Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 391011121314 LastLast
Results 1,201 to 1,300 of 1316

Thread: Trump - misc

  1. #1201

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    You got dig pretty deep to find this stuff. Why do you bring attention to what these inconsequential fringe hate groups support?
    Agree. Trump may be to some degree a racist, sexist, etc. but I would guess that he's not an extreme antiSemitic, white supremacist, nazi, etc. and shouldn't be dragged into those categories. He does seem to be an islamophobe but even there it's hard to say whether he fears the average believer or just the ideological Islamic extremists (being indoctrinated in various countries lacking any pro-tolerance societal tenants. That said, he should fear the same sorts of people facing similar extreme indoctrination of all religions and political stripes - like latent communism in Russia- but he doesn't.)
    Last edited by KC; 11-09-2017 at 09:03 AM.

  2. #1202

    Default

    You don't have to dig very deep to find the Southern Poverty Law Center or the New York Daily News. However, Infowars and Breibart are pretty far down the rabbit hole but you seem to like them.

  3. #1203

    Default

    The Southern Poverty Law Center is a hate group against Christians and ANY other group that holds political views that oppose liberal agendas.

  4. #1204
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,538

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    The Southern Poverty Law Center is a hate group against Christians and ANY other group that holds political views that oppose liberal agendas.
    It's incredible how thoroughly you've managed to self-radicalize yourself. The SPLC is a "hate group against Christians"? Seriously?

  5. #1205

    Default

    The SPLC is dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry and to seeking justice for the most vulnerable members of our society. Using litigation, education, and other forms of advocacy, the SPLC works toward the day when the ideals of equal justice and equal opportunity will be a reality.
    Yeah, real bunch of hatemongers. I mean, look at all the harm they've done:

    Our lawsuits have toppled institutional racism and stamped out remnants of Jim Crow segregation; destroyed some of the nation’s most violent white supremacist groups; and protected the civil rights of children, women, the disabled, immigrants and migrant workers, the LGBT community, prisoners, and many others who faced discrimination, abuse or exploitation.
    https://www.splcenter.org/about
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  6. #1206

    Default

    Guys, guys. MrClosetRacist is a racist. Of course he's going to try to deflect, deny, discredit any group that is working to stamp out racism.

  7. #1207

  8. #1208

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Yeah, real bunch of hatemongers. I mean, look at all the harm they've done

    I know what the SPLC's PR say about themselves (of course it's all good).


    In reality this non-profit organization hides hundreds of millions of dollars in offshore accounts, and equate anything they disagree with to Nazis. That's pretty much all they do nowadays. They are a big-money left-wing smear machine.

    Sounds pretty hateful to me.
    Last edited by MrOilers; 11-09-2017 at 11:47 AM.

  9. #1209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    In reality this non-profit organization hides hundreds of millions of dollars in offshore accounts, and equate anything they disagree with to Nazis. that's pretty much all they do nowadays.

    Sounds pretty hateful to me.
    Citation please.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  10. #1210
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  11. #1211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Isn't that pretty much what you did when you called SPLC a hate group?
    There can only be one.

  12. #1212

    Default

    SPLC handling their assets & keeping much of it offshore to maximize the return on their investments through knowledge of the tax code is clear evidence of them being super shady.

    Trump Organization handling their assets & keeping much of it offshore to maximize the return on their investments through knowledge of the tax code is clear evidence of Trump being a savvy businessman completely on the up & up.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  13. #1213

    Default

    Every time I hear from the SPLC in the news (any news) they come across as a wealthy left-wing smear machine - far different from what they originally did back in the 60s through to the 90s.

    What frightens me is how many people take the SPLC's claims as absolute truth instead of being skeptical of them. They are now simply a business that is involved in political activism - they aren't neutral, and they aren't benevolent.
    Last edited by MrOilers; 11-09-2017 at 12:07 PM.

  14. #1214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    They are simply a business that is involved in political activism - they aren't neutral, and they aren't benevolent.
    The IRS would disagree with that assessment.

    The Southern Poverty Law Center is a tax-exempt, charitable organization incorporated in 1971 under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. All contributions, grants and bequests are tax deductible. Our tax identification number is 63-0598743.
    Our work is supported primarily through donor contributions. We do not receive or use government funds. During the last fiscal year, approximately 68% of our total expenses were spent on program services. At the end of the fiscal year, our endowment – a special, board-designated fund established to support our future work – stood at $319.3 million. We are proud of the stewardship of our resources.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  15. #1215

    Default

    Yeah, I suppose an organization that pulls in hundreds of millions of dollars per year isn't a business, since they are classified as a "charity".

  16. #1216

    Default

    The organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests, and no part of a section 501(c)(3) organization's net earnings may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual. If the organization engages in an excess benefit transaction with a person having substantial influence over the organization, an excise tax may be imposed on the person and any organization managers agreeing to the transaction.
    https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-pr...-organizations
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  17. #1217

    Default

    Speaking of tax evasion, when can we expect to see Mr Trump's tax returns?

  18. #1218
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  19. #1219

    Default

    Yup, oppose Nazis, anti-semites, white supremacists and the like must mean that you're oppose to Christianity. After all, real Christians would be in favour of all those things, wouldn't they? Oh, wait....

    I imagine that his feelings about the ACLU would be about the same.

  20. #1220

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Yup, oppose Nazis, anti-semites, white supremacists and the like must mean that you're oppose to Christianity.
    That's a heck of a leap you've taken!

  21. #1221
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,236

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Speaking of tax evasion, when can we expect to see Mr Trump's tax returns?
    He's a charity of one, doncha know.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  22. #1222

    Default

    Yeah, pretty much. In fact, the last expenditure from the Trump Foundation was to hire lawyers for Don Jr. after his e-mail release showed that his explanations about the Russian meetings were pretty much lies from the get go. His foundation also donated $25,000 to the campaign of the Florida Attorney General who, totally coincidentally I'm sure. dropped her investigation of Trump "university" right after. Meanwhile, in another startling coincidence, she has just joined Trump's Drug Commission. Again, totally on the up and up.

