tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post7179010178322558034..comments2024-03-28T08:51:18.908-04:00Comments on the daily howler: PERISHING FROM THE EARTH: Mr. Lincoln may have been wrong!<b>bob somerby</b>http://www.blogger.com/profile/02963464534685954436noreply@blogger.comBlogger90125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-1717388234998718422017-11-15T06:53:51.089-05:002017-11-15T06:53:51.089-05:00Yes, I understand. I also understand one other th...Yes, I understand. I also understand one other thing, the media obstinately refused to report that accusation, even though it was a lawsuit on the docket in the NY State courts. I actually asked a CNN anchor why they weren't reporting it and he claimed because it wasn't proven.<br /><br />Compare that to the wall to wall coverage given to the Moore accusers. mmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-87946953616371471822017-11-14T22:43:09.100-05:002017-11-14T22:43:09.100-05:00Well, nothing apparently happened.
That's wha...Well, nothing apparently happened.<br /><br />That's what's so funny about the first four Moore stories. He was a pretty chaste guy for the times.<br /><br />Which makes the fifth "violent temper" one suspect.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-35614736869296714422017-11-14T22:39:15.702-05:002017-11-14T22:39:15.702-05:00Apparently CK obtained consent for this -- althoug...Apparently CK obtained consent for this -- although he admits now that that wasn't proper, and still exploitative.<br /><br />I'd also love to know ALL the details of those evenings. The accusers tend to fudge a bit on the sequence of events -- as with Weinstein, where you find out later that a couple of them turned out to have been DATING him.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-86588929996908368322017-11-14T22:34:49.117-05:002017-11-14T22:34:49.117-05:00You know btw that that's not "rape" ...You know btw that that's not "rape" under the law, if true? Not even under the newest and most liberal constructions of the definition.<br /><br />Rape is insertion. So let's be accurate here-- even about Republicans!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-66617397014711619792017-11-14T22:32:19.538-05:002017-11-14T22:32:19.538-05:00Is that an argument?
Whatever. It's not pedop...Is that an argument?<br /><br />Whatever. It's not pedophilia. And if you have a problem with low ages of consent, complain to European countries, and move to Bahrain. I hear theirs is like 25.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-82927613990660654432017-11-14T11:18:02.643-05:002017-11-14T11:18:02.643-05:00The wine is to loosen up the young woman so that s...The wine is to loosen up the young woman so that she will be more receptive to further sexual advances. Just as men do when they offer wine to older women. Except older women are familiar with the effects of alcohol and presumably know enough to maintain their judgment in a social situation that involves drinking. As we see from college binge drinking situations, that isn't necessary a correct assumption. <br /><br />There's no reason to give an 18 year old wine otherwise.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-59413455347386263402017-11-14T11:17:56.018-05:002017-11-14T11:17:56.018-05:00That's why the claims need to be precised. All...That's why the claims need to be precised. All we know is that he has been accused and admitted to masturbating in front of three women over the last 25 years or so. So we should be careful about making broad claims that imply that it's more than that. Because there's no proof of that and no other accusations have been made. So we have to be careful not to jump on bandwagons and kill the pig. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-83881342555922873292017-11-14T11:12:46.943-05:002017-11-14T11:12:46.943-05:00Three women put their names on the record. We don&...Three women put their names on the record. We don't know how many other times this happened. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-19246473562134710362017-11-14T10:15:20.627-05:002017-11-14T10:15:20.627-05:00You can kvetch over the meaning of pedophilia but ...You can kvetch over the meaning of pedophilia but sex with barely post pubescent youngsters is worse than pedophilia. They are mentally incapable of consent as are younger children, and they can become pregnant or impregnate. Then they will be forced to decide to endure a pregnancy or kill their child. Stop excusing this disgustingly abusive behavior on the basis of desire. Calling criticism of it prudish isn't going to make you right, only more deplorable. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-60732019978904767452017-11-14T06:26:49.965-05:002017-11-14T06:26:49.965-05:00Forgot to put the link.
