Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Liz Cheney “History is watching us.”


Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Don Quixote said:

On the topic of McCarthy, I saw this tweet from Jake Sherman: 

I am hearing that a Bakersfield teacher is planning to get in the 2022 race tomorrow against @GOPLeader.

This is a very hard district for Dems. Trump won it by 16 points, and McCarthy won by 25 in 2020.


Good luck, Tanner.

Tanner looks different than I expected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Kal El said:

I don’t hate Trump. I know he egged on the insurrectionists on the 6th after he proved himself to be the sorest loser I’ve seen outside of a Little League parents section, but I don’t hate him.

I do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Dinsy Ejotuz said:

Preach.  So dumb.

The fact that Liz Cheney is persona non-grata in the Republican caucus while no one's stepped up to say much of anything about Matt Gaetz is really something thouh.

Liz will be fine.  She can take care of herself.

Matt Gaetz - lets wait for actual evidence and conviction.

Although, I do like this new focus on morals from the left. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's officially NWO vs the Wolfpac.  Chaney is the face of the old-school, principal driven Republicans.  

Trump Republicans care about getting Trump and themselves elected.  Everything they're doing is with an eye towards keeping the Trump base happy.  Just go out and do your job and stop worrying about 2022.  If you do good for the people, you'll get rewarded.  If you're lying to try to get election points--a lot of people see that.  You're going to further distance the moderate Republicans.  

By cutting her down, she's become a martyr.  She was willing to take the hit for the sake of truth and keeping Trump out of the office.  She'll get a huge ground swell of support.  The party may not want to back her.  But she's going to be the face of reason and sanity and...hope for the future of the GOP.

  • Like 5
  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jm192 said:

The party may not want to back her.  But she's going to be the face of reason and sanity and...hope for the future of the GOP.

See Jeff Flake.  Same will happen to Chaney.  The only reason it doesn't happen to Romney is that the people of Utah have his back.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, jm192 said:

It's officially NWO vs the Wolfpac.  Chaney is the face of the old-school, principal driven Republicans.  

Trump Republicans care about getting Trump and themselves elected.  Everything they're doing is with an eye towards keeping the Trump base happy.  Just go out and do your job and stop worrying about 2022.  If you do good for the people, you'll get rewarded.  If you're lying to try to get election points--a lot of people see that.  You're going to further distance the moderate Republicans.  

By cutting her down, she's become a martyr.  She was willing to take the hit for the sake of truth and keeping Trump out of the office.  She'll get a huge ground swell of support.  The party may not want to back her.  But she's going to be the face of reason and sanity and...hope for the future of the GOP.

Whether intentional or not, the comparison between our politics and fake wrestling is quite poetic.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One guy who is gonna challenge Cheney for her seat has taken an interesting road to get out ahead of a story. The Romeo and Juliet defense.

U.S. House candidate Anthony Bouchard had a relationship with and impregnated a 14-year-old girl when he was 18

"So, bottom line, it's a story when I was young, two teenagers, girl gets pregnant," he said in the Facebook Live video. "You've heard those stories before. She was a little younger than me, so it's like the Romeo and Juliet story."

Bouchard told the Star-Tribune he married the girl when she was 15 and he was 19. At the time, they were both living in Florida. 

LINK

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, the moops said:

One guy who is gonna challenge Cheney for her seat has taken an interesting road to get out ahead of a story. The Romeo and Juliet defense.

U.S. House candidate Anthony Bouchard had a relationship with and impregnated a 14-year-old girl when he was 18

"So, bottom line, it's a story when I was young, two teenagers, girl gets pregnant," he said in the Facebook Live video. "You've heard those stories before. She was a little younger than me, so it's like the Romeo and Juliet story."

Bouchard told the Star-Tribune he married the girl when she was 15 and he was 19. At the time, they were both living in Florida. 

LINK

Uh, age of consent is 18 in Florida.  That's not Romeo and Juliet, that's statutory rape.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Amused to Death said:

Its OK, he married her. Like a good Christian. So all is forgiven.

Is that how it works?  I'm asking because I don't know.....if you knock up a 14 year old girl and then marry her is it no longer statutory rape?  

Ugh, read further - she committed suicide by 20.  :( 

  • Sad 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, General Malaise said:

Is that how it works?  I'm asking because I don't know.....if you knock up a 14 year old girl and then marry her is it no longer statutory rape?  

Ugh, read further - she committed suicide by 20.  :( 

JFC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sea Duck said:

"girl gets pregnant" is a weird way of saying "adult male committed statutory rape and impregnated underage teen girl".

