“Take a look. You look at her. Look at her words. You tell me what you think. I don’t think so.”
—Donald Trump, denying People Magazine writer Natasha Stoynoff’s claim that he “brought her into a room, shut the door, “and within seconds, he was pushing me against the wall, and forcing his tongue down my throat.”
This is Trump accuser Cassandra Searles, who, Donald Trump wants us to know, IS the kind of woman he sexually assaults…
This comes as close to being funny as a man running for President who proves his sexism and misogyny even in the act of denying them can be. It is tragic, however.
Trump can’t help himself. He can’t help himself for two reasons. The first reason is that he really does, deep down, believe that women exist on earth for purely the carnal enjoyment of men, particularly wealth and powerful men. This is part of his world view, and he is incapable of changing or learning. When Trump said, in his second pseudo-apology for his recorded 2005 comments, that he had “changed,” implying that he had changed in regard to his enthusiastic endorsement of privileged sexual assault, he was lying, straight up. This comment, which is an ad hominem attack upon and insult to his accuser, proves it, not that the claim wasn’t an obvious lie when he said it in the apology video.
The second reason is that the man literally is incapable of thinking through what he says before he says it. We already knew this, too. He has pitiful self-control, de minimus common sense, and the judgment of Ryan Lochte.
In this instance, Trump reminded me of Fredo’s downfall in “Godfather II,” when mere minutes after he pretends to not know Johnny Ola, Hyman Roth’s henchman (having previously denied to his Godfather brother that he had ever had any contact with him), Fredo loudly contradicts himself by telling the group including his brother that Johnny Ola had recommended the Havana sex club Fredo had brought them to. Fredo, being an idiot, doesn’t even realize what he has done.
Trump thinks that People writer’s less than model-like appearance proves his innocence. He wouldn’t waste his time with a woman like that. Ick! Women are just sex partners, arm candy and decorations for him, and that’s what he means when he says he has “tremendous respect for women.” He is also such a dim bulb that he doesn’t comprehend that by framing the issue this way, he gives credence to the accusations of the women who are physically attractive.
And I say to all those with brain pans of normal volume who still say they want to vote for Trump as a protest against Hillary Clinton: think this through. You will be endorsing prejudice and deep bias against fully half of the nation, and insulting your mother, your sisters, your daughters, and every one of your female colleagues and peers by stating that a man holding these primitive and ignorant view is your choice to be our leader—indeed not just holding them, but also being incapable of not displaying them at every turn. Is that worse than voting for a corrupt and dishonest politician like Hillary Clinton? It is much worse.
Oh—The Trump campaign now claims that he was only asking people to look at Stoynoff’s words when he said “Look at her.” Right. So we know he also thinks we’re stupid, and will believe an obvious lie.
_____________________
Ethics Alarms 
This is the Carly Fiorina thing all over again. Everything we learn negative about Trump rhymes with something we knew long before he was the nominee. How did Republicans let this happen? I’m having a hard time calling myself a Republican ever since the Indiana Primary, but like Richard Gere in “An Officer and a Gentleman” I’ve got nowhere else to go.
He went to Debra Winger. I may vote for her. (Trump would molest her then, but probably not now.)
http://www.anonews.co/us-elections-illegitimate/
The article points out this was true in 2008, but back them Barack Obama and John McCain did not have such high disapproval ratings.
So this begs the question. Whose responsibility is it to convince the remaining 86 percent to reject the choices made by that 14 percent?
Remember all those posts you made decrying the numbers of people who think.it is “okay” for a “hot” female teacher to share her vagina with an underage male student?
They must be most of Trump’s target market
For me it’s not prejudice or bias that’s the problem, it’s the SUPREMELY dishonorable nature of thinking like that.
I think the middle is brighter than the media and partisans give them credit for. CNN and NBC are pushing these questionable stories about Trump. Meanwhile, people are reading Wikileaks dumps about media collusion with the DNC and Clinton Campaign, including naming “journalists” willing to plant stories. A search of political dirty tricks and black bag jobs, they find many similar tactics throughout history. They are also reading how Hillary turned the State Department into her own Tammany Hall. Add to that NBC’s four-decade record of faking stories, most recently editing a tape to falsely accuse someone of being racist. Are you saying that I should ignore all of that and vote for a modern Boss Tweed whose policies are likely to start a nuclear war (besides appointing left-wing hacks to the SCOTUS)? Her criminal negligence in handling State secrets makes her unqualified for even an entry level job requiring a security clearance. If I did the same with my Earthlink instead of my af.mil, I would be in jail, but I’m supposed to ignore that and take unsubstantiated claims from media sources that have little credibility seriously? Maybe I need to take formal classes on ethics (while there, I should redo freshman comp as a refresher), because I honestly don’t see it.
