The rare case of a leopard eating its own face.
this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2026
810 points (99.6% liked)
politics
31271 readers
2175 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Hoisted by his own petard.
Only if he gets the death penalty.
I notice he still isn't a trans person or a drag queen.
Dude has an iron-clad defense, though. Said it's only abuse if the child is the same sex and he likes women/girls. I really wish I were making that up.
Edit: wow, I actually totally misunderstood his absurd defense. He actually said "sexual deviancy is directed towards one sex rather than two" and since he's attracted to women (when the victim here was a boy) he can't possibly be a sex offender. I think we've finally found something so far gone that even MAGAts can't support it.
Not that I don't believe you, but do you have a source for that? It's so outrageous I need to see it myself.
🤢 That is one of the most disgusting claims I've seen. I'm normally against the death penalty but scum like this makes me question my stance.
I mean, he himself called for people like him to face the death penalty. I am anti death penalty, but I am also in favor of medically assisted suicide for those who fully consent, so if he's opting-in I say let's do it.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Not only a pedophile but also a sexist. But somehow that makes it better in Republican eyes.
load more comments
(16 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
It’s what he would have wanted…
I’m against the death penalty except for people who advocate it’s use in punishing crimes they are guilty of.
He called for death penalty for sexual abuse of children under 12. Weird that he picked that age, specifically...
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
Someone once posted a heroic comment, they broke down all politicians by party who had been convicted of sex crimes with children .... it was pretty one sided
I saw the list on Reddit, pages. Endless pages.
It’s always the ones who you suspect.
Nope. I disagree.
Life in gen pop prison.
For however long gen pop decides "life" is. Could be days, could be a torturous number of years. Either way, it should be fucking awful.
So I'm not for killing every pedophile, but I think killing this one would be too funny. I'll never forgive us if we don't.
Killing them puts their victims in danger. If they know they are going to die for the crime, they'll kill the child to keep the secret.
Okay but see killing this one would be really funny, so I think we need to. Is the law named after him? I hope it's named after him.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
I am against the death penalty, but people like this make me want to make special exceptions. Like, only people who publicly call for death sentences for certain crimes, and then go on to commit those crimes. But if I went that far, then I might say that only people who support the death penalty shall be eligible for the death penalty. It's a slippery slope, really. So, I just have to go back to opposing the death penalty, generally.
Fuck that, if you call for death, you must be willing to die, no slippery slope.
load more comments
(1 replies)
A common misbelief about anarchism is that it opposes rules. It doesn't oppose rules though, but rulers. Those who wish to make rules for others.
If this were an anarchist world, which it should be, it would be perfectly fine to create rules for yourself and consensually with others.
Therefore, if he, and the others supporting the death penalty for this crime, choose to apply that standard to themselves then they should face the death penalty. That doesn't mean that punishment therefore applies to everybody else though.
Your logic is fine, no slippery slope.
On a less related note, here's my favourite video debunking the efficacy of the death penalty: https://youtu.be/_DrsVhzbLzU
Projection is assumed these days.
It's ALWAYS projection
I though child sex was one of the boxes you had to tick in order to be a up-and-coming Republican 😅 and with Epstein's timeshare shutdown, you have to go rogue to get your badge. .... not serious btw, I'm sure the higher ups already have created a new little tiny sex vacation spot somewhere.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Me thinks the righty doth protest too much.
Complicated method of suicide, but given the circumstances I will allow it.
Fork found in kitchen.
The 67-year-old married father of seven
Oh... he's just a family man, don't you all see? He's a married father of seven! Maybe he did horrible things to a child (or more than one) but which married father hasn't ever molested repeatedly a minor? Which married father hasn't ever kidnapped a kid? We're all here virtue signaling him when he's just the average (republican) married father... have a little shame you all!
load more comments
(2 replies)
Indulge him.
Give him what he wants!
Suicide the long game?
Sentencing should be easy, at least.
be a good one for that penalty
Uno card reverse
Always the ones you most expect.
I mean, yeah, firing squad seems appropriate.
I'd love to see data on all the child sex offenders who've been found guilty over the last 50 years and learn whether they're politically liberal or conservative and what types of jobs they've held. I have a hypothesis and I want to see if the data supports or refutes it.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Color me surprised /s
view more: next ›