Donald Trump's Takedown of Hillary Clinton
.
If we are to believe The Mainstream Media, Donald Trump supposedly "lost" the second Presidential Debate as well, or at best it was a draw.
The supposedly neutral Mainstream Media has quite obviously ganged-up on Trump in the most transparently one-sided way in all of Election History to make him out to be a Monster over mere "crude" remarks (made when he was just a private citizen, and not a public office holder) ----- yet according to them, it is perfectly okay for Hillary Clinton to actually violate Federal Laws, Slaughter millions of innocent people and ruin whole Nations in horrific, bloody, reckless Wars, and make much worse crude public statements like: "We came, we saw, and he Died" while bursting out in laughter at the human carnage that she perpetrated.
That apparently is all fine. And while Trump merely made some crude personal remarks in a joking manner, Bill Clinton has actually physically raped and abused multiple women multiple times, and yet we all are not supposed to take offense at that (the real crime) ?
Meanwhile, back in the real World, Donald Trump totally called out and exposed Hillary Clinton in the second Presidential Debate, and absolutely destroyed her. This serially corrupt woman, Hillary Clinton, finally got smacked down in public for all the whole World to see:
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciLUSGAVbg0 width:640 height:480]
---
And when the WikiLeaks documents came out, they revealed that Bernie Sander's had been right all along, and Hillary Clinton is just a paid off puppet and willing servant of the Elite, crooked Globalist Banksters, who has contempt for the common people. These documents much to my surprise were also actually even brought up in the Presidential Debate.
WikiLeaks Excerpts revealed the following:
In the lucrative speeches, for which she was paid some $225,00 a pop (not for any wisdom), Clinton signaled support for a plan that would lower corporate tax rates while raising the Social Security age, and embraced a strong pro-trade position that completely conflicts with remarks she's made on the campaign trail. At a Morgan Stanley get-together, she said the framework and big elements of the Simpson-Bowles [Social Security] deficit reduction plan, loathed by many progressives because of its cuts to the welfare state, "were right." Now we know her real position!
On more than one occasion, she spoke of how bankers should take a leading role in shaping financial regulations. Clinton admitted that you need to have policy platforms that you feed the public — and your real ones. And Hillary Clinton proved that she is committed to the Globalists Agenda to systematically drive down American's wages, relocate our American jobs abroad, and hollow out U.S. Industry and weaken the U.S. Economy with her now documented statement: "My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders."
.
And when the WikiLeaks documents exposed the fact that Hillary Clinton holds private policy positions that are in complete conflict with the "public" positions (phony) that she deceives the people with in her campaigns, and then she even had the gall to equate her corrupt actions with the honorable Abraham Lincoln -- Donald Trump struck her down once again:
Watch:
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etIT8BQ8vVU width:640 height:480]
--
.
"Wikileaks has given us a window into the secret corridors of government power, where we see her desire to end forever the American independence that our founders gave to us and wanted us to have. American soldiers have fought and died to win and keep America's freedom, and now Hillary Clinton wants to surrender that freedom to these open borders, open trade, and a world government."
--Donald Trump
---
.
Finally, Bill Clinton was also called out too, and unable to hide from deserved embarrassment on National TV for his serial physical abuse to women (multiple) that far exceeds any "rude thing" that Trump as a non-holder of public office may have done:
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPpzdmQo650 width:640 height:480]
---
Regardless of what the Mainstream Media says, Donald Trump clearly won the second Presidential Debate and exposed the disgraced record and corrupt agenda of Hillary Clinton.
The only question that remains is what percentage of the American public are able to actually now think independently from the Mainstream Media, and wish to stop Globalism and the oppressive New World Order agenda in its tracks -- before it destroys our Economy, and destroys the whole World as well, and engulfs it in flames. Haven't we already seen enough evidence over the last 35 years to know we have to really stop this now?
.
---
Comments
This Election is a referendum on the tyranny of Globalism
.
This Election is a referendum on the tyranny of Globalism .... not crass behavior.
Fight The Oligarchy!
I've noticed there's been very little discussion
about who 'won' the latest debate.
Just that Trump is awful.......... all the time.
The MSM seems very silent on this issue (including the local rag, that trumpeted Hillary's performance in the first............ but nary a word on the second............... just that Trump is awful all the time).