We know about JFK’s Trump like behavior, and LBJ’s equally sexist behavior including flashing people in public. The Republic survived them, it will survive a buffoon like Trump. It won’t survive Hillary’s corruption and warmonger, nor will it survive the trashing of the BoR the totalitarian wing of her party will insist.
We know about JFK’s Trump like behavior, and LBJ’s equally sexist behavior including flashing people in public. The Republic survived them, it will survive a buffoon like Trump.
This doesn’t follow, because they weren’t buffoons like Trump. They had other compensating virtues, like education, intelligence, experience, common sense, logic, relevant skill and training, good judgment…
Mmmmm, not sure about that last one – LBJ pissed on a secret service agent’s leg and called it privilege, and JFK couldn’t keep it in his pants. Maybe they had good judgment some of the time? Trump apparently has good judgment NONE of the time.
They were still capable of pretending they were not irredeemable jerks, whether or not they actually weren’t.
Kennedy was not exposed until after he was dead.
Johnson- well, he lost an opportunity to serve more than eight years in office.
Fair enough, how about Hillary’s good judgment? I know Trump is a buffoon, but how is that worse than Hillary’s level of corruption, dishonesty, and incompetence?
You cheat to use just “buffoon” to describe Trump, though. Try a more inclusive description, and I’ll answer the question.
Slug?
Rancid McNugget*
Lingering fart in a crowded elevator**
Sodomizer of decency
Stuck-up, half-witted, scruffy-looking, nerf herder.***
Arrogant, entitled, selfish, rude, misogynist, racist, oath-breaking, ignoramus, wannabe tin-pot dictator who couldn’t pour piss out of a boot if the instructions were on the heel.
*Description courtesy of Jezebel.
**Ditto.
***Description courtesy of Princess Leia.
Like what, sexist buffoon? I usually use the vulgar word for anus to describe him, but your site has too much class for such language. I don’t vote for individual or parties and have no loyalty to either. I look at the ideas and policies. Attacking Iran and invading Syria to set up a “no-fly zone” are really bad ideas. The two I would actually “support” were knocked out of the primaries. Hillary doesn’t have any of those compensating virtues other than law school vs business school. Is incompetent experience no experience a virtue? Hillary might be better spoken than Trump, but she isn’t more intelligent. The email issue I mentioned earlier shows that she doesn’t have good judgement, even a junior enlisted person knows that you don’t put classified on nonsecure systems. As SoS, she had originating authority for classified information, yet she said she didn’t know what the paragraph markers like “C” stood for? Pick any recent graduate of basic military training, officer or enlisted, or any civilian who took a basic course in safeguarding classified will give a better answer than what she gave. Neither one of them have those virtues.
I think a scene from the Chronicles of Narnia might help us here. In the fifth book of the series: “The Horse and his Boy” (dunno if this one will ever see film), one of the child heroes is unwittingly party to a conversation between three Arab-type villains regarding a treacherous attack on the good nations of Archenland and Narnia. The first villain, the Tisroc, roughly the equivalent of the Caliph or the Sultan, is against it, since his son (who we’ll get to in a moment) wants to drag their nation into a counterproductive war over a girl. He is ruthless because he needs to be, but he is also intelligent and wise enough to pass up a relatively minor slight. The second, the Grand Vizier, is self-centered and plays upon the thoughts of both to lead the Tisroc to give the nod to the attack in the hopes that it will fail and eliminate the third villain. The third villain, the crown prince, is a spoiled brat writ large, in a rage because a girl (actually a queen) would not consent to be his bride and has now fled beyond his reach. So determined is he to have his way that he demands he be given an army to destroy not only her homeland but the nation in between, just so he can drag her to his harem in chains, and the consequences for anyone who gets hurt or killed in the process be damned.