http://www.dailyhowler.co...Forgot to put the link.<br /><br />http://www.dailyhowler.com/h030999_1.shtml<br /><br />The fact is Broadrick signed a sworn affidavit saying it didn't happen. When you have an accuser swearing under oath it didn't happened, it tends to impeach your credibility.<br /><br />Kathleen Willey had some problems of her own.<br /><br /> <em>Unfortunately, it soon became clear that there was good reason not to believe Willey’s story. Indeed, Independent Counsel Robert Ray would eventually give up on Willey. In his formal report on the Clinton investigations, Ray said that Willey had lied to the FBI; he even suggested that he had considered prosecuting her for her conduct. But when these embarrassing facts became known, your “press corps” did the thing it does best. It kept the evidence from public view, conducting its latest scam on the public. Few recent events do a better job of showing the depth of this press corps’ dysfunction. The Willey affair shows how reflexively dishonest your contemporary “press” really is.<br /><br />The problems began on October 2, 1998, when Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr conducted his high-profile “document dump.” (This was a major news event.) Included was the grand jury testimony of Linda Tripp, who worked with Willey in the Clinton White House. In the course of her lengthy interviews before the grand jury, Tripp was repeatedly questioned about Willey’s relationship with President Clinton. And, as her transcripts made abundantly clear, Tripp substantially contradicted the story Willey told on 60 Minutes. <br /><br />According to Tripp’s detailed, sworn testimony, Willey pursued a romance with Clinton right from the start of her White House employment. Willey had speculated with Tripp as to how she might be able to set up an assignation between herself and the president. She routinely attended events at which Clinton would be present, wearing a black dress she believed he liked. According to Tripp’s testimony, she wondered if she and Clinton could arrange to meet in a home to which she had access along the Chesapeake Bay. <br /><br />Tripp also challenged Willey’s account of that Oval Office meeting. According to Tripp, Willey had arranged the meeting in part to see if her flirtation with Clinton might advance. And when Clinton and Willey did meet in the Oval, Willey rushed back to Tripp’s office to describe it. According to Tripp, Willey “smiled from ear to ear the entire time” as she described the event. “She seemed almost shocked, but happy shocked,” Tripp told the grand jury. Willey told Tripp that she and Clinton had smooched—but there was no talk of a sexual assault. In short, Tripp’s testimony threw into question the story Willey told in March—the story foolish pundits had sworn by. Clinton, of course, has denied that anything inappropriate happened during that meeting. </em><br /><br />The fact of the matter is the allegations were investigated. So don't fucking say there are two standards. Clinton's accusers were taken seriously and us taxpayers spent a lot of taxpayer dollars digging into them.<br /><br />Are you willing to say we should do the same for tRump? Who had a credible accuser claim he raped her when she was 13 years old? <br /><br /><em>A copy of the California lawsuit (filed on 26 April 2016) shared via the Scribd web site outlined the allegations, which included the accusation that Trump and Epstein had (over 20 years earlier) “sexually and physically” abused the then 13-year-old plaintiff and forced her “to engage in various perverted and depraved sex acts” — including being “forced to manually stimulate Defendant Trump with the use of her hand upon Defendant Trump’s erect penis until he reached sexual orgasm,” and being “forced to engage in an unnatural lesbian sex act with her fellow minor and sex slave, Maria Doe, age 12, for the sexual enjoyment of Defendant Trump” — after luring her to a “series of underage sex parties” by promising her “money and a modeling career”:</em><br />https://www.snopes.com/2016/06/23/donald-trump-rape-lawsuit/<br /><br />I want a special prosecutor looking into that. We don't want double standards, do we?<br /><br /><br />mmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-36101404380240112152017-11-14T06:15:47.756-05:002017-11-14T06:15:47.756-05:00Sheerlie - let's make a more precise and accur...Sheerlie - let's make a more precise and accurate claim and try to strip it of your sanctimoniousness and righteous indignation: CK has admitted to masturbating in front of three women in his entire life, the last one being over a decade ago. That is a more precise and accurate claim. lAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-73044064974143083282017-11-14T06:03:22.226-05:002017-11-14T06:03:22.226-05:00Sherlock "For years and years, he exposed him...Sherlock "For years and years, he exposed himself and masturbated in front of women"<br /><br /><br />What is your source for this claim? The New York Times only mentions three women he masturbated in front of. The most recent being 12 years ago. On what do you base your claim that he has done this for years to women?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-38299082990937704712017-11-14T06:00:55.873-05:002017-11-14T06:00:55.873-05:00Yes, let us apply one standard to all sexual assau...Yes, let us apply one standard to all sexual assault. Let us have the FBI and a special prosecutor investigate all of the sexual assault charges made by women against Donald Trump. Cause that was what happened with Clinton's accusers and Starr found none of them had any credibility.<br /><br /><em>Inquiring minds don’t want to know: No one likes probing Mrs. Broaddrick’s allegations, but a press corps is obliged to do so. It is not the job of the political press to lead cheers for the people they like. When individuals make serious criminal charges, those serious charges must be examined. No one is forced to be a journalist. If pundits don’t want to be actual journalists, then by all means they’re free just to quit. <br /><br /><b>Mrs. Broaddrick’s failure to speak to the FBI</b> raises a point we have mentioned before. One can’t help noting: <b>Mrs. Broaddrick refused to make her allegation in any forum where she could be cross-examined.</b> This does not mean that her story is false; again, we take it as obvious that it may well be true. But as we have said before: we shouldn’t create a press culture in which complainants feel free to take criminal charges to Lisa Myers. As part of their ongoing discussion, journalists should identify the obvious problem with Mrs. Broaddrick’s choice of forum. Good luck with this front-running bunch. </em><br /><br /><br />mmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-76233328226389578032017-11-14T00:18:59.239-05:002017-11-14T00:18:59.239-05:00"... because he was a known liar."
