I have always said let the women come forward on Trump and Moore

[bodecea]

I'm not going to defend Hillary and I don't see why I should. I've never voted for her and I never wouldn't. In fact I support changing the voting system so people get a REAL CHOICE of who they vote for, rather than the sham where two parties choose their candidates then 150 million people then get to choose only these two.

You don't go after women who have been victimized? Bullshit. When Trump starts attacking a woman, the nutjobs on the right will go after her like crazy.

Not me, not now, not ever. Look up my posts if you don't believe me.

I didn't say you did, I said there are those that do. That's the point here, that for women to put themselves under that, it's not easy. The rich and powerful have, for a very long time, managed to keep women down.

And now it's time to end the free ride powerful abusive men have gotten.

So do your part, and get rid of the Clintons.

Get rid of them from where? Bill Clinton hasn't been in public office for a long time.

JUST CONDEMN THE GODDAMN CLINTONS. Stop defending them. You can do it, just break the umbilical cord between you and the scumbags.

Sounds like you ARE condemning the Clintons. What you are really upset about is that you can't FORCE the rest of us to agree with you.

 

[danielpalos]

I have never defended Trump or Moore on these sexual charges.

So, why do you Democrats continue to defend Clinton?

So long as Republicans and Democrats are defending these people, we are not making progress.

I say, clear the decks of all of it and let the heads roll where they may.

What if they want to vote for the guy with the "cutest penis", to make an informed decision?

 

[BULLDOG]

You bet. We'll immediately kick Hillary out of her position as.......ah, she doesn't have a position........Well never mind that, we will certainly kick Bill out of office... err, ah ....he doesn't hold any office either. Neither are running for any office either. What exactly do you propose? Aren't you really just mad because everybody doesn't run them down like you do? Come on now, tell us exactly what you want us to do.

I want you to DRIVE THEM OUT OF PUBLIC LIFE like what has happened to all the other men who have lost positions of prestige and power.

That means NO SPEECHES.

NO FUNDRAISING.

NO BOOK DEALS.

BOOK WITHDRAWN FROM BOOK STORES.

Etc.

You want them tarred and feathered too? You might as well add a pony and a new GI Joe to that list cause I don't know ho to ban someone from writing books or making speeches. If I did, I would have banned Hannity and Oreilley a long time ago.

You are rapidly losing all credibility when you continue to argue that nothing can be done about the Clintons.

Really? How as HR Haldeman or John Ehrilechman, or even Neut Gingrich prevented from giving speeches or writing books after their scandals?

How about this as a compromise?

YOU STOP DEFENDING THE CLINTONS.

In fact, as a show of good faith, you should condemn the Clintons for their thirty years of scandals, starting with Whitewater and ending in Uranium One.

Go.

Got it. You prefer me to follow YOUR ***** grabber, and YOUR pedophile. You might note that instead of purging your sexual deviates, you're trying to get another one elected.

 

[bodecea]

No, you Democrats still don't get it.

You defended the Clintons, and because of that, you are still stinky as a rotten corpse, and that stink remains on you until you purge the Clintons out of your party and out of all power.

If we're going to be serious about this sexual assault issue, then there can be NO EXCEPTIONS for the Clintons.

You bet. We'll immediately kick Hillary out of her position as.......ah, she doesn't have a position........Well never mind that, we will certainly kick Bill out of office... err, ah ....he doesn't hold any office either. Neither are running for any office either. What exactly do you propose? Aren't you really just mad because everybody doesn't run them down like you do? Come on now, tell us exactly what you want us to do.

I want you to DRIVE THEM OUT OF PUBLIC LIFE like what has happened to all the other men who have lost positions of prestige and power.

That means NO SPEECHES.

NO FUNDRAISING.

NO BOOK DEALS.

BOOK WITHDRAWN FROM BOOK STORES.

Etc.

You want them tarred and feathered too? You might as well add a pony and a new GI Joe to that list cause I don't know ho to ban someone from writing books or making speeches. If I did, I would have banned Hannity and Oreilley a long time ago.

You are rapidly losing all credibility when you continue to argue that nothing can be done about the Clintons.

I thought we were getting indictments or at least another investigation any day now....any day now...any day now...any day now.

Is that not true?

 

[BULLDOG]

No, you Democrats still don't get it.

You defended the Clintons, and because of that, you are still stinky as a rotten corpse, and that stink remains on you until you purge the Clintons out of your party and out of all power.

If we're going to be serious about this sexual assault issue, then there can be NO EXCEPTIONS for the Clintons.

