Leticia James is a loser!!

[SchlongConery]

Actually, no.

All Trump ever "confessed to" (if that's what you want to call locker room bragging on a bus amongst bullshitters, as distinguished from testimony under oath) is that (at least some) women will "let you" grab them by the pussy if you are rich/influential enough.

Here is the actual transcript of exactly what Trump said.



Trump: Yeah, that’s her. With the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.

Bush: Whatever you want.

Trump: Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.


Locker room bragging that you can grab a woman by the pussy and get away with it because i'm a celebrity is not to be confused with someone who might actually do it?


Also, when you claim that you would never do something like that (taking a woman shopping for clothes and then grabbing them by the/sticking fingers in their pussy) then you open yourself up to having character evidence of prior statements being read into the record. Like whatTrump said about this other woman:

"Trump: I did try and fuck her. She was married.

Unknown: That’s huge news.

Trump: No, no, Nancy. No, this was [unintelligible] — and I moved on her very heavily. In fact, I took her out furniture shopping.

She wanted to get some furniture. I said, “I’ll show you where they have some nice furniture.” I took her out furniture "

A gold digger prepared to do anything to get ahead is a far cry from a sexual assault victim.

But suing someone who a Judge and Jury believed sexually assaulted (grabbing someone by the pussy or insticntively kissing them uunexpectly and without any indication of consent is gold digging?



You need to come out from under the covers Dutch. You're getting high on your own supply.

 

[SchlongConery]

See Frank that's where these guys can tear down your argument.

The $85 million was not for the pussy grabbing.

The $85 million was punitive damages for slandering the adjudicated plaintiff. Again. After the legal system had already found him liable for the sexual assault and slandering her by calling her a liar for falsely accusing him of it.

@mitchell76 What is with the chuckleheads on everything. Do you dispute the fact that the $85 million was not for the sexual assault? Or that you disagree with my correcting frank?

Or are you woke and now feel free to identify as a Chucklehead?

 

[Dutch Oven]

Here is the actual transcript of exactly what Trump said.



Trump: Yeah, that’s her. With the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.

Bush: Whatever you want.

Trump: Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.


Locker room bragging that you can grab a woman by the pussy and get away with it because i'm a celebrity is not to be confused with someone who might actually do it?


Also, when you claim that you would never do something like that (taking a woman shopping for clothes and then grabbing them by the/sticking fingers in their pussy) then you open yourself up to having character evidence of prior statements being read into the record. Like whatTrump said about this other woman:

"Trump: I did try and fuck her. She was married.

Unknown: That’s huge news.

Trump: No, no, Nancy. No, this was [unintelligible] — and I moved on her very heavily. In fact, I took her out furniture shopping.

She wanted to get some furniture. I said, “I’ll show you where they have some nice furniture.” I took her out furniture "

Yes, I've read these quotes before, many times, from when they were first released to the public. Surely you noticed the "let you" phrase in the quote? Trump talks like millions of other guys do in a sports dressing room getting ready to go out on the town after beer league. I stand by my take. Big talk, not to be taken seriously. However, the reason you can get away with talking like this to other men is that the existence of gold digging ladder climbers has been proven beyond any need of repeated proof. The courts refer to this (although sometimes they apply it incorrectly) as "judicial notice".

But suing someone who a Judge and Jury believed sexually assaulted (grabbing someone by the pussy or insticntively kissing them uunexpectly and without any indication of consent is gold digging?



You need to come out from under the covers Dutch. You're getting high on your own supply.

You can sue anyone you like. Results will vary, especially with juries and a choice of venues. Civil suits are all about redistributing money, not morality. Juries are notorious for wanting the rich to redistribute to the lesser off.

 

[Frankfooter]

Actually, no.

All Trump ever "confessed to" (if that's what you want to call locker room bragging on a bus amongst bullshitters, as distinguished from testimony under oath) is that (at least some) women will "let you" grab them by the pussy if you are rich/influential enough. (Seems to me that Trump isn't even incorrect about that, quite apart from whether the comment has anything to do with sexual assault). A gold digger prepared to do anything to get ahead is a far cry from a sexual assault victim.

So how does he come to that conclusion?
Did he read a paper on the subject or was it through experimentation and personal experience?

 

[Frankfooter]

See Frank that's where these guys can tear down your argument.

The $85 million was not for the pussy grabbing.

The $85 million was punitive damages for slandering the adjudicated plaintiff. Again. After the legal system had already found him liable for the sexual assault and slandering her by calling her a liar for falsely accusing him of it.

