Poll of the Day > Cohen says Trump once leered at his 15-year-old daughter and asked: 'When did sh

(+) Yeah! (+)

This guy is a real sicko to say the least.

https://www.businessinsider.com/michael-cohen-says-trump-once-leered-at-his-teenage-daughter-2020-9

---

Sounds a bit like duckbear, did he go on to call someone a heifer?

---

He would walk in on underage beauty contestants changing and was accused of raping a 13 year old girl at a party held by his long-time friend Jeffrey Epstein.
---

He also pointed at an 11 year girl and bragged that hed be dating her in a decade

---

This doesn't surprise anyone. His supporters know this, they either support it or don't care.

Its sickening how many times Trump has to prove things we already know about him.

---

He also banged my 13 year old cousin!


---

Funny how libs are so quick to slap the pedo label on Trump, when it's the libs themselves that are trying to create laws where homosexuals who sleep with underage same sex children won't be put on a sex-offender lis....

I know Trump is no saint either, but if threads like this are made to discredit Trump during election season....they shouldn't be posted from glass houses.

Regardless, come voting day, if the choices was to vote for an old crusty white dude "harmlessly" rubbernecking on forbidden fruit, against creating laws that protect monsters as they get closer to legit fuck your children.....go with the crusty white dude.

...this is why Trump won in 2016; and will again in 2020.

---

Joker_X_II posted...

Funny how libs are so quick to slap the pedo label on Trump, when it's the libs themselves that are trying to create laws where homosexuals who sleep with underage same sex children won't be put on a sex-offender lis....

I know Trump is no saint either, but if threads like this are made to discredit Trump during election season....they shouldn't be posted from glass houses.

Regardless, come voting day, if the choices was to vote for an old crusty white dude "harmlessly" rubbernecking on forbidden fruit, against creating laws that protect monsters as they get closer to legit fuck your children.....go with the crusty white dude.

...this is why Trump won in 2016; and will again in 2020.

Youre a weird dude, did you know that?

Cacciato posted...

Youre a weird dude, did you know that?

Naturally....

---

Blightzkrieg posted...

This doesn't surprise anyone. His supporters know this, they either support it or don't care.

Its sickening how many times Trump has to prove things we already know about him.

i know zeus supports his pro-white beliefs, but i'm curious if he supports his leering at female children and thoughts of incest, ok?

---

ClarkDuke posted...

i know zeus supports his pro-white beliefs, but i'm curious if he supports his leering at female children and thoughts of incest, ok?

knowing @Zeus , he has already has his defense typed up, ok?

---

Aculo posted...

knowing @Zeus , he has already has his defense typed up, ok?

great, i can't wait to hear it, ok?

---

Is he in jail yet?
---

Trumpers: "Who hasn't leered at a budding flower?"

---

ClarkDuke posted...

i know zeus supports his pro-white beliefs, but i'm curious if he supports his leering at female children and thoughts of incest, ok?

White nationalism is heavily tied to misogyny, and the general glorification of the medieval and pre medieval social order (or a mythical version there of). Thinking of women as being sexual objects or trophies, and becoming that at a much younger age, is part of this general worldview.

---

Blightzkrieg posted...

White nationalism is heavily tied to misogyny, and the general glorification of the medieval and pre medieval social order (or a mythical version there of). Thinking of women as being sexual objects or trophies, and becoming that at a much younger age, is part of this general worldview.

Absolutely, it would be stranger to find a alt-righter who believed women deserved equal rights to men.

BlackScythe0 posted...

Absolutely, it would be stranger to find a alt-righter who believed women deserved equal rights to men.

Yeah. I should clarify that though this belief is not necessarily explicit in modern alt right movements, it is explicit in the historical fascist movements in Italy and Germany (but tends to be overshadowed by other stuff, obviously). It is just as core a part of the ideology as the actual nationalist and racist parts.

---

Joker_X_II posted...

Funny how libs are so quick to slap the pedo label on Trump, when it's the libs themselves that are trying to create laws where homosexuals who sleep with underage same sex children won't be put on a sex-offender lis....

