Poll of the Day > Kellyanne Conway Just Shamelessly Posted Her Daughter's Nudes as Revenge

(+) Yeah! (+)

grimhilde00 posted...

Sorry I was quoting sunny but this topic is moving too fast so it wasn't right after my other post

Also reread it, looks like he was talking about Jen I think. Which is also fucked up and I still feel bad for his kids but it was not about this.

I knew who you were responding too, and I was just agreeing with you.

And I am hoping you might understand a little better now why I am the way with sunny.

---

TheOkHornedRat posted...

I knew who you were responding too, and I was just agreeing with you.

And I am hoping you might understand a little better now why I am the way with sunny.

I don't agree with shaming jobs, and I don't think it's healthy to obsessively make topics about someone. You can call people's horrendous behavior out when you see it without doing that.

But I get it more now. And from other topics.

---

grimhilde00 posted...

What the actual fuck holy shit. If feel so horrible for any children you may have.

And how would you correct your children? I was spanked a few times for doing something stupid. It wasn't abnormal back then. The result was I grew up without ever getting in serious trouble.

Meanwhile kids these days, well, look around you. It's awful to see what they've become.

adjl posted...

"What the daughter did is also illegal" pretty clearly qualifies as playing devil's advocate, especially phrased in such a neutral way that doesn't seem to condemn it.

it was a neutral phrase because i am neutral about it. what the daughter did WAS illegal. its an objective statement, and not one that i necessarily agree or disagree with on moral grounds. its not my place to say, because i am so far removed from a place where my opinion on the matter would be relevant.

Rev posted you 2 articles about a specific instance which was nice since i had no intention of looking into it. didnt figure those sorts of records would be released, but i stand corrected.

i cant believe i have to say this, but legally speaking, it is a bad decision to put yourself in legal jeopardy. that is relevant to the topic at hand, and it was something that people here were not likely to realize.

anything else you read into what i said is on you.

---

Snackers posted...

nope. not quoting that

it is fucking scary to see what sunny is like with no filter.

he is 1000x worse when he thinks nobody knows its him.

this man supposedly about to have a child, and he is currently promoting child porn as a viable punishment for behavior he doesnt like.
im gonna go ahead an recommend that the mods contact the authorities.

---

Snackers posted...

And how would you correct your children? I was spanked a few times for doing something stupid. It wasn't abnormal back then. The result was I grew up without ever getting in serious trouble.

Meanwhile kids these days, well, look around you. It's awful to see what they've become.

Well I'm sure most normal, decent human beings wouldn't send out their nudes as a punishment.

Snackers posted...

The result was I grew up without ever getting in serious trouble.

The result is that you adopted deranged world views and engage in hate fueled obsession with strangers on the internet.

---

I refuse to believe Snackers/Sunny (if it is Sunny) actually believes what they're posting. They must be trolling. It's too hard for me to believe that there are really garbage human beings like this out there.

TheOkHornedRat posted...

so, just saying, but its equally illegal for the daughter to have those photos.

Is it, though? Because I'm looking at the DC Criminal Code right now, and I can't find a statute that prohibits a minor from taking and storing topless photos of themselves.

Kellyanne posting a topless photo of her minor daughter on Twitter absolutely and without question violates 22-3053 of the DC Criminal Code (First-degree unlawful publication of Non-consensual pornography), which is a felony.

In fact, the very next Chapter of the DC Criminal Code (regarding Sexual Performance Using Minors) has definitions that do not strictly include being topless as a form of "Sexual Conduct" and, even if they did, specifically excludes the minors depicted in the "Sexual Performance" from liability for possessing or transmitting the "Sexual Performance" unless at least one of the minors depicted does not consent to its transmission.

Ergo, it would appear to be completely legal for Claudia Conway to possess a topless photo of herself, and not "equally illegal", as you stated.

---

its crazy that sunny thinks people dont realize its him and like everything else, he wont answer point blank questions about it lol

honestly what a dumbass

---

dainkinkaide posted...

Is it, though? Because I'm looking at the DC Criminal Code right now, and I can't find a statute that prohibits a minor from taking and storing topless photos of themselves.

Kellyanne posting a topless photo of her minor daughter on Twitter absolutely and without question violates 22-3053 of the DC Criminal Code (First-degree unlawful publication of Non-consensual pornography), which is a felony.

In fact, the very next Chapter of the DC Criminal Code (regarding Sexual Performance Using Minors) has definitions that do not strictly include being topless as a form of "Sexual Conduct" and, even if they did, specifically excludes the minors depicted in the "Sexual Performance" from liability for possessing or transmitting the "Sexual Performance" unless at least one of the minors depicted does not consent to its transmission.

