Evil, Just the Same

“Her childhood was ended too soon. He took that from her. We hope that she can make it through this. We know that she will never be the same. We know that she will never get her innocence back.”

So read a statement to the court written by the broken, lamenting father of this 14-year-old victim, his daughter. The victim met her assailant, 22-year-old, Thomas John Boukamp, on a messaging app when she was thirteen. He later kidnapped her from her Lubbock, Texas middle school. That’s, middle school. Boukamp:

“I loved someone I connected with, I was filled with violent sexual fantasies, and then I thought I had found someone who understood me. I didn’t want to take advantage of her…I loved her.”

The evidence of this, “love?”

During eight days of captivity, Boukamp raped, strangled, beat, and forcibly removed the child’s braces with pliers.

Incidentally, this idea that parents feel overbearing about knowing what their innocent, naïve, and inexperienced children are doing, and that they feel cowardly when their kids scream in protest at their privacy intrusions. Let this outcome be the reason parents step forward with a crisp fresh one. Crack!

“Say one more thing. I dare you; I double-dare you.”

Kids don’t know [poop emoji]. Precisely why experienced and sage parents are in charge.

In fact, the warning signs for every catastrophe yet to personally unfold are clearly visible, and everyone ignores them. Thinking when they happen to someone else, How awful. Gee, glad that wasn’t me, or mine.

And then it happens to them.
And there’s no do-over, no restoration. Only wounds and scars … if luck prevails.

“I like teenage girls!” Boukamp confessed in a recorded jailhouse phone call, played for the court at his sentencing. “They [federal agents and prosecutors] don’t like that I like that. I frankly don’t care what the morality of this current time and place says. It’s not wrong. There’s nothing wrong about it. And they’re not going to ever convince me of its wrongness. So up theirs. I hate this nation.”

Narcissism much? And how ‘bout rape, strangulation, assault, and removing braces with pliers? Can we convince you of that wrongness?

Trust me. That either.

Boukamp added he would never apologize for “quote unquote raping a 14-year-old” and said he didn’t care that authorities were monitoring the [jailhouse] call. “If you’re listening to this, yeah, your family is going to die. Play this at my f-ing sentencing! Do it. I hate you!”

It is certainly untoward for a 22-year-old man to pursue a 13-year-old girl, but that isn’t necessarily what makes Boukamp such an evil human being. It’s the captivity, rape, strangulation, the use of pliers to remove a child’s braces—sans a local anesthetic, no less—and the narcissistic defiance and belligerence thereafter.

Evidently, Boukamp’s “sexual fantasies” were a little too, eccentric, for a naïve 14-year-old child, and her unwillingness to participate in those fantasies threw him into a rage.

Thus, the “love” and unspeakable evils.

So, what is it that makes Boukamp so evil? Society has no shortage of justifications: parental abuse, bullying, female rejection, mentally handicapped, sociopath, psychopath, insanity. Whatever the assigned reason, does it really matter? The baseline is: evil.

Can’t we just let that standalone as the descriptive?

What Boukamp did is evil. He’s an evil human being. The reason he is evil is beside the point, really. And actually, how or why Boukamp is evil is nobody’s concern. He’s evil, period. A descriptive that, indeed, stands alone.

Okay, so, next question: what makes Boukamp any less evil than Hillary Clinton?

Such the great divide in evil here?

Clinton orchestrated and financed a treasonous plot to steal and overturn the 2016 presidential election. Isn’t a treasonous plot to deceive the public and steal an election standalone evil, too?

Of course it is, but it gets worse …

Clinton then allowed some $50 million taxpayer dollars to be spent on a two-and-a-half-year investigation, the Mueller investigation, which used her pretext as the basis for the investigation. Or in other, more practical terms, Clinton, grinning broadly and rubbing her hands together in diabolical delight, sat in her Chappaqua study watching news coverage of the Mueller investigation for 2 ½ years, knowing Special Counsel Mueller was investigating Trump with her treasonous plot script.

Mueller: It says here you partnered with Vladimir Putin to steal the election, Mr. Trump, and that you had courtesans pee on a hotel bed in which former President Obama had slept. Do you deny these charges?
Trump: Well, it all seems rather laughable, Mr. Mueller. Don’t you think? Who would suggest such ridiculous things?
Mueller: Blast you! Damn your hide! I’ll ask the questions! It’s confirmed right here in the script, er, intel, that I received from Hillary Clin, er—from someone with intimate knowledge! So, confess!

The point is this scam is incontrovertibly evil. And note Clinton not only allowed millions in taxpayer dough to be spent investigating her fraud, but as a means of furthering it and securing its success. The fraud, her fraud, dragging the United States into bitter and unwarranted political turmoil, no less. And why?

For her political fortunes.

People say, What a horrible, evil human being to do something like that. On the evil scale, this incident is certainly up around the “10” mark. But it doesn’t begin to hint at the depth of Clinton’s depravity. Last week, for example, she accused republicans of plotting to steal the 2024 election—read alternatively as: she accused republicans of what she actually did herself.

