Where is/can Donald Trump take US (sic)?

[dutchie]

Overnight Donald Trump was accused of sexual assault. But you're not seeing the story on front pages.

Overnight, US President Donald Trump was accused of an incident of sexual assault.
A former model, Amy Dorris, told The Guardian of an incident in September 1997, in which a then 51-year-old Trump allegedly forced his tongue down her throat while she was in his VIP box at the US Open.

She talks about being groped on her butt, breasts and back in a grip so tight she couldn't escape during an attack that left her feeling "sick" and "violated."

....Twenty-five other women have come forward since 2016 and accused Donald Trump of grabbing, groping, or raping them in the decades since the 1970s, with 43 more instances detailed by women in All the President's Women: Donald Trump and the Making of a Predator, which was released last year.

These women are diplomats, ambassadors, yoga teachers, actresses and makeup artists, to name a few. Their stories are set in changing rooms, airplanes, nightclubs, dinner tables, at a Mother's Day brunch, a Ray Charles concert, and at Trump Tower.

.....Probably because Trump has already proven he's untouchable to these sorts of allegations while he sits inside the White House, so much so there's almost no point, it seems, in getting outraged. It's not even the first alleged assault by Trump detailed to have taken place at the US Open. Karena Virginia has accused him of inappropriately touching her at the same event in 1998.

Instead of repetition building momentum, account after account has somehow instead created a flatlining of the story.

Overnight Donald Trump was accused of sexual assault. But you're not seeing the story on front pages.

It's not the first time.

www.mamamia.com.au

_________________________________________________________
This allegation was originally was originally posted in The Guardian.

... Dorris, who lives in Florida, provided the Guardian with evidence to support her account of her encounters with Trump, including her ticket to the US Open and six photos showing her with the real estate magnate over several days in New York. Trump was 51 at the time and married to his second wife, Marla Maples.

Her account was also corroborated by several people she confided in about the incident. They include a friend in New York and Dorris’s mother, both of whom she called immediately after the alleged incident, as well as a therapist and friends she spoke to in the years since. All said Dorris had shared with them details of the alleged incident that matched what she later told the Guardian.

Donald Trump accused of sexual assault by former model Amy Dorris

Exclusive: Amy Dorris alleges Trump forced his tongue down her throat and groped her at 1997 US Open

www.theguardian.com

 

[basilio]

You certainly know how to "poison the well" don't you Dutchie ?

That was a particularly choice piece of filth mate.

Zero truth. Maximum destruction of peoples lives.

Maximum destruction of respect for the 25 people who have publicly noted their rape/assault/abuse experience at the hands of the current President of the United States.

The story I quoted asked just that question. How is it that these days any accustion against Donald Trump, no matter how well supported by evidence, is disregarded and the person who was abused is vilified. ?

And on cue you throw up a prime example of such behaviour. Classy ...not..

 

[dutchie]

You certainly know how to "poison the well" don't you Dutchie ?

That was a particularly choice piece of filth mate.

Zero truth. Maximum destruction of peoples lives.

Maximum destruction of respect for the 25 people who have publicly noted their rape/assault/abuse experience at the hands of the current President of the United States.

The story I quoted asked just that question. How is it that these days any accustion against Donald Trump, no matter how well supported by evidence, is disregarded and the person who was abused is vilified. ?

And on cue you throw up a prime example of such behaviour. Classy ...not..

You are so funny basilio.
25? Statistically you would have thought one of them would have stuck.

 

[basilio]

You are so funny basilio.
25? Statistically you would have thought one of them would have stuck.

Perhaps all we really needed to hear was the boasting from the arch groper himself.

 

[basilio]

The World According To Trump
Donald “Grab ’Em by the Pussy” Trump Thinks People Should Be Fired for Disrespecting Women
Yet somehow he remains employed.