And the fact that he's cloaking this as a Romeo and Juliet love story is just all kinds of icky.  This wasn't 1689 or even the 1800s where times were way different....this was the 80s.  I'm pretty sure we had statutory rape laws in the 1980s.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, General Malaise said:

And the fact that he's cloaking this as a Romeo and Juliet love story is just all kinds of icky.  This wasn't 1689 or even the 1800s where times were way different....this was the 80s.  I'm pretty sure we had statutory rape laws in the 1980s.

esp given what happened with the girl. sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God, it gets worse:
 

Quote

 

The senator has put out a video admitting to it after DailyMail.com asked for his comment, blaming the media for the revelations. The child they had, Tony Bouchard, 36, is currently awaiting trial in California on five sex-related felony charges involving a 51-year-old woman. Bouchard has filed his candidacy to replace controversial U.S. Congresswoman Liz Cheney and has already raised $400,000.

According to his arrest documents, Tony was arrested by police shortly before Christmas 2018 and has been held on a high bond since. He is accused in the violent rape of a 51-year-old woman on Dec. 7, 2018 in Porterville, Calif. 

His original bail was $2.5 million, according to records, but it's been reduced to $500,000 since. The Tulare County Sheriff's website shows Bouchard is still incarcerated while awaiting trial.

He faces charges of sodomy by use of force, oral copulation by force, sexual penetration with force, assault and false imprisonment.

 

 Thanks, Posty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Sea Duck said:

All this info was available to the public. Why didn't the Republican party distance themselves from a child rapist years ago?

Or go a step further, why do many of them still support an organization (Catholic Church) that protects and actively covers up the crimes of pedophiles? 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Amused to Death said:

Or go a step further, why do many of them still support an organization (Catholic Church) that protects and actively covers up the crimes of pedophiles? 

That’s not a Republican thing. Plenty of Democrats support that same organization. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'm not one to defend Republicans these days, but an eighteen year old and a fourteen year old would be one of the harshest standards of statutory rape prosecution and shouldn't be done to anybody.

I had sex with a sixteen year-old as an eighteen year-old and was threatened with it by a cop in a small town because he was an #######.

This is hardly "rape" in any meaningful sense of the word other than a bunch of progressive do-gooder Christians from the early 20th Century looking to haphazardly reform men and women and make them temperate Christians. It's garbage. It's a garbage charge. I do not know this guy's story, but this particular thing, out of context, is stupid.

This had tragic consequences. This is his burden to bear, and society should not be interested in retribution for this.

Edited by rockaction
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, rockaction said:

I'm not one to defend Republicans these days, but an eighteen year old and a fourteen year old would be one of the harshest standards of statutory rape prosecution and shouldn't be done to anybody.

I had sex with a sixteen year-old as an eighteen year-old and was threatened with it by a cop in a small town because he was an #######.

This is hardly "rape" in any sense of the word other than a bunch of progressive do-gooder Christians from the early 20th Century looking to haphazardly reform men and women and make them temperate Christians. It's garbage.

I'll give you 18 and 16 100%

18 and 14 is a bridge too far for me.  14 is barely out of being a child

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sea Duck said:

All this info was available to the public. Why didn't the Republican party distance themselves from a child rapist years ago?

This is a comment that seriously needs introspection and deliberation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, rockaction said:

I'm not one to defend Republicans these days, but an eighteen year old and a fourteen year old would be one of the harshest standards of statutory rape prosecution and shouldn't be done to anybody.

I had sex with a sixteen year-old as an eighteen year-old and was threatened with it by a cop in a small town because he was an #######.

This is hardly "rape" in any meaningful sense of the word other than a bunch of progressive do-gooder Christians from the early 20th Century looking to haphazardly reform men and women and make them temperate Christians. It's garbage. It's a garbage charge. I do not know this guy's story, but this particular thing, out of context, is stupid.

This had tragic consequences. This is his burden to bear, and society should not be interested in retribution for this.

You generally have some well-thought out ideas - this is not one of them.

 

Nobody should be having sex with a 14 yo - I don't care how old/young you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, killface said:

I'll give you 18 and 16 100%

18 and 14 is a bridge too far for me.  14 is barely out of being a child

 

I hear you. I get it where this makes people a little unsteady. Puberty, for girls, is about ten-eleven these days, maybe twelve. That has to factor into it. It is a very short time from puberty to sexual intercourse, but that short time means a ton.

