U.S. Politics episode 4: A New Thread

13468943

Comments

  • Frakkin T said:
    @emnofseattle I think it's admirable that you recognize that African-Americans have a disadvantage when it comes to the criminal justice system, but I would also ask you to be careful because one of the big reasons women don't report when they've been assaulted is that they are not believed. It takes a tremendous amount of courage for a woman to tell her story, especially if the man she is accusing has some stature. (Even if he was unknown at the nat'l level, college ball players tend to have a lot of stature at their schools.) She will have her life torn apart and picked over by strangers in the media and in law enforcement. Victims of sexual assault and harassment are the only victims who are treated this way. Nobody asks a mugging victim what he was wearing or how many drinks he had. When someone tells you their story, believe them. 
    Not only that, but in cases like the Cosby case where it seemed his pattern of behavior was well known and very believable, you can still have a trial and have the defendant escape justice.

    I have very mixed feelings when people say you need to always believe every woman who accuses someone of sexual assault, though. As a feminist, I understand why people are advocating for that- throughout much of history, women were just ignored or pushed aside and not listened to much when it comes to this stuff. So generally believing MORE women or giving more of them the benefit of the doubt is admirable.

    But from a legal perspective you have to give every party due process, and it will always remain that people will accuse others of crimes they did not commit for a variety of reasons, and sexual assault is no exception.

    I guess I would rather we all say something like "give accusers the same respect and due process as people reporting any other crime and don't slut shame them or ignore them because it's sexual" but that's not as catchy, lol


    I hope that it's understood that everyone deserves a fair trial and due process, but part of the problem with these cases is that they most often come down to one person's word vs another's and they're impossible to prove so speaking out becomes the only way of alerting people.

    False accusations do happen, but they are extremely rare.  These are Canadian statistics (from 2015), but I don't imagine that America is wildly different.  About 4% of sexual assault accusations are false, and 75% of that 4% are wives accusing their husbands of molesting their children during divorces.  So excluding cases involving divorce, about 1% of sexual assault accusations are false.

     

    Aww_PHuuCkDee
  • Are you guys familiar with the Jian Ghomeshi case?  He serially assaulted women, but was smart enough to curate a defense in the event of being accused and he walked because of it.  EVERYONE knew that he was guilty, but he was smart from day 1 and had a gathered 'evidence' in his defense to protect himself from prosecution.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • emnofseattleemnofseattle Mason County, Washington USA
    On a related note- This thing about George HW Bush has me scratching my head:

    George H.W. Bush Groped Me, Too

    If you haven't read about this, the allegations are that women show up for photo ops and he will make a joke about his favorite book being "David Cop-A-Feel" and grab their behinds. These have been happening in the past few years when he has been in his 90s and in his wheelchair. His spokesperson put out a statement saying something like (paraphrasing) Bush sits in a wheelchair so his arm is lower and he thought it was a funny joke, and some people think it's funny, but others were apparently offended, and for that he is sorry.

    I'm really, genuinely glad that women can speak out more and more about sexual harrassment and assault nowadays because I remember a time when that wasn't the case, and it wasn't so long ago. But I am having a hard time ginning up any outrage about an elderly man making corny jokes and pinching butts during photo ops. Please feel free to argue with me but I just kind of give elderly people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their behavior and what they say. In another setting or by a younger man, I would be totally outraged but in these cases, I am just kind of like... really. 
    The guys 93, I wouldn't be surprised if he's senile at this point. I mean yes it's not ok for a man to be grabbing buts and joking about copping a feel, but one of the women said HW "sexually assaulted" her. Ok, no he didn't. Sexual assault has a specific definition and it involves contact with sex organs or for the purpose of gratification. If there was a list of accusations of Bush doing this when he was 20-30-40-50 whatever ok I'll buy that. A guy in a wheel chair who's 93 and likely not even existing on the same planet as every one else, and next to his wife while doing it.... I don't know I would go a step further and say to go public with that is just really an attempt to tarnish an honorable man's reputation. It would be like a nurses aid writing a column about how she's cleaning up after a 90 y/o soiled themselves, that certainly wouldn't be right. 
  • emnofseattleemnofseattle Mason County, Washington USA
    Are you guys familiar with the Jian Ghomeshi case?  He serially assaulted women, but was smart enough to curate a defense in the event of being accused and he walked because of it.  EVERYONE knew that he was guilty, but he was smart from day 1 and had a gathered 'evidence' in his defense to protect himself from prosecution.
    All I could I find was references to the fact some accusers were apparently mildly dishonest during the trial. Like white lie kind of stuff. 

