NYT: Two women say DT touched them

[jeaniebueller]

Oct 13, 2016 9:37:13 GMT -5 bex said:

Oct 13, 2016 9:36:01 GMT -5 wakka said:

He can sue for whatever he wants. Doesn't mean he'll win.

I understand that.    My worry is that this is a preview of his greater plan if he were to win - to shut down all unfavorable press, through one means or another.

People should be extremely frightened about this kind of rhetoric. Sadly, they are not.

[WanderingWinoZ]

Oct 13, 2016 9:37:13 GMT -5 bex said:

Oct 13, 2016 9:36:01 GMT -5 wakka said:

He can sue for whatever he wants. Doesn't mean he'll win.

I understand that.    My worry is that this is a preview of his greater plan if he were to win - to shut down all unfavorable press, through one means or another.

Peter Theiel already did that to gawker 

www.vox.com/2016/8/18/12539390/gawker-dot-com-shutting-down-why


Suing or threatening to sue is just another extension of Trump being a bully & using his money/power to do things the rest of us can't do

[bex]

Oct 13, 2016 9:47:44 GMT -5 jeaniebueller said:

Oct 13, 2016 9:37:13 GMT -5 bex said:

I understand that.    My worry is that this is a preview of his greater plan if he were to win - to shut down all unfavorable press, through one means or another.

People should be extremely frightened about this kind of rhetoric. Sadly, they are not.

Exactly - this is the rhetoric that scares me. This is the stuff that destroys democracies.  I don't want to be overly dramatic here but putting a muzzle on the press is really scary. And that's what he clearly wants to do. There's a reason he likes to go on Fox News and O'Reilly but not Rachel Maddow.  Although I don't know if she would want him, ha.

[pixy0stix]

There's a guy in the local news fb page claiming he's seen the D's at the local Krogers asking for people to play Trump victims.

[jeaniebueller]

Oct 13, 2016 10:02:28 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

There's a guy in the local news fb page claiming he's seen the D's at the local Krogers asking for people to play Trump victims.

Is he also reporting that Alex Jones is paying people to wear the "bill clinton is a rapist" shirts at rallies and get on TV? 

[sugarglider]

Oct 13, 2016 9:36:23 GMT -5 ECB said:

Oct 13, 2016 9:34:58 GMT -5 bex said:

 
I know we've been discussing this for a while, but forget the 19th amendment. It seems like the 1st amendment will be the first to fall under a president trump.

But don't take away the 2nd amendment!!! THAT one is gospel.  All the others?  Eh, we can do without. 

Except, police can shoot people for just having a gun on them, so in reality, he doesn't even really want to keep that one.

[juliej]

I just threw up in my mouth.

www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-advice-bill-cosby_us_57fbfce2e4b0b6a43034d47c?

[ECB]

Oct 13, 2016 10:07:58 GMT -5 juliej said:

I just threw up in my mouth.

www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-advice-bill-cosby_us_57fbfce2e4b0b6a43034d47c?

ALL of this - everything we're putting on CEP, and then reading this... ALL of this makes me really scared at the idea of him running our country.  I don't understand how people can actually think he cares about them. He doesn't.  He cares about him and him alone.  Period.  Being president will only be to forward HIS agenda, no one elses.

[smock]

Oct 13, 2016 10:02:28 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

There's a guy in the local news fb page claiming he's seen the D's at the local Krogers asking for people to play Trump victims.

[jeaniebueller]

He is Donald showing all of the self awareness about the dynamics of sexual assault:

Attachments:

[jojoandleo]

Oct 13, 2016 9:34:58 GMT -5 bex said:

Also - because the threats about suing the NYT are really bothering me - how is that acceptable? Trump is basically trying to issue a warning shot and let news organizations know that if they publish stuff about him he doesn't like, he will sue. I feel like he's probably been chomping at the bit to send off a letter like that and this is the first time he's really had even the slightest glimmer of a reason to do so.


I know we've been discussing this for a while, but forget the 19th amendment. It seems like the 1st amendment will be the first to fall under a president trump.

I am sure NYT has insurance for this and your insurer has the duty to defend. So, the threat doesn't mean much when the news organization knows the lawsuit won't hold water.  NYT is reporting from a source they have likely vetted.  This claim may cost some attorney's fees, but they will be paid by the insurance company, not NYT.

[jojoandleo]

Oct 13, 2016 10:28:25 GMT -5 jeaniebueller said:

He is Donald showing all of the self awareness about the dynamics of sexual assault:

[juliej]

Oct 13, 2016 10:28:39 GMT -5 jojoandleo said:

Oct 13, 2016 9:34:58 GMT -5 bex said:

Also - because the threats about suing the NYT are really bothering me - how is that acceptable? Trump is basically trying to issue a warning shot and let news organizations know that if they publish stuff about him he doesn't like, he will sue. I feel like he's probably been chomping at the bit to send off a letter like that and this is the first time he's really had even the slightest glimmer of a reason to do so.


I know we've been discussing this for a while, but forget the 19th amendment. It seems like the 1st amendment will be the first to fall under a president trump.

I am sure NYT has insurance for this and your insurer has the duty to defend. So, the threat doesn't mean much when the news organization knows the lawsuit won't hold water.  NYT is reporting from a source they have likely vetted.  This claim may cost some attorney's fees, but they will be paid by the insurance company, not NYT.

This is also why some stuff can take so long to break. The editor-in-chief and publisher also play a big role in deciding what level of risk the publication is willing to take on, which is why two orgs may have the same story but one will break it much sooner.

[heyjude]

All of this is making me feel sick and depressed. This is not hyperbole. I feel legit terrified for our future and I say this as someone who believes HRC will win. The floodgates against women are opening.

[MrsAxilla]

Oct 13, 2016 10:38:01 GMT -5 heyjude said:

All of this is making me feel sick and depressed. This is not hyperbole. I feel legit terrified for our future and I say this as someone who believes HRC will win. The floodgates against women are opening.

I'm so proud of the way women are fighting back, though.  I see the eveidence of feminazi awakenings everywhere.

[lulu13]

Oct 13, 2016 10:40:23 GMT -5 MrsAxilla said:

Oct 13, 2016 10:38:01 GMT -5 heyjude said:

All of this is making me feel sick and depressed. This is not hyperbole. I feel legit terrified for our future and I say this as someone who believes HRC will win. The floodgates against women are opening.

I'm so proud of the way women are fighting back, though.  I see the eveidence of feminazi awakenings everywhere.

I was just telling H last night that this is firing up something good for women. Have we been too complacent? Now that this is all hanging out there it needs to be addressed.

[hopecounts]

Oct 13, 2016 10:28:39 GMT -5 jojoandleo said:

Oct 13, 2016 9:34:58 GMT -5 bex said:

Also - because the threats about suing the NYT are really bothering me - how is that acceptable? Trump is basically trying to issue a warning shot and let news organizations know that if they publish stuff about him he doesn't like, he will sue. I feel like he's probably been chomping at the bit to send off a letter like that and this is the first time he's really had even the slightest glimmer of a reason to do so.


I know we've been discussing this for a while, but forget the 19th amendment. It seems like the 1st amendment will be the first to fall under a president trump.

I am sure NYT has insurance for this and your insurer has the duty to defend. So, the threat doesn't mean much when the news organization knows the lawsuit won't hold water.  NYT is reporting from a source they have likely vetted.  This claim may cost some attorney's fees, but they will be paid by the insurance company, not NYT.

I think the concern is the potential chilling effect it might have. 
no the lawsuits won't cause actual damage but will it affect who is willing to come forward and how hard the reporters have to work to get the stories.

[jojoandleo]

Oct 13, 2016 10:46:48 GMT -5 hopecounts said:

Oct 13, 2016 10:28:39 GMT -5 jojoandleo said:

I am sure NYT has insurance for this and your insurer has the duty to defend. So, the threat doesn't mean much when the news organization knows the lawsuit won't hold water.  NYT is reporting from a source they have likely vetted.  This claim may cost some attorney's fees, but they will be paid by the insurance company, not NYT.

I think the concern is the potential chilling effect it might have. 
no the lawsuits won't cause actual damage but will it affect who is willing to come forward and how hard the reporters have to work to get the stories.

I took it from the stance of chilling effect on newspapers, which it is unlikely to have because this is something they deal with regularly and weigh prior to publishing.  I don't know if it will have a chilling effect on sources because it doesn't appear he has threatened to sue the sources...yet.

