Donald Trump

Dalai I am going to PM you, I don't want to promote anything along this vein.

"

DalaiLama wrote:

Spoiler

I saw pepe

[Update 3] Claimant #2 Rachel Crooks

Disputed by Lona Burnstein from Columbus, Ohio, says she knows Crooks’ family. Burnstein’s cousin was married to Crook’s uncle.

Lona says: "Rachel Crooks one of the supposed victims of Mr Trump is from Greensprings Ohio, I know the family...she is lying...Shame on Rachel Crooks!!"

http://archive.is/4AL8t

................................

[Update 2] Claimant #3 Mindy:

"The Palm Beach Post reported that Mindy McGillivray, 36, of Palm Springs, Florida, did not report to authorities her 2003 encounter with Trump at the time but had shared the story with close friends and family. A man who had accompanied her to Mar-a-Lago that day, Ken Davidoff, told the newspaper he vividly remembers McGillivray telling him Trump had groped her.

Davidoff said he had brought McGillivray with him when he joined his father to shoot pictures during a concert by singer Ray Charles on Jan. 24, 2003. After the show, as people were saying goodbye to Charles, McGillivray felt "a pretty good nudge, more of a grab" close to the center of her bottom, she told the newspaper.

"I turn around and there's Donald. He sort of looked away quickly. I quickly turned back, facing Ray Charles, and I'm stunned," she said.

McGillivray said she considered making a scene at the time but decided "to stay quiet." Trump's remarks at the second debate in which he denied groping women changed her mind, she said."


"Critical details of McGillivray’s story don’t add up.

McGillivray claims that when she was nudged in 2003, Trump and his wife Melania were engaged. But a quick Google search proves this is false: Trump proposed to Melania in April 2004. Why didn’t the Palm Beach Post or McGillivray check this obvious detail?

Perhaps because they never bothered to verify a Ray Charles concert at Mar-A-Lago even happened on January 24, 2003. A Getty Images search shows Trump and Melania posing with Ray Charles at Mar-A-Lago … in a photo by Davidoff Photos Studio, created on January 1, 2003, more than three weeks before McGillivray claimed she was “grabbed” at a Ray Charles concert. A Ray Charles concert chronology shows that on January 23, a Ray Charles concert in Seattle was canceled, but nothing was scheduled for January 24."

..................


[Update] - We have confirmation on the claim against Trump from the Guardian published even before the NYT published their version:

"He was like an octopus. Hands everywhere."

http://tinyurl.com/hxxyb2s

VP candidate Kaine alluded to the attack as well on Oct 4th:


................

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

Stopped listening to Trump´s words or those of his followers.
Both of them simply disgusting. Can not understand how people still stand by this shady mogul, probably lack of moral standards.

And how do you know their moral standards aren't actually as good as anyone else's? To know that, you would have to know exactly why they have made that choice. A blanket statement against supporters of any kind is just another kind of stereotyping.


Stereotyping constitutes its own moral dilemma.

As to why someone *might* stand by or stand against Trump, there are various possibilities to consider:

Do we know the accusations (there seem to be a lot of them all of sudden) have any merit? Do we know that the accusations were made in any kind of fraudulent manner?

We certainly have motivation on both sides (both sides of the campaigns, not the victims) to claim the high road and to blame the other side.

We certainly have a historical lack of credibility on both sides, as well as some history of questionable claims against Trump by the media before.

We have some evidence of media collusion with Hillary's campaign via Wikileaks.

What we don't have is a lot of investigative journalism - digging in to the facts, so the average viewer can better ascertain the truth, or at least plausibility. This, IMO, is part and parcel of the ideological gulf we see between the left and the right. Rather than deliver accurate, timely information and letting the viewers and voters decide, we have media that shout, hide, ignore, promote, twist, spin and in some cases lie to deceive the viewers.

It's like a three year old child using a very offensive racial slur - you know the child didn't learn that on their own, but was taught to hate. The media are doing the same thing to the public.

If we had some accurate, timely, details on the allegations - we could make reasonable judgments as to whether the claims against Trump should go before a grand jury for prosecution, or whether the people making false claims should go before a grand jury for prosecution, or whether the truth lies somewhere in between.

Details matter. The same kind of details a grand jury would use to decide whether to proceed with charges are the same kind of details the public needs to make a reaonable assessment.

