world

New allegations of sexual misconduct rock Trump campaign

138 Comments
By STEVE PEOPLES and JONATHAN LEMIRE

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2016 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

138 Comments
Login to comment

Not defending trump, think he's a hole. But it goes to show a self funded outsider will not be tolerated by the establishment. Look at Bernie as well, he was more popular than the neocon he faced.

-1 ( +14 / -15 )

MichaelBukakisOCT. 15, 2016 - 07:08AM JST Not defending trump, think he's a hole. But it goes to show a self funded outsider will not be tolerated by the establishment.

You can't really conclude that with the evidence at hand, can you. All you can really conclude is self-funded outsiders who brag about sexually assaulting women, who unleash misogynistic language when questioned by women, who spout and encourage racist and Islamophobic rhetoric, who normalize bigotry in their followers and who can't articulate a single coherent policy position based on evidence to save their life, won't be tolerated by the establishment.

Speaking as a Bernie supporter, trying to claim him as an outsider when he's held political office for 35 years is pretty dishonest.

21 ( +27 / -6 )

People who don't commit sexual assault tend not to have allegations made against them. Especially when they don't brag about committing sexual assault. No woman would put herself through this nightmare if it didn't happen. They are brave even though they know what he will do to discredit them.

16 ( +20 / -4 )

a self funded outsider....

Since his bankruptcies have severed his access to finance, Trump simply licenses his names to edifices others have built. The same has happened here: Craziness has been building on the right for years and has pooled into a basement of the GOP. Trump just slapped a neon sign on the subterrain and ran with it - normally a brilliant business move for him as he's pocketed the profits before the fraud is realized, though complicated here by the fact that his fraud is being caught real-time.

It's not his fault: spots cannot be changed. It's the fault of the GOP to enable erection of such a derelict, unattended construction that such a charlatan would be allowed to erect a sign there.

12 ( +13 / -1 )

But it goes to show a self funded outsider will not be tolerated by the establishment.

That is for sure. I haven't even been keeping up with the story but am only aware of at least the two women now making accusations who were highly complementary of Trump in the past, which I suppose s more than I know of the dozens of accusers that have come forward over the years against President Clinton.

-18 ( +3 / -21 )

The both tell lies, but at least he didn't kill anyone.

-21 ( +4 / -25 )

Donald Trump is the 21st century Willie Loman: Death of a Huckster

I can't see how the ending to this is going to be pretty.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

The both tell lies, but at least he didn't kill anyone.

Give him a chance.

16 ( +19 / -3 )

Funny how these allegations come out just as more Wikileaks' Podesta Files are released. Coincidence? Nah!

0 ( +5 / -5 )

A former contestant from NBC’s “The Apprentice,” said Friday that the former reality television star became sexually aggressive at a Beverly Hills hotel in 2007. Summer Zervos, appearing at a Friday news conference with attorney Gloria Allred, said Trump kissed her open-mouthed and touched her breasts in a private room.

From Summer Zervos - 2013

"Getting on the show is a full-time job, and so when you're picked, you think, 'Gosh, it was hard to get there, what's next?'" Zervos says.

"It's extremely intense," Zervos says of the experience. "Hard work. I learned a lot about myself and how you respond when the pressure's on. I left admiring Donald Trump a lot more than when I arrived."

Well that's kind of odd. I wouldn't put blackmail past the MSM lying Clinton machine.

-22 ( +1 / -23 )

@Lizz , you are probably right. (Actually I have no doubt you are, it reeks of political opportunism).

Thing is DT deriding the woman as 'not attractive enough' is probably not the best defence. He's not talking to his best mate nor political buddies here but the american nation as a whole.

Pretty sure even pro DT female supporters who do not for 1 sec believe these last minute allegations do not particularly enjoy the 'she would not be my first choice' remarks as they are those 'average' women DT mocks here. Again it's (some) blokes talk and am no stranger to that but you just can't use the same rhetoric as a presidential canidate talking to millions.

Although it was expected it's still sad to see character assassination kicked up a notch this week, on both sides. No job or title justifies going through this soul destroying process, and the price they and their family pay is enormous. In a way I admire both candidates for their mental toughness but at the same time I pity them and their relatives.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

No woman would put herself through this nightmare [of claiming to be a victim of unwanted sexual harassment/assault/battery, or rape] if it didn't happen.

Sadly, this is not the case. An allegation is just that: an allegation. The specificity of an allegation alone does not make it any more or less true. The number of allegations make none of them any more true. People lie. A lot. About everything. Particularly this.

No one here is more a partisan Democrat than I. No one here more than I thinks Trump has earned this crap storm of sexual misconduct allegations -- Trump's cynical opportunistic total disregard for the truth, his blatant self-serving lies, his obvious sexism and strongly apparent misogyny. His plain perversity towards females.

And no one here is willing to do just about whatever it takes to not only take down this dangerous clown, but the evil white male Christian supremacist tide he's riding.

But that don't change a thing. Allegations are just allegations.

So, while I am for political reasons more than happy to see Trump being hoisted on his own petard, I willl not suspend my skepticism. And nor will I go on record at this point and conclude that he is guilty at this point of doing anything other than being a complete pig.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

Girl's talk. Let friends of the omen corroborate their stories, that is, in saying that the women told them about it at the time this moves were made. Then again, a grab for power...

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

Not defending trump, think he's a hole. But it goes to show a self funded outsider will not be tolerated by the establishment.

I have to disagree. I think the time is ripe for an outsider to take the presidency. It's very apparent the people are ready for change.

The problem isn't that he is a self-funded outsider, it's that he's an entirely inappropriate candidate for the presidency.

17 ( +18 / -1 )

Amazing, none of this came up a year ago during the primaries and NOW all of a sudden they are just coming out of the woodworks just like that??

Funny how these allegations come out just as more Wikileaks' Podesta Files are released. Coincidence? Nah!

Democrats are just the dirtiest bunch, unbelievable.

-29 ( +2 / -31 )

Right. Compare the "R"s w/the "D"s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_political_scandals_in_the_United_States

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Amazing, none of this came up a year ago during the primaries and NOW all of a sudden they are just coming out of the woodworks just like that??

Before the video came out, who would have believed the women? Now that there is a video of him admitting to be a predator, it's much easier for the women to come for and tell their stories.

Personally, I'm not sold either way. I think it's more likely he at least went overboard with these women, but there is definitely motivation for false claims as well, so that possibility cannot be discounted. But trying to discount the claims as politically motivated without a doubt is blind support for flawed candidate, as his own comments give the claims plausibility.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

Right. Compare the "R"s w/the "D"s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ListoffederalpoliticalscandalsintheUnitedStates

Fixed your link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_political_scandals_in_the_United_States

9 ( +9 / -0 )

while Clinton was Secretary of State, she approved $165 billion to 20 countries. That is double what the State Department approved under George W. Bush’s entire second term. Clinton also approved another $151 billion of weapons sales in another 16 Pentagon-brokered arms deals. So as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton sold more than $300 billion dollars worth of weapons to other countrie - many of them, authoritarian regimes denounced by the State Department for crimes against human rights.

Really, how can there be any comparison between a known war monger. Lefties are living on MSM fantasy Island.

-14 ( +0 / -14 )

Hmmm so now we are to discuss whether or not the P-grabbing candidate engaged in any additional sexual misconduct? I think it is already abundantly clear that you should not send your babies to be held by the president nor should you allow your daughters to be around him. I would also look for a family filter for your TV in case the slimeball wins and wants to give a presidential address.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

FizzBitOCT. 15, 2016 - 08:26AM JST

"It's extremely intense," Zervos says of the experience. "Hard work. I learned a lot about myself and how you respond when the pressure's on. I left admiring Donald Trump a lot more than when I arrived."

Well that's kind of odd.

Not really when you consider how thoroughly Donald Trump's lawyers could have destroyed any of these people through the courts if they'd dared to tell the truth.

I wouldn't put blackmail past the MSM lying Clinton machine.

Other than paranoia, got anything to back that up? You see, I imagine that if they really were going to use blackmail they would more likely have had a quiet chat with some of Trump's campaign people and suggested that he keep quiet about Bill Clinton and Wikileaks in exchange for all this stuff not coming up.

FizzBitOCT. 15, 2016 - 09:35AM JST

Really, how can there be any comparison between a known war monger. Lefties are living on MSM fantasy Island.

