Dump Shithole

[Mojo]

I don't know, to be honest. I just want those kids off the streets.

[Danzig in the Dark]

I don't know, to be honest. I just want those kids off the streets.

They are taking them off the streets.
The Sacramento Bee article I posted a link for but you didn't take time to read:

A misleading column about a new state law by an Orange County lawmaker has sparked inaccurate online reports taking off on Facebook.

Assemblyman Travis Allen, R-Huntington Beach, wrote a piece for the Washington Examiner under the headline “California Democrats legalize child prostitution,” which has been cut and pasted by a variety of partisan websites as the basis for their false claims.


Allen begins his submission by stating that “Beginning on Jan. 1, prostitution by minors will be legal in California. Yes, you read that right.”

One website, Mad Patriots, linked to Allen’s column with its own post: “Sick, Perverted Liberal California Just Legalized CHILD PROSTITUION.” Among the untruths, the website restates: “Immunity from arrest means law enforcement can’t interfere with minors engaging in prostitution – which translates into bigger and better cash flow for the pimps.”

Allen is referring to Senate Bill 1322, by state Sen. Holly Mitchell, D-Los Angeles, which decriminalizes prostitution for minors by barring officers from arresting people under 18 for soliciting sex or loitering with intent to commit prostitution.

It generated significant legislative debate over whether the new approach is sound public policy, but it is false to say the law “legalizes” child prostitution in California.

Those soliciting the sex and those arranging the clients can still be charged with crimes. People caught having sexual conduct with minors can be charged with penalties ranging from misdemeanors to felonies carrying life terms, depending on the ages of those involved and the individual circumstances of the offenses.

It’s also wildly misleading to equate decriminalizing minors with law enforcement not being allowed to interfere with minors engaging in commercial sex acts. Under the law, officers who encounter minors doing so must report the circumstances to the county child welfare agency as abuse or neglect.

Commercially sexually exploited children, based on the bill’s analysis, may be taken into temporary custody “if the minor has an immediate need for medical care, or … is in immediate danger of physical or sexual abuse, or the physical environment” or the child’s unattended status “poses an immediate threat to the child’s health or safety.”

Under statutory rape laws, minors are not legally permitted to consent to sex – for money or not – and Mitchell’s law does not change that. Mitchell and supporters argue that sex workers should be viewed as victims rather than criminals. Her bill was supported by the Alameda County district attorney, American Civil Liberties Union of California, California Attorneys for Criminal Justice and the National Association of Social Workers.

In opposing the bill, the California District Attorneys Association acknowledged that “minors engaged in prostitution are often the victims of human trafficking.” But the group said the solution in the bill could “undermine law enforcement’s ability to address those exploiting such minors.”

Allen makes other misleading statements.

He includes a quote from Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley stating that decriminalizing child prostitution “opens up the door for traffickers to use these kids to commit crimes and exploit them even worse.” O’Malley initially opposed the bill, but ultimately signed on as one of its highest-profile supporters.

Allen and some websites also state the bill was approved by California Democrats who control the state with a two-thirds “supermajority.” Although the state’s dominant party did win supermajority status in the Nov. 8 election, Democrats did not have two-thirds control when the bill was passed. Moreover, a handful of Republicans voted for the bill.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-gov ... rylink=cpy

[Mojo]

Sacramento Bee

I read the Politifact article, actually.
It does make sense not to charge the kids. I'd actually never thought about that, before. Why punish the victim? I hope some good comes out of it. I can't imagine what those kids go through.

[Luminiferous]

California funds first inmate sex-reassignment surgery on killer serving life sentence

Cantstopthemenstruation is seeking conjugal visits...

[radiobed]

I think I also heard about California passing a bill that supposedly makes it harder to prosecute child prostitution. What's that one about, exactly? Sounds seriously fucked up to me.

It's illegal to arrest underage prostitutes caught being under aged prostitutes. I can see where they're coming from, but it's not the right way to go about it.

What is the right way? The old way, AKA putting those little whores in jail, isn't fixing things.

Are you a staff writer for the Huffington Post?!? Do you eat up any shit your "progressive" party feeds you.

Now for the record, I don't necessarily agree with the overreaction on the right saying California is promoting child prostitution, but I'm certainly skeptical of this law.

