Scoot, before you launch into yet another clumsy attempt at distraction, let's get back to what we were actually discussing, whether Trump's links to Epstein are more sinister than the sanitised version you've been peddling, and whether his inclusion in the Epstein files warrants a proper investigation into child sexual abuse. The question was, if that turns out to be the case, would you still defend him?
To your credit, and I use that term loosely, you've stated that if there were proof Trump had sex with children, he'd deserve the death penalty. We'll revisit that statement shortly, because I suspect I already see the caveat you've been quietly laying the groundwork for. But first, let's address your follow-up claim that it's "disgusting" to even suggest such a thing about Trump.
My response was a list, a list of things Trump has publicly said and done that you've never once found disgusting, which highlights that your sudden moral outrage is entirely performative.
Because it is. Manufactured. Hollow. Fake.
Your reponse:
aquascoot wrote on Aug 3
rd, 2025 at 6:36pm:
So he wants to date a 10 yo when she hits 20.
Is that pedophillia Skippy.
Spare me the fake outrage.
I didn't say it was paedophilia, I said you didn't find that disgusting, and sure enough you're defending him sexualising a 10-year-old.
It's not something a normal person does. If you take Trump out of the equation and have some random man, leaning on the fence of a primary school, singling out 10-year-old girls and telling people he'll be dating them in 10 years, at the very least, police would investigate his identity, intent, and whether he has a criminal history or poses a risk.
At the LEAST.
But you don't find that disgusting, and in fact, you're defending it by claiming anyone objecting to a grown man sexualising a 10-year-old as virtue signalling:
Quote:Actually spare me the virtue signalling.
Most men find 20 yo women attractive.
If you have a fat unattractive intimate partner, don't take it out on Trump.
How does the attractive level of one's partner have anything to do with how objectionable, or in your case accepted, it is for another grown man to sexualise a 10-year-old?
I honestly can't believe you're trying to justify this because you've been caught out faking outrage over questioning your reaction to the possibility of there being evidence of Trump abusing children, while you not only stayed silent about him sexualising children in the past, but to now come out and defend that behaviour from him.
Quote:If like gweg and karnal you don't even HAVE an intimate partner
Don't tell us you know several men who have slept with Melania , sorry, "the whore" and her vagina smelt like a tuna that had been in the sun for a week.
I think we can all see who has a messed up way of dealing with women
Maybe the left could get the plank out of their own eye before noticing the splinter in Trump's.
Disgraceful hypocrisy
We're not talking about women though.
It was comments he'd made about a 10-year-old girl.
And this was in 1992, during the height of his friendship, private parties and Lolita Express flights with Epstein.
While the comments about Melania are disgraceful, it's the level of political discourse that your side set.
Harris and Hillary faced much worse, and you said nothing. Again, you expect the left to be better than you, then have a sook when they don't live up to a standard that you're not even attempting to reach.
But that's all a distraction anyway. You've just finished defending Trump's sexualisation of a 10-year-old girl, and others are the bad guys because they said something bad about Melania?
It's disgraceful, but sadly, nothing we wouldn't expect from you these days Scoot. The deeper the connection to Trump and the sexual abuse of children gets revealed, the more depravity we find you defending, like it's a totally normal thing to do...
If anyone were to say that about my daughter when she was 10, you'd need a body bag.
And you have daughters! I worry that you'd actually be ok with someone saying that about them since you're defending Trump doing it!
WTF!
Earlier, I mentioned a caveat I worry you're trying to carve out,
aquascoot wrote on Aug 3
rd, 2025 at 5:39pm:
If there was proof Trump had sex with children he deserves death.
We've touched on this before, when you said that a 16-year-old isn't a child,
aquascoot wrote on Jul 30
th, 2025 at 2:42pm:
Children?
Any evidence of children ?
Virginia g was 16 when working for Trump at mar el lago.
17 when on the island.
16 is the age of consent in the majority of American states.
At the moment, it seems like you don't even consider a 10-year-old to be a child, given you think it's ok for Trump to sexualise them, but you've made the claim that when a 16 or 17 year old was involved, there was no evidence of children.
So, are you going to try and use this as an out?
That, despite legally, under federal and state law, and in any context involving consent, exploitation, or protection, under 18 means you are a child, that you won't consider a 16-year-old to be a child if Trump is found to have sexually abused one or more children that age in the Epstein files?
Forum
Pages: 
