Trump denounces 'lies and smears' as more women come forward

[Jingthing]

trump would be a bad bet whatever the odds. Ask the contractors he stiffed and the trump "university" grads. 

[dunroaming]

8 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Sure mate.

 

Well I think Yogi makes a valid point.  I do think that people in the UK have become very disillusioned by the main stream politicians and that was a factor in the referendum.  I also think that the American public feel the same.  The difference there is that this is an election and not a referendum.  Their choice is between the establishment and a complete moron.  In Britain everyone thought that the remain camp would win (even the Brexiteers) but when it came to it they were wrong.  At the moment everyone thinks that Clinton will win and of course they could also be wrong.  If they are then maybe the Trumpsters and the Brexiteers have more in common than they would want to admit too?

[Baerboxer]

2 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

Really strange that there's not been one iota of sexual abuse in all these years focused at Trump until this month?

Something tells us the Clinton Corruption Camp are getting desperate? 

 

That claim is countered by the release of the "locker room banter" tape. Clintonites (is that like kryptonite but weakens the truth?) claim the tapes release gave all these women the courage to come forward now whereas before they were scared no one would believe them.

 

Trump is innocent till proven guilty, in a court of law. Not by a bunch of media who may have their own agendas and not by a group of women based on the claims of several females who suddenly decide to speak now.

 

Clinton on the other hand, as in Big Bill, did lie about Monica, did lie to the American government and people, and then admitted it. Several other women not only claimed he abused them, some also claim he raped them too; and that Hilary went into battle to discredit them and protect hubby. The media circus seems to be ignoring these ladies' allegations, and especially the part about self proclaimed women's rights supporter Hilary's role in the ensuing cover up.

 

Double standards. And pretty obvious whose pulling the strings.

[Boon Mee]

26 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

It won't change. The election was in the bag . 

Heh...y'all been saying that for over a year.

Why are the polls showing Trump ahead? 

Edited October 15, 2016 by Boon Mee

[Baerboxer]

4 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

 

Well I think Yogi makes a valid point.  I do think that people in the UK have become very disillusioned by the main stream politicians and that was a factor in the referendum.  I also think that the American public feel the same.  The difference there is that this is an election and not a referendum.  Their choice is between the establishment and a complete moron.  In Britain everyone thought that the remain camp would win (even the Brexiteers) but when it came to it they were wrong.  At the moment everyone thinks that Clinton will win and of course they could also be wrong.  If they are then maybe the Trumpsters and the Brexiteers have more in common than they would want to admit too?

 

Good analogy. The disillusioned Brexit voters certainly supported morons - Boris, Farage and Gove. 

 

It's sad when the only alternative to establishment backed candidates are morons.

[Baerboxer]

34 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

 

Yogi I am also here in the UK and I also watch the BBC and most other news channels.  I also listen to LBC and some of their presenters are pretty left wing, especially J.O'B.  However they try for balance and also have as presenters Katie Hopkins ( a Trump defender big time) and Trump's very own Nigel Farage.  Hardly liberal!

 

The BBC has always leaned towards the left and everyone knows and expects that from them.  No more so than Fox leans the other way.  One channel that has always been praised for being impartial is Channel 4.  However the way they are ripping into Trump is not impartial although they also regularly also cover the infamous e-mails.  ITV are also focussing on Trumps hypocrisy as is Channel 5.

 

I think the problem for the various news channels is that at the moment all the current stories are about Trump and the accusations and screw-ups he is making.  It may change direction if anything new comes to light about Clinton.

 

If you have been following the BBC then you must agree that whilst the allegations against Trump are being given a great deal of coverage, usually with minimal comment about being innocent until found guilty and that these are allegations, no more; there has been little if any follow up on the rape and abuse allegations against Bill Clinton including the pertinent fact that Hilary, a woman's rights supporter, attacked and discredited them to defend her husband. Bill lied, lied on oath, and admitted he lied. But that's all ignored. 

 

I find more and more the BBC are less and less impartial and deliberately put their spin on.

[joecoolfrog]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I sometimes watch BBC, and I have never seen such t bias by so cani Trump and mention nothing that would cast doubt on HRC. When the bus tape came out they plugged that, but said nothing about the WikiLeaks.

IMO the BBC should be outed as a Clinton surrogate. No wonder people think the sham news corporation should lose their taxpayer support.

Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters also claim severe BBC bias. I would say that if both extremes of the political world are whining , the corporation must be doing a good , balanced job. Anybody who Just wants to confirm their own bias is probably better off going elsewhere.

[dunroaming]

54 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

If you have been following the BBC then you must agree that whilst the allegations against Trump are being given a great deal of coverage, usually with minimal comment about being innocent until found guilty and that these are allegations, no more; there has been little if any follow up on the rape and abuse allegations against Bill Clinton including the pertinent fact that Hilary, a woman's rights supporter, attacked and discredited them to defend her husband. Bill lied, lied on oath, and admitted he lied. But that's all ignored. 

 

I find more and more the BBC are less and less impartial and deliberately put their spin on.

 

The BBC ran the debates and BBC news had extracts running all the following day.  The reporting showed the extracts dealing with Bill including several camera shots of him squirming.  It also made mention of the Bill babes sitting in the front row.  So given that Bill's infidelity is not "the story" I think they didn't avoid anything.  And of course Bill's history was covered extensively at the time (I remember it well) all those years ago.  The accusations against Trump are current and relevant and very much "breaking news".

 

As I said the BBC leans to the left and always has done.  Everybody knows that and therefore takes that into account when watching or listening. In fact because of that they are more likely to try to be balanced.

[Jingthing]

Heh...y'all been saying that for over a year.
Why are the polls showing Trump ahead? 

Because he's not. But thanks for the injection of bubble reality from trumplandia.

[louse1953]

5 hours ago, Jingthing said:

He's the gift that keeps on giving, and maybe it's an impossible dream, but hoping that gift includes the senate AND the house!

 

trumpists ... save yourself some grief ... abandon all hope. You've backed the biggest LOSER. 

Like all great empires the USA is slowly crumbling.Trump is a little early in the downfall but elect him and the shit will hit the fan.The quicker the US falls the quicker it can rebuild a new model.Trump is an embarressment and US citizens who were humiliated under Bush jnr will cop it 10 times worse.He will drag us all down.I predict a coup when Armed forces have to step into stop a nutter.His own party seem incapable of reining him in.

[Berkshire]

3 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Trump is innocent till proven guilty, in a court of law. Not by a bunch of media who may have their own agendas and not by a group of women based on the claims of several females who suddenly decide to speak now.

 

Clinton on the other hand, as in Big Bill, did lie about Monica, did lie to the American government and people, and then admitted it. Several other women not only claimed he abused them, some also claim he raped them too; and that Hilary went into battle to discredit them and protect hubby. The media circus seems to be ignoring these ladies' allegations, and especially the part about self proclaimed women's rights supporter Hilary's role in the ensuing cover up.

 

Double standards. And pretty obvious whose pulling the strings.

 

You Trump supporters really do sound desperate.  The media did cover Bill Clinton when he was President...ad nauseam.  To the point where there was nothing left to cover.  Why would they want to cover it all over again?  Maybe the media should go back and cover Watergate.  Or JFK and Marilyn Monroe.  Or Lincoln's assassination.  What's wrong with you people? 

[Ulysses G.]

26 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

 

The media did cover Bill Clinton when he was President.

 

He lied under oath oath and was impeached. They did not have much choice.

Edited October 15, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[pattayalover]

Trump and Hillary are like the back and front of the Titanic.
question is where you place them? because anywhere you place them, the boat is still sinking.

[Stargeezr]

It is appearing like The Donald has many bad things in his closet.  I still wonder  why an event that is 11 years old was published  now,  just like these woman , who may or may not have had unwanted contact with Donald  again,  years ago in most cases, just coming forth now. Makes me also think that the squeaky clean camp of the Democrats is not very clean or honest.  I still think that Hillary with all of her years of experience  is also so un-liked  and  not trusted, because. of her past record.  The people of America all had the chance to get , better candidates into this run for the Presidency, but are now stuck with these two choices.

  Good Luck!

Geezer

[thaibeachlovers]

10 hours ago, dunroaming said:

 

Yogi I am also here in the UK and I also watch the BBC and most other news channels.  I also listen to LBC and some of their presenters are pretty left wing, especially J.O'B.  However they try for balance and also have as presenters Katie Hopkins ( a Trump defender big time) and Trump's very own Nigel Farage.  Hardly liberal!