You bet. We'll immediately kick Hillary out of her position as.......ah, she doesn't have a position........Well never mind that, we will certainly kick Bill out of office... err, ah ....he doesn't hold any office either. Neither are running for any office either. What exactly do you propose? Aren't you really just mad because everybody doesn't run them down like you do? Come on now, tell us exactly what you want us to do.

I want you to DRIVE THEM OUT OF PUBLIC LIFE like what has happened to all the other men who have lost positions of prestige and power.

That means NO SPEECHES.

NO FUNDRAISING.

NO BOOK DEALS.

BOOK WITHDRAWN FROM BOOK STORES.

Etc.

You want them tarred and feathered too? You might as well add a pony and a new GI Joe to that list cause I don't know ho to ban someone from writing books or making speeches. If I did, I would have banned Hannity and Oreilley a long time ago.

You are rapidly losing all credibility when you continue to argue that nothing can be done about the Clintons.

That is just heart breaking coming from someone who has no credibility.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I'm not going to defend Hillary and I don't see why I should. I've never voted for her and I never wouldn't. In fact I support changing the voting system so people get a REAL CHOICE of who they vote for, rather than the sham where two parties choose their candidates then 150 million people then get to choose only these two.

You don't go after women who have been victimized? Bullshit. When Trump starts attacking a woman, the nutjobs on the right will go after her like crazy.

Not me, not now, not ever. Look up my posts if you don't believe me.

I didn't say you did, I said there are those that do. That's the point here, that for women to put themselves under that, it's not easy. The rich and powerful have, for a very long time, managed to keep women down.

And now it's time to end the free ride powerful abusive men have gotten.

So do your part, and get rid of the Clintons.

Get rid of them from where? Bill Clinton hasn't been in public office for a long time.

JUST CONDEMN THE GODDAMN CLINTONS. Stop defending them. You can do it, just break the umbilical cord between you and the scumbags.

Oh, so now you think you can order them around. When have I defended the Clintons?

Umbilical cord between me and the Clintons. Er... what the **** are you talking about?

I've never voted Clinton, I've never voted Democrat.

 

[hadit]

I have never defended Trump or Moore on these sexual charges.

So, why do you Democrats continue to defend Clinton?

So long as Republicans and Democrats are defending these people, we are not making progress.

I say, clear the decks of all of it and let the heads roll where they may.

Trump made the decision to put himself in the limelight.

Any woman who comes forward knows they're going to get a massive barrage of abuse from the right wing media, from the president, from people like you. They didn't CHOOSE to have that thrown on them, but they can choose to hide away from it.

This "massive barrage" you speak of pales compared the the living hell Hillary Clinton put her husband's victims through, even though she stated that "all women must be believed." Contrary to what you've been taught, there is no "vast right-wing conspiracy", and we don't go after women who have been victimized. That is primarily something Democrats do.

I'm not going to defend Hillary and I don't see why I should. I've never voted for her and I never wouldn't. In fact I support changing the voting system so people get a REAL CHOICE of who they vote for, rather than the sham where two parties choose their candidates then 150 million people then get to choose only these two.

You don't go after women who have been victimized? Bullshit. When Trump starts attacking a woman, the nutjobs on the right will go after her like crazy.

Women have accused the president. Where has the right "gone after them like crazy"?

 

[frigidweirdo]

I have never defended Trump or Moore on these sexual charges.

So, why do you Democrats continue to defend Clinton?

So long as Republicans and Democrats are defending these people, we are not making progress.

I say, clear the decks of all of it and let the heads roll where they may.

Trump made the decision to put himself in the limelight.

Any woman who comes forward knows they're going to get a massive barrage of abuse from the right wing media, from the president, from people like you. They didn't CHOOSE to have that thrown on them, but they can choose to hide away from it.

This "massive barrage" you speak of pales compared the the living hell Hillary Clinton put her husband's victims through, even though she stated that "all women must be believed." Contrary to what you've been taught, there is no "vast right-wing conspiracy", and we don't go after women who have been victimized. That is primarily something Democrats do.

I'm not going to defend Hillary and I don't see why I should. I've never voted for her and I never wouldn't. In fact I support changing the voting system so people get a REAL CHOICE of who they vote for, rather than the sham where two parties choose their candidates then 150 million people then get to choose only these two.

You don't go after women who have been victimized? Bullshit. When Trump starts attacking a woman, the nutjobs on the right will go after her like crazy.

Women have accused the president. Where has the right "gone after them like crazy"?

On this forum, for example.

And at the present they have accused and nothing much has happened. Trump hasn't even got started yet.

 

[hadit]

I have never defended Trump or Moore on these sexual charges.

So, why do you Democrats continue to defend Clinton?

So long as Republicans and Democrats are defending these people, we are not making progress.

