Off his message again: Trump vows to sue all female accusers

[Strange]

10 minutes ago, LannaGuy said:

for me none of the PC stuff bothers me... not even these opportunists coming out at the last moment with their 'painful' stories bless them. What bothers me much more is the way CNN has converted into the Clinton News Network and their totally biased coverage and reporting. And, BTW, I supported Bernie and loath Republicans am pro legalize Pot, for Women's right to choose and against big business etc. etc. etc.  But surely America can SEE how manipulative it all is?  sadly I think most cannot.

 

They can see it. Its just a certain demographic that uses it all to their benefit. 

[ilostmypassword]

Ac

12 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

 

Strange, you are describing how you view the world:  your definition of 'whore', your fixation that a whore is somehow lower down than others who aren't called whores by profession.  I venture we don't agree on many such issues.

 

I happen to call them 'working women.'  Some are personal friends of mine; I've met their parents, listened to their aspirations, cared for their kids.   Your closing sentence has a tinge of truth to it:  Peoples' actions speak louder than words.   I look at people who have labels such as businessman, salesman, paid lobbyist, politician, and many other professions, and I don't see them as necessarily being one iota better than a woman working in the sex industry.   Indeed, many of those people in prestigious-sounding professions are proven decrepit in how they manifest.  That's yet another reason why I'm the opposite of impressed with the image Donald burnishes of himself. Everything about him is a lie, starting with; "no one has more respect for women, believe me."  If that was his only fault, then he would just be a pervert, ....but he's so much worse.  He's left a trail of miserable and angry people in his wake.

Actually, numerous studies show that the wealthier you are, the more selfish and less empathetic you are.  

[Krataiboy]

Which reminds me: I once knew a Thai prostitute who married a Brit, went to live in the UK and was appalled at the fact that millions of British women happily had sex with men they often hardly knew for FREE.  She called THEM sluts!!

[Strange]

28 minutes ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

I do not take lessons in morality from someone with no morals.

 

You judge and despise the very thing that you objectify and use for your prurience. 

 

The woman LITERALLY OBJECTIFIES HERSELF FOR MONEY ON CAMERA

[Grouse]

41 minutes ago, Strange said:

 

We are not talking about gay people. They are born that way and don't have a choice. A pornstar HAS a choice and chooses to screw on camera for money. 

 

I was born to be a porn star but chose not to. 

[Strange]

6 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

 

Not true. Don't take my word for it. Milo Yiannopolous says so and he should know. He says many gays, himself included, were not born gay and somewhere along the line make a conscious choice. Which is what porn stars do, presumably.

 

So is it just taking the money that makes them sluts/whores or whatever nasty misogynistic word you care to toss into the ring?

 

Milo is cool. I watch his vids all the time. I remember the first one I watched he was dressed up like a stripper cop and I thought "oh god here we go" but was pleasantly surprised. I don't know wether they are born gay or make a choice cause I'm not gay. But I understand that its a possibility for some, if not a majority, and besides what they want to do in their bedroom has nothing to do with me at all. I don't care. 

 

You need to get your nasty misogynistic word definitions in order. Slut = easy; no money. Whore = does it for money. 

 

4 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Which reminds me: I once knew a Thai prostitute who married a Brit, went to live in the UK and was appalled at the fact that millions of British women happily had sex with men they often hardly knew for FREE.  She called THEM sluts!!

 

I would prefer not to be around a person that questions the sex drive and attraction of other women for monetary gain. She is appalled that women are attracted to guys and want to have sex for no other reason than enjoyment. Shit is ridiculous and I wouldn't want to be around that kind of parasite. 

 

Yes, its the money that makes me think less of them. I can buy them for a couple hours. Thats my line in the sand. Not saying they can't be cool and hang out but jeez I prefer to be around people that are not money fixated and manipulative in that regard. I don't want to be with a woman on a serious level that has a monetary drive to be with me. 

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

16 minutes ago, Strange said:

 

The woman LITERALLY OBJECTIFIES HERSELF FOR MONEY ON CAMERA

 

Ms. Drake objectifies her body. You judge her value as a person because of that.

 

You have no moral center.

 

Do not edit my posts. it is also impolite to shout, by doing so you show the weakness of your position.

[Strange]

1 minute ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

 

Ms. Drake objectifies her body. You judge her value as a person because of that.

 

You have no moral center.

 

Do not edit my posts. it is also impolite to shout, by doing so you show the weakness of your position.

 

 

I have a moral center, its just not your moral center. 

 

Get over it. 