    resulting on the judge acquitting the defendant. 
  • The GHWB stuff is icky and a little disappointing, but it doesn’t rise to the level of the other stuff flying around since the Weinstein story finally broke.

    Bad joke, inappropriate grabbing, but not in a position of power where you feel that you have to humor it or keep quiet about it or it could affect your career, and not in a position of physical power where you are actually concerned for your safety or of being overpowered. If you aren’t comfortable, you can take a step to the side and he ain’t going to chase you.

    Not okay, but not on the same level.
  • DeeDee Adelaide
    False rape allegations are extremely rare, and in many of those cases it’s not even that they’re false, it’s that the victim has been pushed to recant for one reason or another and then of course is branded a liar. 
  • emnofseattleemnofseattle Mason County, Washington USA
    Well good news, Harvey Weinstein is responding well to treatment. Seven days, he's done with inpatient pervert rehab. It's a miracle, he's been de-scumbagified and can now move on to the important work, like fighting the NRA

    https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2017/10/22/harvey-weinstein-leaves-rehab-after-one-week-will-continue-working-with-doctors.amp.html
    Frakkin T
  • CretanBullCretanBull Toronto
    edited October 2017
    akritenbrink

    I would take a wild guess American statistics are slightly higher, but not much higher. I would also take a wild guess these statistics have a wobbly margin of error - how is any of this determined? By the accuser admitting it? By a fair legal process? etc.

    It's the percentage of Sexual Assault 2 and 3 accusations that are "determined to be false through police investigation or result of trial judgement".  In Canada, Sexual Assault 2 is "Sexual assault with a weapon, threats, or causing bodily harm." and SA3 is "Sexual assault that results in wounding, maiming, disfiguring or endangering the life of the victim."  Basically it's what are colloquially called "rape".  SA1 refers to incidents of inappropriate touching etc. ie Bush's butt pinching.

    The FBI stats say that only 2% of accusations in America are false, but that's based on a really small sample size (only 136 cases) and excludes cases where the woman was raped but named the wrong perpetrator.  So their 2% number is only of cases where the reported rape was entirely made up.

  • CretanBullCretanBull Toronto
    edited October 2017
    Are you guys familiar with the Jian Ghomeshi case?  He serially assaulted women, but was smart enough to curate a defense in the event of being accused and he walked because of it.  EVERYONE knew that he was guilty, but he was smart from day 1 and had a gathered 'evidence' in his defense to protect himself from prosecution.
    All I could I find was references to the fact some accusers were apparently mildly dishonest during the trial. Like white lie kind of stuff. 

    resulting on the judge acquitting the defendant. 
    Well, to begin with he had 15 accusers, but only 3 went to trial because he archived emails, text messages, facebook and Instant Messenger communication with his victims going back 12 years.  He had all of this stuff printed out and stored in a safe. He began planning his defense of each case within hours of committing his crimes.  What sane person thinks "I just had sex with this girl, but one day she might accuse me of raping her so I'm going to phone her and convince her what just happened was OK, then when I feel she's come around to my way of thinking I'm going to insist that we get off the phone and switch to email/text/IM/Facebook record her consent, print it out and put it in a safe"?  That's why 11 of his 15 accusers didn't come forward at trial - he had a history of badgering his victims until he won them over with charm, then got them to say something that would imply consent in writing and he archived it...and held on to that information for 12 years.

    There were some problems with the witnesses, but the judge made some idiotic decisions - like accused one victim of lying because she forgot a detail from ten years ago.

    For some added context, I used to work in the music industry from the mid 90's to the early 2000's.  Before being a CBC radio/tv host Jian was in the music industry as well (first as an artist, then as a manager).  I didn't really know him (socially, at best) but we had lots of common friends.  Everyone knew about Jian, not through rumour of innuendo - but because he bragged about what he did.  He didn't brag about raping women, but he did brag about beating them - he thought it was funny that he had a 'nice guy' reputation but when he got a woman alone he'd catch her off guard by hitting her, then having sex with her.  He wouldn't call it rape, but LOTS of women who he bragged about said otherwise.  It became a known thing for women to not be alone with him.  It was a Harvey Weinstein type of situation, everyone knew what was happening but no one said anything because of his ability to influence careers in the music industry.  15 or so years later when the story broke and charges were pressed, not 1 person I know was surprised, the universal response was "it's about time".

    I also knew a woman who worked with him at CBC, she complained about him constantly.  I'd tell her to report him to management, but it was that same Weinstein effect - no one wanted to report him because they were afraid of career implications.  The week before her wedding, in front of a bunch of people in their lunch room, Jian told her that it was her last chance to "get some dick" and if she wanted some he had a big one.  People laughed - she was mortified.  Later when they were alone, he told her that he wasn't joking - that if she wanted to do it they could lock he door and use his desk and that he'd done it many times before.  She freaked out, but was still afraid to say anything.  She ended up confiding in another woman who worked very close with him (she worked on his show).  That woman told my friend that one day she was sitting down in a chair and he walked up behind her, undid his pants and put his penis on her shoulder.  When my friend told me (and others) these two stories, we convinced them to go to their manager and they finally did.  Nothing happened.  A TV show here called "The Fifth Estate" (kinda like 60 Minutes) did an investigation into the claims that the CBC didn't do anything about complaints against Jian.  In the end, the human resource manager at the CBC was fired.

    I have to be careful how I say this next part.  I think I've mentioned here before that my girlfriend is an attorney in the Crown's Office, right?  To be clear, she didn't take part in the trial at all, it wasn't even conducted out of her office...but our social circle is made up of a lot of other Crowns.  Knowing that I had a background in the music industry, Jian's name came up and discussions were had.  I'll just say this...even if I didn't already know what I did from his reputations in the music industry and the incident involving my friend who worked with him, I'd be 100% convinced of his guilt. He publicly didn't deny the accusations (he made a facebook post admitting he'd done it), he just insisted that he had consent.  Legally, there are two problems with that.  In Canada, you can't consent to assault causing bodily harm (he chocked a woman until she passed out) and two, consent is an on going process.  A woman can say yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, no - and no means no.  In some cases, Jian got a "yes" and followed it up with more than one "no" but he ignored them because he got the initial yes.  The judge ignored the first point and Jian's archive of emails etc combined with attacking the witnesses overcame the second point.  The judge ignoring the issue of grievous harm assault and consent gave the Crown grounds for an appeal, but once people had seen how brutally the witness were treated and knowing of Jian's archive they didn't/couldn't launch an appeal.

    Instead a decision was made regarding the last case against him.  Instead of going to trial, he had to publicly admit of his wrong doing and behaviour without admitting criminal guilt.  He signed a peace bond, which meant if he engaged in any similar behaviour in Canada it would be viewed as criminal and he'd be charged for it.  Jian moved to LA.