    Trump Decries His Foundation's Closure, Overstating Its Giving

    But extensive reporting over the past year has shown those claims to be overstated. According to the Washington Post's David Fahrenthold, who has researched the foundation's donations and expenses for several months, Trump and his companies have given about $6 million to the charity since its launch, according to tax records up to 2015.


    However, the president-elect has not given anything to the foundation from 2009 until 2014; his businesses gave to the foundation in 2015 for the first time in several years, according to the Post.


    In fact, the two largest donors were professional wrestling magnates Vince and Linda McMahon, who gave $5 million to the foundation from 2007 until 2009. Trump has nominated Linda McMahon to lead the Small Business Administration.


    And as Fahrenthold reported during the campaign, not all of the money was solely for charitable purposes. In many cases, spending benefited Trump and his business interests. Trump used his foundation's money to buy a 6-foot-tall portrait of himself for $20,000, and had earlier bought another portrait for $10,000, the Post's reporting showed. He also used the foundation's money to buy an autographed Tim Tebow Denver Broncos helmet for $12,000.

    http://www.npr.org/2016/12/27/507143...ing-its-giving

    Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi to join Trump's drug commission next week

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/fl...rticle/2633789

  23. #1223

    Default

    Here is a piece written by a black conservative (published in the Wall Street Journal yesterday) who was attacked by the SPLC and, just like myself, ALSO calls them a hate group:


    "When Morris Dees and Joseph J. Levin Jr. started the SPLC in 1971, it was needed and it had noble goals. In recent years, however, it has become a tool of the radical left. Domestically, it uses its influence to paint with a broad brush that smears immigration restrictionists, orthodox Christian churches and pro-family organizations as “hate groups.”

    What landed me in the SPLC’s crosshairs was a Sept. 10, 2009, Huffington Post blog entry titled “Mission Creep and the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Misguided Focus.” I pointed out the SPLC’s silence about video footage released after the 2008 elections showing members of the New Black Panther Party, decked out in full paramilitary regalia, patrolling a polling precinct in Philadelphia where they were clearly intimidating white voters.

    Although several news organizations covered the story, the SPLC ignored the incident. At the time, the law center was spending an inordinate amount of time attacking then-CNN host Lou Dobbs for his relentless focus on illegal immigration. It demanded that CNN fire the anchor. After CNN and Mr. Dobbs parted ways, the SPLC took credit for getting him off the air. I ended my post with a one-liner that raised the ire of the organization and had a devastating effect on my life. I wrote: “Rather than monitoring hate groups, the Southern Poverty Law Center has become one.”

    https://archive.fo/9SyV5#selection-2147.0-2155.572


    This is all what the Southern Poverty Law Center does today - they work as a political smear machine for the left wing.

  24. #1224

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    I imagine that his feelings about the ACLU would be about the same.
    The ACLU is better than the SPLC, but not much. The ACLU is another organization that has been reduced to a political tool for the far-left.

    Right now they are arguing that Artificial Intelligence (that predicts high-crime areas after crunching objective crime stats) is racist:

    Los Angeles began using a service called PredPol to determine areas where burglaries and car break-ins might occur. After the mathematical model–which uses past police reports–outlines where these crimes are likely to occur, the LAPD dispatches police to the area. The presence of police alone is a deterrent and in some precincts, crime dropped 25%. But meanwhile, Oakland police decided not to implement the same technology because the city was concerned about racial profiling.
    https://www.fastcodesign.com/9013427...plan-to-fix-it

  25. #1225

    Default

    http://www.businessinsider.com/katy-...ing-joe-2017-9

    In her new book about her time on the presidential campaign trail covering then-candidate Donald Trump, MSNBC host Katy Tur described receiving an unwelcome greeting from the president: a kiss on the cheek.
    I'm completely unsurprised good ol' rapist & sexual predator DJT keeps on assaulting women.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  26. #1226

    Default

    Yup, a kiss on the cheek is totally rape.

  27. #1227

    Default

    I said he sexually assaulted the reporter, which is completely correct. I didn't say he raped her.

    All rapes are sexual assaults but not all sexual assaults are rapes.

    Try and keep up.

    Or do you think it's appropriate to kiss women without their consent?
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  28. #1228

    Default

    And shaking her hand would be the same as inappropriately feeling her up.

  29. #1229

    Default

    So you're as regressive on female body autonomy as you are on a whole host of other issues? Got it.

    Keep on making excuses for an unabashed & self-admitted sexual predator.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  30. #1230

    Default

    If she wore a hijab she wouldn't get raped.

  31. #1231
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    5,824

    Default

    Pretty well daily I see Justin Trudeau giving the kiss on the cheek, then the other cheek. I hadn't realized until now that he is a sexual predator.

  32. #1232

    Default

    Because Justin Trudeau doesn't think like this.

    “You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything….Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.”
    Read more at http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/enterta...iKHK7vzq8Me.99

  33. #1233
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    5,824

    Default

    “You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything….Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything"......Jeez kkozoriz, I didn't know you were like that. Lol
    Last edited by Drumbones; 12-09-2017 at 12:47 PM.

  34. #1234

    Default

    Ha ha - I love how lefties keep dragging out that quote and shouting it out as some kind of "proof" of rape.

    As if crass "show off" talk while joking around in private is damning of something.

  35. #1235
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    /\/\/\How on earth do you know how Justin Trudeau thinks?
    He used unprecedented physical force on the floor of the Commons, what else bounces around in that vacuous head of his?

  36. #1236

    Default

    Never heard of this Katy Tur women but I suppose her having a book out she is looking for ways to flog it. I for one would not buy a book simply for the fact the author got a kiss from Trump. When it comes to pecks on the cheek from guys/girls it's a pretty slim margin if it's right or wrong. Trump is 70 and no doubt pecks on the cheeks were more prominent in his day then they are now. I think years ago women were not expected to shake hands even in business dealings. Trump did business in that era. A kiss on the cheek is not the substitue. In the instance of this Tur women I would say it was unwarranted for him to kiss her on the cheek. It was a business meeting and not a social event and even if it was a social event there was no need for kisses. Although it was not as if he pulled her into his arms and kissed her passionately then put his tongue down her throat. I wonder if Tur would of felt the same though if it was one of Hollyweird's golden boys, Brad Pitt, Matthew McConaughey etc. I have a feeling she would be asking them for a selfie with them. This 'kiss/peck' like everything connected to Trump has been blown out of proportion simply to flog a book. As unwarranted as it was for a business type meeting she should get over it or maybe counselling if she is so traumatized.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  37. #1237

    Default

    It's not about rape, any more than the unwanted kiss in the story above the quote was. It is, however, about sexual assault. Or do you think that men should be al=ble to walk up to any woman they want to and kiss them? What about grabbing them? That OK too since, in your words, it's not rape?

