Have none of you given a single thought to the feelings of any sexual abuse victims who may happen to catch your shows? Do you think it is funny for them, at all?
You are so caught up by the blood lust of hunting down your quarry, Trump, that you are obsessed. You are intoxicated by the prospect of getting rid of him, and so convinced of your righteousness, that you have lost your sense of perspective.
Making jokes about Epstein and Trump makes you as despicable as them, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE MAKING MONEY OF IT.
And everyone else who claims to be a caring, sharing liberal and laughs at this "humor" is equally horrible.
And everyone in the whole media world who avidly publishes every little sordid detail, START THINKING ABOUT THE ETHICS OF WHAT YOU'RE DONG.
Wagging the finger about the Trump offspring making money of Trump, WHEN YOU'RE DOING THE SAME THING YOURSELF.
You too WONKETTE.
I am offering you a choice: the red pill or the blue pill.
Making jokes about Epstein and Trump does not even come close to making anyone else as despicable as them. And while I am not a sexual assault survivor, I think attacks on their predators are generally a positive thing for them. Your defense of those men is what is despicable.
I am in in no way defending the guilty. What I am pointing out is your attacks do nothing to help the actual victims.
It is illegal to make money off a crime. This creates an ethical problem for police, judges, lawyers and jail wardens. At some point, if they are genuinely decent people, they have to ask themselves: am I really helping bring the guilty to justice, or am I simply helping keep the system going, because it brings in income?
Journalists and people who write about crime have the most serious ethical problem. Since we all know that crime sells, they need to ask themselves, am I really helping by reporting this crime, or am I actually committing a crime and being unethical by profiting off someone's else predatory acts?
Since you admit you have never been a victim of abuse, you cannot feel what they feel when they see TV audiences laughing heartily When comedians "joke", not merely about how bad Trump and Epstein are, (absolutely they are bad people), But specifically, about how young the victims are, and make specific allusions to abusive acts. It is gross, it is crude, it is repulsive - and Jimmy Kimmel and many others in the media ARE MAKING MONEY OFF IT.
They should NOT keep that money for themselves: they need to donate it to the real victims of Trump and Epstein - the sex trafficking victims themselves.
I am NOT defending the criminals. I am pointing out it is also abhorrent when the media make money by concentrating on attacking Trump and Epstein while NOT HELPING THE VICTIMS THEMSELVES>
It is very easy to generate in oneself a sense of righteouness by denouncing crime, but if you don't help the victims you are not really a good person at all.
Any money the media makes by attacking Trump and Epstein should be given to the victims, period.
If you can't see how unethical and hypocritical it is for any person in any media form to keep that money for themselves - yes, you definitely need to think harder.
What are you personally doing to help victims of sex trafficking? I hope you are not just exclaiming how awful predators are, but, just maybe, you could give some of your own money to assist them with all the counselling and asisstance they need.
Cos I don't see any offer of financial help coming from Wonkette.
I would like to remind the editors again, that this is not a $10 billion dollar lawsuit. As can be confirmed on the last three pages of the original complaint (Doc 1, pp. 16, 18) in Trump v. Murdoch, there are two separate "not less than $10 billion dollars" demand paragraphs, making this a $20 billion dollar lawsuit. I believe (in the face of case law to the contrary) the sanctions should be proportional to the demand, so the exact degree of nonsense in this lawsuit is of interest to me.
Murdoch's expected Motion to Dismiss is due on Monday, September 22 and if granted will end any prospect of juicy discovery (c.f. Clinton video deposition) in this lawsuit (barring sanctions motion or sua sponte Order to Show Cause).
> What happens if all this (the Epstein birthday greeting attributed to Trump) is conclusively proven?
Then
1. Trump is conclusively proven as a liar, again, but this time on something he told MAGA was important,
2. his $20 billion lawsuit against Murdoch, 2 reporters, and the Wall Street is proven to be a frivolous waste of the courts and if he insists on pursuing it, he and his lawyer may face monetary sanctions,
3. the portion of MAGA which envisioned him as a force for good faces steepened cognitive dissonance further alienating them from the ranks of humanity embraced by our Founders, because there are few people who respond other than emotionally when you point out objectively that their baby is ugly,
4. some Republicans might finally break with Trump, further eroding his minority-based rule,
5. smarter billionaire/oligarchs/corporations engaged in regulatory capture might decide his value as a useful idiot is over, and
6. his own party/cabinet may retire him with a pre-decided impeachment and conviction/25th Amendment action.
To set this elaborate "hoax" up Democrats would have somehow needed to know that Trump was going to running for his second term as POTUS in 2024 back in 2003. If Democrats are such accurate prognosticators, or time travelers, why can't they win important elections?
It must have been the same time travelers that went back and planted that fake Obama birth announcement in the Hawaii newspaper so no one would find out that he was actually born in Kenya. It's amazing how these nutters believe this nonsense.
