Trump may face a reckoning in case brought by female accuser

[GMDino]

(12-11-2017, 04:51 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: LOL Only Trump then, the rest of us have moved on.
he just likes embellishing on his Wins.

btw, earlier in the thread I said this:
"Trump's accusers only came out once he was running"



Straight from your CNN posts:
"More than a dozen women came forward with allegations of sexual misconduct against Trump during his presidential campaign."

The fact that they happened in the past is lost by the political assassination attempt, then throw in Allred representing some of them, and people are really ignoring it.

Wait though, isn't Gloria Allreds daughter representing one of those guys (Weinstein) that's been accused by multiple women for harassment??

And a few came out before he was running.

Benton provided the better link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations

Three dating 2007 and back.

But hey, facts...who need 'em! Amiright?

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-11-2017, 04:57 PM)GMDino Wrote: And a few came out before he was running.

Benton provided the better link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations

Three dating 2007 and back.

But hey, facts...who need 'em! Amiright?

Exactly, which ones?
Almost all I read said they came out in mid 2016 during his campaign time.

[*bfine32*]

(12-11-2017, 08:04 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Exactly, which ones?
Almost all I read said they came out in mid 2016 during his campaign time.

It appears there were 2 reported before his run for POTUS; however, both were withdrawn. One by his ex-wife and one by a females that brought a breech of contract suit against him.

It appears you are correct that any unwithdrawn allegations came after his run for POTUS. 

[Griever]

if hes innocent, what does he have to fear from an investigation into the allegations?

[*michaelsean*]

(12-08-2017, 11:58 PM)hollodero Wrote: Ehm, actually he meant that you could pick any candidate, and in each case a majority of people voted not for that candidate, but for someone else. Which is, well, just true.

Simply stated, Hillary won a plurality. As did her husband. Twice.

[Bengalzona]

I'm a bit surprised with how many men just up and resign when these "me too" allegations come out. Maybe it is just me and the fact that I know I have never sexually assaulted or harassed anyone (heck, the first three women I had sex with had to initiate with me because I was so damn cautious). But if a woman accused me, then I would tell them "prove it". So, for a man to just roll when the accusations roll in tells me that maybe there is something there. Y'all know I'm not a fan of Trump or Moore. But I do respect that they say "prove it" to the accusers. That would be my reaction too. It doesn't mean they didn't do it, obviously. But if they are actually innocent, they absolutely have to take that path, IMAO.

[hollodero]

(12-11-2017, 11:52 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: I'm a bit surprised with how many men just up and resign when these "me too" allegations come out. Maybe it is just me and the fact that I know I have never sexually assaulted or harassed anyone (heck, the first three women I had sex with had to initiate with me because I was so damn cautious). But if a woman accused me, then I would tell them "prove it". So, for a man to just roll when the accusations roll in tells me that maybe there is something there. Y'all know I'm not a fan of Trump or Moore. But I do respect that they say "prove it" to the accusers. That would be my reaction too. It doesn't mean they didn't do it, obviously. But if they are actually innocent, they absolutely have to take that path, IMAO.

I guess many just resign because the allegations are true. As for Trump/Moore, while I absolutely do understand your position as soon as the number of accusers gets higher and higher the allegations get more credible. At least I have a hard time believing multiple women would put their reputation on the line with completely false claims just to bring down someone they politically oppose.

[GMDino]

(12-11-2017, 11:52 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: I'm a bit surprised with how many men just up and resign when these "me too" allegations come out. Maybe it is just me and the fact that I know I have never sexually assaulted or harassed anyone (heck, the first three women I had sex with had to initiate with me because I was so damn cautious). But if a woman accused me, then I would tell them "prove it". So, for a man to just roll when the accusations roll in tells me that maybe there is something there. Y'all know I'm not a fan of Trump or Moore. But I do respect that they say "prove it" to the accusers. That would be my reaction too. It doesn't mean they didn't do it, obviously. But if they are actually innocent, they absolutely have to take that path, IMAO.

Franken had that picture.  And I think he just doesn't want to be a distraction.  I also think good people, even if they feel they didn't do what they are accused of will sometimes look at the situation and not want to fight so that others can feel free to tell their stories.

Not saying I agree.

