Why, yes, we are. 
dems close ranks.
I really think that we need to make more of the sodomite manifesto (including threats to go after the young sons of non-perverts) which was read into the Congressional record some years back. That was one sick piece of work, and I can’t believe that it even made it into the Congressional record, especially in that day, but there it is.
The sodomite who wrote it later tried to walk it back as “satire”, but any normal non-criminal person knows that some things are indeed sacred, including children and threats to their innocence.
And he was only ahead of his time in openly stating what the true goals of sodomites are.
I don't see the author claiming the old post aren't accurate.
Where is this net-archived article from?
I guess a few comments are in order:
1) Perhaps some people here think that simulating the rape of a child is somehow funny, but I have yet to see anyone here post anything close, much less make videos and tell jokes about something that atrocious. To put it another way, if Trump had done the same with some old tweets, does anyone think Leftists would be defending him?
2) As far as Pizzagate, the reason it got started was because of the Wikileaks E-Mails and some really weird crap these people were saying to each other. Pizzagate has NOT been discredited, it is dormant. The way to actually discredit Pizzagate is to simply explain what those E-Mails were referring to and why such a strange ‘code’ was used. I haven’t yet heard anyone attempt to do that...but maybe someone else has.
3) The comparison with the Child Abuse hysteria of the 1980s and 1990s is TOTALLY INVALID here. During that hysteria, a bunch of sick social workers working with sick feminist DAs fabricated abuse stories in children (where the children ‘remembered’ things after been led-on, 100%, in that direction) to ruin the lives of innocent people. In these cases (Pizzagate and Gunn), the EVIDENCE is right in front of us, either sick jokes, sick mimicking of child rape, or some really, really, strange things said in E-Mails between leading Democrats that, to this day, have not yet been explained.
Why is someone a “troll” when they find facts and tweet and post about it?
To me, a troll is someone who instigates without facts or with fake news. If you are presenting indisputable facts, then you are not a “troll”, even if you make people angry.
Um...so?
Seriously, "smearing" pedophiles? How can you (further) discredit or embarrass someone doing something so disgusting and illegal in the first place? What, does this person feel even a modicum of sympathy for pedophiles? Eff that, they deserve whatever they get and more. Smear them? They're lucky they're not $%@!<% shot on sight.
Hollyweird has been trolling us for years with their degenerate content in movies and tv shows. It is about time they get a dose of their medicine.
Is it even possible to smear a pedophile?
It takes people like Cernovich because our elected representatives will not do anything on these issues. They would rather blather about marginal tax rates and pretend that they are pro life on occasion. Many are compromised, more are scared because they think the voters are represented by CNN and the New York Times. Has National Review run pro kid-touching piece yet?
Why, yes, we are.
Slate is a demonstrably pedophile-friendly organization. This is at least the third time I’ve seen pedo defenses from that quarter.
An actor by the name of Issac Kappy has been naming names of Hollywood pedos - BIG names. Google him, hes made a lot of videos where he’s opening up about the Hollywood swamp. Here’s a short synopsis from Bill Smith that runs 15 mins. Informative, https://youtu.be/inYn3kubSuY
Because, in Hollywood, sex with children is not just ok, but funny!
Actually, it seems Hollywood has a horrific view of sex. I thought I'd try watching some of the Bruce Willis comedy central roast. I remember the Dean Martin Friar's Club roasts, and between Buddy Hackett and some of the others, the comedy could get a bit... "blue." But when I switched on the show tonight, the host was introducing some blonde comedienne, and the first words out of her mouth were how nice the host was, and she'd bet he'd perform oral sex on her. I'm no prude, I'm actually quite good, and creative, when it comes to cursing. I like comedy that's in bad taste, when it's creative and funny. But her speech was just disgusting. Her next few sentences (at which point I changed the channel... It couldn't have been more than 30 seconds total) were little more than someone with tourettes syndrome!
Mark
Smear implies false promotion of negative gossip...this is all true, sorry.
John the Baptizer named sins of public officials, too, so these men are in good company.
So today Slate.com and the publisher of The NY Times are demanding to know when the right became entitled to use the left’s tactics.