    DeeDaveyMac
  • MrX said:
    If it's Manafort, Trump will side step it.  If its Flynn, there could be some heat.  In the unlikely event that it's Kushner or Don Jr he's done.
    MrXFrakkin T
  • MrX said:
    If it's Manafort, Trump will side step it.  If its Flynn, there could be some heat.  In the unlikely event that it's Kushner or Don Jr he's done.
    It’s either Manafort or Flynn, or some low level person. Whomever it is, they’re likely to sing like a canary to get out of prison time which could be bad news for lots of folks. Remember Flynn’s opening gambit was to ask for immunity, and if Trump pardons folks they lose their 5th Amendment protection in the situation pardoned.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • ThomasThomas North Carolina
    On a related note- This thing about George HW Bush has me scratching my head:

    George H.W. Bush Groped Me, Too

    If you haven't read about this, the allegations are that women show up for photo ops and he will make a joke about his favorite book being "David Cop-A-Feel" and grab their behinds. These have been happening in the past few years when he has been in his 90s and in his wheelchair. His spokesperson put out a statement saying something like (paraphrasing) Bush sits in a wheelchair so his arm is lower and he thought it was a funny joke, and some people think it's funny, but others were apparently offended, and for that he is sorry.

    I'm really, genuinely glad that women can speak out more and more about sexual harrassment and assault nowadays because I remember a time when that wasn't the case, and it wasn't so long ago. But I am having a hard time ginning up any outrage about an elderly man making corny jokes and pinching butts during photo ops. Please feel free to argue with me but I just kind of give elderly people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their behavior and what they say. In another setting or by a younger man, I would be totally outraged but in these cases, I am just kind of like... really. 
    The guys 93, I wouldn't be surprised if he's senile at this point. I mean yes it's not ok for a man to be grabbing buts and joking about copping a feel, but one of the women said HW "sexually assaulted" her. Ok, no he didn't. Sexual assault has a specific definition and it involves contact with sex organs or for the purpose of gratification. If there was a list of accusations of Bush doing this when he was 20-30-40-50 whatever ok I'll buy that. A guy in a wheel chair who's 93 and likely not even existing on the same planet as every one else, and next to his wife while doing it.... I don't know I would go a step further and say to go public with that is just really an attempt to tarnish an honorable man's reputation. It would be like a nurses aid writing a column about how she's cleaning up after a 90 y/o soiled themselves, that certainly wouldn't be right. 
    Yeah that's how I feel too. I don't know if anything he did rises to the level of sexual assault, I suppose it depends on what he grabbed. It's certainly not OK and his handlers probably should have found a different way to handle photo ops if this was an ongoing issue, but I just can't get outraged about it, certainly not as outraged as the woman who wrote the article implied the reader should be. 
    As a guy, I have had my butt grabbed so many times by women in bars.  I personally don't care and I understand that I am not in fear of one of those women overpowering me in an alley, but I would expect the President of the United States to behave himself more professionally (something that many do not do unfortunately).  But it definitely isn't a big story.  I know a lot of upstanding old men who think it is ok to make comments to women that are weird by younger people's definition.  They just had a different viewpoint on the subject.  Does it make it ok?  No, but to a lot of them it is/was socially acceptable. 
  • DeeDee Adelaide
    edited October 2017
    Old men are excused a lot of shit, and that’s why they do it. People just explain it away as oh he’s old, oh he’s senile, oh it’s harmless, oh it’s not really assault. Fuck that shit. Don’t fucking touch people without permission. I don’t care who you are.
    CretanBullBrawn
  • ThomasThomas North Carolina
    Dee said:
    Old men are excused a lot of shit, and that’s why they do it. People just explain it away as oh he’s old, oh he’s senile, oh it’s harmless, oh it’s not really assault. Fuck that shit. Don’t fucking touch people without permission. I don’t care who you are.
    If it was only that simple.  A lot of these men, especially the ones who are in their 80s and 90s, grew up in a time when it was socially acceptable to smack the hell out of your wife if she talked back.  Obviously that's not cool in 2017, but if you have been socially conditioned for 50-60 years that something is socially ok, I don't think you can just change in your last 10-20 years of life.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • emnofseattleemnofseattle Mason County, Washington USA
    edited October 2017
    Dee said:
    Old men are excused a lot of shit, and that’s why they do it. People just explain it away as oh he’s old, oh he’s senile, oh it’s harmless, oh it’s not really assault. Fuck that shit. Don’t fucking touch people without permission. I don’t care who you are.
    So throw a wheel chair bound nonagenarian with dementia and Parkinson's disease in the penitentiary for indecent liberties. Got it 