I say, clear the decks of all of it and let the heads roll where they may.

Trump made the decision to put himself in the limelight.

Any woman who comes forward knows they're going to get a massive barrage of abuse from the right wing media, from the president, from people like you. They didn't CHOOSE to have that thrown on them, but they can choose to hide away from it.

This "massive barrage" you speak of pales compared the the living hell Hillary Clinton put her husband's victims through, even though she stated that "all women must be believed." Contrary to what you've been taught, there is no "vast right-wing conspiracy", and we don't go after women who have been victimized. That is primarily something Democrats do.

I'm not going to defend Hillary and I don't see why I should. I've never voted for her and I never wouldn't. In fact I support changing the voting system so people get a REAL CHOICE of who they vote for, rather than the sham where two parties choose their candidates then 150 million people then get to choose only these two.

You don't go after women who have been victimized? Bullshit. When Trump starts attacking a woman, the nutjobs on the right will go after her like crazy.

Women have accused the president. Where has the right "gone after them like crazy"?

On this forum, for example.

And at the present they have accused and nothing much has happened. Trump hasn't even got started yet.

I have to compare the way Trump's accusers were handled vs the way Hillary handled Bubba's accusers. I haven't heard of "bimbo eruptions" or what happens when you drag a hundred dollar bill through a trailer park about Trump's accusers coming from high ranking Republican figures, have you?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Trump made the decision to put himself in the limelight.

Any woman who comes forward knows they're going to get a massive barrage of abuse from the right wing media, from the president, from people like you. They didn't CHOOSE to have that thrown on them, but they can choose to hide away from it.

This "massive barrage" you speak of pales compared the the living hell Hillary Clinton put her husband's victims through, even though she stated that "all women must be believed." Contrary to what you've been taught, there is no "vast right-wing conspiracy", and we don't go after women who have been victimized. That is primarily something Democrats do.

I'm not going to defend Hillary and I don't see why I should. I've never voted for her and I never wouldn't. In fact I support changing the voting system so people get a REAL CHOICE of who they vote for, rather than the sham where two parties choose their candidates then 150 million people then get to choose only these two.

You don't go after women who have been victimized? Bullshit. When Trump starts attacking a woman, the nutjobs on the right will go after her like crazy.

Women have accused the president. Where has the right "gone after them like crazy"?

On this forum, for example.

And at the present they have accused and nothing much has happened. Trump hasn't even got started yet.

I have to compare the way Trump's accusers were handled vs the way Hillary handled Bubba's accusers. I haven't heard of "bimbo eruptions" or what happens when you drag a hundred dollar bill through a trailer park about Trump's accusers coming from high ranking Republican figures, have you?

Ah, so we're back to partisan politics instead of just the issue. Great.

 

[leftwinger]

Even what weird Al did was just stupid joking nonsense as far as what's reported. The forced kiss? Come on! Knee to groin will stop that right there. Whats with these HOs stories? Just let it happen then decades later tell about it? Franken should go nowhere but to work. They knew they voted in a clown. Dont like it now? Too bad. Vote him out.

 

[Reasonable]

I have never defended Trump or Moore on these sexual charges.

So, why do you Democrats continue to defend Clinton?

So long as Republicans and Democrats are defending these people, we are not making progress.

I say, clear the decks of all of it and let the heads roll where they may.

What office does Clinton hold?
What office is he running for?
Dunce.

 

[Reasonable]

I have never defended Trump or Moore on these sexual charges.

So, why do you Democrats continue to defend Clinton?

So long as Republicans and Democrats are defending these people, we are not making progress.

I say, clear the decks of all of it and let the heads roll where they may.

I suspect once the Russia hysteria has come to an end they will turn to the accusation next to remove him.

This if that fails they will turn to something else.

2 guilty pleas and two indictments ALREADY...,with more to come.
The only hysteria is coming from your side now that you know this isn’t fake news..

 

[waltky]

Uncle Ferd already leary o' womens - he says right when ya think dey's yer buddy - dey'll slap ya with a sexy harassment lawsuit...

Will Misconduct Scandals Make Men Wary of Women at Work?
December 11, 2017 — Some women, and men, worry the same climate that’s emboldening women to speak up about sexual misconduct could backfire by making some men wary of female colleagues.