True, Trump has not had the opportunity to get up to any stuff like that. God help America if he ever does. Anyone who looks back on Trump's career and thinks he's got what it takes to run a country is living on a fantasy land even further away from reality than the one "lefties" are living on. It's probably got Ann Coulter books everywhere, nothing on the radio except Rush Limbaugh and underground concrete bunkers full of guns just in case the NWO ever turn up in their black helicopters to try to rob true blue patriots of their bibles and Second Amendment rights.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Get ready for the sleazy a Trump supporters to trade in whatever morals they might have left to blame the women. Just yesterday Serrano and others said it was their fault and accuse do them of lying and being paid, with "proof" being they are only coming forward now, while at the same time Trump vows revenge (and they wonder why the women haven't come forward).

Republicans have no morals, aside from those who know enough's enough and have left Trump already.

9 ( +12 / -3 )

@Simon Foston

Nothing but conjecture. Like I said, fantasy Island.

-13 ( +1 / -14 )

Get ready for the sleazy

Come again? Don't even come at that garbage when 80% of the media is actively pushing against Trump and actively taking a role to usurp and influence the election with a constant pile on. What the MSM is beyond sleazy.

a Trump supporters to trade in whatever morals they might have left to blame the women. Just yesterday Serrano and others said it was their fault and accuse do them of lying and being paid, with "proof" being they are only coming forward now, while at the same time Trump vows revenge (and they wonder why the women haven't come forward).

I don't think people are blaming the women, Trump may have done that, could be, but the anger comes from the unique timing of all of this. If these women HAD a legitimate beef with Trump at the time, they could have taken legal action when it occurred, Trump is not above the law or immune from it, but now this and all these allegations are cascading all at once and these women want to press charges after all these years?? Yeah, we know what this is all about.

Republicans have no morals, aside from those who know enough's enough and have left Trump already.

You're right and the Dems not only are devoid of any morals, but ethics, empathy and decency.

-15 ( +0 / -15 )

I'm not buying the "coincidental" timing. This has been planned and orchestrated. It's not rocket science.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

Really, how can there be any comparison between a known war monger.

A known war monger vs. a known spaz with a huge ego.

Unfortunately, war is possible with both of them. But if one of them starts a war, it will be calculated, and likely not done without the support of the people. If the other one starts a war, it will be because someone criticizes his hair.

I'm not buying the "coincidental" timing. This has been planned and orchestrated.

The release of the video probably is. What's your point? If the video wasn't damning, it wouldn't be a distraction. It's because the video is so damning that it's a distraction.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

After Bill Clinton, I imagine they sent for the White House carpet cleaners, but after Trump, we`ll have to steam clean the entire White House.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Oh, I don't at all believe that the release of that decade old video was coincidental.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

This is the thing. It's hindsight. But now that we're here, does anyone really think that Hillary was NOT going to engineer a stage-managed 'bimbo eruption' too close before Election Day for the Republicans to switch candidates? Kicking it back to the 'vast right-wing conspiracy'?

It's the most obvious thing for her to do!

Megan Kelly question re Hillary's practice of carefully scripting interviews (“Are we watching something real, or are we watching theater?”) could equally apply to the major media outlets finding multiple accusers all within a few hours/days of each other (compared to only one or so in the last 30 years before this week, three weeks before Election Day).

http://www.westernjournalism.com/thepoint/2016/10/07/watch-megyn-kelly-nails-hillary-supporter-1-key-question-america-needs-hear/

Watch: Megyn Kelly Nails Hillary Supporter With 1 Key Question America Needs To Hear

... The segment ... included Clinton’s history of planting questions during her Senate campaign in 1999 as well as the revelation that “The Steve Harvey Show” had actually scripted its entire interview with Clinton before a show in February. ... Kelly cut right to the chase. “Are we watching something real, or are we watching theater?” she asked Clinton supporter and former MSNBC host Krystal Ball. “And if we’re watching theater, then we should know that … With all due respect to Steve Harvey, who I like, it should have been disclosed that she’d been given the questions in advance, and helped craft them.”

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

FizzBitOCT. 15, 2016 - 10:02AM JST

@Simon Foston Nothing but conjecture. Like I said, fantasy Island.

What, and your stuff about the MSM and Clinton blackmailing people isn't conjecture?

6 ( +6 / -0 )

This story now has a Bill Cosby-like aura about it.

Not good for Trump.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Turbotsat, correct.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

"Summer Zervos, appearing at a Friday news conference with attorney Gloria Allred, said Trump kissed her open-mouthed and touched her breasts in a private room." ... ... HRC's own words: "I want to send a message to every survivor of sexual assault: Don't let anyone silence your voice. You have the right to be heard. You have the right to be believed, and we're with you." The last sentence was edited out after a "viral tweet" from Juanita Broaddrick.(The Hill, August 15, 2016 - 09:57 AM EDT Text 'you have right to be believed' edited out of Clinton website) ... ... I agree with the first two sentences. One has the right to be heard and there are legal mechanisms to bring allegations forward. However, one does not have the right to be believed. In a criminal case a jury decides whether the state has made its case against a defendant. The jury may believe the evidence, but believing the accuser is subjective. Perhaps this is the reason for the last sentence being edited out - it became most inconvenient after Ms. Broaddrick's tweet. In action though it looks like the electorate is still supposed to believe allegations like Ms. Zervos' yet disbelieve Ms. Broaddrick's. ... ... I'm sure HRC's staff has been operating in hyperdrive to encourage as many "victims" (these are allegations, not fact) as possible to come forward. But I don't fret about the authenticity of the "victims" as the Democratic campaign will tell me which are to be believed.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

For crying out loud people, BOTH parties ALWAYS research & try to find DIRT etc first on each others colleagues in primaries, then their opponent in the election, PERIOD!

And YES they BOTH use strategy when releasing info........ hardly surprising.

The GOP has by far been the worst at this the last 20yrs or so, the Dems have more recently decided to do the same!

Both parties & candidates look bad, HOWEVER with a klutz like trump, sorry the GOP is getting what it deserves BIGTIME & trump is showing the very real nasty underbelly of the GOP that's always been there, but now on full disgusting display!

6 ( +7 / -1 )

What, and your stuff about the MSM and Clinton blackmailing people isn't conjecture?

Oh, yeah? How much equal time is the MSM devoting in covering the Wikileaks files that have been pouring out like crazy? You cannot be a legitimate news outlet if you don't cover EVERY breaking news that comes out from either side of the aisle. You do that and then you let the people decide what they feel is pertinent and valid. That's not happening.

-17 ( +0 / -17 )

The media? Tune into CNN sometime and watch the "interviewers" shout down the interviewees as they simply attempt to answer the questions that have been asked. It's truly farcical.

-14 ( +0 / -14 )

Guy who claims to be "the guy in the seat across the aisle" from Jane Leeds and Trump on the airplane flight 30 years ago speaks up:

http://nypost.com/2016/10/14/trump-camp-puts-forward-witness-to-refute-sex-assault-claim/

Trump camp puts forward witness to refute sex assault claim - October 14, 2016 - 5:16pm

... The man says he was sitting across from the accuser and contacted the Trump campaign because he was incensed by her account — which is at odds with what he witnessed. “I have only met this accuser once and frankly cannot imagine why she is seeking to make out that Trump made sexual advances on her. Not only did he not do so (and I was present at all times) but it was she that was the one being flirtatious,” Anthony Gilberthorpe said ... Gilberthorpe, 54, said he was sitting across the first class aisle from the couple and saw nothing inappropriate. Leeds was wearing a white pantsuit, he said, while Trump was wearing a suit and cuff-links, which he gave to his British flight companion. ... Indeed, Gilberthorpe claimed, Leeds was “trying too hard” in her attempt to win Trump over. ... “She wanted to marry him,” Gilberthorpe said of Leeds, who apparently made the confession when Trump excused himself and went to the bathroom. ... There was no kissing, but the “shrill” Leeds was “very much in your face” with the real estate developer. ... “What she said about Trump is wrong,” he told The Post. ... Leeds alleged this week in interviews with The New York Times and CNN that Trump groped her, touching her “wherever he could find a landing spot.” ... “The guy in the seat across the aisle could see. And I kept thinking, maybe the stewardess is going to come and he’ll stop, but she never came,” Leeds told CNN. ... That allegation infuriated Gilberthorpe, a retiree living in northwest England, who said, “That I sat there — eyes bulging — and not intervening is nonsense.”

-12 ( +0 / -12 )

It is pretty darn amazing that the video that sped up the Trump implosion costarred Billy Bush, the cousin of John Ellis Bush and Dubya, and nephew to former CIA director and alleged Clinton supporter George H. W. Bush. It all reads like a great novel.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Turbotsat, thanks for the info. Yes, this is how it's done. The muck will stick at this point whether it's true or not.

