Posted without comment
- Thread starter Ladoga
- Start date
Biden is way behind.....
Sexual misconduct allegations have been made against Trump by at least 22 women
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations
So Trump should resign and Biden withdraw- that is your contention? Stormy and 18 or 19 others vs Tara Reid? Neither David Dennison or Joe Biden should occupy the White House after Trump resigns?
Hey, I'm all on board with that. Get your Fox handlers to spread the word. I know there are plenty of people who worked for McCain, Bush, and Romney who are calling for Trump to resign as well. Dick Morris worked for both the Clintons. He feels Clinton is slimy, so he has to KNOW that Trump is. Get him on board and we're all in...
Well there is good news in all of this..... at least this one was over 18 for a change. The Democrats have one of THOSE uncles running for President this year. Should be fun.
Thanks for being a force for good. Now link us to all the articles you posted on the 22 or so women (including those currently involved in court proceedings) that have accused Trump. When you do THAT, I'll take you seriously...
I'm guessing these attacks will all come from people on the fringes of Team Trump. No way people within the campaign will want to invite scrutiny into charges of sexual misbehavior...
Can you point me to the Fox story on this?
"President Donald Trump's lawyers urged a judge Wednesday to halt a lawsuit from a woman seeking Trump's DNA to help prove her claim that he raped her in the 1990s, though her lawyer offered to hold off the DNA request for a time.
Former advice columnist E. Jean Carroll is suing Trump for calling her a liar when she went public with her rape allegation last year. Trump's lawyers argue her case — including the DNA request — needs to wait until New York's highest court rules in a separate case against him. That ruling could take several months or longer."
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/trump-lawyers-halt-suit-woman-alleging-rape-69391310
Here is what I like. You have done nothing but bag on people who voted for Trump because of how despicable and How much of a womanizer he was.
Now, you are voting for someone with baggage. I don’t care if it’s 1 or 3,000. It doesn’t matter. It just goes to show, you guys ARE all hat and no cattle. As I’ve said many a time, Dems are scared to let people know who or what they stand for. You can’t believe them. So get on out there and vote. Let’s see where the chips fall. I like our chances.
No, that's NOT my contention. I said nothing of the sort. Bernie's crowd are after Biden. I'll just watch.
Read the article yet? The core of it is that his own party - Bernie's backers in particular - want Biden out, not some Republican. Its a mess for Dems if the Sanders wing of the CPUSA goes after Biden. This one is the Dems' internal problem. I said not a single word in that article. Its about you having to deal with Biden. No Republicans will be at the Dem Convention voting. Maybe no Dem will object. That ad writes itself in an easy 30 second spot.
Didn’t read it. I’m not a fan of Joe but he’s waaayyyyyy better than the other option.
Is the under 18 comment in reference to the rumors of Trump raping an underage girl? Wonder if that’s the same one he paid for an abortion. Sure there’s more than one for all the “pro-lifers” out there.
I have 2 debate questions: 1) will Trump put Reade on the front row? 2) how many push-ups will win the push-up contest?
Wait a minute... You have ignored Trump's realty for 4+ yrs, now since Biden is accused it's a big deal, and Dems are the hypocrites? I don't think any of the anti-Trump people on this board were influenced by the Access Hollywood tape. We just assumed that all rational people who were even considering supporting Trump would now realize what a horrible decision a vote for Trump would be...
Now the same people who were NOT dissuaded by Trump's behavior, are pushing the Biden angle and expect those of us who knew Trump was an asshole to what? Somehow believe that because Biden is now being accused of what Trump is guilty of, that Trump is suddenly palatable?
This was NOT our primary concern in 2016, and you guys basically dismissed it of having importance to you. So now YOU think it matters and we don't see it changing our opinion of Trump. If Trump resigns and decides not to run- then I'm all in for the Dems possibly nominating someone else. But if Trump is the GOP nominee I want the best challenger and for a variety of reasons IMHO, That is Biden...
Again you totally ignore the fact that the alternative is Trump. Sexual indiscretion and Intelligence vs Biden (or anyone) are NOT winning issues for Trump.
I don't see either of those subjects being an issue the official Trump campaign wants to have scrutinized. You say the "ad writes itself"- what do you think happens with the anti-Trump GOP PACS and the E Jean Carroll (current) court case?