Fair enough, rump was rich and powerful enough that he could get away with pussy grabbing and rape, but it was the lying and slandering of his rape victim that cost him $85 million. Which he wouldn't have had to pay if he wasn't a rapist in the first place.

 

[SchlongConery]

Fair enough, rump was rich and powerful enough that he could get away with pussy grabbing and rape, but it was the lying and slandering of his rape victim that cost him $85 million. Which he wouldn't have had to pay if he wasn't a rapist in the first place.

Fair point but to me, the fact that he is a bald faced lying con man is a far worse danger to society for that than the actual sexual assaults he has been accused or held responsible for. And to be clear, I do not excuse the sexual assaults in any way nor the character that would commit, or even express such thoughts.

 

[SchlongConery]

Yes, I've read these quotes before, many times, from when they were first released to the public. Surely you noticed the "let you" phrase in the quote? Trump talks like millions of other guys do in a sports dressing room getting ready to go out on the town after beer league. I stand by my take. Big talk, not to be taken seriously. However, the reason you can get away with talking like this to other men is that the existence of gold digging ladder climbers has been proven beyond any need of repeated proof. The courts refer to this (although sometimes they apply it incorrectly) as "judicial notice".


You can sue anyone you like. Results will vary, especially with juries and a choice of venues. Civil suits are all about redistributing money, not morality. Juries are notorious for wanting the rich to redistribute to the lesser off.

Well I'd not be sharing locker rooms nor being part of a team with the people on your team talking big about non-consensual sexual touching. Is this coached by former Toronto Maple Leafs Ushers, Catholic Priests or a Gym Jordan Wrestling coach?

As for your civil suits comments, put the covers back and draw another deep breath.

 

[Dutch Oven]

Well I'd not be sharing locker rooms nor being part of a team with the people on your team talking big about non-consensual sexual touching. Is this coached by former Toronto Maple Leafs Ushers, Catholic Priests or a Gym Jordan Wrestling coach?

It's hard to evaluate the impact of your position without knowing whether you've spent much time in sports locker rooms full of testosterone-fueled, single (or single wanna-be) men.

In all my years of playing team sports, I've never seen one guy quit a team because the talk in the dressing room crossed some line that would have to be observed out in public. In fact, most guys know bullshit when they hear it, and listening to someone spout it is just part of the entertainment.

As for your civil suits comments, put the covers back and draw another deep breath.

Do you think Trump would have lost his trial with a jury pool drawn from Wyoming? Trump won by 45 points there.

 

[Frankfooter]

Fair point but to me, the fact that he is a bald faced lying con man is a far worse danger to society for that than the actual sexual assaults he has been accused or held responsible for. And to be clear, I do not excuse the sexual assaults in any way nor the character that would commit, or even express such thoughts.

Capone was put behind bars for tax fraud.
Come to think of it, so should rump.

But anyways, if its slandering his rape victims that does him in, or tax fraud for paying off Stormy, it doesn't matter.
As long as one of his many crimes finally puts him behind bars....

 

[Skoob]

$85 million in fines means its worked well.
Your rapist leader is paying the price for pussy grabbing.

No silly...how would one bring charges to and investigate Hamas for rape? We have a victim that has come forward as a first-person witness. What happens next?
Walk me through your logic since that's how you wiggle out of condemning them every time you are reminded about your hypocrisy.

 

[Skoob]

I agree that these words "convicted", rapist/sexual assault are being indiscriminately rhetorically conflated. Sometimes deliberately, sometimes innocently and sometiimes because the writer simply doesn't know the distinction. You are as guilty of all as is @Kautilya

Can we agree that Trump is pretty much a self-confessed pussy grabber? And that "grabbing them by the pussy" because he can't resist, and thinking he can get away with it because he is a celebrity is pretty fucking despicable?

Even by us hooker fuckers?

Can we at least find common ground on that?

That's an over-simplified question with several possible answers, mostly due to circumstances.

Does Trump walk around the street grabbing strangers or sneaking up on women? No.

Tell me what the difference is between that, and being in a change room getting hot/heavy with someone you barely know then accusing them years later when there's money to be made.

You sound like a reasonable person so I'll wait for your thoughts on that.

 

[Skoob]

See Frank that's where these guys can tear down your argument.

The $85 million was not for the pussy grabbing.

The $85 million was punitive damages for slandering the adjudicated plaintiff. Again. After the legal system had already found him liable for the sexual assault and slandering her by calling her a liar for falsely accusing him of it.

Frank filters out things like facts when he trips over himself to confirm his bias and face his own hypocrisy.

 

[Skoob]

Says the guy whose big win is a loophole in the way something is defined in the law, and one who does not understand that it is a legal distinction without a difference in what it actually means.

How something is defined in the law is not a "loophole". It's the law.
The "legal distinction" here is civil vs criminal law.
Tell us you don't understand the law without telling us you don't understand the law.

 

[Skoob]

$85 million in fines means its worked well.
Your rapist leader is paying the price for pussy grabbing.

Maybe one day you'll review facts before looking like a fool again.
But then again, looking like a fool is your normal function.

 

[Kautilya]

How something is defined in the law is not a "loophole". It's the law.
The "legal distinction" here is civil vs criminal law.
Tell us you don't understand the law without telling us you don't understand the law.

The legal distinction here is that non-consensual penetration by a penis is defined differently than non-consensual penetration with a finger. In reality, they make no actual difference in what they mean. They are both acts of rape.

 

[Skoob]

Trump, what a nice guy. LMAO

Trump invokes Nazi rhetoric during Mar-a-Lago event

I turned on my Youtube Leftist-Bias-Filter before I played the video, and after the plug-in processed it, all that remained was a black screen and no audio.

 

[Skoob]

The legal distinction here is that non-consensual penetration by a penis is defined differently than non-consensual penetration with a finger. In reality, they make no actual difference in what they mean. They are both acts of rape.

No they're not.
Maybe in your own mind but not according to the law.
Regardless, the underlying context here is that it's all bullshit, made up by a con who knew the burden of proof in civil court requires only 51%.

You are being played. She is bragging about her money.

Looks like she fooled you as well.

 

[Kautilya]

No they're not.
Maybe in your own mind but not according to the law.
Regardless, the underlying context here is that it's all bullshit, made up by a con who knew the burden of proof in civil court requires only 51%.

You are being played. She is bragging about her money.

Looks like she fooled you as well.

Not just in my mind. In anyone else's mind with an ounce of common sense. Are you saying that because the law does not define it is as rape, it is okay to sexually assault unsuspecting women and shove your finger in, non-consensually? You are saying it is okay to rape, if the law does not outlaw it. So you dont just support a rapist, you support the act of rape itself.

 

[SchlongConery]

It's hard to evaluate the impact of your position without knowing whether you've spent much time in sports locker rooms full of testosterone-fueled, single (or single wanna-be) men.

In all my years of playing team sports, I've never seen one guy quit a team because the talk in the dressing room crossed some line that would have to be observed out in public. In fact, most guys know bullshit when they hear it, and listening to someone spout it is just part of the entertainment.


Do you think Trump would have lost his trial with a jury pool drawn from Wyoming? Trump won by 45 points there.

I've not played team sports since school. I have however gone on pussy trips with guys who have expressed similar disrespectful sentiments towards working girls. The other guys don't invite them back. Same with other assholes. on fishing trips. I've been out to bars and clubs and watch these "testosterone fuelled single men" in action. They are referred to as 'creepers' or worse. Trump is a creepy old-man, an entitled creeper that thinks he is entitled to do and say what he wants to anyone and any thing if it suits his impulse or purpose. Shoe cammers, change room camera installers and grab first ask later gropers are well known perverts. It's a wonder that Trump doesn't move to Japan and commute by train!

Let's just agree that you and I probably are drawn to, hang around and tolerate a different strata and morality of men.


As for Wyoming. Unlike you, I don't know. I have sat on a Jury and the defendant was very unlikeable. We had deep deliberations on the facts of the matter and while it was not a nice feeling, we did have to acquit him as the case was not really proven and it was a lot of he said-she said and the corroborating evidence wasn't strong enough for our comfort. Juries take this stuff seriously.

I guess by your logic of localized political morality-based justice, a Taliban court might do the right thing and order E.Jean Taylor's family to kill her for being assaulted, or claiming to be.

 

[SchlongConery]

No they're not.
Maybe in your own mind but not according to the law.
Regardless, the underlying context here is that it's all bullshit, made up by a con who knew the burden of proof in civil court requires only 51%.

You are being played. She is bragging about her money.

Looks like she fooled you as well.

Says YOU!

And you don't know FUCK ALL about it except what you have been convinced of. Lots of lawyers, a Judge and some 24 fellow citizens with more information than you could have possibly know or considered came to a different conclusion.

What makes. you think you know better or differently than them?