• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Trump runs for POTUS/ Trumped Up! Part VI

Status
Not open for further replies.
I feel bad for the parents who today are legitimately struggling with the idea of letting their kids watch the debate tonight.
 
twinstead said:
I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees this. In response to Trump's newest issue, his defenders are saying, "well, look what Bill Clinton did" as if he's the one running for president.
Click to expand...
Ah, yes, no, but Hillary is an "enabler", you see. And Hillary is running for president and will enable the gumment to take your guns.
 
twinstead said:
I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees this. In response to Trump's newest issue, his defenders are saying, "well, look what Bill Clinton did" as if he's the one running for president.
Click to expand...
Trumpltons: Don't judge him on the man he was 10 years ago. But please judge Hillary on the man her husband was 20 years ago
 
Rare Truth said:
I feel bad for the parents who today are legitimately struggling with the idea of letting their kids watch the debate tonight.
Click to expand...

We're watching our grandkids for a couple days.

Normally about now I'd be thinking about tuning in to Face The Nation, while they played.

Not today.
 
Rare Truth said:
I feel bad for the parents who today are legitimately struggling with the idea of letting their kids watch the debate tonight.
Click to expand...
It's never too early for a rude awakening. Then again, I'm not a parent. I never had that much trust in the future, and for bloody good reason apparently.
 
twinstead said:
I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees this. In response to Trump's newest issue, his defenders are saying, "well, look what Bill Clinton did" as if he's the one running for president.
Click to expand...

You're attacking a strawman, I was pointing out the double standards. If this happened to the Democrat's nominee, there is no question Democrats would rally around him or her. We don't have to speculate, since it happened 20 years ago with Bill Clinton's sexual escapades (including sexual assaults), and something similar has happened this cycle with Hillary's private email server.

Republicans, on the other hand, react with far less unity and partisan zeal.
 
sunmaster14 said:
You're attacking a strawman, I was pointing out the double standards. If this happened to the Democrat's nominee, there is no question Democrats would rally around him or her. We don't have to speculate, since it happened 20 years ago with Bill Clinton's sexual escapades (including sexual assaults), and something similar has happened this cycle with Hillary's private email server.

Republicans, on the other hand, react with far less unity and partisan zeal.
Click to expand...
Bill Clinton was never caught on tape bragging about sexual assault and the email thing turned out to be no big deal, exactly as we knew it would be.
 
Last edited:
Rare Truth said:
Trumpltons: Don't judge him on the man he was 10 years ago. But please judge Hillary on the man her husband was 20 years ago
Click to expand...

Bill's character, proclivities and actions are totally irrelevant.

What may speak to Hillary's character is her role in the whole sordid mess.

Did she know about or encourage Bill's lying under oath and just go along with it? Did she take an active role in attacking his accusers, all the while knowing their accusations had foundation? Was blaming it all on a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy a strategy she helped concoct?

Those are valid questions about character. Does any of that affect her ability to act as President? Probably not. Does it help explain why the majority of voters find her dishonest? I think so.
 
sunmaster14 said:
You're attacking a strawman, I was pointing out the double standards. If this happened to the Democrat's nominee, there is no question Democrats would rally around him or her. We don't have to speculate, since it happened 20 years ago with Bill Clinton's sexual escapades (including sexual assaults), and something similar has happened this cycle with Hillary's private email server.

Republicans, on the other hand, react with far less unity and partisan zeal.
Click to expand...

Clinton was accused of sexual assault but even the Republican investigation couldn't find anything to support the accusations, while we have Trump on tape not only talking about committing sexual assault but bragging about his techniques for sexual assault and how he gets away with it.

That's what makes the Republican tu quoques about Clinton irrelevant and hypocritical, and their continuing support of Trump so vile and disgusting.
 
Mader Levap said:
Looks like rethuglicans do not know difference between consensual sex and sexual assault. How surprising. :rolleyes:

And then they accuse others of double standards and hypocrisy? Obvious projection is obvious.

(taking aside from fact that Bill Clinton isn't running for president, basic fact that also seems to be elusive to [SNIP] conservatives)
Edited by kmortis: 
Removed to comply with Rule 12
Click to expand...

To be fair, on the first of your points, what they are actually missing is the difference between bragging about sexual assault (Trump), and being accused of sexual assault (Bill Clinton), and actually committing sexual assault (????) Clinton is accused of committing criminal acts with three women (Broderick, Willey, and Jones). However, they remain allegations, because only the accusers' story is in evidence. In the case of Trump he was bragging about committing sexual assault, although it is unclear whether he ever actually did it.

