Messages
8,660
Reaction score
0
Unlike Bill C, Trump has never had to financially pay off any of his "victims." And yes, there are women out there who will willingly let a rich alpha like Trump have their way with them. Usain Bolt's post-Olympic sex-a-thon with women he just met is Exhibit A. Whores and party girls exist. and NBC lets Trump headline an important show for over a decade despite having taped evidence that he's a sex predator? hmmm.
I don't know that a documented paying off of victims is the end-all-be-all on whether the accusations are true or not. Part of Trump's persona is he makes everyone drag him into court and he outspends them until they go away. But his comments on the bus, general comments toward women, his comments with Howard Stern about busting into dressing rooms of Miss Teen USA pageants with the contestants in varios states of undress... he takes pride in his power over women. No one could be surprised that he's sexually assaulted women after those comments. It's more than just women letting him have his way with them because it's a celebrity. It's taking advantage of his position to force women into these situations... just like Bill.
 

bbgun

Administrator
Messages
15,128
Reaction score
2,280
It's taking advantage of his position to force women into these situations... just like Bill.

Bill preyed on subordinates in government; Trump is accused of coming on to random women who didn't work for him. The voters knew of his history as a thrice-married babe hound who would talk frankly of his conquests on the Howard Stern Show. And he's not running for Pope.
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
57,895
Reaction score
8,668
and he gave so many people immunity (people who would never sell her out whether they got immunity or not) that no one went to jail.

Again, did he actually do it, or was he INSTRUCTED to do it?

This administration is beyond corrupt just like Hillary. I don't know that anyone will really ever know the answer.
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
57,895
Reaction score
8,668
"A pox on both their houses" just won't fly in this instance. I think a corrupt, politicized Justice Department is much more serious than Trump saying "pussy" 11 years ago. And I say that as someone who's never had any use for Trump (who's first and foremost an entertainer and an abhorrent candidate who unnecessarily makes it difficult for people to hold their nose and vote for him). Forty years ago, Attorney General Elliot Richardson and his deputy resigned rather than follow Nixon’s order to fire the special prosecutor looking into his dastardly deeds. Fast forward to 2016 and we have an AG who willingly runs interference for Hillary Clinton and her crime family instead of holding them accountable.

Indeed
 

Doomsday

High Plains Drifter
Messages
21,627
Reaction score
4,119
What language is this Dooms? Don't go Jerry on me......
Don't misunderstand me - I am not saying Trump is guilty of anything nor am I disputing the fact that the suit could be total bullshit. I am only pointing out the veracity of the filed court papers. There IS a suit.
 
Messages
8,660
Reaction score
0
Bill preyed on subordinates in government; Trump is accused of coming on to random women who didn't work for him. The voters knew of his history as a thrice-married babe hound who would talk frankly of his conquests on the Howard Stern Show. And he's not running for Pope.
I don't buy the distinction that one is worse than the other because he preyed on employed subordinates, and the other just preyed on women who weren't technically employed by him. He uses his status as a celebrity, the same way a superior uses power over subordinates. I wouldn't want a person like that to be in the same position Bill was in.
 

bbgun

Administrator
Messages
15,128
Reaction score
2,280
I don't buy the distinction that one is worse than the other because he preyed on employed subordinates, and the other just preyed on women who weren't technically employed by him. He uses his status as a celebrity, the same way a superior uses power over subordinates. I wouldn't want a person like that to be in the same position Bill was in.

a random woman Trump encounters on a plane or at a party can reject his advances and walk away unscathed. a female subordinate who works for Clinton and relies on him for a living does not have the same luxury. if you have mouths to feed, or fear having your name dragged through the mud, it might seem preferable to put up with harassment.
 
Messages
8,660
Reaction score
0
a random woman Trump encounters on a plane or at a party can reject his advances and walk away unscathed. a female subordinate who works for Clinton and relies on him for a living does not have the same luxury.
I think you minimize the impact of a woman being sexually assaulted by a man. Most females are physically weaker than their male assaulter. Walking away unscathed from an advance is not the norm. And when it's a pageant contestant, that's just like a subordinate to the "owner" of the pageant, whether it's an employer/employee relationship or not.

if you have mouths to feed, or fear having your name dragged through the mud, it might seem preferable to put up with harassment.
These are the same reasons you see victims popping up 30 years after incidents as opposed to the day after it happens. They all have to deal with their name being dragged through the mud and some decide it's preferable to just not do anything about it.

As a side note, how ridiculous is it that we're debating which type of sexual assualt is worse regarding a former President and a candidate?

Is this real life?
 

bbgun

Administrator
Messages
15,128
Reaction score
2,280
I think you minimize the impact of a woman being sexually assaulted by a man. Most females are physically weaker than their male assaulter. Walking away unscathed from an advance is not the norm. And when it's a pageant contestant, that's just like a subordinate to the "owner" of the pageant, whether it's an employer/employee relationship or not.

