Trump Given A Subpoena For All Documents Relating To Assault Allegations

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: annoyedpharmacist

...or they waited to sacrifice a pawn first.

Harvey Weinstein.

This is also my train of thought. Seems like there are enough #metoo supporters out there now that public sympathy and emotional input to any course of action against President Trump would be at the best possible level right about now. It's all in full swing and the momentum is still building and throwing HW under the bus to show that even the highest positions can be taken down is a perfect way to segway into a lawsuit of this stature.

Should be interesting, I was just telling my wife how it is almost the election anniversary and I wondered if some would try to see to it that the president doesn't make a year in office.... this could do it but I feel it won't. I actually felt like he was doing things to try and throw himself out of the running early on until he found out that no matter what he did people we just roiling with it, they wanted change from the established players bad enough. Now that he has been in office and people have had a taste of what it is like, there will be a clearer line between supporters and the rest.

I do wonder about the North Korea wildcard though. I mean if a war is running, can a president be impeached or does it get waylaid until the conflict ends? Perhaps this is his ticket to staying, we shall see.

a reply to: Aazadan

I am not an attorney but I don't think consent can be "recanted." And while the situations you mentioned might be sexual harassment, they are not rape in the US.

The US legal definition of rape that I was able to find: "Rape in the United States is defined by the Department of Justice as 'Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.'"

If consent was given at the time of the "consensual sexual act" (which is why it's called consensual sex I would believe) - no matter if what the other party "thought" the outcome (their "benefit") would be - that can't later be changed because one or the other party didn't receive the "benefit."

Otherwise, anyone who succumbs to the "Yes, I love you," (lie) that some people give out to "seal the deal" could later come back and say - "Well, they later proved they didn't really love me so that was rape." That is NOT rape.

And the situation you described was pretty much the same - a false promise (lie) to again, "seal the deal" (the most polite way I can think of to say that) but then when the false promise (lie) is not fulfilled, it's rape?

Uh....no.

It's a very slippery slope to say consent can be given (indicating consensual sex) and then changed/revoked later. I'm a woman and I don't consider that fair to men, good for women (again, diminishes from real victims of rape) or even logical.

LOL, I wonder did Trump pay his fine 'not exceeding $50'.

originally posted by: UKTruth

LOL, I wonder did Trump pay his fine 'not exceeding $50'.

The second part is the doozy.

a reply to: luthier

The funniest part is Buzzfeeds reports ... "A high-stakes legal showdown is brewing for President Donald Trump"
The document is from March with an April deadline. I suspect they missed the showdown, lol.

Talk about a blatant attempt to deflect from Hollywood liberal slime.

a reply to: nicevillegrl

I'm a man and I don't consider it unfair to men at all. Be honest and don't just try to score a point in the game and you'll be fine. And consent is generally given under the idea that the material facts being presented are honest. If you tell someone you're a billionaire tech company founder to help your chances, and she later finds out that you're not even a thousandaire who works at McDonalds, that's misrepresenting the material facts and could open the door to her changing her mind about consent.

Consensual sex relies on the idea that you find the person agreeable. If that person later turns out to have been masquerading as someone else, that foundation for previous and future consent is removed.

I see no problem with that, and it works both ways.

a reply to: loam

So the "Russian collusion with President Trump and his associates" is not sticking, so they are back again trying to use more false allegations about "sexual assault".... How many of the women who have made these false allegations have been shown to be full of it, and to be playing the political troll?

a reply to: UKTruth

It's usually done after the politicians leave office. Probably activist judges. They are on both sides.

a reply to: luthier

So, the law firm is the same one that has worked with Summer Zervos, and even allowed themselves to be paid only through "public donations", and not by Zervos paying them... i wonder if Soros/Hillary and friends are the biggest fund raisers... It goes to show this is nothing but another political attack through a false story.

www.gloriaallred.com...

a reply to: Taggart

So any man who has said anything remotely similar, even those who never even laid a hand on a woman but bragged that they did, are all sexual offenders?... BTW, what happens when it is a woman bragging that she can easily get men?... is she a sexual assault predator too?...

I do wonder, did whomever recorded what Trump said "about grabbing pussies" ever presented the whole recording?... Was Donald Trump led to brag merely so his statements could later be used as a political tool?