IOW- reasonable doubt about the claims isn't outrageous. Reasonable acceptance of the claims against Trump isn't outrageous either, as it fits with some of his exposed commentary and prior behavior.

So, that is aspect 1 - Is it True?
Aspect 2 is not so much whether some people are standing by Trump as to whether they find Hillary much worse.

What we do have in Hillary's case is a much more extensive background to look at. It could very well be that if Trump had been in the public eye for so long that he would look worse. That is speculation. What Hillary has done, and what she has stood for, and what she has failed to stand for is NOT a matter of speculation.

The danger of her and Obama's policies and actions has been shown to be horrific. The consequences of Hillary's foreign policy actions are so extreme that linking images or video of them would result in a ban.

You are certainly entitled to the opinion that Trump's foreign policy would be even more dangerous.

And that ultimately, is where the divide lays - in who people think is more dangerous to have in office. It has far more to do with being an analysis based on limited data than it based on personal morals.

The morals of both sides are bankrupt. We are trying to figure out whether the blue robot or the red robot is more likely to kill us all. Anyone in love with either robot is deceiving themselves.

As to who is lying (more) or verifying details of claims.... not an easy thing for people to do. My suggestion for those trying to figure it out is to ignore the shouting, and listen to what either side is NOT saying.



The silence can be deafening.

Another one where Trump grabs a pussy:



And:




//enuff said. Trump 2016!

"Obama slams smear photo
02/25/08

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe accused the Clinton campaign Monday of "shameful offensive fear-mongering" by circulating a photo as an attempted smear.



Plouffe said in a statement: “On the very day that Senator Clinton is giving a speech about restoring respect for America in the world, her campaign has engaged in the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we’ve seen from either party in this election. This is part of a disturbing pattern that led her county chairs to resign in Iowa, her campaign chairman to resign in New Hampshire, and it’s exactly the kind of divisive politics that turns away Americans of all parties and diminishes respect for America in the world," said Plouffe.



The Clinton campaign issued an official response to the growing tempest - but the statement from campaign manager Maggie Williams did not respond to the central question of whether staffers circulated the photo. "

Trump called the campaign out on that and they denied it.

Wikileaks shows the Clinton campaign smear:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/7860

"Paul et al- We've reworked the Obama message into the survey, as requested. But on the list of negative facts we need to cut ONE since we separated out gay adoption and his use of cocaine. Please send your suggestions. Thanks! "


So.... they had considering using "gay adoption" as an attack against Obama?

That's some serious Homophobia going on there.

Here is the full list:



* 7 Obama (owe-BAHM-uh)'s father was a Muslim and Obama grew up among Muslims in the world's most populous Islamic country.

* 8 Obama (owe-BAHM-uh) is ranked as one of the ten most liberal members of the Senate because of his support of issues like gay adoption.

Want your 15 minutes of fame? When mainstream media asks you if Trump touched you inappropriately, simply say yes.

"

Xavderion wrote:

Want your 15 minutes of fame? When mainstream media asks you if Trump touched you inappropriately, simply say yes.

The I'm with Her campaign knows all about inappropriate:


From:jgendelman@american***
To: john.podesta@gma**
Date:2009-01-15 14:45

Subject: FW: Don't know if you want to bother John with this but

-----Original Message----- From: Fred Rotondaro Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 11:45 AM To:
Juliana Gendelman:

Don't know if you want to bother John with this but Eric McFadden, who was Hillary's Catholic liaison in the primaries, was arrested yesterday for running a prostitution ring. The transition political people know.

Fred -------------------------- Sent using BlackBerry

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/4190

Trump: “I’ll go backstage before a show and everyone’s getting dressed and ready and everything else. And you know, no men are anywhere. And I’m allowed to go in because I’m the owner of the pageant. And therefore, I’m inspecting it. You know I’m inspecting it. I want to make sure everything is good.”
Stern: “You’re like a doctor.”
Trump: “Is everyone OK? 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.”

Trump is a perv? Better vote WW3 Hillary.

This week meltdown was hilarious (Trump is going full fight against the New World Order). Things are mostly decided. Not even Wikileaks can save Trump (picking the birther guy was stupid to begin with). I love Trumpenfreude.

Enjoy president Clinton.