Oh, and viewing numbers were down, so nobody cares anyway. Like nobody.
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
I have no opinion on who won the debate
But Clinton's unscrupulous warmongering, death and destruction in all those countries listed, reveals her to be as vile a Neocon as her war criminal pal Kissinger. She is definitely the greater evil. We are in for bad times, whether we get Trump (such a inspiration for his worst supporters) or Clinton (the lying sack who is stupid enough to want war with Russia, and risk us all going up in a thermo nuclear cloud.) Ugh. Its like having to choose surgery with either a drunken butcher or a certified doctor who has killed every patient under her care.
BFF
A lot of ....touchy....grabby.... right there
Crooked Hillary's Advisor (and Lover?)
Who's the real racist?
---
[video:https://youtu.be/e4LKAt1t_8M width:640 height:480]
A difficult decision--not so difficult
I choose Jill. Who wins? We don't.
As someone who has no dog in this fight, not liking either of
them and planning to vote for Jill: I can't tell from the short clips posted who won. Nor do I really care. But if you want to be persuasive, I'd recommend posting clips that show both of them for about the same amount of time on the same subject, to have a full view of point and counterpoint.
Not that you're likely to persuade anyone here, but it's a big Internet. But it's more than Trump making "crude remarks," he said that he would commit sexual assault. That's what it is if you grab a woman without her permission - assault - and charges can be brought against you that could result in decades in jail and registration as a sex offender. This isn't pro-Hillary spin (I don't think anyone should vote for her either), but Trump is disqualified due to the words he clearly spoke on the tape that confess to his actions.
Fact checking the "Hill attacks women who Bill abused" claim: Exaggerated: http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/11/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-bill...
This whole post strikes me as exaggerated. But maybe that's just me.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
Jill Stein on C-Span:
I agree that Hillary seems to want war with Russia, truly
scary. But Trump wants to "take out their families," also scary.
And there's still the fact that I can't support an admitted sexual assailant.
Jill Stein is the only choice.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
I would not accept CNN's fact-checking
On any Clinton related issue.
Here's a video of three of the women discussing the issue. I didnot watch it.
Life is too short. [video:http://youtu.be/NvoRcPXURwg]
Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur.
Ha! Good point (don't trust CNN).
But they're not the most credible of witnesses (I did watch it). I don't want to tear them down point by point because it may just be that they've been thrust into the spotlight somewhat unwillingly so don't come across well.
To me, the fact that the entirety of the "Champion of Women and Children's" claim to fame seems to be giving some supportive speeches, when she was co-founder of a "humanitarian" foundation with almost limitless financial resources, tells me all I need to know about her sincerity.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
If we didn't know by now
that Donald Trump is an asshole with women then we've really not been paying attention all these years. While his remarks are reprehensible, Bill actually DID many of those things, and to a 23 year old star crossed young woman who's life was pretty well ruined for quite a while afterwards. And for Shillary to pile on and treat any woman who was harassed or raped by Bill as the loony one? For HER to paint any of those women as the predator? That is FAR worse than the Rump's idiotic misogyny, which as we all know is fairly run of the mill for powerful, arrogant, wealthy men.
Bill may very well be an actual rapist, and for Hillary to defend HIM against those women? She's worse than Trump in my book, far worse. She gives license to just that type of behavior out of the men in her life, for her to act all outraged just shows her contempt for women, far more than Trumps dirty ass remarks ever did.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
Wiki put out emails that have Hillary admitting the
Clintons are creating and funding ISIS through the Sauds, who are also funding her campaign and dropping millions into the foundation. They are traitors. Not a word from the media.
http://endingthefed.com/its-over-hillarys-isis-email-just-leaked-its-wor...
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Doing more of the same is the definition of Insanity.
Albert Einstein said that.
---
Except I think they're all in the same club
and I ain't.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Except that one candidate slips out the actual TRUTH:
Donald Trump, speaking Thursday in West Palm Beach, Fla.:
This may be the first issue-free election of our lifetimes.
The American people will be forced to base their votes on the various wee-wees of complete strangers.
This all began with Gary Hart, I believe. And now it has achieved full maturity and has displaced all discussion of any issues that pertain to the lives of the American people and the future of the nation.