I was talking about harassment, not assault. Have any of the women accused him of outright assault? Or anything close to what he said on the tape?

These are the same reasons you see victims popping up 30 years after incidents as opposed to the day after it happens. They all have to deal with their name being dragged through the mud and some decide it's preferable to just not do anything about it.

I find it curious that none of these women remembered or went public with their unfortunate encounters with Trump until the Access Hollywood tape surfaced. And not one of them sued him or went to the authorities? If anyone's vulnerable to a sexual harassment suit, it's a rich billionaire like Donald, yet they couldn't be bothered. The most outrage they can summon is a press conference.

As a side note, how ridiculous is it that we're debating which type of sexual assualt is worse regarding a former President and a candidate?

Is this real life?

dave-cover.jpg
 

Doomsday

High Plains Drifter
Messages
21,627
Reaction score
4,119
How absolute power corrupts (especially when the person in power is already corrupt)
Hillary's first power trip
(January 20, 1993 to January 20, 2001—two terms)

When Bill Clinton was president, he allowed Hillary to assume authority over an attempt to reform health care.

Her proposed plan was so bad that many Democrats came up with competing plans of their own in protest, and in spite of threats and intimidation, on September 26, 1994, the “Hillarycare” bill was declared dead.

This fiasco cost the American taxpayers about $13 million for studies, promotion, and other efforts.

Then, President Clinton gave Hillary authority over selecting a female attorney general. Her first two selections were Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood—both were forced to withdraw their names from consideration.

Next, she chose Janet Reno, which husband Bill described as "my worst mistake."

(Some may not remember that Reno made the decision to gas David Koresh and the Branch Davidian religious sect in Waco, Texas resulting in dozens of deaths of women and children.)

Husband Bill also allowed Hillary to make recommendations for the head of the Civil Rights Commission—Lani Guanier was her selection.


After considerable backlash from prominent Democratic senators concerning Ms. Guanier's radical views, Bill Clinton withdrew her name from nomination, stating that she did not represents the civil rights views that he had championed during his campaign.

However, apparently a slow learner, husband Bill continued to allow Hillary to make more recommendations.

She chose former law partners, Web Hubbel for the Justice Department, Vince Foster for the White House staff, and William Kennedy for the Treasury Department.

Her selections went well: Hubbel went to prison, Foster (presumably) committed suicide, and Kennedy was forced to resign.

(Is anyone wondering yet what her Supreme Court Justice appointments would be like?)

Many younger voters will have no knowledge of "Travelgate," the first major ethics controversy during Bill’s presidency.

Hillary wanted to award unfettered travel contracts to Clinton friend, Harry Thompson—but the White House Travel Office refused to comply.

She trumped up allegations of financial mismanagement and reported seven long-time White House employees to the FBI. This ruined their reputations, got them fired, and caused a thirty-six month investigation.

Eventually, most of the employees were reinstated and Clinton associates were forced out of the travel office. Only one White House employee, Billy Dale, was charged with a crime—the enormous crime of mixing personal and White House funds; a jury acquitted him in less than two hours.

Still not convinced of her ineptness, Hillary was allowed to recommend a close Clinton friend, Craig Livingstone, for the position of Director of White House Security.

When Livingstone was investigated for the improper access of about 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies (Filegate) and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, suddenly Hillary and the President denied even knowing Livingstone, and of course, denied knowledge of drug use in the White House.

Following this debacle, the FBI closed its White House Liaison Office after more than thirty years of service to seven presidents.

Next, when women started coming forward with allegations of sexual harassment and rape by Bill Clinton, Hillary was put in charge of the "bimbo eruption" and scandal defense.

Let’s look at some of her more notable decisions in this regard . . .

She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit. After the Starr investigation, they settled with Ms. Jones.

She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor.

After $80 million dollars of taxpayer money was spent, Starr's investigation led to Monica Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later admitting his affairs.


Hillary's devious game plan resulted in Bill losing his license to practice law for 'lying under oath' to a grand jury, followed by his subsequent impeachment by the House of Representatives.

Hillary avoided indictment for perjury and obstruction of justice during the Starr investigation by repeating, "I do not recall," "I have no recollection," and "I don't know" a total of 56 times while under oath. (Sound familiar?)

After leaving the White House, Hillary was forced to return an estimated $200,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork that she had "mistakenly thought was hers."

So you see, the email scandal and all of her malfeasance regarding the handling of Top Secret information, not to mention the "pay to play" schemes of the Clinton Foundation, are nothing new.

Hillary’s entire political career has been nothing but a web of lies, corruption and destruction in her quest for power.

Is anyone else ready to say, “Enough is enough!”?

But unfortunately, I’m sure her loyal fans will say, "What difference does it make?"
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
57,895
Reaction score
8,668
Really? Someone is trying to say the women of Slick Willy examples are like the Trump situation (much of which has been debunked)

Good job Pep
 
Messages
8,660
Reaction score
0
I was talking about harassment, not assault. Have any of the women accused him of outright assault? Or anything close to what he said on the tape?
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/women-accusing-donald-trump-sexual-assault-gallery-1.2831106

And...