    Whats your level of experience here? Because I took all the course work to be a nursing assistant including course work in dealing with patients who have dementia or developmental disabilities, they don't respond to the same incentives that people in their right of mind respond to. Which is recognized in our laws and best practices for treating them. I find this highly ironic since you took the hardline that because a woman had mental illness and was attempting to murder police officers was not a reason to shoot her, but you're arguing for throwing the book at someone who is far less dangerous and likely more mentally impaired 

  • emnofseattleemnofseattle Mason County, Washington USA
    edited October 2017
    Are you guys familiar with the Jian Ghomeshi case?  He serially assaulted women, but was smart enough to curate a defense in the event of being accused and he walked because of it.  EVERYONE knew that he was guilty, but he was smart from day 1 and had a gathered 'evidence' in his defense to protect himself from prosecution.
    All I could I find was references to the fact some accusers were apparently mildly dishonest during the trial. Like white lie kind of stuff. 

    resulting on the judge acquitting the defendant. 
    Well, to begin with he had 15 accusers, but only 3 went to trial because he archived emails, text messages, facebook and Instant Messenger communication with his victims going back 12 years.  He had all of this stuff printed out and stored in a safe. He began planning his defense of each case within hours of committing his crimes.  What sane person thinks "I just had sex with this girl, but one day she might accuse me of raping her so I'm going to phone her and convince her what just happened was OK, then when I feel she's come around to my way of thinking I'm going to insist that we get off the phone and switch to email/text/IM/Facebook record her consent, print it out and put it in a safe"?  That's why 11 of his 15 accusers didn't come forward at trial - he had a history of badgering his victims until he won them over with charm, then got them to say something that would imply consent in writing and he archived it...and held on to that information for 12 years.

    There were some problems with the witnesses, but the judge made some idiotic decisions - like accused one victim of lying because she forgot a detail from ten years ago.

    For some added context, I used to work in the music industry from the mid 90's to the early 2000's.  Before being a CBC radio/tv host Jian was in the music industry as well (first as an artist, then as a manager).  I didn't really know him (socially, at best) but we had lots of common friends.  Everyone knew about Jian, not through rumour of innuendo - but because he bragged about what he did.  He didn't brag about raping women, but he did brag about beating them - he thought it was funny that he had a 'nice guy' reputation but when he got a woman alone he'd catch her off guard by hitting her, then having sex with her.  He wouldn't call it rape, but LOTS of women who he bragged about said otherwise.  It became a known thing for women to not be alone with him.  It was a Harvey Weinstein type of situation, everyone knew what was happening but no one said anything because of his ability to influence careers in the music industry.  15 or so years later when the story broke and charges were pressed, not 1 person I know was surprised, the universal response was "it's about time".

    I also knew a woman who worked with him at CBC, she complained about him constantly.  I'd tell her to report him to management, but it was that same Weinstein effect - no one wanted to report him because they were afraid of career implications.  The week before her wedding, in front of a bunch of people in their lunch room, Jian told her that it was her last chance to "get some dick" and if she wanted some he had a big one.  People laughed - she was mortified.  Later when they were alone, he told her that he wasn't joking - that if she wanted to do it they could lock he door and use his desk and that he'd done it many times before.  She freaked out, but was still afraid to say anything.  She ended up confiding in another woman who worked very close with him (she worked on his show).  That woman told my friend that one day she was sitting down in a chair and he walked up behind her, undid his pants and put his penis on her shoulder.  When my friend told me (and others) these two stories, we convinced them to go to their manager and they finally did.  Nothing happened.  A TV show here called "The Fifth Estate" (kinda like 60 Minutes) did an investigation into the claims that the CBC didn't do anything about complaints against Jian.  In the end, the human resource manager at the CBC was fired.

