Let the record also show that Trump continues to employ as his Labour Secretary Alexander Acosta who negotiated a shamefully lenient plea deal for the monstrous paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, and supported alleged child sexual abuser Roy Moore
If a boy came out an claimed that you raped him in secondary school, should we believe him?
You questioned whether Anthony Wiener committed sexual assault. Sexting with a minor is sexual assault and he rightly went to prison for it.
I have no doubt that Trump sexually assaulted some women in his lifetime as he meets all the standards for an entitled rich male who would do such a thing. Just like Bill Clinton and many others of that generation. Having spoken to many who lived here during that time, it was a bit of a sexual free for all, with very blurry lines on consent. Obviously times have changed, but I am a little suspicious of people who make accusations 25 years after the fact who happen to be writing books, get fees for going on TV shows, or are politically motivated.
I tend to be skeptical about accusations that are without evidence other than the accusation itself and especially may be politically motivated. You believe all accusations as long as they are against right wing figures. If the standard is all accusers must be believed then nobody should run for public office as to take them down simply involves making an accusation against them, no matter how long ago and whether there is any collaborating evidence.
It’s a very dangerous precedent, to believe everyone making an accusation without question. You wouldn’t like it if it happened to you.
Guys, ye’re arguing over the rights and wrongs of rape here
Arguing about fictional rape allegations isn’t much of a line of “argument”, mate
I didn’t question whether he committed sexual assault
I’m not very familiar with the case - I was simply inquiring what he was convicted of
Can you please point me to the relevant law for clarification’s sake
Wow
Three years in and your first admission that you think Trump is a sexual assaulter
But weird how you try and defend him by mentioning Clinton
That is a qualification and pure apologism for sexual assault and rape
Ah it was the done thing then, or something
Not really
Ivana Trump swore under oath that Donald Trump raped her- that’s why I’m strongly inclined to believe it happened
Juanita Broaddrick swore under oath that Bill Clinton did not rape her - that’s why I’d be much more sceptical as to whether Clinton raped her
I’d be sceptical of Neymar’s accuser as her story appears to not stand up
Christine Blasey Ford on the other hand was extremely credible and I believe her 100%
Again the straw man, when you are the actual straw man you complain about
Can I ask you another question - didn’t you think Roy Moore should have stood aside
In that case why are your standards different when it comes to Trump and Barf O’Kavanaugh
Nope, arguing whether all accusations of rape or sexual assault should be automatically believed.
@Sidney believes they all should be, as long as they are against people he dislikes. He wouldn’t be so quick to embrace #metoo if someone made an accusation against him from the past where he had no means to defend himself.
Wow - you seem really eager to run with this line of “argument”, which isn’t an argument at all, merely a straw man which ironically you have proved you are the embodiment of
I don’t like Neymar by the way, but I’m highly sceptical of his accuser’s story because it appears to not stand up
Can I ask you another question @anon7035031
Did you think Al Franken was right to resign?
My answer to that question would be yes, I think he was right to resign
Was Judge Alex Kozinski right to resign after multiple allegations of sexual harrassment were made against him?
I would say yes he was right to resign
I would be skeptical of what people say during divorce proceedings, especially with a lot of money involved. Juanita Broaddrick maintains to this day that she was raped by Bill Clinton and was pressurized by local Democrats to not bring charges. She also claims she was thanked by Hillary for “doing the right thing”. Given Bill Clinton’s history I believe their encounter wasn’t consensual.
You simply cannot examine these issues without the context of the time period. By today’s standards Bill Clinton sexually assaulted Monica Lewinsky as there is no way someone that powerful can claim consent with such a junior figure, it is clearly abuse of power. It is a disgrace that he is still allowed near a Democratic platform.
There are many holes in Blasey Ford’s account, the fact you believe her 100% says it all. You also believed the woman that Michael Avenatti convinced to come forward, who was 100% unbelievable. Think about that, you believed Michael Avenatti, someone who is going to jail for lying and stealing from his own clients.
Yes, Republicans should have got rid of Roy Moore. Just like Democrats should have got rid of the Virginia politician who has been accused of rape by two women, but strangely he is still in office, along with the two lads who wore blackface. Both parties are guilty of protecting their own.
My standards are the same for everyone. Anyone accused of a crime deserves due process. If we get to the point where all accusations are believed, then nobody is safe from accusation and nobody will run for public office.
Yes, I agree Franken was right to resign as there was clear evidence against him. My question is why has the Virginia politician not resigned or been forced to resign? It isn’t the simple Republican bad, Democrat good issue you make it out to be. Democrats are clearly protecting their lads in Virginia as the next in line is a Republican.
On Kozinski, there were multiple accusations from women who directly worked for him, so I think he had to resign. The problem with most of the Trump accusations is he has had hundreds of women work for him and yet how many have made accusations? IF he was such a sexual predator you would think he would have assaulted lots of women that worked for him. A lot of the accusations are very dubious, and there is no clear evidence to support them, and this is a man who was in the public eye all his life. He is clearly an entitled male who thinks every woman wanted to sleep with him, and obviously many did. Whether he actually assaulted anyone is I would say likely, but where is the actual evidence? Not accusations from anonymous sources or people with an agenda, or people paid for their stories, but actual evidence.