Well, you can read the book to find out how it all plays out, but for purposes of this discussion, Hillary is a combination of the first two villains, ruthless and self-centered, but perhaps wise enough not to do something stupid. Trump is the third, a grown up spoiled brat who would destroy who knows what over a proposed slight and is determined to have what he wants no matter the cost to others. Frankly, he deserves the fate that later befalls that villain.
This is a brilliant comparison.
I still like the untrustworthy pilot vs the chimp at the controls of a passenger jet, but concede that this would make a better movie.
I just do not understand how these encounters did not end with a call to security and Mr. Trump being escorted off the premises…
Nor do I. The King’s Pass?
fear of retaliation and desire to avoid bad publicity?
Being a responsible citizen isn’t easy, and being ethical isn’t a breeze. Yup, courage is often required. If you won’t do what is in your power to do to address wrongdoing proactively, I am less interested or sympathetic with your complaints than I might have been.
I thought the most unethical quote was “I don’t recall” 29 times to Judicial Watch’s interrogatories.
Years ago a comedian was talking about allegations that Bill Clinton exposed his penis to a woman in an effort to initiate sex. His question about the incident was “does this ever work?”. That punchline comes back to me again and again as I read about Donald Trump and previously when I read about Anthony Weiner. How must someone be wired that they think something like this will lead to sex. In Trump’s case, the only conceivable way that his behavior will lead to sex is if he is allowed to escalate his assault into full blown rape. However, in all these cases adult men seem to think women share their immature attitude about sex. It is as if these people saw a porno video when they were eleven and they decided that was how it happened in real life. It seems as if these men have never talked to adult women much less had relationships with them. At least Clinton and Weiner pretended to have mature attitudes about sex and relationships until they were caught. Trump is a fick with regard to his sexual behavior as he is with his other unethical behavior. There are numerous incidents in which Trump publicly made comments which show this. I have no doubt that the coming weeks will expose more.
There’s an ancient dirty joke that explains this phenomenon.
A man is at a bar when he notices a small, creepy guy standing in the corner. A young, tall, beautiful woman walks into the bar, and the little man approaches her, blocks her path, and whispers in her ear. She looks shocked, flies into a rage, kicks him in the crotch, breaks his nose, and beats him to bloody pulp.
He limps over to his corner, this time slumped over. Soon two lovely swimsuit models enter the establishment. He goes up to them, and whispers in the blonde model’s ear. “How dare you?” she shouts, and slaps him in the face so hard it dislocates his jaw. Then he whispers into the brunette’s ear. She looks at her friend, they nod to each other, and together they stomp and beat the little man nearly senseless, screaming abuse at him the whole time.
He crawls back to his corner, bleeding profusely and whimpering.
The man at the bar sees this happen two more times, and his curiosity gets the better of him. He goes up to the little man, who is now bruised and bloody from head to toe. “I have to ask,” he says. “What in the world do you say to those women that keeps getting you beat up?” The little man whispers in the man’s ear an obscene proposition.
“That’s disgusting!” says the man. “No wonder they attack you! Why do you keep doing that?”
The ugly little man smiles a bloody, toothless smile, shrugs, and answers..
“Sometimes they say yes!”
The reason I’m not voting for Hillary besides the fact that she is totally untrustworthy, corrupt, enabled her husband’s massive womanizing by threatening and attacking his victims, and a total phony is that she is intent on swinging the country to the left which is her agenda. It is awfully suspicious that Trump’s victims emerge to tell their story of what a nasty pig he has been so shortly before the election.
A completely inept and authoritarian jackass posing as a Republican will turn the nation leftward more than any Democrat could.
Hillary is lying when she says she will continue Obama’s policies, and she is, like her husband, a left-moderate at heart….and she, unlike Obama, will play ball with Republicans, as long as they give to her foundation.
Unlikely if she wins the election and gets the chance to nominate Supreme Court Justices. Hillary is as big a leftist ideologue as Obama. Witness her past efforts to force universal health care on Americans, her attack on First Amendment and Second Amendment rights, her successful effort to treat terrorist activities as “law and order” issues. Her husband may have been a leftist moderate but not her.
Vote for Hillary. If you pay her enough often enough she stays bought.
When did she threaten her husband’s victims?
” It is awfully suspicious that Trump’s victims emerge to tell their story of what a nasty pig he has been so shortly before the election.”
No, it isn’t. The accusations started right after a tape was released where Trump endorsed sexual assault. You can’t see how that would embolden the accusers to speak out?