It t..."... because he was a known liar."<br /><br />It that what's he was known as around the Kremlin, Pavel?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-61812439578118019522017-11-13T23:08:36.013-05:002017-11-13T23:08:36.013-05:00When did CK and his buddies drive any "female...When did CK and his buddies drive any "female comics" out of the business?<br /><br />This is the kind of nuttiness the "left" is getting into I guess. And I've always been left.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-45314081217493278882017-11-13T23:02:02.912-05:002017-11-13T23:02:02.912-05:00Jesus, the guy poured an 18-year-old girl a glass ...Jesus, the guy poured an 18-year-old girl a glass of wine.<br /><br />Call Aunt Pittypat! Attention, Mr. Pecksniff!<br /><br />Bob's right. People are going NUTS. Not just crazy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-34543815141634438742017-11-13T22:57:11.436-05:002017-11-13T22:57:11.436-05:00There's nothing brave or noble about all these...There's nothing brave or noble about all these Repubs wanting Moore to drop out.<br /><br />They've all wanted him out anyway! That's some stretch in their part.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-30178580491589272052017-11-13T22:54:31.483-05:002017-11-13T22:54:31.483-05:00Then where are all the other 14 year olds coming f...Then where are all the other 14 year olds coming forward? So far, none.<br /><br />16+ is legal in Alabam. Big difference in those two ages.<br /><br />Yes. There is. <br /><br />Someone might want to ask the MSNBC women how old THEIR boyfriends were when they were in high school.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-82536433551871726812017-11-13T22:51:10.469-05:002017-11-13T22:51:10.469-05:00He's unfit for office because people think he&...He's unfit for office because people think he's guilty!<br /><br />No? Why else is he then unfit?<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-15027412257693745112017-11-13T22:49:11.311-05:002017-11-13T22:49:11.311-05:00(Actually, making out with teenagers IS a lesser p...(Actually, making out with teenagers IS a lesser perversion than going after young kids. Hate to breaking to you, people. When did the opposite opinion gain traction?<br /><br />And at what age is it no longer perverse? Eighteen and zero days?)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-53941909797518530742017-11-13T22:45:59.848-05:002017-11-13T22:45:59.848-05:00Special language?
Pedophilia is sexual interest i...Special language?<br /><br />Pedophilia is sexual interest in pre-pubescent children. It's not making out with teenagers.<br /><br />Jeez, this is getting wearyng, all these lies and misrepresentations.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-1201932125864945502017-11-13T22:42:17.377-05:002017-11-13T22:42:17.377-05:00Believe everyone, eh?
The Weinstein/Spacey etc co...Believe everyone, eh?<br /><br />The Weinstein/Spacey etc comparison is absurd. There was a LONG history of such stories, over and over again.<br /><br />As a left winger, I don't believe all of those, either!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-55917565836193317732017-11-13T22:37:25.571-05:002017-11-13T22:37:25.571-05:00It's indecent exposure if there's lack of ...It's indecent exposure if there's lack of consent. Those comedians granted consent. <br /><br />That's the whole weird thing about it. And it wasn't in public view, which is the legal def. of "indecent exposure."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-10087062018323056812017-11-13T22:33:46.480-05:002017-11-13T22:33:46.480-05:00You guys are hilarious.
The point is the standar...You guys are hilarious. <br /><br />The point is the standard being applied. If we are supposed to "Believe the Women!" at first blush, we have to believe the women.<br /><br />ALL of them. No picking and choosing. There's no way anyone can get around this without being a sanctimonious hypocrite. If the immediate response is "Guilt!" then guilt it is.<br /><br />As for me, I don't believe anyone!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-31968973726711505302017-11-13T22:06:47.692-05:002017-11-13T22:06:47.692-05:00Point is, DnC, WHY should we rise to your bait? Cl...Point is, DnC, WHY should we rise to your bait? Classic deflection, wheeling out Clinton when the subject is clear and present danger of a monster and pervert AND a foul hypocrite to boot assuming office. <br /><br />This is about Moore, an avatar of foulness even in the age of Trump. And it's about Cons like you who, regardless of the admittedly putrid character of your dear leader and his minions, end up in lock step with his swamp creatures. The bad behavior decades ago of a sleaze like Clinton doesn't give you cover. And your bringing it up over and over again, along with your Breitbartian/Fox and Friends cohort only reveals the utter bankruptcy of your positions. sherrlockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08689553678430736101noreply@blogger.com