Can I ask why no one official is using the terms “rape” or “sexual assault” to describe this? When someone plies someone with alcohol to the point that they can’t consent and then has sex with them - that is rape and sexual assault. He did not “pressure” his teenage staffer into sex. He used alcohol to rape and sexually assault her.
IANAL, but from what I understand, if they described him as such prior to his conviction in a court of law, he could sue them for defamation. This is why you always see the word “alleged” attached before and during trial.
Ah! Got it. There’s no “alleged” in front of what I’ve seen though. I’d take “allegedly raped” over the tribune’s “inappropriate conduct” or whatever minimizing term they used and “pressured into sex”.
That’s exactly my point. It was rape but every official outlet is using minimizing terms. “Inappropriate conduct” is what the Texas Tribune used to describe this rape.
As someone who works in the news and publishing industry, this is part of the reason you see so many headlines worded that way. The other reason is that it can compromise cases or hurt someone’s case down the road because if every news outlet reports it as rape or sexual assault, they can argue that it’s impossible to get a fair trial (much like Trump has attempted to do). So there are strict rules for journalists on reporting at most publications to prevent lawsuits and interfering with cases.
[*The committee concluded that because the aide was intoxicated, she “could not effectively consent to intercourse and could not indicate whether [Slaton’s conduct] was welcome or unwelcome.”*](https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/06/texas-legislature-bryan-slaton-investigation/)
It’s still on the table, especially because the aide went to the drugstore the next day to get plan B.. the irony of which is not lost on me due to Slayton filing HB 3326 ~ [which charges both the pregnant woman and the abortion provider with homicide.](https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/542436-gop-texas-lawmaker-introduces-bill-to-allow-death-penalty-for-women-who/amp/)
True, it isn’t.
I’m more concerned with his lack of using a condom whereby the aide “might’ve” become pregnant.. and then he’d either force her to term or get her locked up for having an abortion.
He’s a stellar asshole, stellar I say..
It prevents implantation of a fertilized egg, thereby causing the death of said egg cell. ***If*** you believe that life begins at conception then it technically counts.
If said hypothetical fertilized egg is already implanted it will not do anything to reverse the implantation.
Prevention is not the same as expulsion. I understand where you’re coming from as an ideological standpoint.
However, it’s gross misinformation to state plan b could be considered an abortifacient when it’s been proven to not affect ongoing pregnancies or cause a miscarriage should the egg make it to implantation.
They expelled him anyway. He's still technically a rep until an election is held to replace him. He doesn't have to be in the room.
In passed decades, they might have done him the "courtesy" of skipping the expulsion after he resigned. Good ol boys club and all that. I'm actually happy they went through with it.
I thought he just was, and his name was removed, and GeneforTexas posted it. Apparently the vote was unanimous to expell him, 147-0. Or is this another guy?
I'm surprised that they even considered expulsion.
Sexual assault is a requirement for GOP leadership.
It's like when someone joins a gang they have to show their commitment by doing a crime.
She’s 19, although morally wrong. There’s nothing illegal about them sleeping together, unless they have some legal ethical obligation about not sleeping with aids. Although the drinking part is another matter but I’d imagine that wouldn’t hold any jail time.
She was under 21 and he plied her with alcohol. Also, he was an employer pressuring an intoxicated employee into having sex. I believe legal scholars use the term “rape.”
Providing alcohol to someone under 21 is a class A misdemeanor, so up to a year in jail. (Tex. Alco. Bev. Code § 106.06), but see Tex. Const. Art. III, § 14, which states that members of the legislature are immune from arrest during the legislative session, except in cases of treason, felony, or breach of the peace. But now he's no longer a member of the legislature, so APD could very well arrest him for the providing alcohol crime alone.
Consent under pressure is not consent
Drunk people cannot consent
That's not even talking about the obvious power discrepancies with his position, and age in relation to her.
He got a teen drunk and raped her.
Drunk anyone can not consent. Their adults, the guy might of been a predator but adults sleeping together isn’t rape. The issue is, what’s “drunk” and what’s “pressured”. Both of those are open to interpretation depending on your view, if it’s rape then it’s rape and call it that. OP used pressured in the headline so I’m going off that.