Wtf has this one been smoking

---

I thought this was about Trumps own daughter, which wouldnt surprise me either, to be honest.

Clench281 posted...

Wtf has this one been smoking

the newspaper you refused to read....

---

Joker_X_II posted...

Funny how libs are so quick to slap the pedo label on Trump, when it's the libs themselves that are trying to create laws where homosexuals who sleep with underage same sex children won't be put on a sex-offender lis....

@Joker_X_II let's see a list of politicians who support this.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Trumpers: "Who hasn't leered at a budding flower?"

Trumpists are disgusting. No wonder they love that pervert Trump so much.

Blightzkrieg posted...

White nationalism is heavily tied to misogyny, and the general glorification of the medieval and pre medieval social order (or a mythical version there of). Thinking of women as being sexual objects or trophies, and becoming that at a much younger age, is part of this general worldview.

that explains him leering judgmentally at women, like toys in duckbear topics, ok?

---

Joker_X_II posted...

the newspaper you refused to read....

those were tabs of acid, you shouldn't have it all at once, ok?

---

I guess every book ever written is true.
---

Revelation34 posted...

I guess every book ever written is true.

Every post you've ever posted sucks.

---

HelIWithoutSin posted...

Every post you've ever posted sucks.

So you're saying the book is true just because it's a book?
---

Joker_X_II posted...

Funny how libs are so quick to slap the pedo label on Trump, when it's the libs themselves that are trying to create laws where homosexuals who sleep with underage same sex children won't be put on a sex-offender lis....

I know Trump is no saint either, but if threads like this are made to discredit Trump during election season....they shouldn't be posted from glass houses.

Regardless, come voting day, if the choices was to vote for an old crusty white dude "harmlessly" rubbernecking on forbidden fruit, against creating laws that protect monsters as they get closer to legit fuck your children.....go with the crusty white dude.

...this is why Trump won in 2016; and will again in 2020.

Hey bro try living in the real world for once, everything you posted is not true.

Revelation34 posted...

So you're saying the book is true just because it's a book?

WTF are you even talking about?

---

HelIWithoutSin posted...

WTF are you even talking about?

Hes building a straw man argument with all the subtlety of a burn bag of dog poop.

---

Joker_X_II posted...

the libs themselves that are trying to create laws where homosexuals who sleep with underage same sex children won't be put on a sex-offender lis....

Imagine believing this is true.

---

Joe Biden is worse

---

Only Biden is allowed to touch children, don't forget that Nazi scumbags

---

darkknight109 posted...

Imagine believing this is true.

Okay,...

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB145

... god, I love being right, when everyone else is calling you crazy......

---

It's hilarious how often this same group was calling Cohen a pathological liar and now they'll believe anything he says because he's temporarily anti-Trumping to sell a book to people like them so he can make an easy fortune.

The leering claim is vague and silly, whereas complimenting a person's daughter's looks is generally innocuous (and it's unsurprising that Cohen would mention a leer, because he can use it to paint the remark in a different light while simultaneously it's open-ended enough that he couldn't be sued for libel if the comment did result in damages)

---

Joker_X_II posted...

Okay,...

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB145

... god, I love being right, when everyone else is calling you crazy......

Could you quote the exact part of the bill you were referring to?

---

Sarcasthma posted...

Could you quote the exact part of the bill you were referring to?

Nope, I read it all, and pointed you in the right direction; rest is up to you.

---

FrndNhbrHdCEman posted...

Hes building a straw man argument with all the subtlety of a burn bag of dog poop.

It isn't a straw man. People only believe this particular book because they don't like Trump. If somebody released a book about Biden the people against Biden would believe it too.
---

Frankly I'd be inclined to believe most negative things people have to say about Trump's character, because he's shown himself to have zero moral fiber or integrity.

---

Joker_X_II posted...

Nope, I read it all, and pointed you in the right direction; rest is up to you.

Apparently, you misinterpreted is what you did.