  38. #1238

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Ha ha - I love how lefties keep dragging out that quote and shouting it out as some kind of "proof" of rape.

    As if crass "show off" talk while joking around in private is damning of something.
    And righties keep calling Bill Clinton a rapist, so it all evens out.
    I feel in no way entitled to your opinion...

  39. #1239

    Default

    Bill Clinton is a pretty skeevy guy.

    Bill Clinton having terrible notions of female body autonomy does not justify or excuse Trump's.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  40. #1240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    It's not about rape, any more than the unwanted kiss in the story above the quote was. It is, however, about sexual assault. Or do you think that men should be al=ble to walk up to any woman they want to and kiss them? What about grabbing them? That OK too since, in your words, it's not rape?
    No I don't think anyone should walk up to just anyone and kiss them, but this was an interview, I believe were there was a certain degree on familiarity of each other with the persons involved. The kiss/peck was not warranted but it was not a sexual assault. Grabbing them is a whole different matter but Tur was not grabbed.
    Tur is blowing this out of proportion. She got a peck/kiss of Trump and is trying to get her name out their to sell her book. I'm sure we have all had awkward moments when someone has pecked us on the cheek but most of us just forget about it. How about all those pecks on the cheek people get from perfect strangers on New Years Eve. Not rape, just pecks on the cheek.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  41. #1241

    Default

    It doesn't matter the degree of familiarity. It's about wanted vs unwanted. Just because you're familiar with someone doesn't give you the right to kiss them without their permission. You lean forward, they lean back, you stop. And just because it's New years give doesn't give you the right to play tonsil hockey with someone.

    I suppose that you don't think that spousal rape is a thing either then? After all, if you're married, how much more familiar can you get?

    The man is a self confessed sexual predator and you have no problem with him carrying on in the same manner (It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything) as he has said?

    I sure hope you don't have a daughter. "Remember honey, if you know someone, you're not allowed to say no"

  42. #1242
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    It's funny that none of the dozen or so women who, during the election, accused Trump of sexually assaulting them have taken him to court or pursued their cases at all.

  43. #1243

    Default

    I think people need to stop putting politicians on a pedestal and trying to use them as role models. They are all just so awful.

  44. #1244

    Default

    So you can kiss women you're familiar with without consent & it's not denying their bodily autonomy, only when it happens to strangers?

    Kinda like how Trump thinks he can't rape his wife because she's his wife & he can do with her as he pleases? Gross.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  45. #1245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60 View Post
    It's funny that none of the dozen or so women who, during the election, accused Trump of sexually assaulting them have taken him to court or pursued their cases at all.
    What about the woman who accused him of rape in the 90s (aka his former wife Ivana) & the only reason that Trump didn't face consequences is outdated & sexist legislation on the books that makes married women the sexual property of their husbands?

    [“I mean somebody’s doing it!… Who’s doing the raping?” Donald Trump said, when asked to defend his characterization.It was an unfortunate turn of phrase for Trump—in more ways than one. Not only does the current frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination have a history of controversial remarks about sexual assault, but as it turns out, his ex-wife Ivana Trump once used “rape” to describe an incident between them in 1989. She later said she felt “violated” by the experience.
    Michael Cohen, special counsel at The Trump Organization, defended his boss, saying, “You’re talking about the frontrunner for the GOP, presidential candidate, as well as a private individual who never raped anybody. And, of course, understand that by the very definition, you can’t rape your spouse.”
    “It is true,” Cohen added. “You cannot rape your spouse. And there’s very clear case law.”
    Ivana Trump’sassertion of “rape” came in a deposition—part of the early ’90s divorce case between the Trumps, and revealed in the 1993 book Lost Tycoon: The Many Lives of Donald J. Trump.
    Trump's a sexual predator (in his own words) & a skeevy, slimy, immoral letch who raped his then-wife & got off on a sexist, outmoded, patriarchal technicality. Fact.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  46. #1246
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    He didn't get off on a technicality, there was never a charge, just an assertion in a divorce case.
    Fact

  47. #1247

    Default

    Statement in a deposition, not a mere assertion. Charges were never brought because, as I mentioned, Trump forcefully penetrated his wife in a jurisdiction that did not believe that a husband violently forcing his wife to have sex with him against her will constituted rape.

    Do you believe forcing yourself on your wife without her consent is okay?
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  48. #1248

  49. #1249

  50. #1250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60 View Post
    just an assertion in a divorce case.
    Yup. Like any instance of a "he said, she said" case, it comes down to how much you believe each side, and how much you think they are embellishing things. Makes it tough to judge.

    I mean, a kiss on the cheek is practically considered rape to some people now.

  51. #1251

    Default

    If it's unwanted, it is sexual assault. Or can a man do whatever he wants to a woman as long as he stops just short of penetration?

    The reason that the majority of the women haven't pressed charges is because of the statute of limitations. A number of states have actually updated their laws to remove sexual assault from being covered by the statute of limitations. When they first brought up the allegations, back when the assaults occurred, Trump threatened to sue them for defamation and made it clear that he was willing to bankrupt them if the pressed charges. As in the quote stated above, "When you're a star, you can do anything".

  52. #1252

  53. #1253
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    4,841

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60 View Post
    just an assertion in a divorce case.
    Yup. Like any instance of a "he said, she said" case, it comes down to how much you believe each side, and how much you think they are embellishing things. Makes it tough to judge.

    I mean, a kiss on the cheek is practically considered rape to some people now.
    No... rape involves penetration. There are many other forms of sexual assault that don't involve penetration. Why is that hard for you to grasp?
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  54. #1254

    Default

    ^Not necessarily assault. Sexual harassment, sure.
    There can only be one.

