• lemmylommy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      11 months ago

      No, he is influential and rich. So the most damning phrase can be „had sex with“. The alternatives were „seduced“ or „was seduced by“.

      • M137@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I wouldn’t be surprised if they even go with “was raped by”, that she did it just to get him in trouble and he had no choice.

  • gift_of_gab@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    85
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    … had sex with an underage girl…

    So, rape? Underage people can’t consent, it’s rape. He’s a pedophile.

  • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    11 months ago

    I seem to recall this asshat and his best buddy Fred Flintstone MTG going on about “groomers” all the time.

    Looks like we found the actual groomer.

    And as usual, it’s ALWAYS projection with the qons. Always.

  • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    You know, I’m willing to believe that Gaetz genuinely didn’t know the girl’s age the first time they had sex. The report acknowledges as much. And I’m unwilling to accuse anybody, even someone as detestable as Gaetz, of something that they didn’t do especially when there’s evidence supporting their claim. And right now, there is plenty of evidence that he did not know she was underage when they had sex.

    The first time.

    Then he went back for seconds. Anyone who has ever been in an FWB relationship knows how it works. You don’t just sit there and make an appointment for every Tuesday afternoon to just get together and quietly fuck like you’re in a clinical trial or something. You don’t get into an FWB relationship without getting to know someone. There’s going to be small talk involved. Playful banter. Genuine conversation. And at some point in that conversation, age is going to come into play. Even if she doesn’t directly say “I’m 17!!!”, she’s going to mention how much she hates the classes she’s taking. Or her plans after she graduates. Or what she plans on being when she grows up. Or the fact she still lives at home. Something. Something is going to give away her age, or at the very least cause a reasonable person to at least start asking questions like “So what college do you go to?” to attempt to figure out how old she is.

    And even if she’s just being paid by an intermediary or something, small talk is still going to be involved. Even the most highly paid prostitute is going to engage in casual conversation to break the ice.

    However it ended up, if it just happened once, I’d be willing to bet he genuinely didn’t know her age. Then he went back for seconds. At that point, any reasonable person is going to believe he knew, and just didn’t care.

      • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I know how strict liability crimes work. I’m saying that the fact that it’s a strict liability crime takes a valid option away from the defendant and is akin to railroading. If you’re at an event available only to wealthy, connected adults and their companions and you happen to get together with one of them, it’s reasonable to assume that the person you’re connecting with is a consenting adult. In fact, barring evidence to the contrary such as something she said, I would actually consider it unreasonable to assume that a 17 year old girl would have access to that party, or the wealth and connections needed to gain access. And I would consider it unreasonable and in fact rude to ask someone to verify their age at that particular type of gathering. With that said, I am well aware that the law doesn’t agree with me. I just think that the law happens to be wrong.

        • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I would consider it unreasonable and in fact rude for a 35 year old to even attempt to fuck a 17 year old who may look a few years older.

          Add payments into the mix and reasonableness goes out the window.

          • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Read my previous statements.

            His subsequent encounters? Yeah, that’s all on him. I’m just saying that in the specific context of their first encounter, he did not intend to have sex with a 17 year old girl, and had no reason to believe the girl was underage given the circumstances.

            The fact that he paid for sex is a different circumstance than paying for sex with a minor. They weren’t paying 17 year old girls $400 a whack for sex. They were paying girls $400 a whack for sex, and one of them happened to be 17 years old. I doubt the people who hired these girls were checking IDs or doing background checks. Regarding that first encounter, should Gaetz be held accountable for paying for sex and drugs? Absolutely. But he shouldn’t be getting extra punishment because she was a minor when there is no evidence he was searching for one.

            Everything after that is all on him.

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      The law specifically doesn’t make a distinction in cases like Gaetz’ because he paid her for it. The moment it becomes prostitution, any “I didn’t know” defense gets immediately disregarded. It’s to prevent child sex traffickers from claiming ignorance to plea down to a lesser charge.

  • JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    11 months ago

    So why did it take so long to release the report? From well before the election iirc. How is this not in the publics interest? Release the ‘vote to release the report’ vote also?

    • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      Evidently DOJ was investigating, so the ethics committee back burnered it. Then of course it went nowhere, and gaetz wasn’t pissing any republicans off at that moment so it wasn’t reopened right away.

  • Rakonat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    11 months ago

    Paragon of conservative virtues and former leading figure of elected government officials, everyone.

  • Freefall@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    11 months ago

    Breaking News: Thing we all knew. In other news, GoP says facts presented are fake and they don’t believe them. Nothing changes.

  • roofTophopper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    How could he possibly not? How could people look at him and think he wouldn’t? The dude FUCKING looks like some sort of evil villain. That or a Dollar Tree Beavis.

    I knew about this years ago. You knew about it. Our neighbors knew about. But still we gotta go through this wishy washy bullshit from those who are supposed to be leaders saying that this is all suddenly “coming to light”. Fuck no it isn’t.

    • teamevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Fetal Alcohol syndrome evil Elvis is who I see but Dollar Tree Beavis is pretty spot on too