Ergo, it would appear to be completely legal for Claudia Conway to possess a topless photo of herself, and not "equally illegal", as you stated.

couple of things:
i said possessing it was equally illegal, and you snipped off the part where i said her mom had the added caveat of distributing.

second, can you post a link to the criminal code you are referring to as well as indicating any relevant section numbers? i am genuinely curious to read it.

if what youre saying is right, (im assuming it is) then clearly DC's criminal code differs from elsewhere, considering (as someone else was kind enough to prove for me) at least one kid HAS been charged for having their own child porn in the US.

if thats the case i am happy to stand corrected.

---

snackers could easily prove he isnt sunny by answering "yes" or "no" to this simple question:

are you antivax?

a plain "yes" or "no" automatically means he is not sunny, as sunny would never give a straight answer to that question

---

"Yes but actually no."

---

Lol. What is that from?

so you want to be a pirate!

the quote was actually "good guess, but actually no", someone clipped it so it was "uess but actually no", sounded like "yes but actually no" and voila

meme

---

TheOkHornedRat posted...

it is fucking scary to see what sunny is like with no filter.

he is 1000x worse when he thinks nobody knows its him.

this man supposedly about to have a child, and he is currently promoting child porn as a viable punishment for behavior he doesnt like.
im gonna go ahead an recommend that the mods contact the authorities.

That was not a connection I made. It does prove that young people are too eager to jump to conclusions in the hopes of finding scapegoats for their problems.

Personally I don't care. I'm not involved with these people and their issues. Why anyone else would care, they must be bored. Commenting about it amounts to unnecessary publicity.

Never heard of it, but it has David Tenant so it must be cool.

Snackers posted...

Personally I don't care. I'm not involved with these people and their issues. Why anyone else would care

bruh

---

Snackers posted...

That was not a connection I made. It does prove that young people are too eager to jump to conclusions in the hopes of finding scapegoats for their problems.

Personally I don't care. I'm not involved with these people and their issues. Why anyone else would care, they must be bored. Commenting about it amounts to unnecessary publicity.

You advocated child porn as a form of punishment. There is no coming back from that. No takebacks, no "that's not what I meants". That shit is forever, and its fucking terrifying to hear from someone who is supposedly having a kid.

---

Mead posted...

The result is that you adopted deranged world views and engage in hate fueled obsession with strangers on the internet.

And you're how old? I grew up without social media. Kids that did, know nothing else besides blaming the world around them. I'm neither deranged nor hate fueled. I happen to know others with a long list of excuses. Sorry to hear you're part of that crowd.

TheOkHornedRat posted...

You advocated child porn as a form of punishment. There is no coming back from that. No takebacks, no "that's not what I meants". That shit is forever, and its fucking terrifying to hear from someone who is supposedly having a kid.

Good luck proving that. Intriguing to see someone who was on the defensive for their opinion start deflecting attention to another user.

hey sunny do you know what juvenoia is? because you have it.

---

Snackers posted...

Sorry to hear you're part of that crowd.

The crowd of people that you dont know any details about? Im ok being part of that

---

Snackers posted...

And how would you correct your children? I was spanked a few times for doing something stupid. It wasn't abnormal back then. The result was I grew up without ever getting in serious trouble.

Meanwhile kids these days, well, look around you. It's awful to see what they've become.

You mean how violent crime and divorce rates are at all time lows (since the spike for legal divorce) and decreasing? Yeah.. Kids these days..

---

You're a fucking trainwreck sunny

---

TheOkHornedRat posted...

devils advocate? where in the flying fuck did i ever advocate for kellyanne conway?

in a whole bunch of posts you made in this topic trying to victim blame her daughter.

---

Snackers posted...

Good luck proving that. Intriguing to see someone who was on the defensive for their opinion start deflecting attention to another user.

Yo, I said it was illegal for both of them to have those photos and you acted like what Kellyanne did was totally acceptable as a punishment. I dont need to prove shit. It's right there.

---

Joe_Biden posted...

in a whole bunch of posts you made in this topic trying to victim blame her daughter.

Yeah ok helly. I didnt do that, and I'm not gonna be responding to anymore of your dumb troll attempts so maybe move on, yeah?

---

you can say you didn't do it all you want but you very clearly did

idk what to tell you man

---

TheOkHornedRat posted...

second, can you post a link to the criminal code you are referring to as well as indicating any relevant section numbers? i am genuinely curious to read it.

Yeah, sure, no problem.
https://code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/code/titles/22/chapters/31/

And you can see how that differs from the definitions in the chapter on non-consensual pornography, here:
https://code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/code/titles/22/chapters/30A/

I would hazard a guess that the main reason that Chapter 31 does not include simple topless photos of children is because they don't want parents going to prison for taking pictures of their toddlers in diapers.

---

Joe_Biden posted...

you can say you didn't do it all you want but you very clearly did

idk what to tell you man

Yawn

---

Sunny can't be a real human lmao wtf

EvilMegas posted...

