It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New York Times: How Donald Trump Behaved With Women in Private

page: 2
14
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2016 @ 08:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic




But to suggest that Bill Clinton was given a pass for his womanizing is ridiculous! The whole country was glued to their TVs and the man was impeached.


I wouldn't say that Billy was given a pass overall but he was given a pass by some. I remember the phrase, "He is remarkable at compartmentalizing" being thrown around about (meaning that he could have is affairs and deal with the aftermath and still function at full capacity). I also remember Geraldo (as an example) saying, "I just want to reach out and give him (Bill) a hug!"




He's not running for president.


Nope, he is not. However, when Hillary stated that she would draft Bill to lead economic recovery, essentially bringing him into her administration, all the personal vetting is fair game.




She was the VICTIM of a womanizer


You are correct. However, I don't think that people are making her responsible for Bill's actions. Rather, the Trumpeters are stating (and I do have to admit I believe this to be true) that it's not that she stood by Bill during/after his shenanigans, it's that she took an active part in attacking and attempting to utterly destroy the women with whom Bill played around with.




trying to make her somehow responsible is just going to turn more and more women against Trump


I've heard so many people say that "this" is going to turn "them" against Trump and "that" is going to turn "them against Trump but so far none of those predictions have panned out yet. I guess we'll find out.




posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: butcherguy
Not by Hillary.


Not sure what you mean... Are you saying that Hillary didn't impeach him?


This NYT piece is a hit piece for sure. And yes, FOX (and other conservative outlets) does hit pieces on Hilllary. But to suggest that Bill Clinton was given a pass for his womanizing is ridiculous! The whole country was glued to their TVs and the man was impeached.

Not to mention that it has NOTHING to do with Hillary. If SHE was the one using men, then there might be something to say about it, but using Bill's exploits to tarnish Hillary is just ... stupid. He's not running for president. She was the VICTIM of a womanizer and trying to make her somehow responsible is just going to turn more and more women against Trump, since his message is that Hillary is somehow to blame for her husband's affairs.

What I mean is that Hillary 'stood by her man'.
Her choice, to be sure, but also a choice that she has to live with in more ways than one.
She actively went about destroying the names of the women that were brave enough to tell their stories about Bill. Some of them were beaten by Bill, according to their stories.

As far as the impeachment goes, Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath.... not for womanizing.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   
I don't need no stinkiin polls....

My mother, the most Baptist, conservative, Texan, Patriotic, Right Wing woman alive, thinks Trump is "Creepy" and won't vote for him no matter what. And her bridge club, old blue hairs, all think the same. She say's she"ll vote for the pot head, Gov. Gary J.; for her to not vote a straight GOP ticket....

You got a real problem there Donald....
edit on 16-5-2016 by olaru12 because: xfg77ty



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: eluryh22
I wouldn't say that Billy was given a pass overall but he was given a pass by some.


And so is Trump. Look at his supporters here. They are totally OK with his attitude towards women. They either just refuse to believe the stories, accuse the women of being politically motivated, or accuse the media of some nefarious action. They make excuses for him, which is the epitome of "enabling", the same thing Donald accuses Hillary of.




However, I don't think that people are making her responsible for Bill's actions. Rather, the Trumpeters are stating (and I do have to admit I believe this to be true) that it's not that she stood by Bill during/after his shenanigans, it's that she took an active part in attacking and attempting to utterly destroy the women with whom Bill played around with.


I have never seen ANY indication that Hillary did ANYTHING to these women. I was glues to the TV during the impeachment and I never heard ANYTHING from or about Hillary at the time. Is there some evidence of her behavior as regards these women? What did she do?

I was furious at Bill Clinton at the time. Not for his private life, but because of his lies. His affairs and his marriage were between himself and Hillary, in my opinion.
edit on 5/16/2016 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Bill Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice, not for abuse of power or sexual assault.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
What I mean is that Hillary 'stood by her man'.


So, you're saying she should have divorced him? How is THEIR marriage ANYONE'S business?



She actively went about destroying the names of the women that were brave enough to tell their stories about Bill.


Link? To a news story, please. I was there. I watched the whole thing. I never heard of Hillary doing ANYTHING. I may have missed it, but I can't find anything on it.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic




And so is Trump.


Yep. You got it. Trump people won't care about this just as B. Clinton supporters didn't care then.




I have never seen ANY indication that Hillary did ANYTHING to these women.


HERE is just a quick summary.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:27 AM
link   
Let me make a small prediction here.

All the women that go to the trump Rallys with their husbands and wear the red hats; will vote for Hillary in the voting booths when it really counts.