By Bess Levin

.... Trump has not said if he’ll be resigning from the office of the presidency in light of the rape allegation against him, or if he’s decided to provide a DNA sample to E. Jean Carroll’s lawyers to see if it matches the genetic material on the dress she says she was wearing when he allegedly assaulted her in a dressing room in the ’90s. Or if he still thinks it’s acceptable to grab women by the genitals, or kiss women without their consent, or “moving on” them “like a bitch.” Perhaps he’ll address such issues in a follow-up tweet.

Donald “Grab ’Em by the Pussy” Trump Thinks People Should Be Fired for Disrespecting Women

Yet somehow he remains employed.

www.vanityfair.com

 

[dutchie]

You certainly know how to "poison the well" don't you Dutchie ?

That was a particularly choice piece of filth mate.

Zero truth. Maximum destruction of peoples lives.

Maximum destruction of respect for the 25 people who have publicly noted their rape/assault/abuse experience at the hands of the current President of the United States.

The story I quoted asked just that question. How is it that these days any accustion against Donald Trump, no matter how well supported by evidence, is disregarded and the person who was abused is vilified. ?

And on cue you throw up a prime example of such behaviour. Classy ...not..

I wonder what you and your communist friends are going to throw at the Supreme Court nominee if it's a woman?

 

[basilio]

I wonder what you and your communist friends are going to throw at the Supreme Court nominee if it's a woman?

How about just following the Senate Republician precedent set in 2018 and defer the decision until after the election ?
And you can get rid of the lying, gratuitous political slurs as well Dutchie. It doesn't become this forum.

 

[moXJO]

So thats your go to position Moxy ? Just trash anyone who stands up to to Trump and points out how dangerous the situation is becoming as a result of Trumps attacks on the electoral system which underpins the legitimacy of the US political system.

This is the opinion piece in the New York Times that Brennan was responding to.

What’s at Stake in This Election? The American Democratic Experiment
Trump’s former director of national intelligence on how to firmly and unambiguously reassure all Americans that their votes will be counted.

By Dan Coats
Mr. Coats served as the director of national intelligence from 2017 to 2019.

• Sept. 17, 2020

View attachment 111971
View attachment 111972
Credit...Mark Makela for The New York Times

We hear often that the November election is the most consequential in our lifetime. But the importance of the election is not just which candidate or which party wins. Voters also face the question of whether the American democratic experiment, one of the boldest political innovations in human history, will survive.

Our democracy’s enemies, foreign and domestic, want us to concede in advance that our voting systems are faulty or fraudulent; that sinister conspiracies have distorted the political will of the people; that our public discourse has been perverted by the news media and social networks riddled with prejudice, lies and ill will; that judicial institutions, law enforcement and even national security have been twisted, misused and misdirected to create anxiety and conflict, not justice and social peace.

If those are the results of this tumultuous election year, we are lost, no matter which candidate wins. No American, and certainly no American leader, should want such an outcome. Total destruction and sowing salt in the earth of American democracy is a catastrophe well beyond simple defeat and a poison for generations. An electoral victory on these terms would be no victory at all. The judgment of history, reflecting on the death of enlightened democracy, would be harsh.

The most urgent task American leaders face is to ensure that the election’s results are accepted as legitimate. Electoral legitimacy is the essential linchpin of our entire political culture. We should see the challenge clearly in advance and take immediate action to respond.

The most important part of an effective response is to finally, at long last, forge a genuinely bipartisan effort to save our democracy, rejecting the vicious partisanship that has disabled and destabilized government for too long. If we cannot find common ground now, on this core issue at the very heart of our endangered system, we never will.

Our key goal should be reassurance. We must firmly, unambiguously reassure all Americans that their vote will be counted, that it will matter, that the people’s will expressed through their votes will not be questioned and will be respected and accepted. I propose that Congress creates a new mechanism to help accomplish this purpose. It should create a supremely high-level bipartisan and nonpartisan commission to oversee the election. This commission would not circumvent existing electoral reporting systems or those that tabulate, evaluate or certify the results. But it would monitor those mechanisms and confirm for the public that the laws and regulations governing them have been scrupulously and expeditiously followed — or that violations have been exposed and dealt with — without political prejudice and without regard to political interests of either party.