On another note, I'm pretty thrilled this is happening so the world gets to see it close up. By any standard, it delegitimizes the US as a civilized nation, or even a decent one. And that will go a long way to rescuing the American people, even if they cannot vote to save themselves from the international catastrophe that is coming.
It's probably prudent to expect the unexpected.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
dkmitch, joe has an article in tonight's EBs
Which states that Obama is willing to risk war with Russia in order to protect Al Quada because they are helping to overthrow Assad so that Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other countries can get their hands on the Syrian resources.
If that's not the most disgusting thing ever, I don't know what is.
Bernie gave a speech today about Hillary's Wall Street speeches and he says "that we must look forward, not backwards because we have gotten the most progressive platform ever"
This comment from the article sums up how I feel.
Bernie doesn't seem to care that the election was stolen from not only him, but more importantly the millions of people who donated and worked for his campaign even though the DNC has stated that they did do everything that they could to keep him from winning the election.
If thousands of people were kicked off the voting rolls or had their party affiliations changed, then I don't see how this election can be considered valid.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
look forward my ass....
I saw the article. In addition to Obama starting a war to steal resources, the whole point of all the ME wars, he is stepping on the email and leaks to cover his own ass in her mess.
Bernie has lost his GD mind. I can't think of one of his followers who would listen to that bull shit particularly after we looked forward on torturers and bankers. If this did this to him as a candidate, they would have done it to him as a President. I have zero regard for the "new" Bernie.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
There is no "New Bernie" dk. What leverage will Bernie have if
Trumps wins?
What leverage will Bernie give up if he throws his support behind Jill?
Bernie ran as a Democrat. Politics is a team sport. Bernie has no choice but to support the candidate that
woncheated her way to victory. Bernie was asked throughout the campaign if he would support the eventual nominee and he always gave his word that he would.Backing the Green party candidate would make him liar.
I wager that you will be back on the Bernie bandwagon after the election because Bernie is going to bring it. As soon as she is inaugurated Bernie is going to bring out the stick and he is going to hold her feet to the fire. It is going to be a lot of fun watching the tail wag the dog.
Every campaign promise she tries to back out of (which will be
nearlyall of them we care about) will be met with a Bernie presser, appearances on the late night shows and of course with speeches and filibusters on the Senate floor.Every single policy decision that is discussed in the White House will first be vetted by how Bernie (and the Bernie wing of the party) will view it and secondly how the GOP will view it. They will constantly have to weigh the reaction from Bernie vs the reaction from the GOP.
Bernie needs to play nice because he knows just like we all do that Hillary IS our next president. He is playing his cards to maximize his influence over her administration.
Bernie has not abandoned you please don't abandon him, you have little to zero other power or influence in this Federal government.
I don't believe that she'll let him have any influence at all..
If there is one common denominator about Hillary Clinton, she always surrounds herself with Neocon and Wall Street policy advisors.
Bernie Sanders would have no influence at all in a Queen Hillary administration. She'll have even more power now to just squash him like a bug. He'd just be mocked, ignored, and treated as an irrelevance.
Sanders, on the other hand, can do press appearances no matter who wins ... whether it is Trump or Clinton. No advantage there.
I would also say that Trump is likely more of a negotiator than Clinton is. Clinton will just march her horrific Neocon World War, Corporatist, and Globalist agenda no matter what. But Trump does not require a teleprompter and Oligarchs "think-tanks" to tell him what to think. A real conversation, and real negotiation is more likely to take place.
I disagree with your assessment on Bernie's influence. Hillary
will still need to win one more election and there is only one person that could prevent that from happening and that is Bernie.
Bernie could do that by running 3rd party or independent, he could easily be the Perot of 2020.
Trump is irrelevant and just a distraction. Whether he would be better or worse at negotiations is a moot point as he will not win. He is going down in a landslide.
We are stuck with the Ultimate Shill in Hill. We have to try to make her better by backing Bernie I believe.
He won't be running at 80
He'll be just shy of 80 years old then, so he won't be on the ballot.
But even if he was......can you imagine, if the DNC by itself, could rig the race for her so badly in 2016 -- just how lopsided and rigged any race against Hillary would be in 2020 with her already installed as the dictator and the chief executive? No challenger will have a chance against her then.