  55. #1255

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    ^Not necessarily assault. Sexual harassment, sure.
    Untoward advancements are harassment, but if you cross the line & engage in contact that's assault.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  56. #1256
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    The statement in the deposition did not call it rape, in Ivana's own words: "She later said she wouldn’t describe the act as rape in a “criminal sense,” adding: “As a woman, I felt violated, as the love and tenderness, which he normally exhibited towards me, was absent"
    source: http://www.thedailybeast.com/all-of-...pe-and-assault

    I'm not saying what he did was right, my point is, he didn't get off on a technicality, that makes it sound like he was charged. I have no doubt that there is some truth to some of the allegations but the fact none of them has been pursued and that they all came out at election time really makes it seem that a lot of it is just more fake news.

  57. #1257

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    It doesn't matter the degree of familiarity. It's about wanted vs unwanted. Just because you're familiar with someone doesn't give you the right to kiss them without their permission. You lean forward, they lean back, you stop. And just because it's New years give doesn't give you the right to play tonsil hockey with someone.

    I suppose that you don't think that spousal rape is a thing either then? After all, if you're married, how much more familiar can you get?

    The man is a self confessed sexual predator and you have no problem with him carrying on in the same manner (It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything) as he has said?

    I sure hope you don't have a daughter. "Remember honey, if you know someone, you're not allowed to say no"
    What we have here is two completely different issues. 1. A kiss on the cheek. 2. Rape. I realize you have a penchant for greatly exaggerating most of your post and for wildly swinging from one end of a spectrum to another and this post is no different. You seem to think that a peck on the cheek is somehow in the same ball park as rape. It's unfortunate you have not got the grey matter to distinguish the difference.
    I was reading an article the other day about how a lot of seniors were very lonely with some hardly coming into contact with other people. Some said they had very little interaction with people and even less physical contact of the touch of another person. Some elderly even going so far as to say it was as if they were lepers, no one wanted to touch them. I got into a discussion with a friend about this and said sometimes a big hug or even a gentle touch on the cheek from even a kind stranger can really cheer elderly people up. Then we realized in this day and age it would be frowned upon. Some (like you) would look on a simple hug as a precursor to rape. We live in an age now where just about everything offends.
    Like everything in life there is a right and wrong way then there are the shades in between.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  58. #1258

    Default

    After a painful scalp reduction surgery to remove a bald spot, Donald Trump confronted his then-wife, who had previously used the same plastic surgeon.“Your ******* doctor has ruined me!” Trump cried. What followed was a “violent assault,” according to Lost Tycoon. Donald held back Ivana’s arms and began to pull out fistfuls of hair from her scalp, as if to mirror the pain he felt from his own operation. He tore off her clothes and unzipped his pants.
    “Then he jams his penis inside her for the first time in more than sixteen months. Ivana is terrified… It is a violent assault,” Hurt writes. “According to versions she repeats to some of her closest confidantes, ‘he raped me.’”
    Following the incident, Ivana ran upstairs, hid behind a locked door, and remained there “crying for the rest of night.” When she returned to the master bedroom in the morning, he was there.“As she looks in horror at the ripped-out hair scattered all over the bed, he glares at her and asks with menacing casualness: ‘Does it hurt?’” Hurt writes
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/ex-wife...ted-during-sex

    Revolting.

    I really don't expect to change the minds of those that support Trump regardless of his being an immoral dumpster fire of a human being, but for a second think about how you'd feel if instead of Ivana it was your wife, mother, sister, daughter or friend who got treated like that? What if they were one of the women Trump boasted about molesting?
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  59. #1259

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    It doesn't matter the degree of familiarity. It's about wanted vs unwanted. Just because you're familiar with someone doesn't give you the right to kiss them without their permission. You lean forward, they lean back, you stop. And just because it's New years give doesn't give you the right to play tonsil hockey with someone.

    I suppose that you don't think that spousal rape is a thing either then? After all, if you're married, how much more familiar can you get?

    The man is a self confessed sexual predator and you have no problem with him carrying on in the same manner (It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything) as he has said?

    I sure hope you don't have a daughter. "Remember honey, if you know someone, you're not allowed to say no"
    What we have here is two completely different issues. 1. A kiss on the cheek. 2. Rape. I realize you have a penchant for greatly exaggerating most of your post and for wildly swinging from one end of a spectrum to another and this post is no different. You seem to think that a peck on the cheek is somehow in the same ball park as rape. It's unfortunate you have not got the grey matter to distinguish the difference.
    I was reading an article the other day about how a lot of seniors were very lonely with some hardly coming into contact with other people. Some said they had very little interaction with people and even less physical contact of the touch of another person. Some elderly even going so far as to say it was as if they were lepers, no one wanted to touch them. I got into a discussion with a friend about this and said sometimes a big hug or even a gentle touch on the cheek from even a kind stranger can really cheer elderly people up. Then we realized in this day and age it would be frowned upon. Some (like you) would look on a simple hug as a precursor to rape. We live in an age now where just about everything offends.
    Like everything in life there is a right and wrong way then there are the shades in between.
    And you are unable to grasp the idea that unwanted touching can be sexual assault. If someone grabs a woman's breast without consent, it's sexual assault. Same for "just a peck on the cheek" if it's unwanted. It comes down to consent, a subject you seem unable to grasp.




    Sexual assault is defined as sexual contact with another person without that other person's consent. Consent is defined in section 273.1(1) as "the voluntary agreement of the complainant to engage in the sexual activity in question".


    Section 265 of the Criminal Code defines the offences of assault and sexual assault.


    Section 271 criminalizes "Sexual assault", section 272 criminalizes "Sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm" and section 273 criminalizes "Aggravated sexual assault".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault#Canada
    And consent, as defined above, must be voluntary. If your boss says that they will fire you if you do not agree to his touching you, even if you permit it because you cannot afford to lose your job, it's not voluntary.

    This is not exaggeration. It's right there in the criminal code.

