Trump runs for POTUS/ Trumped Up! Part VI

[thaiboxerken]

I've never had sex with Donald Trump. I don't mind if some women wish to exploit him that way though. They can do what they like.

Either Trump is lying/exaggerating to impress young Billy, in which case there's not much to complain about - or - Trump is telling the truth and women really do throw themselves (or used to) at his fame and money, in which case there's nothing to complain about. Pick your poison.

As far as actual sexual assault goes, I encourage any woman assaulted by Trump to bring charges against him. That's how it's generally done.

Or, more likely, Trump uses his power to sexually assault women and get away with it.

Either way, you're defending a sexual predator or a liar, pick your poison.

 

[Darat]

"They let you do it" is exactly what "giving consent" means.

No it is not. To create an over the top analogy - if I put a knife to your throat and take your wallet can I then claim in court "you let me do it"?

He's describing what I thought we had agreed was a common enough phenomena with celebrities. ...snip...

But we aren't, and I think that's where your misunderstanding comes in.

I totally agree that some perhaps even many of the women he finds attractive would consent to sexual acts with him because he is a "star". No one has disputed that type of consent but and it is a bloody big BUT we are not talking about him describing such circumstances. What he says quite clearly is that prior to any exchange that could be construed to be giving consent he can engage in sexual acts with women that they afterwards don't do anything about because he is a star.

...snip...

Whether Trump is accurately describing his own affairs is another matter. It is, after all, locker room talk. It's amazing that with all his normal hyperbole and inflating (making up) the facts, this is the thing people choose to believe is the God's honest truth. Amazing.

...snip...

It is true that nothing that comes out of his mouth can be relied on to be truthful but in this case we have the example given in this thread of exactly those circumstances when he assaults a women and gets away with it because of his position.

Given the actual example of him engaging in the actions that you believe to be simply bragging I can't see how it can be argued that he is only bragging about situations where consent has already been given.

 

[marplots]

I don't think that's much of a puzzler.

Celebrity footage is their bread and butter. They may not know if it will ever be useful again, let alone when or why, but they're gonna keep it. Just in case.

I'd be more puzzled if they captured footage like that and didn't keep it.

It's the ten years bit that puzzles me most. They couldn't have known back then that he would be running for President now. And didn't he already run once before? No tape then.

I'm not alleging any conspiracy, it just sounds like it might be a good story.

ETA: I'm reminded of Monica and the dress. She saved it. Didn't her friend have to convince her to come forward? I forget how long afterward that was.

 

[marplots]

No it is not. To create an over the top analogy - if I put a knife to your throat and take your wallet can I then claim in court "you let me do it"?

No, I was coerced. I think it's plain that Trump is describing the benefits of celebrity, not any forced relationship.

 

[Minoosh]

Bill committed adultery. That hasn't been a crime in a veeery looong time.

Bill did tell the public a big fat lie though. And didn't he lie under oath?

Thinking about Monica - it seems weird to me that the fluid ended up on the dress. She then apparently did not launder it or have it dry-cleaned, and though this may have been for sentimental reasons I'm not sure. Maybe she wanted proof, but why?

What I thought was impeachable is that while she gave him oral sex he apparently didn't take care of her. That's just rude.

 

[marplots]

Bill did tell the public a big fat lie though. And didn't he lie under oath?

Thinking about Monica - it seems weird to me that the fluid ended up on the dress. She then apparently did not launder it or have it dry-cleaned, and though this may have been for sentimental reasons I'm not sure. Maybe she wanted proof, but why?

What I thought was impeachable is that while she gave him oral sex he apparently didn't take care of her. That's just rude.

Maybe she didn't give consent.

 

[Darat]

No, I was coerced. I think it's plain that Trump is describing the benefits of celebrity, not any forced relationship.

I've given my reasons why I don't think that it is plain in the specific circumstances he is describing that he is talking about acts after consent has been given so we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[Darat]

Maybe she didn't give consent.

Has she ever made that claim?

 

[Foolmewunz]

Maybe she didn't give consent.

And maybe you're just making **** up to defend an unbelievably awkward corner that you've painted yourself into. There are numerous interviews in which Lewinsky has said that it was consensual and that she was even the aggressor.

Try sticking to the facts.

 

[marplots]

I've given my reasons why I don't think that it is plain in the specific circumstances he is describing that he is talking about acts after consent has been given so we will have to agree to disagree.

Yeah, we are definitely reading the transcript differently. I'm likely biased by having had my share of blue collar jobs, as well as time in the military. And Trump is much older than me.

Just as a side note, I've heard just as bad from women (although rarer). Stuff I can't post without running afoul of the rules.

Has she ever made that claim?