1. The NBC article you posted was concerned about having adequate resources to support these kids now. That's code for these kids will be back on the streets walking within days.

2. It seems unclear to me what a cop does when he spots a child soliciting sex that does not need "medical attention" and does not appear to be in "immediate danger".

3. And then just consider the troubled teen that is now less deterred from starting down this path.

I'll give the creators of this bill the benefit of the doubt that they had good intentions, but I'm guessing some more thought and planning ultimately will be required.

[Danzig in the Dark]

It's illegal to arrest underage prostitutes caught being under aged prostitutes. I can see where they're coming from, but it's not the right way to go about it.

What is the right way? The old way, AKA putting those little whores in jail, isn't fixing things.

Are you a staff writer for the Huffington Post?!? Do you eat up any shit your "progressive" party feeds you.

Now for the record, I don't necessarily agree with the overreaction on the right saying California is promoting child prostitution, but I'm certainly skeptical of this law.

1. The NBC article you posted was concerned about having adequate resources to support these kids now. That's code for these kids will be back on the streets walking within days.

Jail isn't free, either, radiosped. California spends $570 a day, or $208,000 a year to lock them up.(Pg.12) That's a lot of resources. They could send them to USC for $70,000 a year or $75,00 a year for Harvard, to put it in perspective.
http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads/ju ... nal_v2.pdf

2. It seems unclear to me what a cop does when he spots a child soliciting sex that does not need "medical attention" and does not appear to be in "immediate danger".

As victims of sex crimes, technically they're all in danger. You don't have a lot of confidence in the police unless they're killing blacks, do you?

3. And then just consider the troubled teen that is now less deterred from starting down this path.

Jail has been less than effective in preventing them from peddling their asses so far, otherwise this wouldn't be an issue. There are not throngs of children held back from living the dream of sucking some wrinkly old man's dick for $20 solely by threat of incarceration.

I'll give the creators of this bill the benefit of the doubt that they had good intentions, but I'm guessing some more thought and planning ultimately will be required.

'Lock them up and throw away the key' is an abysmal failure. No amount of thought or planning will fix that.

[Luminiferous]

President Flipflop has... (SHOCKER!) flip flopped again. What an idiot.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/751 ... ce-priebus

Trump now 'ACCEPTS' findings into Russian hacking, says top member of new President's team

DONALD Trump has accepted Russia targeted the US election with a series of cyberattacks, according to his incoming chief of staff.

Cracks me up that all the Drumpftards and millennials have no problem with a foreign country's hacking into American political activities as long as it may have supported their candidate and their president elect claiming that "only stupid people would think it's a bad thing to be friends with said country.."

Khoroshaya rabota amerikanskikh tovarishchey!!

[Machado]

President Flipflop has... (SHOCKER!) flip flopped again. What an idiot.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/751 ... ce-priebus

Trump now 'ACCEPTS' findings into Russian hacking, says top member of new President's team

DONALD Trump has accepted Russia targeted the US election with a series of cyberattacks, according to his incoming chief of staff.

Cracks me up that all the Drumpftards and millennials have no problem with a foreign country's hacking into American political activities as long as it may have supported their candidate and their president elect claiming that "only stupid people would think it's a bad thing to be friends with said country.."

Khoroshaya rabota amerikanskikh tovarishchey!!

that is the hypocrisy of America!
very sad to see.

[Rev. Johnny Tyler]

Trump really believes he can spend billions on a wall, then just send Mexico a bill, or maybe force its hand? Mexico doesn't seem to be quaking in its boots or breaking a sweat here.

First of all, that's somewhat different from what he said during his campaign. There was no mention of America being reimbursed for spending its own funds on this, so he's already changing the narrative. But more importantly, if I were a Trump supporter, I'd be concerned about this because the money will have already been spent. I'm far from convinced of his ability to bend Mexico to his will.

Really? On the campaign trail Trump didn't mention that mexico would reimburse us?
Hmmm... You must be one of those uneducated lefty sheep who will believe whatever their shepherds tell them rather than do your own DD.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/trump-well-b ... mburse-us/

[Rev. Johnny Tyler]

President Flipflop has... (SHOCKER!) flip flopped again. What an idiot.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/751 ... ce-priebus

Trump now 'ACCEPTS' findings into Russian hacking, says top member of new President's team

DONALD Trump has accepted Russia targeted the US election with a series of cyberattacks, according to his incoming chief of staff.

