Clinton emails to be released before election

[Captain Crimson]

Weird, because President Trump has multiple rape allegations against him that the media hasn't touched with a ten foot pole.

* Ivanka Trump said that Donald raped her multiple times during their marriage.
* Jane Doe, a 14 year old girl who withdrew the prosecution attempt due to death threats.
https://www.courthousenews.com/rape-allegations-refiled-against-trump/
* E. Jean Caroll, former ELLE editor, claims that Trump raped her and has demanded a DNA sample to run against a dress she has kept.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/07/nyregion/jean-caroll-donald-trump-lawsuit-rape.html

So, according to you, we should have had these running constantly. I've felt that that they have really dropped the ball in not handling them and treating Trump with kids gloves versus a monstrous person. Mind you, I've also felt they've ignored Trump's ties to organized crime, money laundering for dictators, and other actions that mark him as utterly unfit for office.

I feel like Donald Trump has been treated as "one of their own" by the media so much that like Roman Polanski and Woody Allen, they give him slack that allowed him to coast past what should be disqualifying horrible actions. He's treated as a buffoon by the media and an awfully behaving racist uncle ala Archie Bunker versus a dedicated career criminal.

Re: Tara Reade

I actually followed that story extensively and took a large amount of shit because of my refusal to vote for Biden or Trump during it. I have family that are survivors of sexual assault and will not vote for any President who is guilty of it. It seems a no brainer that you'd never cast your vote for a rapist as you're endorsing it. In the end, the investigation by reporters' findings, changing of Tara Reade's story (including the location where the event supposedly happened), and a long talk with my family that survived sexual assault made me believe it was okay to proceed supporting Biden.

But yes, it is something I am terrified of happening, supporting someone who could do such a monstrous crime.

Forgive me if I'm a bit grumpier than usual, but alas, I've only been sleeping in short bursts. Just glad it's the weekend, but I hope this doesn't come back to bite me for work tomorrow.

You do raise an interesting point, but at the same time, I could contend that Mr. Biden is more in urgent need of that, if it's true, since the MSM's disdain for Mr. 45 is clearly visible to all walks of the political spectrum. For the love of H! Not even most of those from Fox News like him personally, and they're about as right-wing as you can get. The needs of the challenger are to prove they can handle the job better, and so more attention is needed on it, while Mr. 45's litany of allegations is so well known, at this point, most mainstream voters only need know whether they defend it as a false allegation, or one more reason to hate him. Fewer knew this about Mr. Biden.

And that really is ironic here, since my impression has been the opposite, as you can tell. It shows how badly trust in our institutions has eroded, if you and I can look at the MSM, and past the typical alternate viewpoint see something completely different. It's really a bad sign and why I could really see him taking this yet again, because he's been one of the most consistently on anti-establishment rhetoric while also firing up his base with traditional GOP policies, but also his incendiary language.

Sorry to hear that. I suppose since you brought this up in goodwill, I'll admit some of my relatives are the same way. We even had a major incident over that I will not get into, so suffice to say, it is what made me identify as a glass-ceiling feminist, even if I'm not up on all the doctrines. One of my biggest questions is, where does MeToo go following what the DNC has done? They've made it very clear they are willing to throw it aside to seize political power with the justification and rationalization mindset of "we have to stop Mr. 45 at all costs." Frankly, after this point, they need to stop crediting MeToo. I think when you coalesce around a lackluster septuagenarian candidate at the expense of an idealistic movement trying to address rape victims and feminism, then you no longer have any high ground to keep on acting like you support that. It would be ironic if they tried, as they have done more harm to the movement than the GOP itself has.

I get that MeToo just a hashtag, like it is for the fandom menace, but it can still be hijacked by unscrupulous types for bad ends with less than sound agendas.

Really, the talking points to rationalize this are almost exactly the same as the GOP. "The timing is convenient." "Why didn't she come forward sooner?" "Well, I'll ignore it because the other side is worse." "Well, I don't doubt she 'thinks' something bad happened to her..."

Amuses me to no end. But as I've said, that ties into my three large points as to why I think voting for Mr. Biden is just an empty feel-good gesture that solves nothing. Not even electing Ms. Clinton would have solved these deep decays within society, brought about by the failures of the New Economy and Big Tech revolution, the disturbingly increasing trend of hate-voting, and loss of faith in the system. That is when you elect a candidate like Mr. 45, and why his voters generally remain silent. Because if, as the MSM tells us, he is the candidate of hate, then hate is his game and so he has the greater home field advantage.

[clearspira]

Innocent until proven guilty. It is as simple as that for me.

I'm not saying they are lying about Trump raping them because how the hell do I know, but equally, I can absolutely 100% see someone doing so if they thought it would get rid of him.

[CharlesPhipps]

Innocent until proven guilty. It is as simple as that for me.

I'm not saying they are lying about Trump raping them because how the hell do I know, but equally, I can absolutely 100% see someone doing so if they thought it would get rid of him.

