• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Three women accuse Trump of forcibly groping, kissing them

Status
Not open for further replies.
TurtleDude said:
About the same. she should have come forward earlier. But IIRC she didn't make the claim at a time that it would sabotage Clinton's election chances. Big difference
Click to expand...

She did it so he'd get impeached. Much worse.
 
Absentglare said:
This sounds like "vicious" character assassination.
Click to expand...

cry me a river. There is a reason why there are statutes of limitations in most criminal statutes. This whole thing sounds fishy to me. but partisan hacks will celebrate such pawns until its done to their candidate.
 
TheGoverness said:
And keep in mind that it's still just allegations. It's not like it's definitive proof Trump actually did those things.
Click to expand...

Trump admits he does those things. He sounded proud of it.
 
Absentglare said:
She did it so he'd get impeached. Much worse.
Click to expand...

do you know how she was forced out so to say? Wasn't Clinton impeached in 1998 and JB's allegations came out in 99?
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
I think their allegations against Trump should be investigated to the same extent that Clinton was in the 90s. 8 years of investigations and a few hundred million dollars spent on them. Then we will know for sure.
Click to expand...

was Trump in office when these alleged actions took place?

I guess you are unable to see the difference
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
I think their allegations against Trump should be investigated to the same extent that Clinton was in the 90s. 8 years of investigations and a few hundred million dollars spent on them. Then we will know for sure.
Click to expand...

Do we know for sure?
 
TurtleDude said:
was Trump in office when these alleged actions took place?

I guess you are unable to see the difference
Click to expand...

I was being tongue-in-cheek. The point being is that if Republicans are willing to have countless investigations of the Clintons anytime they get even the slightest whiff of a potential scandal (whether it pans out or not), so surely we can investigate Trump for a few years if 3 women come out and say he sexually assaulted them (4 women if you count the one from 1997).
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
I was being tongue-in-cheek. The point being is that if Republicans are willing to have countless investigations of the Clintons anytime they get even the slightest whiff of a potential scandal (whether it pans out or not), so surely we can investigate Trump for a few years if 3 women come out and say he sexually assaulted them (4 women if you count the one from 1997).
Click to expand...


I don't buy your explanation.
 
Absentglare said:
I'm surprised that only three have come forward.
Click to expand...

So far the only 3 they can talk into fabricating a story

Some idiot is saying he walked in on naked girls in 1997...20 damn years ago and just now they decide to tell the story
 
Absentglare said:
Monica was a consensual situation.

You might as well bring up the moon landing.
Click to expand...

lots of CEOs get fired for having consensual sex with a subordinate. Many courts have found that an imbalance of power means there is no real consent. If one person can fire another, then the consent of the subordinate is presumed to be coerced.
 
As people are voting is no time to bring up some claim of sexual misconduct.

Those who want me to take them seriously must do the right thing.

Not interested in the least.

:bon_voyag
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
I was being tongue-in-cheek. The point being is that if Republicans are willing to have countless investigations of the Clintons anytime they get even the slightest whiff of a potential scandal (whether it pans out or not), so surely we can investigate Trump for a few years if 3 women come out and say he sexually assaulted them (4 women if you count the one from 1997).
Click to expand...

I have no problem with an investigation. The problem I have is with the timing. I would be just as suspicious were three black men to come forward tomorrow claiming that Hillary called them dumb n*****s for screwing up a lunch delivery to the Governors mansion in Arkansas 30 years ago.
 
Fletch said:
I have no problem with an investigation. The problem I have is with the timing. I would be just as suspicious were three black men to come forward tomorrow claiming that Hillary called them dumb n*****s for screwing up a lunch delivery to the Governors mansion in Arkansas 30 years ago.
Click to expand...

Good point

So if 5 black people came forward and said H Clinton called them N*&^%$....back in 1997 0r 2005 I guess the Libs would support them and demand she drop out


yeah right
 
Fletch said:
I have no problem with an investigation. The problem I have is with the timing. I would be just as suspicious were three black men to come forward tomorrow claiming that Hillary called them dumb n*****s for screwing up a lunch delivery to the Governors mansion in Arkansas 30 years ago.
Click to expand...

No actually it wouldn't be like that. What it would be like is if a video came out where Hillary boasted about how she calls black people "dumb n*****s", she offered a half ass qualified apology and dismissed as just Arkansas talk, and then a few days later 3 black people came out with 3 different stories from 3 different parts of the country and they all talked about the time that Hillary called them a dumb n******.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
No actually it wouldn't be like that. What it would be like is if a video came out where Hillary boasted about how she calls black people "dumb n*****s", she offered a half ass qualified apology and dismissed as just Arkansas talk, and then a few days later 3 black people came out with 3 different stories from 3 different parts of the country and they all talked about the time that Hillary called them a dumb n******.
Click to expand...

I don't think you answered my earlier question. Do you think this sort of "october surprise" allegations that are cultivated for years, kept squirreled away and then dropped right before an election is the proper way to pick the president of the USA?
 
volsrock said:
So far the only 3 they can talk into fabricating a story

Some idiot is saying he walked in on naked girls in 1997...20 damn years ago and just now they decide to tell the story
Click to expand...

I watched a clip of the lady who claims she was groped. She said something like 'if he had just groped me above the waist I would have been fine with it, when he went down below I got pissed.' The whole tale had the ring of a rock star who brings women backstage except Trump brought them from the back of the plane to first class. There is probably more to this story.
 
volsrock said:
Good point

So if 5 black people came forward and said H Clinton called them N*&^%$....back in 1997 0r 2005 I guess the Libs would support them and demand she drop out


yeah right
Click to expand...


Actually in that case we would have already demanded she drop out when she was caught on video boasting to Billy Bush about how she liked the call black people dumb n******s. ;)
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
No actually it wouldn't be like that. What it would be like is if a video came out where Hillary boasted about how she calls black people "dumb n*****s", she offered a half ass qualified apology and dismissed as just Arkansas talk, and then a few days later 3 black people came out with 3 different stories from 3 different parts of the country and they all talked about the time that Hillary called them a dumb n******.
Click to expand...

So they only decided to come out and tell someone AFTER Arkansas story came out

Couldn't tell anyone about it for the 20 plus years before hand...hmmmm wonder where they got the idea to make the claim and get 15 mins of fame
 
TurtleDude said:
I don't think you answered my earlier question. Do you think this sort of "october surprise" allegations that are cultivated for years, kept squirreled away and then dropped right before an election is the proper way to pick the president of the USA?
Click to expand...

How we pick our presidents is a different discussion altogether. What all this proves so far is how terrible the other Republican's opposition research was back in the primaries.
 
TurtleDude said:
three pawns who waited 11 years or more? I find that rather telling about the character of the accusers
Click to expand...

They did the same thing to Herman Cain. None of the accusations were true.
They all lied and were paid for it.
 
Fletch said:
I have no problem with an investigation. The problem I have is with the timing.
Click to expand...
You shouldn't.

This isn't the first set of accusations.

Cassandra Searles went public in June 2016.

Jill Harth went public in May 2016.

Temple Taggart also went public in May 2016.

Discussing sexual assault is seldom easy; the events are often trivialized, the women vilified. Making it harder is that Trump is infamously litigious, and is already making noises about suing the NY Times over their latest article.

An audio tape of Trump describing how he grabs and kisses women at random gives these women motivation, as they are outraged by his denials; it also gives them support they didn't have just 1 week ago. So does more women coming forward. Two accusations today has already prompted a third.

Now, I won't say that every single allegation against him is true. But I do think this is only the beginning. This is going to be a total nightmare for the Trump campaign.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
No actually it wouldn't be like that. What it would be like is if a video came out where Hillary boasted about how she calls black people "dumb n*****s", she offered a half ass qualified apology and dismissed as just Arkansas talk, and then a few days later 3 black people came out with 3 different stories from 3 different parts of the country and they all talked about the time that Hillary called them a dumb n******.
Click to expand...

No. Someone could make that claim right now. And if you had three black men sounding like it was a sincere tale, she would have to answer whether it was true of not. After all, we know what she thought of blacks back in the 90's--super predators. The point is, if people came forward with that accusation of racial slurs today, it would be unfair whether true or not because of the timing. If you do something to inflict the maximum political damage, then you cant escape the charge that you are being political. These women are being political whether their stories are true or not.
 
ludin said:
They did the same thing to Herman Cain. None of the accusations were true.
They all lied and were paid for it.
Click to expand...

Cain dropped out and all the accusations stopped not a peep about it since
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom