President Trump and accusations of sexual misconduct: The complete list

[Khayembii Communique]

Sexual misconduct by powerful men has all but taken over the news, with Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.), Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) and senatorial hopeful Roy Moore (R-Ala.) among the politicians on this growing list.

Trump vociferously has taken aim at accused Democrats, while apparently giving a pass to Republicans. Moreover, it was only a year ago that similar accusations against Trump dominated the headlines, with more than a dozen women accusing Trump of improper conduct or sexual assault. Many of the accusations surfaced after the release of a 2005 tape of Trump speaking graphically about kissing and groping women uninvited.

During the second presidential debate, Anderson Cooper asked then-candidate Trump point blank whether he had “actually kiss[ed] women without consent or grope[d] women without consent?” Trump asserted that “nobody has more respect for women” and Cooper pushed him, asking, “Have you ever done those things?” Trump denied that he had, responding: “No, I have not.”

The president has held this line, telling the New York Times, when asked the same question: “I don’t do it. I don’t do it.”

But it’s not as simple as that. Many of the women have produced witnesses who say they heard about these incidents when they happened — long before Trump’s political aspirations were known. Three have produced at least two witnesses.

Such contemporaneous accounts are essential to establishing the credibility of the allegation because they reduce the chance that a person is making up a story for political purposes. In the case of sexual allegations, such accounts can help bolster the credibility of the “she said” side of the equation. Often, a sexual assault will occur behind closed doors. The contemporary corroborators can explain what they heard at the time and whether the story being told now is consistent with how the story was told years earlier. This does not necessarily mean an allegation is true, but it does give journalistic organizations more confidence to report on the allegation.

The Fact Checker first detailed some of the accusations against Trump during the 2016 campaign. That fact check also detailed the witnesses who backed up claims of sexual accusations against former president Bill Clinton — who, like Trump, insisted the women accusing him were not telling the truth.

Here’s a list of 13 women who have publicly come forward with claims that Trump had physically touched them inappropriately in some way, and the witnesses they provided. We did not include claims that were made only through Facebook posts or other social media, or in lawsuits that subsequently were withdrawn.

We also did not include the accounts of former beauty contestants who say Trump walked in on them when they were half nude because there were no allegations of touching. Trump had bragged on the Howard Stern show of his “inspections” during the pageants: “You know they’re standing there with no clothes. Is everybody OK? And you see these incredible looking women. And so I sort of get away with things like that.”

Washington Post

In light of all of the new allegations coming forward this is definitely newsworthy now, and it's good to see some media outlets start asking the question anew - what about Trump?

 

[Harshaw]

In light of all of the new allegations coming forward this is definitely newsworthy now, and it's good to see some media outlets start asking the question anew - what about Trump?

When were they NOT "asking" it about Trump?

It's perfectly legit to say "if Franken needs to go, why not Trump?"

But the idea that the "media" is only now "asking the question" -- or indeed, ever stopped -- is patently ludicrous.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

Yeah, I put Trump in the same category as all these other pieces of ****. And yes, I include Bill Clinton as well.

But the American people knew these things when they elected him.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

When were they NOT "asking" it about Trump?

It's perfectly legit to say "if Franken needs to go, why not Trump?"

But the idea that the "media" is only now "asking the question" -- or indeed, ever stopped -- is patently ludicrous.

I don't think so. A lot of it died down after the election. It certainly hasn't been getting the same press as Roy Moore.

 

[Harshaw]

I don't think so. A lot of it died down after the election. It certainly hasn't been getting the same press as Roy Moore.

Seems to me it's getting the press along with Roy Moore. But perhaps we're seeing different media.

 

[Saladin4]

Wow! That is a lot of women....trump is a real perv and low life

 

[MrPeanut]

Yeah, I put Trump in the same category as all these other pieces of ****. And yes, I include Bill Clinton as well.

But the American people knew these things when they elected him.

I think that's what makes these situations so difficult. On one hand it is likely Trump is guilty of at least some of what he is being accused of, but on the other hand a lot of people don't care about it. It is still illegal, and he should still have to be punished in some way for it right? I'm not sure what that entails, but getting away with things because of your position is a pretty horrible thing.

 

[holbritter]

In light of all of the new allegations coming forward this is definitely newsworthy now, and it's good to see some media outlets start asking the question anew - what about Trump?

All of these 'witnesses' did not actually witness anything. They heard about it or were told. Not saying some of it may not have happened, but reporters and editors should know the difference.

 

[joG]

In light of all of the new allegations coming forward this is definitely newsworthy now, and it's good to see some media outlets start asking the question anew - what about Trump?

I think it’s time for bigots to stop making fun of themselves by frothing about trumped up wet dreams and move on to something interesting to people without a sexual hang up.

 

[joG]

All of these 'witnesses' did not actually witness anything. They heard about it or were told. Not saying some of it may not have happened, but reporters and editors should know the difference.

But they’d swear they heard it was true!!!

 

[chuckiechan]

In light of all of the new allegations coming forward this is definitely newsworthy now, and it's good to see some media outlets start asking the question anew - what about Trump?

Well, we have quite a purge going on as it is, so now you want oppo research on every possible “yes” on impeachment vote, while you do the same on “no” votes?

What a FUBAR country the hypocrites would create!

 

[Waddy]

So there you have it. This is what the "sexual harassment" bandwagon was designed to do; try to bring down Trump. But it backfired because so many liberals and Democrats are such horn dogs in their own right. The mass media certainly has their share as well. When you open that can of whoop ass it's hard to control.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

All of these 'witnesses' did not actually witness anything. They heard about it or were told. Not saying some of it may not have happened, but reporters and editors should know the difference.

Did you read the article? They aren't witnesses of the act, they are able to testify that they were told of the act by the victim at the time. Here you go:

But it’s not as simple as that. Many of the women have produced witnesses who say they heard about these incidents when they happened — long before Trump’s political aspirations were known. Three have produced at least two witnesses.

Such contemporaneous accounts are essential to establishing the credibility of the allegation because they reduce the chance that a person is making up a story for political purposes. In the case of sexual allegations, such accounts can help bolster the credibility of the “she said” side of the equation. Often, a sexual assault will occur behind closed doors. The contemporary corroborators can explain what they heard at the time and whether the story being told now is consistent with how the story was told years earlier. This does not necessarily mean an allegation is true, but it does give journalistic organizations more confidence to report on the allegation.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

So there you have it. This is what the "sexual harassment" bandwagon was designed to do; try to bring down Trump. But it backfired because so many liberals and Democrats are such horn dogs in their own right. The mass media certainly has their share as well. When you open that can of whoop ass it's hard to control.

lol yes, Harvey Weinstein going down was all about Trump. Give me a break.

 

[holbritter]

Did you read the article? They aren't witnesses of the act, they are able to testify that they were told of the act by the victim at the time. Here you go:

Yes I read it. That's what I said, isn't it?

 

[yankintx]

lol yes, Harvey Weinstein going down was all about Trump. Give me a break.

The Weinstein fall out has been occurring for the last few weeks. Add in Chester the Molester Moore and it has opened the floodgates. There is power in numbers, not EVERY case can be dismissed with a wave of the hand. As for Trumps accusers, they are lining up, and want there voices heard. I believe its called female empowerment.

 

[Saladin4]

So there you have it. This is what the "sexual harassment" bandwagon was designed to do; try to bring down Trump. But it backfired because so many liberals and Democrats are such horn dogs in their own right. The mass media certainly has their share as well. When you open that can of whoop ass it's hard to control.

trump and Moore are 2 pieces of ****...Enough said

 

[Superfly]

The Weinstein fall out has been occurring for the last few weeks. Add in Chester the Molester Moore and it has opened the floodgates. There is power in numbers, not EVERY case can be dismissed with a wave of the hand. As for Trumps accusers, they are lining up, and want there voices heard. I believe its called female empowerment.

A name that strikes fear in the hearts of men everywhere - Gloria Allred - is taking up the mantle again with Trump's accusers.

 

[Kobie]

So there you have it. This is what the "sexual harassment" bandwagon was designed to do; try to bring down Trump. But it backfired because so many liberals and Democrats are such horn dogs in their own right. The mass media certainly has their share as well. When you open that can of whoop ass it's hard to control.

Oh, for chrissakes

 

[apdst]

The deflection begins. I guess the stove is getting way to hot for the Leftists.

 

[apdst]

So there you have it. This is what the "sexual harassment" bandwagon was designed to do; try to bring down Trump. But it backfired because so many liberals and Democrats are such horn dogs in their own right. The mass media certainly has their share as well. When you open that can of whoop ass it's hard to control.

The Libbos are desperate to take the heat off of all the Democrats that are getting fingered.

Moore (R) got accused, then Franken (D) and Conyers(D) got exposed. They can't allow that ratio to stand.

 

[Will Marshall]

I don't think it's about "ratios". Some Democrats are sexual predators, some Republicans are sexual predators. What all of these allegations coming to light should prove is that sexually predatory behavior is not - and should not be treated as - a partisan issue. I remember when all of this started, when Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey got accused, and Fox News 'n' Co. treated it as a "liberal elites exposed" story. It frustrated me, because they were politicizing something that wasn't in the slightest bit political. Roy Moore would be a sexual predator regardless of whether he was a Republican or a Democrat. What everyone should be doing is decrying behavior of guys like Franken, Moore, Trump, Spacey and Weinstein without acting as though this sort of behavior is a Republican Thing or a Democrat Thing.

 

[Waddy]

I don't think it's about "ratios". Some Democrats are sexual predators, some Republicans are sexual predators. What all of these allegations coming to light should prove is that sexually predatory behavior is not - and should not be treated as - a partisan issue. I remember when all of this started, when Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey got accused, and Fox News 'n' Co. treated it as a "liberal elites exposed" story. It frustrated me, because they were politicizing something that wasn't in the slightest bit political. Roy Moore would be a sexual predator regardless of whether he was a Republican or a Democrat. What everyone should be doing is decrying behavior of guys like Franken, Moore, Trump, Spacey and Weinstein without acting as though this sort of behavior is a Republican Thing or a Democrat Thing.

Yep..... Trump just happens to be on the list. A thousand liberals thrown under the bus to get at one man...... God, sweet Jesus, how you all must hate him......

 

[Khayembii Communique]

The Libbos are desperate to take the heat off of all the Democrats that are getting fingered.

Moore (R) got accused, then Franken (D) and Conyers(D) got exposed. They can't allow that ratio to stand.

I don't think I know anyone that's a Democrat/left leaning who isn't also supportive of the dem pervs stepping down, too.

 

[apdst]

I don't think I know anyone that's a Democrat/left leaning who isn't also supportive of the dem pervs stepping down, too.

Liberals have been excusing, or at least minimizing the misconduct of Democrat sexual preditors from the git go.