women’s sports anyways.

Reminds me of those pious southern Christian Holy Rollers yipping about the same stuff… then ending up in the news for sucking cock in puic bathrooms! Just sayin’ …🤷‍♂️
 

squeezer

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2010
23,523
18,793
113
Also, does choosing enhanced privacy indicate that I'm up to no good? Because from what I understand many users choose this option. Beyond that I'm curious why you're attempting to gather information by way of perusing my profile? What gives here Richard?
Let me try again and explain it to you slowly why I asked you! I never mentioned up to no good, not once. You obviously seem to have a guilty conscience, which is not my fault.

Now follow the story. I'll go slow for you.

Wyatt posted this asking Shaq why his profile is locked and you "liked" Wyatt's post. So I ask you, since your profile is locked up, why did you like the post? I think I had made myself clear when I first asked. Do you now understand?

I also added like and lock as you wish but yet seem to think I have bad intentions. I'm hurt, Jimmy, HURT I tell you!!!

Huh?
What brings you here?

I find it interesting that a guy who made the comment above has locked their profile from the membership. I kind of like to see what threads the more prolific members are participating in.

Seriously Richard? I'm supposed to clarify to you why I like another members post? What's next, I have to explain why I decide to toftt a certain lady? Come on Richard, I thought you were a little classier than that. 🤦‍♂️
PS...who is Richard?? Do you actually hobby, NO, no way!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frankfooter

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
30,209
8,170
113
Did you read the verdict? No Rape. you can call Trump a pervert...no a rapist...
EJ Carroll claimed that Trump "RAPED HER". Trump tried to sue her as it was not proven in Court. But he lost that case as if you look at New York's Law:

Dismissing the counterclaim, a judge in New York, Lewis A Kaplan, said that when Carroll repeated her allegation that Trump raped her, her words were “substantially true”. Kaplan also set out in detail why it may be said that Trump raped Carroll.
In May, the New York case was decided in favour of Carroll. After that ruling, she and her lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, gave interviews. Trump’s counterclaim centered on comments in which Carroll said Trump raped her.

“Oh yes he did, oh yes he did,” she told CNN.

Carroll also said she had told a Trump lawyer: “He did it and you know it.”

Trump denies assaulting Carroll – whom he called a “whack job” in his own remarks to CNN after the New York verdict, prompting Carroll to increase her damages claim.

In his counterclaim, Trump said Carroll “made these statements knowing each of them were false or with reckless disregard for their truth or falsity”.

Dismissing the counterclaim, Judge Kaplan provided an unsparing analysis of the legal issues that informed the New York verdict. He wrote: “The only issue on which the jury did not find in Ms Carroll’s favour was whether she proved that Mr Trump ‘raped’ her within the narrow, technical meaning of that term in the New York penal law.

“The jury … was instructed that it could find that Mr Trump ‘raped’ Ms Carroll only if it found that he forcibly penetrated Ms Carroll’s vagina with his penis.

“It could not find that he ‘raped’ her if it determined that Mr Trump forcibly penetrated Ms Carroll’s private sexual parts with his fingers – which commonly is considered ‘rape’ in other contexts – because the New York penal law definition of rape is limited to penile penetration.”

Kaplan had already outlined why it was not defamation for Carroll to say Trump raped her.

“As the court explained in its recent decision denying Mr Trump’s motion for a new trial on damages and other relief [in the New York case] … based on all of the evidence at trial and the jury’s verdict as a whole, the jury’s finding that Mr Trump ‘sexually abused’ Ms Carroll implicitly determined that he forcibly penetrated her digitally – in other words, that Mr Trump in fact did ‘rape’ Ms Carroll as that term commonly is used and understood in contexts outside of the New York penal law.”

So if EJ Carroll claimed that Trump raped her, and Trump lost that counter claim of Rape against her....... in other words it is rape outside of New York's Legal Definition!!
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
8,630
2,903
113
LMAO, I suspect the military was much better off under Obama and Biden because they didn't fire the folks who knew how to manage a military and it's intel.
Please follow along because this follows a very logical non-pretzel like path. The U.S. military hierarchy is bloated. This article below explains the need to rationalize the very top-heavy structure.

Hegseth argued that during World War II, the military had "a ratio of one general to 6,000 troops; today, it's one general to 1,400."

"More generals and admirals does not equal more success," Hegseth argued, noting the move "is not a slash-and-burn exercise meant to punish high-ranking officers."


You might not be a quantitative guy, but you get the point. And of course, the Trump Administration is going to fire the generals that they are not satisfied with.

 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
101,451
28,513
113
please do not compare the ladyboy in my thread to the mentally ill guy in the video I posted

I hope that you can see the difference between those two

BTW: that thread has over 8000 views,

haw many times have you gone back there? :ROFLMAO:
That explains so much.
You're just another closeted right winger who is pissed that they like dick so want to blame the trans community for being so 'hot', as you said.

got it

Like every other republican gay basher or pedo chaser.
Every accusation....

I now apologize to you (but not rich) for the dick sucking gif replies I posted to him.
Had no intent on turning you on, my bad.
 

squeezer

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2010
23,523
18,793
113
Please follow along because this follows a very logical non-pretzel like path. The U.S. military hierarchy is bloated. This article below explains the need to rationalize the very top-heavy structure.

Hegseth argued that during World War II, the military had "a ratio of one general to 6,000 troops; today, it's one general to 1,400."

"More generals and admirals does not equal more success," Hegseth argued, noting the move "is not a slash-and-burn exercise meant to punish high-ranking officers."


You might not be a quantitative guy, but you get the point. And of course, the Trump Administration is going to fire the generals that they are not satisfied with.

The fact that you regard Hegshit the drunk as a person to be taken seriously really shows me you are more than just Pretzel Man.

The man who let out military secrets out over Signal, yup, that man.

This man, who wants liberals and Muslims taken out



I'm very disappointed in you, Wyatt, but then again, I kind of expect it from you.

The religious man who fooled around on his wife and has a problem with the bottle, yes, that Hegshit.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts