March for Women

[mary_bobo]

Trump is not anti-immigration. He’s anti-illegal-immigration–big difference. I’m a legal immigrant citizen and am in the process of helping my brother immigrate, which, if you can believe it, takes about 12 years waiting in line. Illegal immigration isn’t fair.

Bless you for doing it the right way. It should not take that long to come legally.

 

[queenofheartscv]

Bless you for doing it the right way. It should not take that long to come legally.

It’s faster for parents, children and spouses, but siblings aren’t considered direct family, so yeah, that’s how it stands.

 

[dvdjs]

Please stop with the term “sexual assault”, he used the word let you, and was clearly referencing women who throw themselves at rich men.

You may like to review the tape. This was not a discussion of women who throw themselves at rich men. He evidenced no boundaries.

If he acted without prior consent then in DoJ parlance - which i realize some contest - it is sexual assault. Whatever the type of woman.

Do we need to point out everyone who has gone on Howard Stern and accepted his lewd comments? Trump was basically agreeing that his daughter is a good looking woman, and he’s right.

.
Not sure who you hang out with, but I have never heard a father allow this language to be used about his own daughter, even in the saltiest of conversations.

My memory doesn’t need any refreshing with regards to Teddy Kennedy.

Your alternative facts in the earlier post need reconsideration. And whatever spoi you put on it, the salient facts are simple. Kennedy was rejected by Democrats in his run for POTUS. Trump was accepted by Republicans. The locus of hypocrisy is clear.

There are countless other US leaders including distinguished members of Congress who have said far worse than Trump …

Not sure that that is true. Words? Perhaps. Content. I doubt it. If they did, they are unfit.

 

[joshman1]

Ivana Trump denies accusing Donald Trump of Rape. States she used the word “rape” in a deposition in an emotional sense.
politico.com/story/2015/07/ivana-trump-denies-accusing-donald-trump-rape-daily-beast-120721

Jill Harth did accuse Trump of sexual assault in 1997, just days after she lost a law suit against Trump and after she didn’t get a job from Trump….

Yes the same Jill Harth who in emails in 2015 and 2016 written to the Trump campaign and, provided by Trump’s office in response to her allegations expressed friendly feelings about Trump and even asked about a job helping to do his campaign trail makeup….Pfff…

The same Jill Harth who wrote in an August 2015 email forwarded by Trump’s campaign: “I also would like to show my support for Donald and his campaign. I am offering my services to do his grooming and getting him perfectly camera ready for photos and Hi-Definition TV. He knows better than anybody how important image is.”

Yes Jill Harth who in email from October 2015, praised Trump for “doing a tremendous job of shaking things up in the United States” and added: “I am definitely Team Trump!”

It’s been proven that Jill Harth’s 24yr allegations lacked any merit or veracity, and had massive credibility issues.

But hey…I have no evidence nor can I produce witnesses, but I can remember every detail of when Hillary groped me 30 years ago in a Walmart bathroom…

Let’s not forget the New York Times conducted a major investigation into Trump’s treatment of women and came up empty-handed. The Washington Post hired 40 investigative reporters to look into every aspect of Donald Trump’s life. All they could come up with was the Billy Bush tape…

What lawsuits over racial inequality are you referencing exactly? Do you mean the ones thrown-out of court or the ones Trump won?

2 things
1- I successfully rebuked your assertion that he had never been accused of these things in the past.
2- As to their veracity, I find it incredibly distasteful to put the victim on trial and triple check their assertions. We will never find out what happened, but there’s a body of work that matches his comments. And I feel this way across the aisle, same goes to any accusers of Bills. Research shows that the amount of women who put forward false accusations of this sort are incredibly rare.

 

[gamewell45]

Maybe we should also have a Men’s March in DC?

A march dedicated to men being real men. Similar to a Men’s Catholic conference, focused on authentic masculinity: i.e. honor, respect, fatherhood, chivalry, etc.

Go for it!

 

[kat07]

You may like to review the tape. This was not a discussion of women who throw themselves at rich men. He evidenced no boundaries.

