Paul Ryan intern charged with sextortion (he may have also dressed up as Newt's elephant)

Discuss

38 Responses to “Paul Ryan intern charged with sextortion (he may have also dressed up as Newt's elephant)”

  1. Chuck says:

    Hm.  That pic isn’t too incriminating.  Both hands are plainly visible, and not “wandering.”  Same thing with the trunk.

  2. nixiebunny says:

    I follow the wacky exploits of Callista on Princess Sparkle Pony’s photoblog. This was inevitable, given the subject material. 

  3. PhosPhorious says:

    He’s the elephant that never forgets. . . to exploit you sexually!

    What a scumbag.

  4. Cowicide says:

    The family values party?

    • wysinwyg says:

       Right, but their family values come right out of the old testament.  This is pretty consistent I think.

  5. Ygret says:

    From the criminal complaint, Savader wrote this gem to one of his victims:

    “Do it from ur phone RIGHT NOW! I swear to God don’t be stupid. U don’t want every1 including your parents seeing your t–s (and) ass.”

  6. SedanChair says:

    The saddest I ever became upon re-reading a sentence:

    Paul Ryan intern charged with sextortion

    (I’m a bad person)

  7. R_Young says:

    I mean, normally I’m overwhelming against smearing Politicians with their aids but…

    I mean, come on.  That is the most disgusting thing I’ve heard in a while. Has Ryan ever heard of vetting?

    • jgs says:

       Has Ryan ever heard of vetting?

      You’re assuming a lot.

    • Stooge says:

      Isn’t vetting like playing doctor but for furries?

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      Vetting?   Ahahahaha.  That would require knowing how to use a computer.  Which is too gay for a serious candidate to admit to.

      Have you heard the one about the police commissioner in the UK who hired a “youth crime commissioner” without bothering to look at her Twitter account?  Which was full of racist and homophobic tweets.

    • morcheeba says:

      I’m sure the guy took a party loyalty oath. What more could you ask for?

    • Snig says:

      Both:
      Think Republican men should have dominion over women’s bodies.
      Have an unhealthy unwanted interest in the sexual lives of others.
      Believe selfishness is something worth working at.
      Are not as smart as they’d like to think they are.

    • C W says:

      “Has Ryan ever heard of vetting?”

      How do you think he got the job?

  8. angusm says:

    So, we’ve had the Elvis impersonator wrongly accused of trying to poison the President. Now we’ve got the vice-presidential candidate’s personal elephant up on sextortion charges.

    The only adequate explanation that I can think of is that we’re living in a version of the Matrix scripted by Carl Hiaasen.

  9. Syd says:

    It’s about time we all start talking about the elephant in the room.

  10. niktemadur says:

    What I also find weird is right wingers associating with Ellis The Elephant.
    LSD Elephant.

  11. Jardine says:

    Skinnamarinky dinky dink
     Skinnamarinky do,
     I love you!

    I love you in the morning,
     And in the afternoon
     I love you in the evening,
     Underneath the moon…

    Skinnamarinky dinky dink
     Skinnamarinky do,
     I love you!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=EEEsX69iIxY

  12. snagglepuss says:

    Sextortion and blackmail.

    Or, as Randians think of it, “recognizing and maximizing any opportunity for enlightened self-interest, as well as hard-earned and well-deserved personal advancement while reminding one of the lower lifeforms of their own miserable failure to anticipate the divine whims of the real-politik marketplace of ideas”.

    Yup, the wingnuts will be blaming this on that ratfuck’s victims before sunrise. How DARE they impede a go-getter’s self-actualization ? They’re just JEALOUS of his drive to excel and his daring willingness to use unusual methods to achieve his goals, those parasites..

    • IronEdithKidd says:

      I need to go wash my eyeballs after reading this comment.

    • Jim Davison says:

      While there are some (okay, many) ideas in that spectrum of Randrian thoughts that really seem reality-distorted, can we please not preemptively dehumanize and demonize people holding the ideas we disagree with?