For every demeaning ad attacking "Uncle Joe's intelligence" there are literally hundreds of already posted youtube videos that haven't already been turned into ads. Captain Clorox, the Imbleached President, Lie sol- those ads write themselves just as readily. Trump's staff are already trying to convince him to exit the virus briefings- they appeal to his base but his numbers with everyone else are dropping like a rock. Nobody believes the "sarcasm" nonsense, or basically anything he says at the "briefings"...
Edit- Looks like Trump knows what a loser the briefings are...
Last edited:
Are you serious? A guy who supports a man, known for numerous known misdeeds with various women, accuses Biden who is rumored to have had one misdeed? And that's not even at the level your Trump has done, not even close!
Does hypocrisy have a bound? But then, hypocrisy has more class than the behavior you are exhibiting. No, I am not condoning Biden's alleged misdeed, if true.
Good Lord, the world must be coming to an end!
Last edited:
# 1 makes no sense at all. You really think Trump wants to see 20 of his own accusers just so he can embarrass Biden? If so, you think he's stupider than I do. And I think he's a moron...
So your position is that a rape allegation against Biden aren't the same as rape allegations against Trump. Was Reade asking for it?
The yeah-but-whataboutism is strong in this one (thread), Obi-Wan.
You missed the point and the issue raised in the article completely. When the Dems have a nominee - after their convention - then Trump is the opponent. This article is about a Democrat activist calling for Biden to withdraw. This is about an internal dispute/battle WITHIN the Democrat party about who should even be the nominee.
It's great the Democrats are having that dispute/battle! Too bad the Republicans didn't in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2020!
They did. They went with the deviant.
Obviously, you flunked math in the grade school, and bigly at that! Let's do a simple math; you know what math is, right?
Biden - That's bad. Whether such thing really happened is still under "you said; he said" category. Yet, you have the nerve to jump to a condemnation. None-the-less, I belong to "If there's smoke, there must fire" school. So, Biden was bad if the allegation is true.
Now, let's look at what kind of accomplishments your hero has accomplished in that department.
Huffington Post lists, in 2016, Trump's misdeeds in the similar department, starting way before Biden's alleged affair, and way after as well.
- Karen Johnson says that Trump grabbed her vagina without her consent in the early 2000
- E.Jean Caroll - Allegedly pushed his dong into her in mid 1990s. He denys it; in fact he has never met her in his life, so says our great Liar-in-chief. Yeah, I hear ya! But then Biden says the same thing. It's strange to hear similar words from these two gentlemen. Biden says he's never done it; Trump says he's never met her. I am wondering whether you are capable of seeing the difference in their wordings.
- Ava Johnson - 2016
- Ninnie Larksonen - July 2006
- Jessika Drake - 2006
- Karena Virginia - 1998
- Cathy Heller - 1997
- Summer Zervos - 2007
- Kirstin Anderson - early 1990s
- Samantha Holvey - 2006
- Lisa Boyle - 1996
- Jessica Leeds - early 1980s
- Rachel Crooks (What a name!) - 2005
- Mindy McGillivray - 2003
- Natasha Stoynoff - 2005
- Jennifer Murphy - 2005
- Mariah Billado - 1997
- Tasha Dixon - 2001
- Cassandra Searles - 2013
- “Jane Doe” - 1994
- Bridfet Sullivan - 2000
- Temple Taggart McDowell - 1997
- Jill Harth - 1993
And then, of course, there was the infamous Stormy Daniels' affair, but then, that was not a rape nor a rape attempt, which probably is the reason why it didn't make list. Add to that his infamous bragging during in his interview with a talk show host, whose name escapes me now: "If you are famous, you can get away with a lot of thing" or something to that effect.
Happy? Or, are you still in denial?
WAT? How about we stick with what I said? You seemed to hint that Trump would have Reade seated in the front row, at a debate. I said I did not see that happening, based on reality. I don't think Trump wants to (inadvertently) draw attention to the fact that his lawyers are currently engaged in court arguments to keep his DNA from being released to a woman who has accused him of rape. She has an evening dress with unidentified DNA on it,and she seeks to prove it is Trump's...
Now I did not point out that that it is significantly more evidence than Biden's accuser, or that she is accusing Trump of actual intercourse, which I don't think is the actual claim vs Biden. I just pointed out that Trump would be a moron to pull a stunt like that, because Having Tara Reid front and center on one side would likely result in having E Jean Carroll (and others) equally prominent, front and center on the opposite side.