Forget private meetings and get-to-know-you dinners. Beware of banter. Think twice before a high-ranking man mentors a young female staffer. “I have already heard the rumblings of a backlash: ‘This is why you shouldn’t hire women,’” Facebook chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg wrote in a recent post . “So much good is happening to fix workplaces right now. Let’s make sure it does not have the unintended consequence of holding women back,” said Sandberg, author of the working women’s manifesto “Lean In.” Ana Quincoces, a Miami-based attorney and entrepreneur who owns her own food line, says her business and its success involves working mostly with men, and sales and other activities are often concluded over lunch or drinks. Those opportunities, she says, are dwindling, because many of the men she knows through her business “are terrified.” “There’s a feeling of this wall that wasn’t there that is suddenly up because they don’t know what’s appropriate anymore — it’s disconcerting,” Quincoces said. “I feel that they’re more careful, more formal in their relationships with co-workers. And I can’t say I blame them, because what’s happened is pervasive. Every day there’s a new accusation.”

She said many of the men she knows are now avoiding one-on-one social occasions that were normal in the past. “This is going to trickle down into all industries. ... It’s going to become the new normal,” Quincoces said. “It’s a good thing because women are not afraid anymore, but on the other side, it’s a slippery slope.” Americans were already edgy about male-female encounters at work: A New York Times/Morning Consult poll of 5,300 men and women last spring found almost two-thirds thought workers should be extra careful around opposite-sex colleagues, and around a quarter thought private work meetings between men and women were inappropriate. But in a season of outcry over sexual misconduct, some men are suddenly wondering whether they can compliment a female colleague or ask about her weekend. Even a now-former female adviser to the head of Pennsylvania’s Democratic Party suggested on Facebook that men would stop talking to women altogether because of what she portrayed as overblown sexual misconduct claims. Certain managers are considering whether to make sure they’re never alone with a staffer, despite the complications of adding a third person in situations like performance reviews, says Philippe Weiss, who runs the Chicago-based consultancy Seyfarth Shaw at Work.

Philadelphia employment lawyer Jonathan Segal says some men are declaring they’ll just shut people out of their offices, rather than risk exchanges that could be misconstrued. “The avoidance issue is my biggest concern, because the marginalization of women in the business world is at least as big a problem as harassment,” Segal says. A recent report involving 222 North American companies found the percentage of women drops from 47 percent at the entry level to 20 percent in the C suite. Vice President Mike Pence has long said he doesn’t have one-on-one meals with any woman except his wife and wants her by his side anywhere alcohol is served, as part of the couple’s commitment to prioritizing their marriage. The guidelines have “been a blessing to us,” the Republican told Christian Broadcasting Network News in an interview this month.

Employment attorneys caution that it can be problematic to curb interactions with workers because of their gender, if the practice curtails their professional opportunities. W. Brad Johnson, a co-author of a book encouraging male mentors for women, says limiting contact sends a troubling message. “If I were unwilling to have an individual conversation with you because of your gender, I’m communicating ‘you’re unreliable; you’re a risk,’” says Johnson, a U.S. Naval Academy psychology professor. Jessica Proud, a communications professional and Republican political consultant in New York City, said it would be wrong if this national “day of reckoning” over sexual misconduct resulted in some men deciding not to hire, mentor or work with women. She recalled a campaign she worked on where she was told she couldn’t travel with the candidate because of how it might look. “I’m a professional, he’s a professional. Why should my career experience be limited?” she said. “That’s just as insulting in a lot of ways.”

Will Misconduct Scandals Make Men Wary of Women at Work?

See also:

Four Senators Call on Trump to Resign Over Misconduct Allegations
December 11, 2017 Four U.S. senators have called for President Donald Trump to resign over allegations of sexual misconduct on Monday. “President Trump should resign,” Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a Democrat from New York, said during an interview Monday on CNN. “These allegations are credible; they are numerous. I’ve heard these women’s testimony, and many of them are heartbreaking.”

She added that if Trump does not immediately resign, Congress “should have appropriate investigations of his behavior and hold him accountable.” The remarks follow similar calls by Sens. Bernie Sanders, and Independent from Vermont, Jeff Merkley, a Democrat from Oregon and Cory Booker, a Democrat from New Jersey. All of them urged the president to step down following the announced resignation of Sen. Al Franken from Minnesota over sexual harassment allegations. Three women, who last year accused Donald Trump of making unwanted sexual advances, renewed their allegations Monday, saying it was time Congress investigate claims against the president in the wake of dozens of other powerful American men being held accountable for their treatment of women.