Cracks me up that all the Drumpftards and millennials have no problem with a foreign country's hacking into American political activities as long as it may have supported their candidate and their president elect claiming that "only stupid people would think it's a bad thing to be friends with said country.."

Khoroshaya rabota amerikanskikh tovarishchey!!

The Russians hacked NOTHING! They did not hack voting machines. They did not provide Wikileaks with anything. Key findings on the actual report actually state clearly, "Vote tallies were not affected by Russian interference."
Russians had ZERO effect on the election and Trump has NOT stated that he "accepts findings into Russian hacking."

[vlad]

Speaking of the "Wall", the former President, Vincente Fox tweeted (the new diplomacy?) back that he wanted Trump to be clear that Mexico wouldn't pay for "that fucken wall". He actually said "That fucken wall"....

The day before that Toyota tweeted back a response (I can't believe I'm saying this...the way they felt they could really get Trump's attention was through Twitter) to Trump's "tough talk" on Toyota.

[exitflagger]

President Flipflop has... (SHOCKER!) flip flopped again. What an idiot.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/751 ... ce-priebus

Trump now 'ACCEPTS' findings into Russian hacking, says top member of new President's team

DONALD Trump has accepted Russia targeted the US election with a series of cyberattacks, according to his incoming chief of staff.

Cracks me up that all the Drumpftards and millennials have no problem with a foreign country's hacking into American political activities as long as it may have supported their candidate and their president elect claiming that "only stupid people would think it's a bad thing to be friends with said country.."

Khoroshaya rabota amerikanskikh tovarishchey!!

The Russians hacked NOTHING! They did not hack voting machines. They did not provide Wikileaks with anything. Key findings on the actual report actually state clearly, "Vote tallies were not affected by Russian interference."
Russians had ZERO effect on the election and Trump has NOT stated that he "accepts findings into Russian hacking."

[radiobed]

What is the right way? The old way, AKA putting those little whores in jail, isn't fixing things.

Are you a staff writer for the Huffington Post?!? Do you eat up any shit your "progressive" party feeds you.

Now for the record, I don't necessarily agree with the overreaction on the right saying California is promoting child prostitution, but I'm certainly skeptical of this law.

1. The NBC article you posted was concerned about having adequate resources to support these kids now. That's code for these kids will be back on the streets walking within days.

Jail isn't free, either, radiosped. California spends $570 a day, or $208,000 a year to lock them up.(Pg.12) That's a lot of resources. They could send them to USC for $70,000 a year or $75,00 a year for Harvard, to put it in perspective.
http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads/ju ... nal_v2.pdf

2. It seems unclear to me what a cop does when he spots a child soliciting sex that does not need "medical attention" and does not appear to be in "immediate danger".

As victims of sex crimes, technically they're all in danger. You don't have a lot of confidence in the police unless they're killing blacks, do you?

3. And then just consider the troubled teen that is now less deterred from starting down this path.

Jail has been less than effective in preventing them from peddling their asses so far, otherwise this wouldn't be an issue. There are not throngs of children held back from living the dream of sucking some wrinkly old man's dick for $20 solely by threat of incarceration.

I'll give the creators of this bill the benefit of the doubt that they had good intentions, but I'm guessing some more thought and planning ultimately will be required.

'Lock them up and throw away the key' is an abysmal failure. No amount of thought or planning will fix that.

Ahhhhh, you don't write for Huffington post yet!! Still sending them your blogs though??

Stay persistent, you are just the type of political hack that ultimately they're looking for!

[Luminiferous]

President Flipflop has... (SHOCKER!) flip flopped again. What an idiot.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/751 ... ce-priebus

Trump now 'ACCEPTS' findings into Russian hacking, says top member of new President's team

DONALD Trump has accepted Russia targeted the US election with a series of cyberattacks, according to his incoming chief of staff.

Cracks me up that all the Drumpftards and millennials have no problem with a foreign country's hacking into American political activities as long as it may have supported their candidate and their president elect claiming that "only stupid people would think it's a bad thing to be friends with said country.."

Khoroshaya rabota amerikanskikh tovarishchey!!

The Russians hacked NOTHING! They did not hack voting machines. They did not provide Wikileaks with anything. Key findings on the actual report actually state clearly, "Vote tallies were not affected by Russian interference."
Russians had ZERO effect on the election and Trump has NOT stated that he "accepts findings into Russian hacking."

