- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: MO governor indicted for felony invasion of privacy
Posted on 2/22/18 at 5:10 pm to ShortyRob
Posted on 2/22/18 at 5:10 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
Okay. Tell me why this is supposed to bother me given that she clearly was there consensually?
well it changes things, but only if she's being 100% truthful
also, there is this
quote:
In the recorded phone conversation, the woman takes on some of the blame and says that Greitens apologized after the encounter-and told her he had deleted the picture.
She claims they had at least one more physical interaction later that day.
i'm curious why didn't didn't use the quotes there
there also may be some selective editing in the quotes used to make it look worse
Posted on 2/22/18 at 5:13 pm to SlowFlowPro
I'm gonna be honest I'm kind of amazed at how breezily and thoughtlessly both you and ShortyRob filled in the same false backstory, argued on it, and he (not you) immediately retreated to a much more generic and less justifiable "well, people who frick around should expect bad shite" without acknowledging the error
He's making me look like a model of skeptical thinking and as my sig indicates this is not always the case (pretty sure he was one of the folks dragging me)
He's making me look like a model of skeptical thinking and as my sig indicates this is not always the case (pretty sure he was one of the folks dragging me)
This post was edited on 2/22/18 at 5:17 pm
Posted on 2/22/18 at 5:16 pm to Iosh
i mean i still have my doubts, but the 2nd link is much worse
the problem is that it sounds like ole boy caught her red-handed and recorded the conversation, so i doubt she was being 100% truthful and making it sound as good as it can for her. now that doesn't mean she was lying about the picture, but it's possible
the problem is that it sounds like ole boy caught her red-handed and recorded the conversation, so i doubt she was being 100% truthful and making it sound as good as it can for her. now that doesn't mean she was lying about the picture, but it's possible
Posted on 2/22/18 at 5:18 pm to SlowFlowPro
Oh it's definitely possible, and I assume that question is going to be the central subject of the trial. If there was no other recording of the bondage sesh I don't know that it's possible to definitively prove one way or the other whether she consented to the photo
But as you know, indictments aren't trials
But as you know, indictments aren't trials
This post was edited on 2/22/18 at 5:19 pm
Posted on 2/22/18 at 5:19 pm to boosiebadazz
Between Snapchat, private FB groups, and my posts here I am definitely not running for office
Posted on 2/22/18 at 5:19 pm to Iosh
quote:
Oh it's definitely possible, and I assume that question is going to be the central subject of the trial. If there was no other recording of the bondage sesh I don't know that it's possible to definitively prove one way or the other whether she consented to the photo
doesn't sound like they can prove the photo even exists
Posted on 2/22/18 at 5:19 pm to Iosh
quote:
The consensual fricking, however kinky, is not the issue. The photograph and threat to release is.
Actually it would appear he didn't threaten to release it. He only said he would release it if she tried to expose him which she shouldn't be doing either so it's kind of a wash
quote:
when you failed to read the article.
I went by what you've told me so far in this thread and nothing you've told me in this thread to include in this post creates a problem for me
She knew who she was fricking. He took her picture. He said don't expose me and I won't expose you
Uncouth to be sure but so what
Posted on 2/22/18 at 5:19 pm to Iosh
quote:
But as you know, indictments aren't trials
do you know what happened to Rick Perry?
Posted on 2/22/18 at 5:21 pm to Iosh
quote:
gonna be honest I'm kind of amazed at how breezily and thoughtlessly both you and ShortyRob filled in the same false backstory, argued on it, and he (not you) immediately retreated to a much more generic and less justifiable "well, people who frick around should expect bad shite" without acknowledging the error
We went by what you said. And you haven't actually added anything that made it that much worse
Posted on 2/22/18 at 5:23 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
the problem is that it sounds like ole boy caught her red-handed and recorded the conversation, so i doubt she was being 100% truthful and making it sound as good as it can for her. now that doesn't mean she was lying about the picture, but it's possible
Hell how do we even know for sure that he threatened her with the photo?
Posted on 2/22/18 at 5:23 pm to NIH
quote:
The amount of good oppo research and blackmail material on my generation's politicians will be insane.
It'll become so pervasive that I think it'll actually lose its impact.
Posted on 2/22/18 at 5:24 pm to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
It'll become so pervasive that I think it'll actually lose its impact
I said this a while ago Beyond just politics. Very few people can pass the internet test and that's only going to get worse over time
So these internet lynch mobs are eventually going to Peter out because everybody's going to have the same skin in the game
Posted on 2/22/18 at 5:35 pm to ShortyRob
i feel bad for whomever had to budget going through all my TD posts when I run for political office. gonna need Koch Bros money to fund that
Posted on 2/22/18 at 5:36 pm to SlowFlowPro
If nobody has seen these photographs and still has possession of them, there's absolutely no case at all here and no way you could ever prove anything.
So I'm going to assume they actually have these photographs, otherwise it's just a charade.
So I'm going to assume they actually have these photographs, otherwise it's just a charade.
Posted on 2/22/18 at 6:03 pm to Iosh
Mizzery is such a shithole state
Posted on 2/22/18 at 6:06 pm to LSUTigersVCURams
quote:
Missouri: The Alabama of the Midwest.
You either have ghetto trash or meth everywhere in that shithole of a state and to top it off you have Mizzery football fans to deal with. Totally dimwitted people who know nothing.
Everywhere outside of KC and STL is like a giant meth lab blew up.
Mizzery
Posted on 2/22/18 at 7:07 pm to Iosh
I posted after he got elected he was dirty.
When one of my friends was in Afghanistan his Seal friends couldn’t believe that Greitens was elected. They said he was dirty and when your military family talk bad about one of their own you know something is wrong.
He is also cutting the state budget in most area’s and one he his has increased($1.7 million) is governor’s personal discretionary fund.
When one of my friends was in Afghanistan his Seal friends couldn’t believe that Greitens was elected. They said he was dirty and when your military family talk bad about one of their own you know something is wrong.
He is also cutting the state budget in most area’s and one he his has increased($1.7 million) is governor’s personal discretionary fund.
Posted on 2/22/18 at 10:07 pm to MizzouBS
The woman didn’t threaten to go public according to any account of this. She said he took the pics without her consent and said he’d use them if she ever did. I believe admitted to taking the picture, but said he deleted it. But, he apparently stored the pic she didn’t consent to on his computer - that, by statute, is a felony, even if he didn’t do anything else with it. It’s an invasion of privacy statute and a felony according to the law.
The governor’s problem is that he hasn’t no allies. He ran as an outsider, and took a lot of dark money donations. He’s also being investigated for the sources of those donations - corruption. He also made it really obvious that the Missouri governor’s mansion was a stepping stone for him. He had (past tense, I’d bet) presidential aspirations. But at this point, both sides want him gone.
The governor’s problem is that he hasn’t no allies. He ran as an outsider, and took a lot of dark money donations. He’s also being investigated for the sources of those donations - corruption. He also made it really obvious that the Missouri governor’s mansion was a stepping stone for him. He had (past tense, I’d bet) presidential aspirations. But at this point, both sides want him gone.
Popular
Back to top


1