Oh, I think that’s a stretch, Chris. The dam broke in one day, conveniently after the debate? I’d be amazed if there wasn’t some coordination. It doesn’t make Trump any better, and I don’t know why you or anyone would bother denying that this is likely. Are you really that determined to deny the utter ruthlessness of the Democrats and desire to keep the focus off of Hillary at all costs? Why?
Hillary reportedly threatened Juanita Broaddrick, Bill’s alleged rape victim, into silence at a political fundraiser after the accused rape.
Were there any corroborating witnesses?
I just did some research on the first group of Trump accusers, and their stories don’t ring true. Either time frames are impossible, or described circumstances are highly doubtful, i.e.: “Donald Trump was sitting alone in a NY nightclub in the 90’s”…Or they have attempted to maintain contact, and recently at that, “Come to my restaurant!”.
Given that Trump has been a very attractive target for any plausible sexual assault/harassment lawsuit for years, one has to wonder why this is news right now. It seems that the thinnest chance of a “go away” settlement would have had attorneys lining up to file suit. The Cosby comparison doesn’t hold: nobody seems reluctant to sue Trump, and no one has called him “America’s Dad”.
Pending further evidence, I call politically motivated balderdash.
8 (last I checked)? Come on. His attitude guarantees that he treats women this way. When multiple women come out like this, it’s fire, not smoke. And the first counter witness Trump digs up on the most dubious accuser on the airplane is a proven slime-ball himself? And Trump’s defense on others is that they aren’t good looking enough? of course the timing is politically motivated, and a bogus one may sneak in here and there, but there is no chance that they are all fakes.
I’ve no doubt that Trump has behaved atrociously, and that there are some truthful accusers, although perhaps not these so-very-timely ones, he is an asshole after all. Inappropriate actions or actionable at law?, I guess we’ll see.
That Hillary Clinton’s closing argument in this election is that a man who behaves this way towards women should not be President, and that the MSM nods sagely while clutching at their pearls about this “predator” is just too fucking much for me. I’m alternately laughing like a loon and weeping for the nation.
Except, Joe, that the arguments isn’t in a vacuum.It’s a signature significance argument, to be sure, but still only frosting on the unfitness cake. Trump’s sexual predator inclinations are part of the package, and follow from his narcissism, impulsiveness, lack of compassion, lack of empathy, absence of common sense, arrogance, lack of self control, ethical ignorance and stupidity. If he were a perfect gentleman in all respects, he’d still be ridiculously unqualified. It’s being used as afinal straw, that’s all, for anyone so stubborn that they couldn’t figure out he was horrible based on everything else.
I’m not sure that signature significance and final straw aren’t somewhat different ends of the ‘bad’ spectrum. Like ‘he’s stolen millions’ vs. ‘plus he’s a lousy tipper’.
You can’t be immune to the irony of the Democrats pointing at Trump and labeling him unfit due to his behavior towards women.
Of course he’s horrible, as is Hillary.
But the point, Joe, is that nobody in their right mind thinks he’s “unfit due to his behavior towards women.” He’s unfit. His behavior toward women is a small part of that. Clinton wasn’t “unfit” because he was a sexual predator. He was an otherwise able President who was a sexual predator, which meant that his character was too flawed to trust.
Which begs the question of why feminist leaders trusted him.
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/maureen-down-feminism-died-under-bill-clinton-190246356.html
Easy: he was pro abortion. Abortion trumps everything.
One wonders if there is any limit to that position.
If one opposed every single policy a candidate had, except that they were pro abortion, do they still get one’s vote? And vice versa?
The definition of single issue voter.
The right of a teenage girl to kill her baby to ensure that she can fit into the dress she wants to wear to the prom is sacrosanct.
I mean, if these people had to choose between a neo-Nazi, who wants to kill all Jews, but also wants to expand public funding of abortion, versus a traditional liberal Democrat, liberal in almost all public policy issues, except thinks that oo much money is spent on public funding of abortion- the neo-Nazi would win.
I mean, if these people had to choose between a neo-Nazi, who wants to kill all Jews, but also wants to expand public funding of abortion, versus a traditional liberal Democrat, liberal in almost all public policy issues, except thinks that oo much money is spent on public funding of abortion- the neo-Nazi would win.
The great thing about this comment is that it’s just as crazy as it is unfalsifiable. You get all the lunacy without any of the pesky fact-checking!