The Trump Presidency 15

[alfaniner]

It's been barely two years.

To clarify (and as noted above) this was Trump copy/pasting a Tweet from Lindsay Graham. The inserted "Thank you" between the quote and the source is cause for some confusion.

Normally retweets are labeled as such on Twitter.

 

[TragicMonkey]

It's been barely two years.

And yet it feels like it's been ages.

 

[Bob001]

The two women who Jean Carroll told Trump raped her are speaking on the record to confirm her account.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/27/podcasts/the-daily/e-jean-carroll-trump-interview.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...iends-talk-her-alleged-rape-trump/1582453001/
https://slate.com/news-and-politics...sexual-assault-rape-allegation-the-daily.html

 

[BobTheCoward]

The two women who Jean Carroll told Trump raped her are speaking on the record to confirm her account.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/27/podcasts/the-daily/e-jean-carroll-trump-interview.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...iends-talk-her-alleged-rape-trump/1582453001/
https://slate.com/news-and-politics...sexual-assault-rape-allegation-the-daily.html

This raises a criminology question. Do we know if claims made at the time are significantly more likely to be correct? Do we have any data on this? Because these arguments are made as if they are true.

 

[Bob001]

This raises a criminology question. Do we know if claims made at the time are significantly more likely to be correct? Do we have any data on this? Because these arguments are made as if they are true.

So what you're asking is how often do women call their closest friends out of the blue and make up a story about "(A celebrity) raped me last night," and then never tell anybody else for 23 years. Is that what you're asking?

 

[BobTheCoward]

So what you're asking is how often do women call their closest friends out of the blue and make up a story about "(A celebrity) raped me last night," and then never tell anybody else for 23 years. Is that what you're asking?

That is absolutely what I am asking. Before determining if this event makes it more or less likely to be true, we need data on if events like this make it more or less likely to be true.

 

[plague311]

The two women who Jean Carroll told Trump raped her are speaking on the record to confirm her account.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/27/podcasts/the-daily/e-jean-carroll-trump-interview.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...iends-talk-her-alleged-rape-trump/1582453001/
https://slate.com/news-and-politics...sexual-assault-rape-allegation-the-daily.html

I don't understand why she was laughing when she called the person after the assault. I guess everyone reacts differently, but I wouldn't expect laughter from someone who was just assaulted in the dressing room.

 

[plague311]

That is absolutely what I am asking. Before determining if this event makes it more or less likely to be true, we need data on if events like this make it more or less likely to be true.

Jesus Christ, no we don't. Stop with this ****. There is no criminology as no one is going to be arrested for this specific instance. As I understand it the statute has long since passed.

If you're not convinced by the fact that 19 ******* women have come out with similar stories about how Trump assaulted them then no amount of "data on if events like this" blah blah blah is going to make any ******* difference.

If you want to imply something else, then you provide evidence of it. It's not on other people to research your incredulously ridiculous theories.

 

[Bob001]

I don't understand why she was laughing when she called the person after the assault. I guess everyone reacts differently, but I wouldn't expect laughter from someone who was just assaulted in the dressing room.

Stunned disbelief, denial, minimization. People react to bad things in different ways.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Jesus Christ, no we don't. Stop with this ****. There is no criminology as no one is going to be arrested for this specific instance. As I understand it the statute has long since passed.

If you're not convinced by the fact that 19 ******* women have come out with similar stories about how Trump assaulted them then no amount of "data on if events like this" blah blah blah is going to make any ******* difference.

If you want to imply something else, then you provide evidence of it. It's not on other people to research your incredulously ridiculous theories.

I'm not presenting a thesis. I'm asking what would be the basis of the thesis that the fact she told two friends at the time is evidence that the story is true. Where is the evidence for that?

 

[BobTheCoward]

Stunned disbelief, denial, minimization. People react to bad things in different ways.

I would ask plague what is the criminology evidence that those victim behaviors inform the accuracy or inaccuracy of the story.

 

[Stacyhs]

Yes, laughing is a common reaction to a traumatic event:

Some reactions are common to people who experience traumatic stress as a result of witnessing or being involved in a traumatic event. ... You may also experience a number of physical shock reactions such as nausea, perspiration, tremors, loss of body control, eg., bladder control, uncontrollable crying or laughing, etc.

https://www.google.com/search?sourc...j0i131j0j0i22i30j0i13j33i22i29i30.XZtz6fu4DTM

 

[Minoosh]

I'm not presenting a thesis. I'm asking what would be the basis of the thesis that the fact she told two friends at the time is evidence that the story is true. Where is the evidence for that?

I don't know if stats exist. Anecdotally, though, GOP operatives seem happy to say that women not telling anyone at the time is evidence that they're lying now. This at least forestalls that argument.

 

[Stacyhs]

I'm not presenting a thesis. I'm asking what would be the basis of the thesis that the fact she told two friends at the time is evidence that the story is true. Where is the evidence for that?

Which is more probable to be true using common sense and logic?

1. A woman makes up a rape story, lies to two of her best friends immediately about it including identifying the famous and powerful rapist, then waits 23 years to put it in a book.

2. A woman is raped, confides in two friends immediately, is counseled to tell no one because of the power of the rapist, then waits 23 years to put it in a book knowing that she is now not alone in her accusation of assault of that same rapist?

 

[JoeMorgue]

I'm not presenting a thesis. I'm asking what would be the basis of the thesis that the fact she told two friends at the time is evidence that the story is true. Where is the evidence for that?

Bob for the love of God stop spouting off gibberish and defending it with some variation on "It's okay because I'm not trying to make a point."

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Let's remember that we aren't talking trial levels of "beyond reasonable doubt" of proof: Trump will not be charged for this, criminally or civilly.

There is enough evidence to make the claim that Trump did rape her. If he is so certain that this is just slander, he can sue her.

 

[Stacyhs]

Let's remember that we aren't talking trial levels of "beyond reasonable doubt" of proof: Trump will not be charged for this, criminally or civilly.

There is enough evidence to make the claim that Trump did rape her. If he is so certain that this is just slander, he can sue her.

...as he threatened to do to all those 'lying' women who came forward during the campaign. No suits have been filed.

 

[The_Animus]

I don't want to start a whole separate thread for this but SCOTUS decided partisan gerrymandering isn't their responsibility to overturn.

So we can count on politicians continuing to draw extremely partisan maps letting them pick their voters instead of voters picking their representatives.

My state of Wisconsin in 2018 voted in a Democratic governor with 51% of the vote but due to partisan gerrymandering only received 36 out of 99 assembly seats.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Which is more probable to be true using common sense and logic?

1. A woman makes up a rape story, lies to two of her best friends immediately about it including identifying the famous and powerful rapist, then waits 23 years to put it in a book.

2. A woman is raped, confides in two friends immediately, is counseled to tell no one because of the power of the rapist, then waits 23 years to put it in a book knowing that she is now not alone in her accusation of assault of that same rapist?

I care which one is more likely to be true based on data. Common sense in the absence of data to justify it is nothing to me.

ETA: and I'm not sure why it is acceptable to other skeptics.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

I don't want to start a whole separate thread for this but SCOTUS decided partisan gerrymandering isn't their responsibility to overturn.

So we can count on politicians continuing to draw extremely partisan maps letting them pick their voters instead of voters picking their representatives.

My state of Wisconsin in 2018 voted in a Democratic governor with 51% of the vote but due to partisan gerrymandering only received 36 out of 99 assembly seats.

this absolutely deserves its own thread.