Correct and I’ve already said the under age drinking is bad but that doesn’t make it rape nor does it make it an offense that typically see jail time. I could care less if he’s jailed for it but by the article I read the staffer isn’t even calling it rape
I think the phrase you are looking for is I COULDN'T care less. The phrase you used conveys that you do, in fact, care. Here is a helpful guide https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om7O0MFkmpw&t=48s
Have you never heard of Harvey Weinstein? 3rd degree rape and 1st degree for sexual assault all for "pressure". A state representative holds power over his staff, the threat is implied whether it exists or not, and our laws uphold that coercion equals rape.
Yes.
But, the law is clear. He retains the seat and will continue to collect salary and benefits unless expelled.
He can resign, but it doesn't do anything legally.
One thing the resignation does is that it gives his colleagues "permission" to vote for his expulsion. He's basically saying "it's okay for you to vote me out - by me resigning already, you can vote to expel me without facing potential intra-party repercussions for doing so". The power of the [Eleventh Commandment](https://politicaldictionary.com/words/eleventh-commandment/) remains very strong, and by pre-resigning this effectively negates that.
And that’s the absolute facade of politics. When regular people resign, they stop getting paid and lose benefits. So much for politicians being a “representation of the people”. It’s all such a joke.
Why isn’t he being prosecuted? https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/crime-and-abuse-power-offenses-and-offenders-beyond-reach-law#:~:text=A%20simple%20definition%20of%20the,individuals%2C%20organizations%2C%20or%20governments. It’s insane to me how these people are engaging in something criminal but never actually experience any legal consequences. There’s still time for that I’m aware but honestly why didn’t they lead with criminal charges?
Yeah, they act like expulsion is worse, like being an elected politician has elevated them to this higher plane.
“Forget the victims or the law! His honor is at stake!”
Kinda telling where their heads are at.
Here the tldr:
The report also alleged that after Slaton and the woman had unprotected sex in the early hours of April 1, Slaton drove her home, and she later went to a drugstore to purchase Plan B medication to prevent a pregnancy. Slaton, a staunch abortion opponent, later tried to intimidate the woman and her friends into not speaking about the incident
The victim. But you're correct, he will probably face a divorce as well, but you never know with maga karens, any sane woman would have already divorced him just because the legislation he helped pass.
>The committee report said Slaton had invited the 19-year-old woman to his Austin apartment late March 31 and gave her a large cup of rum and coke, then refilled it twice — rendering her unable to “effectively consent to intercourse and could not indicate whether it was welcome or unwelcome.”
Is this not a felony?
From the report:
> (16). All or part of the foregoing also constitute offenses under Texas law, specifically the
following:
> a. the offense of furnishing alcohol to a minor under Section 106.06, Alcoholic Beverage
Code;
b. an unlawful employment practice under Sections 21.142 and 21.1065, Labor Code;
c. the offense of abuse of official capacity under Section 39.02, Penal Code; and
d. the offense of official oppression under Section 39.03, Penal Code
a, c, and d are Class A misdemeanors.
fwiw - I'm not a lawyer, but I work with litigation lawyers regularly.
Rape is extremely difficult to prove in terms of open-and-shut-evidence - that usually doesn't exist, and verdicts become emotional questions of who the jury likes more. That's not something judges like to see happen in their courtrooms.
Right now, we simply don't have any info beyond the initial claims - she says he gave her alcohol, but he might say she served herself without asking him. She says he rendered her unable to consent, but he might claim that she kept refilling his drink and rendered him insensible. Judges often don't like to let these kinds of cases even proceed where there is no hard evidence.
Given the age difference, it would be a long-shot claim for him to say she manipulated him instead of him taking advantage of her, but I've seen more unlikely things happen. I saw one rape case get dismissed because the defense found out that the victim had perjured herself in a completely unrelated custody case, and the judge called the DA back into chambers so he could chew her out for bringing the charges at all.
It's up to the DA to decide whether to pursue the case, and then it would be up to the jury to decide if they believe him or if they believe her, and if they believe her enough.
We need to elect DAs that will smile when the judge chews them out and say "see you next week." And then bring the next case to trial.
Judges aren't there to like it they are there to make sure the law is followed.
This is why many large jurisdictions frequently rotate prosecutors between judges - so you're not afraid to piss off the judge. In a small town though, it's not all that simple - the DA and the judge might be one of 5 lawyers in town and at be at a political deadlock. And as a prosecutor being in front of the same judge day in and day out, it's important to stay credible. Things like novel legal decisions (which come up a lot more often than people think) can go either way and it could mean a crucial piece of evidence goes in or out.
