patrick.net

jazz_music says

baron fuckface das GropenFuhrer

Shouldn't it be von gropenfuhrer?

Regardless,Trump has committed no impeachable high crime or misdemeanor.

Funny.. This coming out shortly after it was discovered Hunter was making $50k a month off of the Ukrainian company... lol

She saw a good payday - hope she gets it. LOL

4 more year. I'd pay good money to watch you after the final polls come in!

That would be too much of a TDS sticker.

Debt is Slavery is a much better sticker.

APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says

You're right.

The book clearly confirms he paid this lady to say this to prove to the world he has an interest in females, has an attention span durable enough for him to commit rape and has the dexterity required to tie a knot.

You forgot to change your accounts, if you are going to comment on your own posts better double check you shill accounts

What a piece of shit

Isn't this sticker misogynist? How about "Whack-a-Mole Trump With A Knobby Strap On!"

Woke Patnet bumper stickers only.

A BOOK!!!!! confirmed that Trump is a rapist?!!? Well then it’s GOT to be true because you can’t publish anything in a !!!BOOK!!! without it being absolutely as true as the BIBLE!!!

joshuatrio says

Funny.. This coming out shortly after it was discovered Hunter was making $50k a month off of the Ukrainian company... lol

She saw a good payday - hope she gets it. LOL

Exactly. Cunt. Feel sorry for him even if he is corrupt and had jobs he had no business taking. Of course he is the "piece of shit" but she is an innocent, naive baby-mama. Right.... LOL

OccasionalCortex says

krc says

Of course he is the "piece of shit" but she is an innocent, naive baby-mama. Right.... LOL

If it IS his baby, then what do all the smears you make about here really have to do with this? Either he pays up for supporting the kid or not.

Xactly. It's either him or we as taxpayers. I prefer it to be him. And he can afford it most def.

Time for a focus group study!

Or group therapy.

Yeah - agree - it is hard to judge peoples motivations, but the timing, etc.. of this seems very suspicious as others noted.

My problem is he has no say. It is simply the degradation of marriage. By saying that because a woman has a child, the male is "on the hook", it is basically conferring to her a marital status that she doesn't deserve. Remember, she can decide to abort. He cannot. She can decide to abandon the baby at a hospital. He cannot. Again, women "want" to say they are equal to men but don't actually really want this. If we were "equal", he should be able to say "I don't agree - if you want to keep it you are going to have to provide". I am not quite at the point where the male should be able to say that she must have an abortion... but give me time.

In marriage, the expectation is that there will be children. And at that point, he would be "on the hook". But "marriage" is that contract.

Again, these are just baby-mama whores getting what they can. Men just don't realize the biological facts: men want sex, women like sex but want children. Of course, I have been told if there were true equality then men would never get married, and would never agree to children... and our society would fade away. Perhaps... :)

Men are forced to be financially responsible for choices only women can make. Furthermore, this is NEVER a 50/50 split of responsibilities and cost - in general mother in unmarried situations is usually awarded fully custody. If the man makes more (she will take time off, make false accusations against the male, etc.), he will pay a correspondingly higher share of the support cost. In some states, the unmarried father has zero visitation rights but is on the hook to provide financial support, or even if we wants to be a father, his unmarried status prevents him from taking that roll (this is state by state legislation).

That is frankly why I am pro-life. If abortion was outlawed, then one sex would not have this much control over the other. Right now we let women have the choice to enslave a biological father. Of course - the usual response is "just don't have sex". If abortion would outlawed, I would agree: he should be paying instead of the taxpayer.

jazz_music says

There is no “court” involved at any point.

(1) A single angry house member issues hundreds of subpoenas in order to harass the president and his cabinet and to obstruct the President's agenda of doing the people's bidding.
(2) Trump and other receivers of subpoenas decline to cooperate with the subpoenas.
(3) Angry house member needs to involve the court system in order to enforce the subpoenas.
(4) Judge sees that it's a single angry house member and sides with Trump.
(5) Angry house member calls a vote to begin impeachment investigation and the vote is a "yeah" for beginning an investigation.
(6) Now judge in (4) sees that the house as a whole is investigating and is more likely to issue enforcement of at least some of the subpoenas.

krc says

Again, these are just baby-mama whores getting what they can. Men just don't realize the biological facts: men want sex, women like sex but want children. Of course, I have been told if there were true equality then men would never get married, and would never agree to children... and our society would fade away. Perhaps... :)

Actually I don't think this holds true anymore. Most men do want kids with the right woman and often these days wommyn chose not to have kids and be miserable. The thing is that men like to have kids with stable, nesting, maternal, feminine, hot and nurturing women, not attention-whoring sluts and gold-diggers. There's a severe shortage of marriage material among modern womyn, even more so than a shortage on hot ones. Now Hunter may not be the brightest tool in the shed and this is yet another episode proving it.

On the first day of Bush's second term, Pelosi announced there would be no impeachment.

Keep in mind it's probably provable that Bush knowingly doctored the WMD intel, and may have violated the Geneva Convention, the ban on Cruel and Unusual punishments in the Constitution, or both.

But Leftists want to impeach Trump.

This is all about policy.

jazz_music says

You are obviously referring to some other presidents.

1. Obstruction: Exercising constitutionally granted powers, such as to fire the FBI Chief for any or no reason, can't be obstruction.
2. Emoluments Clause: Nonsense. What titles or salaries has Trump received as President without Congressional permission?
3. Conspiring with others: Requires that some other crime was planned or committed.
4. Advocating Violence: Then Clinton, Obama, and Bush are also guilty (Yugoslavia, Libya, and Iraq). Completely farsical crime that exists only in minds of the Left.
5. Pardon Power: Exercising Constitutionally granted powers, such as to pardon anybody for any or no reason, can't be abused as there are NO LIMITS on his power (see #1)
6. Recklessly threatening Nuclear War: Show me where is this a crime. Define "Reckless"? See #4 - a crime that only exists in the mind of the Left
7. Directing Law enforcement to pursue Political Enemies: Every Administration. This was done to Nixon, and just wait until the proof of Obama's malfeasance comes out. The President is required by law to enforce the laws of the USA. Investigating Hunter and Joe Biden for corruption with Ukrainian companies is 100% the purview of POTUS. Abusing FISA, however, is expressly prohibited, as is misleading FISA Court Judges as to source/origin/purpose of warrant requests.
8. Undermining Freedom of the Press: Another Leftist fantasy. Insulting needle moving journalists is not forbidden the POTUS, who retains 1st Amendment rights himself.
9. Enforcing the Immigration Laws is the POTUS' duty. Open borders is not the law, though the Left would like a POTUS who ignores these laws. OBAMA put kids in cages.
10. After a multiyear investigation involving a team mostly consisting of Trump's Deep State enemies, this failed to produce one single recommended charge.

Conclusion: List is 110%Bullshit

"ONLY if a guy is stupid to stick it into her w/o protection. Hunter Biden by now is established as clearly being a whole class of stupid that fits that bill."

Agreed. But I know a lot of horror stories as well where one party lied about protection, etc... My advice to any husband going through a divorce with very young children: get a DNA test of your kids right away. I have a friend who did this and found out his youngest child (a year old when she filed) was not his. In fact, DNA testing should be mandatory at birth. If the unknowing "father" raises the child for two years before challenging (Wait! That is not my kid! ) ... well, that is too late. Most states will see that the "married father" is on the hook for child support, not the biological father, because he "acted as the father" for a substantial period of time.

And, that is why I originally said all reproductive males should get a reversible vasectomy. What - you don't think women are conniving enough to pin hole a condom, or pull sperm from a condom and self-inject? Seriously - that is why there is marriage. In marriage only is where sex should happen. But as a society we are past that.

But, please, anyone that says women want to be equal to men is just full of crap.

"ONLY if a guy is stupid to stick it into her w/o protection. Hunter Biden by now is established as clearly being a whole class of stupid that fits that bill."

