Another Credible Rape Claim Against Trump....

[oxmixmudd]

It works just fine. The anger, raw hate, and hostility rolls off from you and is rather easy to spot.

And it just keeps coming ...

Jim

[lilpixieofterror]

Let's hope not anyway. Alright - I'll retract that part of what I posted. Sorry Max, clearly you could not have voted for Donald Trump. And the honest truth is I got caught be the phone mobile app 'edit will delete' thing - I meant to say 'so many idolize', not 'you'. So I can apologize for that as well. Just too much going on and tired enough of being the most hated person on TWEB that I just could not muster a reason to care. That is, even if I'd have taken the effort to copy it, watch it get deleted, and then repost it, it wouldn't have made a hill of beans worth of difference in terms of what the response was to it.


Jim

Nobody hates you, I just don’t like the fact you’ve thrown objectivity out the window and decided to attack your fellow believers with loads of false accusations because they don’t think Trump is the next anti christ.

[oxmixmudd]

Nobody hates you,

good one!

I just don’t like the fact you’ve thrown objectivity out the window and decided to attack your fellow believers with loads of false accusations because they don’t think Trump is the next anti christ.

and it just keeps on coming ...


Jim

[rogue06]

Apparently, pointing out why fewer and fewer are believing rape accusations anymore and pointing out evidence based guilt is how our justice system works is ‘hostile’. Interesting, now where is the evidence a crime took place?

Welcome to the consequences of what happens when the boy continues to cry wolf. When every slightest thing is magnified into a crisis, every statement no matter if obvious hyperbole or approximation gets promoted as a dastardly lie.

Eventually the public stops listening even when a credible claim comes along^[1] just like in the story. What is amusing though is watching how those with TDS act like they cannot fathom why folks stopped paying attention to them.







1. I don't know how credible Ms. Rape-is-Sexy's claim is but understand that even an obvious nutjob can be assaulted.

[Raphael]

Welcome to the consequences of what happens when the boy continues to cry wolf. When every slightest thing is magnified into a crisis, every statement no matter if obvious hyperbole or approximation gets promoted as a dastardly lie.

Eventually the public stops listening even when a credible claim comes along^[1] just like in the story. What is amusing though is watching how those with TDS act like they cannot fathom why folks stopped paying attention to them.







1. I don't know how credible Ms. Rape-is-Sexy's claim is but understand that even an obvious nutjob can be assaulted.

dagnabbit Rogue, you stole my what I was going to say regarding the crying wolf.

I have no problem agreeing that Trump can often be the rear-end of a donkey. He is a braggart with no filter. Yes he's a filanderer (or was).
But the reason why I am not prepared to give accusers with wonkey stories the benefit of the doubt is because there have been too many accusers with wonkey stories that have fallen apart upon examination.

And yes, I do admire him for being a teetotaller, I also admire him for changing his position on abortion when he was confronted with the reality of it (which was prior to his tilt at the Presidency). I also admire him for, unusually for a politician, doing his best to keep his campaign promises (even if I disagree with some of those promises).

[Mountain Man]

and it just keeps on coming ...

Apparently what's not coming is any evidence that Trump did any of the things he's been accused of by women. In fact, every accusation that has been investigated has fallen apart, whether it's key details that have been shown to be false, or named witnesses denying that any assault ever took place. You ask, "Could all these women really be lying?" and the evidence suggests that yes, they could be.

[oxmixmudd]

Welcome to the consequences of what happens when the boy continues to cry wolf. When every slightest thing is magnified into a crisis, every statement no matter if obvious hyperbole or approximation gets promoted as a dastardly lie.

Eventually the public stops listening even when a credible claim comes along^[1] just like in the story. What is amusing though is watching how those with TDS act like they cannot fathom why folks stopped paying attention to them.







1. I don't know how credible Ms. Rape-is-Sexy's claim is but understand that even an obvious nutjob can be assaulted.

I would say that is an interesting analogy in that the same psychological element that 'crying wolf" illustrates can also be used to allow evil to flourish or win. If when warning after warning goes out, people begin to ignore them if nothing is done about it, or if they don't see immediate evidence of the warnings content. So if we warn someone about the risk of venereal disease, and they have sex a few times and don't get it, they stop listening to the warnings.

