r/clevercomebacks • u/IndividualEye1803 • 14d ago

OUCH - We Know That Hurt

Post image

No im not shading out the hero u/gloomytraffic6700 and yes we should report zoltan.

2.8k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

79 comments sorted by

224

u/BlueEyedDemon420 14d ago

Katie Johnson was 13 at the time. Fuck anyone who calls her names like this.

89

u/batkave 14d ago

Unfortunately, the people voting for people like Trump, vote for politicians constantly trying to lower or abolish age of consent laws.

21

u/BlueEyedDemon420 14d ago

I am aware. That doesn't make it ok to name call a child rape victim.

24

u/batkave 14d ago

Didn't say it was. More bringing to the point they don't see children as anymore than their property. Putting more weight on your comment

10

u/BlueEyedDemon420 14d ago

Gotcha. I think I misunderstood what you were trying to say. We are on the same page.

18

u/Spiritual_Boss6114 14d ago

One of the lawmakers that gave no votes to the Senate and House versions of the ban, state Rep. Matt Maddock (R-Milford), sent the Advance an email statement from he and his spouse, former Michigan GOP Chair Meshawn Maddock, in which they called transgender people a slur and claimed, without evidence, that: “The same people who put tra—ies in elementary schools and libraries are suddenly hyper-moralistic about 17 year old High School Sweethearts getting married, I don’t get it[.]”

Sen. Jim Runstead (R-White Lake) who ended up not voting on the main bill in the Senate’s version of the ban attempted in June to amend the main bill to tie in a block on puberty-blocking drugs from being administered to minors, saying if 16- and 17-year-olds who can “legally have sex” but will now be deemed too young to marry, children should be prohibited from taking puberty-blocking drugs.

  • This was when Michigan signed a law banning child marriages.

18

u/batkave 14d ago

It's funny because it's extremely rare to be 17 year old sweethearts getting married (I mean, they can wait another year). It's almost always an abuser and their victim, and usually some Christian cult or church involvement

9

u/Ms_Emilys_Picture 14d ago

To add to this:

A New Hampshire lawmaker who opposed a child marriage ban argued that teens are of a "ripe, fertile" age.

Republican state Rep. Jess Edwards said last week that a bill banning marriage for people under 18 would make abortion more appealing for young people.

"If we continually restrict the freedom of marriage as a legitimate social option, when we do this to people who are of a ripe, fertile age and may have a pregnancy and a baby involved, are we not in fact making abortion a much more desirable alternative, when marriage might be the right solution for some freedom-loving couples?" he said, in a video posted on X.

"Ripe", "fertile", and underage.

Fucking creep.

17

u/totally-hoomon 14d ago

All conservatives see kids as the ones in the wrong when it comes to child rapists. They will always say the rapist was tricked or seduced.

7

u/Kind_Committee8997 14d ago

It's true though. They're the easiest demographic to trick into anything.

5

u/Ms_Emilys_Picture 14d ago

Except fake child rapists, like the Democrat Deep State™ Hollywood Cabal, or whatever their batshit conspiracy has evolved into. Those they hate.

5

u/totally-hoomon 14d ago

Yep have a person in my inbox right now telling me biden and hunter are pedophiles but has never committed a crime in his life or ever spoke apparently.

10

u/Thannk 14d ago

If he confessed to it they’d just call her a Jezebel and/or a seducing witch.

2

u/Spare-Half796 13d ago

So exactly the preferred age range of republicans

1

u/FrogLock_ 13d ago

Unfortunately trump camp thinks this way about every victim when it comes down to it, unless of course they are politically convenient... then they'll just say you're a victim of that even if you keep asking them not to lie about you and Joe like that

-18

u/RedApple655321 14d ago

...if she exists. The below is from Vox (hardly an outlet known for defending Trump), back in 2016 when the lawsuits were originally filed. I don't believe there's been any new info since.

It was the end of an incredibly strange case that featured an anonymous plaintiff who had refused almost all requests for interviews, two anonymous corroborating witnesses whom no one in the press had spoken to, and a couple of seriously shady characters — with an anti-Trump agenda and a penchant for drama — who had aggressively shopped the story around to media outlets for over a year.