How does a human being do this? Even if Clinton has yet to be herself indicted or convicted of the crimes, federal court testimony proves conclusively she committed them. So, we know she committed them. More importantly, she knows she committed them. And yet, falsely and sans a single shred of evidence, here she is proclaiming the GOP is plotting steal the 2024 election.

It’s breathtaking and offensive hypocrisy, yes. But how does one justify in their mind accusing someone else of a treasonous plot, knowing full-well they are the architect of one, and that the public is fully aware of their guilt in the matter?

How does one do that?!
How does one override the senses of guilt and shame and ultimate morality?

It’s pretty simple, really. Clinton clearly has no sense of morality. What isn’t present in the first place needn’t be overridden. It can’t be overridden, in fact. If Clinton had a sense of morality, she would have never orchestrated and executed a treasonous plot. She wouldn’t later accuse others of doing what she herself did and was caught doing, either. Had she this sense of morality—the desire to do good and for righteousness, she would be ashamed and remorseful.

So, the morality gene is clearly absent in Clinton. We often say in a cliché way, “Good Lord. That person is shameless!” But in Clinton’s case, it’s really true. She’s incapable of shame, which means she’s incapable of humility. And what label fits these sorts? Human beings who follow no law or moral code, who lie, cheat, and steal, who wrongly and hypocritically accuse their fellow human beings, and who are incapable of both acknowledging their failures and the humility it requires to do it?

Peel away the slick-paper backing and slap the sticker on the pantsuit lapel:

*EVIL*

If there is no law or moral code, then there can be offense to either, and thus no evil.
However, there is a law, both God’s and man’s. And, there is a moral code.
Thus, those failing to meet those standards are then, (fresh sticker please):

*EVIL*

Clinton and her fellow conspirators in the Obama Administration knew what they were doing was against the law, else they wouldn’t have gone to such lengths to conceal their crimes, and to keep them concealed. They knew, and didn’t care. They didn’t care because they don’t recognize any law. That’s the tell in all of this. Evil is entitled, isn’t subject to any rules. And doesn’t entitled lawlessness precisely describe how Clinton, Obama, and liberals behave?

Treasonous coup, anyone?
Lying to FISA courts to illegally spy on Americans?
Wasting millions in taxpayer dough to investigate a fake crime of your design?
Falsely labeling a laptop Russian disinformation to conceal its damning data?
An aiding and abetting news media blackout to conceal historical political crimes, and to ensure electoral and political victories for the crooks?

The tell: evil behavior by evil human beings.

And what about liberal voters, the supporters of this evil …

Hearing Boukamp’s remarks, your average liberal voter would be seething: What a disgusting, evil piece of human debris! Get a rope! They’d demand. Yet here is Clinton—likewise evil, lying and cheating and stealing, wrongly and hypocritically accusing her fellow human beings, and following no law or moral code. And who has a husband, not so incidentally, who clearly shares Boukamp’s appetite for young, naïve women and Boukamp’s contempt for the “morality of this current time and place.” All this depravity and injustice, and yet liberal voters applaud Clinton’s every utterance and stand loyally behind her on stage with “Hillary!” signs.

So, why the different response to evil from liberal voters?

Well, your average liberal voter doesn’t want to believe in Boukamp. He’s just a deranged, narcissistic nobody. He has no power or prestige, and no doctrine to sell—the requirements of a liberal voter god.

Furthermore, Boukamp told the truth, that he liked adolescent girls; that he didn’t care about morality; and basically, that he would proudly, passionately, do what he did to his 14-year-old victim again. All of which is waaay too much public honesty for your average liberal voter’s comfort, who obviously prefer their gods be more cunning and deceptive, and haughty. Hubris of the degree you can get caught in a treasonous plot, and accuse your political enemies of plotting one, too.

That is the kind of cojones your average liberal voter respects. Rather, that is the kind of evil your average liberal voter expects. And these being the prerequisites, what does it say about liberal voters? People who will yet, knowingly, turn out in hordes to vote for and enable their clearly evil gods in November and beyond?

It says they’re evil, just the same.

The fact is, lest anyone delude themselves, every human being must resist and defeat evil every single day of their existence. They fail. Try harder. Succeed. Fail again. Try again. As Stevenson put it, “The saints are the sinners who keep on trying.” Indeed.

Then there are those who not only don’t try, but see evil as the success. People who labor every day to ensure evil’s dominance and reign. These people serve no law or morality, except that they might use either in a ruse to advance evil. They don’t expose treasonous plots; they plan and execute them. They don’t verify damning laptops as authentic; they fill them with corruption data, and label them *Russian disinformation*. They don’t acknowledge their criminal and moral failures; they don’t have these failures, because they haven’t the morality gene. They don’t tell the truth; they lie, without compunction. They don’t want questions; they want compliance …

with evil.

And finally, this: evil isn’t stopped because the “tryers” keep pointing it out, and pointing their fingers at its practitioners.

Evil has no rules, no conscience, no shame, and it doesn’t bargain. A juggernaut, it crushes everything in its path until it rules, because that’s the world’s endgame. Its demise requires but a simple vote, now. Left to its devices, however, necessitates something a little more, bloody. And costly.

Or so says the lone voice in the wilderness. And history—example after example after example …

JMWs latest: New Rules: Relationship Logic for the Darkside.