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

Lies lies and she can take a polygraph test on tv if she likes.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Oh, I don't at all believe that the release of that decade old video was coincidental.

Ok. And? Does that somehow change the content of the video?

You cannot be a legitimate news outlet if you don't cover EVERY breaking news that comes out from either side of the aisle.

And by that definition, you've just pointed out how Fox "News" isn't a legitimate news outlet.

You do that and then you let the people decide what they feel is pertinent and valid. That's not happening.

You're right, Fox News hasn't been doing this since they started, and in particular for the past eight years. They have been pushing an agenda of hatred and discrimination, rather than reporting unbiased news. That has not only prevented the people from deciding what they feel is pertinent and valid based on actual information, it has lead directly to the disaster that is Trump, who perfectly exemplifies the hatred and discrimination that Fox has pushed for so long. He is a direct result of both the Fox "News" agenda, and the Republican party's alt-right values.

Guy who claims to be "the guy in the seat across the aisle" from Jane Leeds and Trump on the airplane flight 30 years ago speaks up:

This guy's comments are just as questionable as the accusations. It's plausible that he is speaking the truth, but it's just as plausible that he is lying in order to protect his candidate.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Wonder if this fool will try again in four more years (and whether or not thr GOP will allow him) or will he just have one of his psycho sons run instead. Glad the GOP has been blown up, about time!

7 ( +7 / -0 )

This is the thing. It's hindsight. But now that we're here, does anyone really think that Hillary was NOT going to engineer a stage-managed 'bimbo eruption' too close before Election Day for the Republicans to switch candidates?

I would expect it. Trump was born rich, has been rich all his life, and is known to be a womanizer. Any political strategist would have dug up whatever information they could on this sometime last year after he announced his candidacy, and held it in reserve until it mattered - which is now.

You somehow seem to think that Trump and every other candidate in the race wouldn't have tried to find equivalent skeletons in Hillary's closet. If you really believe that, you're kidding yourself.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

I don't see what all the fuss is about, trump is rich,rich people are not held to they same standards as the rest of us peasants. So what if he sexually harassed some women right????

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Funny how these allegations come out just as more Wikileaks' Podesta Files are released. Coincidence? Nah! of course anybody with any dirt on the other would release the details when the timing is right, release it too early and itll be forgotten come electing day. Main difference is Trumps dirt bucket on Clinton is empty, yet Clinton dirt buckets on Trump are all lined up in a row up the street and around the block. If your past is clean then you have nothing to worry about, but with Trumps hes got more financial and moral corruption to sink the Titanic.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

“It’s astonishing to see the enormous coverage of these, of these really unfounded allegations, unestablished allegations,

Trump has spent the entire campaign making unfounded, unestablished allegations against all and sundry. He has no grounds to complain if others do the same.

But Trump has admitted to feeling up and assaulting women: it's on tape. Why is he surprised when people then come forward to verify what he said? If he never went around groping and fondling women, why did he say he did those things? Either way he's a liar.

Even some of the less rabid Fox News presenters are now grudgingly conceding that Trump will lose and, hilariously, Trump supporters are accusing Fox News of anti-Trump bias. Trump is going down in flames and is taking the republican party with him.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

hilariously, Trump supporters are accusing Fox News of anti-Trump bias. Trump is going down in flames and is taking the republican party with him.

If we're lucky, he'll take Fox "News" down with him as well.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Strangerland: You somehow seem to think that Trump and every other candidate in the race wouldn't have tried to find equivalent skeletons in Hillary's closet. If you really believe that, you're kidding yourself.

Except that we know that Hillary, her campaign, and her media are truth-challenged, and wouldn't stop at lying or faking. If they didn't find anything they'd make it.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Except that we know that Hillary, her campaign, and her media are truth-challenged, and wouldn't stop at lying or faking. If they didn't find anything they'd make it.

Pure speculation, which is doubly ironic considering that Donald is the most "truth-challenged" candidate ever, and the right has made up stuff about Hillary non-stop, ie Benghazi, selling uranium to the Russians laughing about getting a rapist out of punishment and so many other debunked lies.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

"You somehow seem to think that Trump and every other candidate in the race wouldn't have tried to find equivalent skeletons in Hillary's closet. If you really believe that, you're kidding yourself."

I remember Fox News going into meltdown after Obama sent Romney packing in the last election. The reaction? Part of the reason Romney lost was because those big, nasty Dems fight dirty.

The same thing will be trotted out by the Trumpers if Clinton wins. Trump's incompetence, appeals to racism and bigotry, disgusting comments about women and lack of knowledge of key issues will fade into the memory. He lost because the nasty Dems crushed him.

No lessons learned and because of this, 2020 could see something even more preposterous than Trump. Let your imaginations run wild.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

And by that definition, you've just pointed out how Fox "News" isn't a legitimate news outlet.

by playing and showing all the leaked Wikileaks. Yeah, to liberals that uncovering the truth, that would seem a bit legitimate, I guess.

You're right, Fox News hasn't been doing this since they started, and in particular for the past eight years. They have been pushing an agenda of hatred and discrimination, rather than reporting unbiased news.

I never said that, but it wouldn't be the first time you distorted my words

You mean by pointing out that people like the Rev. Al Sharpton are hypocrites when it comes to Blacks being allegedly killed by Whites and claiming there is a war against Blacks or when an illegal murdered Kate Stein, the rest of the MSM didn't cover it because she's white, Sharpton who claims he's for victims rights won't even touch a case or get involved unless it's someone Black or if he can make money off of it and by the way never pays taxes on it. Yeah, exposing that is so bias and unfair.

That has not only prevented the people from deciding what they feel is pertinent and valid based on actual information, it has lead directly to the disaster that is Trump, who perfectly exemplifies the hatred and discrimination that Fox has pushed for so long. He is a direct result of both the Fox "News" agenda, and the Republican party's alt-right values.

And still their ratings are soaring, in fact, they are crushing the completion. So what else bogus statement you want to make about the ONLY network that doesn't tow the Hillary line and Thank God for that. Kudos to them.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Pure speculation, which is doubly ironic considering that Donald is the most "truth-challenged" candidate ever, and the right has made up stuff about Hillary non-stop, ie Benghazi, selling uranium to the Russians laughing about getting a rapist out of punishment and so many other debunked lies.

I debunked (smithinjapan, I believe)'s claim of debunking Benghazi, debunked your (and sioux chief's, I believe) claim of debunking the story of Hillary laughing about getting a rapist out of punishment, and what do you mean, 'selling uranium to the Russians'? Did someone accuse her of selling uranium to the Russians? I thought her uranium problem was not exactly that.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

bass4funkOCT. 15, 2016 - 10:58AM JST

"What, and your stuff about the MSM and Clinton blackmailing people isn't conjecture?"

Oh, yeah? How much equal time is the MSM devoting in covering the Wikileaks files that have been pouring out like crazy?

That's totally unrelated to the notion that these women are being blackmailed into speaking out against Trump. I know it must be hard to stop misinterpreting everything so that you can turn every discussion towards things you want to talk about, but do try.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

And by that definition, you've just pointed out how Fox "News" isn't a legitimate news outlet.

by playing and showing all the leaked Wikileaks.

You and I both know that's not what I was referring to. Nice deflection attempt though.

You're right, Fox News hasn't been doing this since they started, and in particular for the past eight years. They have been pushing an agenda of hatred and discrimination, rather than reporting unbiased news.

I never said that, but it wouldn't be the first time you distorted my words

Read the first half of this post, then read this quote, and tell me what you see. Hint, it begins with 'hyp' and ends with 'ocrisy'.

You mean by pointing out that people like the Rev. Al Sharpton are hypocrites when it comes to Blacks being allegedly killed by Whites

No, that's not what I meant. They've been promoting hatred and discrimination through things like questioning Obama's birth certificate, preaching hatred against transgenders, etc etc.

And still their ratings are soaring, in fact, they are crushing the completion.

And?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

bass4funk: "Come again? Don't even come at that garbage when 80% of the media is actively pushing against Trump "

What's hilarious is that you take whatever FAUX 'news' says as Gospel, despite the fact that they spend the majority of their time making things up and ignoring the facts, but when actual facts are reported, like an actual tape of trump saying he can grab women "by the p---y if he wants to", you claim it is sleazy and dishonest, etc. You should be angry at Trump for saying and doing what he did, not angry at the media for putting it out for people to see. Hell, even Kelley at FOX is saying the women accusing Trump cannot be ignored or fobbed off, and Trump would not allow even his own campaign managers to look at his history to prepare for anything like the women coming forward. That's HIS problem, not the media's, friend. So, yes, Trump is an outright sleaze bag -- for both what he says and does -- and the people who blame the women for coming forward, and the media for reporting it instead of ignoring it and covering it up, are an even worse kind of scum.

Are you guys angry about the Wikileaks? Why not? I mean, obviously because it paints HIlary in a negative light, but my guess is you somehow think in that case it's good, but reporting on what Trump did is 'wrong'. It's okay to bring Clinton accusers onto Hannity, to the debate, and the general spotlight, for what happened to them some 20 or 30 years ago, but when Trump accusers come forward it is a "media smear" and "the women are paid actors", and "we can't focus on something that happened so long ago", etc.

So, yeah, not just sleazy, but downright hypocritical are the aforementioned people.

"And still their ratings are soaring,"

Ah, but in the case of FOX you probably think it's not smear, not sleaze, and all fact, etc., right? And who cares if their ratings are soaring -- that only proves that birds of a feather (sleaze buckets who defend a man who says sexual assault is okay and brags about i!) flock together. They also defended Ailes, and STILL defend O'Reilly -- who is known for assault, both domestic and at work. No wonder Trump fans all gather their; it's like a support group for people who think assault is okay.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

All of this bias reporting is getting to the point of irresponsible. All of these women, just happen to voice their misfortunes, 3 weeks before the election? G the F outta here!

You have Jill Stein from the Green Party who even said a Clinton president = war!!

A NO FLY ZONE = WW3!

To allow Clinton to become president is a clear signal that you support tyranny. She is the establishments sock puppet. Do you think the media is controlled? Do you think DC is out of control? Are you sick of perpetual war (Think 15 years Afganistan!)? IF NOT, VOTE FOR CLINTON!!

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

All of these women, just happen to voice their misfortunes, 3 weeks before the election?

There are two possibilities, both equally plausible:

1) These are lying women came forward purely out of political motivation

Plausible because: the timing would be rough on the Trump campaign, as seen by the fact that his poll numbers are hurting bad.

2) These women are telling the truth:

Plausible because: Trump is extremely powerful, and coming out against a guy with a proven record of launching lawsuits against anyone who dares cross him would be extremely intimidating, but now that a tape has come forward showing that he has an 'assaulty' side, their claims are more likely to be believed.

Without video, none of us can know which of the two possibilities is true. If I had to decide on one, I'd go with the second, as it's highly doubtful that a guy who brags about being able to grab girls by the crotch wouldn't have actually done it at some point. But, as there is no proof, I can't discount the first possibility.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Simon

"What, and your stuff about the MSM and Clinton blackmailing people isn't conjecture?"

Simon, what I said was "I wouldn't put blackmail past the MSM lying Clinton machine." It was never meant to be taken as fact, only conjecture. I couldn't help see how you spun it to fit your fantasy Island arguments.

Now, how about we drop the conjecture stuff and lets see if you want to address my main point?

while Clinton was Secretary of State, she approved $165 billion to 20 countries. That is double what the State Department approved under George W. Bush’s entire second term. Clinton also approved another $151 billion of weapons sales in another 16 Pentagon-brokered arms deals. So as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton sold more than $300 billion dollars worth of weapons to other countrie - many of them, authoritarian regimes denounced by the State Department for crimes against human rights.

I'll be waiting at the docks.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Any one who falls for the Clinton smear rubbish honestly deserves to earn less $50,000 and have 20 year + mortgage.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

To allow Clinton to become president is a clear signal that you support tyranny. She is the establishments sock puppet. Do you think the media is controlled? Do you think DC is out of control? Are you sick of perpetual war (Think 15 years Afganistan!)? IF NOT, VOTE FOR CLINTON!!

Yeah, and like vote for a guy that would nuke Iran because some sailors flipped off the US navy. And SINCE WHEN did ypu right-wingers suddenly be ome peaceniks? I remember during George Bush people being harassed and arrested or detained at airports for wearing t-shirts with Peace on them, and you people were hooping and hooting on the insanity. And NOW you want me to honestly believe that you are all so peace-loving???? That is a HOOT!

4 ( +5 / -1 )

FizzBitOCT. 15, 2016 - 01:07PM JST

Simon, what I said was "I wouldn't put blackmail past the MSM lying Clinton machine." It was never meant to be taken as fact, only conjecture.

But you get all sniffy and self-righteous whenever anyone else does the same thing, e.g. what I said about Trump's lawyers scaring people into silence.

I couldn't help see how you spun it to fit your fantasy Island arguments.

No, that was a response to what you said about lefties living on fantasy islands if they think Clinton would make a good president. No connection at all. I would suggest that if you don't like demeaning insinuations being made about your opinions, refrain from making any about anyone else's.

Now, how about we drop the conjecture stuff and lets see if you want to address my main point?

No, I don't. It's totally unrelated to the topic of the article, namely the allegations made against Donald Trump.

bass4funkOCT. 15, 2016 - 12:15PM JST

And still [Fox's] ratings are soaring, in fact, they are crushing the completion. So what else bogus statement you want to make about the ONLY network that doesn't tow the Hillary line and Thank God for that. Kudos to them.

I bet you'd rather they didn't conduct polls that show Clinton leading by 7 points, though, or post videos like this:

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5170871987001/ben-stein-on-trump-its-pretty-much-a-lost-cause/?#sp=show-clips

Or articles like this:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/14/some-big-republican-donors-want-rnc-to-cut-ties-with-trump.html

Kudos to them indeed.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Bass: You cannot be a legitimate news outlet if you don't cover EVERY breaking news that comes out from either side of the aisle. You do that and then you let the people decide what they feel is pertinent and valid. That's not happening.

So give us a list is sites you frequent that present the good and bad of each candidate equally.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Simon

But you get all sniffy and self-righteous whenever anyone else does the same thing, e.g. what I said about Trump's lawyers scaring people into silence.

I think you might want to check your pulse and relax. You're getting so worked up you're confusing yourself who you're talking to. I never brought up that subject.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

FizzBitOCT. 15, 2016 - 10:02AM JST

"Nothing but conjecture. Like I said, fantasy island."

So that was your conjecture, then? You didn't exactly make that clear.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Smoke and mirrors, folks, to disctract the simple low-information people from seeing the truth being revealed by Wikileaks about the multiple levels of collusion between the Clintons, high-value donors(including many foreign regimes) and innumerable corrupt politicians to install Shillary.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

It's kind of funny watching the alt-right, who is used to only seeing their theories getting validated by Fox "News", getting more and more frustrated that even though they keep trying to push the agenda in another direction, the rest of the world isn't getting sucked into their BS anymore.

Face it guys. You backed a loser. You should have realized he'd have some huge skeletons in his closet from the start, and that they would be big enough that he wouldn't be able to garner the votes needed to win. You only have yourselves to blame.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

JeffreyDomer: "All of this bias reporting is getting to the point of irresponsible. All of these women, just happen to voice their misfortunes, 3 weeks before the election? G the F outta here!"

Wow... you guys are starting to make the Indian government's stance on and punishment for rape look pretty rosy. With Donald now threatening to sue these women, of COURSE they did not come out previously when the case was low-profile and would have guaranteed him more force over them.

And as for wall, please tell us how Trump will prevent it -- because he's more bombastic than anyone. Russia wants him to win for the same reason Dems don't want Trump to quit -- guaranteed victory of the Dems (or Russia over the US on all issues), and the US would crumble within. Just look at what Trump has left in the GOP in his wake.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

That's totally unrelated to the notion that these women are being blackmailed into speaking out against Trump. I know it must be hard to stop misinterpreting everything so that you can turn every discussion towards things you want to talk about, but do try.

Oh, don't worry, I do and I'll say it again, these women knew who Trump was, why all of a sudden they bring out these allegations now? Why not 30 years ago or 11 years ago by another accuser and oh, by the way, both of them WERE Obama supporters and Hillary supporters and both contributed to their campaigns. I dunno..... it just all seems so conveniently perfect timing for the last debate.

What's hilarious is that you take whatever FAUX 'news' says as Gospel,

That coming from the liberal squad that takes every news that comes out the of Clinton news network as fact and has these stories and knew about them for a very long time and just all of a sudden, they have to break this news? No one with a functioning cerebral cortex would ever believe that. But liberals seem to gobble it up.

despite the fact that they spend the majority of their time making things up and ignoring the facts, but when actual facts are reported, like an actual tape of trump saying he can grab women "by the p---y if he wants to", you claim it is sleazy and dishonest, etc.

Like what, tell me, so I can debunk them and yes, they did play the tape of what Trump said, however, they didn't do an overkill on it. You know, there are a lot of things going on in this world and a lot of news that has to and should be covered, but that's NOT what the MSM want, they want to solely focus on Trump only and that is journalistically irresponsible.

