politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Yeah, that was definitely the Problem. Not the vaping, fondling, obnoxious behavior… Sure.
Don’t forget the tits out for Harambe too. She exposed herself in the presence of children—a tried and true Republican tradition at this point.
When did this happen?
The most I've heard is that her husband whipped it out in front of her and her friends, she fondled her new play-toy at a Beetlejuice musical, and apparently is OK with public lewdness so long as it's not with a Democrat. Not sure where this came from.
It happened. Her boyfriend was playing with her boobs, and she was giving him an over the pants rub in the theater. There are night vision shots of it that were published at the time. I'm not googling it for you, but try "Boebert Beetlejuice fondling" and that should find it.
Please point out where she whipped out her boobs.
Yes, we all know the incident happened. We don't need to make it any worse than it really is by claiming they did things they never actually did. They groped each other, yes, but at no point did she "whip them out" or actually expose herself or her date.
Oh, come on. That's a load of horseshit and you know it.
There's the image. There is zero chance in hell your "wife" saw nipple or anything else. You can barely even make out that his hand is on her boob. She absolutely did not expose herself.
And the fact that you used the terms "turned on the high beams for her" shows you don't have a clue what you're talking about. "High beams" doesn't mean her tits were out. It means her nipples would have been hard, and from that distance you wouldn't be able to tell unless she were standing on the chair topless. The fact that she was tucking in a boob means nothing; walk down the street and you'll see random women making random adjustments all the time. That, and we already know he groped her, so her having to adjust herself shouldn't be a surprise.
For the love of God, what she did was bad enough without having to completely make shit up to make it sound even worse.
I love how you put “wife” in quotes as if she’s my imaginary friend, lol.
I was trying to bring some humor to the situation with my word choice. It’s a ridiculous story of ridiculous behavior by a ridiculous person. Rather than say high beams, I probably should have said she’s a vapid, hypocritical, idiotic, white trash, no good, dumpster fire of a woman. You can see all that from the video a mile away.
Given the fact that you made up the fact that you can see her boobs in that video, she very well might be.
By exaggerating it to make it sound worse than it was by accusing her of doing more than she did?
Now this is correct. Heck, you don't even need video footage for proof of that.
He wasn't her husband when he sexually exposed himself to minors in a bowling alley. The fact he ended up marrying one of them doesn't make him any less a paedophile.