You may want to contact Mr Priebus and tell him to shut the fuck up then...

Priebus claims Trump accepts Russia's role in hack

Incoming White House chief of staff Reince Priebus said Sunday that President-elect Donald Trump accepts that Russia played a role in hacking the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta.

Trump "is not denying that entities in Russia were behind this particular hacking campaign," Priebus said on "Fox News Sunday."

Trump has only indirectly acknowledged the intelligence community's conclusion that Russia interfered in the election and has consistently downplayed its significance — and the president-elect has a history of later contradicting what his surrogates tell the media.

The U.S. intelligence community has definitively pointed the finger at Russia for hacking and releasing the emails of both the Democratic National Committee and Podesta, and said the interference was intended to help Trump, who has pledged to have a friendlier relationship with the Russian state. Trump spent weeks questioning the publicly disclosed findings of the intelligence service before a briefing on Friday.

After the briefing, Trump stated, “While Russia, China, other countries, outside groups and people are consistently trying to break through the cyber infrastructure of our governmental institutions, businesses and organizations including the Democrat National Committee, there was absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election including the fact that there was no tampering whatsoever with voting machines.”

In other words Mr Fedorable, the new administration along with his faithful followers have no problem with Russian interference in the US elections, no matter if voting machines weren't tampered with or not, but I'd bet a Sonor knockoff that the vaginas would be a flowin' if the Russian's had interfered for Clinton....

Since you're such a fervent admirer of Drumpf do you also think American POW's are losers for getting captured?

[exitflagger]

The entire internet is buzzing today with a legion of Trumptards attempting to judge Meryl Streep's acting abilities.



Butthurt idiots gonna butthurt idiot.

[Hollywood's Burning]

Are you a staff writer for the Huffington Post?!? Do you eat up any shit your "progressive" party feeds you.

Now for the record, I don't necessarily agree with the overreaction on the right saying California is promoting child prostitution, but I'm certainly skeptical of this law.

1. The NBC article you posted was concerned about having adequate resources to support these kids now. That's code for these kids will be back on the streets walking within days.

Jail isn't free, either, radiosped. California spends $570 a day, or $208,000 a year to lock them up.(Pg.12) That's a lot of resources. They could send them to USC for $70,000 a year or $75,00 a year for Harvard, to put it in perspective.
http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads/ju ... nal_v2.pdf

2. It seems unclear to me what a cop does when he spots a child soliciting sex that does not need "medical attention" and does not appear to be in "immediate danger".

As victims of sex crimes, technically they're all in danger. You don't have a lot of confidence in the police unless they're killing blacks, do you?

3. And then just consider the troubled teen that is now less deterred from starting down this path.

Jail has been less than effective in preventing them from peddling their asses so far, otherwise this wouldn't be an issue. There are not throngs of children held back from living the dream of sucking some wrinkly old man's dick for $20 solely by threat of incarceration.

I'll give the creators of this bill the benefit of the doubt that they had good intentions, but I'm guessing some more thought and planning ultimately will be required.

'Lock them up and throw away the key' is an abysmal failure. No amount of thought or planning will fix that.

Ahhhhh, you don't write for Huffington post yet!! Still sending them your blogs though??

Stay persistent, you are just the type of political hack that ultimately they're looking for!

How about responding instead of a weak-assed insult, radiobed? It makes you look like you don't have anything to say.

[TenBenny]

Trump really believes he can spend billions on a wall, then just send Mexico a bill, or maybe force its hand? Mexico doesn't seem to be quaking in its boots or breaking a sweat here.

First of all, that's somewhat different from what he said during his campaign. There was no mention of America being reimbursed for spending its own funds on this, so he's already changing the narrative. But more importantly, if I were a Trump supporter, I'd be concerned about this because the money will have already been spent. I'm far from convinced of his ability to bend Mexico to his will.

Really? On the campaign trail Trump didn't mention that mexico would reimburse us?
Hmmm... You must be one of those uneducated lefty sheep who will believe whatever their shepherds tell them rather than do your own DD.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/trump-well-b ... mburse-us/

Interesting. Okay, I guess he did say that. I stand corrected. Although most of the time, I didn't hear that part. Usually it was just, "We're building it. They'll pay for it." I would imagine he didn't want to have to mention the caveat about the US spending its money *first* if he could help it. That sort of thing raises other questions.