It would be like Ron Paul trying to run against the re-election of George W. Bush (he didn't even try then). No threat is posed to Hillary at all at that point .....
You don't know that he won't run.
It would be like Ron Paul trying to run against the re-election of George W. Bush (he didn't even try thenNo, actually it would be more like Ross Perot running against George's Dad in '92 which prevented his 2nd term and launched Clinton to victory.
Bernie can run Independent and cause her to lose the general election in 2020.
Hundreds of thousands. That's the low estimate.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I should note also that the Daily Torygraph
has become very anti-Trump in the last week or so.
The Oligarchs are making their views known. Hidden hands.
We shall like Hillary Clinton.
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
HRH Prince Phillip?
We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg
Good one!
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
Times like these I think monarchy has the advantage
Politicians come and go, but the sovereign remains the central figurehead around which the country rallies. (As long as s/he remains just a figurehead and doesn't do anything radical like actually trying to rule!)
Trying to remember which of the Scandianvian monarchs it was who brought out a pocket handkerchief and quipped "This is the only thing into which I dare put my nose".
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
My British mother agrees with you!
She likes to say that the US doesn't distinguish between the head of government and the head of state.
We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg
He picked Mike Pence as his
He picked Mike Pence as his VP, admitted he got his Wall idea from Israel, which is neocon central, so I suspect he is about as serious about not being a neocon warmonger as Hillary is about not supporting TPP.
Both as bad as each other.
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
Not Accurate ....
[video:https://youtu.be/e4LKAt1t_8M width:640 height:480]
Not according to Dr. Jill Stein
See the earlier comment a few jumps above (Jill Stein's statement).
Goddamn it, trump did not "merely make some crude remarks"
And I do not give a flying fuck if it was as a private citizen -- he bragged about committing sexual assault.
I am seriously blown away by how many people here seem to think this is fine. I tried listening to a couple of your videos, but trump with his incessant sniffing is impossible to listen to. The next one with the guy insisting that sexual assault is "normal guy stuff" turns my stomach.
Yes, the Clintons are monsters and war is evil and they are perpetrators on multiple levels. Bill Clinton is a sexual predator and a rapist, and Hillary attacked his victims. I agree.
That does not mean it's ok to pretend that trump is normal or what he did is cool and groovy.
Every person defending his behavior as nothing needs to seriously rethink this. Defending or minimizing sexual assault is really fucked up.
Thanks Bill ...
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPijibzAwVw width:600 height:400]
Things are so clear now ....
Did you even read what I wrote?
Do you actually think trump committing sexual assault is ok?
Trump was joking about it ...
Bill Clinton actually raped women.
It's like comparing Eddie Murphy (Trump) with Bill Cosby (Clinton).
Only one guy is a real rapist!
No. Trump was NOT "joking" about it. Total bullshit.
I already agreed Bill Clinton is a sexual predator and a rapist.
Stop changing the subject.
You are making excuses for and defending a dffferent sexual predator.
absolutely disgraceful.
So you think sexual assault is funny.
Good to know.
You should be ashamed to even say that. What is wrong with you?
Moderation: please avoid personal attack. Thanks. n/t
Please clarify
Moderaters here are in agreement that sexual assault is a "joke" and it is ok? Are you serious?
If this is for real, I will be canceling my monthly donation
and rethinking my interest in supporting this site. Give some thought to what you want to encourage and validate here. This is very disturbing.
No, it’s not a question of agreeing or disagreeing with you
What’s against the rules is pivoting from attacking a public figure or whoever, Trump in this case, to directly targeting the person you’re conversing with.
Moderation isn’t challenging you to change your views, just asking you to refrain from saying things like “What’s wrong with you?” and “You should be ashamed” to a person you’re conversing with.
Suggesting there is something wrong with one’s opposite number in a conversation is a form of gaslighting — that’s what’s discouraged at c99, a particular kind of behavior, not any particular view.
Blast away at Trump & Co. all you want — just try to stay civil to your conversation partner.
I'm not suggesting, I'm saying that sexual asssult is wrong
Is that really a matter of opinion around here?
You find it perfectly fine for someone to support sexual assault - just his opinion.
But it's a problem to say there is something wrong with that?
Wow. Just wow. I'm stunned. I'm going to give myself a day to cool off and I willl give JtC a chance to say directly if he supports this or not.