 

The BBC has always leaned towards the left and everyone knows and expects that from them.  No more so than Fox leans the other way.  One channel that has always been praised for being impartial is Channel 4.  However the way they are ripping into Trump is not impartial although they also regularly also cover the infamous e-mails.  ITV are also focussing on Trumps hypocrisy as is Channel 5.

 

I think the problem for the various news channels is that at the moment all the current stories are about Trump and the accusations and screw-ups he is making.  It may change direction if anything new comes to light about Clinton.

The BBC is a citizen funded organization and has no right to "lean" either way. That they are "expected" to is a scandal.

When the bus tapes story broke they covered that and said nothing about the e mails. Shame on them.

An ad funded channel can do whatever it likes.

[thaibeachlovers]

6 hours ago, Berkshire said:

 

You Trump supporters really do sound desperate.  The media did cover Bill Clinton when he was President...ad nauseam.  To the point where there was nothing left to cover.  Why would they want to cover it all over again?  Maybe the media should go back and cover Watergate.  Or JFK and Marilyn Monroe.  Or Lincoln's assassination.  What's wrong with you people? 

Bill is relevant as he is married to the candidate and is actively campaigning for her. Nixon, JFK and Lincoln are not in this race.

[thaibeachlovers]

6 hours ago, louse1953 said:

Like all great empires the USA is slowly crumbling.Trump is a little early in the downfall but elect him and the shit will hit the fan.The quicker the US falls the quicker it can rebuild a new model.Trump is an embarressment and US citizens who were humiliated under Bush jnr will cop it 10 times worse.He will drag us all down.I predict a coup when Armed forces have to step into stop a nutter.His own party seem incapable of reining him in.

I predict a coup when Armed forces have to step into stop a nutter

Given that Trump is more popular with the troops than her that would probably not work. I also believe it is unlawful for US military to operate in the US ( correct me if I am wrong ).

Lastly, it is precisely for that reason that the constitution requires that citizens have the right to bear arms. A military coup to install her would lead to civil war, and I'm sure the pro Trumpers have more guns that the pro Clinton ones. The founding fathers foresaw such an eventuality and have tried to prevent it with armed civilians.

[SaintLouisBlues]

2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I predict a coup when Armed forces have to step into stop a nutter

Why would you need a coup? Assassination is the Standard Operating Procedure against US Presidents, surely?

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, SaintLouisBlues said:

Why would you need a coup? Assassination is the Standard Operating Procedure against US Presidents, surely?

Just to be clear, I did not say that about predicting a coup. By deleting the rest of my reply you make it seem that was me.

 

However, it's just as well the candidates have secret service protection, given the level of hostility to both.

[SaintLouisBlues]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

By deleting the rest of my reply you make it seem that was me.

Your statement was in bold; it wasn't clear until I went back and reviewed it that you were quoting from another person. Why you didn't simply edit that person's post as any normal person would do beats me

[thaibeachlovers]

31 minutes ago, SaintLouisBlues said:

Your statement was in bold; it wasn't clear until I went back and reviewed it that you were quoting from another person. Why you didn't simply edit that person's post as any normal person would do beats me

Forum rules

 

16) You will not make changes to quoted material from other members posts, except for purposes of shortening the quoted post. This cannot be done in such a manner that it alters the context of the original post.
 

[SaintLouisBlues]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Forum rules

 

16) You will not make changes to quoted material from other members posts, except for purposes of shortening the quoted post. This cannot be done in such a manner that it alters the context of the original post.
 

Precisely my point

[williamgeorgeallen]

14 hours ago, sandrabbit said:

'Trump also suggested the women who have come forward to accuse him were not physically attractive enough to merit his attention. "Believe me, she would not be my first choice, that I can tell you," he said when speaking of one of the women. '

 

When in a ditch stop digging .........

well thats why some of us like him so much. he should have stuck to hookers. better chance to pay them to keep their mouths shut.

[yogi100]

On 10/15/2016 at 6:05 PM, dunroaming said:

 

Yogi I am also here in the UK and I also watch the BBC and most other news channels.  I also listen to LBC and some of their presenters are pretty left wing, especially J.O'B.  However they try for balance and also have as presenters Katie Hopkins ( a Trump defender big time) and Trump's very own Nigel Farage.  Hardly liberal!