Or we warn them about the dangers of drug use, but they try it and see no immediate negative consequence and only much later find themselves trapped in its grip.

The danger in these cases is still real and significant, but it is not immediate. The warnings go out. And they must go out But people still choose not to heed them and eventually begin to despise those issuing the warnings ... until they realize they are in fact trapped by what they had come to believe was just a boy crying wolf.

Isn't that the ultimate point of Jesus parables about Hell? People hear the warnings, but they cant see what is being warned against, or further, they really don't want to see it. And they become numb to the message of the preacher, to the gospel.

The issues raised do in fact represent very real, but long term, dangers to this country and it's well being. We all should be aware of that fact. But, if the warnings are ignored, each time they are ignored, each time someone is able to convince us they are not really that bad after all, we become numb to them. And we can no longer benefit from them.

I don't know the solution rogue. Trump is a bad deal. But people on your side don't want to hear it, and they don't want to listen, and yes, you are gradually becoming numb to what he is, gradually tolerating more and more and more that at one time you never would have tolerated in anyone.

Jim

[Adrift]

I would say that is an interesting analogy in that the same psychological element that 'crying wolf" illustrates can also be used to allow evil to flourish or win. If when warning after warning goes out, people begin to ignore them if nothing is done about it, or if they don't see immediate evidence of the warnings content. So if we warn someone about the risk of venereal disease, and they have sex a few times and don't get it, they stop listening to the warnings.

Or we warn them about the dangers of drug use, but they try it and see no immediate negative consequence and only much later find themselves trapped in its grip.

The danger in these cases is still real and significant, but it is not immediate. The warnings go out. And they must go out But people still choose not to heed them and eventually begin to despise those issuing the warnings ... until they realize they are in fact trapped by what they had come to believe was just a boy crying wolf.

Isn't that the ultimate point of Jesus parables about Hell? People hear the warnings, but they cant see what is being warned against, or further, they really don't want to see it. And they become numb to the message of the preacher, to the gospel.

The issues raised do in fact represent very real, but long term, dangers to this country and it's well being. We all should be aware of that fact. But, if the warnings are ignored, each time they are ignored, each time someone is able to convince us they are not really that bad after all, we become numb to them. And we can no longer benefit from them.

I don't know the solution rogue. Trump is a bad deal. But people on your side don't want to hear it, and they don't want to listen, and yes, you are gradually becoming numb to what he is, gradually tolerating more and more and more that at one time you never would have tolerated in anyone.

Jim

I'm firmly in the anti-Trump camp, but I have no problem accepting that individuals may be highly motivated to discredit Trump either because they don't like his politics/administration, or don't like his person, and may do whatever it takes, up to and including making false claims of rape. That doesn't seem far-fetched to me at all, even considering Trump's past, and especially for someone as high profile, and vilified as he is. I think every person who makes such a claim should be listened to, and listened to seriously, but I also think it's a terrible idea to naively accept every claim without evidence, or without an investigation. I'm fine with withholding judgement on this particular case until more evidence is forthcoming, but her unusual statements in this interview, and the fact that she made the claim concurrent with a new book doesn't really help her case in the court of popular opinion.

I have to admit some confusion about how you're hitching this to Jesus' parables on hell. I don't really see the connection.

I agree with you that Trump is a bad deal, but it looks like we'll be stuck with him for some time, especially since there doesn't seem to be any serious contenders for president in 2020. All of the Democratic nominees look pretty bad, and, as far as I can tell, there's only one serious Republican candidate, and it doesn't look like his chances are very good. I've looked through some of the candidates outside of the two main parties, and haven't seen anyone that looks great either (not that the media cares about anyone outside the two party system).

[oxmixmudd]

I'm firmly in the anti-Trump camp, but I have no problem accepting that individuals may be highly motivated to discredit Trump either because they don't like his politics/administration, or don't like his person, and may do whatever it takes, up to and including making false claims of rape. That doesn't seem far-fetched to me at all, even considering Trump's past, and especially for someone as high profile, and vilified as he is. I think every person who makes such a claim should be listened to, and listened to seriously, but I also think it's a terrible idea to naively accept every claim without evidence, or without an investigation. I'm fine with withholding judgement on this particular case until more evidence is forthcoming, but her unusual statements in this interview, and the fact that she made the claim concurrent with a new book doesn't really help her case in the court of popular opinion.

I have to admit some confusion about how you're hitching this to Jesus' parables on hell. I don't really see the connection.

I agree with you that Trump is a bad deal, but it looks like we'll be stuck with him for some time, especially since there doesn't seem to be any serious contenders for president in 2020. All of the Democratic nominees look pretty bad, and, as far as I can tell, there's only one serious Republican candidate, and it doesn't look like his chances are very good. I've looked through some of the candidates outside of the two main parties, and haven't seen anyone that looks great either (not that the media cares about anyone outside the two party system).

The connection to Jesus parables is just that people can't hear what they don't want to hear, that people become numb to warnings if they can't perceive the threat immediately even though the warning are about very real, even horrendous dangers (e.g. Hell) .

Your points are valid about the fact it is possible Trump could be, would be a target. And in this case she is clearly using this event to generate income. But I think in this case - the issue of womanizing - it's more likely an opportunistic attack on Trump than a manufactured one.

This is what I believe. Trump has sown so many wild oats that there are literally dozens if not hundreds of women that could tell similar stories. So anyone that would like to attack trump on this issue doesn't need to make up stories. In fact, why would anyone one risk making up such a story and it being discredited if there are so many potential sources for real accounts?

(there are reasons - these women could be afraid, not willing to take the abuse, so it could be hard to get them to come forward, or in this case, she could be counting on Trumps reputation to make it easier to get away with making up a story)

But on the balance the negatives of telling a story like this are so much worse than any positive, and the fact we know this is who trump is (he admitted it and we've all heard that tape) that I tend to believe them - that this is real.

Further, my expression of belief in her story is not a trial, nor is it a conviction. It is what I believe is the most likely reality, just like before Lance's confession, we all knew it was extremely unlikely the people telling stories about his doping were lying - even though they also stood to benefit handsomely from their book deals exposing him.

Jim

[Mountain Man]

The connection to Jesus parables is just that people can't hear what they don't want to hear...

Jesus also had a lot to say about hypocrisy.

[Adrift]

The connection to Jesus parables is just that people can't hear what they don't want to hear, that people become numb to warnings if they can't perceive the threat immediately even though the warning are about very real, even horrendous dangers (e.g. Hell) .

Hmm. That's sort of just restating what you said above, and I guess the connection to this situation seems vague to me at best. That is, I'm not sure how strong an argument one can make that because Jesus warned about the dangers of hell, and some people will ignore those warnings, we can overlap that with some people claiming that Trump abused/raped them, and some people ignore those warnings about Trump. It's still possible I'm missing something though.

Your points are valid about the fact it is possible Trump could be, would be a target. And in this case she is clearly using this event to generate income. But I think in this case - the issue of womanizing - it's more likely an opportunistic attack on Trump than a manufactured one.

Fair enough. That's possible.

This is what I believe. Trump has sown so many wild oats that there are literally dozens if not hundreds of women that could tell similar stories. So anyone that would like to attack trump on this issue doesn't need to make up stories. In fact, why would anyone one risk making up such a story and it being discredited if there are so many potential sources for real accounts?

Again, while I think all claims need to be taken seriously and investigated, I think this underestimates the measures that people are willing to go through for ulterior motives. People are willing to risk a lot more for a lot less, and Trump is one of the most, perhaps the most hated person in America. If an otherwise coherent and sane appearing TV star is willing to shoddily stage a beating/noosing by homophobic/racist MAGA supporters, it's not at at all out of the realm of plausibility that others may also be making claims that are unjustified. I'm not saying that the claims are unjustified, only that it's not implausible. People are willing to risk quite a bit, it seems, to get their way.

the fact we know this is who trump is (he admitted it and we've all heard that tape) that I tend to believe them - that this is real.

To be clear, as absolutely reprehensible as that the tape is (and I think that alone should have lost him the election), it was not an admission from Trump that he rapes women. I think that the best argument is that it's an admission that he makes sexual advances without consent, but the counter-argument always hinges on his words, "they let you do it," which to many people clears him of non-consensual behavior. While you and I may find that excuse uncompelling, throwing out "he admitted it and we've all heard that tape," may not be as convincing proof of past behavior as you think it is when attempting to convince Trump supporters of bad behavior.

Further, my expression of belief in her story is not a trial, nor is it a conviction. It is what I believe is the most likely reality, just like before Lance's confession, we all knew it was extremely unlikely the people telling stories about his doping were lying - even though they also stood to benefit handsomely from their book deals exposing him.

Again, that's fair. I wasn't really arguing against your personal belief on the subject, only noting the strength of the argument when presented to others who may withhold judgement until more evidence is available.

[Sparko]

Interesting. How then are so many Christians able to be on Trump's side with each and every accusation against him from each and every woman that claims he has assaulted her? Every Single One. Not one of these ladies is telling the truth they say. And yet the evidence exists in spades that this is the sort of person Donald Trump is. It does not pass credulity to me that people who have sworn allegiance to Christ and to moral purity can time and time again attack the woman claiming to have been assaulted and defend Trump without some sort of compromise of their moral character taking place. With Trump's character, it is nearly impossible for all of these women to be liars. There are just too many.

I do appreciate your effort to try to point out what I'm doing to provoke hostility. But the reality is there is nothing I can do that will lesson the hostility. Just watch and see. I'll try to avoid what you are pointing out. But it will make no difference.



Jim

Where were all these women before he ran for President?

[oxmixmudd]

Where were all these women before he ran for President?

Hiding, embarrased. Sometimes people are willing to endure a thing like this in private, especially when coming forward would only bring more harm to them. Trump has lots of money and sues at the drop of a hat. To bring that up in the normal day to day is to be obliterated by the Trump financial empire.

Two things change when he runs for president. Now she has an obligation to let people know who this man is - he is running for the highest office in the land which requires massive public trust. It's no longer just about her and him. Second, she has the possibilty of real support which might be able to shield her from obliteration by the Trump financial empire.

Jim

[Sparko]

Hiding, embarrased. Sometimes people are willing to endure a thing like this in private, especially when coming forward would only bring more harm to them. Trump has lots of money and sues at the drop of a hat. To bring that up in the normal day to day is to be obliterated by the Trump financial empire.

Two things change when he runs for president. Now she has an obligation to let people know who this man is - he is running for the highest office in the land which requires massive public trust. It's no longer just about her and him. Second, she has the possibilty of real support which might be able to shield her from obliteration by the Trump financial empire.

Jim

Trump was an influencial and well-known celebrity long before he ran for President, so any reason they would feel to come forward now to protect the public, they would have had then. Yet none came forward until now. And every one so far has either gone away quietly or has been shown to be unreliable and making false allegations. They did the same with Kavenaugh. It seems to be a standard liberal strategy, try to ruin the reputation of the person they don't want in office by bringing forth accusation after accusation of sexual impropriety or in this case rape.

[JimL]

I love your self righteousness, but we all know your hatred of Trump is what makes you automatically believe. Sorry, but I’m not mocking anyone because it is true that this women has a ‘tell all’ book coming out and quite honestly, I doubt Trump would have to work all that hard to sleep with tons of women. Being a sleeze and a rapist, is two different things. I don’t care for ‘that sounds like something he would do’ arguments. That’s little more than guilty till proven innocent. I want evidence a crime took place. Got some?

Evidence is that, even though she didn't press charges, she told people of the incident at the time it happened. And that, along with with the testimony of all the other women, along with Trumps own words of self incrimination, makes her own testimony very credible in comparison to the credibility of Trumps denials. This isn't about whether he is guilty or not, its about whether you believe him to be guilty or not. Sad that anyone, particularly a woman, would believe the man under these circumstances.