'Unhinged': Clinton slams Trump over beauty queen Twitter tirade

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

This has 30 something days to get much much worse.

 

I watched in disbelief yesterday on the various news items the surrogates defending him (Trump). Most disturbing of all were the unbelievable excuses given by Chris Christie and that monster Giuliano. They have clearly been promised very senior positions in the Administration should Americans have a total brain dump and vote the guy in.

 

Here was Giuliano's sickening defence of Trump going after Clinton for her husbands infidelity and when asked by the interviewer "but your past, you have your own infidelity charge"" he says, well everybody does!!!!

 

 

Many Trump supporters on here lay claims against Clinton or President Clinton when there are ZERO charges laid against them - ZERO. Now it is finally done that the case against Trump for the rape of a 13 year old girl is submitted, with witnesses. I do hope we do not have TV members trying to defend Trump. Charges are laid, so lets not start trashing the 'victims' (as Giuliano would put it!!).

Not defending anyone, but the fact that the charges have been refiled ( 3rd time ) by anonymous accuser and anonymous witnesses after 20 years at such a convenient time for Hillary must raise suspicions.

NB one of the witnesses is a self confessed procurer of under age girls for Epstein, witnessed the events and did nothing for 20 years, till now, when Trump might win.

 

Frankly, I'll give it more credence when Juanita Broaddrick's claim of rape against Bill Clinton is accepted by a court, before the election.

 

BTW, the one that trashes victims in this context is HRC against the women Bill molested.

[up-country_sinclair]

39 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

the women Bill molested.

 

It amazes me how seemingly rational people are able to just toss out words like "molest"  and "rape" and not think twice about it.

 

You are stating that former President Clinton sexually assaulted someone as if it were a fact.  Yet there is no proof of this happening.  How would you feel if someone said similar about you even if there was no evidence?

[up-country_sinclair]

42 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'll give it more credence when Juanita Broaddrick's claim of rape against Bill Clinton is accepted by a court, before the election.

 

Well, she would first have  to actually file such a claim with a court.  

 

To my knowledge she has never done so in all the decades that she has been making her claims.  Note that the alleged rape is claimed to have occurred in 1978.  38 years ago.

 

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Andaman Al]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Not defending anyone, but the fact that the charges have been refiled ( 3rd time ) by anonymous accuser and anonymous witnesses after 20 years at such a convenient time for Hillary must raise suspicions.

NB one of the witnesses is a self confessed procurer of under age girls for Epstein, witnessed the events and did nothing for 20 years, till now, when Trump might win.

 

Frankly, I'll give it more credence when Juanita Broaddrick's claim of rape against Bill Clinton is accepted by a court, before the election.

 

BTW, the one that trashes victims in this context is HRC against the women Bill molested.

You have completely lost your moral compass. You ARE defending against it.

 

Filed for the 3rd time because the first it was not filed correctly as they could not afford a lawyer. The second time it was withdrawn voluntarily as another girl (aged TWELVE at the time came forward to testify as a witness). I just hope someone like Mark Cuban will fund a top attorney for them.

 

There could be no better witness than the self confessed procurer of under age girls! She is taking on the burden of opening a real personal can of worms, but right now she is doing the RIGHT thing. She is likely to be despised and reviled, but boy oh boy you couldn't want a better fly on the wall. She had to monitor and supervise the girls during the sex acts!!!! Do you know how ugly this is going to get? Yes Trump was right, he should have stayed on and done another series of the Apprentice, as the Tsunami that is coming will see the Trump brand with the same reputation as pig poo. This will leave millions of deplorables at a loss thinking 'how were we sucked in'. THEN the violence of American Vs American will start. Remember YOU support this man, remember that.

 

I recognise it is futile posting. Even if Trump were found guilty tomorrow you would actually say 'well it takes two to tango, i bet the young minxes wanted it anyway, they chose to do it for fame and fortune'!  If proven, this will be statutory rape of a 13 and 12 year old. Think about that!

 

You make statements like "the women Clinton 'molested' without ANY evidence yet when someone has gone through the trauma of putting this in court you call BS.

 

By the way she is currently anonymous because YOUR country allows women that were sexually assaulted whilst underage to adopt the name 'Jane Doe' or some variation. The same US kind of law that you says has not been broken by Trump not paying taxes. Jane DOE breaks no law by adopting the procedure offered by your legal system.

 

And if I were HRC I would definitely be funding this womans legal team. If Trump were dragging me across the dirt for my husbands infidelity, when Trumps background is worse, then it would be game on. If Trump could shut his mouth, act Presidential and talk about the right things then none of this would be happening. And If I cheated on my wife the first thing my wife would do after cutting my balls off would be to attack the woman that knowingly got into a relationship with me. I think under the circumstances HRC has been very restrained.

Edited October 3, 2016 by Andaman Al

[Chicog]

From what I understand, the statute of limitations has run out on the sex charges.

However, I believe the suit still seeks damages for defamation.

 

[Andaman Al]

53 minutes ago, Chicog said:

From what I understand, the statute of limitations has run out on the sex charges.

However, I believe the suit still seeks damages for defamation.

 

  ^^^  I will dig out the charge docs, I am sure you are correct about the SoL - funny how it didn't run out for Bill Cosby and folks want Pres Clinton charged for something 38 years ago.

 

The charge filed on 30 Sept is as follows

Quote

COMPLAINT FOR RAPE, SEXUAL MISCONDUCT, CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACTS, SEXUAL ABUSE, FORCIBLE TOUCHING, ASSAULT, BATTERY, INTENTIONAL AND RECKLESS INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS, DURESS, FALSE IMPRISONMENT, AND DEFAMATION

 

And as it points more seriously

 

Quote

The rapes in the first, second, and third degrees; sexual misconduct; criminal sexual acts in the first, second, and third degrees; sexual abuse in the first, second, and third degrees; and forcible touching 

 

That would be a long stretch!

 

In fact Chicog you so kindly provided the link with the full set of docs in, in your post further up the page. Have a read. It could get very messy.

 

Lets see the surrogates defend this.

Edited October 3, 2016 by Andaman Al

[Andaman Al]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Not defending anyone, but the fact that the charges have been refiled ( 3rd time ) by anonymous accuser and anonymous witnesses after 20 years at such a convenient time for Hillary must raise suspicions.

NB one of the witnesses is a self confessed procurer of under age girls for Epstein, witnessed the events and did nothing for 20 years, till now, when Trump might win.

 

Fear would have played a great part in the decision to remain silent. However what better way for sweet retribution after having your childhood destroyed than to play your ace at a time when it could bring the entire Trump Empire down. I do hope the ladies concerned get the financial backing required to see this through to the end. I bet there will be discussion of huge out of court settlements right now. Popcorn anyone.

Edited October 3, 2016 by Andaman Al

[Ulysses G.]

2 hours ago, Chicog said:

From what I understand, the statute of limitations has run out on the sex charges.
 

 

That is correct.

[Andaman Al]

Here is an interesting quote in the case against Trump. A sworn statement from the woman that Epstein hired to recruit and supervise adolescent girls for his parties with Trump.

 

Quote

In her witness statement, 'Tiffany Doe' states: "I am coming forward to swear to the truthfulness of the physical and sexual abuse that I personally witnessed of minor females at the hands of Mr. Trump and Mr. Epstein... I swear to these facts under the penalty for perjury even though I fully understand that the life of myself and my family is now in grave danger."

“I personally witnessed the Plaintiff being forced to perform various sexual acts with Donald J Trump and Mr Epstein... Both Mr Trump and Mr Epstein were advised that she was 13-years-old... I personally witnessed four sexual encounters that the Plaintiff was forced to have with Mr Trump during this period, including the fourth of these encounters where Mr Trump forcibly raped her despite her pleas to stop.”

 

This should not go away. These are really serious charges and the statute of limitations is not over if the Plaintiff can reasonably show that until now she was unable to file (this is done via previous statements of fear, threatening phone calls etc). Well it seems the 3 witnesses and the lawyer have done just that as the case was accepted into court 30 Sep.

 

This is not 'touching someone up, touching a breast asking 'how about it for a promotion'  , this is serious on a completely different scale. On the fourth occasion the witness statements are that the girl - 13 was actually tied down and forcibly raped. After the alleged rape by Trump , Epstein then beats the Girl around her head saying "I was supposed to have your virginity'.

 

If this was a 'story' that we normally get on TV of an expat reported for having sex with a 13 year old, then before trial based on the above information almost all the Trump supporters would be screaming 'cut his balls off, I hope he rots in Prison etc etc', but now we are getting 'well it seems suspicious she is reporting it now', 'it's not true', 'but what about what Bill Clinton did' etc etc.