If I had to guess the real reason they avoided those terms is because they don't want to imply they're making some kind of legal determination. Things get messy very fast when separation of powers gets involved.
Ehhhh, I imagine this exact scenario is common across multiple professions. While it is certainly immoral and debatedly, it should be illegal to get someone intoxicated with the intent of sexual intercourse. A prosecutor would be hard pressed to prove a crime.
He's a REPUBLICAN in TEXAS, we won't face any actual accountability.
If he were a TX teacher, he would've lost his job and retirement, but since he is a senator or a cop, they are free to diddle kids to their hearts content and then still able to collect retirement.
I'm surprised Briscoe Cain voted in favor. The guy was a gay cheerleader in high school and has done everything he can since then to quash and squelch anything pro-LGBTQ
Him being a representative anywhere is bad for people everywhere. He still has a vote on legislation that affects then entire state, regardless of whether or not he votes in the interests of his constituents. Frankly, the fact that he is even a representative says a lot about the constituents who voted him in.
Sure but i didn't vote for him and I've gotten to lobby to my reps personally so it would have really grossed me out even more if I knew it was one of them.
All this guy did outside of being a creepy perv was write legislation to take away liberties form Texans...not kidding... that is all of his bills summed up.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/05/08/texas-rep-bryan-slaton-resigns-after-sex-alcohol-misconduct-with-aide/70196879007/
“Slaton, a married father and a former pastor, did not deny having sex with the woman, the report said.”
EXACTLY! How many decades have the republicans held themselves up as the family morals party and along comes Trump with multiple affairs, sex with porn stars, sexually assaulting women and business practices so shady that Al Capone would be jealous….and the Republican Party just ignores it all and continues their dipshittery. This is why I quit voting Republican.
I live about 4 minutes walk from this walking advertisement for abortion. About a week ago someone protested outside his house and my wife and I just laughed and laughed. After having to endure his election and his representation of us, I can't think of someone who is more deserving a quick, sharp, and hard fall from what passes for grace in the Texas legislature. Next time I see this two-legged bag of horse assholes in Walmart I'm certainly going to ask him how his political career is doing.
They only did this because they have a solid lead in house seats. You can bet the whole barn that they would have held their noses and kept him had he been pivotal to holding the majority.
You could almost say he was....grooming her. Weird how that projection happens so often with the party of faith and family or whatever they claim to be.
That's not how you spell rape. You do not give an underage teen alcohol, drinking age is 21. Drunk teens cannot consent so it's immediately rape if sexual activity occurred. Fuck off bias media, say it like it is
Don't expel him. There's no consequences for rape when you're in office with an R next to your name. Just blame the dems for a me too witch hunt hoax and mention antifa and socialism.
Eh. Until they actually do something, it doesn’t matter. They’ll posture and pretend to be mad. And he’ll come out with a statement about being an alcoholic. And they’ll move on to inventing border crises.
The last time a member was expelled was 1927.
Almost made it 100 years.
Almost only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades - from what I've been told
Nuclear weapons too.
Swept it under the rug for 100yr.
Can I ask why no one official is using the terms “rape” or “sexual assault” to describe this? When someone plies someone with alcohol to the point that they can’t consent and then has sex with them - that is rape and sexual assault. He did not “pressure” his teenage staffer into sex. He used alcohol to rape and sexually assault her.
IANAL, but from what I understand, if they described him as such prior to his conviction in a court of law, he could sue them for defamation. This is why you always see the word “alleged” attached before and during trial.
Worked with survivors for years, and this is correct in any public setting. In private, we always believed the survivor however.
Ah! Got it. There’s no “alleged” in front of what I’ve seen though. I’d take “allegedly raped” over the tribune’s “inappropriate conduct” or whatever minimizing term they used and “pressured into sex”.
Inappropriate conduct sounds like lewd comments were made. This sounds like it was rape.
That’s exactly my point. It was rape but every official outlet is using minimizing terms. “Inappropriate conduct” is what the Texas Tribune used to describe this rape.
As someone who works in the news and publishing industry, this is part of the reason you see so many headlines worded that way. The other reason is that it can compromise cases or hurt someone’s case down the road because if every news outlet reports it as rape or sexual assault, they can argue that it’s impossible to get a fair trial (much like Trump has attempted to do). So there are strict rules for journalists on reporting at most publications to prevent lawsuits and interfering with cases.
