Welcome to Thunderdome

I'd say it was stupid to take pictures of things you don't want to be public, but that would be victim shaming or something.

GORDON wrote: I'd say it was stupid to take pictures of things you don't want to be public, but that would be victim shaming or something.

Correct.

I tell my kids all the time that if you agree to be filmed or photographed, it WILL make it's way into the hands of the general public. It's only a matter of time.

GORDON wrote: I'd say it was stupid to take pictures of things you don't want to be public, but that would be victim shaming or something.

It would be, and sending them out would be illegal in CA, and many other states.

At any rate, I still don't get it.

Very lofty ideals. She's still out of a job.

TheCatt wrote:

Leisher wrote: CNN making a martyr out of Katie Hill.

I still don't understand why she resigned, assuming she never had the law-breaking affair.

She did. That's why she's resigning. You can tell because the media is trying to make it into an issue of the photographs being leaked rather than the affair with the staffer. The press is misdirecting. The MSM is also attacking the Red State writer that broke the story. I remember the good old days when the press talked about being the defenders of freedom and democracies dying in darkness and all that other shit they only believe when it can be used as a club to beat Trump with.

The irony is that the whole "me too" thing rolled into politics to go after Trump with. This rule was created as a result of the Me Too movement. If I recall it was proposed by the Democrats and passed by a Republican majority. I don't think they suspected it would be used so efficiently against they themselves.

I remember when consenting adults could do what they wanted with each other, and we hadn't legislated victimhood.

Got to apologize to my kid again, today, for the world I'm handing him.

Vince wrote: She did. That's why she's resigning. You can tell because the media is trying to make it into an issue of the photographs being leaked rather than the affair with the staffer. The press is misdirecting. The MSM is also attacking the Red State writer that broke the story. I remember the good old days when the press talked about being the defenders of freedom and democracies dying in darkness and all that other shit they only believe when it can be used as a club to beat Trump with.

Yes, damn the press for attacking the people who may have broken an actual law, or at least been the assholes in this story.

TheCatt wrote: Yes, damn the press for attacking the people who may have broken an actual law.

If they were attacking Van Laar (and had evidence to back it up) for breaking the law, then I'd have no issue. They're attacking her for breaking a story while having right leanings.

Vince wrote:

TheCatt wrote: Yes, damn the press for attacking the people who may have broken an actual law.

If they were attacking Van Laar (and had evidence to back it up) for breaking the law, then I'd have no issue. They're attacking her for breaking a story while having right leanings.

Got it. Posting photos of naked women is OK for news, and the Fappening hackers were in the right. Glad to see how you still feel about women.

TheCatt wrote: Got it. Posting photos of naked women is OK for news, and the Fappening hackers were in the right. Glad to see how you still feel about women.

So you think the New York Times should have been prosecuted for publishing the Pentagon Papers. Gottcha.

Not sure how you conflate people that hacked the pictures with the ones reporting on the pictures, but you do you.

Vince wrote:

TheCatt wrote: Got it. Posting photos of naked women is OK for news, and the Fappening hackers were in the right. Glad to see how you still feel about women.

So you think the New York Times should have been prosecuted for publishing the Pentagon Papers. Gottcha.

Not sure how you conflate people that hacked the pictures with the ones reporting on the pictures, but you do you.

Weird, I didn't realize the Pentagon Papers had so many private moments in them. Things really were different in the 60s and 70s.

Did she consent to the photo being published? No. It's that simple, Vince, when you give a shit.

To make my position clear. If the person that leaked the photos broke the law in doing so (which seems to be likely), then I support charges being pressed against that person. If the Congresswoman had illicit affairs with underlings against house rules (which seems to be likely), I support her resignation. This isn't hard.

Jamie Lee Curtis and a Washington Post reporter defend ISIS' now dead leader against Trump's insults.

Yeah, it's Daily Wire so ignore the commentary around it, but they have Jamie's, now deleted, tweet on full display. I guess she was trying to make an anti-war statement?

The Post guy's comment just proves his bias. How the fuck do you call someone brave for killing children or committing suicide?

As I said, the press was trying to downplay his terroristiness to try to make Trump look less good.

Now the press is going after a cutsie photoshop image that Trump tweeted.
As embarrassed as I am to have Trump as President, I'm even more embarrassed that we have this caliber of journalism now.

Leisher wrote: Deadspin's parent company demands "sports only", and its workers revolt.

... and were fired. Which is good. Why the hell take a job at a sports website if you didn't want to write about sports?

It must be important for sports fans to know that trump sucks.

ESPN thought so, and then their ratings started declining so they stopped inserting politics into everything.

People want their escapes and don't need asshats from any political spectrum ruining it.

Vince wrote: As I said, the press was trying to downplay his terroristiness to try to make Trump look less good.

Now the press is going after a cutsie photoshop image that Trump tweeted.

...

As embarrassed as I am to have Trump as President, I'm even more embarrassed that we have this caliber of journalism now.

I mean, it is about time...