Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually, there is one foolproof witness in every single one of the 12 accusations . . . . . . Trump. Listen to his Access Hollywood tape; he tells you exactly what he does, and that comports with the accusations.
So how come none of the Trump supporters are also denying that the not adjudicated but investigated sexual assault claims against Bill Clinton? The only confirmed situations were consensual relationships which made him a bad husband but not a sexual assaulter. The rest are just allegations with no proof, just like you are all claiming is the case with the women accusing Donnie.
So which is it? Claims are always believed or claims are never believed? Can't wait to see the hypocritical tap dancing to explain....
That's laughable. You either need to believe both or dismiss both.
If you believe over, regardless whom, Hillary or Trump, you support, you would be supporting a sexual predator.
Did you vote for Clinton? I'm guessing yes. Hypocrite.
hmm... I think the OP on this was actually calling Cuban mean and a misogynist. But, yeah, you pounced on that comment because, yes, it does also apply to trump.
Respecting women enough to understand why one wouldn't want to go public with accusations against a very powerful man, when there is no objective evidence of his tendencies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wall st kid
you're back at square one if you think they're both bad people
Hardly. Even if you think they're both equally bad people, you're left with an incompetent, bombastic, fascist with no experience and no respect for anything other than his own instincts, and an accomplished public servant with the intelligence and temperament to do the job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by emm74
the reality is that Trump is a liar either way. He either lied when he boasted about committing sexual assault or he lied when he said he didn't. Maybe even he doesn't know anymore - he lies so much he wouldn't recognize the truth if it grabbed him in the, er, wherever.
Just look at last night's debate. It took a lot of work to find one claim Trump made that was truthful. Meanwhile, most of what Clinton said was truthful. Forget about the sexual impropriety itself if you must, and just look at how they each have responded to it: Trump flew off the handle and doubled down on his abject disrespect for women (unable to control his blurting out "she's a nasty woman" when Clinton made reference to the fact that he hasn't paid federal income tax for year - a substantive concern of many voters) while Clinton calmly and deftly turned the discussion toward something more substantive. Even if you're upset that you didn't slake your bloodthirst for Clintons from her response, you have to take a breath, step back, and acknowledge that she's presidential, she's highly competent, she's worthy of respect, by comparison - just based on those interchanges last night.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91
I would believe any credible evidence.
Do you know what the word "evidence" means? The most fundamental form of evidence is "oral testimony of witnesses". As a matter of fact, through much of the history of jurisprudence, oral testimony of witnesses was considered the most important form of evidence. It is only since science and orderly processes has been able to improve the viability of physical evidence that physical evidence has joined with oral testimony of witnesses as equally respected forms of evidence.
Oral testimony of witnesses is weighed against the credibility of the witnesses. We need only to focus on Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff. They would be relatively unassailable in court, especially Natasha Stoynoff as she has six witnesses to her own witnessing - people who learned of the attack contemporaneous with the attack. No defense attorney on the face of the earth would want to take a defendant with the Access Hollywood tape into court with such evidence against him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GearHeadDave
That's what it comes down to in my opinion for a lot of these hard liners. They. Just. Don't. Care. In fact I think a lot of them secretly applaud Trump's behavior. They view it as a sort of reward for being a rich and powerful man, that he can grope or molest or disparage women at will.
This is the crux of the issue. All this hypocrisy believing those accusing Clinton's husband and disbelieving those accusing Donald Trump himself is a scurrilous dodge. They just want some excuse to support this undisciplined, incompetent, self-centered child for President.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer
For crying out loud, it's NOT sexual assault unless the woman objects!
Consent is a mutual verbal, physical, and emotional agreement that happens without manipulation, threats, or head games. Consent cannot be inferred from the absence of a "no." Consent is affected by the existence of a power differential. A power differential exists when one person has significant influence over another (such as a powerful person in an industry within which a less powerful person is pursuing a career). This power differential impacts the individual with less power and may influence them to say yes (or not say no) when they don’t want to engage in an activity because their actions, or lack thereof, could impact their opportunities in life.
You may be asking: "How can a powerful man hit on less powerful women in the industry?" The answer is simple: "He shouldn't." And if he does, he incurs the risks stemming from sexual contact without true consent. Alternatively, he could abide "Yes Means Yes" protocols - that's substantially less risky.
Quote:
Originally Posted by earthlyfather
No adjudication without trial. Would these 'witnesses' stand up under a real investigation.
It's an interesting question, but the Access Hollywood tape pretty-much precludes any trial for Trump's sexual improprieties: He'll be compelled by his lawyers to settle out of court because the tape firmly establishes his tendency toward that corrupt behavior.
I will say this....
In Trump's earlier years, I would believe that Trump tried to make women...what man doesn't?
No, let me say it this way, Most men do, in their prime.
And I would even go as far to say, that since some women fall all over rich men, to be taken care of, I'm sure, he was led to believe that women are easy....
What I don't believe is, that he sexually tried to abuse a woman....but do believe these women were hired by the democratic camp to come forward now, to try and paint him as Hillary's husband actually is.
The Dems set up double blind system wide fraud involving a guy that met with Obama 300 times...and you think this corrupt party can't put together a smear involving 12 women??? Bahahahaha.
Uh-duh...uh-duh...uh-duh
You do understand that Creamer didn't meet with Obama over 300 times????
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
