kurtster wrote:
"And if these girls represent themselves as 18 years old, they are paid consenting adults as far as the participants are concerned."

Your claim if uttered by the adult participants during a trial wouldn't buy them an ounce of defense. "She looked 18 and said she was 18" will get you convicted every time. That's like getting caught carrying your friend's suitcase filled with coke through airport security: "I had no idea" is not a sufficient excuse. That's why you're told that material in your possession during security checks is entirely your responsibility. 

If you're f#&king someone in or near their teens, you should check their age through a reliable resource. 

And Katie Johnson stated told Epstein how old she was. She also stated IIRC that Trump knew her real age. 

Her parents failed her. That doesn't make her fair game for pedophiles like Trump and Epstein. 

All this round-di-round about Katie Johnson doesn't even touch on the numerous phone call records about Trump getting massage appointments with girls working for Epstein. Those records were recently unsealed. You also seem to have nothing to say about Ivana Trump's statement that Trump raped her, an event she included in her published biography. 

 kurtster wrote:
The fault I find with her reaction is that there are far too many parents who do a poor job of protecting their children. That's an unfortunate fact of society. 

Who let's their girls go out all night long? Drug addicts, some people with mental health problems, etc. Maybe some single parent that got stuck working unpaid overtime at their service job because they can't afford to get fired or have their hours cut by a vindictive boss. And they can't find or afford a safe childcare situation for the hours before they were supposed to get home. Or maybe they left the child in the care of a relative who didn't care. 

I expect there are some mothers who are poorly equipped to manage that common 12-14 mother-daughter rebellion and give up or give in. I mean I've known many caring parents who were poorly equipped for that, including a trained psychologist. 

There are all kinds of reasons why these things might happen. Is it good? No. But it happens and that doesn't mean that it is ok for the kids to end up abused.

By your logic it is ok if some girl goes in to make porn and says she is 18. Or likely someone takes her in and says she is 18, looks at her and says, "Right" and she nods. No further proof needed, she's a consenting adult.

 kurtster wrote:
Despite lots of numbers that's still a sample size of one, namely you, which is the source of "a rule."

One study: How old was she? The accuracy of assessing the age of adolescents’ based on photos

Using facial photos of target persons aged 12–18 years, we investigated the effects of gender, age, and ethnicity of both targets (n = 240) and observers (n = 869) on the accuracy of age estimation. We also investigated the effects of targets’ facial expressions (neutral or smiling), use of makeup, and photo quality. Participants overestimated the age of the adolescents by, on average, 3.51 years. Participants overestimated the age of young adolescent girls to a greater extent than that of younger boys. Men made larger overestimations than women. Participants also estimated smiling targets as being older than targets with neutral facial expression, and the age of girls with makeup to be older than girls without makeup. Because there was considerable variation in the accuracy of estimations, and overestimates were common, we conclude that the ability of individuals to estimate the age of adolescents is generally low. This might have important legal implications.

 kurtster wrote:
Wow, take a break and can't even follow all the back and forth very well. So I'll just respond to bits where it seems fit in somewhat random order.

Kurt, You missed the "a lot" part of his statement. I believe that there are probably some, particularly because more often, there are some 18 year olds who do not look that old. There are not a lot of 12-14 year olds who look like a typical 18 year old. Additionally, there are probably very few 12-14 year olds who can behave like an 18 year old. For pushing prescriptions, it probably doesn't matter a lot. For dealing with sexual situations it is hugely important.

So you end up with a situation where disingenuous people feign ignorance and take advantage of it to abuse children. If you are going to run sex island, you bloody well better make sure your sex workers are of legal age and agree to every act. And if you are going to attend sex island you have the duty as an adult to be sure that whatever shit you are doing is being done to someone who is not being harmed.

Ok, the concept of affirmative consent is relatively new. But the concept of responsibility is not. If trump likes 18 year olds who look 12, he should goddam make sure that they aren't 12. If he engaged in kinky sex activities with someone who looked 12 or 14... or shit, even looked 18, he is an abuser, a creep, and a failure as a human being if they come out of the situation feeling that they were forced to do something they didn't want.

 kurtster wrote:
I never see an actual DOB, but I can tell a 13-year-old isn't 18.  Newsflash...so could Epstein, and Maxwell.  It's not a mistake... it's a goal for the depraved.  Your boy so much as said so.

I'm not following how this whole line of conversation started... and I'm not saying Trump did or didn't do anything... but your defending ignorance (at best) speaks volumes.  Just in case...

 kurtster wrote:
look who failed the training module called "What is consent?"

and for a guy who bristled so hard about this very topic recently, this is a bad take.

 rgio wrote: 
That is exactly what I am going to tell you.

Next month I will have been selling glasses for 30 years.  An easy 75% of my customers are female.

Long ago I gave up trying to figure out how young / old they are.  I am constantly surprised as I see their actual DOB's as part of their medical records.  I have simply given up guessing the age of women.  I see 12 or 14 year old's that look 21 and 70 year old's that look 45 or 50 and everything in between.

Only a woman is going to have some sort of clue as to the actual age of other women.  Men as a rule, are clueless.

Now go ahead and tell me how often you see a female's actual DOB in the course of your everyday life and actually find out if you guess a female's age correctly.

 kurtster wrote:
So if a 40-year-old man has sex with a 13-year-old who said she was 18, you want to blame the parents and give the 40-year-old a pass?  

Please don't tell me there are a lot of 13-year-olds who look 18.

Now that abortions are harder to get... you better ask for ID.  There are gonna be a lot more unwilling, disinterested parents in about 13 years.  Of course... you likely won't be voting by then.

 kcar wrote:

I just had a conversation with her earlier on this very subject.  A woman, a victim of both rape and incest. 

You want to know what her first response was ?   Where were the parents of these 12 and 13 year old girls ?  How did they let them go to these kinds of places / parties in the first place ?  Who lets their little girls go out all night long in circumstances like that ?  Go ahead and find fault with her reaction.  

.
And if these girls represent themselves as 18 years old, they are paid consenting adults as far as the participants are concerned.

 kcar wrote:


“We won world wars out of forts."

“They changed the name of a lot of our forts. We won two world wars out of a lot of these forts and they changed the name,” he said. “It’s unbelievable.”

Never gets old...  

As "addled" as some people believe Joe is... I couldn't ever imagine him uttering anything close to that.

 kurtster wrote:

" narcissistic condescending progressive liberal elites"

Your go-to bogeyman. Don't forget the globalists!

"No. I know what is best for me and my self interests. My primary interest is having a secure border."

Right. Because the Cleveland OH area is so close to Mexico and it's just swarming with illegal immigrants. NOT.

Unauthorized Immigrant Populations by Country and Region, Top States and Counties of Residence, 2019

https://www.migrationpolicy.or...

20 metro areas are home to six-in-ten unauthorized immigrants in U.S.
https://www.pewresearch.org/sh...


"That is what I am voting on. And don't give me any shit about the Senate bill. It is worse than the problem it purports to "fix"."

STRANGE how you can never detail what's wrong with the Senate bill with supporting evidence or opinion from informed sources. I spent considerable time and effort to look at HR 2 and list its shortcomings. You don't seem capable of doing that for the Senate bill. Look at it this way: if the Senate bill had become law, you'd have some of the things you want for immigration. Right now you don't even that half-loaf. 

And hey! No comment about Project 2025's plan to cut Medicare? Somehow I think it'd be in your best interests to oppose that, given the serious health issues present in your family. I think you're in for a very nasty shock if Trump gets elected. 

"So tell me that this remark did not address you charge above ."

I simply don't know what you're trying to say here. Let me expand on my previous statements:

I believe that you think rape is a horrible, awful criminal act. Certainly that seemed to case when you stated years ago that a relative—a cousin, perhaps—was raped by an illegal immigrant. 

But when Trump is accused of rape or sexual assault, you don't believe it. When Trump was found to have sexually assaulted E. Jean Carroll by a jury of his peers, you dismissed that judgment. When a second jury found that Trump's denial of Carroll's charge and his denigration of her character should be punished with an $83.3 million judgment, you tried to waive that away. You still haven't seriously addressed the claims by over 25 women that Trump raped, sexually harassed and/or assaulted them

Your moral compass, in short, disappears when Trump is accused of criminal or civilly liable actions. Or even just bad behavior. I truly believe that if Trump were criminally convicted of rape, you wouldn't accept the results. Or you'd just shrug your shoulders, because Trump. 

PS—As for Biden, I think he should step down. Whether his performance early on in the debate was a senior moment, a panic attack or sign of dementia, we have no guarantee that he won't freeze up again or more often in the coming years. 

HOWEVER: his administration has received high marks by economists, politicians and historians for getting a lot done. He has highly capable people surrounding him. Trump OTOH is judged the worst US president by a survey of historians. He's had many, many moments of confusion, garbled language, memory loss and brutal distortion of the past. Revolutionary War soldiers guarding our airports? 