Rachel Crooks, left, Jessica Leeds, center, and Samantha Holvey attend a news conference, Dec. 11, 2017, in New York to discuss their accusations of sexual misconduct against Donald Trump. The women, who first shared their stories before the November 2016 election, called for a congressional investigation into Trump's alleged behavior.​

Rachel Crooks, who accused Trump of forcibly kissing her 12 years ago when she worked as a receptionist at his Trump Tower business headquarters in New York, said lawmakers should "put aside their party affiliations and investigate Mr. Trump's history of sexual misconduct." She appeared alongside the two other Trump accusers at a New York news conference: Samantha Holvey, who alleged that Trump walked uninvited into a backstage dressing area where she and others were in various states of undress at a 2012 beauty pageant Trump owned, and Jessica Leeds, who accused Trump of groping her when she sat next to him on a commercial airline flight in the late 1970s. During last year's presidential campaign, more than a dozen women accused Trump of sexual misconduct extending over several decades, but he denied all the accusations, and said that an explicit 2005 taped comment of him boasting of groping women was merely "locker room talk."


On Monday, as the three women appeared on NBC's Today show before their news conference, the White House again rejected the allegations. "These false claims, totally disputed in most cases by eyewitness accounts, were addressed at length during last year's campaign, and the American people voiced their judgment by delivering a decisive victory," the White House said. "The timing and absurdity of these false claims speaks volumes and the publicity tour that has begun only further confirms the political motives behind them." Later, White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders said, "We feel these allegations have been answered" by the results of the 2016 election. "The American people knew this and voted for the president."

Rachel Crooks speaks at a news conference, Monday, Dec. 11, 2017, in New York to discuss her accusations of sexual misconduct against Donald Trump.​

The women's renewed claims against Trump come as powerful men from film making, politics, the media and business have been fired or forced to resign in the last two months after women came forward with graphic details of unwanted sexual advances. Crooks said of the alleged Trump Tower encounter with the future president, he "repeatedly kissed my cheeks and ultimately my lips in an encounter that has since impacted my life well beyond the initial occurrence and feelings of self-doubt and insignificance I had. Unfortunately, given Mr. Trump's notoriety and the fact that he was a partner of my employer's, not to mention the owner of the building, I felt there was nothing I could do. Given this hostile work environment, my only solution at the time was to simply avoid additional encounters with him."

MORE

 

[Reasonable]

You bet. We'll immediately kick Hillary out of her position as.......ah, she doesn't have a position........Well never mind that, we will certainly kick Bill out of office... err, ah ....he doesn't hold any office either. Neither are running for any office either. What exactly do you propose? Aren't you really just mad because everybody doesn't run them down like you do? Come on now, tell us exactly what you want us to do.

I want you to DRIVE THEM OUT OF PUBLIC LIFE like what has happened to all the other men who have lost positions of prestige and power.

That means NO SPEECHES.

NO FUNDRAISING.

NO BOOK DEALS.

BOOK WITHDRAWN FROM BOOK STORES.

Etc.

You want them tarred and feathered too? You might as well add a pony and a new GI Joe to that list cause I don't know ho to ban someone from writing books or making speeches. If I did, I would have banned Hannity and Oreilley a long time ago.

You are rapidly losing all credibility when you continue to argue that nothing can be done about the Clintons.

Really? How as HR Haldeman or John Ehrilechman, or even Neut Gingrich prevented from giving speeches or writing books after their scandals?

How about this as a compromise?

YOU STOP DEFENDING THE CLINTONS.

In fact, as a show of good faith, you should condemn the Clintons for their thirty years of scandals, starting with Whitewater and ending in Uranium One.

Go.

Cant you ******* assholes EVER stop being obsessed with Bill and Hillary?
The topic in YOUR thread is about Moore and Trump and the women they molested.

 

[hadit]

This "massive barrage" you speak of pales compared the the living hell Hillary Clinton put her husband's victims through, even though she stated that "all women must be believed." Contrary to what you've been taught, there is no "vast right-wing conspiracy", and we don't go after women who have been victimized. That is primarily something Democrats do.

I'm not going to defend Hillary and I don't see why I should. I've never voted for her and I never wouldn't. In fact I support changing the voting system so people get a REAL CHOICE of who they vote for, rather than the sham where two parties choose their candidates then 150 million people then get to choose only these two.

You don't go after women who have been victimized? Bullshit. When Trump starts attacking a woman, the nutjobs on the right will go after her like crazy.

Women have accused the president. Where has the right "gone after them like crazy"?

On this forum, for example.

And at the present they have accused and nothing much has happened. Trump hasn't even got started yet.

I have to compare the way Trump's accusers were handled vs the way Hillary handled Bubba's accusers. I haven't heard of "bimbo eruptions" or what happens when you drag a hundred dollar bill through a trailer park about Trump's accusers coming from high ranking Republican figures, have you?

Ah, so we're back to partisan politics instead of just the issue. Great.

The issue being how to make sure justice is done for both parties in an accusation of sexual impropriety. Mike Pence is looking smarter all the time.