    I have to be careful how I say this next part.  I think I've mentioned here before that my girlfriend is an attorney in the Crown's Office, right?  To be clear, she didn't take part in the trial at all, it wasn't even conducted out of her office...but our social circle is made up of a lot of other Crowns.  Knowing that I had a background in the music industry, Jian's name came up and discussions were had.  I'll just say this...even if I didn't already know what I did from his reputations in the music industry and the incident involving my friend who worked with him, I'd be 100% convinced of his guilt. He publicly didn't deny the accusations (he made a facebook post admitting he'd done it), he just insisted that he had consent.  Legally, there are two problems with that.  In Canada, you can't consent to assault causing bodily harm (he chocked a woman until she passed out) and two, consent is an on going process.  A woman can say yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, no - and no means no.  In some cases, Jian got a "yes" and followed it up with more than one "no" but he ignored them because he got the initial yes.  The judge ignored the first point and Jian's archive of emails etc combined with attacking the witnesses overcame the second point.  The judge ignoring the issue of grievous harm assault and consent gave the Crown grounds for an appeal, but once people had seen how brutally the witness were treated and knowing of Jian's archive they didn't/couldn't launch an appeal.

    Instead a decision was made regarding the last case against him.  Instead of going to trial, he had to publicly admit of his wrong doing and behaviour without admitting criminal guilt.  He signed a peace bond, which meant if he engaged in any similar behaviour in Canada it would be viewed as criminal and he'd be charged for it.  Jian moved to LA.






    This is probably going to rank amongst the most controversial things I've ever said on this forum.

    is it wrong if you got some musical pansy like the guy you're describing, exposing himself to women and allegedly raping others, that maybe a father or boyfriend goes over and has a discussion with him? Seriously if he did that to like one of my cousins or my (hypoethical since I'm currently single) girlfriend I would have to resist an urge to just go left hook him and eat the assault charge if if goes to that. Clearly he's not pulling this stuff to a Bikers 'ol lady at a Hells Angels roadhouse. Maybe he's willing to assault women because the era and demographic of women he's targetting don't carry a risk of him ending up in hospital 

    yes this guy sounds like a real scumbag from what you describe, but I'm scratching my head at what the criminal justice system is supposed to do given the circumstances you described. Maybe we can bring back a limited form of trial by combat 


    CretanBull
  • If HW is so far gone he can't be around a woman without grabbing her ass then don't let him around women.
    DeeCretanBullBrawn
  • emnofseattleemnofseattle Mason County, Washington USA
    edited October 2017
    If HW is so far gone he can't be around a woman without grabbing her ass then don't let him around women.
    I would agree, it's not just an issue of being around women per se, being the former president does not exempt one from biology, access to the best medical team money can procure at most delays the inevitable. There should come a point at which frankly, the former president is an old man suffering mental degeneration just like most of us here will when we become elderly, and there comes a point at which maybe it's time to stop parading him around for photo ops and allow him to spend his final years with his family in a dignified manner 

    i dunno, part of me says when I get old and frail I want to go out like the Alaskan Inuits did with their elders, at one point you simply became a drag on the resources of the tribe of Inuits you were with, you had a ceremony, you were ritually cleansed and readied for the afterlife, and then the tribe moved on without you,  they built you a fire, and you were left to contemplate on your legacy and your life and when the fire went out you died of exposure. actually there's some controversy over how 
    Widespread this practice was, but you get the point. 


