This is now 16 Women that have Accused Trump of Sexual Attacks

[Perotista]

I cannot believe you.

There is a huge difference between kissing a child on the cheek and an accusation of rape. None of the videos of Biden show anything other than a caring man that is touchy-feely. Never has Biden been accused of sexual misconduct. Trump has been accused 24 times. The worst thing said about him by one woman is "he made me feel uncomfortable". This is totally on the opposite side of Jean Carroll saying "Trump raped me or at least put his hand in my vagina".

Do you not have any scruples? This is the kind of thinking and statements that make Trump and Republican supporters so hateful.

I think you're over looking Bill Clinton who was the first one I mentioned who was also accused of rape which all the Democrats in the world came to his defense. Now every Democrat in the world are after Trump. So much for scruples. It's all political, find a woman to accuse whomever and hope that it sticks.

 

[Luckyone]

I think you're over looking Bill Clinton who was the first one I mentioned who was also accused of rape which all the Democrats in the world came to his defense. Now every Democrat in the world are after Trump. So much for scruples. It's all political, find a woman to accuse whomever and hope that it sticks.

I do not disagree with you that politicians use everything they can get their hands on to win for their side. Nonetheless, that does not make the accusations untrue. The Republicans certainly used Bill Clinton's sexual actions as political fodder but ultimately they were proven to be correct. The case for Trump is (in my opinion) ten-fold strong. With Clinton there were 4 accusations. With Trump there are 24 (that is 6 times greater). With Clinton there were no statements previously that could be mistaken for a lack of respect for women, in fact just the opposite given all the credit he gave to his wife. In Trump's case there are many examples of his total disrespect for women. Remember his very public comment about Megyn Kelly ""You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever."?

This man has done and shown many more anti-women things than Clinton ever showed and yet Clinton was guilty and Trump is innocent? You have to be kidding me, right?

 

[Sabre]

No, you were the one I was talking to. What that means is that I was using you as an example of what I would consider someone to be if they thought that way.

You could have easily stated "that does not apply to me because I do not think or feel that way" and the example would then have moved on to others that think that way.

Bottom line is that in my opinion anyone that considers accusations from 26 women, deriding statements from Trump about what he does to women, extramarital affairs that have been proven against him, and his track record of lying to be dismissible is either gullible or a fool.

If that applies to you, so be it.

By the way, attacking the poster rather than addressing the problem is a common act of Trumpers when they have no answer.[/QUOTE]

You are a strange one to be speaking about attacking a poster, but I can see where it provides you with a deflection from yours...

 

[vegas giants]

I think you're over looking Bill Clinton who was the first one I mentioned who was also accused of rape which all the Democrats in the world came to his defense. Now every Democrat in the world are after Trump. So much for scruples. It's all political, find a woman to accuse whomever and hope that it sticks.

I didn't defend Clinton. But trump is a rapist

 

[Perotista]

I do not disagree with you that politicians use everything they can get their hands on to win for their side. Nonetheless, that does not make the accusations untrue. The Republicans certainly used Bill Clinton's sexual actions as political fodder but ultimately they were proven to be correct. The case for Trump is (in my opinion) ten-fold strong. With Clinton there were 4 accusations. With Trump there are 24 (that is 6 times greater). With Clinton there were no statements previously that could be mistaken for a lack of respect for women, in fact just the opposite given all the credit he gave to his wife. In Trump's case there are many examples of his total disrespect for women. Remember his very public comment about Megyn Kelly ""You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever."?

This man has done and shown many more anti-women things than Clinton ever showed and yet Clinton was guilty and Trump is innocent? You have to be kidding me, right?

I never dealt out guilt or innocents. Just the fact that both sides use these things as you put it, political fodder. Since it has been rampart since Bill Clinton I tend to ignore these things. I instead confer on support or opposition to based on whether I think someone was/is a good president. I liked Bill and rank him 3rd or 4th on the list of best presidents in my lifetime. I was born right after WWII. Whether or not those accusations were true or false didn't make him in my opinion any less of a president.

I don't care for Trump, didn't vote for him and never will. It is more than a pet peeve though when I see one side jumping all over and condemning the other side on something that they forgave, defended and protected their side from. That I can't stand. This fact is one reason I could never belong to either major party. Neither in my opinion have any core principles. Other than that is to use anything thing that comes up against the other side for their own political advantage.

It is my belief that one should either condemn someone regardless of party or condone, protect and defend regardless of party. That is pretty naive, but it is my belief.

 

[Luckyone]

I never dealt out guilt or innocents. Just the fact that both sides use these things as you put it, political fodder. Since it has been rampart since Bill Clinton I tend to ignore these things. I instead confer on support or opposition to based on whether I think someone was/is a good president. I liked Bill and rank him 3rd or 4th on the list of best presidents in my lifetime. I was born right after WWII. Whether or not those accusations were true or false didn't make him in my opinion any less of a president.

I don't care for Trump, didn't vote for him and never will. It is more than a pet peeve though when I see one side jumping all over and condemning the other side on something that they forgave, defended and protected their side from. That I can't stand. This fact is one reason I could never belong to either major party. Neither in my opinion have any core principles. Other than that is to use anything thing that comes up against the other side for their own political advantage.

It is my belief that one should either condemn someone regardless of party or condone, protect and defend regardless of party. That is pretty naive, but it is my belief.

I don't know if you have read many of my posts but my attacking Trump has never been as a party to a political side but as an attack on the kind of man that Trump is. I was a Republican for over 30 years and though I now feel more comfortable with the Democrats, I have not adopted all of their platform. Some of my core thinking remains Republican, though I must admit that my Republican core values are not now reflected by what the Republican party has become.

Nonetheless, I do not attack Trump as a Republican, I attack him as a person of no ethics, morals, principles or humanity.

I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that Trump is guilty of what he is being accused of. Not necessarily guilty of all the accusations but certainly a good portion of them. This thing about "innocent until proven guilty" is all technical in nature and does not reflect the idea that a person is judged by who he is and shows and not necessarily by what can be proven in court.

I don't need to prove that Trump is a bully, that he disrespects women, that he does not have a heart, that he is incompetent. Everything he says and does proves that every single day.

My intention with both of these last 2 threads I put up is not to prove Trump is guilty as a matter of him going to jail but as a matter of proving that he is not fit for the office that he has. That he is not fit to lead our nation.

I laugh at everyone that throws this "innocent until proven guilty" garbage at me. Each and every one of those that say that, would not allow their young and beautiful daughters to be in the same room alone with Trump. The hypocrisy is overwhelming. They don't have the guts to say the truth aloud when they know in their hearts that Trump is not a man to be trusted with a beautiful woman at his side.

Pure and unadulterated hypocrisy.

I will always stand by what I believe and say it out loud even if others consider it to be a negative. I am true to who I am and do not defend those actions that are undefendable, whether mine or someone else's.

 

[Pound4abrown]

*"You can do anything.*Grab them by the *****. You can do anything."*

Exactly, he said "you can", not he did and unfortunately he's right just ask any star, especially rock stars.

That is a really weak sauce argument. You are trying, with a straight face to say that Trump said you "can" grab them by the *****. But he shows such amazing restraint that he hasn't? Well then how does he know you "can"?
This whole idea that women let you assault them is completely disingenuous. If a man grabs a woman by the *****, without consent, did she let him, or did she not have the opportunity to say no to her ***** being grabbed?

 

[Luckyone]

No, you were the one I was talking to. What that means is that I was using you as an example of what I would consider someone to be if they thought that way.

You could have easily stated "that does not apply to me because I do not think or feel that way" and the example would then have moved on to others that think that way.

Bottom line is that in my opinion anyone that considers accusations from 26 women, deriding statements from Trump about what he does to women, extramarital affairs that have been proven against him, and his track record of lying to be dismissible is either gullible or a fool.

If that applies to you, so be it.

By the way, attacking the poster rather than addressing the problem is a common act of Trumpers when they have no answer.[/QUOTE]

You are a strange one to be speaking about attacking a poster, but I can see where it provides you with a deflection from yours...

Attacking a poster for being blind, for not seeking truth, for not being what everyone in life should try to be (honorable, honest, truthful and humane) is not a deflection but a sad commentary on what our nation is becoming.

You, on the other hand, are in fact deflecting because in none of my posts have I been blind, dishonest, inhumane and not a seeker of truth as you have shown yourself to be. At no point have you even acknowledged that Trump has acted incorrectly publicly on many occasions. Saying "innocent until proven guilty" is allowable because the statement is true from a legal point of view but saying you are certain he did not commit the crimes and that the women are lying is deflecting.................and you know it................unless of course, you are gullible and/or blind.

 

[Fruityfact]

That is a really weak sauce argument. You are trying, with a straight face to say that Trump said you "can" grab them by the *****. But he shows such amazing restraint that he hasn't? Well then how does he know you "can"?
This whole idea that women let you assault them is completely disingenuous. If a man grabs a woman by the *****, without consent, did she let him, or did she not have the opportunity to say no to her ***** being grabbed?

He knows it a weak sauce argument. He knows his argument is in bad faith. In fact, i'd wager he knows donald trump is a rapist himself. Because he doesn't really care that donald trump is a rapist.

 

[Pound4abrown]

So, you think Evangelical Christians should vote for baby killers?

How many people on the ballot have personally killed any babies? Link would be helpful so I can vote accordingly.

 

[Moderate Right]

How many people on the ballot have personally killed any babies? Link would be helpful so I can vote accordingly.

That's dishonest. Do I really have to rephrase that or do you think that Evangelical Christians should have voted for Hillary or other Democrats, who favor abortion? I mean, what do you think is worse in the mind of an Evangelical Christian, some womanizing or murder? In fact, I have an employee who works for me who is married to an illegal immigrant. She supported Trump over the protests of her husband because murder is a more important issue to her.

 

[gdgyva]

I didn't defend Clinton. But trump is a rapist

great

now just prove it in a court of law so that the world will know it also

or it that just too hard for you guys to understand?

 

[hanger4]

That is a really weak sauce argument. You are trying, with a straight face to say that Trump said you "can" grab them by the *****. But he shows such amazing restraint that he hasn't? Well then how does he know you "can"?
This whole idea that women let you assault them is completely disingenuous. If a man grabs a woman by the *****, without consent, did she let him, or did she not have the opportunity to say no to her ***** being grabbed?

You can make up whatever you want about me, but the fact remains, Trump did not say he grabbed.

 

[vegas giants]

You can make up whatever you want about me, but the fact remains, Trump did not say he grabbed.

Sure he did

 

[vegas giants]

great

now just prove it in a court of law so that the world will know it also

or it that just too hard for you guys to understand?

You understand he can be tried in a court while president....dont you?

 

[hanger4]

Sure he did

You've already been corrected and you even posted the quote, there's no need to make a fool of yourself again.

 

[gdgyva]

You understand he can be tried in a court while president....dont you?

which district is pondering charging him for ANY of these acts AFTER he gets done with being president...just one

surely there is one DA ready to file charges...right?

i mean with so many cases of sexual abuse and rape, there has to be a plethora of cases to choose from

so which one is the LUCKY WINNER

i will wait for the response.....

i expect crickets though

 

[vegas giants]

which district is pondering charging him for ANY of these acts AFTER he gets done with being president...just one

surely there is one DA ready to file charges...right?

i mean with so many cases of sexual abuse and rape, there has to be a plethora of cases to choose from

so which one is the LUCKY WINNER

i will wait for the response.....

i expect crickets though

Pondering? What is the legal form submitted when you are pondering prosecution?

Come on man

 

[Sabre]

Attacking a poster for being blind, for not seeking truth, for not being what everyone in life should try to be (honorable, honest, truthful and humane) is not a deflection but a sad commentary on what our nation is becoming.

You, on the other hand, are in fact deflecting because in none of my posts have I been blind, dishonest, inhumane and not a seeker of truth as you have shown yourself to be. At no point have you even acknowledged that Trump has acted incorrectly publicly on many occasions. Saying "innocent until proven guilty" is allowable because the statement is true from a legal point of view but saying you are certain he did not commit the crimes and that the women are lying is deflecting.................and you know it................unless of course, you are gullible and/or blind.

That is valid general statement but you then did attack personally using those exact words to do so.

Now what was that you were saying about personal attacks?

I never said any of those words you put into my mouth, as you did there and then accused me of saying.

3 :bon_voyag you will not be missed.

 

[gdgyva]

Pondering? What is the legal form submitted when you are pondering prosecution?

