Donald Trump: Black Like Me

a reply to: Sillyolme

Really is to think 99% think Clinton can take on Trump in debates. Hysterical.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

HMM Seems to me that court is in full session when it comes to Hillary but not for the Don huh?

That's what I was thinking. I agree with Les' assertion, but it's amazing how that doesn't apply equally to all candidates.

Cognitive dissonance.

a reply to: Sillyolme

HMM Seems to me that court is in full session when it comes to Hillary but not for the Don huh?

This thread, the media portrayal, the protests, prove the opposite.

a reply to: introvert

That's what I was thinking. I agree with Les' assertion, but it's amazing how that doesn't apply equally to all candidates.

Cognitive dissonance.

It does. It applies to everyone.

Cognitive dissonance.

a reply to: Nikola014

I didn't see anything in the OP suggesting that Trump is stupid, so I'm not sure where you got that from...my apologies if I missed it somehow...but just because a person is wealthy it doesn't mean he got that way by being an intellectual giant. Clever and ruthlessly ambitious does not in any way equate to being intelligent...no matter who the person in question may be.

He's never going to be President, nor did he ever have any intention of doing so...that's not his purpose...but if he were, his lack of experience and penchant for making inflammatory statements that fly in the face of basic common sense would stand out far more starkly than the sum total of his intelligence quotient and personal wealth very quickly. Like it or not, he has treated this entire campaign like it's some WWF Smackdown sideshow, and that has not exactly engendered a whole lot of trust in his intellectual capacity and professionalism when it comes to running a country...particularly one in such a state of turmoil as this one currently is.

Trump loves to be center stage. He's a great front man. But this isn't a show. This is a country full of real human beings who, at the moment, are living in real fear and real turmoil, and who need a leader to step up and take charge...not one who widens the divide by inflaming the situation further.

People can talk about Hillary being irresponsible all they want. And from all that we've been shown, she has been. But she's not out there slinging racial insults or grandstanding like some mediocre carnival barker. She is not bellowing barely coherent bias at people every time she sees a camera pointed her direction. She shows her intelligence without bluster. She does not appear to be crumbling or faltering under the pressure being dealt from all sides, and that in and of itself is an important presidential quality. If I knew nothing else whatsoever about either candidate, that alone would award her my respect.

If people think that Trump is stupid, it's because he gives them ample reason. Hillary could have the IQ of a signpost, but no one would know it hearing her speak or watching her, because that is not what she projects to people. So much so, in fact, that when she does act silly occasionally, it's one of the first things people pounce on.

And as entertaining as people have found Trump to be, as the election draws nearer, many have now found that the novelty has worn off and are growing tired of the show. There are serious issues facing us that will only be ameliorated by strong, levelheaded leadership. And I think it's going to come down to that, ultimately, to the exclusion of everything else surrounding this bizarre comedy of errors...stories like these are not really going to matter much pretty soon, from either side of the fence.

It doesn't matter if these allegations are true...it is a fact that politics are rife with corrupt and questionable practices. And they're all just as shady behind the scenes. It is the nature of the machine. In fact, it is remarkably akin to show business in that regard. But when the lights come up and the curtain falls, the production doesn't stop. The issues will still be there, and likely will be even more serious by the time November rolls around. So serious, I'd wager, that drama like this will seem infantile to most of the people in this country. Who's going to really care who Donald Trump is diddling, or has diddled in the past? It doesn't matter.

If I believed for one second that Trump is anything other than a stooge, I'd be surprised that he is still acting a complete fool this close to the end. But he isn't, so I'm not. This will all become apparent very soon anyway.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert

That's what I was thinking. I agree with Les' assertion, but it's amazing how that doesn't apply equally to all candidates.

Cognitive dissonance.

It does. It applies to everyone.

Cognitive dissonance.

In theory, it should.

In practice, it does not.

originally posted by: ipsedixit
Just google it.

I have!
Everything you people present I research and find to be lacking.
Everything!

For the sake of me wasting my time AGAIN can you please give me the abridged version of what he did this time? Don't have the time or motivation to go over the whole OP...

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: ipsedixit

Lies and pedophilia. That's quite the accusation. Of course, what you've proven is that his only crime is talking, while you engage in slander.