    Meaning of “consent”
    273.1 (1) Subject to subsection (2) and subsection 265(3), “consent” means, for the purposes of sections 271, 272 and 273, the voluntary agreement of the complainant to engage in the sexual activity in question.


    Where no consent obtained


    (2) No consent is obtained, for the purposes of sections 271, 272 and 273, where (a) the agreement is expressed by the words or conduct of a person other than the complainant; (b) the complainant is incapable of consenting to the activity; (c) the accused induces the complainant to engage in the activity by abusing a position of trust, power or authority; (d) the complainant expresses, by words or conduct, a lack of agreement to engage in the activity; or (e) the complainant, having consented to engage in sexual activity, expresses, by words or conduct, a lack of agreement to continue to engage in the activity.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault#Consent


  60. #1260

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    It doesn't matter the degree of familiarity. It's about wanted vs unwanted. Just because you're familiar with someone doesn't give you the right to kiss them without their permission. You lean forward, they lean back, you stop. And just because it's New years give doesn't give you the right to play tonsil hockey with someone.

    I suppose that you don't think that spousal rape is a thing either then? After all, if you're married, how much more familiar can you get?

    The man is a self confessed sexual predator and you have no problem with him carrying on in the same manner (It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything) as he has said?

    I sure hope you don't have a daughter. "Remember honey, if you know someone, you're not allowed to say no"
    What we have here is two completely different issues. 1. A kiss on the cheek. 2. Rape. I realize you have a penchant for greatly exaggerating most of your post and for wildly swinging from one end of a spectrum to another and this post is no different. You seem to think that a peck on the cheek is somehow in the same ball park as rape. It's unfortunate you have not got the grey matter to distinguish the difference.
    I was reading an article the other day about how a lot of seniors were very lonely with some hardly coming into contact with other people. Some said they had very little interaction with people and even less physical contact of the touch of another person. Some elderly even going so far as to say it was as if they were lepers, no one wanted to touch them. I got into a discussion with a friend about this and said sometimes a big hug or even a gentle touch on the cheek from even a kind stranger can really cheer elderly people up. Then we realized in this day and age it would be frowned upon. Some (like you) would look on a simple hug as a precursor to rape. We live in an age now where just about everything offends.
    Like everything in life there is a right and wrong way then there are the shades in between.
    And you are unable to grasp the idea that unwanted touching can be sexual assault. If someone grabs a woman's breast without consent, it's sexual assault. Same for "just a peck on the cheek" if it's unwanted. It comes down to consent, a subject you seem unable to grasp.




    Sexual assault is defined as sexual contact with another person without that other person's consent. Consent is defined in section 273.1(1) as "the voluntary agreement of the complainant to engage in the sexual activity in question".


    Section 265 of the Criminal Code defines the offences of assault and sexual assault.


    Section 271 criminalizes "Sexual assault", section 272 criminalizes "Sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm" and section 273 criminalizes "Aggravated sexual assault".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault#Canada
    And consent, as defined above, must be voluntary. If your boss says that they will fire you if you do not agree to his touching you, even if you permit it because you cannot afford to lose your job, it's not voluntary.

    This is not exaggeration. It's right there in the criminal code.

    Meaning of “consent”
    273.1 (1) Subject to subsection (2) and subsection 265(3), “consent” means, for the purposes of sections 271, 272 and 273, the voluntary agreement of the complainant to engage in the sexual activity in question.


    Where no consent obtained


    (2) No consent is obtained, for the purposes of sections 271, 272 and 273, where (a) the agreement is expressed by the words or conduct of a person other than the complainant; (b) the complainant is incapable of consenting to the activity; (c) the accused induces the complainant to engage in the activity by abusing a position of trust, power or authority; (d) the complainant expresses, by words or conduct, a lack of agreement to engage in the activity; or (e) the complainant, having consented to engage in sexual activity, expresses, by words or conduct, a lack of agreement to continue to engage in the activity.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault#Consent


    Seems the old adage: "If in doubt, don't" applies to speaking and touching.



    The social minefield of kissing a woman 'hello'
    One kiss or two? Or even three? Alan Tyers explains why so many men fall at the first hurdle when it comes to greeting a woman with a kiss

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/think...man-hello.html




    THE BLOG 09/14/2009 05:12 am ET Updated May 25, 2011
    One Kiss or Two? The Etiquette of Social Kissing
    By Jo Bryant

    excerpt:
    "When I was introduced to a small group of people at a party last week, I found myself in the dilemma of whether to kiss or shake hands. Opting for the social kiss, I was successfully doing the rounds with a peck and an exchange of names when my confidence was shaken to the core. The last person I came to awkwardly stuck out their hand and I had to quickly change tack, all the while wondering if I had made a social kissing blunder.

    Should I have just opted to shake hands with everyone? Was the hand-shaker in question rude not to follow suite and go with the kiss? We Brits definitely don’t do halfway-house hugs or casual greetings. It’s either a kiss or a firm handshake and, in the environment of the party, a handshake felt far too formal.

    Social kissing is a potential minefield but, when approached with appropriate confidence and charm, it creates a welcome feeling of conviviality. ..."

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jo-bry..._b_259572.html



    Should you ask someone's permission to kiss them?
    16 June 2014
    excerpt:
    To many it seems the rules around relationships are changing, and the consequences of getting things wrong can be serious.
    At the trial of Conservative MP Nigel Evans earlier this year, the court was told that he had tried to kiss someone, been rebuffed, and had backed off. This was regarded by the Crown Prosecution Service as potentially criminal. Evans was acquitted.
    ...
    http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-27831626



    It’s time to ban greeting people by kissing them on the cheek
    Share this article with Facebook
    Share this article with Twitter
    583

    By Ellen Scott for Metro.co.uk, Lifestyle editor
    Thursday 20 Jul 2017

    excrpt:

    "I like a hug from someone I know well. I’m perfectly alright with a handshake from a new person. I like kissing someone I’m dating. I’d just really rather an acquaintance didn’t put their lips on my cheek(s). ..."

    http://metro.co.uk/2017/07/20/its-ti...cheek-6794059/

  61. #1261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    It doesn't matter the degree of familiarity. It's about wanted vs unwanted. Just because you're familiar with someone doesn't give you the right to kiss them without their permission. You lean forward, they lean back, you stop. And just because it's New years give doesn't give you the right to play tonsil hockey with someone.