The nude photos were on the daughters phone, Kellyanne took her phone at one point, then they ended up on her (Kellyanne) Twitter. Sounds open and shut.

But is it confirmed this actually ended up on Twitter? So far as I can tell, we only have the claim that it happened from the daughter. I haven't seen Twitter confirming this to be the case and given the relationship Conway and the daughter have not to mention the girl being a child, I wouldn't put it outside the realm of possibility of being a lie.

I'm not saying this to put blame on the kid because 1. she's a child and 2. if true, shes a victim. But shouldn't we, ya know, wait for evidence before excoriating someone?

If it's true, then yeah lets throw the book at her. But near as I can tell all we have is a claim.

---

dainkinkaide posted...

Yeah, sure, no problem.
https://code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/code/titles/22/chapters/31/

And you can see how that differs from the definitions in the chapter on non-consensual pornography, here:
https://code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/code/titles/22/chapters/30A/

"Shall not apply to the minor or minors depicted in a still or motion picture who possess it or transmit it to another person unless at least one of the minors depicted in it does not consent to its possession or transmission; and"

yep, right there, you got me 100%.

like i said, i am happy to stand corrected. clearly DC's laws differ here

dainkinkaide posted...

I would hazard a guess that the main reason that Chapter 31 does not include simple topless photos of children is because they don't want parents going to prison for taking pictures of their toddlers in diapers.

interesting take. i seem to remember that being some sort of big issue with parents getting in trouble or almost getting in trouble for some clearly innocuous photos.

---

Smarkil posted...

But is it confirmed this actually ended up on Twitter? So far as I can tell, we only have the claim that it happened from the daughter. I haven't seen Twitter confirming this to be the case and given the relationship Conway and the daughter have not to mention the girl being a child, I wouldn't put it outside the realm of possibility of being a lie.

I'm not saying this to put blame on the kid because 1. she's a child and 2. if true, shes a victim. But shouldn't we, ya know, wait for evidence before excoriating someone?

If it's true, then yeah lets throw the book at her. But near as I can tell all we have is a claim.

i mean, fair enough, but given her history i sure as shit am not giving KC the benefit of the doubt

---

Smarkil posted...

But is it confirmed this actually ended up on Twitter? So far as I can tell, we only have the claim that it happened from the daughter.

As far as I can glean, Claudia never actually saw her mother post the picture on Twitter. However, a number of her followers did apparently see it happen and told her about it.

This means either:

1. Multiple witnesses saw Kellyanne Conway post a topless photo of her teenage daughter, or
2. Multiple people, who somehow knew a topless photo of Claudia Conway existed, conspired to create a fictional account of that topless photo being posted on Twitter by her mother.

---

dainkinkaide posted...

Multiple people, who somehow knew a topless photo of Claudia Conway existed, conspired to create a fictional account of that topless photo being posted on Twitter by her mother.

Clearly the likeliest of scenarios

---

Law enforcement is involved at this point so its best to let them handle it. Hopefully not too many people are dumb enough to actually look for the image.

---

Mead posted...

Law enforcement is involved at this point so its best to let them handle it. Hopefully not too many people are dumb enough to actually look for the image.

They already botched handling the clearly shown emotional and verbal abuse from videos by responding to further isolate the victim

---

grimhilde00 posted...

They already botched handling the clearly shown emotional and verbal abuse from videos by responding to further isolate the victim

The police aren't exactly well known for their nuanced and sensitive hand in emotional issues. This is very clearly a fuckup from the mom's side, so it should get handled.

Snackers is not sunwukung.

UnknownNobody posted...

Snackers is not sunwukung.

Youre a random alt, why should anyone believe you

---

UnknownNobody posted...

Snackers is not sunwukung.

You keep saying that and all you're really doing is making me assume you are also sunny

---

Mead posted...

Law enforcement is involved at this point so its best to let them handle it. Hopefully not too many people are dumb enough to actually look for the image.

law enforcement has been involved before, and all they did was tell the mom to turn off the internet and take her daughters phone and computer.

---

Joe_Biden posted...

law enforcement has been involved before, and all they did was tell the mom to turn off the internet and take her daughters phone and computer.

well the cop that said that should be kicked in the nuts

---

Surely now the police has to act considering she just posted nude pictures of a minor AKA child pornography.

---

I find it strange how everyone shits on Kellyanne Conway for posting the pics (deservedly so) but everyone's perfectly okay with a child having nude pics of themselves on their phone.

G-Ziss posted...

I find it strange how everyone shits on Kellyanne Conway for posting the pics (deservedly so) but everyone's perfectly okay with a child having nude pics of themselves on their phone.

People can do what they want with their own bodies. What the fuck is this?

---

I thought Kellyanne Conway sucked before this. She always just seems like a sour, fake turd of a person. This is really taking it to the next level though. There are so many things wrong with this situation. I hope someone just beats the shit out of her.