 

This can not be allowed to go away. IF it is false then fine kick it out and punish the accuser, but IF it is true then what? What do Trump supporters say then?

Edited October 3, 2016 by Andaman Al

[Andaman Al]

8 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

That is correct.

 

Sorry but it turns out it is not. Proof of why complaint was not made is all that is required. That has been stated and the case is now in the courts. Lets see!

 

Trump has brought all this on himself by not keeping his mouth shut. The Miss Universe has been the tipping point for many women at the boiling point concerning what he did to them. Google is full of accusations and court cases that were 'settled'. Are they ALL fake?

[Ulysses G.]

11 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

 

Sorry but it turns out it is not.

 

 Prove it with a link to a credible source. The only articles that I can find say that it is a civil case - all about money.

[Chicog]

2 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

funny how it didn't run out for Bill Cosby

 

It did.

[Andaman Al]

29 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

 Prove it with a link to a credible source. The only articles that I can find say that it is a civil case - all about money.

 

I don't need to prove anything, I will let the court do that. Jury decision has been requested. All I have said is Statute of Limitations is over unless the Plaintiff can give good reason why complaint has not been made until now.

 

So it's all about money? Does that reduce the gravity of the charges? I guess you think Bills accusers weren't all about money, theirs was a genuine grievance?

 

Let's hope the Judge is a good ole boy Republican from Texas and not a Dem from Mexico    That will be the next excuse. Seems the supermarket is about to run out of popcorn. Everyone is stocking up.

Edited October 3, 2016 by Andaman Al

[Ulysses G.]

2 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

 

I don't need to prove anything

 

In other words, you are making things up again. There are no criminal charges.

[Andaman Al]

12 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

In other words, you are making things up again. There are no criminal charges.

 

Did I say "criminal charges'? or are you making it up again?

 

What I said was the Statute of Limitations has run out BUT given the right conditions it can be extended. The clock is stopped it is called 'tolling', there have already been two precedents set for this in NYC.

 

Quote

New York’s five year statute of limitations on this claim - the legal deadline for filing — has long since run. However, Jane Doe’s attorney, Thomas Meagher, argues in his court filing that because she was threatened by Mr. Trump, she has been under duress all this time, and therefore she should be permitted additional time to come forward. Legally, this is calling “tolling” - stopping the clock, allowing more time to file the case. As a result, the complaint alleges, Jane Doe did not have “freedom of will to institute suit earlier in time.” 

 

From A lawyers site

 

Quote

N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law 30.10 

Class A felony, 1st degree rape, 1st degree criminal sexual act, 1st degree aggravated sexual abuse, 1st degree course of sexual conduct against a child: no statute of limitations 

Other felonies:  5 years 

Misdemeanors:  2 years 

Petty offense:  1 year 

Larceny by person with fiduciary duty: 1 year after discovery of offense

Misconduct in public office:  while defendant still in office or within 5 years after leaving office, up to a maximum additional 5 years 

Environmental conservation law violation: 4 years after discovery

Tax law misdemeanors or violations of Chapter 46 of NY administrative code: 3 years 

2nd degree course of sexual conduct against a child: 5 years

Certain defined sexual offense crimes with victim under 18; incest in the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd degree with victim under 18; or use of a child in a sexual performance:  when victim turns 18 or offense is reported, whichever occurs earlier

Terrorism felony: 8 years, or no limit if risk of death or serious physical injury

 

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/criminal-case-statute-of-limitations/ny-felonies-misdemeanors.htm#

 

See the bit I put in bold above. Not exactly sure of the definitions of a 'child' but reading the charges laid against him that looks pretty scary.

 

Anyway, why are you so bothered? You keep telling us you do not support him. You are always part of the hang em high brigade. It seems you have moderated your normally 'quick to lynch em' reaction. Why is that?

 

All Trumps lawyers can do now is tear the application for tolling to pieces (unless the bit in bold above applies), and tear the Plaintiffs apart.

 

Read the documents. It is a serious issue, especially with THREE plaintiffs/Witnesses.

[Ulysses G.]

38 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

 

Did I say "criminal charges'?

 

I said there are only civil charges and you said that you do not "need to prove anything." That is because you can 't prove otherwise. The statute of limitations for criminal charges has run out and it is very unlikely that anything will change that.

Edited October 3, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

39 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

 

Anyway, why are you so bothered? 