    I suppose that you don't think that spousal rape is a thing either then? After all, if you're married, how much more familiar can you get?

    The man is a self confessed sexual predator and you have no problem with him carrying on in the same manner (It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything) as he has said?

    I sure hope you don't have a daughter. "Remember honey, if you know someone, you're not allowed to say no"
    What we have here is two completely different issues. 1. A kiss on the cheek. 2. Rape. I realize you have a penchant for greatly exaggerating most of your post and for wildly swinging from one end of a spectrum to another and this post is no different. You seem to think that a peck on the cheek is somehow in the same ball park as rape. It's unfortunate you have not got the grey matter to distinguish the difference.
    I was reading an article the other day about how a lot of seniors were very lonely with some hardly coming into contact with other people. Some said they had very little interaction with people and even less physical contact of the touch of another person. Some elderly even going so far as to say it was as if they were lepers, no one wanted to touch them. I got into a discussion with a friend about this and said sometimes a big hug or even a gentle touch on the cheek from even a kind stranger can really cheer elderly people up. Then we realized in this day and age it would be frowned upon. Some (like you) would look on a simple hug as a precursor to rape. We live in an age now where just about everything offends.
    Like everything in life there is a right and wrong way then there are the shades in between.
    And you are unable to grasp the idea that unwanted touching can be sexual assault. If someone grabs a woman's breast without consent, it's sexual assault. Same for "just a peck on the cheek" if it's unwanted. It comes down to consent, a subject you seem unable to grasp.




    Sexual assault is defined as sexual contact with another person without that other person's consent. Consent is defined in section 273.1(1) as "the voluntary agreement of the complainant to engage in the sexual activity in question".


    Section 265 of the Criminal Code defines the offences of assault and sexual assault.


    Section 271 criminalizes "Sexual assault", section 272 criminalizes "Sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm" and section 273 criminalizes "Aggravated sexual assault".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault#Canada
    And consent, as defined above, must be voluntary. If your boss says that they will fire you if you do not agree to his touching you, even if you permit it because you cannot afford to lose your job, it's not voluntary.

    This is not exaggeration. It's right there in the criminal code.

    Meaning of “consent”
    273.1 (1) Subject to subsection (2) and subsection 265(3), “consent” means, for the purposes of sections 271, 272 and 273, the voluntary agreement of the complainant to engage in the sexual activity in question.


    Where no consent obtained


    (2) No consent is obtained, for the purposes of sections 271, 272 and 273, where (a) the agreement is expressed by the words or conduct of a person other than the complainant; (b) the complainant is incapable of consenting to the activity; (c) the accused induces the complainant to engage in the activity by abusing a position of trust, power or authority; (d) the complainant expresses, by words or conduct, a lack of agreement to engage in the activity; or (e) the complainant, having consented to engage in sexual activity, expresses, by words or conduct, a lack of agreement to continue to engage in the activity.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault#Consent

    I know what your position is, you don't seem to recognize shades of grey in different situations. Your narrow minded as well which does not help. It's possible you have intimacy phobia's and lack nurturing. Never mind, someone might come up and hug you and make you feel better.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  62. #1262
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    To Quote Ivana:
    "I have recently read some comments attributed to me from nearly 30 years ago at a time of very high tension during my divorce from Donald. The story is totally without merit. Donald and I are the best of friends and together have raised three children that we love and are very proud of. I have nothing but fondness for Donald and wish him the best of luck on his campaign. Incidentally, I think he would make an incredible president.”"
    Source: http://www.thedailybeast.com/ex-wife...ted-during-sex
    By the way, this is the same article that Noodle quoted in line 1258

  63. #1263
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,538

    Default

    She got her divorce settlement, which I'm sure had stipulations that she say only wonderful things of her scum bag ex going forward. What else would you expect? Under oath, her story was quite different.

  64. #1264
    I feel in no way entitled to your opinion...

  65. #1265

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    I know what your position is, you don't seem to recognize shades of grey in different situations. Your narrow minded as well which does not help. It's possible you have intimacy phobia's and lack nurturing. Never mind, someone might come up and hug you and make you feel better.
    Gemini talking to his daughter about consent - "OK sweetee, just remember that if someone wants to kiss you or feel you up then you should do it because otherwise people will think that you're frigid. Sure, legally you have the right to refuse but you really don't want to do that. Just remember that your body is there for their pleasure, not yours."

    Apparently you do not understand the concept of consent. Ever hear the old maxim "Your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose"? If someone doesn't want to be touched, groped, kissed or have sex, then they have the right to say no and if you do not honour their wishes then YOU are the one at fault.

    Consent is not a shade of gray. Either you have someone's consent or you do not. It doesn't matter if you want to hug someone, a stranger, an acquaintance, a friend, a relative or a spouse. You do not get to decide if they should or should not accept it. If they're open to it and willing, sure, go for it.

    There's a number of rape cases where men have claimed that they were simply trying to "help" women get over their intimacy issues. As if having someone force unwanted attention on someone is going to make them more open. It's the same mindset that leads some men to decide that raping a lesbian is for their own good because they will see what they're missing.

    Tell you what, next time you see a female cop on duty, go up to her and try to kiss her and see how far you get. And then, if she refuses, tell her that he's got intimacy issues. I'll wait.

  66. #1266
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Come on Marcel, you're smarter than that. A court order can stop a person from saying negative things, it can't compel them to say positive.

  67. #1267

    Default

    And it would appear that the Uber driver is the one in the wrong here since she obviously has intimacy issues and this, in Gemini's world, is a terrible miscarriage of justice.

    GOP state senator resigns after being charged with sexual assault of Uber driver


    “A married senator and father of three has resigned from his position in the Oklahoma Senate following his arrest for sexual battery,” Oxygen reports. “Bryce Marlatt was charged last week after being accused of making unwanted and inappropriate sexual advances toward a female Uber driver on the night of June 26 in Oklahoma City.”


    NewsOK reports a court affidavit says the Uber driver told an investigating detective that then-state Senator Marlatt said, “Hey, you got not t–s.”