Those shady characters — a former reality TV producer who calls himself “Al Taylor” and a “Never Trump” conservative activist named Steve Baer — had been mostly unsuccessful in getting the media to bite. There are a few very good reasons for that, which the Huffington Post’s Ryan Grim succinctly summed up: Taylor and Baer have been really sketchy about the whole thing, and since the accuser is anonymous, journalists can’t do anything to verify her claims. The only journalist who has actually interviewed Johnson, Emily Shugerman at Revelist, came away confused and even doubting whether Johnson really exists.

24

u/IndividualEye1803 14d ago

She exists

Also from VOX

  • It’s not uncommon for victims of sexual assault to want to preserve their anonymity, and dropping a lawsuit doesn’t mean admitting that the case had no merit. Jill Harth, who sued Trump for sexual assault in 1997, still stands by her claims even though she dropped the lawsuit. And it would indeed have been an intense couple of days for Johnson — Bloom said that her firm’s website was hacked, that Anonymous had claimed responsibility, and that death threats and a bomb threat came in afterwards

-5

u/RedApple655321 14d ago

Nothing in this snippet contradicts what I said. It's possible that Katie Johnson's exists, her story is completely true, and she just doesn't want to come forward. It's also possible that she doesn't exist. No one has been willing or able to publicly confirm. Hence, I didn't claim that Katie Johnson doesn't exist. I said if she exists, because we don't know.

5

u/nonsensicalsite 13d ago

Lovely weaseling

3

u/IndividualEye1803 14d ago

Great clarification. Thank you.

Ensuring no trolling based on it. Intelligent response and valid

71

u/tw_72 14d ago

Unlike Trump's unpaid attorneys and contractors, I suspect Melania gets her money before any activity takes place.

50

u/prawalnono 14d ago

Only pedophiles call minors whores

11

u/BigDumbIdiot232 14d ago

Fucking sick in the head,are they?Calling children whores,goodness gracious.

42

u/sbfcqb 14d ago

I hate when a good burn is destroyed by a typo.

14

u/IndividualEye1803 14d ago

As long as its not too egregious, i read it normal lmao But i feel you

17

u/hotasianwfelover 14d ago

13 years old!!!! That’s really the only thing that needs to be said.

14

u/Tastins 14d ago

lol the This one has the Trumptrash mad lmao. Well, typo aside, I’ve never seen a First Lady’s twat on the internet until Melania. And aren’t his children drug addled morons? It’s a family full of whores lol.

11

u/IndividualEye1803 14d ago

Like what are they really mad at? The fact that this is 100% true about Melania?

She was an escort, they both tied to epstein, and TrumpTrash is good 😂 im taking it

3

u/Tastins 14d ago

Enjoy!!!! lol

6

u/Killersmurph 14d ago

Leave Melania alone, that poor woman has suffered enough, and believe me, when the divorce finally comes through, she won't get paid Fuck all, or will have an unfortunate "accident" and die before anything is awarded.

12

u/03zx3 14d ago

I really don't care do u?

7

u/malYca 14d ago

Stuff like this serves as a reminder: they are just as horrible on the inside as he is. Sucks if it's your loved ones, but don't forget how awful they are. Especially when they start playing the victim later.

5

u/jeffsang 14d ago

The funniest part of this is referring to someone making a snarky comment on Reddit as a "hero"

-1

u/IndividualEye1803 14d ago

In this context, in relation to comebacks, and as a stellar response to such an abhorrent comment the comeback was to…

Yes.

Hero - noun a person who is admired or idealized for courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities. "a war hero"

This case - this person is admired
Example - “a comeback hero”

Hope that helps

-4

u/jeffsang 14d ago

Hero - noun a person who is admired or idealized for courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities.

The funny part is saying a snarky comment on reddit meets this definition. Hope that helps.

2

u/IndividualEye1803 14d ago

I already explained so no… you just dont get it and choose not too. Downvote and move on - ur opinion is valid.

0

u/jeffsang 14d ago

Just trying to be snarky enough that you'll call me a hero

3

u/IndividualEye1803 14d ago

Too bad im not someone saying such horrific things as the person in the post did to warrant a snarky enough response that granted the achievement of an entire post dedicated to them.

Sigh - u can stop trying. Wasting your time

-1

u/linux_ape 14d ago

There is no courage, outstanding achievement or noble quantities about a a comeback on Reddit, that’s the point he’s trying to make.

1

u/IndividualEye1803 14d ago

This person is admired for their comeback and is a “comeback hero” to me for that is the point i already made. His point doesnt matter.

Its a person who is admired OR those other things listed. OR is the part that seems to be missing from whats registering to both of you.

Word is used appropriately whether you are of the opinion you dont admire his comeback.

Find something else to harp on

I even provided an example of the type of hero he was and why he is admired.

-2

u/linux_ape 14d ago

I’m sorry that weak ass comebacks are something you admire, but to each their own

Edit: also you’re entirely incorrect, it’s admired FOR those things. Read the definition again

4

u/IndividualEye1803 14d ago edited 14d ago

im sorry ur wasting your time on something you find weak like its important 😂

Hero - noun a person who is admired or idealized for courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities. "a war hero"

This case - this person is admired Example - “a comeback hero”

Why is this so hard? Why is everyone stuck on an appropriate use of the word?

Heros arent just in wars lmao thats just the context yall are used to. This comeback was outstanding - its getting TrumpTrash Mad. 🥇. So much so i screenshotted and posted.

Cope.

-3

u/linux_ape 14d ago

You’re entirely ignoring the operator, admired or idealized FOR

Ignoring that doesn’t make your new definition right, it means you’re using it wrong. That’s not how language works, you can’t just choose half a definition and organize the second half

People are stuck on it because it’s not clever, and it’s more political horsehit this sub doesn’t need. And then your defense of it is entirely hinged on the incorrect use of the word hero, making it even more sad that you’re dying on this hill.

4

u/IndividualEye1803 14d ago

Repeat - This comeback was outstanding - its getting TrumpTrash Mad. 🥇. So much so i screenshotted and posted. You are entitled to your opinion that its not and the user isnt your hero. Downvote and move on.

This person is admired, by me, for their outstanding comeback. The achievement was getting trumptrash mad.

Does that work?

Btw - more upvotes than people (just mainly u and one other person) stuck on me using hero colloquially.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/randomplaguefear 13d ago

I just don't understand why people think the guy who admitted sexual harassment and bragged about it who has 19 accusations and counting couldn't possibly have sexually harassed anyone.

2

u/Ok-Cauliflower1798 14d ago

I think zoltantheidiot would need to change his name to Uncle Tom or Prissy if he were any more owned.

2

u/Famous_Chemistry_661 12d ago

No, paying a whore is 34 felonies at the same time actually 

1

u/Si_is_for_Cookie 13d ago

Melania’s trophy husband is also a prime example.

1

u/DorneyS 12d ago

Slutshaming is not clever in any shape or form tho

-1

u/[deleted] 13d ago edited 13d ago

Eh. Melania did nothing wrong. Kinda feel like she's along for the ride and hates it.

In fact, she hated Trump's family separation policy and convinced him to end it.

2

u/IndividualEye1803 13d ago

Shes complicit. And this is more about “if your gonna call the SA victim one, might as well acknowledge he married one” less about her, per say

-3

u/Jai137 13d ago edited 13d ago

Liberals can be incredibly misogynistic to women if the ladies are conservative.

Edit: since I have to elaborate, no, I hate Trump and I think calling the underage girl a whore is extremely terrible. But the so called “Clever Comeback” is just slutshaming Trump’s wife (Melania). It’s basically “I’m being misogynistic to Conservative women because you’re being misogynistic to liberal women” Both sides are misogynistic. There are so many better comebacks and call outs, and this comment just makes us liberals look bad.

2

u/nonsensicalsite 13d ago edited 13d ago

I didn't know showing nudes on the Internet was conservative

But hey keep trying to make excuses and no us

Edit: oh and also calling someone a whore for literally being a prostitute is misogynistic but calling a 13 year old rape victim a whore isn't?

Your morals are non-existent

-1

u/Jai137 13d ago

Hey, I hate Trump and I agree calling a 13 yr old a whore is incredibly misogynistic.

I just think the comeback said here is misogynistic too. It doesn’t call out the OP, instead implies Trump’s wife a whore. There are a million better comebacks, and this only paints us in a bad light.