When did she what? Finish your sentences TC.

Sarcasthma posted...

Could you quote the exact part of the bill you were referring to?

Don't bother, he's purposefully misunderstanding the bill.

Prior to this bill, the law stated that judges are required to force sex offender registration in cases involving consensual mouth-anus or penis-anus sex, without discretion. However, cases involving consensual penis-vagina sex allowed the judge to decide whether registration was necessary, depending on the circumstances surrounding the case. As a result, the law disproportionately harmed non-heterosexual people.

In essence, the law disproportionately punished people for the type of sex they had, regardless of other circumstances of the case. Previously, a consensual sexual encounter between two males age 18 and 17, the elder would be automatically be required to register as a sex offender--while a 24 year old man having sex with a 15 year old girl would NOT necessarily be required to register, at the judge's discretion. The wording in the new law makes it so cases can be treated the same, regardless of whether it was consensual anal, vaginal, or oral sex.

That is not to say that it is legal in all cases. Again, it comes down to discretion of the judge to make the determination based on the circumstances of the case.


---

Joker_X_II posted...

Okay,...

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB145

... god, I love being right, when everyone else is calling you crazy......

Imagine posting a source that completely destroys your own argument, yet still being oblivious enough to think you've won the debate.

---

Don't mind me, just posting a random picture for no particular reason.

---

darkknight109 posted...

Imagine posting a source that completely destroys your own argument, yet still being oblivious enough to think you've won the debate.

Funny, ...what do you think my argument was?....

Clench281 posted...

Don't bother, he's purposefully misunderstanding the bill.

Actually, I totally agree with your interpretation of the bill, only because you took it at face value, but never applied the broadview of the law itself....that's where you failed.

You forgot things like precedence, reasoning behind 'age of content laws', and the mere fact that California is a degenerate state to begin with.

That is not to say that it is legal in all cases. Again, it comes down to discretion of the judge to make the determination based on the circumstances of the case.

Here's how it works.....Basically, you're right. The bill that was passed was meant to be more of an "equal opportunity" way to punish ALL PEDOS equally.....not just the "Jerry Lee Lewis" pedos, but the "Micheal Jackson" pedos too now.

However, precedence factors in as the latitude between the elder partner's age and the young partner's age is factored in the judge's decision. CALIFORNIA has the widest age gap for this latitude, spanning a 10 year difference while most other states is around 4-5 years. So precedence is set in the fact that you could get away with a 24 year old man boning a 14 year old girl, and not be placed on the sex offender registry in the end.

This bill just includes the LGBTQ to gain the same latitude, because if it was a 24 year old man grooming a 14 year old boy, before they would actually throw the book right at him, put him on the registry and be done with him. Senator Wiener (lol) advocated for the same punishment as straight-pedos get....that's all.

Now why is the LGBTQ factor in all this is such a controversial notion....? Well, because it's bad enough to confuse young teens about having sex in the first place (which is why we have age of consent laws in the first place), now they've exposed the danger of confusing a child's sexuality as well; grooming them! Now a 24 year old man can get a boy to swing for his team, so to speak (without the high probable 'danger' of being in the registry for the adult)..... It's one thing to be 14 and come into your sexuality on your own, but it's another to when you get 'help' from an adult.....

Then when you back up from all this, and ask "Why give pedos all that latitude in the first place?". Why create such a 10 year gap, when honestly law-makers should be working to closing that gap, so ALL PEDOS are punished the same? Why allow Gay-Pedos access to the 10 year gap, when they should've closed the gap to the Straight-Pedos so they'd be punished the same way as the Gay ones? Wouldn't that achieve the same result for the same "inclusive" punishment?.....

...but no, because "California"; home of degenerate libs who rather call out Trump for peeking in a dressing room and not notice how their state is become a pedo-paradise.

/mic-drop


---

Joker_X_II posted...

but the "Micheal Jackson" pedos too now.

So you think Trump is innocent but not Michael Jackson?