    Marlatt is facing 10 years in prison for sexual battery, which stems from allegations he groped and forcibly kissed on the neck his Uber driver, while in transit.

    http://www.rawstory.com/2017/09/gop-...f-uber-driver/


  68. #1268

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    I know what your position is, you don't seem to recognize shades of grey in different situations. Your narrow minded as well which does not help. It's possible you have intimacy phobia's and lack nurturing. Never mind, someone might come up and hug you and make you feel better.
    Gemini talking to his daughter about consent - "OK sweetee, just remember that if someone wants to kiss you or feel you up then you should do it because otherwise people will think that you're frigid. Sure, legally you have the right to refuse but you really don't want to do that. Just remember that your body is there for their pleasure, not yours."

    Apparently you do not understand the concept of consent. Ever hear the old maxim "Your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose"? If someone doesn't want to be touched, groped, kissed or have sex, then they have the right to say no and if you do not honour their wishes then YOU are the one at fault.

    Consent is not a shade of gray. Either you have someone's consent or you do not. It doesn't matter if you want to hug someone, a stranger, an acquaintance, a friend, a relative or a spouse. You do not get to decide if they should or should not accept it. If they're open to it and willing, sure, go for it.

    There's a number of rape cases where men have claimed that they were simply trying to "help" women get over their intimacy issues. As if having someone force unwanted attention on someone is going to make them more open. It's the same mindset that leads some men to decide that raping a lesbian is for their own good because they will see what they're missing.

    Tell you what, next time you see a female cop on duty, go up to her and try to kiss her and see how far you get. And then, if she refuses, tell her that he's got intimacy issues. I'll wait.
    Still missing the point I see.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  69. #1269

    Default

    So is a kiss on the cheek still rape?

  70. #1270

    Default

    It's not rape but it can be sexual assault. Try and keep up.

  71. #1271

    Default

    A kiss is just a kiss, a sigh is just a sigh.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  72. #1272

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    It's not rape but it can be sexual assault.
    A kiss is rarely sexual assault. Try and keep up.

  73. #1273
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    868

    Default

    White House: ESPN’s Jemele Hill should be fired for calling Trump a ‘white supremacist’

    Regardless of your thoughts on the reporters comments, which are pretty dumb to be honest considering she is a public figure who still represents a private company, it's incredible that anyone could think this is OK to do. Yes ESPN could fire her for these comments, but it is not the Whitehouses place to comment on that. The 1st amendment doesn't protect you from consequences from private companies and employers, but it is supposed to protect you from consequences from the government. Now that the Whitehouse has commented, if she gets fired, it could be argued that she faced consequences because of the governments comments, which could be argued as a breach of the 1st amendment.

    I'm sure that all of you constantly complaining about your freedom of speech being taken away are super upset about this....

  74. #1274

    Default

    Nope, don't care if that person gets fired or not.

    But if she gets to keep her job, I think the "white" people at ESPN who have been fired for saying something "offensive" should also get their jobs back.

    That's fair.

  75. #1275
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    868

    Default

    No because those are completely different scenarios. In one, the government commented breaking the first amendment. In the other scenarios the government did no comment and they were fired solely based on the companies decision, which they are fully entitled to do as free speech does not protect you from consequences from anyone other than the government. Not surprising that you can't see the difference however.

  76. #1276
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    To quote then Senator Barack Obama regarding Don Imus:
    I understand MSNBC has suspended Mr. Imus," Obama told ABC News, "but I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude."

  77. #1277

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seamusmcduffs View Post
    Not surprising that you can't see the difference however.
    Do you REALLY have to start throwing cheap shots at me?

  78. #1278
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    868

    Default

    deleted, not worth getting into
    Last edited by seamusmcduffs; 14-09-2017 at 11:53 PM.

  79. #1279
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    4,841

    Default

    So, interesting development yesterday...

    California legislature passes bill requiring presidential candidates to release tax returns

    The California State Assembly on Thursday passed a bill that would require all presidential candidates to release their tax returns prior to being placed on the state’s ballot.

    The bill, called the Presidential Tax Transparency and Accountability Act, passed the state Assembly on a 42-18 vote and will now head to the state Senate for a concurrence vote before being sent to the governor for his signature.

    http://thehill.com/homenews/state-wa...-candidates-to
    It's not mentioned in that article, and I can't find the article I read it in, but there are similar laws on the table in some States that Trump won. If those pass, it means his name wouldn't be on the ballot for President in 2020. Of course that assumes he hasn't quit or been arrested by then.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  80. #1280

    Default

    ^So how many years would a candidate have to go back and produce their taxes or would it just be for the previous year?. If it is just the previous year and Trump is intending to run again he could be putting his ducks in a row fairly early so that his taxes look squeaky clean.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  81. #1281

    Default

    Guess googling "SB 149 California" was too hard?

    SB 149, as amended, McGuire. Presidential primary elections: ballot access.
    Existing law establishes processes for printing on presidential primary ballots the names of candidates for President of the United States who are considered to be generally recognized candidates or who are selected by a sufficient number of registered voters. Existing law generally requires a write-in candidate for President in a presidential primary election to file an endorsement of his or her write-in candidacy with the Secretary of State, at least 21 days before the election.
    This bill would enact the Presidential Tax Transparency and Accountability Act, which would require a candidate for President, in order to have his or her name placed upon a primary election ballot, to file his or her income tax returns for the 5 most recent taxable years with the Secretary of State, as specified. The act would require the Secretary of State, after adopting regulations, to redact the income tax returns of Presidential candidates as necessary to protect individual privacy, as specified, and subsequently to make the returns available to the public on the Secretary of State’s Internet Web site.
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...201720180SB149
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  82. #1282

    Default

    ^ Yeah, well, that was nice of you.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  83. #1283
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    4,841

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    ^So how many years would a candidate have to go back and produce their taxes or would it just be for the previous year?. If it is just the previous year and Trump is intending to run again he could be putting his ducks in a row fairly early so that his taxes look squeaky clean.
    It was part of the article:

    The bill would require all presidential candidates to release the last five years of their tax returns in order to appear on the California ballot.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  84. #1284
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    This is a great idea, I wonder why it's just limited to Presidential candidates, it should be required for all candidates for public office.