Also, this commission would be responsible for monitoring those forces that seek to harm our electoral system through interference, fraud, disinformation or other distortions. These would be exposed to the American people in a timely manner and referred to appropriate law enforcement agencies and national security entities.

Such a commission must be composed of national leaders personally committed — by oath — to put partisan politics aside even in the midst of an electoral contest of such importance. They would accept as a personal moral responsibility to put the integrity and fairness of the election process above everything else, making public reassurance their goal.

Commission members undertaking this high, historic responsibility should come from both parties and could include congressional leaders, current and former governors, “elder statespersons,” former national security leaders, perhaps the former Supreme Court justices David Souter and Anthony Kennedy, and business leaders from social media companies.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/16/arts/television/chris-rock-fargo.html?action=click&algo=bandit-all-surfaces_desk_filter&block=editors_picks_recirc&fellback=false&imp_id=571306880&impression_id=336d7202-fa5b-11ea-b22d-f187f10a0cec&index=2&pgtype=Article®ion=ccolumn&req_id=494774137&surface=home-featured&action=click&module=editorContent&pgtype=Article®ion=CompanionColumn&contentCollection=Trending
This commission would be created by emergency legislative action. During that process, its precise mandate, composition, powers and resources would be defined. Among other aspects, the legislation would define the relationship between the commission and the intelligence and law enforcement communities with the capability necessary for the commission’s work. And it would define how the commission would work with all the individual states.

Congressional leaders must see the need as urgent and move quickly with common purpose. Seeking broad bipartisan unity on such an initiative at such a fraught time goes against the nature of the political creatures we have become. But this is the moment and this is the issue that demands a higher patriotism. No member of Congress could have any valid reason to reject any step that could contribute to the fundamental health of our Republic. With what should be the unanimous support of Congress, the legislation must call upon the election campaigns of both parties to commit in advance to respect the findings of the commission. Both presidential candidates should be called upon to make such personal commitments of their own.

If we fail to take every conceivable effort to ensure the integrity of our election, the winners will not be Donald Trump or Joe Biden, Republicans or Democrats. The only winners will be Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping and Ali Khamenei. No one who supports a healthy democracy could want that.

Dan Coats was the director of national intelligence from 2017 to 2019. He served as a U.S. senator from Indiana from 1989 to 1999 and again from 2010 to 2016. From 2001 to 2005 he was the U.S. ambassador to Germany. Currently, Mr. Coats is a senior adviser with the law firm King & Spalding.

Opinion | What’s at Stake in This Election? The American Democratic Experiment (Published 2020)

Trump’s former director of national intelligence on how to firmly and unambiguously reassure all Americans that their votes will be counted.

www.nytimes.com

You put up the guy that was a known liar. Who helped spy on a candidate for potus. Pretty sure that whole investigation is bigger then the toss trash you dug up.

 

[moXJO]

How about just following the Senate Republician precedent set in 2018 and defer the decision until after the election ?
And you can get rid of the lying, gratuitous political slurs as well Dutchie. It doesn't become this forum.

She was free to retire under Obama at 80 years old. She didn't. Obama wasn't in control of the senate so any pick he made was likely not going to happen.

The lying crap that happened during kavanaugh was disgusting. Democrats deserve zero concessions.

 

[dutchie]

How about just following the Senate Republician precedent set in 2018 and defer the decision until after the election ?
And you can get rid of the lying, gratuitous political slurs as well Dutchie. It doesn't become this forum.

Genius Trump Nominates Joe Biden To Supreme Court Forcing Dems To Accuse Him Of Sexual Assault
September 20th, 2020

857Shares
662SHARE
89SHARE
SHARE
WASHINGTON, D.C.—Trump has announced his pick for Supreme Court justice: Joe Biden. By nominating Biden, Trump has forced the Dems' hands, making them believe the sexual assault claims and allegations of inappropriate, creepy behavior against the former vice president.