[*The committee concluded that because the aide was intoxicated, she “could not effectively consent to intercourse and could not indicate whether [Slaton’s conduct] was welcome or unwelcome.”*](https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/06/texas-legislature-bryan-slaton-investigation/) It’s still on the table, especially because the aide went to the drugstore the next day to get plan B.. the irony of which is not lost on me due to Slayton filing HB 3326 ~ [which charges both the pregnant woman and the abortion provider with homicide.](https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/542436-gop-texas-lawmaker-introduces-bill-to-allow-death-penalty-for-women-who/amp/)
Plan b is not an abortifacient
True, it isn’t. I’m more concerned with his lack of using a condom whereby the aide “might’ve” become pregnant.. and then he’d either force her to term or get her locked up for having an abortion. He’s a stellar asshole, stellar I say..
I feel he would have taken her for an abortion. These are “rules for thee, not for me” people.
It prevents implantation of a fertilized egg, thereby causing the death of said egg cell. ***If*** you believe that life begins at conception then it technically counts.
If said hypothetical fertilized egg is already implanted it will not do anything to reverse the implantation. Prevention is not the same as expulsion. I understand where you’re coming from as an ideological standpoint. However, it’s gross misinformation to state plan b could be considered an abortifacient when it’s been proven to not affect ongoing pregnancies or cause a miscarriage should the egg make it to implantation.
Having non consensual sex is RAPE
Yes, yes it is — which is why it’s still on the table to charge him with
It's rape
To answer your question, this is Texas.
I had the same thoughts but haven't been able to verify it yet bc he resigned before he got expelled
They expelled him anyway. He's still technically a rep until an election is held to replace him. He doesn't have to be in the room. In passed decades, they might have done him the "courtesy" of skipping the expulsion after he resigned. Good ol boys club and all that. I'm actually happy they went through with it.
Yeah
I thought he just was, and his name was removed, and GeneforTexas posted it. Apparently the vote was unanimous to expell him, 147-0. Or is this another guy?
I'm surprised that they even considered expulsion. Sexual assault is a requirement for GOP leadership. It's like when someone joins a gang they have to show their commitment by doing a crime.
It is not enough to expulsion of the guy. He needs to go to jail for a long time as well.
She’s 19, although morally wrong. There’s nothing illegal about them sleeping together, unless they have some legal ethical obligation about not sleeping with aids. Although the drinking part is another matter but I’d imagine that wouldn’t hold any jail time.
She was under 21 and he plied her with alcohol. Also, he was an employer pressuring an intoxicated employee into having sex. I believe legal scholars use the term “rape.”
Providing alcohol to someone under 21 is a class A misdemeanor, so up to a year in jail. (Tex. Alco. Bev. Code § 106.06), but see Tex. Const. Art. III, § 14, which states that members of the legislature are immune from arrest during the legislative session, except in cases of treason, felony, or breach of the peace. But now he's no longer a member of the legislature, so APD could very well arrest him for the providing alcohol crime alone.
He got her drunk underage to have his way with her Thats rape Pretty illegal.
Pressured and rape are two things. He clearly needs to be removed from office but unfortunately there’s no article with the post to give any facts.
Consent under pressure is not consent Drunk people cannot consent That's not even talking about the obvious power discrepancies with his position, and age in relation to her. He got a teen drunk and raped her.
[удалено]
Drunk teenagers cannot consent.
Drunk anyone can not consent. Their adults, the guy might of been a predator but adults sleeping together isn’t rape. The issue is, what’s “drunk” and what’s “pressured”. Both of those are open to interpretation depending on your view, if it’s rape then it’s rape and call it that. OP used pressured in the headline so I’m going off that.
19 year olds are not legally allowed to drink.
Correct and I’ve already said the under age drinking is bad but that doesn’t make it rape nor does it make it an offense that typically see jail time. I could care less if he’s jailed for it but by the article I read the staffer isn’t even calling it rape
I think the phrase you are looking for is I COULDN'T care less. The phrase you used conveys that you do, in fact, care. Here is a helpful guide https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om7O0MFkmpw&t=48s
Have you never heard of Harvey Weinstein? 3rd degree rape and 1st degree for sexual assault all for "pressure". A state representative holds power over his staff, the threat is implied whether it exists or not, and our laws uphold that coercion equals rape.
It's rape.
Didn't he resign yesterday? https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/08/bryon-slaton-pressure-resign-texas-house/
Yes. But, the law is clear. He retains the seat and will continue to collect salary and benefits unless expelled. He can resign, but it doesn't do anything legally.
How Michael Scott of him to declare his resignation.
One thing the resignation does is that it gives his colleagues "permission" to vote for his expulsion. He's basically saying "it's okay for you to vote me out - by me resigning already, you can vote to expel me without facing potential intra-party repercussions for doing so". The power of the [Eleventh Commandment](https://politicaldictionary.com/words/eleventh-commandment/) remains very strong, and by pre-resigning this effectively negates that.
I'm waiting for him to do his Dwight K Schrute statement of regret.
Gene's the fucking man.
2nd that. Get’em Gene!
Hell yeah he is!
You can't fire me! I QUIT!
You can check out, but you can never leave.
“Don’t Hotel California my Texas!”
And that’s the absolute facade of politics. When regular people resign, they stop getting paid and lose benefits. So much for politicians being a “representation of the people”. It’s all such a joke.
Why isn’t he being prosecuted? https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/crime-and-abuse-power-offenses-and-offenders-beyond-reach-law#:~:text=A%20simple%20definition%20of%20the,individuals%2C%20organizations%2C%20or%20governments. It’s insane to me how these people are engaging in something criminal but never actually experience any legal consequences. There’s still time for that I’m aware but honestly why didn’t they lead with criminal charges?
Yeah, they act like expulsion is worse, like being an elected politician has elevated them to this higher plane. “Forget the victims or the law! His honor is at stake!” Kinda telling where their heads are at.
The ruling class. They are above us peasants. The rules are completely different.
salary? don't we pay the legislature in like sticks of gum?
$600 / mo
Here the tldr: The report also alleged that after Slaton and the woman had unprotected sex in the early hours of April 1, Slaton drove her home, and she later went to a drugstore to purchase Plan B medication to prevent a pregnancy. Slaton, a staunch abortion opponent, later tried to intimidate the woman and her friends into not speaking about the incident
I just read the report, he even emailed threats from his business account. He certainly believes to be untouchable.
I hope she take half
In Texas? There's for sure a very low limit on the compensation she could get.
The wife?
The victim. But you're correct, he will probably face a divorce as well, but you never know with maga karens, any sane woman would have already divorced him just because the legislation he helped pass.
If he ain't got power and name recognition she out.
To shreds.
What a despicable human being.
"the woman"???? She's a teen ffs
Why are they calling it “pressuring her to have sex” and not calling it rape?
Seriously, he raped her. Pressuring someone into sex that you've boozed up is not consent. It's two levels away from consent.
You know why....
Is there any sense of which way the vote would go for expulsion?
Voted 147 to 0 for expulsion. No one can defend this.
The report mentions 3 class A misdemeanors, is he going to get charged or is up to the victim?
>The committee report said Slaton had invited the 19-year-old woman to his Austin apartment late March 31 and gave her a large cup of rum and coke, then refilled it twice — rendering her unable to “effectively consent to intercourse and could not indicate whether it was welcome or unwelcome.” Is this not a felony?
From the report: > (16). All or part of the foregoing also constitute offenses under Texas law, specifically the following: > a. the offense of furnishing alcohol to a minor under Section 106.06, Alcoholic Beverage Code; b. an unlawful employment practice under Sections 21.142 and 21.1065, Labor Code; c. the offense of abuse of official capacity under Section 39.02, Penal Code; and d. the offense of official oppression under Section 39.03, Penal Code a, c, and d are Class A misdemeanors.
Those seem like slam dunks but if the above accusation sticks, that's Rape as well.
fwiw - I'm not a lawyer, but I work with litigation lawyers regularly. Rape is extremely difficult to prove in terms of open-and-shut-evidence - that usually doesn't exist, and verdicts become emotional questions of who the jury likes more. That's not something judges like to see happen in their courtrooms. Right now, we simply don't have any info beyond the initial claims - she says he gave her alcohol, but he might say she served herself without asking him. She says he rendered her unable to consent, but he might claim that she kept refilling his drink and rendered him insensible. Judges often don't like to let these kinds of cases even proceed where there is no hard evidence. Given the age difference, it would be a long-shot claim for him to say she manipulated him instead of him taking advantage of her, but I've seen more unlikely things happen. I saw one rape case get dismissed because the defense found out that the victim had perjured herself in a completely unrelated custody case, and the judge called the DA back into chambers so he could chew her out for bringing the charges at all. It's up to the DA to decide whether to pursue the case, and then it would be up to the jury to decide if they believe him or if they believe her, and if they believe her enough.
We need to elect DAs that will smile when the judge chews them out and say "see you next week." And then bring the next case to trial. Judges aren't there to like it they are there to make sure the law is followed.
This is why many large jurisdictions frequently rotate prosecutors between judges - so you're not afraid to piss off the judge. In a small town though, it's not all that simple - the DA and the judge might be one of 5 lawyers in town and at be at a political deadlock. And as a prosecutor being in front of the same judge day in and day out, it's important to stay credible. Things like novel legal decisions (which come up a lot more often than people think) can go either way and it could mean a crucial piece of evidence goes in or out. If I had to guess the real reason they avoided those terms is because they don't want to imply they're making some kind of legal determination. Things get messy very fast when separation of powers gets involved.
It's rape
You or I would be in the slammer already if we had done this.
Ehhhh, I imagine this exact scenario is common across multiple professions. While it is certainly immoral and debatedly, it should be illegal to get someone intoxicated with the intent of sexual intercourse. A prosecutor would be hard pressed to prove a crime.
The only minor it's legal to give alcohol to is one's own children. It's pretty open/shut.
While making my comment, I failed to remember the victim in this case is below 21, my apologies.
It's up to the Travis County DA
He's a REPUBLICAN in TEXAS, we won't face any actual accountability. If he were a TX teacher, he would've lost his job and retirement, but since he is a senator or a cop, they are free to diddle kids to their hearts content and then still able to collect retirement.
I'm surprised Briscoe Cain voted in favor. The guy was a gay cheerleader in high school and has done everything he can since then to quash and squelch anything pro-LGBTQ
I imagine he will have a leadership in the GOP pretty soon. Trump needs a running mate so this guy would be perfect.
He will no doubt be re-elected after he asks Jesus to forgive his sins.
He spent 13 years as a youth pastor. Where there is smoke there is fire.
But drag shows...
Exactly!!
There are more victims😬
Shes 19 but reports say she was under the influence. Still impossible to get consent. Glad hes not my representative.
Him being a representative anywhere is bad for people everywhere. He still has a vote on legislation that affects then entire state, regardless of whether or not he votes in the interests of his constituents. Frankly, the fact that he is even a representative says a lot about the constituents who voted him in.
Sure but i didn't vote for him and I've gotten to lobby to my reps personally so it would have really grossed me out even more if I knew it was one of them.
Isn’t buying alcohol for someone not of age still a crime?
Fool needs to be incarcerated.
Incinerated*
All this guy did outside of being a creepy perv was write legislation to take away liberties form Texans...not kidding... that is all of his bills summed up.
He was unanimously voted out. 147-0
Is Mr. Slaton secretly a drag queen? I’ve heard they are the groomers.
Must be. Texas wouldn’t vote to expel for something as “minor” as screwing underaged girls
Was there more than one? All the news reports have said she's 19.
I don’t think so. I didn’t see an age. My bad Edit- I’m putting my money on more coming forward soon tho
Yeah, can’t ever rule that out.
Ya got to git ‘em drunk first, otherwise it’s no consent
Considering? Shouldn't he be gone by now? jeez!!
In this context it means "voting", not "pondering".
Agree!!!
I thought our gubborner got rid of all the rapists in TX? Was this one just hiding right under his nose?
heh i think we all forgot about this particular claim
Do we know who it is?
Zoom into the red text in the pic... Sorry it's blurry. Edit: it says Bryon Slaton
Ok thanks. I just wanted to know if it's my district rep and it's not. I'm glad they're expelling him.
Yup, a married father who is a youth minister, and graduated from a baptist college.
Who could have guessed that a youth pastor would have a thing for young girls?
I mean, do we know this, or are we just playing the percentages?
Yes
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/05/08/texas-rep-bryan-slaton-resigns-after-sex-alcohol-misconduct-with-aide/70196879007/ “Slaton, a married father and a former pastor, did not deny having sex with the woman, the report said.”
You’re almost playing catholic odds with these Baptists youth ministers
What’s there to think about… the pig should be gone
No matter what side, he needs to be out.
For sure. But for the record, to no one’s surprise… it’s a Republican.
Hold up. Let's not paint one party with one stroke.
Getting them drunk and pressuring them into sex... a.k.a. rape
Can we keep going? I have a few more in mind that need to be expelled.
Most family-values-pilled Republican
Just read his bio on wikipedia. Yes. Very typical Texas Republican prick.
The party of family and Christian values, ripe with rapists, pedophiles and adulterers. All casting stones in glass houses.
EXACTLY! How many decades have the republicans held themselves up as the family morals party and along comes Trump with multiple affairs, sex with porn stars, sexually assaulting women and business practices so shady that Al Capone would be jealous….and the Republican Party just ignores it all and continues their dipshittery. This is why I quit voting Republican.
But remember, kids! It’s the drag queens who are the bad guys! /s
Was he a drag queen?
Not sure about queen, but he was definitely a drag.
I live about 4 minutes walk from this walking advertisement for abortion. About a week ago someone protested outside his house and my wife and I just laughed and laughed. After having to endure his election and his representation of us, I can't think of someone who is more deserving a quick, sharp, and hard fall from what passes for grace in the Texas legislature. Next time I see this two-legged bag of horse assholes in Walmart I'm certainly going to ask him how his political career is doing.
They only did this because they have a solid lead in house seats. You can bet the whole barn that they would have held their noses and kept him had he been pivotal to holding the majority.
You could almost say he was....grooming her. Weird how that projection happens so often with the party of faith and family or whatever they claim to be.
The party of fambly valooooze!
Oh, I thought it was the Democrats and trans ppl who are doing the grooming.
But by all means, let's keep the drag queens away from the kids.
So he raped his underage staffer is what we’re saying.
Why don’t they just say rape.
**considering?!?!??!** **expulsion of a member for getting HIS teen staffer drunk and pressuring her into sex.** This is the CULT!!!
It was a unanimous vote. Chill.
Considering means voting in this context. The vote was unanimous, By the way.
What's to consider? If they have proof, this should be a no-brainer
That's not how you spell rape. You do not give an underage teen alcohol, drinking age is 21. Drunk teens cannot consent so it's immediately rape if sexual activity occurred. Fuck off bias media, say it like it is
Again r/notadragqueen
HIS
Truly disgusting, thanks for the details
I mean that’s rape, not “Pressuring”
Still not a drag queen...
Don't expel him. There's no consequences for rape when you're in office with an R next to your name. Just blame the dems for a me too witch hunt hoax and mention antifa and socialism.
This shouldn’t even be a debate. Expel him immediately
Just considering... These spineless fucks won't do anything about it though.
“Considering”
Looking at the next TX governor there.
I believe that's called attempted rape
_considering_
This wouldn't be a member of the Grand Old Party, would it? How ironic, if so.
Eh. Until they actually do something, it doesn’t matter. They’ll posture and pretend to be mad. And he’ll come out with a statement about being an alcoholic. And they’ll move on to inventing border crises.
Considering?
Considering????? LOL...
*considering *
His lips must have lightly grazed a Bud Light.... /s/
Hell, it’s Texas just shoot the fucker...
If he had gust shot her in Texas he would be in the clear.🔫🔫
Stay classy Texas 😬
Figured…..Groomers grooming.
Considering?? Fucking do it!!
Also - underage - he should be jailed!
Doubt. It’s Texas and he has that magical letter next to his name
Sounds like the staffer would've been safer at a drag show vs. being a republican?
Expel the pedophile and help him into a wood chipper.
If he is Republican, he is safe from expulsion. If he is Democrat, he is GONE!
Texas Republican Party deserves this ASSHOLE!
Uuhhh. Considering???
“Considering” The fuck is there to consider?
Kick him out. He’s just a fat, hog of a man.
Am I so jaded that I fully expected the gop to somehow defend his actions? Glad to be surprised!
Burn him at the stake?
Lemme guess - republican, right?
Is this representative famous? Because if he his famous, then she would just let him do it.
Oh, dear.
Dudes an absolute legend, he gave no fucks and threw everything away for some uncut America pie.
This is only in consideration? Idiots!
In this since by "considering", they mean voting.
Considering? Fuck Texas.
“considering”….oh no!…what a weak response
Considering??? How could you not?
Considering? Throw his ass out on his ear! These GOP reps don't really care unless they feel it's going to hurt their poll numbers.
Surprised Texas didn’t throw him a party.
What the guck is the “considering” about. Just fucking do it.
It's what we call it when we vote on stuff.