That's something else that Trump defenders don't seem to get. Whether or not it's true, the idea that Trump would want people to think it's true is really gross.



And then they throw in all sorts of other stuff, like the clearly consensual conduct between Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, which just never should have been known to the public in the first place, and should be long forgotten and not part of the history books, but for some reason some people just can't get over it, so they keep bringing it up. You would think after it hurt them in the elctions 18 years ago, they might have learned their lesson, but some people are slow.

ETA: I see that others had made pretty much the same point already. No suprises. It's a fairly obvious point, no matter how many people miss it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sunmaster14 said:
You're attacking a strawman, I was pointing out the double standards. If this happened to the Democrat's nominee, there is no question Democrats would rally around him or her. We don't have to speculate, since it happened 20 years ago with Bill Clinton's sexual escapades (including sexual assaults), and something similar has happened this cycle with Hillary's private email server.

Republicans, on the other hand, react with far less unity and partisan zeal.
Click to expand...

There were some claims of sexual assault involving Bill Clinton. These claims never were proved and may have been true or false.

Bill Clinton never bragged on tape about his ability to sexually assault women and get away with it.

Trump did exactly that. There's no matter of interpreting whether this person or that was telling the truth when they accused him of assault. He said that this is what he did. (Could he have been lying? Yes, conceivably, though the claim did match an earlier accusation pretty well.)

Partisans might occasionally favor their candidate when it comes to judging accusations, but we're not talking about a mere accusation when it comes to Trump. He claimed that he engaged in sexual assault as a perk of celebrity.
 
Grizzly Bear said:
No equivalence needed. Bill should have just kept his pants on
Click to expand...

Absolutely, now how about we talk about Trump openly claiming to have bribed politicians, or maybe his fraud trial? Or attacking a Gold Star family? Hey about the fact that the Russian Ambassador to the UN felt the need to rush to his defence when he was criticized for his racist/xenophobic remarks? Is he going to 'build the wall', and who is going to pay for it? How about his super secret plan to beat ISIS, or his open suggestion he wouldn't support some of the NATO allies against Russia? Is he still planning to ban all Muslims entering the US or just subject them to 'extreme vetting'? Would he allow the water boarding of prisoners and other methods of torture? How about his plan to rip up all those trade deals the US signed?
 
phiwum said:
There were some claims of sexual assault involving Bill Clinton. These claims never were proved and may have been true or false.

Bill Clinton never bragged on tape about his ability to sexually assault women and get away with it.

Trump did exactly that. There's no matter of interpreting whether this person or that was telling the truth when they accused him of assault. He said that this is what he did. (Could he have been lying? Yes, conceivably, though the claim did match an earlier accusation pretty well.)

Partisans might occasionally favor their candidate when it comes to judging accusations, but we're not talking about a mere accusation when it comes to Trump. He claimed that he engaged in sexual assault as a perk of celebrity.
Click to expand...

I think it's interesting that descriptions from women of Trump's behavior precisely matches what he said on that bus.
 
A'isha said:
Clinton was accused of sexual assault but even the Republican investigation couldn't find anything to support the accusations,
Click to expand...

What evidence do you expect? It's almost always going to be a "he said, she said" situation which is not enough to prosecute. We do have evidence of course that Bill Clinton is perfectly willing to lie under oath about his sexual indiscretions, as well as suborn perjury about the same. If he was willing to do that for legal actions, why wouldn't he be willing to do that about illegal actions?

while we have Trump on tape not only talking about committing sexual assault but bragging about his techniques for sexual assault and how he gets away with it.
Click to expand...

Well, he was certainly bragging, either for entertainment value or to make himself look more powerful. When he does that regarding his business acumen, most people take it with a grain of salt. Although I'm inclined to believe he has sexually assaulted women in the past, I don't believe it any more because of that video tape than I did before.

That's what makes the Republican tu quoques about Clinton irrelevant and hypocritical, and their continuing support of Trump so vile and disgusting.
Click to expand...

As always, there's a difference between tu quoque and evidence of hypocrisy. I am not defending Trump; I am attacking Democratic hypocrisy. And I think Republicans may be better served to circle the wagons rather than jump ship. Of course, because of the mainstream media bias, it might not be a practical strategy to circle the wagons. This story is dominating the press, while, at the same time, the continuing revelations of FBI and White House collusion with the Clinton campaign to quash the email investigation has been utterly ignored.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom