Anonymous #2 14w

Freedom of speech, sorry dude. I get you don’t believe in it but you could at least do a better job of pretending like you do

1

It was a press conference dude, not a private meeting. He came in and asked questions loudly, that’s it. Quit defending censorship

1

Anonymous OP 14w

It’s not censorship when you purposefully try to cause a scene just so someone will hear you 💀 she even said if he would’ve acted like an adult she would’ve met with him. Hell she did afterwards and they talked for a while. A grown man shouldn’t act like that and you know it

4

Anonymous #2 14w

You’re allowed to cause a scene at a press conference and be loud. That is part of peacefully protesting. You are in favor of censorship

0

Anonymous OP 14w

Whatever you say man 😂

1

Anonymous #2 14w

If protests weren’t allowed to be peacefully disruptive then you would be against basically every protest in American history

1

Anonymous OP 14w

Again, there’s a difference between protesting peacefully, which I’m absolutely ok with, and causing a scene

0

Anonymous #2 14w

Peaceful protests cause a scene. Thats how you get your point heard dude

0

Anonymous OP 14w

Ok we’re clearly not gonna agree on this so I’m done arguing about this over Yik yak 😭

-4

Anonymous #2 14w

Did you know the sit-ins during the 1950’s and 60’s were disruptive? They caused a massive scene, often with cops called. Property was destroyed or made a mess of. There was shouting and screaming from people

4

Anonymous OP 14w

That’s called disturbing the peace and is against the law as a misdemeanor. That’s why you see so many “peaceful protests” filled with law enforcement. They think they’re being peaceful when they’re not

2

Anonymous OP 14w

41 CFR 102-74.390

1

Anonymous OP 14w

41 CFR 102-74.390

1

Anonymous #4 14w

You support a party headed by a pedophile, cry harder. I have no sympathy for pedo enablers

3

Anonymous OP 14w

Which year was “that year”?

-1

Anonymous #5 14w

Holy shit you can’t read

3

Anonymous OP 14w

Oh nvm 2002, which was before the case went public

-1

Anonymous #5 14w

Me when I hang out with someone for almost two decades and don’t know they’re a pedophile until the same period of time everyone else does

5

Anonymous OP 14w

ATP they were both at least 40 so “younger side” could implicate anyone less than 30. Saying that “it is said” about Ep doesn’t imply much other than that his perception of Ep is that he likes younger women which as previously can be broad considering the age.

-1

Anonymous #5 14w

You can do the math. They were in their mid fifties. So saying “well they’re only in their fifties dating people only slightly over half their age” is not the own you think it is. And also; I don’t think he was talking about people under thirty. I think thirty is being overly charitable You are defending a pedophile

3

Anonymous OP 14w

It’s not really an own, just saying the scope of “younger” grows as one’s age increases. Just because you think something happened doesn’t mean it did.

-1

Anonymous #5 14w

Didn’t he also say he wished Maxwell the best of luck? Hmmmm

1

Anonymous #3 14w

It is peaceful because they’re not causing any harm to anyone other than pissing off racist folk

4