You should be angry at Trump for saying and doing what he did, not angry at the media for putting it out for people to see.

I'm angry at the media for not being fair and ignoring the Wikileaks that are coming out with a lot of damning material that contradicts everything and all of her defenders have been trying to get the public to believe. I'm angry that the MSM is one-sided and I am really angry at the role the media is playing and that is not to be objective, but to destroy Trump and that is not their job to do so.

Hell, even Kelley at FOX is saying the women accusing Trump cannot be ignored or fobbed off, and Trump would not allow even his own campaign managers to look at his history to prepare for anything like the women coming forward. That's HIS problem, not the media's, friend. So, yes, Trump is an outright sleaze bag -- for both what he says and does -- and the people who blame the women for coming forward, and the media for reporting it instead of ignoring it and covering it up, are an even worse kind of scum.

This is and never has been about FOX, they never ignored it, they spent about 15 min. talking about it and devoted the same time to Hillary's Wikileaks files. NBC, (my former network) didn't even mention it at all. So I blame the liberal networks and I blame the women for coming out now. If these women had a legitimate beef with Trump, why didn't they take action at the time of the incident? Again, we can all see the con artistry at play here.

Are you guys angry about the Wikileaks? Why not? I mean, obviously because it paints HIlary in a negative light, but my guess is you somehow think in that case it's good, but reporting on what Trump did is 'wrong'. It's okay to bring Clinton accusers onto Hannity, to the debate, and the general spotlight, for what happened to them some 20 or 30 years ago, but when Trump accusers come forward it is a "media smear" and "the women are paid actors", and "we can't focus on something that happened so long ago", etc.

Well, it is a media smear, No doubt about that! Explain to me why these women didn't come out last year when Trump declared his run for the White House, they could have come out and said something, but they didn't and now we are seeing these women emerge, cry, looking all shocked and traumatized as if this happened to them yesterday? Also, if you have 9 networks showing all the women allegedly complaining about Trump and saying the most negative things about him, what's wrong when one or two show women that have something positive to say? Maybe for Europeans that's a hard and difficult thing to understand, but in the States, we are given the presumption of innocence and taught there are 2 sides to every story.

So, yeah, not just sleazy, but downright hypocritical are the aforementioned people.

So then the MSM should stop doing it and do their jobs, stay out of the election and allow the people process the info about the candidates and let them decide for themselves.

Ah, but in the case of FOX you probably think it's not smear, not sleaze, and all fact, etc., right? And who cares if their ratings are soaring -- that only proves that birds of a feather (sleaze buckets who defend a man who says sexual assault is okay and brags about i!) flock together.

Well, we could same the same about the networks defending Hillary, glossing over her Wikileaks reports and her cheating husband. Right back at you. Please, stop calling the kettle Black.

They also defended Ailes, and STILL defend O'Reilly -- who is known for assault, both domestic and at work. No wonder Trump fans all gather their; it's like a support group for people who think assault is okay.

How do you know this about O'Reilly? Were you there? I wasn't nor were you? You think I would just take a woman's word for it because she is a woman? Newsflash, women are capable of lying. I'm not saying they are, but this is ridiculous, some woman makes the accusation that Trump did a feel up and now everyone is taking this as fact and NOT questioning the validity of these women. But when we talk about Bill and his transgressions, that's just wrong and that's the past. LOL Yeah, I love liberals, they can always make me LMAO.

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

So give us a list of the sites you frequent that present the good and bad of each candidate equally.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

This is really quite comical when you think about it.

Trump: "I grope women, and can get away with it"

Women: "Trump groped me"

Trump: "You can't believe these women"

In other words trump is saying "believe me when I say I grope women, but believe me when I say I didn't grope women".

What a joke.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

bass4funk: "That coming from the liberal squad that takes every news that comes out the of Clinton news network as fact and has these stories and knew about them for a very long time and just all of a sudden, they have to break this news? No one with a functioning cerebral cortex would ever believe that. But liberals seem to gobble it up."

You've been called on this EVERY DAY for years and, as Yabits mentioned only yesterday, if you bothered to get your news from anything but FOX (which isn't real news, but entertainment) you would see people being very critical of Clinton as well, but you refuse to listen -- you simply can't. It is impossible for a partisan like yourself to do because that would require that you admit your vehement denial is simply denial, and that it is one-sided. Again, Dumpy brings the "Clinton accusers" on FOX "all of a sudden", no? Why now? Why not ages ago -- you know, even BEFORE Trump's accusers say what happened happened. And you have Trump LITERALLY saying on radio shows, played before you, "I do that kind of thing", and you still flat out deny it. Then Trump says "Maybe Hillary has cheated" when Trump himself has been divorced for that very thing, and you literally said, bass, "Maybe she did. Who knows?"

So, don't talk to us about "you guys take every word as the truth" beacuse that is ALL you know how to do, when we do nothing of the sort. Just because Donald Trump has literally bragged about being able to sexually assault people whenever he wants and get away with it, and the media reports it and you guys can't get away with brushing it aside does NOT mean everyone else tries to do the same with a candidate who is completely different. One minute you demand we not look at things that happened way back when, then you bring up Bill Clinton to try and justify why. It makes ZERO sense, especially since Bill isn't running for president! You accuse these women of being liars and doing it for money, and question why now, but do not at all think FOX is engaging in any sort of behaviour at all, nor is Trump, with Clinton's accusers.

Seriously, bud, get out of the way of all those trees -- there's a forest there!

2 ( +5 / -3 )

OutriderOCT. 15, 2016 - 10:10AM JST I'm not buying the "coincidental" timing. This has been planned and orchestrated. It's not rocket science.

You say that as though the timing matters.

"Trump sexually assaulted me." <- Are you honestly saying this claim ceases to be serious based on when it's said?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

All those claiming these sexual assault allegations are a smear campaign are conveniently ignoring the fact that many recent presidents have never been accused of this kind of behaviour - why weren't any of these 'smear campaigns' directed at Obama, Bush, Reagan, Carter then? Trump is a sexual predator, his own words conform this.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Wow, sexual misconduct? Shouldn't that disqualify him?

I think even after his apology, he should still resign and say sorry to Hillary Clinton for all the terrible, terrible things he said and just let her win. Then they should examine all his emails to see if he sent any damaging, classified information to his businesses from his own private server.

Next they should investigate his wife to see if she has violated any human's rights laws.

There, that should do it. That will get rid of that big mean guy who won't let Hillary Clinton win.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Trump has stepped up a gear now in full self destruction mode,,,its a beautiful thing..the thought of Trump getting further and further away from the white house gives me a warm fuzzy feeling..

2 ( +4 / -2 )

You've been called on this EVERY DAY for years and, as Yabits mentioned only yesterday, if you bothered to get your news from anything but FOX (which isn't real news, but entertainment) you would see people being very critical of Clinton as well, but you refuse to listen -- you simply can't.

Sorry, Smith, you don't know me or where I get my news from, but continue....

It is impossible for a partisan like yourself to do because that would require that you admit your vehement denial is simply denial, and that it is one-sided. Again, Dumpy brings the "Clinton accusers" on FOX "all of a sudden", no? Why now?

If I were a partisan, I would think Trump is 100% innocent of all these allegations, I just don't know and if he did, of course it's bad, but my question as it has always been and I know liberals hate to face the facts, but WHY NOW all of a sudden and both these women are Hillary donors and supporters, NBC had the other tape for over a year, so what gives? We all know what this is.

Why not ages ago -- you know, even BEFORE Trump's accusers say what happened happened. And you have Trump LITERALLY saying on radio shows, played before you, "I do that kind of thing", and you still flat out deny it. Then Trump says "Maybe Hillary has cheated" when Trump himself has been divorced for that very thing, and you literally said, bass, "Maybe she did. Who knows?"

Yup, maybe she did and maybe Trump did, but again, if Trump were guilty of anything going on, the man would have already been arrested and that hasn't happened and the man deserves as an American citizen, the right to the presumption of innocence and the benefit of the doubt.

So, don't talk to us about "you guys take every word as the truth" beacuse that is ALL you know how to do, when we do nothing of the sort. Just because Donald Trump has literally bragged about being able to sexually assault people whenever he wants and get away with it, and the media reports it and you guys can't get away with brushing it aside does NOT mean everyone else tries to do the same with a candidate who is completely different.

Gosh, I wish you had that same fire in the belly about Hillary's lies! LMAO

One minute you demand we not look at things that happened way back when, then you bring up Bill Clinton to try and justify why.

I didn't demand anything, I will hold off on judging the man until there is concrete evidence, until then I will remain safely and modestly skeptical.

It makes ZERO sense, especially since Bill isn't running for president! You accuse these women of being liars and doing it for money, and question why now, but do not at all think FOX is engaging in any sort of behaviour at all, nor is Trump, with Clinton's accusers.

Why? For one thing, Clinton was a public servant, so since I'm paying his salary, YES, Clinton was predator and I NEVER called these women liars that are accusing Trump, I am just saying I don't know, I am skeptical, but I have an open mind. Well, so much for the your partisan accusation.

When liberals can get off the talking points, maybe we can have a decent conversation about the issues.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

@smithinjapan

With Donald now threatening to sue these women, of COURSE they did not come out previously when the case was low-profile and would have guaranteed him more force over them

So, please enlighten me anywhere in Trumps history of anybody coming forward with accusations of sexual misconduct prior to campaign. Your saying that at any point in the last year and a half, when Trump was running for office, they JUST NOW OF ALL TIMES decided to make a big deal about it? Sorry, Im just not that gullible. PLUS I would go as far to call anyone a bald face liar if they are going to start telling me that the entire monopolized media isnt pulling for Clinton.

This is Syria. Obama supplies and trains small groups with the hopes of defeating ISIS and overthrowing the official government (Because overthrowing governments worked out so well in Libya and Iraq!). These small groups than defect to ISIS because there is no difference. Russia works with the Syrian government and actually kill ISIS.

Trumps plan, work with Russia and Defeat ISIS quickly and soundly.

Clintons plan, make a NO FLY ZONE IN SYRIA AND RISK OPEN WAR WITH RUSSIA!!!!!

Come on now, this is black and white. You honestly can not fall for such simply distractions, here say and slight of hand. You are being played as if you were a simpleton. Do you really believe everything the Media tells you??????

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Bass

Why now? Because Trump stupidly bragged about doing such things on tape 11 years ago and then in the 2nd debate denied doing those things. That's obviously pissed these women off so they decided to go public. By the sounds of things, this is the tip of the iceberg as far as Trump's sexual assaults go. He can blame everyone else but what a fool, what a joke, what a beautiful thing Nov. 8 will be.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Another and another and another. . . . . Don the Con's party is just about over. I expect something bigger before the next debate. GO HILLARY ! ! ! 1/20/17 - "Madame President" !

4 ( +5 / -1 )

The photographer should be congratulated. Brilliant photo. Victim comforted by her lawyer. Makes me wonder how much money is involved. ... ... Is she lying? Are the others lying? (Either about Trump or HRC, it doesn't matter.) I don't know. LBJ was supposed to have said that any lie about an opponent, no matter how outrageous, was a good political tactic because the target of the lie would keep it in the news simply by his efforts to refute it. The longer a lie circulates the more likely it is to be believed. Campaign managers all know this and are exploiting it to the hilt now.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

The part that is most foolish is both sides claim superiority over the other. After all, both sides are guilty of the same offense.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Jeffery-Beffrey, you want to be enlighten about previous rape and molestation cases against Trump BEFORE the election.SURE. There are dozens, but the most believable one comes from his OWN WIFE:

First was Ivana Trump, Donald Trump’s first wife, who said under oath in a 1989 deposition that he had violently attacked her, ripped out her hair and forcibly penetrated her without her consent. According to the Daily Beast, she claims he was wildly angry that she’d referred him to a cosmetic surgeon who had botched a “scalp reduction” job (to cover a bald spot) and caused pain in his scalp - hence the vindictive yanking on her hair. At the time Ms. Trump said she felt “violated” by the alleged “rape.”

But with you being a repig, this is NOTHING, a husband after all can not rape his wife.

This man is an animal. A wild one with rabies. We know what to do with such animals.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Why now? Because Trump stupidly bragged about doing such things on tape 11 years ago and then in the 2nd debate denied doing those things.

Ok, so he denied it, again, where's the proof? Are there any fingerprints? With Clinton, we had the infamous Blue dress and with Trump...nothing. The man says a lot of things when the day is long, so we are just taking both their words at this point and time.

That's obviously pissed these women off so they decided to go public.

You do know before this all came about, the first 2 are Clinton supporters and donors and at least one of them voted and gave money to Obama's campaign. Food for thought.

By the sounds of things, this is the tip of the iceberg as far as Trump's sexual assaults go. He can blame everyone else but what a fool, what a joke, what a beautiful thing Nov. 8 will be.

No, it's just a witch hunt, pure and simple. They could have done all this earlier, but waited now to do it. That's Democrats for you, backstabbing and sneaky. No one is surprised.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

It's like Bill Cosby all over again.

What are the chances all of 'em are lying?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Hillary is guilty by association, with Bill's accusers saying Hillary helped to cover it up.

Trump is no ace either in this category.

Why does Hillary's side fail to bring it up? Are they really level headed people that understand right from wrong?

What, just pour me another cup of that utopia that Hillary is serving and drink it no matter what?

And ppl mistake me for liking Trump. Why? Because I don't turn a blind eye to Hillary and take whatever she serves?

Bring on the negative score, I'd be disappointed if it didn't turn out that way. It would prove me wrong on Hillary's people.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Do you get the feeling that Wikileaks are saving the best for last, or is the founder of wiki no longer in control of it?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

bass4funkOCT. 15, 2016 - 03:03PM JST

"That's totally unrelated to the notion that these women are being blackmailed into speaking out against Trump. I know it must be hard to stop misinterpreting everything so that you can turn every discussion towards things you want to talk about, but do try."

Oh, don't worry, I do and I'll say it again, these women knew who Trump was, why all of a sudden they bring out these allegations now? Why not 30 years ago or 11 years ago by another accuser and oh, by the way, both of them WERE Obama supporters and Hillary supporters and both contributed to their campaigns. I dunno..... it just all seems so conveniently perfect timing for the last debate.

Just out of curiosity, do you know who Jimmy Saville was? British DJ, TV show host, knighthood arranged by Margaret Thatcher, accused of countless sexual assaults by people who only came forward after he'd died? Check him out if you're not sure. Do you think he was guilty of all the things he was accused of? Straight yes or no.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Bass: Sorry Smith, you don't know me or where I get my news from

So where do you get your news from? Seems strange that your go around lecturing people about their biased news sources, but you keep all of your perfectly balanced sources a secret. I guess the only thing left to ask is what you're hoping to accomplish.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Bass

Is it surprising that they would support Hillary after having been sexually assaulted by Trump?

6 ( +6 / -0 )

This is the man some support: In a 2005 recording released by CNN on October 9, Trump, when asked repeatedly about his personal involvement with Miss USA and Miss Universe pageant contestants, told the provocative radio personality Howard Stern that he would go backstage where women were getting dressed.

"I'll tell you the funniest is that I'll go backstage before a show and everyone's getting dressed," Trump told Stern. "No men are anywhere, and I'm allowed to go in, because I'm the owner of the pageant and therefore I'm inspecting it. ... 'Is everyone OK'? You know, they're standing there with no clothes. 'Is everybody OK?' And you see these incredible looking women, and so I sort of get away with things like that."

I guess you have no daughters, sisters or mother that you care about. HRC is not terribly appealing, but I'll happily hold my nose and vote for her to keep this goon out of the WH. I can understand those with opposing political views, but I worry about the souls of folks who would support a mysogynist who actively courts bigots. Thankfully he has imploded and his campaign is falling apart. The US barely averted one of the most shameful results in our relatively short history.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Just out of curiosity, do you know who Jimmy Saville was? British DJ, TV show host, knighthood arranged by Margaret Thatcher, accused of countless sexual assaults by people who only came forward after he'd died? Check him out if you're not sure. Do you think he was guilty of all the things he was accused of? Straight yes or no

Interestingly, most waited until Savile died as they, correctly, assumed no one would believe them. The few that did come forward were ignored or fobbed off as the attitude was someone so famous and important couldn't possibly have done anything like that. Exactly the same attitude that many posters here have taken.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I'm wondering whether or not Trump will drop out of the race in the near future--e.g., before the third and final debate on October 19, 2016. It may be too late. Because the US Department of Justice may have investigated into his probable connections with the enemies of the United States to, inter alia, the cyberhacking of the Democrat headquarters e-mails regarding Hilary Clinton's secret plans. This is quite familiar to the infamous Watergate case. President Obama and First Lady Michelle may probably help Trump's victims of Trump's self-confessed sexual assaults. This is a typical or textbook case in the US criminal laws.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Trump needs help. He will be facing Alfred on kis sexual harassment haddits

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Your saying that at any point in the last year and a half, when Trump was running for office, they JUST NOW OF ALL TIMES decided to make a big deal about it?