But, if this is a place where the wrongness and disgracefulnesss of advocating sexual assault is merely a matter of opinion, and can't be called out... well, it's not the place I thought it was.
So I will say it again. There is something wrong - very, very wrong - with anyone who defends or makes excuses for or advocates sexual asssult or think it's a "joke" and that is disgraceful!
Telling me that's just a matter of my opinion is what I'd call gaslighting!
I am a survivor of a sexual assault. No one is going to tell me I'm wrong for opposing it!
So if JtC wants to kick me out of here for saying that, so be it.
Moderation is not disagreeing or agreeing with you.
People are simply being asked to not make it personal.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Sorry dkmich, but it is personal
Like I said, I'm a survivor of sexual assault. It is very personal.
I won't tolerate apologists for it.
I'm very disappointed that moderators here don't see advocacy of sexual assault is clearly and unambiguously over the line of decency.
Taking off my moderator hat and speaking only for me....
I am sorry to hear that. I can understand why it is so close and personal to you. It would be hard for someone in your shoes to not take it personally, but I can't imagine anyone here or anyplace else actually supporting sexual assault.
My generation, me anyway, expected guys to get "fresh" and pushy. We also expected them to stop when the rejection was adamant enough. All that I came in contact with did. Today, guys are practically getting written authorization to be intimate and leery of being alone with a female without witnesses. Every advance is an assault just like every crime is now terrorism. The pendulum does swing wide.
To move this discussion to the impersonal, I think the conversation is happening on two different planes that are slopping over into one another. Advocating sexual assault isn't doing it, but it does cross the line. Let's just cede the argument that Trump is a pig. When he isn't sexually assaulting someone, he is advocating it. While this is awful, it isn't as awful as actually killing and advocating for the killing of people. I am picking a president and not a date or a friend. I believe the whole Trump bru ha ha, accurately reported or not, is a strawman away from the issues of life and death facing us and this planet. The only person who benefits from this distraction is Hillary and all of the Republicans who support her. While their crimes may be different, I wouldn't vouch for their character either.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Thanks for the response dk
I'll try to make this clear as I can and keep it short cuz I'm at work and should be working.
I don't care about the presidential election. Trump and the Clintons are both unfit to even be considered, in my opinion. I won't ever vote for either of them.
So, the fact that sexual assaults on women is not "worse" than what the Clintons do and have done re wars, etc. is not relevant to me or this discussion. (And Trump will be bombing people to, if he wins) But having a competition over which monster is more vile is not what this is about.
This poster, free society, is openly being an apologist for sexual assault. He called it "merely some crude remarks" that trump brags about "grabbing women in the pussy" - this is not being "fresh" - it is a sexual assault and an insane thing to defend or say is a "joke" or not a big deal.
Did you watch the video in this essay with the guy saying what trump brags about doing to women is "normal guy stuff" and thinks it's fine. That IS advocating sexual assault.
Someone here IS doing that, right now. And is being supported and defended in doing so. I don't care about trump. I care about men, or anyone, attempting to normalize and minimize what he does to women.
I think you said it best
When you admitted that this issue is personal to you, and not political. I too have my own issues where I feel compelled to speak out against people who conflate erroneous information about pedophiles, molesting children, the laws protecting the assailants, and the ugliness that keeps adults quiet in the face of these crimes. But to keep my sanity, I usually have those conversations in safe places. While we are, for the most part, a group of thinking and caring people, this is a political blog. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I would suggest that this might not be a safe place for the discussion and acknowledgement you most understandably deserve to have.
Respectfully, I hope you can find a sympathetic ear IRL, because this issue is churning up a lot of stuff for many of us and we need to take care of ourselves in the best way we can.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
I don't need a "safe space" and I'm not looking for sympathy
Thank you for being kind, but you missed my point.
I think you are not correct in defining this as a "political" blog. As I understand it, this is an issues-oriented site, not necessarily via electoral politics. That's part of why I like it.
Seeing people normalizing and being an apologist for sexual assault is an issue, one that is very important to me. If I see someone doing that on here, like this poster is doing, I will call it out, and I won't be civil about it or show that person respect, any more than I would be civil and respectful to a homophobe or a racist posting here.