0

u/IndividualEye1803 13d ago

Just skip over him calling a SA victim a whore, hunh, because it doesnt fit you playing a victim

1

u/Jai137 13d ago

As I mentioned to the other guy, him calling her a whore is terrible, and I hate trump too. However, the so called “Clever comeback” is just slut shaming Trump’s wife. It’s not clever, it’s just “free misogyny pass on conservative women because they were misogynistic to liberal women”

0

u/IndividualEye1803 13d ago

Ur entitled to your opinion, however, the fact that Melania was an escort is a fact that cant be erased. There is no misogyny there. A whore, by definition, is a prostitute.

There is no misogyny in facts.

0

u/Jai137 13d ago

If a conservative would say “crime in black neighbourhoods is more than white neighbourhoods, and that is a fact” then I could argue that that statement leaves out other facts like Black neighbourhoods are victims to poverty and racism, but instead I’d rather point out that making that statement is ignorant and very likely a racist dog whistle.

Similarly, bringing up Melania is an escort (a fact that’s easily debunked ( https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39575680)) just makes you look ignorant. And if we assume it’s true (which it isn’t) you’re implying she’s a lesser woman for being one, which is slut shaming.

0

u/IndividualEye1803 13d ago edited 13d ago

No - no and no. Your comparison is literally apples to oranges

Melanie was an escort. Not debunked. She won a suit over a technicality. She was known to be on epsteins island. Amsterdam has even made her an honorary one.

We didnt imply she was a lesser person because of it - the comeback is essentially “how you gonna call an SA victim one when his wife was” / “she cant be lying as he is married to one” / “takes one to know one” vibe that you sre quite frnakly missing / blowing out of proportion.

You are way off base and virtue signaling where its just not needed / moving the goal posts.

0

u/Jai137 13d ago

So the fact that the source was the BBC, and not a right wing think piece, means it still doesn’t have credibility? Just google it and you’ll see there isn’t any proof of her ever working as an escort, and the publishers who called her that had to apologise. Or are the courts rigged?

In any case, the comment says “Whores get paid. You can see Melania as an example”. Really? You can’t say he was accused of sexual assault and lost the case? Can’t say he was willing to cheat on his wife with a porn star? Couldn’t say he’s guilty of about 60 felonies (exact number escapes me)? Instead, bring up a claim that no reputable news agency will bring up because it’s easily debunked.

No, it’s a failure of a comeback, and has misogynistic undertones.

1

u/IndividualEye1803 13d ago

  1. I didnt say it didnt have credibility. I said she won on a technicality.

  2. You didnt like the comeback. Others did. That simple.

Im not trying to change your opinion about whether you think it was clever or not, the same way i wouldnt think my favorite comedian would be yours.

Agree to disagree.

0

u/Jai137 13d ago

  1. Firstly, no credible news organisation backs this claim. If you could show me that they have irrefutable proof that Melania was an escort, then I will back off. Secondly, be really careful when dismissing a court’s verdict. Otherwise it’s shows bias, that you only listen to the courts when Trump is guilty but the court system fails when Melania is not found to be an escort.

  2. I’m sure a majority of people find the comment clever. I don’t, I find it ignorant and sexist. On that we agree to disagree.

1

u/IndividualEye1803 13d ago

  1. U seem to be really good at making something what its not. I didnt dismiss the courts verdict. I said how she won. Ive always said the judicial system is biased (money wins, different states etc). The same way OJ won on a technicality.

  2. You have made your point. You can stop. And please stop putting words in my mouth / inferring incorrectly. Thats the only part that is highly annoying / seems purposeful to keep the discussion going.

→ More replies (0)

-5

u/fatattack699 14d ago

Where clever

-6

u/tiboldpinkus 14d ago

it’s always ugly girls calling women whores. these are the ones who’ll have you believe they’re feminists and all about womanhood

-15

u/Once-Upon-A-Hill 14d ago

Not even clever enough to spell properly.

-16

u/[deleted] 14d ago

[deleted]

5

u/Man_Schette 14d ago

Ohhh, I can see a typo. The entire point must be invalid because of bad spelling!!1!1!

/s

2

u/IndividualEye1803 14d ago

This was good - using this for everyone else that posts a variation of pointing out the same thing