Conservative gadfly and creator of CPAC Matt Schlapp, who is accused of sexually assaulting a male staffer himself, appeared yesterday on greasy Steve Bannon’s YouTube broadcast to commiserate about the whopping $83 million judgement levied against their dear leader by a New York jury in the E. Jean Carroll civil case.

Schlapp appears to be concerned that the hefty settlement will be used as a precedent which can be used against all perpetrators of rape, sexual harassment or assault in an attempt to make sexual violence a thing of the past by imposing real consequences on the mostly male practitioners of the detestable crimes.

Schlapp stated:

“This $83 million — this is just the beginning. All of us will be paraded down this gangplank. We won’t have our resources, we won’t have our homes, we won’t have our livelihood.”

In response, Twitter users seemed nonplussed


Well, come to think of it…


“Accountability” will have to be added to his vocabulary, Millie.


At least he and Matt Gaetz are hoping that is the case.


Yup


Yup.


A simple and elegant solution.


Yup.


😂


🤷‍♂️


💯 💯 💯


🤣🤣🤣


In a nutshell.


🤣🤣🤣


👍


🤣🤣🤣

You might find some support for sexual offenders in Steve Bannon’s largely incel audience, Matt, but amongst Twitter users – not so much…

Help keep the site running, consider supporting.

7 COMMENTS

  1. Has it even penetrated through whatever passes for a mind of these idiots that the award was NOT for what Trump did to Ms Carroll in the first instance but the fact that he couldn’t keep his big gob SHUT after he was found guilty.

    The award(s) were for DEFAMATION in that he slandered and denigrated Ms Carrol even after he was fined $5 million for doing just that.

    18

    • Drumpkopf’s attempts to re-try and reverse the verdict of the original case are proof positive of his and Schlepper’s total lack of understanding of the fact – and likely Bannon as well…..

      1

  2. And using this settlement as a precedent would be a bad thing because….? WTF is wrong with these idiots?!? Knowing there are harsh consequences for breaking laws is SUPPOSED TO be a deterrent to crime. Most people aren’t like dingleberry, although too many are pretty much cookie cutter wannabes. Most people take a look at hefty consequences, financial or prison time-wise, and say to themselves “hmmm, maybe it isn’t worth it to have my way with so-and-so and then defame her. 83 million is a big chunk of change”. Sure, the financial punishment is for the defamation but surely it makes a person think twice before committing a crime.

    9

    • Even more ironic when you remember that this is the self proclaimed ‘law and order’ party, very fond of ‘locking them up’ and people ‘facing the consequences of their actions’.

      But like all their policies, it’s a case of rules not applying to them, just ‘others’.

      4

  4. So, I’m guessing Mr Schlapp is now firmly against the death penalty? After all, proponents of the death penalty have long argued that “knowing the penalty for a heinous crime is death will keep most people from committing such crimes.” Therefore, using his “fear” that his sexually assaulting someone might lead to his financial ruin SHOULD keep him from ever actually sexually assaulting someone.
    But, he doesn’t really seem to be as concerned at committing sexual assault as he is at the prospect of being punished financially for doing that.
    (Then again, as Daithi pointed out, the penalty that was assessed was because Trump couldn’t keep his fat mouth shut after having been found guilty of sexually assaulting Ms Carroll and feeling the need to defame her at every opportunity until she found no recourse but to sue his overbloated ass.)

    7

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

The maximum upload file size: 128 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop files here