There was a recent case of a lesbian couple who were 18-14, freshman and senior, and everyone was up in arms because the small town they were in punitively charged the eighteen year-old at the behest of the fourteen year-old's parents with statutory rape or illegal touching or whatever it would be. Garnered national press because of the merits of the case. She was seventeen when the girl was fourteen when they started this.

What if they were closer to 17 and 15 than they were really at the end of 18 and 14? This is where law becomes a complete problem in its inflexibility when talking about statutory rape. I'm not a stat rape defender, either, but we have to have some sort of accommodation for real-life's messiness other than to have a messload of convicted rapists on our hands were we ever to even-handedly approach this issue and apply it stringently.

This issue is always fraught with moral and virtue signaling (not that you're doing that at all). But it becomes tough to have honest conversations about teenagers without really tripping over some stuff about our culture.

Edited by rockaction
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

You generally have some well-thought out ideas - this is not one of them.

 

Nobody should be having sex with a 14 yo - I don't care how old/young you are.

I don't think it's not well-thought out. They could have been senior-freshman. That would mean 10% of my school growing up should have had rape charges. I find that poorly thought-out and untenable.

Romeo and Juliet laws need to be in existence and expanded to cover year gaps rather than strict age cutoffs. A lot of states do this already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, rockaction said:

I hear you. I get it where this makes people a little unsteady. Puberty, for girls, is about ten-eleven these days, maybe twelve. That has to factor into it. It is a very short time from puberty to sexual intercourse, but that short time means a ton.

There was a recent case of a lesbian couple who were 18-14, freshman and senior, and everyone was up in arms because the small town they were in punitively charged the girl at the parental behest with statutory rape or illegal touching or whatever it would be. Garnered national press because of the merits of the case.

What if they were closer to 17 and 15 than they were really at the end of 18 and 14? This is where law becomes a complete problem in its inflexibility when talking about statutory rape. I'm not a stat rape defender, either, but we have to have some sort of accommodation for real-life's messiness other than to have a messload of convicted rapists on our hands were we ever to even-handedly approach this issue and apply it stringently.

This issue is always fraught with moral and virtue signaling (not that you're doing that at all). But it becomes tough to have honest conversations about teenagers without really tripping over some stuff about our culture.

I agree with you.  The law needs amending I think

But again 14 to 18 is a pretty huge difference.  Just out of childhood with entering adulthood

16 and 14....sure

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry. I see kids prosecuted for child pornography for sexting their boyfriends or whatever, and the standard of criminality for stuff like this is so punitive and mandatory it makes me side away from the strict interpretation and application of the law in instances like this. The age ranges from 18-14 are especially fraught with social and other pressures and problems that ruining people's lives for these sorts of things goes against not just nature and the natural course of things, but also our own social groupings and institutions. We put 18 and 14 year-olds together, compulsory, every day for about 300 days a year and don't expect this?

That's insanity.

These laws are designed for men over 18 and women under 14, really. 19-13 is a gasper of an age gap precisely because nature and our own social engineering goes against it. But our own engineering puts the age ranges in question in a hothouse, really, and this is the type of stuff that happens because of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this really isn't something I want to fall on a sword upon. I don't really have a ton of experience with this other than from where I grew up, which, come to think about it, was pretty ####ed up compared to the rest of suburbia. We were more, um, rural suburbia, I guess, and it showed.

I'm amenable to other arguments not in favor of this, but there's got to be some sort of middle ground between a lifelong burden of a rape charge and complete permissiveness. I guess this is where norms and customs used to hold.

I mean, when fourteen year-olds are deluged with overt sexual displays in their music and art, what are we really expecting them to do? WAP just won Grammys up the ying and the whole message and thrust was aimed at teenage girls by their sisters-at-large. Who else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, anyone is free to comment. I'd like to get it back to Cheney. I was coming in after reading Maurile's link in his post, which I thought was pretty accurate and something Democrats might want to think about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, killface said:

I'll give you 18 and 16 100%

18 and 14 is a bridge too far for me.  14 is barely out of being a child

 

My daughter is 13...damn right its a bridge too far.  Hell, if one of my son's friends (who are 16-17) tried to date my daughter it would be a hell no.  There is a chasm of difference between those guys and her and her friends right now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, rockaction said:

I guess this really isn't something I want to fall on a sword upon. I don't really have a ton of experience with this other than from where I grew up, which, come to think about it, was pretty ####ed up compared to the rest of suburbia. We were more, um, rural suburbia, I guess, and it showed.

I'm amenable to other arguments not in favor of this, but there's got to be some sort of middle ground between a lifelong burden of a rape charge and complete permissiveness. I guess this is where norms and customs used to hold.

I mean, when fourteen year-olds are deluged with overt sexual displays in their music and art, what are we really expecting them to do? WAP just won Grammys up the ying and the whole message and thrust was aimed at teenage girls by their sisters-at-large. Who else?

Look, I agree with the basic philosophy that "maturity" should not be defined solely by chronology, and that it's ridiculous that the government states with authority that all girls who are 18 are automatically more capable of informed consent than all girls who are 17.9999.

But.....the law's the law. What he did was a felony, even by Florida standards of 1983.

Also, what's with retroactively applying 2021 standards to 1983? Come on, you're better than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sea Duck said:

Also, what's with retroactively applying 2021 standards to 1983? Come on, you're better than that.

I forgot that the 1983 version of Cardi B, Madonna, was all that much more wholesome. The lyrics to "Physical Attraction," while focusing more on the nature of "chemical reactions" as opposed to the physical state of one's vagina, is certainly Exhibit A in my favor.

6 minutes ago, Sea Duck said:

But.....the law's the law. What he did was a felony, even by Florida standards of 1983.

I said it was a stupid law and a relic of the 20th Century Christian reform movement, not that the law wasn't the law. That's a normative complaint, not a positivist one. But even in a positivist realm, what he did was only a felony if charged, either then or now. (I assume the statutes of limitations do not apply to rape.) But to charge him now would be an act of hubris by the DA so great that, in my opinion, it would be a disqualifying act with respect to his competency were he to charge him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, rockaction said:

The lyrics to "Physical Attraction," while focusing more on the nature of "chemical reactions" as opposed to the physical state of one's vagina, is certainly Exhibit A in my favor.

:mellow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That kind of emoji belongs to people I generally don't comment with. That's other people's territory as far as I'm concerned, and I generally do not engage with that. Just so you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

My daughter is 13...damn right its a bridge too far.  Hell, if one of my son's friends (who are 16-17) tried to date my daughter it would be a hell no.  There is a chasm of difference between those guys and her and her friends right now.

Couldn't agree more.  It's a huge gap and i get why that is statutory rape

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I think @rockactionmakes some strong arguments about why 18-14 shouldn’t be criminally prosecuted.

But as a general rule I’m probably not going to look very favorably on an 18 year old that impregnates a 14 year old.  I probably would prefer not to have that person be my Congressman.

Thanks. I probably would also not want that person representing me, especially given the dodgy histories of the entire MAGA crowd. They're illiberal and scandal seems to follow them, whereupon they cry foul and blame everybody but themselves for their scandalous behavior.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Whoever reported that has said far worse, recently, I can all but guarantee. Come on, people!

 

ETA: I mean, I just read a post about how Liberals hate America because Trump got elected. From a poster that frequently says similar things. Can we all grow up a bit in our posting, and our report button mashing? 

Edited by Herb
  • Like 3
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, General Malaise said:

Uh, age of consent is 18 in Florida.  That's not Romeo and Juliet, that's statutory rape.....

Sure but is he willing to look the other way when tourists cross the ropes in the Capitol?  That’s what is important here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I think @rockactionmakes some strong arguments about why 18-14 shouldn’t be criminally prosecuted.

But as a general rule I’m probably not going to look very favorably on an 18 year old that impregnates a 14 year old.  I probably would prefer not to have that person be my Congressman.

I agree with all of this.  I have two teenage daughters and of course I would be pretty fired up if this scenario happened to one of them but I also try to stay rational and think to when I was a dumb and horny 18 year old boy.  I can’t sit here and say with 100% certainty that it couldn’t have happened to me.  It’s an important lesson that Dad’s need to teach their sons.

ETA - I do think there are some scenarios where prosecution could be warranted - just FTR.

Edited by AAABatteries
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/21/2021 at 3:42 PM, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I think @rockactionmakes some strong arguments about why 18-14 shouldn’t be criminally prosecuted.

But as a general rule I’m probably not going to look very favorably on an 18 year old that impregnates a 14 year old.  I probably would prefer not to have that person be my Congressman.

Yeah, that’s a senior in high school knocking up an eighth grader. Yuck. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bigbottom said:

Yeah, that’s a senior in high school knocking up an eighth grader. Yuck. 

In this particular case, it was more likely to be a college freshman impregnating a girl who had just started the 9th grade. Also yuck. And also a felony under Florida statutes of 1983.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...