Instances where Trump got blamed unfairly

[hollodero]

Since I often make lists of imho legit and objectifiable reasons to blame or attack Trump, let me try to proof a little fairness and look for instances where indeed accusations against Trump were over the top or unfair. These instances seem rare to me, but they sure do exist.

- The so-called "Peepee-tape"
...there actually is little to back up that accusation, that still gets mentioned plenty. It's basically just within the unverified portions of the Steele dossier and there seems to be no credible alternative source to back that story up.

- People who diagnose Trump's mental health
...yeah I think he is a narcissist and that it's possibly pathological, as is his lieing. Still I have an issue with some news segments that take this line of thinking way too far. Not just once have I heard some expert musing on how he has the mindset of Hitler or Stalin. These aren't diagnosis (which are hard to come by and it's probably unethical to diagnose someone from his appearances in public alone), these are slanders.

- Blaming him for the divided country
...not to create a wrong impression, Trump is a very divisive figure and strives for that division. But the division is not a product of Trump, Trump is a product of the division. The notion that the country unifies again once Trump is out of office imho is naive.

- Accusations that he claimed George Floyd should be proud of the job numbers
... while I still find it really distasteful to have mentioned George Floyd in any speech designed to tout his own horn, Trump never actually did that directly. Many claimed he did, including Biden.

- Accusations that he was close to Epstein (or that Asian lady that organized the Robert Kraft massages etc)
...these accusations usually do not hold much water to me. He was a real estate mogul, he came across many people. Trying to accuse him by showing a picture of him and Epstein imho is not fair.

- Calling the China travel ban "xenophobic" [edit]
...it was not an extraordinary measure to ban travel from China in light of corona.



--- so, ok. I am willing to expand that list when additional clear-cut examples of Trump getting blamed or scolded unfairly are provided.

The reasons for that thread are the following: For one, I was under the impression that unfair accusations against Trump are deemed non-existent; and second, to finally at least put some new thread in the new P&R-section. Third, maybe some Trump supporters or Trump friendly people might feel inclined to chime in.

[fredtoast]

(07-10-2020, 10:08 AM)hollodero Wrote: - Accusations that he claimed George Floyd should be proud of the job numbers
... while I still find it really distasteful to have mentioned George Floyd in any speech designed to tout his own horn, Trump never actually did that directly. Many claimed he did, including Biden.

Well the direct quote is "This is a great day for George Floyd" and this is in a speech that Trump gave about the good job numbers.
So please tell me what you thought Trump really meant if he wasn't talking about Floyd being happy about the job numbers?  what else was he talking about?

[fredtoast]

(07-10-2020, 10:08 AM)hollodero Wrote: - Accusations that he was close to Epstein (or that Asian lady that organized the Robert Kraft massages etc)
...these accusations usually do not hold much water to me. He was a real estate mogul, he came across many people. Trying to accuse him by showing a picture of him and Epstein imho is not fair.

Again let's deal with a direct quote

“I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.” - Donald Trump, 2002


How would Trump know that Epstein was a "terrific guy" and "fun to be with" and what type of "women" he liked if Trump was not close to him?  And why would anyone have asked Trumps opinion on Epstein if they were not known to be close?


Also Epsteins phone book had 15 different numbers to contact Donald plus other contact numbers for Melanie Trump, Ivana Trump, Ivanka Trump, Robert Trump (Donald's brother), and Blaine Trump (Roberts ex-wife).

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(07-10-2020, 11:50 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Again let's deal with a direct quote

“I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.” - Donald Trump, 2002


How would Trump know that Epstein was a "terrific guy" and "fun to be with" and what type of "women" he liked if Trump was not close to him?  And why would anyone have asked Trumps opinion on Epstein if they were not known to be close?


Also Epsteins phone book had 15 different numbers to contact Donald plus other contact numbers for Melanie Trump, Ivana Trump, Ivanka Trump, Robert Trump (Donald's brother), and Blaine Trump (Roberts ex-wife).