Come on man

the answer is none....you and i both know it

no charges will ever be brought

and therein lies the issue

and why few if any of people on my side of the aisle cant see things through our partisan glasses

 

[Luckyone]

which district is pondering charging him for ANY of these acts AFTER he gets done with being president...just one

surely there is one DA ready to file charges...right?

i mean with so many cases of sexual abuse and rape, there has to be a plethora of cases to choose from

so which one is the LUCKY WINNER

i will wait for the response.....

i expect crickets though

Here read it yourself:

Although it’s impossible to know exactly what a prosecution of Citizen Trump would look like, or who would conduct it, it’s already possible to project some paths a likely prosecution would take. In the eyes of a seasoned former federal prosecutor looking only at the evidence we have so far, here are the likely routes—and what Trump has to worry about next.

The Three Strongest Cases

Mueller’s team examined 10 distinct courses of conduct by Trump that could constitute obstruction of justice, but it’s not clear there is sufficient evidence to prove them all beyond a reasonable doubt. Three of the potential charges, however, are so strong that they are virtually certain to be included in any indictment of Trump. (They’re strong enough that over 1,000 former federal prosecutors signed a letter stating that Trump would be indicted if he were not president.)

The strongest count would be his attempt to fire Mueller, the man appointed to investigate the Russian government’s interference in the 2016 election and the possibility that the Trump campaign conspired with it. Very simply, obstruction of justice is when someone acts to undermine an investigation with the intent to do so, and there can be no serious question that firing Mueller would have curtailed the investigation. By the time Trump tried to fire Mueller, he knew the special counsel was also investigating him for obstructing justice. Trump tweeted about how he was under investigation a day before he tried to fire Mueller, and White House counsel Don McGahn warned Trump about his “exposure” for obstructing justice.

On June 17, 2017, Trump directed McGahn to get Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to remove Mueller, telling him “you gotta do this.” When McGahn didn’t follow through, Trump called him a second time the next day, after which McGahn decided to resign. Ultimately, he didn’t quit, but didn’t follow through on Trump’s order, either.

 

[gdgyva]

Here read it yourself:

those have NOTHING to do with this case...or the sexual cases do they?

dont go off on tangents

 

[Perotista]

I don't know if you have read many of my posts but my attacking Trump has never been as a party to a political side but as an attack on the kind of man that Trump is. I was a Republican for over 30 years and though I now feel more comfortable with the Democrats, I have not adopted all of their platform. Some of my core thinking remains Republican, though I must admit that my Republican core values are not now reflected by what the Republican party has become.

Nonetheless, I do not attack Trump as a Republican, I attack him as a person of no ethics, morals, principles or humanity.

I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that Trump is guilty of what he is being accused of. Not necessarily guilty of all the accusations but certainly a good portion of them. This thing about "innocent until proven guilty" is all technical in nature and does not reflect the idea that a person is judged by who he is and shows and not necessarily by what can be proven in court.

I don't need to prove that Trump is a bully, that he disrespects women, that he does not have a heart, that he is incompetent. Everything he says and does proves that every single day.

My intention with both of these last 2 threads I put up is not to prove Trump is guilty as a matter of him going to jail but as a matter of proving that he is not fit for the office that he has. That he is not fit to lead our nation.

I laugh at everyone that throws this "innocent until proven guilty" garbage at me. Each and every one of those that say that, would not allow their young and beautiful daughters to be in the same room alone with Trump. The hypocrisy is overwhelming. They don't have the guts to say the truth aloud when they know in their hearts that Trump is not a man to be trusted with a beautiful woman at his side.

Pure and unadulterated hypocrisy.

I will always stand by what I believe and say it out loud even if others consider it to be a negative. I am true to who I am and do not defend those actions that are undefendable, whether mine or someone else's.

I have no problem with that. As I stated the ones I have a problem with are those who defended Bill Clinton to the max and now attack Trump. Also vice versa, those defending Trump these days that attacked Bill Clinton. The difference is I don't need a thousand women coming forth and saying Trump raped them to know what kind of individual he is. Bully, for sure. With all his temper tantrum throwing, calling others names he reminds me of a four year old kid whose parents failed to teach him any manners. Then their is his feud creating against anyone who would dare mutter a word against him. He is one thin skinned egotistical oaf. No doubt.

Now when I see someone who attacks Trump for something someone in their party did almost the the exact same, this I bring out. This to me means it's all about the R and the D to them. Not the individual.