If he acted without prior consent then in DoJ parlance - which i realize some contest - it is sexual assault. Whatever the type of woman.

.
Not sure who you hang out with, but I have never heard a father allow this language to be used about his own daughter, even in the saltiest of conversations.
Your alternative facts in the earlier post need reconsideration. And whatever spoi you put on it, the salient facts are simple. Kennedy was rejected by Democrats in his run for POTUS. Trump was accepted by Republicans. The locus of hypocrisy is clear.

Not sure that that is true. Words? Perhaps. Content. I doubt it. If they did, they are unfit.

The tape was clear, I think it’s you who may need to review it. Trump said verbatim ". “And when you’re a STAR, they LET YOU do it.” At least to me that indicates women who are throwing themselves at stars/rich men, especially if they LET HIM grab their genital…maybe you sum it up a different way? What boundaries exists when it’s consensual and women are letting you do it? I guess by your standards when two consenting adults are fooling around boundaries have been crossed? In a court of law letting you is not sexual assault.

You may want to get some tapes and listen to guests on Howard Stern, many of them go along with him when on his show and talking in aggressive sexual language about wives, husbands, girlfriends, boyfriends or other family members. It’s not just men guests either it’s woman too. Nothing new here. Also, has nothing to do with who “I” hang out with…

In regards to TK there is no spin on what I wrote. He won 11 Senate races after the Chappaquiddick incident. He lost a Presidential primary race in 1980. By your reasoning, he should have also lost his 11 Senate races after Chappaquiddick. TK didn’t lose the Presidential primary race in 1980 solely because of Chappaquiddick, even though you want to spin it that way. Once again TK held a two to one lead over Carter in polls until two very clear incidents occurred which I outlined in my previous posts.

In regards to others including distinguished members of Congress using worse sexual language and/or slurs = TRUE.

*U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez

• Rep. Barney Frank
• Sen. Al Franken

Just to name a few off the top of my head…

 

[7_Sorrows]

Madonna isn’t a “Hollywood woman”.
Born and raised in Michigan, then a New Yorker, and so on.

And, since everyone here says once you are baptized Catholic, you are Catholic always…she’s Catholic.

Anything Judd and Madonna said, the new president has said much, much worse.

.

Yes, Madonna was in movies and music videos and probably owned real estate in California and is the ex-wife of Sean Penn and I am sure still has many connections to Hollywood. She also lived in England for many years. Since her divorce, I don’t know
where her domicile is now. But she definitely qualifies as a Hollywood celebrity.

 

[kat07]

2 things
1- I successfully rebuked your assertion that he had never been accused of these things in the past.
2- As to their veracity, I find it incredibly distasteful to put the victim on trial and triple check their assertions. We will never find out what happened, but there’s a body of work that matches his comments. And I feel this way across the aisle, same goes to any accusers of Bills. Research shows that the amount of women who put forward false accusations of this sort are incredibly rare.

1. One person Jill Harth, I forgot about her. Ivana Trump did not as she explained it was taken out of context.
2. There is not a body of work that matches Trumps comments. Again, the New York Times conducted a major investigation into Trump’s treatment of women and came up empty-handed. The Washington Post hired 40 investigative reporters to look into every aspect of Donald Trump’s life. All they could come up with was the Billy Bush tape leaked. Now if those two anti-Trump organization’s couldn’t find a body of work…there’s none there to be found. FACT: Trump has never been found guilty of sexual assault. In fact Jill Hart the only person person who did accuse and file sexual assault charges against Trump, only after losing a lawsuit to Trump, dropped those charges and did so on the condition that Trump monetarily settle a different lawsuit he had with her husband - and that’ not why Trump settled (just saying…)
3. One is not a “victim” when sexual assault did not occur but make those claims. They are liars. Now of course one is termed a “victim” until evidence proves otherwise, or proves they are in-fact a “victim”.
4. Every 11th hour Trump accuser, “all” who just happened to come out 4 weeks before the election was held…,have been proven to have either 1) lied, 2) lacked any merit or veracity, and 3) had massive credibility issues. The timing of their claims is what makes it questionable to people. You man find it to be distasteful to put people who make these type of accusation on trial and triple check their assertions, but the media and general public do it all the time, especially when the person accused is in the public spotlight and especially if running for the office of “President”, same was true for all of BC victims.
5. I find it hard to believe there is any research out there that shows it’s rare for women to lie, who put forward false accusations of “sexual assault” against someone running for a top public office - especially 4 weeks before people cast their votes in a highly heated and contested election…

What I find to be truly unfair is to judge Trump on allegations until it’s proven. That’s why we call it “innocent until proven guilty.” People were so quick to condemn Trump and label him as a sexual assaulter/groper, even before evidence was presented, or before he may have had an opportunity to prove himself innocent in a court of law and without any proof. That’s true unfair justice.

 

[dvdjs]

The tape was clear, I think it’s you who may need to review it. Trump said verbatim ". “And when you’re a STAR, they LET YOU do it.” At least to me that indicates women who are throwing themselves at stars/rich men, especially if they LET HIM grab their genital…maybe you sum it up a different way?

1. The tape makes absolutely clear he is talking about women other than those “who throw themselves at stars/rich men”.
2. His sense of what people “let” him do is not a definitive test for consent. We heard from two assault victims on this thread whose experiences contradict this misogynistic idea.
3. Trump clearly admits to contact without prior consent.

You may want to get some tapes and listen to guests on Howard Stern, many of them go along with him when on his show and talking in aggressive sexual language about wives, husbands, girlfriends, boyfriends or other family members. It’s not just men guests either it’s woman too. Nothing new here. Also, has nothing to do with who “I” hang out with …

I am intrigued by your experience with Stern, and your blase attitude about his content. The character of these people is not exculpatory for Trump. I will not vote for any of the people that talk the way Trump did with Stern for POTUS or anything else.

In regards to TK there is no spin on what I wrote.

You make an interpretation of the causes and relationships of certain events. But the events speak very clearly for themselves: TK was rejected in his bid for POTUS by Democrats; Trump was accepted by Republicans in his bid for POTUS. Nuff said.

In regards to others including distinguished members of Congress using worse sexual language and/or slurs = TRUE.

Again the tiresome pivot from the substantive issue. Salty language is, in this particular context, a relatively minor thing. It is the content of Trump’s words that reveal a character that disqualifies him, IMO, from holding the office of POTUS. By elevating him to POTUS, we have accepted a new low in standards of character. By vigorously defending the low standards, they sink even more.

 

[Jeanne_S]

Again the tiresome pivot from the substantive issue. Salty language is, in this particular context, a relatively minor thing. It is the content of Trump’s words that reveal a character that disqualifies him, IMO, from holding the office of POTUS. By elevating him to POTUS, we have accepted a new low in standards of character. By vigorously defending the low standards, they sink even more.

That new low precedent was set when BC was elected,not once but twice.

 

[kat07]

1. The tape makes absolutely clear he is talking about women other than those “who throw themselves at stars/rich men”.
2. His sense of what people “let” him do is not a definitive test for consent. We heard from two assault victims on this thread whose experiences contradict this misogynistic idea.
3. Trump clearly admits to contact without prior consent.

I am intrigued by your experience with Stern, and your blase attitude about his content. The character of these people is not exculpatory for Trump. I will not vote for any of the people that talk the way Trump did with Stern for POTUS or anything else.

You make an interpretation of the causes and relationships of certain events. But the events speak very clearly for themselves: TK was rejected in his bid for POTUS by Democrats; Trump was accepted by Republicans in his bid for POTUS. Nuff said.

Again the tiresome pivot from the substantive issue. Salty language is, in this particular context, a relatively minor thing. It is the content of Trump’s words that reveal a character that disqualifies him, IMO, from holding the office of POTUS. By elevating him to POTUS, we have accepted a new low in standards of character. By vigorously defending the low standards, they sink even more.