The only thing I need is to be allowed to confront such disgusting people and speak my mind. JtC said he's not kicking me out, so that's enough for me. It's his place. If he thinks I'm wrong or out of line, he can stop me.
I would like to not be smacked down by a moderator or accused of "gaslighting" a person who thinks sexual assault is ok, when I simply ask such a person "what is wrong with you?" -- and believe me, that WAS me being very polite.
My thoughts were a rant of calling this poster every name in the book, which this person richly deserves.
I'm not happy that so many people here are apparently in agreement that sexual harassment and invasions of women's bodies is not a big deal. That is an issue that needs discussion. I may write an essay on it, when I have time to focus on it. I'm not going to stand down on this issue, that's for sure.
I responded because you seemed upset
People who are upset usually vent and the situation escalates from there. Little understanding is achieved and a "teachable"moment is gone. That was my point. I wasn't weighing in on the OP's comments or your right to comment on them. If you want to be disrespectful because you feel being disrespectful is warranted, that's another discussion.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Is he being supported and defended?
I don't think so.
I do think that sometimes you've got to bat me upside the head and remind me that you're talking about something other than the Presidential election when you're talking about Trump. Which you did. And I bet a bunch of other people are the same.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
CS in AZ...
No, it's perfectly fine for you to say sexual assault is wrong, I agree with that. Free Society also also made the leap from "sexual assault" to "rape" to make his point, which is disingenuous. And I agree with you calling him out on that.
But then you also made a leap from lotlizard asking you to be civil with the individual that you are conversing with to saying this about lotlizard, "You find it perfectly fine for someone to support sexual assault - just his opinion." That's not at all what lotizard was saying and I ask you to reread lotlizard's comment. This is what she is saying, "Blast away at Trump & Co. all you want — just try to stay civil to your conversation partner." Lotlizard did not say you were wrong in opposing defense of sexual assault.
And this from a comment of yours above: "Moderaters here are in agreement that sexual assault is a "joke" and it is ok? Are you serious?" Do you really believe that?
Quite frankly, I find these essays that defend Trump's sexual escapades disturbing, but if we were to go down the road of censoring them then where does that censorship stop. But you are right in calling out defense of sexual assault when you see it, all we ask is that you be civil in the call out.
Lotlizard accused me of "gaslighting" - a personal attack on ME
for saying there is something wrong with a person who is an apologist for sexual assault.
Gaslighting means saying he's wrong when he's not.
That is very clearly taking his side and saying his defense of sexual assault is ok. And that saying it's wrong is considered "gaslighting" and is not allowed.
This is 2000% not ok with me. I'm stunned at this, frankly.
Let me be clear: I will NOT be "civil" to anyone who advocates or promotes or minimizes or jokes about sexual attacks!
The person doing that is one who should be being told to shut the fuck up with this incredibly offensive promotion of violence against women. Not me being attacked for saying there is something wrong with him.
There is something very wrong with him. And with everyone who is agreeing and supporting him. Very wrong.
Sorry JtC, but if I can't say that, I guess you'll have to boot me off your site.
No...
you will not be booted from this site.
Man, I can't wait for this election to be over. What the fuck is wrong with this country? We, the people, are being manipulated on a deep visceral level. Instead of discussing the existential issues that we're faced with in this election, deep primal fears that inhabit the amygdala are being stroked to scare us into submission.
I don't feel manipulated, I'm voting for hope, I'm voting for
Jill.
But Trump's own statements admitting to sexual assault make him 100% unacceptable to me. Even if it would stop Hill's wars, it is a bridge too far to elevate a sexual assailant instead. CS is right about one thing, his history is no joke. Fortunately it's not really a choice, since I don't believe that Trump will wage peace either.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
My problem, as I keep saying over and over
is that Trump & Bill Clinton occupy pretty much the same space on that issue, legally; innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, but evidence exists that is disturbing. Putting one into the WH is not that much different than putting the other, esp. considering that Hillary will probably share power w/Bill the same way he did with her--and he will be able to wield the power of his position over women working in the WH just like Trump would as Pres.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I agree, that's why I think everyone needs to vote third party.
I've managed to convince a few neighbors (here in Trumpland) to vote Gary Johnson.
There's no loss in voting third party when both mainstream candidates are approximately equal.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
Sure.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I did not make any "leap"
Bill Clinton has been accused and charged of Rape by multiple women.
I did not make any "leap" at all. Clinton has a well-documented history of physical Rape and predatory abuse. There is nothing "disingenuous" here about citing that fact.
Donald Trump, to my knowledge, has never been charged with actual rape. He may do inappropriate things, but nobody ever charge him with rape.
---
Finally, this Election is not about crass or inappropriate behavior, it is about whether the tyranny of Globalism is going to prevail and enslave us or not.
That's your opinion...
and you better do a little more research, try googling "Trump charged with rape".
And here you go again:
Making up your own "facts". You make it sound like it's a fact that Clinton is a rapist. He has been accused of rape but never convicted. That he has ever raped anyone is not a fact in the eyes of the law, so quit stating it as fact. That is disingenuous.
They look pretty much the same in that regard to me.
Don't know why anybody's shocked about any of that.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I don't disagree...
that's what money will do in America's two tier justice system.
My point was that Free Society needs to quit conflating facts with his opinion. That does nothing for the integrity of this site.
I agree. Even loathsome people like Bill Clinton
need to be innocent until proven guilty; however, that comes with a side of understanding, as you say, what money will do in America's two-tier (IMO, three-tier) justice system.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
You're so wrong.
I made up no facts at all, and I'm really getting tired of all this phony "manufactured outrage" when Hillary Clinton wants to start WWIII with Russia:
Multiple women have charged and accused Clinton of physical rape. That is a Fact! I made up nothing.
-----
What Trump did is say that women (who are star struck) "let you grab" them and make sexual advances. Any objective person can recognize the clear difference. If girls are star struck, and therefore Let Him make sexual advances then that is not Rape at all.
It's just like a Rock Star having "groupies". There is no crime here.
What Bill Clinton did was totally unwanted physical abuse, and actual Rape. Bill Clinton had to pay a settlement (guilt) of $850,000.00 in Court (to Paula Jones). That is a fact.
Very, very different things here.
Thanks for the clarification...
and oh, yeah, thanks for proving that CS in AZ is totally right about you.
Thank you JtC - that means a lot to me (nt)
Just to be clear - and I hate defending him -
Bill has had one person, Juanita Broaddrick, accuse him of rape, and she recanted it at one point and now has recanted her recantation. Her story of Hillary's "threats" strikes me as absurd. http://www.npr.org/2016/10/09/497291071/a-brief-history-of-juanita-broad...
Paula Jones accused him of exposing himself to her, not rape. There was a lawsuit settlement, in which he admitted no wrongdoing and her lawyers got most of the money. Her description of him undressed has been contradicted by doctors and by Monica. http://www.vox.com/2016/10/9/13221670/paula-jones-kathleen-willey-bill-c...
Kathleen Willey accused him of groping, which is sexual assault but not rape, and her testimony has been inconsistent. Ken Starr declined to prosecute Clinton on that basis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Willey and the Vox article.
Monica, as is well known, has always said it was consensual.
One can argue sources, but this is consistent with the majority of articles that showed up when I googled, as well as my memories from TV and news reports at the time. If there are better sources, then anyone is invited to cite them.
As stated elsewhere, I will vote for Jill. And no amount of corruption from the mainstream candidates would particularly surprise me. But Bill has never been legally charged with rape, much less convicted.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
Thanks for your moral certitude
You certainly have picked the winner in this race.....
Hah...
that shows how much you know about me, which is nothing.
I must say that your penchant for using oversized images and youtubes certainly enhances your overblown bombastic blogging style, which I've witnessed since 2009 when you were at Docudharma, yeah, I was there too. Your style and ego haven't changed a bit.
My index finger is itching and twitching.
JtC, this person is trolling and being an asshole on purpose
I truly do respect your belief in free speech to a large degree here, but this person has gone so far over the line it's ridiculous. Yes I'm calling him an asshole. I'm trying my best to be nice in not saying more. Please rid this site of this ... oh I just wrote and deleted six different ways of saying what he is.
So "grabbing their pussy" is cool with you
and "just kissing them, without waiting" and without permission is cool with you.
And using his position of power as owner of beauty pageants to walk in on nude contestants in their dressing area and ogle them is cool with you.
Sexual assaults are cool with you. As long as it's not "actual rape" you don't see the problem.