[WanderingWinoZ]

Oct 13, 2016 10:49:46 GMT -5 @majorwife said:

Oct 13, 2016 10:40:23 GMT -5 MrsAxilla said:

I'm so proud of the way women are fighting back, though.  I see the eveidence of feminazi awakenings everywhere.

if this allows for third wave feminism to be rebooted and to include ALL women - WOC, trans, etc it will be a good thing

Even the christian women are coming out- lol! 

[heyjude]

There will be darkness before there will be light. Just hold on for the bumpy ride ahead.

[aurora]

Oct 13, 2016 10:46:48 GMT -5 hopecounts said:

Oct 13, 2016 10:28:39 GMT -5 jojoandleo said:

I am sure NYT has insurance for this and your insurer has the duty to defend. So, the threat doesn't mean much when the news organization knows the lawsuit won't hold water.  NYT is reporting from a source they have likely vetted.  This claim may cost some attorney's fees, but they will be paid by the insurance company, not NYT.

I think the concern is the potential chilling effect it might have. 
no the lawsuits won't cause actual damage but will it affect who is willing to come forward and how hard the reporters have to work to get the stories.

It is chilling for sure to worry about lawsuits thrown at you, but on the other hand it's making me (a non-journalist) really think hard about how important it is to have news agencies strong enough to take on this kind of risk. For the past ~decade, I really haven't paid for journalism, instead clicking through a variety of news sources until I hit my monthly limit and then moving on to the next one. Now I'm realizing that doing so may play a role in hindering important investigative journalism that sheds light on powerful people and institutions. Once these big news sources are gone (because we're not willing to pay for them), who will take on that risk?

[WanderingWinoZ]

This is a really good read- from teh former GOPlifer.com
politicalorphans.com/why-now/

he first tape dropped exactly one month to the day prior to the General Election. That recording featured Donald Trump describing in explicit detail his habit of sexually assaulting women. A few days later, after an absolutely catastrophic performance in the second debate, snippets of Trump’s appearances on Howard Stern’s show started to dribble out into news media.

From the first of the Stern releases we learn that Trump draws the line sexually at women over age 12. Helpful, I guess. In another clip he makes lewd sexual comments about his daughter. Then we hear him describe how he treats contestants in his beauty pageants. Finally after a flood of media attention has provided a sense of safety, victims of Trump’s lifestyle start pouring out to share their stories.

This sequence of revelations emerged into a carefully constructed narrative pattern, exactly the technique deployed by a trial attorney laying out a case. Republicans are crying foul, hinting that the Clinton campaign is manipulating the media. So what? That’s what credible, competent campaign professionals do. And ‘manipulating the media’ was what Trump was doing before he blundered into the buzzsaw of the Clinton machine.

It may be years before we learn the whole story of how this media firestorm was launched, but one thing is clear. Nothing about the Republican primary process prepared the party’s candidates to square off against a professional campaign run by adults. No one could have been surprised by the allegations against Trump. He’s been talking about his behavior in public for decades. The fact that this candidate survived the Republican primary demonstrates that the party’s voters, not Donald Trump, are at the core the GOP’s illness.

A few Republicans have had the temerity to whine that “no one mentioned this in the primaries.” That’s bullshit. Donald Trump did face scrutiny over his treatment of women in the GOP primary. The ugly fact is that Republican voters didn’t care. They still don’t.

In the very first Republican debate, the very first question Donald Trump faced specifically called out his abuse of women. Predictably enough, his response was crude, abusive, creepy and juvenile. How did Republicans respond? With cheers. They cheered that miserable cretin like a hero. Watch the video and tell me you were surprised by what we learned last week:



After the debate, he went on the attack against Kelly herself with a series of crude, ugly comments. Republicans responded by rallying around Trump. Meanwhile the leadership of Kelly’s network was being dismantled by their own sexual harassment scandal. Republicans didn’t care about that either, continuing to tune into a network built from the ground up around a sick culture of abuse.

Let’s be honest – none of these revelations about Donald Trump, if they had emerged in February instead of October, would have changed the outcome of the primary. Republicans wanted a racist, sexist pig as their champion. They got exactly what they wanted.