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: luthier

So, the law firm is the same one that has worked with Summer Zervos, and even allowed themselves to be paid only through "public donations", and not by Zervos paying them... i wonder if Soros/Hillary and friends are the biggest fund raisers... It goes to show this is nothing but another political attack through a false story.

www.gloriaallred.com...

The court signs off on it though. A judge signs subpoenas. Not that it makes it any better if it's a hit.

originally posted by: luthier

The court signs off on it though. A judge signs subpoenas. Not that it makes it any better if it's a hit.

Judges can be bought as well. BTW, i am not saying that the way Trump has talked about women is right. no matter in what situation no man should talk like that about women. But to me it is obvious that he was led to say that as a political tool.

There is also a double standard in today's world. When a woman, such as JL brags about being with younger men, and make similar remarks about "grabbing certain parts, and why she is with younger men" that woman is generally described as "an independent and strong woman, a role model for the younger generations".

Heck, "other independent women" include "Hannah Montana" who has been caught shaking her bottom in front of minors at her concert, and allowing minors to touch her bottom and her front... But even when there is actual evidence of this she is not described by the left as "a sexual predator" but she is described as another role model and left-wing activist...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

That is what I mean it's just as bad if this is a political hit from a judge.

But also there could be truth because a judge does sign off.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

If you did it, you're guilty. If you didn't, you're admitting to crimes you didn't commit. Not exactly the smartest thing to do.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Heck, "other independent women" include "Hannah Montana" who has been caught shaking her bottom in front of minors at her concert, and allowing minors to touch her bottom and her front

Hey, when a 70 year old guy publicly jiggles his oysters in front of a crowd of screaming minors who he lets grab them on the half shell, you can get back to me.

Until then, that's an unfair comparison regarding unsolicited and nonconsensual sexual assault.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
Heck, "other independent women" include "Hannah Montana" who has been caught shaking her bottom in front of minors at her concert, and allowing minors to touch her bottom and her front... But even when there is actual evidence of this she is not described by the left as "a sexual predator" but she is described as another role model and left-wing activist...

Just because someone puts on an act in a show doesn't mean you have free reign to do whatever you want to them outside of that show.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Taggart

Was Donald Trump led to brag merely so his statements could later be used as a political tool?

That is absolutely what happened. Why else would the conversation be recorded? Trump should look into where/when this recording was made, as it may constitute wiretapping (depending on the state) since all parties didn't give informed consent.

Regardless of the legal status, it was clearly a trap to get some blackmail on him. It is also possible the tape was faked entirely, given the technology we have today - PHOTOSHOP FOR VOICE. source: BBC

a reply to: Aazadan

Scoring points in a game isn't illegal. Using people as sexual objects is immoral, but not illegal. Consent is black and white, it either exists or does not exist. Simply having a managerial role over someone does not constitute the legal requirement for "position of authority." (this applies to minors, not adults - unless they're disabled in some cognitive way)

You cannot change your mind after the fact. You can revoke consent at any point, but you have to clearly articulate this fact. Once the act is done, regardless of how much lying/objectification occurred, it is legal and without reproach.

Future consent? Yes, you can revoke that... sure. But again, you need to clearly state this one way or the other.

Past consent? Wrong. The law disagrees with you and your convoluted reasoning.

Breaking hearts isn't a crime. Using someone for sex isn't a crime. Threatening them with job termination is SEXUAL HARASSMENT - a civil tort - and not a CRIME. Offering to pay someone for sexual relations isn't rape either - it is attempted soliciation of prostitution.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: luthier

So, the law firm is the same one that has worked with Summer Zervos, and even allowed themselves to be paid only through "public donations", and not by Zervos paying them... i wonder if Soros/Hillary and friends are the biggest fund raisers... It goes to show this is nothing but another political attack through a false story.

www.gloriaallred.com...

I knew if I kept an eye out I'd see it rampant in this thread... Here's the tactic for dealing with bad Trump press:

1. Minimize the real issue (In this case, assault allegations against Trump)
2. Make it a liberal thing
3. Whenever possible, use it to cast Clinton in a negative light.

So often these three traits exist within a single response as seen above.

Read more:
www.dni.gov...

When Trump brags that his money and fame give him power to grab women by the p*ssy, or walk in on young girls in their dressing room without any consent.... Or even talk about how he'd like to date his own daughter... It's called.... Red Flag...