Pretty manly name for a woman...

(07-10-2020, 10:08 AM)hollodero Wrote: yeah I think he is a narcissist and that it's possibly pathological, as is his lieing.

Lying***

Sorry to be the English police, but this one gets me bothered all too often.

[hollodero]

(07-10-2020, 11:46 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Well the direct quote is "This is a great day for George Floyd" and this is in a speech that Trump gave about the good job numbers.
So please tell me what you thought Trump really meant if he wasn't talking about Floyd being happy about the job numbers?  what else was he talking about?

Oh I will tell you that.

Said Trump: "Equal justice under the law must mean that every American receives equal treatment in every encounter with law enforcement regardless of race, color, gender or creed. They have to receive fair treatment from law enforcement. They have to receive it. We all saw what happened last week. We can’t let that happen. Hopefully George is looking down right now and saying, “This is a great thing that’s happening for our country.” It’s a great day for him, it’s a great day for everyone. This is a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality. It’s really what our Constitution requires and it’s what our country is all about."

- so, well, he was referring to fair treatment from law enforcement and equality. This part wasn't about the job numbers.

[hollodero]

(07-10-2020, 11:50 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Again let's deal with a direct quote

“I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.” - Donald Trump, 2002


How would Trump know that Epstein was a "terrific guy" and "fun to be with" and what type of "women" he liked if Trump was not close to him?  And why would anyone have asked Trumps opinion on Epstein if they were not known to be close?


Also Epsteins phone book had 15 different numbers to contact Donald plus other contact numbers for Melanie Trump, Ivana Trump, Ivanka Trump, Robert Trump (Donald's brother), and Blaine Trump (Roberts ex-wife).

That Epstein likes young women is an observation that does not require much closeness. I guess pretty much everyone had figured that out.

Trump knew Epstein. They had to do with each other. That imho is not so surprisinng, nor is it any indication that Trump must have known something about his deeds.

[hollodero]

(07-10-2020, 12:26 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Pretty manly name for a woman...


Lying***

Sorry to be the English police, but this one gets me bothered all too often.

 Totally fine with me. I'm not lieing :)

[*Nately120*]

(07-10-2020, 12:51 PM)hollodero Wrote: That Epstein likes young women is an observation that does not require much closeness. I guess pretty much everyone had figured that out.

Trump knew Epstein. They had to do with each other. That imho is not so surprisinng, nor is it any indication that Trump must have known something about his deeds.

No, but Trump also bragged about grabbing women and walking into dressing rooms and seeing teen girls in various forms of undress. 

Just another situation where if a normal person did it or said it he would be ruined.  No fire, just a man gleefully dispensing smoke. 

[hollodero]

(07-10-2020, 01:19 PM)Nately120 Wrote: No,

This is my whole point.

(07-10-2020, 01:19 PM)Nately120 Wrote: but Trump also bragged about grabbing women and walking into dressing rooms and seeing teen girls in various forms of undress. 

Just another situation where if a normal person did it or said it he would be ruined.  No fire, just a man gleefully dispensing smoke. 

I know and agree 100%. There is a long list and this grim picture does not need to be filled with a more vague point like knowing Epstein.

[fredtoast]

(07-10-2020, 12:49 PM)hollodero Wrote: Oh I will tell you that.

Said Trump: "Equal justice under the law must mean that every American receives equal treatment in every encounter with law enforcement regardless of race, color, gender or creed. They have to receive fair treatment from law enforcement. They have to receive it. We all saw what happened last week. We can’t let that happen. Hopefully George is looking down right now and saying, “This is a great thing that’s happening for our country.” It’s a great day for him, it’s a great day for everyone. This is a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality. It’s really what our Constitution requires and it’s what our country is all about."

- so, well, he was referring to fair treatment from law enforcement and equality. This part wasn't about the job numbers.