  • emnofseattle

    This is probably going to rank amongst the most controversial things I've ever said on this forum.

    is it wrong if you got some musical pansy like the guy you're describing, exposing himself to women and allegedly raping others, that maybe a father or boyfriend goes over and has a discussion with him? Seriously if he did that to like one of my cousins or my (hypoethical since I'm currently single) girlfriend I would have to resist an urge to just go left hook him and eat the assault charge if if goes to that. Clearly he's not pulling this stuff to a Bikers 'ol lady at a Hells Angels roadhouse. Maybe he's willing to assault women because the era and demographic of women he's targetting don't carry a risk of him ending up in hospital

    yes this guy sounds like a real scumbag from what you describe, but I'm scratching my head at what the criminal justice system is supposed to do given the circumstances you described. Maybe we can bring back a limited form of trial by combat


    I don't really know, but I suspect that you're right about him targeting certain women who have a lower risk factor in terms of people going after him.  Also, the influence that he had over his victims careers can't be underestimated.  He was the biggest star at the CBC and had a 'golden boy' reputation.  A lot of his victims were university students who were doing co-op internships at the CBC.  He'd been inappropriate with so many students over the years that two major schools (York University and Carlton University) both ended their internship agreement with the CBC...but no one did anything to stop the problem. Another factor was that he was charming, handsome and a celebrity.  He didn't hide in bushes at 2am and jump out at these women, they wanted to be with him.  When he went too far during sex, his victims didn't immediately self-identify as being raped...these women questioned themselves, wondered if they'd 'asked for it' etc. the stigma of rape is so strong that it's sometimes easier for the victim to rationalize what happened than to identify with having been raped.

    As for the how the justice system deals with these types of questions, we don't have an answer.  This case happened two years ago and every nuance of the case has been picked apart and the court system still doesn't have a means of dealing with it.  That's a major reason why most rapes aren't even reported...the victim has their life publicly torn apart and in the end there's a relatively low conviction rate.

  • DeeDee Adelaide
    Thomas said:
    Dee said:
    Old men are excused a lot of shit, and that’s why they do it. People just explain it away as oh he’s old, oh he’s senile, oh it’s harmless, oh it’s not really assault. Fuck that shit. Don’t fucking touch people without permission. I don’t care who you are.
    If it was only that simple.  A lot of these men, especially the ones who are in their 80s and 90s, grew up in a time when it was socially acceptable to smack the hell out of your wife if she talked back.  Obviously that's not cool in 2017, but if you have been socially conditioned for 50-60 years that something is socially ok, I don't think you can just change in your last 10-20 years of life.
    They grew up in a time when it was acceptable to do a lot of things that they’ve since learned not to do, so they can learn that one too. 
  • DeeDee Adelaide

    Dee said:
    Old men are excused a lot of shit, and that’s why they do it. People just explain it away as oh he’s old, oh he’s senile, oh it’s harmless, oh it’s not really assault. Fuck that shit. Don’t fucking touch people without permission. I don’t care who you are.
    So throw a wheel chair bound nonagenarian with dementia and Parkinson's disease in the penitentiary for indecent liberties. Got it 

    Whats your level of experience here? Because I took all the course work to be a nursing assistant including course work in dealing with patients who have dementia or developmental disabilities, they don't respond to the same incentives that people in their right of mind respond to. Which is recognized in our laws and best practices for treating them. I find this highly ironic since you took the hardline that because a woman had mental illness and was attempting to murder police officers was not a reason to shoot her, but you're arguing for throwing the book at someone who is far less dangerous and likely more mentally impaired 

    Dee said:
    Old men are excused a lot of shit, and that’s why they do it. People just explain it away as oh he’s old, oh he’s senile, oh it’s harmless, oh it’s not really assault. Fuck that shit. Don’t fucking touch people without permission. I don’t care who you are.
    So throw a wheel chair bound nonagenarian with dementia and Parkinson's disease in the penitentiary for indecent liberties. Got it 