If Biden stays in the race, I'm still voting for him. His agenda seeks to improve the lives of Americans. Trump's agenda is mostly about retribution against his enemies WHO ARE TRYING TO UPHOLD THE LAW., 

But you've drunk your side's Kook Aid. Christ, you swill it and bathe in it. So don't bray about how you weren't fooled. You're a world-class sucker.

 kurtster wrote:
Once again, the answer is a resounding "You". 
 
But hey, in his time wasn't Hitler was given stellar marks for his modernization of the German transit system? 
 
So, by all means... let's fixate on the one thing (borders) and completely ignore all the other "stuff". Especially since all the other "stuff" is problematic and tough to justify. 

 kurtster wrote:

Kurtster, firstly, sorry if you get the collective ire of everyone here, who is alarmed by Trump, but then again you are the only Trump supporter here with the balls to say it loud. So kudos for that, but that is really about it. I find it painfully obvious that:

1. Trump actually gives a shit about the border, but he knows it's a topic that sells to his base, so he peddles that.
2. Trump is mining a niche that he suddenly found himself in where smarter guys than him with bigger pockets are willing to stroke his ego, feed him the trappings of power and glory but who are basically using him to further their own program, which is:
3. Demolishing the laws and institutions that hold them back from really screwing over the little guys (that's both you and me)
4. Sowing division and reducing the States to civil war or something close to it

In the process, they will actually destroy the very thing that has made America great and them rich.  But hey ho.  

Now, convince me that all of this is in your best interest. 

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote: 
This is what is typical for the narcissistic condescending progressive liberal elites.  You know what is best for me, because I am inferior or have defective thinking.  Therefore you are justified in doing my thinking for me.

No.  I know what is best for me and my self interests.  My primary interest is having a secure border.  That is what I am voting on. And don't give me any shit about the Senate bill.  It is worse than the problem it purports to "fix". No different from those who make abortion their top consideration for voting.  The thing is that you have to take all the other stuff that comes with the advocates of your favorite concern(s).

So based on my primary concern, my vote is still for Trump.  No borders, no country. This in direct opposition to the wide open border policy of the democratic party. He is the only one who has had a handle on the border and actually did things that brought it more under control than in the past 45 years.  And will do the same again, so we can then fix the other things that need fixing.  

.
kcar wrote: 
So tell me that this remark did not address you charge above .
.
 kurtster wrote: 

kcar wrote: 
And you were successfully gaslit by the media and party that you trust regarding Biden's health and state of mind, defending his cognitive function and overall health right up to the debate.  This alone is enough to question the judgement and credibility of all those who sucked it up and asked for more to feed their confirmation bias.  And then went on the viciously attack anyone who questioned Biden faculties.  Complete with copy and pastes from "the experts" to back your thoughts up.

I am supposed to go along with your proposition that you know what is best for me and get mad if I disagree ?  Who is zooming who ?

.
You were fooled, I wasn't.  So who again is the gullible ?

 kurtster wrote:
Fixed your typo. You really need to read the posts with a little more attention. 
 
Comprehension might be your enemy.

 kcar wrote:
Completely concur. And he wonders why people question his integrity? 

 kcar wrote:

 bingo.  .. and zooming out to the bigger picture.. exactly the same was true for Brexit and the same is true for the wave of right-wing nationalism sweeping Europe at the moment. And the whole bloody lot has been fanned by an unhealthy amalgam of big money / mob interests / right-wing media / disinformation that is trying to weaken government so that they can screw over the little guys even more. Look at Farage trying to destroy the NHS in the UK for instance. Or the Putin-Versteher wanting to keep Europe dependent on Russian oil and fuck global warming or the environment.  Needless to say, they also want to dismantle the EU. 
And they (Murdoch/Putin and their cohorts) do all this by whipping up hysteria about the very things that get people scared. (illegal) immigration, hordes of brown-skinned people coming for your women, greenies taking away your car, deep state doing something or other nefarious (although it is actually them doing that), etc. etc. 

.. and people fall for it like serfs kneeling before royalty.

I truly believe that you like Trump so much that you would shrug your shoulders in indifference at most if strong evidence indicating that Trump raped and/or sexually assaulted an underage woman became public. You certainly had nothing to say about the horrific nature of such an alleged act in your earlier posts. 