1. You state the tape makes it’ clear he’s not talking about "women who throw themselves at stars’, please enlighten me how the tape makes it clear he’s not?

2). In a court of law where sexual assault is the issue, if someone let’s you do something, in more cases than not it’s a definitive test for consent and acquittal. I haven’t read the posts in their entirety from the two assault victims on this thread, but I did see where one of them was 14 when assaulted and “froze”, which is typical for children. I’ll argue however that it’s not typical in our society today or of adult women, although I’m not arguing it never happens, again key word here is “typical”. To further assume that any adult women Trump may have touched, because they let him, wasn’t necessarily consent is more improbable than probable IMO. The more pragmatic scenario is that they threw themselves at him because he’s a billionaire.

1. Trump absolutely does not admit to contact without consent. If you want to make that claim please provide evidence where he does so.
2. I have no personal experience with Stern, although I do know who he is and his platform, as I assume a large majority of American do as well unless they have been living under a rock for the past 20 years. Stern’s radio career was built on raunchy talk. As far as my “blase attitude” for his content I have never claimed that to be the case, that’s a false assumption on your part. If you or others want to punch Trump for raunchy talk on Howard Stern’s radio show then I challenge them do the same to others like Trump who have appeared on Stern’s show making raunchy comments about friends, wives, husbands, boyfriend and girlfriends.
3. I’m not making an interpretation of causes and relationships of certain events. I’m only pointing out evident double standards. The events do speak for themselves. While TK was rejected by his bid for POTUS he was also supported by many democrats who were outraged at Trump, and he was elected Senator 11 times after killing someone by democrats. Women and leaders who have supported Teddy Kennedy were at the march speaking out against Trump. Teddy Kennedy was also was one of the most respected, and popular elected officials among millions, and among many leading democrat leaders. He also was never called upon, by those who called upon Trump, to apologize for his actions nor was said to be unfit to run. We are talking about killing someone vs locker room talk…Further, there were women like Gloria Steinem at the march bashing Trump, the same person who in the pages of the NYT announced the “one free grope rule, specifically developed for Bill Clinton during his era. And the thousands of millions of women who were marching in protest because Trump is a “misogynist” are the same women who voted for Bill Clinton for a second term after he admitted and was found guilty of sexual harassment and yelped “Let’s move on!”. These same women too who at the march protested in support of climate change and then did their part to help the environment by leaving piles of trash in front of the Trump hotel….
4. Finally, I’m not talking about “salty language” or a word of two when I referenced the likes of Rep. Barney Frank, en. Al Franken, and U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez. Their vulgarities were intentionally, publicly broadcasted, and laughed at by the same media and people that today pretend to need smelling salts after hearing the word “p*ssy”. At least this new puritanical standard explains why rappers like Jay Z were banned from the White House. Wait — what…

Now one can easily pull up my previous post from months ago where I stated “What Trump said was wrong, and sounded gross no matter what” however that does not make his a sexual predator or guilty of it.

Women have been sexualized for decades in every industry you can think of. It something that remains largely silent. It’s sad that men talk this way about women behind closed doors, but Trump is not the only man that has done this, there are plenty others including elected officials. Most have probably all have been a part of some type of 'vulgarity" in our lives. We watch movies with violence and sex, people buy magazines with sexual explicit photos. We listen to movie stars telling us who to vote for when they have played degrading roles in movies. Both men and women have to step up and do better. Hopefully a lot of people can learn about how disrespectful vulgarity is to each other, but vulgarity is a societal problem. However to suddenly act outraged over it because of one person is sanctimoniousness.

 

[kat07]

That new low precedent was set when BC was elected,not once but twice.

 

[dvdjs]

1. You state the tape makes it’ clear he’s not talking about "women who throw themselves at stars’, please enlighten me how the tape makes it clear he’s not?

Go back and listen.

2). In a court of law where sexual assault is the issue, if someone let’s you do something, in more cases than not it’s a definitive test for consent and acquittal.

It may be sufficient for reasonable doubt and acquittal, but it is not a definitive test for consent.