  85. #1285

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60 View Post
    I wonder why it's just limited to Presidential candidates
    Oh, you know why.

  86. #1286
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  87. #1287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    A kiss is just a kiss, a sigh is just a sigh.

    Saw a minute of the Emmys on tv. Everyone kissing everyone without first asking for consent!!!
    Think of the children!

  88. #1288
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,236

    Default

    Those shows are more about kissing arse than anything else.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  89. #1289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    A kiss is just a kiss, a sigh is just a sigh.

    Saw a minute of the Emmys on tv. Everyone kissing everyone without first asking for consent!!!
    Think of the children!
    Ha ha. You're right!

    Seriously though, all of the crying about him being a "rapist", "abuser", etc. for kissing someone on the cheek only downgrades horrifying experiences of rape and abuse that some people actually suffer through.

  90. #1290

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    A kiss is just a kiss, a sigh is just a sigh.

    Saw a minute of the Emmys on tv. Everyone kissing everyone without first asking for consent!!!
    Think of the children!
    Ha ha. You're right!

    Seriously though, all of the crying about him being a "rapist", "abuser", etc. for kissing someone on the cheek only downgrades horrifying experiences of rape and abuse that some people actually suffer through.
    Didn't several women come forward and accuse him of sbuse? Even his ex wife did so. Are they all lying?

  91. #1291

    Default

    Yup - 8 or 9 women all of a sudden came from out of nowhere after the Access Hollywood tape came out (less than a month before the election). The timing could not have been more suspect. Since then, not a word about any of it from any of the alleged "victims". I don't buy it.

  92. #1292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Yup - 8 or 9 women all of a sudden came from out of nowhere after the Access Hollywood tape came out (less than a month before the election). The timing could not have been more suspect. Since then, not a word about any of it from any of the alleged "victims". I don't buy it.
    Well his lawyers might think otherwise by even suggesting he could use his trump card.

    Trump claims immunity from 'Apprentice' contestant's lawsuit
    Mar 28, 2017
    "President Trump’s private attorneys asserted in court this week that he should be immune from a defamation lawsuit filed against him because of his presidential duties."

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...suit/99729932/



  93. #1293

    Default

    A rather unusual article:

    Louise Linton Part of Cavalcade of Trump Administration Trophy Wives | TheImproper.com

    http://www.theimproper.com/149934/lo...dministration/

  94. #1294
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    4,841

    Default

    Well... this is interesting...

    Exclusive: US government wiretapped former Trump campaign chairman

    US investigators wiretapped former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort under secret court orders before and after the election, sources tell CNN, an extraordinary step involving a high-ranking campaign official now at the center of the Russia meddling probe.
    The government snooping continued into early this year, including a period when Manafort was known to talk to President Donald Trump.
    Some of the intelligence collected includes communications that sparked concerns among investigators that Manafort had encouraged the Russians to help with the campaign, according to three sources familiar with the investigation. Two of these sources, however, cautioned that the evidence is not conclusive.

    Special counsel Robert Mueller's team, which is leading the investigation into Russia's involvement in the election, has been provided details of these communications.

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/18/politi...ans/index.html
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  95. #1295

    Default

    President Trump gave a speech at the UN today. He calls socialism a "discredited ideology", and says "The problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented, but that socialism has been faithfully implemented"


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFRq2ONUCug

  96. #1296

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    President Trump gave a speech at the UN today. He calls socialism a "discredited ideology", and says "The problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented, but that socialism has been faithfully implemented"


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFRq2ONUCug


    Hate speech


    Trump's first UN speech met with criticism from some leaders - BBC News

    "Iran's foreign minister said: "Trump's ignorant hate speech belongs in medieval times", and not the UN. "


    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41327130

  97. #1297
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    President Trump gave a speech at the UN today. He calls socialism a "discredited ideology", and says "The problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented, but that socialism has been faithfully implemented"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFRq2ONUCug
    Hate speech

    Trump's first UN speech met with criticism from some leaders - BBC News

    "Iran's foreign minister said: "Trump's ignorant hate speech belongs in medieval times", and not the UN. "


    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41327130
    the absolute last thing i want to be perceived as doing is defending trump or a speech that in my books would have failed as a campaign speech, never mind a speech to the un but really...

    quoting the foreign minister for iran - that bastion of freedom and equality and free speech and non-aggression - on hate speech and medieval behavior is really the blind leading the blind or the ignorant taunting the ignorant..
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  98. #1298

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    President Trump gave a speech at the UN today. He calls socialism a "discredited ideology", and says "The problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented, but that socialism has been faithfully implemented"


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFRq2ONUCug


    Hate speech


    Trump's first UN speech met with criticism from some leaders - BBC News

    "Iran's foreign minister said: "Trump's ignorant hate speech belongs in medieval times", and not the UN. "


    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41327130

    I watched some of the speech. Trump is mostly speaking to his own audience, a segment of the US. The setting happens to be the UN, but he cares little about what they think of him and is he generally not one for much diplomatic niceties anyways. I am not surprised he has offended some of them as he has many others.

    I think some of his points are valid, but probably could have been delivered more diplomatically. However, I do think he was too harsh on Iran. There is somewhat of an ongoing mid east conflict between the Saudis and their allies vs. Iran and its allies and Trump generally seems to be on the Saudi side. I am not surprised the Iranians are upset.

  99. #1299

    Default

    In the middle of his comments, Trump paused to take the room's temperature, but it was apparent world leaders were unmoved by the rebuke of the worker state. The room was silent. It was reminiscent of Jeb Bush's "please clap" moment.
    Conservative commentator Bill O'Reilly perhaps described it best: "Most fascinating part of Trump [United Nations] speech: After lambasting socialism, he paused, perhaps waiting for applause. None came. Stony silence."
    http://www.newsweek.com/trump-was-la...cialism-667785
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  100. #1300

    Default

    It looked like Trump was expecting the UN to get behind him and cheer him on like he has at his post-election rallies (as strange as those are).

Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 391011121314 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •