Are you saying what trump said was in jest?



Cuz it wasn't.

Pretty obvious that the conversation was light hearted and full of laughter. How come when Trump (a known lier and exaggerater) attempts humour it becomes literal?


No need to twist the guys words into something they are not. The guy is a [BLEEP] but he deserves to have a fair judgement of speech just like everyone else.

---

Nobody should be going around grabbing other people's crotches...but I seriously doubt that it went down like that.

---

Have you seen my baseball?

You mean the woman that claimed he sexually assaulted her, dropped the charges weeks later when her boyfriend got a settlement check in his lawsuit against Trump back in 97? The same woman that in August 2015 was begging to be able to do Trumps makeup "for a television interview, a debate, a photo session, anything" and saying she's "definitely on Team Trump"...that Jill Harth?

<a class="bbc_url" href='https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2996186-HarthEmails.html#document/p1'>https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2996186-HarthEmails.html#document/p1</a>

Yep the same one. You know the one who in 97 described the same behavior Donald would admit to 19 years later. Makes believable now huh?

---

IT DOESN'T [BAD WORD REMOVED] MATTER IF IT IS TRUE OR NOT! I DON'T CARE.


Answer the question I posed. Honestly. Can we as a society absolve any man over any potential improper touching simply because the man involved claims "she let me" without having been there, seen it, or heard from the woman who allegedly "let" him?

Relax man, thus we come to the crux of the matter, you don't care if what he said is true or not. Thank you.


I'm going to have to know where the claims of improper touching come from first before I answer. As you said, we havn't been there, seen it, or heard from the women involved. Can't really absolve or judge a guy without that info.

---

Wow.  Still arguing over a non-issue.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Wow. Still arguing over a non-issue.

The American electorate doesn't agree!!

---

the electorate that thinks Trump's kids killed Triceratops? 

---

The American electorate liberal MSM doesn't agree!!

 

FTFY.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

The American electorate doesn't agree!!

 

Not really. The MSM works with the DNC/Clinton Campaign (with loads of evidence to prove so) to keep negative non-stories about Trump in the news to damage his election chances. They did the same against Bernie Sanders. There is also an email proving that the DNC/Clinton campaign ordered the MSM to push Trump, Cruz, and Carson as the favorites because they felt they would be easier to defeat in November with negative non-stories.

 

Poll: Vast majority of Republican voters don’t care much about the leaked Trump tape

---

Relax man, thus we come to the crux of the matter, you don't care if what he said is true or not. Thank you.


I'm going to have to know where the claims of improper touching come from first before I answer. As you said, we havn't been there, seen it, or heard from the women involved. Can't really absolve or judge a guy without that info.

I don't care because it has no bearing on the discussion at hand.


Of course you would need to investigate a situation before making a personal determination of innocence or guilt. That is not what I asked.


What I asked is would you absolve a man from any potential wrong doing simply because he said the female in any given incident "let" him do whatever to her? Would you say.. "He says she let him, he cannot possibly be guilty of any wrongdoing?" Answer that question.

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

Nobody should be going around grabbing other people's crotches...but I seriously doubt that it went down like that.

 

Sometimes it might be necessary.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

sometimes it takes a savage to get stuff done

 

Groping women is the sign of a bully, not an effective, strong leader.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

I don't care because it has no bearing on the discussion at hand.


Of course you would need to investigate a situation before making a personal determination of innocence or guilt. That is not what I asked.


What I asked is would you absolve a man from any potential wrong doing simply because he said the female in any given incident "let" him do whatever to her? Would you say.. "He says she let him, he cannot possibly be guilty of any wrongdoing?" Answer that question.

"Of course you would need to investigate a situation before making a personal determination of innocence or guilt."


That's the problem with the question you are asking me. You're asking me to absolve a guy when I have no idea what he has done and have no idea who he is or have any evidence from the women, nor was I there.


Give me some kind of scenario at least instead of asking me to absolve a mystery man from a mystery crime with no details other than the he may have done something wrong.

---

Groping women is the sign of a bully, not an effective, strong leader.

 

ok i wasn't saying he's a strong leader because he talked about grabbing [BLEEP]

---

Groping women is the sign of a bully, not an effective, strong leader.

A lot of people still think Bill Clinton was a damn good president, don't they?

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

"Of course you would need to investigate a situation before making a personal determination of innocence or guilt."


That's the problem with the question you are asking me. You're asking me to absolve a guy when I have no idea what he has done and have no idea who he is or have any evidence from the women, nor was I there.


Give me some kind of scenario at least instead of asking me to absolve a mystery man from a mystery crime with no details other than the he may have done something wrong.

I'm not the one who made the argument. It can go for any scenario you want. If a guy grabs a woman's breasts or crotch he just met, is found on top of her unconscious in an alleyway, is walked in on while she is tied up to a bed.. it does not matter what the scenario is.


If the guy simply says.. she let me.. do you immediately walk away and say.. hmm.. well he said she let him, so nothing more to see. Or do you leave open the smallest possibility that just because the guy says she let him do whatever, there is the chance he is just saying that and the woman may have been touched, attacked, etc. without consent.


Would you absolve him on the spot for simply saying.. she let me? No further questions.

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

A lot of people still think Bill Clinton was a damn good president, don't they?

JFK too.

---

I'm not the one who made the argument. It can go for any scenario you want. If a guy grabs a woman's breasts or crotch he just met, is found on top of her unconscious in an alleyway, is walked in on while she is tied up to a bed.. it does not matter what the scenario is.


If the guy simply says.. she let me.. do you immediately walk away and say.. hmm.. well he said she let him, so nothing more to see. Or do you leave open the smallest possibility that just because the guy says she let him do whatever, there is the chance he is just saying that and the woman may have been touched, attacked, etc. without consent.


Would you absolve him on the spot for simply saying.. she let me? No further questions.

 

If it's normal guy talk, I would assume that the woman let him.  Why is that an issue?

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

JFK too.

 

maybe i was saying it

 

need savages

---

I'm not the one who made the argument. It can go for any scenario you want. If a guy grabs a woman's breasts or crotch he just met, is found on top of her unconscious in an alleyway, is walked in on while she is tied up to a bed.. it does not matter what the scenario is.


If the guy simply says.. she let me.. do you immediately walk away and say.. hmm.. well he said she let him, so nothing more to see. Or do you leave open the smallest possibility that just because the guy says she let him do whatever, there is the chance he is just saying that and the woman may have been touched, attacked, etc. without consent.


Would you absolve him on the spot for simply saying.. she let me? No further questions.

You keep saying absolve when there is no reason to absolve them from anything. But yeah sure I suppose there's always a small possibility that when a guy says a women let him do something that he may in fact be lieing.


In the same way when my girlfriend comes back with the shopping theres a small possibility that she may in fact have stolen it all.



This is a classic Kotite debate. Step 1) Come out all guns blazing opposing one particular area. Step 2) Insert supposed superior knowledge based on personal experience and relationships. Step 3) Change argument based on if you seem to be losing or not. Step 4) Ask vague open ended questions and argue about the semantics of them. Step 5) Flail around in an attempt to win some kind battle in the debate. Rinse and repeat.

---