I had another crazy day so I have just arrived to say how disappointed I am by this drawing. When I first read about this I imagined a stylize torso with rather thick pen strokes, pretty curves for breasts and the signature giving real pubic hair vibe. I don't know why I thought Donnie would be capable of this, maybe because his building cartoons had a certain simplistic elegance.
Instead.. damn that drawing is ugly and weird. The text looks terrible in there, it doesn't fit the body at all. And the body is horrifying, why the neck with no head, the shoulders with no arms? That is not even necessary! Honestly, it makes sense, even thinking of the building drawings. He's a creepy little man and he can't draw for beans
My degree is in art not psychology so you can take this with a grain of salt - the places where arms should be are part of the solid line drawing, with no indication they had ever existed. This indicates the powerlessness of the figure. She has nothing with which to defend herself and never had. The head (if we are seeing the entire sketch here) once existed but has been cut off. The place where her genitalia would be has a signature, like a brand put on livestock.
An already defenseless girl had her ability to think and reason removed and her genitalia is owned.
Typical that trumpy's drawing does not show the woman's head or lower legs since those parts of a woman are useless for his purpose.
Trump drew a picture of a girl, not of a woman.
Please, let the court that got the WSJ lawsuit sanction Trump's attorneys for lying.
WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE STOP JIMMY KIMMEL?
And Stephen Colbert?
And Seth Meyer?
STOP IT. JUST STOP WITH THE EPSTEIN "JOKES".
Have none of you given a single thought to the feelings of any sexual abuse victims who may happen to catch your shows? Do you think it is funny for them, at all?
You are so caught up by the blood lust of hunting down your quarry, Trump, that you are obsessed. You are intoxicated by the prospect of getting rid of him, and so convinced of your righteousness, that you have lost your sense of perspective.
Making jokes about Epstein and Trump makes you as despicable as them, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE MAKING MONEY OF IT.
And everyone else who claims to be a caring, sharing liberal and laughs at this "humor" is equally horrible.
And everyone in the whole media world who avidly publishes every little sordid detail, START THINKING ABOUT THE ETHICS OF WHAT YOU'RE DONG.
Wagging the finger about the Trump offspring making money of Trump, WHEN YOU'RE DOING THE SAME THING YOURSELF.
You too WONKETTE.
I am offering you a choice: the red pill or the blue pill.
I believe the choice is that you are a pill.
Making jokes about Epstein and Trump does not even come close to making anyone else as despicable as them. And while I am not a sexual assault survivor, I think attacks on their predators are generally a positive thing for them. Your defense of those men is what is despicable.
I am in in no way defending the guilty. What I am pointing out is your attacks do nothing to help the actual victims.
It is illegal to make money off a crime. This creates an ethical problem for police, judges, lawyers and jail wardens. At some point, if they are genuinely decent people, they have to ask themselves: am I really helping bring the guilty to justice, or am I simply helping keep the system going, because it brings in income?
Journalists and people who write about crime have the most serious ethical problem. Since we all know that crime sells, they need to ask themselves, am I really helping by reporting this crime, or am I actually committing a crime and being unethical by profiting off someone's else predatory acts?
Since you admit you have never been a victim of abuse, you cannot feel what they feel when they see TV audiences laughing heartily When comedians "joke", not merely about how bad Trump and Epstein are, (absolutely they are bad people), But specifically, about how young the victims are, and make specific allusions to abusive acts. It is gross, it is crude, it is repulsive - and Jimmy Kimmel and many others in the media ARE MAKING MONEY OFF IT.
They should NOT keep that money for themselves: they need to donate it to the real victims of Trump and Epstein - the sex trafficking victims themselves.
I am NOT defending the criminals. I am pointing out it is also abhorrent when the media make money by concentrating on attacking Trump and Epstein while NOT HELPING THE VICTIMS THEMSELVES>
It is very easy to generate in oneself a sense of righteouness by denouncing crime, but if you don't help the victims you are not really a good person at all.
Any money the media makes by attacking Trump and Epstein should be given to the victims, period.
If you can't see how unethical and hypocritical it is for any person in any media form to keep that money for themselves - yes, you definitely need to think harder.
What are you personally doing to help victims of sex trafficking? I hope you are not just exclaiming how awful predators are, but, just maybe, you could give some of your own money to assist them with all the counselling and asisstance they need.
Cos I don't see any offer of financial help coming from Wonkette.
Or a whole lotta other shows, incl Jimmy Kimmel.
I would like to remind the editors again, that this is not a $10 billion dollar lawsuit. As can be confirmed on the last three pages of the original complaint (Doc 1, pp. 16, 18) in Trump v. Murdoch, there are two separate "not less than $10 billion dollars" demand paragraphs, making this a $20 billion dollar lawsuit. I believe (in the face of case law to the contrary) the sanctions should be proportional to the demand, so the exact degree of nonsense in this lawsuit is of interest to me.