Kinda like all the murder claims of clinton, but hey that isn't slander right?

a reply to: Sremmos80

Kinda like all the murder claims of clinton, but hey that isn't slander right?

Justify hypocrisy all you wish, but I never made any such claim.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

Once again, Trump's only crime is talking, and until he gets convicted of anything else, that's all anyone has to condemn him for.

I agree with that. Technically speaking Donald Trump is innocent until proven guilty. So is Hillary Clinton. My point in this thread is to suggest that Donald Trump's statements and association with a known sexual predator who liked to photograph people having sex is reason to believe that he might be susceptible to blackmail, just as Hillary Clinton's careless use of email might have made her susceptible to blackmail, the latter suggestion having been made by Mr. Trump himself.

a reply to: nobunaga

This case has not been dismissed in New York. It was dismissed in California for problems with the original papers filed. I don't think the original filing was made by a lawyer. The complainant got a lawyer involved and refiled in New York.

Note: Earlier I said that the complainant had asked for one million dollars in damages. That was a mistake. As another poster said, the claim is for one hundred million dollars.

a reply to: JAY1980

When I said "just google it" I was referring to Donald Trump's continuing repetition of the lie that America gave Iran 150 billion dollars and got nothing in return. This has been explained ad nauseum on the web. It is explained in my OP.

Repeating a "big lie" over and over again to get a bunch of dopes riled up is right out of the Hitler play book. Trump is shameless in his continued repetition of this big lie.

Here is an update on the status of the lawsuit filed in a New York federal court by an anonymous plaintiff, "Jane Doe", against Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein.

heavy.com...

A federal lawsuit accusing Donald Trump of raping a 13-year-old girl during a party hosted by convicted pedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein 20 years ago in New York is still in the early stages. A pre-trial conference that was scheduled for September 9 was recently pushed back to October.

It is not likely that the Republican presidential candidate will have to appear in court for the October 14 conference, which typically only involve attorneys and the judge in the case. The lawsuit was initially filed in April, but was then dismissed for procedural reasons. It was re-filed in June, pseudonymously by Jane Doe.

Judge Ronnie Abrams ordered the conference to be pushed back, according to the federal court docket:

An initial pretrial conference is presently scheduled for September 9, 2016 in this action. Plaintiff, however, has not yet filed affidavits of service confirming that Defendants have been served with copies of the summons and complaint. In order to allow Plaintiff the full amount of time authorized by Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to serve Defendants and to allow Defendants the full amount of time authorized by Rule 12(a) to respond to the complaint in advance of the initial pretrial conference, the conference shall be adjourned until October 14, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. Initial Conference set for 10/14/2016 at 10:00 AM before Judge Ronnie Abrams.

The conference is scheduled to take place in Courtroom 1506 at the Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse at 40 Centre Street in New York City.

Note: In the course of this thread there was some confusion about the amount of the damages being sought by the plaintiff. As the court documents found at the above link state, the amount being sought is $75,000 plus costs.

Here is a further update, sent by Jane Doe's attorney, to the press two days ago.

jezebel.com...

The plaintiff and her counsel in Jane Doe v. Donald J. Trump and Jeffrey E. Epstein (SDNY 1:16-CV-04642) filed today a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal pursuant to F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, without prejudice to refiling the complaint. An additional witness has been identified and her declaration will accompany the new complaint.

It appears that the suit has been temporarily withdrawn and will be refiled at a later date.

a reply to: ipsedixit

Apparently, "Jane Doe" has, once again, dropped her lawsuit against Donald Trump. The suit had been refiled with a prominent Florida attorney joining Thomas Meagher in representing her.

www.theguardian.com...

A woman who had accused Donald Trump of raping her when she was a 13-year-old dropped her lawsuit against the Republican nominee on Friday.

One of the accuser’s attorneys, Thomas Meagher, filed a one-page voluntary dismissal in district court in New York late Friday. Neither he nor a second attorney listed immediately responded to questions about the document.

The woman, who had filed suit earlier this year under the pseudonym Jane Doe, had alleged that Trump and billionaire Jeffrey Epstein had raped her in 1994, when she was a 13-year-old aspiring model.

This week she abruptly canceled a plan to speak publicly about the allegations, and another attorney, Lisa Bloom, cited “numerous threats” against her client.

The attorneys in charge of the lawsuit have not commented as yet.