    Whats your level of experience here? Because I took all the course work to be a nursing assistant including course work in dealing with patients who have dementia or developmental disabilities, they don't respond to the same incentives that people in their right of mind respond to. Which is recognized in our laws and best practices for treating them. I find this highly ironic since you took the hardline that because a woman had mental illness and was attempting to murder police officers was not a reason to shoot her, but you're arguing for throwing the book at someone who is far less dangerous and likely more mentally impaired 

    Show me where I said to throw an old man in prison because he groped someone. 
    Frakkin T
  • DeeDee Adelaide

    If HW is so far gone he can't be around a woman without grabbing her ass then don't let him around women.
    Exactly! 
  • Frakkin TFrakkin T Currently Offline
    MrX said:
    If it's Manafort, Trump will side step it.  If its Flynn, there could be some heat.  In the unlikely event that it's Kushner or Don Jr he's done.
    I think it depends on the charges. If Manafort or Flynn are charged with money laundering, perjury, failing to disclose-type violations it will be easy for 45 to distance himself. If there are espionage charges, FARA violations, or even something akin to treason, 45 will be gone by Friday.

    I read over the summer someone spitballing the idea that Mueller would force 45's resignation by indicting Kushner, Don Jr., or Ivanka--"Resign or your little girl and your namesake are going away for 30 years each." It's maybe dirty pool a little bit, but it would be a legal (allowed) tactic on a prosecutor's behalf. 
    CretanBull
  • Frakkin T said:
    MrX said:
    If it's Manafort, Trump will side step it.  If its Flynn, there could be some heat.  In the unlikely event that it's Kushner or Don Jr he's done.
    I think it depends on the charges. If Manafort or Flynn are charged with money laundering, perjury, failing to disclose-type violations it will be easy for 45 to distance himself. If there are espionage charges, FARA violations, or even something akin to treason, 45 will be gone by Friday.

    I read over the summer someone spitballing the idea that Mueller would force 45's resignation by indicting Kushner, Don Jr., or Ivanka--"Resign or your little girl and your namesake are going away for 30 years each." It's maybe dirty pool a little bit, but it would be a legal (allowed) tactic on a prosecutor's behalf. 
    We really don't know who's been charged with what, but I'm going to guess that its Manafort with something relatively minor - like undisclosed income or something like that.  I'm expecting this to be the first domino, not the killing blow.

    I can't see the second point being true because I don't think that Mueller is gunning for Trump (Mueller is a Republican).  I think he's a pretty honest guy who's going to go where the evidence takes him, but I don't think he has a particular motive or end-goal in mind.
  • Frakkin TFrakkin T Currently Offline


    I can't see the second point being true because I don't think that Mueller is gunning for Trump (Mueller is a Republican).  I think he's a pretty honest guy who's going to go where the evidence takes him, but I don't think he has a particular motive or end-goal in mind.
    He may not be gunning for Trump (I think he is but I could be wrong) but I'm sure Mueller is worried about interference from the executive branch and would think about how to neutralize it. 
    CretanBull
  • Frakkin T said:


    I can't see the second point being true because I don't think that Mueller is gunning for Trump (Mueller is a Republican).  I think he's a pretty honest guy who's going to go where the evidence takes him, but I don't think he has a particular motive or end-goal in mind.
    He may not be gunning for Trump (I think he is but I could be wrong) but I'm sure Mueller is worried about interference from the executive branch and would think about how to neutralize it. 
    I think the later part is true for sure, he's a smart guy and probably knows how to do what he needs to do and how to neutralize interference.  I just can't see a special prosecutor taking it upon himself to force a President to resign.  I really don't know what he'll be able to turn up, but if there's something of substance against Kushner or Don Jr (I personally don't think that Trump himself was involved in anything, if anything even happened) I think a more likely scenario would be Mueller forcing Trump to Pardon Kushner/Don Jr and that action would prompt Congress to start impeachment hearings.
This discussion has been closed.