Even if some Republicans did care about Trump’s horrendous flaws, the process itself was so degraded that none of the campaigns could have effectively investigated or pressed the matter. Real vetting in the GOP primary was non-existent. It was a circus run by the monkeys themselves. Nothing left in the Republican infrastructure can restore any element of professionalism. It is a party of idiots.

Why are Republican campaigns so consistently incompetent? Because Republican candidates and officials are no longer permitted to traffic in facts.

A Republican candidate who acknowledges that climate change is real, illegal immigration is declining, Benghazi was a tragic mistake rather than a deliberate conspiracy, Obama is not a Muslim, and black people have some legitimate concerns about police abuse, would be booed off the debate stage and hounded into oblivion. If you cannot use facts, then you are left to fly blind. Everything you do will at best be clumsy until it eventually tumbles into disaster.

Whichever unfortunate goofball happened to win the Republican nomination was ultimately doomed to face one of the most expert political machines in the country’s modern history. Naive Republicans who insist that Trump was just a bad candidate who doesn’t reflect on the party itself should never have to discover what the Clinton campaign would have revealed about Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, or (God help us all) Ted Cruz.

These allegations are only emerging now because a broken political party, stripped of competent professionals, was incapable of staging a real primary. This is what happens when your party rejects facts. The GOP isn’t going to restore its ability to compete nationally without a painful reassessment of the party’s relationship to reality. Nothing happening now suggests that any sort of reform is on the horizon. The GOP has become, as Republican Governor Bobby Jindal explained, “the stupid party,” and so it shall remain until its delicate members develop the courage to face some facts.

[katietornado]

OH MY FUCKING GOD. FIRE THIS MOTHERFUCKER.

www.businessinsider.com/lou-dobbs-trump-accuser-twitter-2016-10

Fox Business host Lou Dobbs on Thursday posted a phone number and address purportedly belonging to one of the women who has accused Donald Trump of unwanted sexual contact.

Dobbs, a fierce Trump supporter, retweeted an individual who had posted the purported information of Jessica Leeds. The 74-year-old woman told The New York Times in an article published Wednesday that decades ago Trump groped her on a first-class flight.

"This is the Dirtiest Campaign in our History," Dobbs wrote, using the hashtags "MAGA," "TrumpPence16," and "AmericaFirst."



Twitter's terms of service prohibit individuals from posting "other people's private and confidential information" such as home addresses.

Representatives for neither Fox Business nor Twitter immediately responded to a request for comment.

The purported personal information was posted to falsely claim that Leeds had the same phone number as one listed for the Clinton Foundation.

Dobbs is one of Fox Business' most prominent hosts and earns some of the highest ratings on the network.

[bex]

Okay so Dobbs' twitter account should be closed? yes?

that's reprehensible.

[StrawberryBlondie]

I'm dedicated to posting one factual anti-Trump article to facebook each day till the election.

[bex]

Oct 13, 2016 10:53:13 GMT -5 jojoandleo said:

Oct 13, 2016 10:46:48 GMT -5 hopecounts said:

I think the concern is the potential chilling effect it might have. 
no the lawsuits won't cause actual damage but will it affect who is willing to come forward and how hard the reporters have to work to get the stories.

I took it from the stance of chilling effect on newspapers, which it is unlikely to have because this is something they deal with regularly and weigh prior to publishing.  I don't know if it will have a chilling effect on sources because it doesn't appear he has threatened to sue the sources...yet.

No, to clarify, because people seem very confused by my comment, lol - I don't think this particular lawsuit is going to deter NYT (I said several pages back that I am sure the freaking NYT had all their ducks in a row before publishing this.) 

I'm more concerned about what this would mean in a Trump administration in terms of his treatment of the press. Not that news organizations are going to fold because someone may sue them. But I think it is very troubling in terms of showing us how trump deals with news outlets that post unflattering/negative stories about him - having chants about shutting down CNN, etc.  I know people are going to say "he cant touch the first amendment" but well.....crazier things have happened.

I don't think NYT is going to stop publishing stories like this because Trump's lawyer sent a nasty letter or even files suit.

[smock]

Lou Dobbs better get fired for that shit. Fuck no.

[WOT?*]

I really wish the R party would approach GOPlifer and others like him to help reshape their party and policies. He won't run but I think he'd be a heck of an advisor, if they'd only listen.