 

Because I object to certain members constantly spamming the forum with partisan lies. I have no problem with legitimate criticism of Trump - I think he is a terrible candidate - but 80% of what is posted here about him is distorted nonsense.

[Andaman Al]

6 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

I said there are only civil charges and you said that you do not "need to prove anything." That is because you can 't prove otherwise. The statute of limitations for criminal charges has run out and it is very unlikely that anything will change that.

When i say 'I do not need to prove anything' Ulysses it means that you are so utterly lazy when it comes to checking facts out yourself. Look at your post above in response to my comprehensive post dealing with the SoL issue and you address none of it you just say 'it has run out'. Please do not waste my time engaging me in any discussion. You only ever reply in one sentence or less just to try and keep your post count up.

 

You have addressed none of the points. EVERYTHING Bill Clinton is accused of is beyond the SoL yet YOU keep harping on about his sexual crimes'. It is futile trying to have a reasoned discussion with you, so leave me alone.

[Ulysses G.]

You seem confused between a lot of deceitful, ineffectual words and a "comprehensive post".  Don't you realize that most people can tell the difference?

 

Trump will never face criminal charges for this and the civil case will probably be dropped if Hillary is elected. 

[Andaman Al]

2 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

You seem confused between a lot of deceitful, ineffectual words and a "comprehensive post".  Don't you realize that most people can tell the difference?

 

Trump will never face criminal charges for this and the civil case will probably be dropped if Hillary is elected. 

Well lets let everyone else decide then. Still strange how you drag up Clintons SoL expired claims yet refuse to even acknowledge the gravity of the claims against Trump which are now in court.

 

Conversation with you over.

[Ulysses G.]

IMO, the sex case against Trump is all about money and politics. The email case against Hillary had merit, but was thrown out for the same reasons. There is no justice in America if that woman gets away with it.

[Jingthing]

"That woman" is going to be your next president. 

[Ulysses G.]

4 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

"That woman" is going to be your next president. 

 

Unfortunately, you are probably right. There ae plenty of lies being spread about Trump, but he is not helping anything by constantly saying stupid things and commenting on things that he should not be.

The PTSD remark is the latest one. He may be right, but no need to bring it up.

[Andaman Al]

4 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Unfortunately, you are probably right. There ae plenty of lies being spread about Trump, but he is not helping anything by constantly saying stupid things and commenting on things that he should not be.

The PTSD remark is the latest one. He may be right, but no need to bring it up.

Can you give us your examples about the 'plenty of lies being spread about Trump'?

 

Reference PTSD no he is absolutely not right and I am frankly amazed you hint he may be. With that comment he has lost just about the entire military and veterans vote.

[Ulysses G.]

2 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

Can you give us your examples about the 'plenty of lies being spread about Trump'?

 

 

 I could point out several members numerous dishonest posts about him, but I am afraid that would be against the rules. However, I have addressed many of these false statements already. Just read all the different threads.

[Ulysses G.]

7 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

 

Reference PTSD no he is absolutely not right and I am frankly amazed you hint he may be. With that comment he has lost just about the entire military and veterans vote.

 

Actually a lot of soldiers probably agree with him. Some are stronger than others, but it is not PC to say it.

[Andaman Al]

2 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

 I could point out several members numerous dishonest posts about him, but I am afraid that would be against the rules. However, I have addressed many of these false statements already. Just read all the different threads.

So you just made it up then? It is not against forum rules to point out any posts. You say there are many lies being told about Trump, so tell us what they are or withdraw the comment.

[Andaman Al]

1 minute ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Actually a lot of soldiers probably agree with him. Some are stronger than others, but it is not PC to say it.

That answer is so BS it makes me quite angry. You clearly know zero about it, so stop commenting. You know NOTHING of PTSD and how it manifests itself. He has just called around 200K military personnel weak. The guy is a moron, and as he also knows nothing about it he should shut up also. Now lets get back on thread.

[Ulysses G.]

Please quit trolling. You know perfectly well that they would be considered off topic. I do not need any TV holidays this close to the election.

 

3 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

 It is not against forum rules to point out any posts. 

 

[Andaman Al]

1 minute ago, Ulysses G. said:

Please quit trolling. You know perfectly well that they would be considered off topic. I do not need any TV holidays this close to the election.

 

 

It is not off topic to name the lies that you state are being circulated about Trump. And if these lies are only by TV members then it is hardly off any impact or bearing at all is it. Jeez! You made the claim, if you can't back it up then delete the posts.