[boomerangutang]

The difference between Bernie Madoff and Trump:

 

Madoff cheated people who already had lots of money.  Trump cheats people, most of whom are struggling to make ends meet.

[thaibeachlovers]

12 hours ago, Chicog said:

 

Link please.

 

Do your own research.

Hint- it's on U TUBE.

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, Strange said:

 

The woman LITERALLY OBJECTIFIES HERSELF FOR MONEY ON CAMERA

And what has that got to do whether or not she's a truthful person?

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

30 minutes ago, Strange said:

 

 

I have a moral center, its just not your moral center. 

 

Get over it. 

 

Sorry to inform you but morality doesn't actually work that way. Even for moral relativists. Perhaps you should go back and start with Aristotle and come back when you have a clue.

 

Ms. Drake has full control over her body. Neither Trump nor you can touch her without her consent irrespective of how many others she may have allowed to touch her in the past.

 

Anything that Ms. Drake alleges with reference to sexual assault by Trump has the same value as similar statements by anyone and is not diminished by her occupation. Perhaps you should try to emulate the impartiality of the US justice system and assess Ms. Drake's comments on the merits.

 

It is quite astonishing that Trump fanboys continue with the slut shaming when the impact on female voters is so clear in the polling. 

 

Trump will be paying through the nose for his sexual assaults on women.

[The Old Bull]

Trump is a moron, he could have won the election but couldn't keep his mouth shut. More than half the voters are women he should be careful how he talks to and about them. Now you will be stuck with Hillary who is a whore, not the kind that sells her body but the kind that sells her principals. Selling arms and cosying up to all kinds of nasty bastards like the Saudies , whenever there is some serious cash to be made. She is too bound up in the lobbying scene, lobbying should be illegal as it subverts the democratic process by giving people with deep pockets a way to make an end run around the electorate. Coruption in full view, but where are the media? They are all owned by special interest groups which is OK when they put their cards on the table. The ones that piss me off are the ones like CNN that pretend there news is the real thing.

[Strange]

33 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

And what has that got to do whether or not she's a truthful person?

 

Well considering she has everything to gain and nothing to lose, including her feminist lawyer, and the fact that she is a pornstar, might, maybe, you know, have something to do with it. 

 

Truthful or not we will probably never know. But yeah call me a skeptic. 

[Strange]

34 minutes ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

Sorry to inform you but morality doesn't actually work that way. Even for moral relativists. Perhaps you should go back and start with Aristotle and come back when you have a clue.

 

Ms. Drake has full control over her body. Neither Trump nor you can touch her without her consent irrespective of how many others she may have allowed to touch her in the past.

 

Anything that Ms. Drake alleges with reference to sexual assault by Trump has the same value as similar statements by anyone and is not diminished by her occupation. Perhaps you should try to emulate the impartiality of the US justice system and assess Ms. Drake's comments on the merits.

 

It is quite astonishing that Trump fanboys continue with the slut shaming when the impact on female voters is so clear in the polling. 

 

Trump will be paying through the nose for his sexual assaults on women.

 

Personally don't give a shit what you believe my morals should be. 

 

I mean what? Nowadays are we supposed to get a waiver or consent form before making a move on a woman that we believe or feel wants it? What if we make a mistake and misjudge a situation and kiss a woman? Will it be "OMG SEXUAL ASSAULT!!!" ? Geez... 

 

No one is slut shaming so get over it. She can do what she wants. But yeah, personally, when she says "Trump kissed me without permission" and has everything to gain and it helps her "Wiki Page" and "Brand" and same as her feminist lawyer who is clearly using it as a propaganda machine, yeah call me a skeptic. 

[amykat]

12 hours ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

 

Slut shaming a sex worker. Well done. I guess you can only go for the low hanging fruit.

 

There is a commonality among Trump supporters beyond the fact that the core is comprised of middle-aged to elderly poorly educated straight white men. There is a mindset that is entirely mid Century bourgeoise. A kind of Normal Rockwell fantasy that hides some ugly truths.

 

These are people who have experienced limited success. So they fear change and lash out at Progressives and Liberals and others who embrace change.

 

These are people who don't know how to engage with people of different races and beliefs. Perhaps they never went to school with a Black or Latino or Asian kid and so fear the unknown.

 

These are people who don't understand and cannot deal with issues of sexual preference and gender identity. Perhaps they have had feelings or notions in the past that they have suppressed or perhaps they have been indoctrinated into some religiously driven set of behaviors. So they protest marriage equality and refuse transgenders the dignity of taking a leak in comfort.