You mean now, after Trump has come out saying he gropes people, and they will actually be believed by a lot of people and not likely to lose in any defamation suits since his words make it plausible that they actually were groped?

Yeah, now of all times is exactly when they would make a big deal about it.

The few that did come forward were ignored or fobbed off as the attitude was someone so famous and important couldn't possibly have done anything like that. Exactly the same attitude that many posters here have taken.

Bingo.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

At this rate Clinton might have to start worrying about Gary Johnson becoming the nearest competitor for the White House. Trump can fight it out with Jill Stein for 3rd place (tough battle, but I slightly favor Trump for 3rd though).

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Yup, maybe she did and maybe Trump did, but again, if Trump were guilty of anything going on, the man would have already been arrested and that hasn't happened and the man deserves as an American citizen, the right to the presumption of innocence and the benefit of the doubt.

Not from the public or the media or most of society he doesn't.

He gets those rights, like any other citizen, if he is put on trial: the court does not assume guilt until it is established through the trial process. No one else is obliged to hold to those standards, which are simply there to make the law work, and be seen to be fair (but which in practise, it often isn't).

Trump isn't given the benefit of the doubt by a lot of people because there isn't that much doubt after he himself boasted about assaulting women, and being able to get away with it. That's the point where people make up their minds that he is exactly the pig he appears to be.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Seems strange that your go around lecturing people about their biased news sources, but you keep all of your perfectly balanced sources a secret.

Once again Bass gets caught out for hypocrisy. Acting all indignant about people reading biased news sources, while in turn only reading biased news sources himself.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

@Bass

Here, I've corrected it for you.

Yup, maybe he did and maybe Clinton did, but again, if Clinton were guilty of anything going on, the woman would have already been arrested and that hasn't happened and the woman deserves, as an American citizen, the right to the presumption of innocence and the benefit of the doubt.

Goes both ways!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

When I was a kid I read a wonderful story by Mark Twain (he is still my favourite American writer) "Running for Governor". It seems some aspects of US politics did not change since XIX century.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

notagainOCT. 15, 2016 - 06:46PM JST

Interestingly, most waited until Savile died as they, correctly, assumed no one would believe them. The few that did come forward were ignored or fobbed off as the attitude was someone so famous and important couldn't possibly have done anything like that.

And if he felt it necessary he would threaten them with courts, lawyers and police if they dared make a claim against him, by all accounts. But I don't suppose Trump fans would see any parallels there at all.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

JeffreyDomer: "So, please enlighten me anywhere in Trumps history of anybody coming forward with accusations of sexual misconduct prior to campaign."

The onus is not on me to prove anything of the sort, and as he is now doing, and has a history of doing, Trump says he is going to "fight" and "sue", and as he is indeed a person with a lot of money and power -- enough to avoid paying millions in taxes for nearly 20 years -- do you SERIOUSLY wonder why people might not have come forward earlier?

Like I said, you and the people like you who are blaming women for sexual assault are just as bad as Trump is for doing it (and he's already said, "Yeah, I do stuff like that").

bass4funk: "Sorry, Smith, you don't know me or where I get my news from"

It's pretty clear you get it from your imagination, aside from what you watch on FOX. Hence, you cannot tell people where you get it from and have been caught in your hypocrisy. Well done, bass.

"If I were a partisan"

Hahaha... "if"! You're the single biggest partisan poster on this board, hands down.

"Why? For one thing, Clinton was a public servant, so since I'm paying his salary, YES, Clinton was predator and I NEVER called these women liars that are accusing Trump, I am just saying I don't know, I am skeptical, but I have an open mind."

Wow, so not only is back to Clinton again after saying people can't talk about what Trump did eleven years ago, you've said matter of factly that Clinton did what he's being accused of but you're "open-minded" when it comes to Trump! That's... sorry bud... the very opposite of being open-minded.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

There is no report Hillary placed her hands on a male worker's central part of his pant or went other office to kiss on mouth of a male worker and no vide of her groping.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Any one who falls for the Clinton smear rubbish honestly deserves to earn less $50,000 and have 20 year + mortgage. actually you got it wrong, it should be Trumps name in that sentence. Its been proven that Trump supporters on average come from lower class, lower wage earners compared to Clinton supporters

1 ( +1 / -0 )

All of the allegation against Donald Trump were back in 1980s and 1990s. What took it so long for that women wait until October 2016? Their motive is character assisnation for ruining Trump bid for Presidentilal race just before the election!

Americans need to ask whether Cliton or Trump is more competent, trustworthy or fit and well enough for leading the nation. Because of Cliton laziness or negligence, Lybra ambassador was slaughtered. Because of her vote for Irag war Thousands of Marines died. She took sick leave during her campaign and she can not stand straight for a long time. She will take more sick leaves after she becomes the President.

No one has died because of Trump. Trump has no blood on his hands.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

"The Clinton campaign, citing information it says is from the FBI, says the hacks are being investigated as part of a broader attack on Democratic Party leaders that may involve Russia."

Is this the same FBI that said Hillary was extremely careless with classified information? Checking...yeah, it is! And if Hillary is elected, how many 18-40 year old men will allow themselves to be drafted into a war with Russia?

"Clinton herself spoke Friday of a need for national healing."

Well then why doesn't she apologize for all her wrongdoings and quit?

This is interesting:

"Clinton Campaign Wants a "Compliant, Unaware" Citizenry, Exploits the Legacy Media" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoKVYm5tUY8

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

It's a good thing for Hillary that sexual assault wasn't such a big deal back when she was defending her husband for the same behavior and worse. Now that she has used her position as first lady to promote her own political ambitions now is the time to crack down on men running for president who are unable to control their lecherous behavior.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Trump bragged about his successful sexual misconduct habits even showing video to provee that. He might be thankful many women came out to prove his claim had been true.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

It's a good thing for Hillary that sexual assault wasn't such a big deal back when she was defending her husband for the same behavior and worse

And it's very ironic how Trump has condemned Hillary for viciously attacking the women who came forward with accusations against her husband, while he, Donald J. Trump, has treated his female accusers with kid gloves. (LOL...Not)

Trump LIES again!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@Simon

I'm not sure, I know of him, but NOT enough about him to say whether the man is guilty or not. That's my answer.

It's pretty clear you get it from your imagination, aside from what you watch on FOX. Hence, you cannot tell people where you get it from and have been caught in your hypocrisy. Well done, bass.

Again, you know nothing about me, so you might as well stop wasting your time to hurl baseless accusations.

Hahaha... "if"! You're the single biggest partisan poster on this board, hands down.

If I were then I would say, Trump is completely innocent of all charges and everything he does as well as his conduct is great and pristine, but I haven't. So that killed your argument.

Wow, so not only is back to Clinton again after saying people can't talk about what Trump did eleven years ago, you've said matter of factly that Clinton did what he's being accused of but you're "open-minded" when it comes to Trump! That's... sorry bud... the very opposite of being open-minded.

Is there any tangible evidence (blue dress, DNA) with Trump like there was with Clinton? Was there a woman that enjoyed and confirming a steamy romance with Trump in the same manner as Bubba? No? That's what I thought. So, I am open-minded, but I am also highly suspicious of the timing of all this. One time, Ok, but 3 times, nope, NOT an accident.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Obama at a pro-Clinton rally: "You want to see what somebody's going to do? Look what they been doing all their lives."

Yeah, Mr. President, WikiLeaks is making that clearer day by day.

This is interesting:

" BREAKING WIKILEAKS 6 EMAILS: Confirms Hillary Clinton Deserves Espionage Act Indictment For Emails"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHK_enwTSlQ

And what's up with this pesky Rasmussen poll that has Trump up by 2 points now? This can't be right...

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

"So, I am open-minded"

Very open-minded. You still think Obama may be a Muslim and may declare martial law before the election.

I once heard a nice expression that you should keep an open mind but not to the point where your brain falls out.

GraininthepyramidsROFL.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@Bass4:there will, be last Presidential nominee debate at UN LV in Vegas. Bunch of Republican members along some deems will be attending. Harry Reid is retiring now that other elle tin candidates are all expected to attend. There will be a and a. If you can, please watch TV to see how republican based area do. Many are from Regan era in Calif.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Very open-minded. You still think Obama may be a Muslim and may declare martial law before the election.

Knowing now what we are finding out about Hillary....anything is possible.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Maybe Trump is getting "swift-boated"

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

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Knowing now what we are finding out about Hillary....anything is possible.

Well, you can and will make up almost anything. Like your unfounded claim about the NYT doing 11 articles about Trump and none about Hillary. (Care to back that up?)