Again, in a fact NOT currently widely known, Trump is FIGHTING an attempt to obtain his DNA to see if it matches the sample on her dress. Maybe YOU don't know about this-I doubt it has been covered on Fox,so a lot of Trump followers are likely not aware of it. Maybe I'm wrong, but I've got to believe that Trump (or at least his attorneys) would not engage in a foolish publicity stunt that can only seek to heighten awareness of his own PROBLEMS in this area...
Now I don't know how you got the gobbledygook you accused me of out of my post which said...
# 1 makes no sense at all. You really think Trump wants to see 20 of his own accusers just so he can embarrass Biden? If so, you think he's stupider than I do. And I think he's a moron.
Basically sexual assault is NOT a winning issue for Donald Trump/ David Dennison. I'd be shocked if he thinks it is...
Last edited:
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
I’ll see your “Posted without comment” and raise you a “skipped without reading.”
Imo, the Dems will nominate Biden (warts and all) the same way the 2016 GOP nominated Trump (warts and all). I'm guessing you did not advocate Trump withdrawing (after the release of the Access tape which ADMITTED sexual assault), so that makes you (imo) totally excluded from any discussion of possible Biden withdrawal based on an ACCUSATION of sexual assault. And even if you miraculously could demonstrate a link showing you expressing outrage at Trump- you undoubtedly VOTED for him. So your crocodile tears in starting this thread are disingenuous, at the very least...
It's also interesting that YOU should be advocating the Dems replacing Biden since you're a Trump guy. Isn't the prevalent belief among Trumpers that Biden is the easiest candidate for your guy to beat? If claims of sexual harassment are not a disqualifier for being POTUS (in your own calculations-which you've already shown), then why object to the Dems running the more "beatable" candidate who basically negates Trump's problems in the sexual assault area? Don the "stable-genius" vs "Sleepy Joe"- seems like should be a slam dunk from your vantage point...
Here's an interesting fact to keep in mind for all the Trumpers that think Biden doesn't present a whole different set of problems for Trump compared to Hillary. In 2016 the "Double haters" people who did not like either Trump or Clinton broke for Trump by 17 %-
47-30. Right now they favor Biden 60-10%- nearly a 70% difference.
"During the last weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump’s data team was obsessed with a particular subset of voters: those who disliked both Trump and Hillary Clinton. As I reported in my book about the race, Devil’s Bargain, Trump’s analysts nicknamed this group “double haters.” They comprised about 3% to 5% of the 15 million voters the campaign believed were persuadable, but they were vexing because their intentions were difficult to discern. While their voting history indicated they would likely cast a ballot, many refused to answer pollsters’ questions or declared themselves undecided.
That is, until the final days of the campaign.
On October 28, then-FBI Director James Comey announced his intention to reopen the investigation into Clinton’s disputed emails. Immediately, the double haters made up their minds and started moving en masse toward Trump. “What we saw is that it gave them a reason to vote against her instead of voting for him,” Matt Oczkowski, a Trump campaign data scientist, said at the time. “They were finally able to admit that to pollsters without feeling any guilt.”
The Clinton campaign was also tracking double haters and, to its horror, saw the same thing. “We saw those fickle, Republican-leaning voters that we’d been successfully attracting off and on throughout the general election revert back to Trump at the end,” Brian Fallon, a top Clinton official, said then. The shift to Trump proved decisive."
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...shows-a-hidden-danger-for-trump-double-haters
I was a Double Hater that ended up being a Triple Hater, hating myself for voting for either one of the two deplorable candidates.
Well Clinton basically lost the election in 3 states (Mi,WI and PA) where Trump won those EVs by less than 80,000 votes total. Two of those states (MI and WI) she lost to Bernie in the Primaries, so she was already on thin ice there. Both Trump and Clinton polling picked up a huge shift to Trump (or 3rd parties) among double haters following the Comey letter. Was that the decider for you also?
I was never going to vote for trump and never believed he would get the nomination. Once he did I assumed he would lose badly but at least it would be fun to watch him pound on Hillary (whom I despise) in the debates.
The Comey aspect did not affect my vote as that was already baked into my understanding of Clinton.
Ultimately (as discussed here before) I held my nose and voted for Hillary but have regretted it since. I will vote third party or sit out if ever faced with an untenable choice like that again rather than forsake my own standards.
I am not in denial of anything. Trump isn't a hero. I don't even know if what Biden is accused of is true. The fact is in today's PC climate people get fired and sued for less.