 

They live in a comfortable bubble surrounded by like minded people. There is no problem with this but when they start to believe that they can force their reactionary, backwards and negative views on others, then it is time to stand up and be counted.

 

These are people who have developed personality traits that are egocentric and see the world around them as something to benefit them so they are confounded when others don't appreciate being objectified. Like women. Trump objectifies them and sees them as purely for his pleasure. He feels entitled to sexually assault them at will and to brag about it. Exactly the same mentality as someone who objectifies sex workers. It comes as some shock to them that the vote of a sex worker or adult film performer is not worth less than their own vote. Similarly with their opinion.

 

This is the commonality of the Trumpist mentality. You see it all around him. Bannon. Ailes. Hannity. Pence. All these old men with their mid Century mentality. We see it above in the quite grotesque and potty mouthed observations of the value of the word of a sex worker. It is one of the most disgusting things I have read on TVF and that says a lot.

 

For shame.

 

Thank you VERY MUCH for this post!  I wish it could be on EVERY Trump thread on TVF!  I also wish I could have posted it myself and could write and articulate myself so well.  Could you write more often ...I always enjoy your posts!!

 

[boomerangutang]

I'm not a woman, but I have a good idea of what women go through when they come forth to mention unwanted sexual advances:  from unwanted touching/kissing to rape.   Some men go through similar, but it's probably well over half of all women, since before the pyramids - have been subject to that - usually multiple times.   

 

The responses from the accused men vary, depending on their social status. Trump and his fans are doing what's been commonly done by men rightly accused:

 

They start out denying, and then quickly get angry and vindictive and denigrating.   That's why over half of sexual assaults are never mentioned - outside of a few close confidantes of the assaulted person.  There are several reasons why a woman or boy would not want to come forth with truthful accusations.   I could list them and elaborate, but it would fill a thick book - to do justice to the many reasons.

 

And what % are false accusations?  I'd venture 4% or less.     Currently, Trump has 23 sex-related accusations against him.

 

 

[Chicog]

 

Quote

 

Posted 14 hours ago · Report post

15 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Clinton is on record as threatening to use the nuclear option

 

Link please.

 

 

 

No answer?

So we can assume that was a fabrication then.

[amykat]

I would like to say BRAVO to the many men on this thread, and similar ones lately, who are making positive comments about women,  and against slut-shaming!  It is very nice to see groups of you come out on threads all at once and realize you are out there (after many years of reading this website).

[boomerangutang]

       Speaking of candidates' messages:  Republicans have always wanted to increase military spending - often more than the military asks for.  They know it gets more votes.  Dems are scant better.  No matter that the US military is supremely wasteful in everything it does.  For example:  the US military spends over $4.3 billion annually on moving expenses for soldiers, that's an average of about $12 million per each working day, just for moving furniture from point A to point B.

source

 

For someone like Donald Trump, there is no sense of money like regular people have.  He thinks there's an endless spigot of money.  He's never really had to earn the stuff,  it's always been poured into his lap by either his dad, banks or investors.

Edited October 24, 2016 by boomerangutang

[Khun Han]

46 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

I'm not a woman, but I have a good idea of what women go through when they come forth to mention unwanted sexual advances:  from unwanted touching/kissing to rape.   Some men go through similar, but it's probably well over half of all women, since before the pyramids - have been subject to that - usually multiple times.   

 

The responses from the accused men vary, depending on their social status. Trump and his fans are doing what's been commonly done by men rightly accused:

 

They start out denying, and then quickly get angry and vindictive and denigrating.   That's why over half of sexual assaults are never mentioned - outside of a few close confidantes of the assaulted person.  There are several reasons why a woman or boy would not want to come forth with truthful accusations.   I could list them and elaborate, but it would fill a thick book - to do justice to the many reasons.

 

And what % are false accusations?  I'd venture 4% or less.     Currently, Trump has 23 sex-related accusations against him.

 

 

 

And the daftest and most surreal thing about all the denials and defence of him is that he was caught on camera boasting that he does what he's now accused of!

[55Jay]

13 minutes ago, amykat said:

 

So, Strange, following with your logic in paragraph 2 ...you have stated before in this thread that the slut/whore cannot be a credible witness against Trump.  People will be judged by their actions. You participate in the same actions as the slut/whore, and often. Therefore, we can conclude that you are NOT a credible person.

 

You have made a very good argument and now we should feel free to ignore all you write because you are not credible.

Moreover, Trump viewed Ms. Drake as a foregone conclusion.  When she rejected his alleged advances to have sex with him, he put $10,000 and a ride home on his jet, on the table.  Surely a woman like her, a porn actress, would take the money and get to work.  This one fits Trump's character and personality like a glove.  In Trump's world, everyone and everything has a price.  He enjoys the chase, the process of dealing, exploiting leverage, and reveling in success when his target capitulates.

