• 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!

Michael Cohen to file ‘emergency stay’ to quash Stormy Daniels case — to plead the Fifth: report

It is called ACTING and they have award events for it, or so I am told.

I know, I always thought that would be a fun event to attend as an observer, especially in the days of my misspent youth when psycodelacs we're a common form of entertainment.
 
And again, there is one claim of a rape accusation in that link, and the person who is said to have accused him of rape says she didn't accuse him of rape.

She described an action that was rape.

She just didn't want him to suffer the criminal consequences of that, hence her statement. Why, I wouldn't presume to speculate.

"This guy broke into my house, put a gun to my head, and walked out with my television without my permission. But I'm not saying it was burglary." Actually still is burglary.
 
Cohen was in Prague for a meeting and it confirms parts of the dossier. Stay tuned.
 
Feeling violated and not feeling love and tenderness during sex is sexual assault, aka, rape.

don't believe so
sex between a prostitute and a john
not seeing the love and tenderness being present
and neither is there rape
 
don't believe so
sex between a prostitute and a john
not seeing the love and tenderness being present
and neither is there rape

Was Ivana a prostitute and 45 a "john?" Your idea of sex on an unwilling woman initiated by a man with the power to exert control, terrorize and punishment is indeed rape. Please, for the women in your life, learn the difference.
 
I'm feeling like Trump is raping America at the moment; I hope he uses a condom
 
Was Ivana a prostitute and 45 a "john?" Your idea of sex on an unwilling woman initiated by a man with the power to exert control, terrorize and punishment is indeed rape. Please, for the women in your life, learn the difference.

apparently i was not clear in my previous post
you had previously presented that the absence of love and tenderness being present during a sex act made those absences determinative of the sex act constituting "rape"
and i challenged that assertion. and i vigorously do so again
during sexual intercourse by and between a prostitute and a john, love and tenderness is not typically going to be found. however, that absence of love and tenderness during the performance of the deed in no way causes that sexual union of the john and the prostitute to be deemed a "rape"
and if my presentation is valid, then yours is not
 
Oh I hope everyone this ass-munch has bullied and threatened got a call to his phone this week and just laughed their ass off into the mouthpiece....:lamo
 
If you've read anything about the issue, you'd know damn well Ivana accused Trump of rape in a sworn deposition, which she acknowledges in her non-denial denial. The allegations contained in it are describing a brutal rape . That was under oath. Yes, after she got a big settlement, not doubt with a NDA typical of Trump, she pasted a non-denial denial on the front page of the book that didn't even approach a declaration that the account of it was false in any way.

If you want to claim that's not a "verified" accusation, fine, but you're just carrying Trump water like Sean Hannity. Don't hurt your back.... :roll:

You keep quoting a book that references a deposition that has been refuted by the witness as if the author is more trustworthy than the witness... the witness now has two different stories, either of which could be motivated by money. You think you can suss out what actually happened through the power of your hate for Trump. As I said, you are fooling yourself.
 
You keep quoting a book that references a deposition that has been refuted by the witness as if the author is more trustworthy than the witness... the witness now has two different stories, either of which could be motivated by money. You think you can suss out what actually happened through the power of your hate for Trump. As I said, you are fooling yourself.

Ivana didn't refute a word of the book describing the event. I quoted her non-denial denial - quote the part where she disavows her sworn deposition. You can't do it. She has ONE story. The only thing she "refutes" is whether what is a rape is correctly described by the word "rape." Does changing the word change what happened?

And your claim was there was no "verified" accusation of rape. There is. I don't know how much more "verified" an accusation can get than events sworn to under oath in a legal proceeding.

As to what actually happened, I make no claim inside knowledge about that. That's you moving the goal posts.

BTW, using your standard, there has never been of course any "verified" accusation of rape by any woman regarding Bill Clinton. Both women who accused him of rape swore in court under oath that he did not rape them.
 
Ivana didn't refute a word of the book describing the event. I quoted her non-denial denial - quote the part where she disavows her sworn deposition. You can't do it. She has ONE story. The only thing she "refutes" is whether what is a rape is correctly described by the word "rape." Does changing the word change what happened?

And your claim was there was no "verified" accusation of rape. There is. I don't know how much more "verified" an accusation can get than events sworn to under oath in a legal proceeding.



As to what actually happened, I make no claim inside knowledge about that. That's you moving the goal posts.

BTW, using your standard, there has never been of course any "verified" accusation of rape by any woman regarding Bill Clinton. Both women who accused him of rape swore in court under oath that he did not rape them.

Todays date in court is going to be so fascinating for both Cohen and Daniels. What a shame it wont be televised, and Trump wont be able to protect himself any longer.
 
Ivana didn't refute a word of the book describing the event. I quoted her non-denial denial - quote the part where she disavows her sworn deposition. You can't do it. She has ONE story. The only thing she "refutes" is whether what is a rape is correctly described by the word "rape." Does changing the word change what happened?

And your claim was there was no "verified" accusation of rape. There is. I don't know how much more "verified" an accusation can get than events sworn to under oath in a legal proceeding.

As to what actually happened, I make no claim inside knowledge about that. That's you moving the goal posts.

BTW, using your standard, there has never been of course any "verified" accusation of rape by any woman regarding Bill Clinton. Both women who accused him of rape swore in court under oath that he did not rape them.

So in the accusation of "rape" Ivana now doesn't call it "rape". Like I said, she refutes the claim.

That is like saying she accused Trump of stealing a car, but then said she gave him the car, but since there was still an exchange of the vehicle the "theft" accusation stands.
 
So in the accusation of "rape" Ivana now doesn't call it "rape". Like I said, she refutes the claim.

That is like saying she accused Trump of stealing a car, but then said she gave him the car, but since there was still an exchange of the vehicle the "theft" accusation stands.

Yeah, your right, throwing Ivana on the bed, pinning back her arms, grabbing Ivana by the hair, pulling out big lumps of it, as he's forcing himself on her, after which she fled crying and hid in another bedroom with the doors locked, and told friends was a rape and testified under oath was rape in her deposition, isn't really a rape!

Not one word of this does she dispute, so it was a rape, but not a "rape" rape! That's a great point!
 
Yeah, your right, throwing Ivana on the bed, pinning back her arms, grabbing Ivana by the hair, pulling out big lumps of it, as he's forcing himself on her, after which she fled crying and hid in another bedroom with the doors locked, and told friends was a rape and testified under oath was rape in her deposition, isn't really a rape!

Not one word of this does she dispute, so it was a rape, but not a "rape" rape! That's a great point!


Sure, she testified under oath in divorce court that Trump raped her. She had a financial incentive to make Trump seem as bad as possible in their divorce proceedings just like, as you claim, she has a financial incentive to claim Trump didn't rape her now.

My point is that there is financial incentive in either case for Ivana's claim so, therefor, it is a wash.
 
Sure, she testified under oath in divorce court that Trump raped her. She had a financial incentive to make Trump seem as bad as possible in their divorce proceedings just like, as you claim, she has a financial incentive to claim Trump didn't rape her now.

My point is that there is financial incentive in either case for Ivana's claim so, therefor, it is a wash.

The problem is Ivana didn't deny the not-"rape" happened as described. What do you call what she alleged if not rape? A violent sexual assault of his wife? If that makes you feel better, OK.

And I wouldn't exactly consider testimony under oath is "washed" and made moot by a statement not under oath that doesn't deny a single fact alleged under oath but uses a different word or words to characterize the event as described.
 
Back
Top Bottom