Without the minorities and a solid majority of female votes...Donald is SOL.
edit on 16-5-2016 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:34 AM
link   
Oh, a former girlfriend of DJT says the Times misquoted and twisted her words. What a surprise that this leftist rag would do that.




posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Meanwhile:

Brietbart - Bill and Hillary Clinton’s Women Victims To Hit Campaign Trail


Reuters reports that Roger Stone, a Republican strategist and Donald Trump supporter, is putting together a group of women to campaign against Hillary Clinton, should the former Secretary of State win the Democrat nomination. The political action committee, originally created last year with the name Women Against Hillary, is now called the Rape Accountability Project for Education PAC, or RAPE PAC.


So yeah. If the NY Times publishes something that might reflect negatively on Donald Trump, it's written off as a smear campaign by his supporters but at the same time, Trump's political henchman/lobbyist/self-proclaimed 'dirty trickster', Roger Stone, has been talking about paying discredited "victims" of Clinton to campaign for Donald Trump and even if it never actually happens, dozens of right-wing media sources picked up the story so it's a win-win.
edit on 2016-5-16 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: eluryh22
HERE is just a quick summary.


Thanks. The article seems to be full of hearsay and things like. "She ALLOWED Bill to" do so and so... ALLOWED?



And she allowed her husband to abuse women, to harass women, possibly other things that he did wrong to women. And she allowed it to happen.


What is she? His MOM? She's being accused of "standing by her man" and "allowing" him to do things, like he's a little boy, not responsible for his own actions...


I'm sorry, but that article doesn't tell me ANYTHING that she did, which is what I suspected in the first place. She may have said they were lying, but she hardly "destroyed" anyone.

Basically, this whole 'enabler' line of attacks pisses me off. I've been the wife of a man who cheated (my first marriage) and to suggest that I "allowed" him to do so, or that I "enabled" him, infuriates me. And I stood by him for a while, too. And if anyone has any judgments about that they can go to hell.

To place ANY blame on a person because their mate cheated leaves a very bad taste in my mouth, and the mouths of many people.

Just FYI, I am NOT a Hillary fan.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

In an interview with Bill O'Reilly Trump suggested it could get nasty, but Hilary would have to fire first.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

If by head and shoulders you mean he's taller then yeah.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: butcherguy
What I mean is that Hillary 'stood by her man'.


So, you're saying she should have divorced him? How is THEIR marriage ANYONE'S business?



She actively went about destroying the names of the women that were brave enough to tell their stories about Bill.


Link? To a news story, please. I was there. I watched the whole thing. I never heard of Hillary doing ANYTHING. I may have missed it, but I can't find anything on it.

You must have missed where I said that it was her choice as to how she handled his womanizing.
I will get you some links to the stories about Hillary and her handling of the 'Bimbo Eruptions that you seem to have conveniently forgotten about.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: UnBreakable

She's smart. He once sued the Chicago Times for half a billion dollars because their Pulitzer prize winning architecture critic questioned the plausibility of a building that Trump ended up not building anyway.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed LMAO, the Clintons have fans ?



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Martin75
a reply to: Profusion
Can you imagine the women if The NY Times had been this interested in Bill Clinton?


We have a winner....best reply of the week



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:48 AM
link   
This is all such old news. These same stories were around 8 months ago and many were written in the late 90's when he appointed a woman to be in charge of construction for Trump Tower. This is nothing new.

Wow...a millionaire playboy gave someone a bathing suit and then introduced her...the shame! She even came out and said it was garbage. They even dated.

This stuff is as dumb as tax returns. It is fodder to 'argue' over but I could care less if someone files a 1040 EZ and bangs half of Manhattan...

What type of leader has he been? What can he do for our country? Do you agree with his policy?



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: UnBreakable

She's smart. He once sued the Chicago Times for half a billion dollars because their Pulitzer prize winning architecture critic questioned the plausibility of a building that Trump ended up not building anyway.


The focus is not how smart she is. It's the fact the Times misquoted her.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

You mean you don't believe it when they say stuff about trump. When they say something bad about Hillary you sure believe that.
I lived in N.Y. when Trump was in his heyday. I remember all the crap he did and the constant chatter about his fooling around on his wife then the divorce, his then cheating on Marla then the divorce. The way he bragged about everything. In the 80s his face was everywhere, he was everywhere. He bought his way in. He forced his way on everybody.
There's a lady well she's probably gone now who was rudely ousted from her home in Atlantic city so that he could build the Taj Mahal. She was on the news crying about her home and garden. The his lawyer saying she got a great price or something like that. What she didn't get was a choice. I imagine the city declared eminent domain then sold the property to trump but I don't know that. I just remember her.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join