 

Trump could learn a thing or two from Ms. Drake but he's too much of an a**hole to learn anything from anyone.   In this case, Trump was flat out rejected and made to look like a married, morally bankrupt sleazeball by a lowly, lowly porn movie actress.  Man, that's gotta sting and it's no wonder he's a public relations and lawsuit disaster zone.

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, Chicog said:

 

 

 

No answer?

So we can assume that was a fabrication then.

Well, I did read that back in 2012, Clinton did threaten to use the nuclear option on Iran if it launched a nuclear attack against Israel.

[Strange]

1 hour ago, amykat said:

4 hours ago, Strange said:

You happen to call them working women because it makes you feel better about it. It makes them feel better about it. My definition of a whore, prostitute, sex worker is the literal definition. They do sex acts for money. You can paint it another color by calling it something easily consumed but its still the same thing. 

 

Nobody is saying that anyone is better than another person, what I'm saying is that people will be judged by their actions. A pornstar can do whatever they want. I enjoy their service often. But I'm also aware of a thing called hypocrisy. 

 

I honestly believe prostitution should be legalized in the states, and the government shouldn't have anything to do with what people do in the bedroom. However, yes, they will be judged by their peers. 

 

So, Strange, following with your logic in paragraph 2 ...you have stated before in this thread that the slut/whore cannot be a credible witness against Trump.  People will be judged by their actions. You participate in the same actions as the slut/whore, and often. Therefore, we can conclude that you are NOT a credible person.

 

You have made a very good argument and now we should feel free to ignore all you write because you are not credible.

 

I never called her a slut. Not 1 time. I have not slut-shamed anyone. I never said that she can not be a credible witness. I never said anything of the sort. I do not participate in the same actions as a pornstar. I watch porn, but I do not get paid to screw on camera. You can choose to ignore list me if you like. You can declare me, in your opinion, NOT credible. Thats your choice. Its an unfortunate choice cause I like what you have to say sometimes, but your choice nonetheless. 

 

What I'm saying, is that while she can clearly do whatever actions she wants, be prepared to be judged on them. She is a pornstar and gets paid to screw on camera saying that "Trump tried to kiss me without asking for permission". Shit is childish at best and she should have gone to the police and made some sort of documentation, but no, years later she pops up on TV claiming trump tried to kiss her. 

[amykat]

What is kind of funny about all of this, is that in actual fact, each and every day, Trump is fully, 100% without a doubt, defaming, each of these women! (Obviously I am assuming they are all honest about their reports).  First he is trying to penalize them for exercising their free speech. There is a higher standard to be met for defamation which includes proving malice because he is a public figure and his potential lawsuit really amounts to nothing more than harassment.  Next, he is trying to censor women who might come forward who have not yet spoken. This is considered quite serious when our government does this ...and the government will almost never do this.

 

Anyway, think about it ...Trump knows he did these things ..he gets up every day and publicly states that he didn't do it, they are liars and several other derogatory comments about each woman.  A person has committed libel/defamation when they KNOW the statement was false and defamatory.  These people are not public figures. They don't have to prove that he had malice as an element. 

 

Also, what about Obama and his birther claims? Were those not factual claims that he knew were untrue, that he made with malice, over and over again, that Obama could probably easily sue him for, if he wanted to?  And I am sure there are many others out there.  Most people don't give a damn.

 

It seems that Trump has a strange way of accusing people of doing exactly whatever it is, he is actually doing.  I think you can almost bet that if he is accusing someone of "something" that it is his "tell".

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, amykat said:

What is kind of funny about all of this, is that in actual fact, each and every day, Trump is fully, 100% without a doubt, defaming, each of these women! (Obviously I am assuming they are all honest about their reports).  First he is trying to penalize them for exercising their free speech. There is a higher standard to be met for defamation which includes proving malice because he is a public figure and his potential lawsuit really amounts to nothing more than harassment.  Next, he is trying to censor women who might come forward who have not yet spoken. This is considered quite serious when our government does this ...and the government will almost never do this.

 

Anyway, think about it ...Trump knows he did these things ..he gets up every day and publicly states that he didn't do it, they are liars and several other derogatory comments about each woman.  A person has committed libel/defamation when they KNOW the statement was false and defamatory.  These people are not public figures. They don't have to prove that he had malice as an element. 