The media is protecting Ol' Joe, and it's the Democrats who are in denial. He should be raked through the same coals as everyone else who is accused of those things. At least you have enough integrity to admit there's smoke.
Billy Bush - "Access Hollywood"
America, this is your president. This is what he's good at. This is his world, within which he thrives. He's a fish out of water now as POTUS. He needs to go back to doing this kind of stuff, where he makes his money. This is his natural world. POTUS is a place where he can't adequately leverage his natural talents to best effect. He should have never been elected as POTUS, but he was (due to enormous GOP idiocy), and now he needs to recede back to his natural landing spot. Do the Hollywood thing, do interviews, molest young nubile rising stars, make ridiculous comments that don't have grave international consequences as his current role dictates. That's where you belong, Mr. (hopefully soon) former POTUS.
You got that all wrong!
Democrats nor other non-die-hard Republicans are in denial. They are not jumping to a conclusion, based on one potentially biased news (or is it a rumor?). If this were true, I would be at the front of crowd demanding his removal from his candidacy. Got that? That separates us from you! Have you ever demanded the resignation of Trump, after there were 23+ accusations? Have you demanded his withdrawal of his candidacy after Stormy Daniel's accusations were "proven" to be true?
Got that? PC climate? Give me a break!
Last edited:
Good, don't need you reading aarticles I cut and paste here. But if you do, understand I didn't write it or add a single word to it. So get down off your high horse.
Note to self: add "high horse" to the list of things that GreenIronBossierLagoCulDeSac gets wrong.
Well, I found this CNN article from April 17 discussing this very topic. Pretty easy just did a google search using CNN as a keyword...
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/17/politics/joe-biden-allegations/index.html
Basically a news article
Then I tried to find Fox reporting on E Jean Carroll's allegations of rape vs Trump. I found this dating back all the way to Feb, that is more of an opinion piece deriding the women on the View for saying Trump should have to submit a DNA sample. Nothing about the fact that the attorneys are trying to fight the court decision that says the case can go forward...And check out the letters from the Trump fans...
https://www.foxnews.com/media/view-trump-dna-e-jean-carroll-allegation
So which media is protecting who? Whatever you are advocating that Biden should have to provide an answer to can you point me to Trump doing likewise to ANY of the 20+ women who have accused him? I think some of us are taken aback by people like you and Ladoga suddenly being crusaders for "women's rights" because we don't recall any similar attempts from you to investigate accusations against Trump for the past 4 yrs. Are we all misremembering?
Btw Trump has been very accusatory and abusive in his attacks on ALL of those women who have accused him as "liars" or worse.
Again can you point me to similar attacks by Biden on Tara Reid? Thanks in advance...
Can you expound on this? You seem to be trying to play "gotcha", yet seem blissfully unaware of the fact that your "candidate of choice" is desperately trying to avoid having his DNA tested against a sample on an accuser's dress. That seems quite a bit advanced of the he said/she said level of accusation you are seizing upon, and I'm still not sure of your point.
Carroll made her accusations against Trump nearly a year ago, back in June 2019. She accused both Trump and Les Moonves (likely prompted by the deluge of allegations against Moonves at that time) so I'm not even sure there was any political element to her charges. Trump attacked her, accused her of lying, and in her opinion exercised his influence to get her fired. So she sued him. Now nearly a year later Trump's attorney's have continued to play the deflect/defer game in order to keep her from being able to have his DNA matched to her clothing. Trump claims he never knew her- what's the harm...
Undoubtedly Trump will fight tooth and nail to keep all of that locked up in court till well after the election. My guess is you see no problem with Trump taking that stance, so I'm confused by your desire to have a rush to judgement in this Tara Reid matter? As far as I know, Biden hasn't even responded and I certainly don't think he's attacked anyone or called them a liar. So if Trump doesn't want any progress till after the election (if ever) on the charges against him, what exactly are you proposing to be done in a far less advanced case that is only a couple of months old?
Are you going to be honest and come clean- tell us how we should chronologically present the evidence and deal with each case. Or are you going to continue to obfuscate and post snide remarks while hiding behind your ridiculous avatar? Why should we feel the need to deal with the contending "deviant", when we haven't yet dealt with the one currently occupying the Oval Office? Are you proposing we go alphabetically?
I envy King Donald for having such loyal subjects!
Last edited:
So, you are speaking for Bernie! I like Bernie too! Nice to know that we have a common ground!