You have zero respect for women and think assaults on them are ok.
But gee - it's really important that YOU be treated with respect.
I think I'm going to puke.
OK
Why do you keep posting stuff about Bill Clinton?
That is irrelevant to the point, which is your support for sexual assault.
It doesn't matter if you post irrelevant things about Bill Clinton or Bill Cosby or Charles Manson or Lizzy Borden or any other sick crazy person.
You are advocating that sexual assault is acceptable behavior and "normal guy stuff" and there is no reason that men should not "grab women by the pussy" if they happen to be rich or powerful and able to get away with it.
That is disgusting, sick, and wrong.
The Truth hurts
---
[video:https://youtu.be/e4LKAt1t_8M ]
You seem to be under some delusion that I like Bill Clinton
Nothing you post about him "hurts" because I agree that Bill Clinton is an asshole and a sexual predator. I despise him. Nothing he does makes sexual predators cool or acceptable. Are you just too dense to understand this? Apparently so.
I will not be civil to advocacy of sexual assaut.
Expecting that to be treated like a difference of opinion is absurd.
The fact that you - as a representative of this site - and apparently at least six other people, actually think that it is acceptable, and that I'm in the wrong for being disgusted by it, is absolutely unbelievable.
and yet you are perfectly fine with and supporting this poster who is saying sexual assault is a joke and being an apologist for it.
I'm livid. You owe me an apology for this "gaslighting" bullshit. I know what gaslighting is, all too well. And anyone saying sexual assault is ok and calling that out as wrong is "gaslighting" ... I have no words.
Well, I don't think it's acceptable--
it's just not surprising. As Oct surprises go, it sucks, and for me the only surprise is that so many are so shocked. Didn't y'all know that Trump was a misogynist?
This is what happens when a bunch of corrupt sociopaths control our politics through their private clubs; we get to choose between two corrupt 1%-ers who engage or enable sexual predation and get poll bumps off the race war.
One of them at least says that he doesn't want to get into WWIII and that he dislikes so-called free trade. But both are so deceitful it's hard to rely on that.
So the obvious course is to question the entire system that has restricted your choice to one of two sociopaths. If a restaurant limits the menu to a cyanide omelette or an arsenic hotdish, stop going to that restaurant.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
CStS,
I don't have time to write a response now, I'm at work and already put too much time in here on this, so I'll refer you to my reply to dkmich elsewhere on this thread:
http://caucus99percent.com/comment/190961#comment-190961
This is not about the presidential candidates or elections. It is about the attempts to normalize and minimize sexual attacks on women that is going on with too many Trump apologists.
Oh, you mean the "locker room talk" talking point.
Also known as "boys will be boys."
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Bill Clinton has not been convicted of a crime.
It wouldn't particularly surprise me to find he was guilty of a crime, but we don't know that at this point.
Trump too has been accused of rape. I don't know why you think one is worse than the other.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
Funny, The jury found OJ not guilty too.
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho
Granted, these things may prove out in the future.
I don't want to overstate the case. They both may be guilty. I don't trust either of them. But journalists typically use "alleged" for a reason.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
Like I said, looks like a wash to me.
Hmmm, there's some suck. And some more suck. And over here, a heaping helping of....suck.
Hmmm.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Clinton was forced to pay $850,000.00 in Court
How is that not proof of guilt?
Would an innocent man agree to pay out a settlement like that?
Has anyone read the book the
Has anyone read the book the Clinton's War on Women?
FreeSociety...
do you have proof that Bill Clinton raped women? If not replace "actually" with "allegedly". If you are going to make accusations in the future be certain that what you say is true.
Mulitple Eye-witnesses
Just Google Clinton and Rape.
Recall, that he had to pay out a settlement to Paula Jones of $850,000.00 (plus whatever $$$$ he spent on Lawyer fees). Now why would an innocent man have to pay out a settlement (guilt) of a whopping $850,000.00?
--
Kindly share your sources...
There is a lot of misinformation out there. Do you have information about Trump that is not available to the rest of us? It would be helpful if you would share it in a calm and factual post so that we all could learn what you have already learned. (Personally, I find that a lot of swear words distract from whatever someone is trying to say.)
We are all trying to sift through multiple reports and news sites, so any actual links or references are greatly appreciated.
Pages