 

Also, what about Obama and his birther claims? Were those not factual claims that he knew were untrue, that he made with malice, over and over again, that Obama could probably easily sue him for, if he wanted to?  And I am sure there are many others out there.  Most people don't give a damn.

 

It seems that Trump has a strange way of accusing people of doing exactly whatever it is, he is actually doing.  I think you can almost bet that if he is accusing someone of "something" that it is his "tell".

 

 

[Strange]

9 minutes ago, amykat said:

What is kind of funny about all of this, is that in actual fact, each and every day, Trump is fully, 100% without a doubt, defaming, each of these women! (Obviously I am assuming they are all honest about their reports).  First he is trying to penalize them for exercising their free speech. There is a higher standard to be met for defamation which includes proving malice because he is a public figure and his potential lawsuit really amounts to nothing more than harassment.  Next, he is trying to censor women who might come forward who have not yet spoken. This is considered quite serious when our government does this ...and the government will almost never do this.

 

Anyway, think about it ...Trump knows he did these things ..he gets up every day and publicly states that he didn't do it, they are liars and several other derogatory comments about each woman.  A person has committed libel/defamation when they KNOW the statement was false and defamatory.  These people are not public figures. They don't have to prove that he had malice as an element. 

 

Also, what about Obama and his birther claims? Were those not factual claims that he knew were untrue, that he made with malice, over and over again, that Obama could probably easily sue him for, if he wanted to?  And I am sure there are many others out there.  Most people don't give a damn.

 

It seems that Trump has a strange way of accusing people of doing exactly whatever it is, he is actually doing.  I think you can almost bet that if he is accusing someone of "something" that it is his "tell".

 

The point is, we don't know anything. You are stating guilt from the sidelines. If they are lying, that is defamation and not protected under the 1st amendment. If I was Trump and I didn't do anything then I would sue like a mofo too. Most likely this shit will get drug out and nothing will come of it. Its their word against his without evidence.

[metisdead]

A number of posts containing inappropriate language have been removed as well as the replies.  While the media may be using those terms, let's not bring the gutter language in to the discussion here. 

[amykat]

31 minutes ago, Strange said:

 

I never called her a slut. Not 1 time. I have not slut-shamed anyone. I never said that she can not be a credible witness. I never said anything of the sort. I do not participate in the same actions as a pornstar. I watch porn, but I do not get paid to screw on camera. You can choose to ignore list me if you like. You can declare me, in your opinion, NOT credible. Thats your choice. Its an unfortunate choice cause I like what you have to say sometimes, but your choice nonetheless. 

 

What I'm saying, is that while she can clearly do whatever actions she wants, be prepared to be judged on them. She is a pornstar and gets paid to screw on camera saying that "Trump tried to kiss me without asking for permission". Shit is childish at best and she should have gone to the police and made some sort of documentation, but no, years later she pops up on TV claiming trump tried to kiss her. 

 

First of all Strange ...please don't take the things I say personally.  I was making a logical argument based on premises that you put forward (even though you didn't seem to totally realize it) so I just wanted to take that home for you.  You tried to give yourself an out by saying you were being hypocritical but a logical argument doesn't allow for that.  If you read my posts like I write them (with a smile on my face and laughing hopefully you won't feel so bad and I certainly won't put you on my ignore list.)

 

From what you have written to several people today it seems you don't understand what slut-shaming means because you have certainly been participating in it towards this porn actress.  So I am going to post some definitions:

 

An act of making any person feel guilty or inferior for certain sexual behaviors or desires that deviate from traditional or orthodox gender expectations, or that which may be considered to be contrary to natural or religious law.

 

Having premarital, casual, or promiscuous sex, engaging in prostitution, or when being victim blamed for being raped or otherwise sexually assaulted.

 

The term slut-shaming is also used to describe victim blaming for rape and other sexual assault; e.g. by stating that the crime was caused (either in part or in full) by the woman wearing revealing clothing or acting in a sexually provocative manner, before refusing consent to sex, and thereby absolving the perpetrator of guilt.

 

Slut-shaming is defined by many as a process in which women are attacked for their transgression of accepted codes of sexual conduct, i.e., of admonishing them for behavior or desires that are more sexual than society finds acceptable.

 

[amykat]

On 10/23/2016 at 10:26 AM, Strange said:

Well yeah he should sue. The hell is wrong what that? Also:

 

 

"Adult Film Actress"

 

PORNSTAR

 

Yep.... Classy.... Character and integrity level over 10,000. Must be true. 

 

Here is the first post you made about her, which I translated to:  you said she was not a credible witness against Trump.

 

Did you mean something else?