Quote:Don't have time to review the whole thread, so pardon me if this has already been pointed out. 

 

I've heard it said rape and sexual assault aren't about sex, but power.  It is the assertion of one's power over someone who is helpless to resist, for reasons of actual or perceived weakness.  True sexual predators get off on the power, not the sex act.

 

I don't know if Donald is a groper, but his statement about "grab them by the _______" because you can get away with it when you are "a star", speaks to what he wants to do with his power.

 

If we are stupid enough to give this man more power than he already has, he'll be grabbing his perceived enemies by the genitals. He pretty much told Hillary that in the debate with the "you'd be in jail" quip.  The trumpettes like this about him, because they think he'll be the authoritarian that will subjugate the Mexicans, Muslims, Iranians, and the GOP establishment. The problem is, when you disagree with him - and you inevitably will - he's going to give you the same treatment, no matter who is wrong or right.

 

Other men and women do great things with their power.  They adopt orphans, they help eradicate diseases, they fight hunger, they try to make the world a better place.

 

Donald just wants to grab the genitals of whoever he wants on any given day. 

 

He is a petty, incredibly small-minded human being that has made the world a little worse via twitter for the last 5 years.  He will not behave like Eisenhower, Lincoln, or T. Roosevelt, he will behave pretty much like Burlosconi, Pinochet, or Marcos (No way he's up there with the Hitlers and Stalins, gives him too much credit).

 

While I understand anger at the establishment, I don't understand cutting off your nose to spite your face.  That's what we would have done if we elected Donald.  Now, thanks to his own big mouth, it doesn't look like we will.

 

What a wonderful October surprise.

 

Pinochet, lol.  Trump didn't indicate that she would be in jail because he is big and bad and all his political opponents need to be locked up.  He said she would be in jail because she demonstorably violated the espionage act and the freedom of information acts record keeping requirements. 

 

When you destroy evidence that is under subpoena, that's a crime.  When you are legally required to affirmatively preserve your work related emails and devices and you don't, that's a crime.  When you sign an exit document stating that you surrendered all your work related emails and then we discover thousands more that you didn't turn over (as required by law) that's perjury.  In this case the list goes on.

 

He wasn't threatening political retaliation, he was affirmatively stating a commitment to enforce the law. 

 

In reality, the people who purport that just because Mrs. Clinton is seeking elected office, or that her husband is a former president, that she should somehow be held immune from ANY wrong doing are advocating a banana republic.  not those who are simply advocating the simple rule of law. 

---