It isn’t a straw man, it gets to the core of the issue. Should all accusers be believed? You are on record as saying they should be. I believe that’s a very dangerous standard, as everyone is open to be accused, and it becomes the de facto weapon to use against public figures.
Wow
Democratic accuser telling the truth despite swearing that no rape took place, Republican accuser talks shit
According to you anyway
I think you’ve just proved that straw man
Roy Moore has never faced due process - if you believe he is unfit for office and should have been “got rid of” by the Rapeublicans there’s no possible way you can’t simultaneously believe Trump or Barf O’Kavanaugh are remotely fit to hold office
There’s no way you can possibly believe they shouldn’t resign without performing an Olympic feat of mental gymnastics
The hypocrisy and moral selectiveness is staggering
I don’t think you understand the term
The default is that all accusers should be treated as telling the truth and should be treated with empathy, unless their story falls apart
It’s the exact same principle as reporting the theft of a bicycle - do you ask the question “should all reporters of bicycle theft be believed”?
Of course you don’t
Rape and sexual assault are the only crimes that this question is asked in relation to
In a previous post you were talking about power and abuse of it, yet now you can’t see the contradiction
You’re now telling us that all accusers should not be believed unless they can prove sexual assault or rape to a criminal standard of proof
There is no half way house
The default can only be to believe everybody or disbelieve everybody
I think it’s pretty obvious which is the correct approach
A bizarre response re Trump
It’s almost as if you’re now searching desperately for any rationale whatsoever to convince yourself that he didn’t sexually assault women, after previously telling us you had no doubt he did
More nonsense.
Both Trump and Ivana were Democrats at the time of the alleged marital rape, he was also a Democrat at the time of the latest rape allegation. Juanita Broddrick maintains she was raped to this day, I have no problem believing her and that she was pressured at the time to not file charges, over someone who lied to a grand jury.
Roy Moore was accused of having sex with minors, and there is some evidence to back that up. Please provide the evidence that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Blasey Ford. Her own friend who she claimed was there said she didn’t know Kavanaugh and had no recollection of a party that Blasey Ford described.
We will just have to agree to disagree., You believe all accusers, as long as they are against people you hate. I believe people when there is at least some evidence to believe they are telling the truth and not politically motivated. If you don’t think Blasey Ford was politically motivated and used by the Democrats then you are beyond help.
I live in California, most women I know here don’t believe Blasey Ford, but also believe Trump is a slimeball. It’s possible to not just see the world in black and white.
More nonsense. Credible belief can only be based on evidence, otherwise people can believe anything (and they do, look at religion).
The default should be to listen to all accusers and then rationally examine their cases. That is the half way house. If you default to #Ibelievethem, it is difficult to then question your own belief, as you demonstrate over and over. You believed the accuser that Michael Avernatti unearthed on Kavanaugh, have you ever admitted you were wrong, given how preposterous her claims were and the fact he’s a lying scumbag?
You simply cannot accept you can be wrong, even when the evidence is staring you in the face. So sorry, not the person I would accept adds any value to this conversation.
Your response is that “the Trumps were Democrats”?
Fucking hell
Ivana Trump gives sworn testimony that Donald Trump raped her, and your response is try and smear the Democrats
This is Brass Eye stuff now
It reminds me of the scene in The Simpsons where Sideshow Bob runs for Mayor and puts out an advert accusing Mayor Quimby of being soft of crime
“Mayor Quimby even released Sideshow Bob, a man twice convicted of attempted murder - can you trust a man like Mayor Quimby? Vote Sideshow Bob for mayor”
“Democrats love rape - Donald Trump raped his wife when he was a Democrat - can you trust a party like the Democrats? Vote Donald Trump for President”
Trump was a Republican between 1987 and 1999 by the way so you;re talking shit
It’s quite simple - if you think Roy Moore is unfit for office, then you automatically think Trump and Barf are unfit for office too
There is no way around this and it’s laughable that you’re trying to find one
Quit with the cognitive dissonance
I got my bike robbed in 2013 but I had no evidence
The nature of historic rape allegations is that many will have no corroborating evidence
That’s the nature of rape full stop
Your approach is that women should be automatically disbelieved
There is no way around this fact
It’s sick
You are still avoiding the central question and now just straw manning.
Your default position is that all those making accusations of sexual assault or rape must be believed. We have seen multiple cases where this has been demonstrated to be dangerous and innocent people had their lives destroyed or imprisoned.
My default is all those who make such accusations should be listened to and their cases examined. Everyone is entitled to the presumption of innocence, no exceptions.
1 Like
You are the only sick one here.
I have never stalked a woman in my life, let alone across continents.
Nor have I written disgusting “satires” about a woman whose husband just died.