I’ll argue however that it’s not typical in our society today or of adult women, although I’m not arguing it never happens, again key word here is “typical”.

The key word was definitive.

1. Trump absolutely does not admit to contact without consent. If you want to make that claim please provide evidence where he does so.

Go back and listen.

As far as my “blase attitude” for his content I have never claimed that to be the case, that’s a false assumption on your part.

You manifest the attitude in these posts. If that is not your attitude, reconsider your posture on this thread.

If you or others want to punch Trump for raunchy talk on Howard Stern’s radio show then I challenge them do the same to others like Trump who have appeared on Stern’s show making raunchy comments about friends, wives, husbands, boyfriend and girlfriends.

Punch? . And again the tiresome pivot to mere “raunchy talk” which could mean anything. It is the specifics of what Trump said about his daughter that is deplorable.

I’m not making an interpretation of causes and relationships of certain events. I’m only pointing out evident double standards.

Actually you steadfastly resist seeing the most evident double standard.

millions of women who were marching in protest because Trump is a “misogynist” are the same women who voted for Bill Clinton for a second term after he admitted and was found guilty of sexual harassment

And again you need to refresh your memory. No one voted for BC after he “admitted and was found guilty of sexual harassment”.

Now one can easily pull up my previous post from months ago where I stated “What Trump said was wrong, and sounded gross no matter what” however that does not make his a sexual predator or guilty of it.

You can say this as often as you want, but that doesn’t make it so.

It’s sad that men talk this way about women behind closed doors, but Trump is not the only man that has done this,
… but vulgarity is a societal problem. However to suddenly act outraged over it because of one person is sanctimoniousness.

We are not talking about what he said behind closed doors, but very publicly.
We are not talking just about salty talk, but content that is particularly disturbing.
We are not talking about only talk, but action.
We are not talking about a “societal problem” but Trump’s problem.
We are not taking random men but one who was under review for POTUS.

You are entitled to hold and defends standards as low as you like. But when such low standards prevail and are deemed acceptable for the POTUS, yes people will appear to be “losing their minds, souls, dignity, humanity”.

 

[dvdjs]

That new low precedent was set when BC was elected,not once but twice.

How so?

 

[vz71]

One thing about this entire March…
The big story is about their behavior.
There is almost nothing about what they wanted to say.

All of their efforts accomplished nothing.

 

[EIF5A]

Lots of liberal (mostly white) women with disposable income gathered to throw a tantrum and act absurdly to fight for abortion on demand.

Meanwhile the co-organizer of this inane event supports and condones sharia. Conveniently ignored by the media of course.

 

[joshman1]

One thing about this entire March…
The big story is about their behavior.
There is almost nothing about what they wanted to say.

All of their efforts accomplished nothing.

The big story isn’t about their behavior. It was an overwhelming success.

 

[ucfengr]

If there’s one thing we can take from the March for Women, it’s that, judging from the featured speakers, the left’s shock at Trump’s vulgarity was affected.

 

[EIF5A]

The big story isn’t about their behavior. It was an overwhelming success.

Sure, if success means having no clear goal or idea or plan other than demonstrating they love abortion and hate Trump.

Because Trump wants to defund “women’s healthcare”.

All we’ve seen so far are vulgar displays and saccharine slogans about “love trumps hate”.

Who’s hating on anyone?

It’s the tired old argument, “You disagree with me, so you hate this and that group of people.”

All it’s done is turn a section of DC into a giant safe zone.

 

[joshman1]

Sure, if success means having no clear goal or idea or plan other than demonstrating they love abortion and hate Trump.

Because Trump wants to defund “women’s healthcare”.

All we’ve seen so far are vulgar displays and saccharine slogans about “love trumps hate”.

Who’s hating on anyone?

It’s the tired old argument, “You disagree with me, so you hate this and that group of people.”

All it’s done is turn a section of DC into a giant safe zone.

You sound so bitter. It was a beautiful show of solidarity, women need to be heard. Suffragists faced similar attacks btw.