She's a RINO, supporting transgenderism for example before she was against it, but if she's telling the truth that he took naked pictures of her without her consent, then she's unquestionably in the right.
He’s her ex fiancé, the likelihood of them being “without her consent” is about the same as a female teenager actually being “raped” by her boyfriend when they’re caught by her parents.
Maybe, maybe not. The images should make that clear. E.g. it seems that the videos were taken clandestinely. If the camera is out there in the open, visible to her, then not so much.
It's possible even for an attention whore RINO to be victimized.
Still doesn’t mean anything under the law or make a case for… rape. At worst you have a guy who has a nude video of an ex fiancée, in DC it’s a single party recording consent state, so if he interacts with her at all in the video and/or didn’t publish the material or sell it then it’s at best a grey area.
I wasn't talking about the rape stuff, only about the images.
Also, I'd be absolutely shocked if 'single party consent' applied to taking nude or sexual pictures of people, in whatever state. Everything I can find about 'single party consent' is about audio only, but of course, I spent 10 seconds on it.
The photo I saw her talking about was clearly taken from a kitchen facing a common area and what looks like it might be a sliding glass door.. Not exactly where one would expect a camera to be hidden if the intent were to take naked photos.
When are women going to jail for making fake rape accussations without your consent? Especially the ones 40 years later just as you are about to become a president or supreme court justice.
She's a RINO, supporting transgenderism for example before she was against it, but if she's telling the truth that he took naked pictures of her without her consent, then she's unquestionably in the right.
He’s her ex fiancé, the likelihood of them being “without her consent” is about the same as a female teenager actually being “raped” by her boyfriend when they’re caught by her parents.
Maybe, maybe not. The images should make that clear. E.g. it seems that the videos were taken clandestinely. If the camera is out there in the open, visible to her, then not so much.
It's possible even for an attention whore RINO to be victimized.
No they fucking wouldn't.
Oh we are all well aware of his simpery. Start talking shit about Tulsi Gabbard if you really want to see him go.
RETARD ALERT
Still doesn’t mean anything under the law or make a case for… rape. At worst you have a guy who has a nude video of an ex fiancée, in DC it’s a single party recording consent state, so if he interacts with her at all in the video and/or didn’t publish the material or sell it then it’s at best a grey area.
I wasn't talking about the rape stuff, only about the images.
Also, I'd be absolutely shocked if 'single party consent' applied to taking nude or sexual pictures of people, in whatever state. Everything I can find about 'single party consent' is about audio only, but of course, I spent 10 seconds on it.
The photo I saw her talking about was clearly taken from a kitchen facing a common area and what looks like it might be a sliding glass door.. Not exactly where one would expect a camera to be hidden if the intent were to take naked photos.
Women shouldn't have the right to spell 'chaperone' correctly.
A retard's place is in the asylum.
When are women going to jail for making fake rape accussations without your consent? Especially the ones 40 years later just as you are about to become a president or supreme court justice.