You also twisted yourself into knots while denying the very real fact that Trump is an adjudicated rapist. Oh no, it was a NY jury. Oh no, the lawsuit wasn't a criminal trial so there was a lower requirement for evidence (preponderance of evidence instead of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt as in a criminal trial). Oh no, Carroll couldn't definitively state that Trump penetrated her with his penis (which would be criminal rape in NY) instead of his fingers. 

And you have had nothing to say about the 25+ women who have accused Trump of rape, sexual assault and/or sexual harassment since the 1970s.—including his first wife who said Trump raped her.  IIRC you have dismissed all such claims as gold digging or fame-seeking. 

You have never shown any sympathy or concern for the people whom Trump has screwed out of their rightful money—contractors for instance. You've never stated disapproval of Trump's verbal abuse or mocking of people—Nancy Pelosi's husband, eg, who got hit in the head with a hammer by a nutjob looking to kill Nancy. Or the reporter with palsy who interviewed Trump, leading Trump YEARS LATER to mock the guy during a rally. 

I truly believe that you get off on this guy's cruelty and ability to get away with committing crimes or bad behavior. He's your Tony Soprano. 

The reason I call you roadkill is that you support a guy whose agenda runs quite counter to your best interests. Read up on Project 2025's plan to slash Medicare. I don't know if you have supplemental heath insurance through an employer or a public exchange, but Trump will try to kill the ACA again, which would massively destabilize the entire US healthcare system. So don't think you're safe. 

Trump and Miller's plan to round up all undocumented emigrants and people waiting for asylum would be a serious shock to the US labor force, leading to major labor shortages, wage hikes and a spike in inflation. That's in part why 16 Nobel Prize winning economists condemned Trump's economic plans as dangerous and inflationary. 

https://www.reuters.com/world/...

https://www.axios.com/2024/06/...

But you're just a sucker for Trump and FNC. Fox or Trump comes up with a lie and you swallow and parrot it. The Biden Crime Family! Obamagate! HRC's emails! To your credit, you seemed skeptical of the rigged election claims but you're still watching Fox even after it shelled out $785.5 million for lying about Dominion and while it faces a bigger payout to Smartmatic

You still lap up their BS. 

When it comes to Trump and right-wing hate, you're a perpetual motion machine of gullibility. Even to your own detriment. 

 kcar wrote: 
yet you brought it up today as if it was breaking news and even used it to slander and defame my character here in the process simply because I questioned you on what this was about.

You made a very serious accusation about me, which I am taking very seriously :  "you approve of Trump raping and sexually assaulting 12 year old girls"

You are going down a very dangerous path.

 kurtster wrote:

Dear roadkill, 

The case DID gain national coverage. It was dropped in 2016. 

Woman suing Trump over alleged teen rape drops suit, again

A woman who accused Donald Trump of raping her two decades ago when she was a 13-year-old aspiring teen model has again dropped a federal lawsuit over the alleged assaults.

The accuser, identified in the lawsuit by the pseudonym “Jane Doe,” was expected to appear at a news conference in Los Angeles Wednesday, but that appearance was abruptly canceled.

The lawyer who organized the event, Lisa Bloom, said Trump’s accuser had received threats and was too frightened to show up.

In the most recent suit, Trump’s accuser asserted that while she was exploring a modeling career in 1994, she attended a series of parties at the Manhattan home of prominent investor Jeffrey Epstein. She alleges that during those parties the real estate mogul tied her to a bed and raped her. She also claimed Epstein raped her during that series of gatherings.

...

The first suit over the alleged rapes was filed in federal court in Riverside, California, in April by someone acting without an attorney and using the name “Katie Johnson.” That suit named both Trump and Epstein as defendants, alleging that the two men held Johnson as a “sex slave” and repeatedly forced her to engage in sexual acts against her will.

...

U.S. District Court Judge Dolly Gee dismissed that case in May, ruling that Johnson’s complaint didn’t raise valid claims under federal law. Gee, an appointee of President Barack Obama, noted that the suit cited a criminal statute that doesn’t give rise to civil damages and that the civil statute Johnson cited only applies to actions based on “race-based or class-based animus.”

...

The second and third iterations of the complaint (filed by Katie Johnson using the pseudonym Jane Doe) accused Trump of only a single act of rape, but said he had “sexual contact” with the accuser on three other occasions. A declaration from an anonymous witness attached to the later suits continued to accuse Trump of four acts of rape or sexual assault.



See also this Newsweek piece from January 4, 2024:

https://www.newsweek.com/fact-...