And maybe you're just making **** up to defend an unbelievably awkward corner that you've painted yourself into. There are numerous interviews in which Lewinsky has said that it was consensual and that she was even the aggressor.

Try sticking to the facts.

It was a joke. Honest.

 

[Minoosh]

Maybe she didn't give consent.

There's no doubt in my mind that she did. I think she wanted to bag a president, for status, ego, whatever. She was basically a groupie, in my opinion. She reportedly had set her sights on George Stephanopoulos previously. It's highly unlikely Bill had to pry her jaws open.

 

[Darat]

Yeah, we are definitely reading the transcript differently. I'm likely biased by having had my share of blue collar jobs, as well as time in the military. And Trump is much older than me.

I've found over the decades that blue collar or white collar makes no difference as to the content of sexual bragging.

Just as a side note, I've heard just as bad from women (although rarer). Stuff I can't post without running afoul of the rules.

...snip...

I've heard much, much worse from men and women but just because there are worse things he could have said doesn't alter what he did actually say.

 

[quadraginta]

It's the ten years bit that puzzles me most. They couldn't have known back then that he would be running for President now. And didn't he already run once before? No tape then.

Sure there was. It just didn't surface.

The stakes were a bit higher this time around, don't you think?

I'm not alleging any conspiracy, it just sounds like it might be a good story.

There is probably hundreds of thousands of hours of celebrity footage out there, by professionals, I'm not even counting amateurs, and I doubt much if any of it has been discarded since they started using tape instead of film.

Certainly not by the 90s, when tape was dirt cheap.

ETA: I'm reminded of Monica and the dress. She saved it. Didn't her friend have to convince her to come forward? I forget how long afterward that was.

I'm not sure if "friend" is exactly the right word (as in "With friends like that ..."), and more accurately it was Ken Starr who "convinced" her (aka threatened with various charges and then offered immunity) after her "friend" Linda Tripp slipped Starr the tapes of their phone conversations which she had recorded (on the advice of her literary agent) without Lewinsky's knowledge.

Aside from those little details, yeah, it was something like that.

Lewinsky's last words to a Washington, DC grand jury;

"I hate Linda Tripp."
​

 

[Foolmewunz]

I've found over the decades that blue collar or white collar makes no difference as to the content of sexual bragging.


I've heard much, much worse from men and women but just because there are worse things he could have said doesn't alter what he did actually say.

Donald tried that defense... "in a world where evil doers are beheading people, etc..." It pleased his sycophants but convinced no one else. I think Battling Sceptics refer to this as the Dear Muslima Quandary.

 

[SezMe]

That's what I'm hoping for. A destructive end to the fraudulent empire he's running.

Agreed. I hope the only deal he works on is with the DA regarding how much jail time he'll get.

I feel bad for his kids, they don't know any better. They think what they've grown up with is the real world.

I don't. Sounds too much like that kid down in Texas(?) whose lawyer tried to plead "affluenza" to get the kid off. These are grown adults who should be able to look at the world with eyes at least somewhat unburdened from their father's influence. I see no evidence of that.

 

[SezMe]

You can spin the wheels any way you want but fact of the matter is you want a sexual assault bragger to be barred from the White house ....

No. Nobody wants him barred. Every sensible person wants him to lose the election. There's a BIG difference between the two.

 

[Hlafordlaes]

Well, how ironic. A fear-driven supporter of Trump implying he knows the first thing about manhood, panicking as they all customarily do at the slightest sign of criticism or, worse, OMG, facts!

 

[SezMe]

You don't even make an attempt to get people to take you seriously, do you?

Can I answer that: no.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Well, how ironic. A fear-driven supporter of Trump implying he knows the first thing about manhood, panicking as they all customarily do at the slightest sign of criticism or, worse, OMG, facts!

I would like someone to find the guy with the sign and ask him "So who's the pussy, now, then?"

That was from a demonstration at the RNC(!!) staged by the Trump Chair in Virginia. He was fired immediately thereafter, by Trump's campaign. It appears that the pussies in the campaign including the Big Pussy, still need RNC support and don't want to alienate them or their money.

(Remember, Trump has no ground game anywhere. The entire GOTV effort is with the RNC and the state Republican chapters. It's not the money... it's the votes. If the RNC pulls out the ground game, Trump could match Goldwater in the crash and burn sweepstakes.)

 

[SezMe]

Tony, the Iran deal is nothing to brag about, along with the ransom payment that the weak SOB stole and handed to the Mullahs.

This is probably futile but there's a bit of Sancho Panza in me tonight.

logger, there was no ransom payment. The money that your referring to was Iran's. It was not USA money. When sanctions were imposed on Iran, money not in Iran was held until the sanctions were lifted. Then Iran's own money was returned to them (plus interest).

Please acknowledge these facts (without using the word leftist).