Megyn Kelly Supports Trump's Pedophilia

[Lakers Legend#32]

The aging bimbo said on her podcast today that the Epstein story was a nothing burger because the victims of Epstein/Trump were 15-16 year-olds and not five to eight year olds.

She said it was OK because these teens could have passed for older.

So it's not really pedophilia.

Kelly has a 14 year-old daughter.

Are we to assume she is fine with her having sex with Donald Trump?

[Lakers Legend#32]

C'mon MAGA Fatties, she's giving you a talking point.

Run with it.

[Lakers Legend#32]

Megyn Kelly in 2018: " There's no consenting for a 14 or even a 17 year old."

Megyn Kelly today: "Jeffrey Epstein…was not a pedophile…He was into the barely legal type, like he liked 15 year old girls…There's a difference between a 15 year old and a 5 year old."

[FultzNationRISE]

Whoa!

This will definitely have Poopsie shitting!


Right? Or no?

You tell me OP, youre the expert on Poopsie's shits.

[1987_Lakers]

Whoa!

This will definitely have Poopsie shitting!


Right? Or no?

You tell me OP, youre the expert on Poopsie's shits.

[SouBeachTalents]

Yikes, the pathetic double bump several hours later, only to be ridiculed in the first response. OP is a walking L.

The sad part is they're just going to create another thread later today

[Bill Gates]

She is getting hammered over this. And rightfully so.

[BurningHammer]

https://ew.com/megyn-kelly-says-jeff...phile-11849343

https://twitter.com/AccountableGOP/s...14083274952746

Megyn Kelly has waded into the discourse around convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein with a creative new take.


On Wednesday's episode of The Megyn Kelly Show, the conservative political commentator referenced "somebody very, very close to this case" who knows "virtually everything" about the late financier's troubling private dealings that helped her form her own views on the matter. "Jeffrey Epstein, in this person's view, was not a pedophile," Kelly said. "This is this person's view, who was there for a lot of this, but that he was into the barely legal type. Like, he liked 15-year-old girls."

Kelly reflected, "I realize this is disgusting."

Not that I like Megyn Kelly as a person, but the part that people are picking up isn't incorrect, technically. She was paraphrasing and didn't sound supportive to either pedophilia or ephebophilia (sexual interest in mid-to-late teen). It's indifferent at worst.

Megyn Kelly today: "Jeffrey Epstein…was not a pedophile…He was into the barely legal type, like he liked 15 year old girls…There's a difference between a 15 year old and a 5 year old."

Those "..."s

[Baller234]

She's right. Everyone should be able to draw a line between an older teenager and pre-pubescent child.







If you're telling me it's cool and acceptable to sing about having sex with 17 year old girls, and have magazines featuring girls who were 17 just a few weeks ago... then don't tell me it's just the same as pedophilia.

Should a father want their 16-17 year old daughter out there getting plowed by older adults? No. But I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that if you're 17 years old and at a Jeffrey Epstein party... there's a solid chance your father isn't in your life to begin with. She's just some whore at that point. If you're at one of these parties and these girls are throwing themselves at you, and you're this famous rich person who's used to having girls throw themselves at you... then you might not think twice. I doubt any of the rock bands we grew up listening to knew the ages of the girls backstage, and I'm sure a lot of them looked young. There are also plenty of 16-17 year old girls who could pass for older. So no, I'm not giving these people a total pass, but Megyn is 100% right to draw the line between that and harming a small child. They are not the same.

Like I said, let me know how many of the left's favorite woke celebrity mascots ever attended a Diddy party.

[BurningHammer]

She's right. Everyone should be able to draw a line between an older teenager and pre-pubescent child.







If you're telling me it's cool and acceptable to sing about having sex with 17 year old girls, and have magazines featuring girls who were 17 just a few weeks ago... then don't tell me it's just the same as pedophilia.

Should a father want their 16-17 year old daughter out there getting plowed by older adults? No. But I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that if you're 17 years old and at a Jeffrey Epstein party... there's a solid chance your father isn't in your life to begin with. She's just some whore at that point. If you're at one of these parties and these girls are throwing themselves at you, and you're this famous rich person who's used to having girls throw themselves at you... then you might not think twice. I doubt any of the rock bands we grew up listening to knew the ages of the girls backstage, and I'm sure a lot of them looked young. There are also plenty of 16-17 year old girls who could pass for older. So no, I'm not giving these people a total pass, but Megyn is 100% right to draw the line between that and harming a small child. They are not the same.

Like I said, let me know how many of the left's favorite woke celebrity mascots ever attended a Diddy party.

[Hey Yo]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of..._United_States

[Bill Gates]

Older men into "barely legal" porn are creepy as hell, that is for pedos to get as close to the edge as the can without breaking the law.


The Winger 17 song is also creepy but at least they were in their 20s when they wrote it.

[Baller234]

I noticed that when right leaning posters respond with laugh emojis, it's because the person they're quoting genuinely said something retarded. Usually the part that's retarded is bolded or highlighted. But when woke left wing retards respond with laughing emojis, it's because they're trapped in a corner and can't refute your arguments with facts and logic. Which is why you couldn't point to the part of my post that's false or untrue.

If you're prepared to equate statutory with pedophilia, and pretend as if they are one in the same, then you're the weirdo.

[SouBeachTalents]

She's right. Everyone should be able to draw a line between an older teenager and pre-pubescent child.







If you're telling me it's cool and acceptable to sing about having sex with 17 year old girls, and have magazines featuring girls who were 17 just a few weeks ago... then don't tell me it's just the same as pedophilia.

Should a father want their 16-17 year old daughter out there getting plowed by older adults? No. But I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that if you're 17 years old and at a Jeffrey Epstein party... there's a solid chance your father isn't in your life to begin with. She's just some whore at that point. If you're at one of these parties and these girls are throwing themselves at you, and you're this famous rich person who's used to having girls throw themselves at you... then you might not think twice. I doubt any of the rock bands we grew up listening to knew the ages of the girls backstage, and I'm sure a lot of them looked young. There are also plenty of 16-17 year old girls who could pass for older. So no, I'm not giving these people a total pass, but Megyn is 100% right to draw the line between that and harming a small child. They are not the same.

Like I said, let me know how many of the left's favorite woke celebrity mascots ever attended a Diddy party.

You'll never convince me 15, which is what she specified, isn't fvcking creepy, you're still essentially a child at that age and have no business having sex with an adult.

[Baller234]

Older men into "barely legal" porn are creepy as hell, that is for pedos to get as close to the edge as the can without breaking the law.


The Winger 17 song is also creepy but at least they were in their 20s when they wrote it.

What's creepy about it? What's creepy about a 20 year old rock star having sex with a 17 year old groupie? Sounds pretty normal to me. I'm betting it happened all the time.

I'm also betting you don't give a fukk.