Joker_X_II posted...

now they've exposed the danger of confusing a child's sexuality as well; grooming them! Now a 24 year old man can get a boy to swing for his team, so to speak (without the high probable 'danger' of being in the registry for the adult)..... It's one thing to be 14 and come into your sexuality on your own, but it's another to when you get 'help' from an adult.....

Homosexuality is natural. There is no such thing as "changing" sexuality.
---

Joker_X_II posted...

Funny, ...what do you think my argument was?....

Actually, I totally agree with your interpretation of the bill, only because you took it at face value, but never applied the broadview of the law itself....that's where you failed.

You forgot things like precedence, reasoning behind 'age of content laws', and the mere fact that California is a degenerate state to begin with.

Here's how it works.....Basically, you're right. The bill that was passed was meant to be more of an "equal opportunity" way to punish ALL PEDOS equally.....not just the "Jerry Lee Lewis" pedos, but the "Micheal Jackson" pedos too now.

However, precedence factors in as the latitude between the elder partner's age and the young partner's age is factored in the judge's decision. CALIFORNIA has the widest age gap for this latitude, spanning a 10 year difference while most other states is around 4-5 years. So precedence is set in the fact that you could get away with a 24 year old man boning a 14 year old girl, and not be placed on the sex offender registry in the end.

This bill just includes the LGBTQ to gain the same latitude, because if it was a 24 year old man grooming a 14 year old boy, before they would actually throw the book right at him, put him on the registry and be done with him. Senator Wiener (lol) advocated for the same punishment as straight-pedos get....that's all.

Now why is the LGBTQ factor in all this is such a controversial notion....? Well, because it's bad enough to confuse young teens about having sex in the first place (which is why we have age of consent laws in the first place), now they've exposed the danger of confusing a child's sexuality as well; grooming them! Now a 24 year old man can get a boy to swing for his team, so to speak (without the high probable 'danger' of being in the registry for the adult)..... It's one thing to be 14 and come into your sexuality on your own, but it's another to when you get 'help' from an adult.....

Then when you back up from all this, and ask "Why give pedos all that latitude in the first place?". Why create such a 10 year gap, when honestly law-makers should be working to closing that gap, so ALL PEDOS are punished the same? Why allow Gay-Pedos access to the 10 year gap, when they should've closed the gap to the Straight-Pedos so they'd be punished the same way as the Gay ones? Wouldn't that achieve the same result for the same "inclusive" punishment?.....

...but no, because "California"; home of degenerate libs who rather call out Trump for peeking in a dressing room and not notice how their state is become a pedo-paradise.

/mic-drop

Holy shit lol, what the fuck is wrong with this guy. Right?

The dude says this entire board is Antifa. Just tag him move on.

---

Revelation34 posted...

So you think Trump is innocent but not Michael Jackson?

Going back to my first post, Trump's not innocent at all, but I am saying that if you're going to slam Trump do it from a position where your side is blameless. The left laughs at him because he peeks into the girls changing room, while creating laws that give wide-berth for pedophiles anyways?.... that kind of irony is stupid.

Homosexuality is natural. There is no such thing as "changing" sexuality.

I agree, and my point is that it should come naturally, not being coerced by older adults with their own agendas and desires. "Get' em when they're young!", as the pedo-motto goes....

ReggieTheReckless posted...

Holy shit lol, what the fuck is wrong with this guy. Right?

...and yet, you disprove nothing...thanks for playing troll.

keyblader1985 posted...

The dude says this entire board is Antifa. Just tag him move on.

Considering the last few "Rittenhouse" threads grew to epic proportions to the point the crooked mods deleted them, I'd say a fair amount of posters on this board drank the ANITFA Kool-Aid....

...it's not a far reach to assume they would be defending their own personal brand of pedophilia, or at least shifting the taboo to political figures they don't like, is part of their agenda.

---

Joker_X_II posted...

I agree, and my point is that it should come naturally, not being coerced by older adults with their own agendas and desires. "Get' em when they're young!", as the pedo-motto goes....

No you don't. There is no such thing as coercing a sexuality.
---