What we seem to be finding out about Hillary through the leaked Podesta emails is that, behind closed doors, she speaks of better cooperation between the two parties, and comes off sounding like a moderate Republican.

The lunatic fringe on the right have tried telling us for years that the Clintons are leftists. Shocking -- LOL -- to learn the truth.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-trump-campaign-battles-former-1476504096-htmlstory.html

... Donald Trump’s campaign on Friday released a friendly email from a woman who had accused him earlier in the day of sexually accosting her, as well as a statement from the woman's cousin questioning her motives. ...The disclosures came hours after Summer Zervos, a former contestant on “The Apprentice,” tearfully described darting around a hotel room in 2007 to avoid Trump’s kisses and wandering hands as she sought employment from him. ... In the April 14 email to Trump’s assistant released by the campaign late Friday, Zervos described operating a restaurant in Huntington Beach and asked to get in touch with the businessman-turned-reality television star. ... “He has witnessed both my highs and lows operating a small business and I am pleased to report that business is good,” Zervos wrote. “… I would greatly appreciate reconnecting at this time. He will know my intentions are genuine.” ... The GOP presidential nominee’s campaign also released a statement from John Barry, who is identified as Zervos’ first cousin who lives in Mission Viejo. Barry said he is “shocked and bewildered” by Zervos’ allegations and noted that she repeatedly made “glowing” statements about Trump after appearing on the fifth season of “The Apprentice.” ... “I think Summer wishes she could still be on reality TV, and in an effort to get that back she’s saying all of these negative things about Mr. Trump,” Barry said. “That’s not how she talked about him before. I can only imagine that Summer’s actions today are nothing more than an attempt to regain the spotlight at Mr. Trump’s expense.” ...

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I think Hillary will win. All she has to. do is to ignore Trump.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The New York Times has been working on this story since at least last March, when they tried to get Carrie Prejean Boller to lie about it, and misrepresented an incident in her book (according to an article posted last May).

http://www.westernjournalism.com/former-miss-california-gives-her-side-of-story-about-donald-trump/

Former Miss California Gives Her Side Of Story About Donald Trump - May 18, 2016

... The New York Times was “lying” in its Sunday story about presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and his relationships with women, one of the women quoted in the piece said Tuesday night on Fox News’ Hannity. ... Carrie Prejean Boller, who was Miss California USA in 2009, told host Sean Hannity that The Times took pieces of her book out of context, and noted that she had told The Times weeks ago she was not interested in helping them with their story. ... “Back in March when they started this whole campaign against him, several reporters had reached out to me and asked to interview me, and I said that I really had nothing to say to them, and they weren’t going to get out anything out of me negatively about Donald Trump,” she said. “And they weren’t really happy with that.” ... The Times used an anecdote from her book about Trump, who was an owner of the Miss Universe pageant back then, inspecting the contestants and then asking them to evaluate one another’s looks. However, she said The Times took the anecdote out of context. ... “I mean, I was saying what goes on behind the scenes, and they lied and said it was backstage. It wasn’t backstage,” she said. “And they totally took it out of context and they just ran with it, and it just goes to show how dishonest they are. I mean, really.” ...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SerranoOCT. 16, 2016 - 01:21AM JST

And what's up with this pesky Rasmussen poll that has Trump up by 2 points now? This can't be right...

When "wildly popular" FOX News polls show an 8 point lead for Clinton one does have to wonder.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Maybe this is Trump's swift-boats

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well, you can and will make up almost anything.

Sorry, NOT my style. I leave that to the Democrats.

Like your unfounded claim about the NYT doing 11 articles about Trump and none about Hillary. (Care to back that up?)

Yeah over the last week, I counted 11 times, sorry as of today 12.

What we seem to be finding out about Hillary through the leaked Podesta emails is that, behind closed doors, she speaks of better cooperation between the two parties, and comes off sounding like a moderate Republican.

Yabits, with all due respect, I can read and I really don't need you to interpret what Podesta was trying to convey, we all know by the emails EXACTLY what he meant. Maybe a 6 year old will buy it, but I won't and most of the American people won't, but thanks anyway.

The lunatic fringe on the right have tried telling us for years that the Clintons are leftists. Shocking -- LOL -- to learn the truth.

No, with all the Wikileaks that have been coming out, it's apparent why Hillary didn't want them to come out and it shows that Democrats are the absolute lowest of the bottom when it comes to anything remotely resembling morals or ethics. Pitiful.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Yeah over the last week, I counted 11 times, sorry as of today 12.

Anyone wanting to verify the number of articles in the NY Times about Hillary over the past week can simply follow the link.

http://query.nytimes.com/search/sitesearch/#/hillary+clinton/7days/

No, with all the Wikileaks that have been coming out, it's apparent why Hillary didn't want them to come out and it shows that Democrats are the absolute lowest of the bottom when it comes to anything remotely resembling morals or ethics.

Uh, try counting those articles again, please. Then tell us about morals and ethics.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

When "wildly popular" FOX News polls show an 8 point lead for Clinton one does have to wonder.

Polls mean nothing. The vote means everything. Polls can actually skew an election - if many people who don't like Trump, but don't think much of Hillary decide to vote for Johnson or Stein, thinking that Hillary will definitely win in their state because of the polls, she could actually lose in those states.

Polls are nice for one side or the other to feel good about their standing, when it comes to who actually wins, they have zero-percent weight, and the vote has 100% weight.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Uh, try counting those articles again, please. Then tell us about morals and ethics.

I did.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Anyone wanting to verify the number of articles in the NY Times about Hillary over the past week can simply follow the link.

http://query.nytimes.com/search/sitesearch/#/hillary+clinton/7days/

Haha once again Bass is exposed for simply spouting rhetoric, rather than living in the real world.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

1 ( +1 / -0 )

http://query.nytimes.com/search/sitesearch/#/hillary+clinton/7days/

Four things about this link. One, it is not going to show the prominence of articles (whether they are on the front page of the site or buried). Two, it is going to count articles with any mention of Hillary, not distinguishing those that are actually about her. Three, it is not going to say whether the articles are positive for Hillary, negative, or BenSmithing for Hillary (pretending to investigate her but actually only providing a cover that she was investigated). Four, it also won't indicate which articles are bait-and-switch, with headline negative to Hillary but where it's evidence early in the article that it's favorable to her.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=BenSmithing

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"I think Hillary will win. All she has to. do is to ignore Trump."

She can't ignore Trump - she has to keep finding bimbos who will claim Trump sexually abused them - it's he only thing she has.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

SerranoOCT. 16, 2016 - 11:08AM JST

She can't ignore Trump - she has to keep finding bimbos...

Is that the kind of expression you use in face to face conversations with female acquaintances?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Four things about this link. One, it is not going to show the prominence of articles (whether they are on the front page of the site or buried).

LOL... All it had to disprove was that the NY Times did articles on Hillary Clinton within the past seven days -- plenty of them. I understand you're a Trump supporter and therefore unable to keep a solid grip on reality, but keep in the mind the claim was made that there were NO articles on Clinton, while the Times went to 11 on Donald Trump.

There's also a section titled Election 2016 -- and guess what? -- there are articles there covering Hillary too, updated daily.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Hillary will win. Beck to speculate World Series.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The Wikileaks releases prove without a shadow of doubt that indeed Hillary is GUILTY of ALL the misdeeds of which she has been accused. But go ahead and let your silly selves be distracted by the faux sexual shenanigans.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

She can't ignore Trump - she has to keep finding bimbos who will claim Trump sexually abused them - it's he only thing she has.

That, and an understanding of the US political system, knowledge of where countries are and who governs them. and other little things Trump can't be bothered with. But still, I have no doubt that more abused bimbos are out there, and we`ll get to hear about every one.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Now we know that Trump is a cowardly sexual predator. Now it's time to take him to court and put him in jail where he belongs. He has become too pathetic even for America now

2 ( +2 / -0 )

who spout and encourage racist and Islamophobic rhetoric,

Trust the muzzies at your peril

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Not my first choice, but my second and third one ... after few drinks ;)

0 ( +1 / -1 )

...I don't mean to sexually abuse the self demeaning, but... is HOOTER'S owned/CEO'd by women?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2016/10/19/madonna-vote-hillary-clinton-will-give-blowjb/

Madonna: ‘If You Vote for Hillary Clinton, I Will Give You a ...’

She makes it sound interesting, but ...

Shouldn't we expect faux Democratic outrage over this?

And how many guys voted Democrat in the last presidential election?

Reported popular vote for Obama was 65,915,795. So, about half that?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites