Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation


About Chollowa

  • Rank

  • Birthday 04/19/1979

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    San Diego, California
  1. She's not even fucking crying. There are no tears coming out of her eyes as she fake sobs. I don't know what her motivation for calling the cops was. Maybe it was racial (I couldn't take the whole video so if she said some racist shit in the parts I didn't watch, I'm sorry for not seeing that), but maybe she is one of the people in the neighborhood that pushed hard for no charcoal grills in the park? Anyhow, she's looks like a disgusting human being that's crying out for attention when she takes the other woman's card. Honestly, videos like this are why I hate the internet.
  2. Former first lady Barbara Bush passes away at 92

    I kind of assumed that the Bushes would go one right after the other. They just seemed like one of those older couples that lived primarily for each other so it makes sense to me. I wonder if Trump will show up at this one?
  3. I haven't listened to him in a while, but I can imagine that they were all about the witch hunt. But won't they just hide behind the fact that he's an "opinion guy" and part of Fox News's opinion programming? I've always found that position to be complete bullshit. In 2018, when Fox News opinion shows are having a direct correlation with US policy, I find it frightening. Anyhow, I'm sure an announcement is coming at any moment now. They are probably working on finalizing the spin back to the Depp State, Clintons and Obamas.
  4. Do you think he is legit shook, or do you think he's milking his audience and waiting until the news gets out a bit more before making the statement? I can't imagine that he wasn't prepared for this, or that his "fans" will care either way. If anything him and Trump having the same attorney will be seen as a positive for everyone involved.
  5. As someone that lives in San Diego and that grew up right down the street from Qualcomm, I think the appropriate reaction to this news is: "thank you." Qualcomm means alot (probably) too much to our local economy and if I remember correctly from past articles is the only Fortune 500 company that calls San Diego its home. There was a write-up in the NYT that outlined what Qualcomm means to San Diego and how they foster innovation in their employees and the net benefit that is for the local economy.
  6. Absolutely, and as I mentioned, I'm probably wrong to read that sentence as if it cancels out the possibility of pre-election collusion. I was telling a friend earlier today that at this point I don't think it matters if there was collusion or not. Putin won.
  7. Sure. It's just not the "collusion" story that people have been hanging their hopes on for the last 14 months and that's really surprising to me.
  8. Given the correction this does seem to run contrary to the narrative that the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia or am I reading this wrong?
  9. It's crazy to me that anyone thinks the content of the memo is what is going to make Trump supporters buy into this thing. That's the magic of Trump, it doesn't matter what the memo says or what it doesn't say, all's that matters is that it exists and that Republicans say it's proof of corruption and most importantly that Trump agrees (and Hannity/Fox News too). I'm sure this will play out like Fusion GPS and all of the other non-scandal "scandals".
  10. I'm assuming, based on anecdotal evidence, that their bodies and body parts were in contact throughout the night in ways other than described in the article. It's not uncommon, when you're naked with a woman to have your penis brush up against her body. And that's why I don't think it's assault. That act is probably consistent with what was happening on the couch and on the way over to the mirror. I think the key point is that he didn't have sex with her, he pantomimed an action and put his penis on her butt. He didn't insert it into her anus or her vagina and that type of contact was probably occurring all night as a result of two naked people engaging in that type of behavior for a nice chunk of time. If he had penetrated her in any way without her consent then it would rise to the level of assault in my completely layman's, never gone a step above a paralegal program, opinion. For those that think it was assault, when did the assault begin? Was every contact that her body had with his penis an instance of assault after she said "next time"? Or was it the act of him asking for consent while contacting her body with his penis the assault?
  11. I don't think my timeline is wrong at all. He asks her while they are still on the counter, she doesn't know how to answer. She says she doesn't want to be forced, then she gives him a blow job (he asked for consent on this one too). They then walk over to the mirror... What is off about my timeline?
  12. At that point her desire to not have intercourse was not explicitly stated. He had asked the question: "Where do you want me to fuck you." and according to the article she didn't know how to answer because she didn't want to have intercourse. This leads her to saying: I don't think we should right now. Then that second date/glass of wine comment happens. My point being, it wasn't explicit. She doesn't explicitly state that she doesn't want to have sex until the incident in front of the mirror and once she explicitly states that and gets dressed the night is over. Over the course of 30 minutes being naked in a variety of different places throughout this encounter do you think that this is the first time that his penis contacted a place other than her mouth or hand? Do you think their bodies weren't rubbing together for almost this entire time? The altercation in front of the mirror sounds like him rubbing his dick on her and asking for consent to insert it somewhere. I highly doubt it was the first time his dick came into contact with her body that night. And I don't disagree that he's trying to coax a different response from her. But it's not under duress and he has a reason to believe that she may say yes because she has just consented to oral sex and to walking over to the mirror with him. But again, once she says no and decides she wants to put her clothes the date is over and he calls her an Uber. I guess what I don't understand is why he's getting killed for when he asked for consent almost every step of the way.
  13. You're omitting the part where after she got on the couch he pointed to his dick and she blew him. Things start up again and he says, "come over here, I have something to show you" she does this on her own volition and he brings her to the mirror. Here, he asks for consent to have sex with her for a second time, this time he uses his dick to try to ask her if she wants anal sex in front of a mirror (WTF) and at this point she finally says "no" and puts her clothes on. Now, what we don't know, and what I'm curious about, is was there more making out while nude going on while they were on the couch? I've been in sexual encounters with a handful of women and I don't know that I've ever spent a prolonged amount of time naked with a woman that didn't end in sexual intercourse. This entire thing is so weird to me that they're both buck-naked the entire time and are engaging in sexual acts (making out while naked is pretty sexual imo) and she seems perplexed as to why he keeps trying to have sex with her. Why isn't it a logical assumption on his part that sex is on the table if they've spent all of this time together naked and she's gone down on him twice?
  14. But that's the thing, I'm not convinced he "expected" anything. As he asked for consent multiple times and received with active or passive consent multiple times during the encounter. I would bet that if we had a Rashomon style recounting of this event from the 3 different perspectives that Aziz's account could be the exact same but his reading of the situation would be vastly different. He probably saw it all as foreplay and the football play around the apartment to him was probably foreplay like you see in 9 1/2 Weeks. The fact that she was still naked and actively taking part in the encounter up to and until the point they were I'm front of the mirror probably means he was shocked when he received that text. I do believe that these two people could have experienced the exact same thing and had vastly different take aways as far as how they felt about the encounter in regards to how much the other did or didn't want to be there, how much consent was asked for and given, etc. Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
  15. Are you saying any defense of this behavior automatically you don't support the Times Up movement? I guess while I certainly see this as creepy, I don't see the value in lumping this in with sexual assault and rape. Because it's not the same thing and if you have to think it's the same and think that Aziz should lose his job over this then I guess I don't support that movement.