The "4D chess" move forced Dems to immediately accuse Joe Biden of sexual assault and reverse their position on the current claims against him.
"We now believe Tara Reade," said a somber Kamala Harris, "and we will do everything in our power to destroy this man's life."
In addition to believing current claims against Joe Biden, Democrats also immediately dug up 417 new accusers against Joe Biden. He has been accused of participating in wild frat parties, drunken keggers, and something called the "Devil's Triangle," which Dems say is either a Satanic ritual or code for a sexual practice or "maybe both."
"It's clear this man is dangerous and cannot be trusted," said Nancy Pelosi. "We call on the Senate to turn down his nomination and run him out of public life."
Biden released a statement, saying, "I just want to go home and see my grandkids again." His mic was cut off and he was pulled off the stage with a shepherd's crook.

 

[basilio]

The death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg just months before the 2020 presidential election sets a political dilemma for some Republican senators, who in 2016 said that Supreme Court vacancies should not be filled near the end of a president's term.
What did they say then ?

 

[dutchie]

The death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg just months before the 2020 presidential election sets a political dilemma for some Republican senators, who in 2016 said that Supreme Court vacancies should not be filled near the end of a president's term.
What did they say then ?

Republicans - "It's OK to nominate a new Supreme Court Judge just before the election if it suits us."
Democrats - "It's OK to nominate a new Supreme Court Judge just before the election if it suits us."

 

[moXJO]

It all depends who holds the senate. If dems held the senate then their pick would have got green lighted.

But they didn't, so they had zero chance. And ended up on a permawhinge ever since.

Trump still needs 1 of the 3 rinos to vote or it won't go through.

 

[basilio]

Republicans - "It's OK to nominate a new Supreme Court Judge just before the election if it suits us."
Democrats - "It's OK to nominate a new Supreme Court Judge just before the election if it suits us."

Untrue. In any way, shape or form.

Republicans undermined the process of replacing Supreme Court judges when they died by refusing to even hear President Obamas nominee in March 2016. Hand on heart they said the Nation should have a voice in deciding the next judge by blocking the process.

In 2020, less than two months before the election with millions of people already voting they are determined to ram through a new Supreme Court judge in a total reversal of their 2016 behaviour.

Merrick Garland Supreme Court nomination - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[dutchie]

Untrue. In any way, shape or form.

Republicans undermined the process of replacing Supreme Court judges when they died by refusing to even hear President Obamas nominee in March 2016. Hand on heart they said the Nation should have a voice in deciding the next judge by blocking the process.

In 2020, less than two months before the election with millions of people already voting they are determined to ram through a new Supreme Court judge in a total reversal of their 2016 behaviour.

Merrick Garland Supreme Court nomination - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Boo hoo hoo . Only we are good and righteous. Orange man bad. Boo hoo hoo

 

[basilio]

Boo hoo hoo . Only we are good and righteous. Orange man bad. Boo hoo hoo

You don't get past three letter words and one syllable responses do you Dutchie ?

 

[Joe Blow]

Folks could we please raise the level of debate in this thread. It would be nice to have some substance and discussion of real issues instead of playground stuff and partisan talking points.

Why not actually dissect ideas and policy and discuss the merits or otherwise of them? Political tribalism is boring and a waste of time and energy.

Please offer up something interesting. Thanks.

 

[moXJO]

Have we had one trump policy even mentioned on here?

I doubt anyone would know of any successful policies. Its basically been media snippet half truths from Trump hating loons.

He has had some huge successes and big failures. Probably one of the most complex presidential terms from memory.

 

[basilio]

A Pre Trump view of Amercian Exceptionalism.

 

[IFocus]

The move to appoint a Supreme Court judge just before an election is another removal of precedent that democracy is built on.

Regarding the language / labelling used here in the thread is really disturbing as its currently the political weapon of choice to label any that any that disagree with extreme accusations creating greater divides in the community.

This is not Australia or an Australian value heaven forbid we get to the extremes currently tearing the US apart all with no moral or ethical leadership.