Conyers was probably more guilty.  And he's 140.

But I get what you're saying.  If it was me and I knew I was innocent I'd say that.  The culture right though makes it very hard to stand up for yourself while also not bringing down the accusers who may be telling the truth.



And when the number of named accusers is over a dozen?  I don't think they are ALL making it up.   You also can't just say they are ALL lying without looking bad.

[Bengalzona]

(12-12-2017, 12:48 AM)hollodero Wrote: I guess many just resign because the allegations are true. As for Trump/Moore, while I absolutely do understand your position as soon as the number of accusers gets higher and higher the allegations get more credible. At least I have a hard time believing multiple women would put their reputation on the line with completely false claims just to bring down someone they politically oppose.

In our culture of completely partisan politics, I have no trouble envisioning a group willing to make false claims to take down a politician.

(12-12-2017, 01:30 AM)GMDino Wrote: Franken had that picture.  And I think he just doesn't want to be a distraction.  I also think good people, even if they feel they didn't do what they are accused of will sometimes look at the situation and not want to fight so that others can feel free to tell their stories.

Not saying I agree.

Conyers was probably more guilty.  And he's 140.

But I get what you're saying.  If it was me and I knew I was innocent I'd say that.  The culture right though makes it very hard to stand up for yourself while also not bringing down the accusers who may be telling the truth.



And when the number of named accusers is over a dozen?  I don't think they are ALL making it up.   You also can't just say they are ALL lying without looking bad.

I don't think the picture was so much of a problem for Franke. He didn't resign until new allegations were reported, allegations which we were not privy to outside of the fact that people made them.

But if you are standing up for yourself and you honestly didn't do anything, how could your accuser be telling the truth and why would you be concerned about 'bringing them down'? It seems to me that people who make false accusations need to be exposed. Also, I'm not convinced that all (or even most) of the people making accusations are really risking that much.

I suspect that every male celebrity, sports star or politician has a number of accusations against them during the course of their life just by sheer exposure of their position. In some cases, they are true and in some they are not. That's sort of the thing about allegations, isn't it. And the nature of sexual harassment allegations are that they are generally "he said, she said" type situations. There is no evidence either way.

On the other hand, sexual assault is a different beast. There generally is physical evidence to support, so long as that evidence is processed in a timely manner (i.e. some types of biological evidence aren't going to hang around forever). It is also a much more severe crime. Or so it used to be. It seems that in our current culture, accusations of sexual harassment are the same as accusations of sexual assault. I'm not sure that that should be the case.

[hollodero]

(12-12-2017, 10:12 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: In our culture of completely partisan politics, I have no trouble envisioning a group willing to make false claims to take down a politician.

I know some people are quite intense, but still. You'd have to make up coordinated false stories. Then you'd have to go out in the open. There isn't much to gain, but much hatred to be earned, as Moore accuser I'd honestly fear for my life when seeing the vile Breitbart pushback on their boards. Aside from that, you are sure to get hate mails, be recognized on the streets, called all kinds of things both on TV and face to face. Every one you know assoociates you with that. And you'd also risk to be exposed for getting something wrong, e.g. the person wasn't at the place at the time you claimed or some other thing. It seems awfully risky to do so just because you prefer one politician over another, I still cannot quite believe that. I also can not preclude it, but the more women are in, the less likely forgery does become.

In Trump's case, it doesn't help him that he fits the pattern of a molester 100%; in Moore's case, his non-denial denial, not inside my behavioural pattern and I usually asked their mommys first, plus some circumstantial things like people claiming it was common knowledge and the YMCA did look out for him and then some, makes me 99% certain he did as accused. I think that's fair.

- I also would caution to believe just everybody though. You're not wrong, it's just that the benefit of the doubt only will go that far in the public eye.

[Belsnickel]

(12-12-2017, 10:12 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: It seems that in our current culture, accusations of sexual harassment are the same as accusations of sexual assault. I'm not sure that that should be the case.

Sexual harassment is a fireable offense in any office I've worked in. It should be a fireable offense for lawmakers and celebrities as well. Granted, there should be some evidence of the wrongdoing before being fired, but still.

Edit to add: the evidence should only have to be at a preponderance level, though. Was it more likely than not that it occurred? Can the person. This isn't a criminal proceeding, so I have no problem with that.

[*Nately120*]

(12-12-2017, 12:41 PM)hollodero Wrote: In Trump's case, it doesn't help him that he fits the pattern of a molester 100%; in Moore's case, his non-denial denial, not inside my behavioural pattern and I usually asked their mommys first, plus some circumstantial things like people claiming it was common knowledge and the YMCA did look out for him and then some, makes me 99% certain he did as accused. I think that's fair.

- I also would caution to believe just everybody though. You're not wrong, it's just that the benefit of the doubt only will go that far in the public eye.

We need 100% facts on these cases, though.  This isn't as simple as invading a country because you're pretty sure they have weapons in there somewhere.

[Bengalzona]

(12-12-2017, 12:41 PM)hollodero Wrote: I know some people are quite intense, but still. You'd have to make up coordinated false stories. Then you'd have to go out in the open. There isn't much to gain, but much hatred to be earned, as Moore accuser I'd honestly fear for my life when seeing the vile Breitbart pushback on their boards. Aside from that, you are sure to get hate mails, be recognized on the streets, called all kinds of things both on TV and face to face. Every one you know assoociates you with that. And you'd also risk to be exposed for getting something wrong, e.g. the person wasn't at the place at the time you claimed or some other thing. It seems awfully risky to do so just because you prefer one politician over another, I still cannot quite believe that. I also can not preclude it, but the more women are in, the less likely forgery does become.

In Trump's case, it doesn't help him that he fits the pattern of a molester 100%; in Moore's case, his non-denial denial, not inside my behavioural pattern and I usually asked their mommys first, plus some circumstantial things like people claiming it was common knowledge and the YMCA did look out for him and then some, makes me 99% certain he did as accused. I think that's fair.

- I also would caution to believe just everybody though. You're not wrong, it's just that the benefit of the doubt only will go that far in the public eye.

Not sure for the need to coordinate false stories. Even in cases where sexual harassment is confirmed and/or admitted, the stories of the victims always have variations. In fact, stories that are exactly the same might even cause some people to wonder if they were coordinated becasue they are so exactly the same.

I've also seen some cases in the past where, even in cases where there is confirmed and/or admitted sexual harassment, some people contrive stories and claims for various reasons (hopes of some sort of financial gain, attention, revenge, etc.). In other words, sometimes a large group of accusers (who may have been harassed) gets larger because of people making false claims for ulterior motives. Hence, while I believe that the number of people making accusations is important and indicative to a degree, I can't say that that would be totally indicative.

As far as Trump goes, his own words show how he feels about women. But it doesn't matter to the people who voted for him. And the same thing will happen with Roy Moore today. AL peoples are more upset that "liberal outsiders are gonna tell them how to vote and make them get abortions (even the men)" than they are worried about a man who sexually harassed and perhaps assaulted teens.

Reminds me a little of Silvio Berlusconi.

[Bengalzona]

(12-12-2017, 12:50 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Sexual harassment is a fireable offense in any office I've worked in. It should be a fireable offense for lawmakers and celebrities as well. Granted, there should be some evidence of the wrongdoing before being fired, but still.

Edit to add: the evidence should only have to be at a preponderance level, though. Was it more likely than not that it occurred? Can the person. This isn't a criminal proceeding, so I have no problem with that.

(12-12-2017, 02:07 PM)Nately120 Wrote: We need 100% facts on these cases, though.  This isn't as simple as invading a country because you're pretty sure they have weapons in there somewhere.

But my point is that so much is happening with only accusations. I think you picked up on that, Matt, when you mentioned preponderance level. It doesn't seem like they are at that level in a lot of these cases.

Also I don't feel there is the need to have the same pro-active and aggressive reaction to sexual harassment cases that you have in sexual assault cases. The latter is a physical crime upon another person's person akin to rape. The former is comments or attitudes which could hurt or degrade someone. There is a difference. That doesn't mean I believe sexual harassment complaints need to be ignored. Far from it. But as I mentioned before, a lot of sexual harassment cases are "he said, she said" situations without witnesses or evidence. In those circumstances, I'm not sure why you would choose to totally believe ne side or another and act on it without some deliberation and consideration for each side.

[*bfine32*]

The whole sexual harassment trend has gotten perverted IMO and I'm not sure how we can but the Genie back in the bottle. I just say where Donovan McDabb and Eric Davis (not the Red) have been suspended. They join recently suspended analysts Marshall Faulk, Ike Taylor, Heath Evans.

I think some of this new dynamic can be attributed to Time magazine's person of the year award; I mean who doesn't want to be the elbow on the cover? Is this to say I condone acts of sexual misconduct or they should go unreported? No. But there needs to be a statute of limitations. If there is no documented record of prior reports, then I'm sorry, you had your chance.

I do believe that POTUS is going to say something about the flurry of cases very soon, because as Bernie Mac said: "I ain't scared of you MFers" and when he does; heads are going to explode.

[GMDino]

(12-12-2017, 05:15 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The whole sexual harassment trend has gotten perverted IMO and I'm not sure how we can but the Genie back in the bottle. I just say where Donovan McDabb and Eric Davis (not the Red) have been suspended. They join recently suspended analysts Marshall Faulk, Ike Taylor, Heath Evans.

I think some of this new dynamic can be attributed to Time magazine's person of the year award; I mean who doesn't want to be the elbow on the cover? Is this to say I condone acts of sexual misconduct or they should go unreported? No. But there needs to be a statute of limitations. If there is no documented record of prior reports, then I'm sorry, you had your chance.

I do believe that POTUS is going to say something about the flurry of cases very soon, because as Bernie Mac said: "I ain't scared of you MFers"  and when he does; heads are going to explode.

Trump has said something:  He said all the women accusing him are liars and he believes Moore over all his accusers.

He also had a horrible tweet today.

In other news:

GOP Rep. Accused of Raping 17-Year-Old Sings Hymn Before Declaring: 'No Reason I Would Resign' https://t.co/OJrjUtrf1G pic.twitter.com/3VqvVsdaQ7

— Mediaite (@Mediaite) December 12, 2017

Link from the tweet:

https://www.mediaite.com/online/gop-rep-accused-of-raping-17-year-old-sings-hymn-before-declaring-no-reason-i-would-resign/


The girl filed a police report and it was closed in 2013 with no charges filed.  So far no word on why, according to this article:

http://time.com/5059817/dan-johnson-sexual-assault-accusation/

[*bfine32*]

(12-12-2017, 05:33 PM)GMDino Wrote: Trump has said something:  He said all the women accusing him are liars and he believes Moore over all his accusers.

Good point bringing up Moore. Have reactions been negative or positive in the media with his siding with the accused?

[Benton]

There's no easy answer here.

On the one hand, anyone can file a complaint and it takes no proof to make an accusation that can wreck someone's life. When I covered courts, I saw it on a weekly basis where an accuser would lash out at an ex or a friend by accusing them of assault, rape, or misconduct. It was even worse with spouses and issues about parental rights. But for every one of those that made it to court on an accusation, there was probably a like number that went unreported.

In the case of public officials, people say "Well, obviously it's motivated, they didn't come forward until now. If it bothered them, they would've done something."

Well, coming forward that person is doing something. And maybe they waited because, at the time, it didn't matter. If Bill an attorney in town grabs a client's backside on his way into court, there's not a lot of recourse; but the client has some recourse if Bill — years later — is suddenly a political candidate where public opinion matters. On the other hand, the person may just be coming forward because she doesn't like Bill.

So, since there's not a lot of good answers after the accusation is made, we should probably work on our approach to gender expectations and acceptable behavior. When we accept people saying vulgar things about women by justifying it as "locker room talk" then we make unacceptable behavior acceptable. When we say "oh, it's not a big deal, he was just being funny" or "it's not a big deal, everybody sleeps with teens" then we're making it acceptable.

Maybe it's a good thing the two parties decided to politicize the issue, because maybe we'll finally start talking about how we raise kids and what kind of values we're teaching.

[GMDino]

(12-12-2017, 06:07 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Good point bringing up Moore. Have reactions been negative or positive in the media with his siding with the accused?

Who are you saying sided with the accused?

[*bfine32*]

(12-12-2017, 07:04 PM)GMDino Wrote: Who are you saying sided with the accused?

Trump. Was it really not obvious given the post I quoted?