T1B

As much as I'd love a smarmy, haughty Family Values dipshit to go down, sounds like he got revenged proned by a spurned lover. Not very smart of him to send crank shots to people, but she didn't have any right to pass those along to other parties. And I don't give a shit if he was married or had multiple girlfriends (amazing the bullshit women will come up with to excuse immoral and illegal behavior).

His threat to go to Capitol Police IMO was completely justified. Well, the moral of the story is---no crank shots---period.

Take note, AP.

Pics?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DPQyypiUMAAIsp7.jpg

If you're dumb enough to be sending crank shots over the interwebs, I would question whether you have the judgement required to serve in Congress. Of course, that's not a really high bar to clear.

Screw_Michigan wrote:

His threat to go to Capitol Police IMO was completely justified. Well, the moral of the story is---no crank shots---period.

Why would that be justified? You send somebody a pic over the internet, or through the mail, or whatever, don't you sort of lose the assumption of privacy? Sharing it is a pretty shitty thing to do but probably completely legal. I wonder what other kinds of threats he might have made, that could be illegal themselves.

Moral of the story, don't be a dumbass.

The snowflakes in TX outlawed revenge porn in 2015.
So him saying "if you break the law I'm going to the cops" is perfectly justified.

Got to Rack Screwy’s take.

He's a goddamn moron who shouldn't be anywhere near the House of Representatives.

She's a felon. She shouldn't be in Congress either.

Mikey wrote:Pics?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DPQyypiUMAAIsp7.jpg

If you're dumb enough to be sending crank shots over the interwebs, I would question whether you have the judgement required to serve in Congress. Of course, that's not a really high bar to clear.

Screw_Michigan wrote:

His threat to go to Capitol Police IMO was completely justified. Well, the moral of the story is---no crank shots---period.

Why would that be justified? You send somebody a pic over the internet, or through the mail, or whatever, don't you sort of lose the assumption of privacy? Sharing it is a pretty shitty thing to do but probably completely legal. I wonder what other kinds of threats he might have made, that could be illegal themselves.

Moral of the story, don't be a dumbass.

There has been a bipartisan effort for many decades to prove that there is no such thing as not having enough judgement to serve.

Screw_Michigan wrote:Take note, AP.

AP is the least likely poster here to send a crank shot. Not out of sound judgment or moral superiority, but merely a penchant for tucking.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Screw_Michigan wrote:Take note, AP.

AP is the least likely poster here to send a crank shot. Not out of sound judgment or moral superiority, but merely a penchant for tucking.

He's not an idiot. California's "3 Tuck" law and everything...

smackaholic wrote:

Mikey wrote:Pics?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DPQyypiUMAAIsp7.jpg

If you're dumb enough to be sending crank shots over the interwebs, I would question whether you have the judgement required to serve in Congress. Of course, that's not a really high bar to clear.

Screw_Michigan wrote:

His threat to go to Capitol Police IMO was completely justified. Well, the moral of the story is---no crank shots---period.

Why would that be justified? You send somebody a pic over the internet, or through the mail, or whatever, don't you sort of lose the assumption of privacy? Sharing it is a pretty shitty thing to do but probably completely legal. I wonder what other kinds of threats he might have made, that could be illegal themselves.

Moral of the story, don't be a dumbass.

There has been a bipartisan effort for many decades to prove that there is no such thing as not having enough judgement to serve.

RACK.

Once someone sends you a pic, would it not become the property of the receiver? Unless of course there was some sort of agreement that said pics would never be shared.

Why don't you look up a revenge porn law and let us know, bigfuckingmoron?

bigredretard wrote:Once someone sends you a pic, would it not become the property of the receiver? Unless of course there was some sort of agreement that said pics would never be shared.

If you could read penal codes you would know the answer.

Moving Sale wrote:

bigredretard wrote:Once someone sends you a pic, would it not become the property of the receiver? Unless of course there was some sort of agreement that said pics would never be shared.

If you could read penal codes you would know the answer.

He fully understands penile codes.