It was a rambling speech, but when Trump was talkin g about "equal treatment under the law" he was talking about protestors being "dominated in the streets" but the National Guard.  He was not talkin g about George Floyd getting justice he was talking about rioters getting arrested.

Here is the full quote in context.

Call in the national guard, call me. We’ll have so many people, more people than you have to dominate the streets. You can’t let what’s happening happen. It’s called dominate the streets. You can’t let that happen in New York where they’re breaking into stores and all of the things. And by the way, hurting many small businesses, you can’t let it happen.  Equal justice under the law must mean that every American receives equal treatment in every encounter with law enforcement, regardless of race, color, gender or creed, they have to receive fair treatment from law enforcement. They have to receive it. We all saw what happened last week. We can’t let that happen. Hopefully George is looking down right now and saying, “This is a great thing that’s happening for our country.” This is a great day for him. It’s a great day for everybody. This is a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality. It’s really what our constitution requires and it’s what our country is all about.

Now that I have looked at the context it is even worse. he was not using George Floyd to tout the job numbers. Instead he was using George Floyds name to tout the actions the police an national Guard used against rioters and protestors.

[*Nately120*]

(07-10-2020, 01:56 PM)hollodero Wrote: This is my whole point.


I know and agree 100%. There is a long list and this grim picture does not need to be filled with a more vague point like knowing Epstein.

I get your point, but this isnt a criminal Court that requires concrete evidence.  Trump brags about intruding in a sexual manner on teen girls and he knows America's most famous kiddie diddler.  

The points aren't vague unless you are looking at this with a "guilty by the law" sense.  It's a one-two punch of circumstantial creepiness.  Would I have a job right now if that coincidence and quote were attributed to me?

So yeah, I wouldn't vote him guilty but he's probably OJ or Michael Jackson "not guilty" on this.  

[hollodero]

(07-10-2020, 02:14 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I get your point, but this isnt a criminal Court that requires concrete evidence.  Trump brags about intruding in a sexual manner on teen girls and he knows America's most famous kiddie diddler.  

The points aren't vague unless you are looking at this with a "guilty by the law" sense.  It's a one-two punch of circumstantial creepiness.  Would I have a job right now if that coincidence and quote were attributed to me?

So yeah, I wouldn't vote him guilty but he's probably OJ or Michael Jackson "not guilty" on this.  

Probably you wouldn't, Epstein or not.

I don't quite concur with your "he's OJ not guilty" verdict. I get that public opinion is not a courtroom and that different rules apply, and that in this sense knowing Epstein is not quite ideal from a PR standpoint. Especially with Trump's own history on the topic.

But then again, there is still very little to go on from "he knew the guy". He is not Prince Andrew-like implicated.

[fredtoast]

(07-10-2020, 10:08 AM)hollodero Wrote: - Accusations that he was close to Epstein (or that Asian lady that organized the Robert Kraft massages etc)
...these accusations usually do not hold much water to me.

(07-10-2020, 12:51 PM)hollodero Wrote: Trump knew Epstein. They had to do with each other. That imho is not so surprising, 

Now I am confused.  

It is pretty clear that Trump was "close to".  So close that reporters wanted Trumps opinion on Epstein.  And Trump tells them he has a 15 year relationship with Epstein and that Epstein is a great guy to be around.

Trump also made it clear that Epstein liked pretty ladies just like he did.  And now we know that the way Trump liked pretty ladies was to grab them by the ***** because rich and powerful men are allowed to do that.

Trump himself has bragged about dating younger women back when he made comments about dating Ivanka if she was not his daughter.  So it makes me wonder why he would comment about Epstein liking girls "on the younger side" when he did the same thing himself?

Is it proof that Trump knew what Epstein was doing?  No.  But when you look at everything together it seems that he probably did.  I mean, if you are Jeffrey Epstein and you know your buddy Donald Trump also likes to "date" the younger women you don't think he would ever mention the possibilities to him?  Or at least ask if he was interested in underage girls?  I find that hard to believe.

It is like two guys who like to do drugs and one of them gets a new drug that he loves.  You don't think he is going to ask his friend if he is interested?

[hollodero]

(07-10-2020, 02:09 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It was a rambling speech, but when Trump was talkin g about "equal treatment under the law" he was talking about protestors being "dominated in the streets" but the National Guard.  He was not talkin g about George Floyd getting justice he was talking about rioters getting arrested.

Here is the full quote in context.

Call in the national guard, call me. We’ll have so many people, more people than you have to dominate the streets. You can’t let what’s happening happen. It’s called dominate the streets. You can’t let that happen in New York where they’re breaking into stores and all of the things. And by the way, hurting many small businesses, you can’t let it happen.  Equal justice under the law must mean that every American receives equal treatment in every encounter with law enforcement, regardless of race, color, gender or creed, they have to receive fair treatment from law enforcement. They have to receive it. We all saw what happened last week. We can’t let that happen. Hopefully George is looking down right now and saying, “This is a great thing that’s happening for our country.” This is a great day for him. It’s a great day for everybody. This is a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality. It’s really what our constitution requires and it’s what our country is all about.

Now that I have looked at the context it is even worse.  he was not using George Floyd to tout the job numbers.  Instead he was using George Floyds name to tout the actions the police an national Guard used against rioters and protestors.

Yeah, you migeht be right about that one. It sure is still distasteful, I'm not argueing that.

Still, yeah he was not using George Floyd to tout the job numbers. And the hundreds of headlines that claimed just that were just wrong.

[fredtoast]

(07-10-2020, 02:36 PM)hollodero Wrote: But then again, there is still very little to go on from "he knew the guy". 

Epstein knew Trump was attracted to very young women.

Epstein knew Trump felt that rich and powerful men could just grab ***** whenever they wanted without asking.

You don't think he would ever bring up the topic of underage girls with Trump?

Did Trump do anything with underage girls?  I have no idea.

Did Trump know Epstein was into sex with underage girls.  I find it hard to believe that he didn't.

[*Nately120*]

(07-10-2020, 02:36 PM)hollodero Wrote: Probably you wouldn't, Epstein or not.

I don't quite concur with your "he's OJ not guilty" verdict. I get that public opinion is not a courtroom and that different rules apply, and that in this sense knowing Epstein is not quite ideal from a PR standpoint. Especially with Trump's own history on the topic.

But then again, there is still very little to go on from "he knew the guy". He is not Prince Andrew-like implicated.

I don't disagree, but the fact that Trump brags on and "off" the record about forcing himself upon women and teen girls takes the Epstein connection from "troubling" to "it's your fault if you let your guard down around him" if you ask me.  If Trump were a normal guy and I let my teen daughter hang around his place after hearing he associates with sex offenders and willingly brags about sex offending of his own, I'd turn myself in for negligence and corruption of a minor.  

The bottom line is that on multiple occasions Trump has flat-out bragged that he can, and has gotten away with things that could qualify as sexual offenses.  What else needs to be said?  We know he's an amoral person and he has directly stated that he knows he can do illegal things and get away with it.  It's the one-two punch...we think he may have done something and just in case we are still on the fence he makes sure he volunteers information to help us work through our doubts.

The best thing you can say about Trump in this case is that he lies about being a sex-offender in order to impress people. That's just crazy. Maybe next time I interview for a job I'll lie and say I was on To Catch a Predator.

[hollodero]

(07-10-2020, 02:37 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It is pretty clear that Trump was "close to".  So close that reporters wanted Trumps opinion on Epstein.  And Trump tells them he has a 15 year relationship with Epstein and that Epstein is a great guy to be around.

I don't think that means much. Trump says that about everyone when he thinks it might serve him.
And that Trump gets asked about Epstein is not evidence of anything really. It also is not that surprising. After all, they were two figures in the spotlight, in a quite similar way (aside from the topic at hand).

(07-10-2020, 02:37 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Trump also made it clear that Epstein liked pretty ladies just like he did.

Yeah, that's just what Trump would say, and that Epstein has ladies around was well known. I don't think that quote means anything deeper. Aside from Trump being creepy, of course, but that's just who he is.

(07-10-2020, 02:37 PM)fredtoast Wrote:   And now we know that the way Trump liked pretty ladies was to grab them by the ***** because rich and powerful men are allowed to do that.

True, but I don't think that influenced his answers to reporters really.

(07-10-2020, 02:37 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Trump himself has bragged about dating younger women back when he made comments about dating Ivanka if she was not his daughter.

Yeah there are really disgusting comments on his own daughter, which makes him a tasteless creep, not a child molester. I do agree it points to a certain mindset. The point is not lost, I just don't want to overvaluate it.

(07-10-2020, 02:37 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Is it proof that Trump knew what Epstein was doing?  No.  But when you look at everything together it seems that he probably did.  I mean, if you are Jeffrey Epstein and you know your buddy Donald Trump also likes to "date" the younger women you don't think he would ever mention the possibilities to him?  Or at least ask if he was interested in underage girls?  I find that hard to believe.

It is like two guys who like to do drugs and one of them gets a new drug that he loves.  You don't think he is going to ask his friend if he is interested?

I get the point. But I don't know if they were that close in the first place. I mean, yeah there a pictures of the two and Trump said something nice about him to a newspaper, and they had their phone numbers. And that's it. That they were actual buddies is kind of a speculation that is not very well founded on facts.

[hollodero]

(07-10-2020, 02:48 PM)Nately120 Wrote: The bottom line is that on multiple occasions Trump has flat-out bragged that he can, and has gotten away with things that could qualify as sexual offenses.  What else needs to be said?

Yep, kind of my point. Who needs any Epstein speculation added on?

And maybe the point is not important, but I feel as soon as some more dubious layers of accusations are applied to the already rotten fruit that is Donald Trump, the easier it gets for Trump defenders to contradict said accusations.
For when people say "the speculations about Trump and Epstein lack any evidence and are mere speculation fueled by Trump hatred", they kind of have a point, imho. Not overall, but specifically. And then it gets generalized and hence I would find it wiser to leave such things out and focus on the many, many, many better founded instances to accuse Trump of sexual offenses.

(07-10-2020, 02:41 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Did Trump know Epstein was into sex with underage girls.  I find it hard to believe that he didn't.

I honestly don't know either way, and I do not have that much of a hunch than you do about that. Which might be just me, but I feel a part of it is that it's not a very well founded accusation.

[*Nately120*]

(07-10-2020, 02:57 PM)hollodero Wrote: Yep, kind of my point. Who needs any Epstein speculation added on?

And maybe the point is not important, but I feel as soon as some more dubious layers of accusations are applied to the already rotten fruit that is Donald Trump, the easier it gets for Trump defenders to contradict said accusations.
For when people say "the speculations about Trump and Epstein lack any evidence and are mere speculation fueled by Trump hatred", they kind of have a point, imho. Not overall, but specifically. And then it gets generalized and hence I would find it wiser to leave such things out and focus on the many, many, many better founded instances to accuse Trump of sexual offenses.

Anyone who doesn't see any sort of issue with the Epstein link doesn't see any sort of issue with what Trump brags he can do and/or get away with.  The fact that knowing Epstein doesn't even crack the top tier of Trump's sexual red flags speaks volumes.

[hollodero]

(07-10-2020, 03:02 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Anyone who doesn't see any sort of issue with the Epstein link doesn't see any sort of issue with what Trump brags he can do and/or get away with.

I wouldn't go as far as to not see any issue at all, but I see way more issue with the Billy Bush tape. And the actual accusations against him, and the misogyony he displays, and the creepy things he says about his daughter, and that he bragged about walking into girls locker rooms, and then some. All of these things are way more convincing to me of who Trump is, as a connection to Epstein that very well could have been quite shallow.