[radiobed]

How about responding instead of a weak-assed insult, radiobed? It makes you look like you don't have anything to say.

I think I made my points pretty clear. Going back and forth reiterating the same points multiple times won't change anything.

Danzig thinks everyone that potentially starts down the path of child prostitution does not consider the law at all. I disagree.

Danzig looks at outrageous prison costs and her first instinct is to release criminals. My first instinct is to wonder why those costs are so out of line (assuming her numbers are accurate). Waste, fraud, corruption, etc. would be my guess. Our laws should dictate who goes to jail, not our mismanaged, bloated, out of control government budgets.

And finally, Danzig deflects to talking about cops killing blacks in her other point. Do I need to respond to her other off topic misinformed opinion?!?

[Danzig in the Dark]

How about responding instead of a weak-assed insult, radiobed? It makes you look like you don't have anything to say.

I think I made my points pretty clear. Going back and forth reiterating the same points multiple times won't change anything.

You think?

Danzig thinks everyone that potentially starts down the path of child prostitution does not consider the law at all. I disagree.

They're children. That's why it is called child prostitution. We don't let them buy booze or guns,let them vote or sign contracts because we know they do not have a proper appreciation of consequences.

Danzig looks at outrageous prison costs and her first instinct is to release criminals.

They're sucking cock or taking it in the ass for money. They are hardly menaces to society.

My first instinct is to wonder why those costs are so out of line (assuming her numbers are accurate). Waste, fraud, corruption, etc. would be my guess.

For someone who values numbers, logic and statistics, you provide precious little of any of those. Your guess is irrelevant and worthless. Give me facts.

Our laws should dictate who goes to jail, not our mismanaged, bloated, out of control government budgets.

That is what this law is doing.

And finally, Danzig deflects to talking about cops killing blacks in her other point. Do I need to respond to her other off topic misinformed opinion?!?

Go whine some more about my nonexistent role in the Huffington media empire, you stupid little bitch. It really deflects from your inadequacy, radiosped.

[Hollywood's Burning]

How about responding instead of a weak-assed insult, radiobed? It makes you look like you don't have anything to say.

I think I made my points pretty clear. Going back and forth reiterating the same points multiple times won't change anything.

Danzig thinks everyone that potentially starts down the path of child prostitution does not consider the law at all. I disagree.

Danzig looks at outrageous prison costs and her first instinct is to release criminals. My first instinct is to wonder why those costs are so out of line (assuming her numbers are accurate). Waste, fraud, corruption, etc. would be my guess. Our laws should dictate who goes to jail, not our mismanaged, bloated, out of control government budgets.

And finally, Danzig deflects to talking about cops killing blacks in her other point. Do I need to respond to her other off topic misinformed opinion?!?

Danzig is right, IMHO. You resort to attempted, clumsy shout-downs to try to make your point. That's fine, but let's accept it for what it is.

[Danzig in the Dark]

Laughable dunce?

[TawnyVonJagger]

Now Jared Kushner is a senior advisor.

Yeah, no fucking nepotism here!

[Turner Coates]

Now Jared Kushner is a senior advisor.

Yeah, no fucking nepotism here!

Hail boss Jr.
Help lead the way to a brighter future.
You HAVE the power.

[TenBenny]

Well this is interesting...

https://gizmodo.com/trump-just-dismisse ... 1790908093

[Anne_Thrax]

Now Jared Kushner is a senior advisor.

Yeah, no fucking nepotism here!

I think his relatives are the only people that will work with him at this point lol

[Machado]

Sometime in 2015 Trump went out of his way to compliment Streep on her acting.

Now he calls her overrated.

I wonder how overrated the bankruptcies of Trump are in his mind

[exitflagger]

I wonder how overrated the bankruptcies of Trump are in his mind

Ladies and gentlemen, behold the seamless wordsmithery of Matardo...

[DEATH ROW JOE]

The two-page synopsis also included allegations that there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government, according to two national security officials.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/ ... index.html

[Chip Z'Hoy]

Trump likes pee-pee.

[TenBenny]

Trump likes pee-pee.

Heh. I wonder how these kink sessions will go over with the American public.