Meme Thread for Both Posting and Discussing Memes

He literally admitted he was trafficking. He led them on to do sexual things in order to make money for him.
This is called pornography, not trafficking.
Trafficking is slavery. Not soliciting a willing adult woman to do porn. (which SHOULD be illegal. but not what they are going for)
"Your proposal is acceptable."

😉
I too am ok with this. but they better be explicit and apply it to ALL pornographers
 
main-qimg-6be718bd2d8e2f73c8f0f8039fbd2084
 
He is not on record for admitting any of this.
"If you want me to marry you, you have to do X" is not "intimidation".
Tate acted like a scumbag. But don't go making up shit
He is on record for admitting these things. I've provided a link where he admits stuff, not dealing with marriage at all. There are women that had to convince Tate they were in love with him so they could be 'allowed' outside and escape. That you defend him says a lot about what you believe.

According to legal analysis videos I have seen by real lawyers going over his current indictment.

He is currently being indicted over "tax evasion therefore trafficker" argument.
You are confusing "media accusations" with "trial accusations"
No. You are confusing his lies with reality. Here's a (translated, I believe) copy of the indictment:

Oh, look, it lists rape and human trafficking. Maybe that's why a quick google search of "Tate rape indictment" found me a million news articles from different sources saying so.

That would make every single person involved in porn that is not the pornstars themselves be involved in "trafficking".

Also, hooking is kinda legal in a few places.

And we have shit like that sugar baby website, too.
Yes, this is not the definition of trafficking. If he just did this, I wouldn't have cared. But when he admits that he prevents women from leaving his house, well, that's another story. When he beats them and rapes them, that's trafficking.
 
Honestly, given he's on trial in a different country, I have a hard time working up much will to care about the details.

What I have seen Tate say in unedited clips, proves he's a scumbag. Manipulator, exploiter, both of women and of other men.

Whether he did so in technically legal ways or not, matters a lot less to me, and since he's not on trial in my country under laws that I have even a vague chance of influencing, I just don't have the time or energy to get more invested.

In the end, he's a symptom of how sick western society is. He gained a lot of social power and influence by saying a handful of true things, basically 'men should be strong, and shouldn't let society treat them like shit,' that are so buried in post-modernist lies, that this gained him a following. He probably never would have gained a meaningful following if Jordan Peterson hadn't been deathly ill and completely off the radar for such a long time, as Peterson is a much more wholesome and honest figure who was speaking against the same lies Tate did.

And unlike Tate, Peterson didn't try to exploit people with the standing speaking some truths to power gained him.
 
Yes, this is not the definition of trafficking. If he just did this, I wouldn't have cared. But when he admits that he prevents women from leaving his house, well, that's another story. When he beats them and rapes them, that's trafficking.
I can't say I give much of a damn about Tate one way or another, if anything, I find it entertaining when he makes all the right people ree up a shitstorm, but aside for that, he is just another obnoxious, anabole stuffed Batka(dude bro/wiseguy combo)

However, I would:
a) Put a lot of his bragging under question.
b)Let the actual law decide what had happened.
c) Him using non-physical methods to keep them around, like playing stupid mind games with dumb hoes like most pimps do, is not that smithing I see as necessarily breaking the law.
Some of these dumb cunts that get into prostitution legit think their pimp loves them and they are kept in bondage because of stupid emotions.
 
I don't have a dog in the hunt here, about this person and what he has or hasn't done, but let's remember not to confuse Romanian law and legal definitions with American ones.

I'll take a guess he expected to get away with it, and is finding out he's in a "try that in a small country" scenario.
 
Eh, what matters to me more is if he's a bad person. There are 'scumbags' like the guy who recruits for a porn studio, then there are evil people like Epstein, who rape and force people into prostitution. Tate falls into the second category from what I've seen.

The issue I really have is with people who are all "The dems are pro sex trafficking" then immediately jump on Tate's dick. Just because someone evil hates X doesn't make X good. Even someone saying true things can also be an awful person.

Only reason I brought up the indictment is because it's one of many things he lies about.
 
Eh, what matters to me more is if he's a bad person. There are 'scumbags' like the guy who recruits for a porn studio, then there are evil people like Epstein, who rape and force people into prostitution. Tate falls into the second category from what I've seen.

The issue I really have is with people who are all "The dems are pro sex trafficking" then immediately jump on Tate's dick. Just because someone evil hates X doesn't make X good. Even someone saying true things can also be an awful person.

Only reason I brought up the indictment is because it's one of many things he lies about.
It is not about good and evil, it is about the levels of hatered you feel towards the enemy.
 
I'll remind you that only happened when they got caught by outsiders and congress made a law specifically preventing them from giving federal grant money to the NAMBLA.
Not true? Like at all? No, they were infiltrated by pedos (notably by David Thorstad), then NAMBLA began, then the lesbians led the charge to kick them out. They were founded in December 1978, and were nearly completely isolated by the mid 80s by constant pushback.

The LGBT groups were not getting federal funding then.


F2-XAbQWAAAS4r_
 
Not true? Like at all? No, they were infiltrated by pedos (notably by David Thorstad), then NAMBLA began, then the lesbians led the charge to kick them out. They were founded in December 1978, and were nearly completely isolated by the mid 80s by constant pushback.

The LGBT groups were not getting federal funding then.


F2-XAbQWAAAS4r_
That's an oldie but a goodie.

Other than it being the old FB layout, the easiest way to tell it's old? They're still using the "no one is trying to take your guns" lie. They've moved on to being open about wanting to take the guns.

Edit: that's actually twitter I think. I don't use social media enough to be sure lol
 
Last edited:
No. You are confusing his lies with reality. Here's a (translated, I believe) copy of the indictment:
I literally said I was going by real lawyers posting analysis, and not tate's accounts. like legal eagle and a few other youtube lawyers.
If someone got confused it is them, not me.
Oh, look, it lists rape and human trafficking. Maybe that's why a quick google search of "Tate rape indictment" found me a million news articles from different sources saying so.
Assuming this PDF is authentic, then it is either newer or older than my own news then.

It does mentions 2 counts of rape. Although now that we mention things, I recall in the BBC interview it came up that those charges were levied and then dropped.

Anyways, I See you completely ignored my analysis of the "proof video" you posted. And how said proof video undermines itself with shoddy editing.
You gonna reply to that or just ignore that bit?

===
Huh... so... I am looking at it.
In the month ....... 2021, the defendant Andrew Tate, recruited by deception the victim ... by falsely inducing her about the intention to establish a marriage/cohabitation relationship and the existence of false feelings
all my keks.
... are we going to start arresting gold digger women who lie about loving a man, and women who break off engagement?
what about women who have plastic surgery done?
 
Honestly, given he's on trial in a different country, I have a hard time working up much will to care about the details.

What I have seen Tate say in unedited clips, proves he's a scumbag. Manipulator, exploiter, both of women and of other men.

Whether he did so in technically legal ways or not, matters a lot less to me, and since he's not on trial in my country under laws that I have even a vague chance of influencing, I just don't have the time or energy to get more invested.

In the end, he's a symptom of how sick western society is. He gained a lot of social power and influence by saying a handful of true things, basically 'men should be strong, and shouldn't let society treat them like shit,' that are so buried in post-modernist lies, that this gained him a following. He probably never would have gained a meaningful following if Jordan Peterson hadn't been deathly ill and completely off the radar for such a long time, as Peterson is a much more wholesome and honest figure who was speaking against the same lies Tate did.

And unlike Tate, Peterson didn't try to exploit people with the standing speaking some truths to power gained him.
I wish I could give this more than one like
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top