      It’s always easier, though never accurate, to view others as one-dimensional sock puppets, and that tendency ought to be resisted.

      • wysinwyg says:

        http://www.thebigquestions.com/2013/03/20/censorship-environmentalism-and-steubenville/

        In this case…rather accurate.

        I mean, c’mon, she was asking for it lying there all catatonic on that hospital gurney.

      • Antinous / Moderator says:

        They dehumanize themselves. We’re just pointing it out.

        • Jim Davison says:

          And undoubtedly many people that disagree with my/our viewpoints think we are similarly one-dimensional. You’re only making my point for me on how difficult it is, and therefore how hard we must try, to resist such tendencies.

          • snagglepuss says:

             “Wash my eyeballs out” – ? I’m not sure whether to take that as a compliment or not. Which makes me NOT a Randian, I guess…..

            Honestly, I’m not blaming Ryan for what his sleazeball flunky did – Any more than I blame Obama for when Biden says something dopey.  Obama haters already own that particular slimy tactic, the whole guilt-by-association thing – Soros, Ayers, Wright, yadda yadda. If anything, Ryan’s aid has probably been a lifelong degenerate who, in his quest to rise to the top of the scumvat, has happily slithered aboard any available bandwagon that would take him, and that would include self-glorifying, “MeMeME” masturbation societies that pose as political or moral movements. Ryan himself probably barely mattered to that dirtbags’ calculations.

            I just think it’s interesting, the way wingnuts clam the fuck up or feign persecution when it’s one of their own that could be roasted on that same spit.
            And I think it’s really, really depraved of conservatives, when dems take the high road and don’t use an incident like this to smear Ryan, that Obama haters see that as a sign of weakness, and believe that such “weakness” entitles them to sink to even lower depths in their efforts to maul Obama’s rep.

            Seriously – Before Obama leaves office (and after this whole cynical attempt by repubs to “reach out” to non-white voters backfires), I wouldn’t be surprised to see the RNC start a windshield-pamphlet-in-church-parking-lot drive claiming that the Obamas adopted a “n****r baby”.

  13. Jim Davison says:

    I’m no big fan of Paul Ryan, but unless there’s a lot more going on here than we know, this is really a non-story. It’s unfortunate for Ryan that he employed such a person but it doesn’t reflect poorly on Ryan, and the only reason this would get anything more than local attention is because the intern worked for a prominent figure.

    I expect stories of the type, “Prominent Figure Linked to Sextortion Scandal!” from regular media outlets, but not from Boing Boing. So, unless I’m missing something here, why publish this at all? Why treat it any differently than any other random crime of this type?

    • wysinwyg says:

       1. Because it’s weird and BB focuses more on weird than on breaking news.
      2. Actually it does reflect pretty poorly on Ryan and the Republican party that they’re hiring people who do this kind of shit.  The fact that it seems pretty consistent with the ethics of the conservative movement (I can do whatever I want as long as I don’t get caught) is also relevant.

      • Jim Davison says:

        On the weird, okay, I guess. Otherwise…

        The fact that they hired someone who, at the time of hiring, they had no idea or reason to believe was anything other than an enthusiastic intern hardly reflects badly. That people who hold their point of view are sometimes bad people does not either: That is guilt by association. There are plenty of bad people on either side.
        Imagine the outrage in the news story if Republicans subjected every person hired, even unpaid part-time interns, to invasive background checks and searches of their personal computing devices.

        I don’t like Ryan’s views, but guilt by association is not a claim I would tolerate if it were made against someone I generally support (like the whole Reverend Wright issue with Obama). Yes, there’s plenty of hypocrisy on the Right, and my own (somewhat biased view) is that there even seems to be a little more there than on the left at times. But I don’t think it’s hypocritical for someone to unknowingly employ an individual that violates their stated ethics.

Leave a Reply