Agreed. But I know a lot of horror stories as well where one party lied about protection, etc... My advice to any husband going through a divorce with very young children: get a DNA test of your kids right away. I have a friend who did this and found out his youngest child (a year old when she filed) was not his. In fact, DNA testing should be mandatory at birth. If the unknowing "father" raises the child for two years before challenging (Wait! That is not my kid! ) ... well, that is too late. Most states will see that the "married father" is on the hook for child support, not the biological father, because he "acted as the father" for a substantial period of time.

Marriage is undermined when one sex is allowed to entrap the other sex and confer "marriage-like" benefits. Men don't get the option of "the right woman".

And, that is why I originally said all reproductive males should get a reversible vasectomy. What - you don't think women are conniving enough to pin hole a condom, or pull sperm from a condom and self-inject? Seriously - that is why there is marriage. In marriage only is where sex should happen. But as a society we are past that.

But, please, anyone that says women want to be equal to men is just full of crap. That is my primary point. Ultimately, the male has the FORCED responsibility, women have the CHOICE.

1. Mandatory Paternity tests protect Men
1b. And children, since they identify potential genetic disorders
2. Ban No-Fault, replace with only Fault and/or Consent. No-Fault might only be allowed in marriages lasting less than 2 years and without children, in which case the parties take out what they brought in and split the rest.
3. Replace Section 8 and AFDC with Unwed Mother's homes with curfews and mandatory birth control.

6rdB says

simple solution: pay more and there will be lines of kids entering "high tech" studies, just like with med schools.

Or don't even pay more. Just move to a lower-cost part of the country. Heck, programmers in silicon valley already make more than most doctors (non-specialists) in most of the rest of the country.

"This also dissuades men from having children out of wedlock."

In this case, it doesn't. Women make that decision. Will read the link... thanks.

Will there be orders for the Secret Service to pepper Melania's Cuban Gardner Lotharios with Uzi spray on sight?

They might think Trump Cunt Punch is a drink.

krc says

That is frankly why I am pro-life. If abortion was outlawed, then one sex would not have this much control over the other. Right now we let women have the choice to enslave a biological father. Of course - the usual response is "just don't have sex". If abortion would outlawed, I would agree: he should be paying instead of the taxpayer.

So under your logic, a woman who is strongly pro-life must choose to either abort her child or have the child but not get any help from the man who helped put her in that position? Makes no sense.

There's a kid and the kid needs to be taken care of. If the guy doesn't pay child support then the mom goes on welfare and how's that fair the the taxpayer? We certainly had nothing to do with the problem.

Half the people in this thread sound like bitter dads tired of having to pony up for child support. I get that there are some issues with the system, like that custody always defaults to the woman, but boo hoo, take care of your fucking kids.

Quigley says

If anyone had any questions about why tech workers shouldn’t vote Democrat anymore... a good reason is that they want to import Chindians to do your jobs!

Tech workers coming from CA have turned Austin bright blue.

6rdB says

Quigley says

If anyone had any questions about why tech workers shouldn’t vote Democrat anymore... a good reason is that they want to import Chindians to do your jobs!

Tech workers coming from CA have turned Austin bright blue.

#fuckingmorons

truthhurts says

some issues

"Some issues"

hahahahahahahaha

He said "Some issues!"...

blahahahahahahahahahahaha...

I recall a recent under statement from somebody else recently: "Some people did something"

"If the guy doesn't pay child support then the mom goes on welfare and how's that fair the the taxpayer?"

Yes. And that is a big part of the problem. That state is serving as the lender of last resort, essentially. What if there was not this welfare backstop? I bet the illegitimacy rate would decrease - substantially! And lets make no bones about it. Women now are perfectly aware of their power here: the actual abortion rate has dropped dramatically because women have various forms of birth control and they are deciding when to have the child - regardless of "who" it is with. Look at the abortion rates for the past 20 years - massive decline. Illegitimate children are the way that baby mamas can make it in this world when they see that their own independent future looks bleak. Why should a man support a child that he had no interest in having?

krc says

Why should a man support a child that he had no interest in having?

Because it's the moral thing to do.

krc says

Illegitimate children are the way that baby mamas can make it in this world when they see that their own independent future looks bleak.

Maybe so, but this is even more reason why you should be careful where you are sticking it.

I don't know why I need to explain biology to you, but there's no such thing as an illegitimate child. You stuck your penis voluntarily into a vagina and made a baby, it really happened, it's legit. Now it needs to be taken care of. In a perfect world, you wouldn't need court mandated child support because both parents would work together and figure out a way to pay for it all. But some don't, and so there is a system in place to enforce it and some people are taking advantage of that system and men get screwed.

But just because it's a bad system doesn't take away your responsibility. You can't just say "Oh, well the child support system is unfair so I'm not going to be a responsible adult and pay for my kid".

The Best part will be when he invites Putin.

The Rotten son's of bitches Global Punks invited Iran to the last G7 after kicking Russia out. And if you all remember, and don't have your heads shoved so far up Jeff Bezos and Zucker's Ass, will remember Trump vowed to invite Putin to the next one, since the Globalist saw fit to invite Iran. Who at the time during that week was threatening America and our President.

It's going to be glorious, the crying will hurt our ears.

AF, why do you hate CAPITALISM! and ENTREPRENEURSHIP???

"Oh, well the child support system is unfair so I'm not going to be a responsible adult and pay for my kid".

Well, even if a biological father wanted to walk away, they can't. So not sure of the argument here. The state is definitely enforcing child support even with jail time, which also makes zero sense. And, when it is convenient the state will also repudiates a biological father's right as well. For example, if a married wife has a child from an affair, if the married father accepts that child, then most states will terminate the biological father's rights.

I am not questioning the morality here. Yes - you fathered a child, I think you should support it. But, to your point, that is a moral question only. If you look at this from a constitutional protection issue, then this is completely unfair. If you believe it is fair that a woman who "decides" to have a child should be entitled to entrap an unmarried father, then we disagree. Hopefully, you would then agree that the most logical course would be to outlaw abortion so that one sex doesn't have this power over the other. Then, yes, you engage in sex you run a risk with a known consequence and BOTH parties bear that responsibility.

I guess if it is a "bad system" you just put up with it.... Illegitimate children are children born out of wedlock. So - there are "illegitimate" children though it is not a popular word to use anymore as it stigmatizes the biological parents. And we can't have that can we? Only the man needs to bear the social condemnation - as we see by most responses to the original post. No one seems to even question her integrity/ responsibility for birth control / etc... I know if my daughter "got pregnant" without being married, I would tell her it is her decision and she is responsible. If the "boyfriend" wants to chip in, GREAT! But if not, she should deal with it herself and be prepared to support the child on her own.

Found this interesting article. I guess I am interested in this subject since it seems that only the man bears the ridicule when a baby mama pops out of the woodwork. Whether it is Biden's son, a famous football player, actor, etc... there is never social condemnation against the woman! I always find that interesting and just another manifestation of the matriarchy at work. :)

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-04/financial-abortion-men-opt-out-parenthood/8049576

Cool.

"State Department Concludes Clinton Email Review Says It Found Nearly 600 Security Violations"

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1248894/pg1

Double Triple Agent IHLLary pleaded ignorance! Hilarious.

APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says

I don't! I was just hoping that Trump would turn the golf course into a hunting range filled with RAPEFUGEE! children whom he'd encourage the G7 delegates to shoot with high powered rifles at a premium for their entertainment!

Why not, hire this man! Pretty much every day a rapefugee humiliates an autochthonous resident, like recently in the Netherlands where they made a white dutch guy strip at gunpoint. Of course this video was censored on twatter shortly after it was posted. Many rapefugees behave utterly atrocious and shouldn't be admitted into a civilized country in the first place.

Love those cajones! I hope she doesn't get suicided - at least she knows how to defend herself with a weapon as well.

Using the usual 180 degree flip LibbyFuck propaganda ploy, this means that IHLlary is admitting to being a Russian agent.

If I pretend to have State secrets that the Russians want, can I fool Tulsi into honey trapping me?

Hillary has to be the worse candidate in the last 100+ years.