[ESF]

Oct 13, 2016 11:47:42 GMT -5 WanderingWinoZ said:

This is a really good read- from teh former GOPlifer.com
politicalorphans.com/why-now/

he first tape dropped exactly one month to the day prior to the General Election. That recording featured Donald Trump describing in explicit detail his habit of sexually assaulting women. A few days later, after an absolutely catastrophic performance in the second debate, snippets of Trump’s appearances on Howard Stern’s show started to dribble out into news media.

From the first of the Stern releases we learn that Trump draws the line sexually at women over age 12. Helpful, I guess. In another clip he makes lewd sexual comments about his daughter. Then we hear him describe how he treats contestants in his beauty pageants. Finally after a flood of media attention has provided a sense of safety, victims of Trump’s lifestyle start pouring out to share their stories.

This sequence of revelations emerged into a carefully constructed narrative pattern, exactly the technique deployed by a trial attorney laying out a case. Republicans are crying foul, hinting that the Clinton campaign is manipulating the media. So what? That’s what credible, competent campaign professionals do. And ‘manipulating the media’ was what Trump was doing before he blundered into the buzzsaw of the Clinton machine.

It may be years before we learn the whole story of how this media firestorm was launched, but one thing is clear. Nothing about the Republican primary process prepared the party’s candidates to square off against a professional campaign run by adults. No one could have been surprised by the allegations against Trump. He’s been talking about his behavior in public for decades. The fact that this candidate survived the Republican primary demonstrates that the party’s voters, not Donald Trump, are at the core the GOP’s illness.

A few Republicans have had the temerity to whine that “no one mentioned this in the primaries.” That’s bullshit. Donald Trump did face scrutiny over his treatment of women in the GOP primary. The ugly fact is that Republican voters didn’t care. They still don’t.

In the very first Republican debate, the very first question Donald Trump faced specifically called out his abuse of women. Predictably enough, his response was crude, abusive, creepy and juvenile. How did Republicans respond? With cheers. They cheered that miserable cretin like a hero. Watch the video and tell me you were surprised by what we learned last week:



After the debate, he went on the attack against Kelly herself with a series of crude, ugly comments. Republicans responded by rallying around Trump. Meanwhile the leadership of Kelly’s network was being dismantled by their own sexual harassment scandal. Republicans didn’t care about that either, continuing to tune into a network built from the ground up around a sick culture of abuse.

Let’s be honest – none of these revelations about Donald Trump, if they had emerged in February instead of October, would have changed the outcome of the primary. Republicans wanted a racist, sexist pig as their champion. They got exactly what they wanted.

Even if some Republicans did care about Trump’s horrendous flaws, the process itself was so degraded that none of the campaigns could have effectively investigated or pressed the matter. Real vetting in the GOP primary was non-existent. It was a circus run by the monkeys themselves. Nothing left in the Republican infrastructure can restore any element of professionalism. It is a party of idiots.

Why are Republican campaigns so consistently incompetent? Because Republican candidates and officials are no longer permitted to traffic in facts.

A Republican candidate who acknowledges that climate change is real, illegal immigration is declining, Benghazi was a tragic mistake rather than a deliberate conspiracy, Obama is not a Muslim, and black people have some legitimate concerns about police abuse, would be booed off the debate stage and hounded into oblivion. If you cannot use facts, then you are left to fly blind. Everything you do will at best be clumsy until it eventually tumbles into disaster.

Whichever unfortunate goofball happened to win the Republican nomination was ultimately doomed to face one of the most expert political machines in the country’s modern history. Naive Republicans who insist that Trump was just a bad candidate who doesn’t reflect on the party itself should never have to discover what the Clinton campaign would have revealed about Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, or (God help us all) Ted Cruz.

These allegations are only emerging now because a broken political party, stripped of competent professionals, was incapable of staging a real primary. This is what happens when your party rejects facts. The GOP isn’t going to restore its ability to compete nationally without a painful reassessment of the party’s relationship to reality. Nothing happening now suggests that any sort of reform is on the horizon. The GOP has become, as Republican Governor Bobby Jindal explained, “the stupid party,” and so it shall remain until its delicate members develop the courage to face some facts.

I'm going to need a cigarette.

My god, that was a satisfying read.

[ESF]

Lou Dobbs can go fuck himself. Holy shit.