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/calif-woman-accusing-trump-child-rape-break-silence-article-1.2855631

I find it curious that none of these women remembered or went public with their unfortunate encounters with Trump until the Access Hollywood tape surfaced. And not one of them sued him or went to the authorities? If anyone's vulnerable to a sexual harassment suit, it's a rich billionaire like Donald, yet they couldn't be bothered. The most outrage they can summon is a press conference.
You may find it curious, but this is what happens. Women tend to suppress these things, especially when they are alleged to have occurred decades ago. Many times when one person comes forward, it gives courage to other accusers to come forward. In this situation, Trump's statements that were released and his defense when posed the questions about the accusers in the media also likely gave the women courage to come forward.

Generally in criminal cases, I give the benefit of the doubt to the accused... that said, with sexual assault, specifically when it involves someone who is in the public eye, I usually give much less benefit of doubt to the accused, because it is so taxing on those who come forward with these accusations. They are drug through the mud like no other victim of any crime. I don't see why anyone would want to do that. Do false accusations happen? Of course they do... but I feel like it's much more rare to see someone falsely accused in the context of a sexual assault.
 
Messages
8,660
Reaction score
0
Really? Someone is trying to say the women of Slick Willy examples are like the Trump situation (much of which has been debunked)

Good job Pep
What do you mean by debunked? Like Trump denying it happened is "debunking" it?
 

bbgun

Administrator
Messages
15,128
Reaction score
2,280
I'm not interested in groping accusations. I'm talking about flat out rape or touching/grabbing someone's genitals without their permission. On the tape, Trump referenced women who allow famous men to do that to them:

"And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.”

Big difference.
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
57,895
Reaction score
8,668
What do you mean by debunked? Like Trump denying it happened is "debunking" it?

No, like when there are witnesses on the plane where a woman says he was all over the whole time, and those witnesses say absolutely nothing inappropriate happened.

That kind of debunked.
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
57,895
Reaction score
8,668
I'm sure this was just a big misunderstanding:

'Voter fraud'? California man finds dozens of ballots stacked outside home
By Malia Zimmerman
·Published November 03, 2016
· FoxNews.com

Jerry Mosna was gardening outside his San Pedro, Calif., home Saturday when he noticed something odd: Two stacks of 2016 ballots on his mailbox.

The 83 ballots, each unused, were addressed to different people, all supposedly living in his elderly neighbor’s two-bedroom apartment.

“I think this is spooky,” Mosna said. “All the different names, none we recognize, all at one address.”

His wife, Madalena Mosna, noted their 89-year-old neighbor lives by herself, and, “Eighty people can’t fit in that apartment.”

They took the ballots to the Los Angeles Police Department, but were directed to the post office. They felt little comfort there would be an investigation, and called another neighbor, John Cracchiolo – who contacted the Los Angeles County Registrar's office.

A spokeswoman for the Registrar said the office will investigate. Both Cracchiolo and Jerry Mosna told FoxNews.com they think they stumbled upon a case of fraud.

“Yes, there is voter fraud. We saw it with our own eyes,” Cracchiolo said.

In a statement, the office of the Registrar said, “We are carefully reviewing our records and gathering information to fully identify what took place. Our preliminary assessment is that this appears to be an isolated situation related to a system error that occurred causing duplicate ballots to be issued to an address entered for a single voter. We are working directly with the system vendor to ensure the issue is addressed and to identify any similar occurrences.”

Further, spokeswoman Brenda Duran said the Postal Service “has indicated that they returned all of the improperly addressed ballots to our office.”

Spokesman Richard Maher confirmed the U.S. Postal Inspection Service has offered its assistance. He would not comment on the number of incidents, saying only there are “relatively few.”

John Fund, a journalist and co-author with Hans von Spakovsky of the book, “Who’s Counting: How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Risk,” said someone could easily have voted with these ballots using a variety of fake signatures.

“It is doubtful they would have ever been detected,” Fund said.

Von Spakovsky, senior legal fellow and manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at the Heritage Foundation, said voter fraud is prevalent enough that it could make the difference in a close election. The Heritage Foundation, he said, has recorded 430 cases of voter fraud -- proven cases where someone was convicted or a judge ordered a new election.

A former FEC commissioner and counsel to the assistant attorney general for civil rights at the U.S. Justice Department, von Spakovsky said California is of particular concern because of the rising number of noncitizens illegally registering and voting in elections, as well as the “terrible shape” the voter registration rolls are in.

The 89-year-old neighbor to whom the stack of ballots was addressed is hard of hearing, and was unavailable for comment. The Mosnas stressed that the ballots clearly were not for her -- and have not even discussed the issue with her.
 
Top Bottom