Bigking321
Well-known member
"Your proposal is acceptable."That would make every single person involved in porn that is not the pornstars themselves be involved in "trafficking".
"Your proposal is acceptable."That would make every single person involved in porn that is not the pornstars themselves be involved in "trafficking".
This is called pornography, not trafficking.He literally admitted he was trafficking. He led them on to do sexual things in order to make money for him.
I too am ok with this. but they better be explicit and apply it to ALL pornographers"Your proposal is acceptable."
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.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
No. You are confusing his lies with reality. Here's a (translated, I believe) copy of the indictment: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"
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.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.
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)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.
It is not about good and evil, it is about the levels of hatered you feel towards the enemy.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.
Yup, and that's how you end up at 'are we the baddies?' It caused the LGBTQ+++ movement to go from kicking out NAMBLA to backing the pedos, it can kill any movement.It is not about good and evil, it is about the levels of hatered you feel towards the enemy.
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.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.
That's an oldie but a goodie.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.
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.No. You are confusing his lies with reality. Here's a (translated, I believe) copy of the indictment:
Assuming this PDF is authentic, then it is either newer or older than my own news then.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.
Huh... so... I am looking at it.Indictment EN.pdf
R O M A N I A PUBLIC MINISTRY PROSECUTORS OFFICE ATTACHED TO HIGH COURT OF CESSATION AND JUSTICE DIRECTORATE FOR INVESTIGATION OF ORGANBIZED CRIME AND TERRORISM CENTRAL STRUCTURE SECTION FOR COMBATTING ORGANIZED CRIME Str. Sfânta Vineri, nr. 33, Sector 3, București, contact@diicot.ro, cod...www.docdroid.net
all my keks.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
I wish I could give this more than one likeHonestly, 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.