Murdoch's expected Motion to Dismiss is due on Monday, September 22 and if granted will end any prospect of juicy discovery (c.f. Clinton video deposition) in this lawsuit (barring sanctions motion or sua sponte Order to Show Cause).
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70843413/trump-v-murdoch/
Serious question:
`
What happens if all this is conclusively proven?
Sadly, things like this cannot be conclusively proven to trumpsters because they live in a bubble that filters out facts they don't like.
> What happens if all this (the Epstein birthday greeting attributed to Trump) is conclusively proven?
Then
1. Trump is conclusively proven as a liar, again, but this time on something he told MAGA was important,
2. his $20 billion lawsuit against Murdoch, 2 reporters, and the Wall Street is proven to be a frivolous waste of the courts and if he insists on pursuing it, he and his lawyer may face monetary sanctions,
3. the portion of MAGA which envisioned him as a force for good faces steepened cognitive dissonance further alienating them from the ranks of humanity embraced by our Founders, because there are few people who respond other than emotionally when you point out objectively that their baby is ugly,
4. some Republicans might finally break with Trump, further eroding his minority-based rule,
5. smarter billionaire/oligarchs/corporations engaged in regulatory capture might decide his value as a useful idiot is over, and
6. his own party/cabinet may retire him with a pre-decided impeachment and conviction/25th Amendment action.
To set this elaborate "hoax" up Democrats would have somehow needed to know that Trump was going to running for his second term as POTUS in 2024 back in 2003. If Democrats are such accurate prognosticators, or time travelers, why can't they win important elections?
It must have been the same time travelers that went back and planted that fake Obama birth announcement in the Hawaii newspaper so no one would find out that he was actually born in Kenya. It's amazing how these nutters believe this nonsense.
"Because the drawing sucks?"
`
HEYYY... You know who ELSE was a failed artist?
Hitler, I assume.
His paintings were actually pretty good Back when I did my thesis on him I was truly surprised to find he had some talent.
We ARE both talking about John Wayne Gacy, right?
Thought we were talking about Adolf Hitler
Face painting doesn't count.
I had another crazy day so I have just arrived to say how disappointed I am by this drawing. When I first read about this I imagined a stylize torso with rather thick pen strokes, pretty curves for breasts and the signature giving real pubic hair vibe. I don't know why I thought Donnie would be capable of this, maybe because his building cartoons had a certain simplistic elegance.
Instead.. damn that drawing is ugly and weird. The text looks terrible in there, it doesn't fit the body at all. And the body is horrifying, why the neck with no head, the shoulders with no arms? That is not even necessary! Honestly, it makes sense, even thinking of the building drawings. He's a creepy little man and he can't draw for beans
I know what you mean. For some reason, I was picturing a Vargas nude. As if!
I mean, I've seen some bronzes of human figures that were just as stylized.
Alternately, it may have been meant to depict the arms were behind or in front of the body and not akimbo or at her sides.
No matter where the arms are it's a disturbing image. Ann Telnaes kind of sums up my feelings: https://anntelnaes.substack.com/p/another-trump-drawing?img=https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F64b55926-3934-4cee-bf2e-49bad7dc0ba2_2373x1689.jpeg&open=false
Ta, Gary. I am disgusted, but unsurprised. It's not a political party, it's a cult.
Donald Trump is a rapist and pedophile, and his name is all over the Epstein Files.
There. I said it.
You might also want to mention trumponomics any time bad economic news comes out. We need to hang that label around his neck like a dead albatross.
Keep saying it, over and over.
There's no punishment awful enough for men who sell women/girls.
Maybe there is, but can't say it out loud.
The Raveonettes have a song called "Boys Who Rape Should All Be Destroyed."
Corvids never forget.
I hope people who use "scare" quotes
My degree is in art not psychology so you can take this with a grain of salt - the places where arms should be are part of the solid line drawing, with no indication they had ever existed. This indicates the powerlessness of the figure. She has nothing with which to defend herself and never had. The head (if we are seeing the entire sketch here) once existed but has been cut off. The place where her genitalia would be has a signature, like a brand put on livestock.
An already defenseless girl had her ability to think and reason removed and her genitalia is owned.
I believe the Marquis de Sade also really enjoyed the idea of beheading women. He, like trumpy, was a sadist and entitled freak.
Not impossible that the figure's arms are being held behind her in a stress position, resulting in weird shapes for her shoulders?
After some thought, I realized that with no head she also has no mouth with which to complain.
Art is expression. The artist reveals much about himself to the person who can interpret his work
Trump is fundamentally opposed to actual work, so he probably had the card written and drawn for him to sign. It's immaterial.
"Immunity your honor. Presidential Immunity. That card was signed by... (crescendo!) The Autopen!!!"