 

The BBC has always leaned towards the left and everyone knows and expects that from them.  No more so than Fox leans the other way.  One channel that has always been praised for being impartial is Channel 4.  However the way they are ripping into Trump is not impartial although they also regularly also cover the infamous e-mails.  ITV are also focussing on Trumps hypocrisy as is Channel 5.

 

I think the problem for the various news channels is that at the moment all the current stories are about Trump and the accusations and screw-ups he is making.  It may change direction if anything new comes to light about Clinton.

 

Hopkins is the only presenter who you could not call a liberal on LBC and she gets just 2 hours a week, there are 168 hours in a week so that means the liberal presenters are on 165 hours a week if you discount Farage's one hour slot. The English hating O'Brien gets the prime slot from 10 am till 1 pm every week day and even the new Muslim presenter Maajid Nawaz gets 6 hours a week so the one presenter the working man can identify with Katie Hopkins gets just two hours a week which is definitely not balance. 

 

There is not one single working class presenter on LBC nor has there ever been. Larry Lamb who did a short stint on there was a millionaire actor who in spite of his Thames Estuary accent was easily as liberal as Clive Bull or Nick Ferrari

 

There is very little 'balance' in the British Media. No one get's a platform to give the working man's point of view on any radio or TV station

 

I no longer watch or listen to any programs on the BBC which deal with politics or current affairs.

 

Farage is not really a presenter he just has an hour in which he hosts his own phone in program but that again is only for an hour and he's hardly a right winger in the same mold as Hopkins. Some UKIP policies regarding immigration are actually quite liberal when compared to those of Thailand, a country that all of us on here are fond of visiting in spite of any principles we might have regarding liberalism and immigration. UKIP actually had a business spokesman who was a Muslim.

 

 

[yogi100]

12 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Good analogy. The disillusioned Brexit voters certainly supported morons - Boris, Farage and Gove. 

 

It's sad when the only alternative to establishment backed candidates are morons.

 

 

To accuse someone of being a moron means nothing unless they can say why they're morons. Unless the accuser can give justification for his or her accusations then that must surely make him or her a moron as well. Or at least raise doubts about their intellect.

 

 

Edited October 16, 2016 by yogi100

[JLCrab]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Bill is relevant as he is married to the candidate and is actively campaigning for her. Nixon, JFK and Lincoln are not in this race.

I agree -- but it seems maybe you underestimate how popular Bill Clinton was and still is dirty laundtry and Kenneth Starr Report and all.

Gallup Historical Presidential Job Approval Statistics

Overall Averages

President

Dates in office

Average approval rating

Bill Clinton	January 1993-January 2001	55.1
George W. Bush	January 2001-January 2009	49.4

[Chris Lawrence]

Unfortunately Trump has a bad case of fleas which if elected will bring into the White House. Now Bill and even John developed fleas whilst in the White House. Different scenarios?

[Boon Mee]

List of Debunked Groper Allegations by Corrupt Media Against Donald Trump

 

The Democrat-media complex carpet bombed Donald Trump with several alleged groping stories this week from several women.

The media clearly did not fact check these stories. They ran the stories no matter how farfetched they were. It is clear from the number of stories dropped in the last week that this was a coordinated effort, probably from inside the Hillary Clinton campaign. The goal was not to present facts to the public. Their goal was to destroy Donald Trump.

Read the list of shame here:  http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/list-debunked-groper-allegations-corrupt-media-donald-trump/

[Berkshire]

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Bill is relevant as he is married to the candidate and is actively campaigning for her. Nixon, JFK and Lincoln are not in this race.

 

I was responding to a post that suggested a double standard, that the press ignored Bill's issues back in the day.  But like nearly everything Trump supporters claim, it's not true. 

[hugh2121]

18 hours ago, Jingthing said:

He's the gift that keeps on giving, and maybe it's an impossible dream, but hoping that gift includes the senate AND the house!

 

trumpists ... save yourself some grief ... abandon all hope. You've backed the biggest LOSER. 

The biggest LOSERS are the American people and, by extension, the rest of the western world. Neither of these two front runners are credible to become the leader of the western world. Come on USA! Can't you find ANYONE more capable than this pair of muppets?