Honestly, you don't have to go to the rape or the criminal allegations to know Trump is a piece of shit. He robbed cancer funds for children and veterans by his own admission. The Trump Charity was something he embezzled from and he admitted his guilt before just paying fines. How anyone can vote for that man after he did that is beyond me.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2019/12/23/best-stories-of-the-decade-how-donald-trump-shifted-kids-cancer-charity-money-into-his-business/

FUCKING FORBES is the magazine that shared this too so we can just ditch the "Fake News" bullshit too.

I just don't get the loyalty this man engenders when he can rob fucking children, cozy up to North Korea, cozy up to Russia, get rape allegations, and all this other shit. I remember a conversation where a guy said, "Obama separated children first!"

My response was, "Yes, and it was fucking awful of him to do it."

He reacted like I'd broken some sacred rule and all that mattered was your team.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Weird, because President Trump has multiple rape allegations against him that the media hasn't touched with a ten foot pole.

* Ivanka Trump said that Donald raped her multiple times during their marriage.
* Jane Doe, a 14 year old girl who withdrew the prosecution attempt due to death threats.
https://www.courthousenews.com/rape-allegations-refiled-against-trump/
* E. Jean Caroll, former ELLE editor, claims that Trump raped her and has demanded a DNA sample to run against a dress she has kept.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/07/nyregion/jean-caroll-donald-trump-lawsuit-rape.html

So, according to you, we should have had these running constantly. I've felt that that they have really dropped the ball in not handling them and treating Trump with kids gloves versus a monstrous person. Mind you, I've also felt they've ignored Trump's ties to organized crime, money laundering for dictators, and other actions that mark him as utterly unfit for office.

I feel like Donald Trump has been treated as "one of their own" by the media so much that like Roman Polanski and Woody Allen, they give him slack that allowed him to coast past what should be disqualifying horrible actions. He's treated as a buffoon by the media and an awfully behaving racist uncle ala Archie Bunker versus a dedicated career criminal.

Re: Tara Reade

I actually followed that story extensively and took a large amount of shit because of my refusal to vote for Biden or Trump during it. I have family that are survivors of sexual assault and will not vote for any President who is guilty of it. It seems a no brainer that you'd never cast your vote for a rapist as you're endorsing it. In the end, the investigation by reporters' findings, changing of Tara Reade's story (including the location where the event supposedly happened), and a long talk with my family that survived sexual assault made me believe it was okay to proceed supporting Biden.

But yes, it is something I am terrified of happening, supporting someone who could do such a monstrous crime.

Sorry to hear that. I suppose since you brought this up in goodwill, I'll admit some of my relatives are the same way. We even had a major incident over that I will not get into, so suffice to say, it is what made me identify as a glass-ceiling feminist, even if I'm not up on all the doctrines. One of my biggest questions is, where does MeToo go following what the DNC has done? They've made it very clear they are willing to throw it aside to seize political power with the justification and rationalization mindset of "we have to stop Mr. 45 at all costs." Frankly, after this point, they need to stop crediting MeToo. I think when you coalesce around a lackluster septuagenarian candidate at the expense of an idealistic movement trying to address rape victims and feminism, then you no longer have any high ground to keep on acting like you support that. It would be ironic if they tried, as they have done more harm to the movement than the GOP itself has.

I get that MeToo just a hashtag, like it is for the fandom menace, but it can still be hijacked by unscrupulous types for bad ends with less than sound agendas.

I'm not clear on how the DNC is particularly at odds with MeToo or how there is some friction impeding either's development.

Amuses me to no end. But as I've said, that ties into my three large points as to why I think voting for Mr. Biden is just an empty feel-good gesture that solves nothing. Not even electing Ms. Clinton would have solved these deep decays within society, brought about by the failures of the New Economy and Big Tech revolution, the disturbingly increasing trend of hate-voting, and loss of faith in the system. That is when you elect a candidate like Mr. 45, and why his voters generally remain silent. Because if, as the MSM tells us, he is the candidate of hate, then hate is his game and so he has the greater home field advantage.

Hate-voting doesn't seem like an unprecedented condition in either modern democracy or even otherwise. I think we do have a new political landscape in the form of a social media revolution, but this is essentially a case of distinctly younger demographics with different fundamental customs/conventional habits, being at odds with the older generation. It's a consistent social evolution in which the world moves towards urbanization and a lot more people look to progressivism instead of communitarianism. Like, the dust bowl for instance.

Also I don't find that an administration's speculated inability to solve patriarchy as a reason to disbandon the ideal of establishment in favor or saying it doesn't matter who wins, especially in this case.

[Captain Crimson]

I'm not clear on how the DNC is particularly at odds with MeToo or how there is some friction impeding either's development.

They have been some of the biggest MeToo bandwagon jumpers. I mean, look at how they kicked out Mr. Al Franken, and yet, Mr. Biden gets a pass? Why? You have to conclude there is literally no other factor at play than it is a critical election year, and they've become just as hyperpolarized as the rest of us. A lot of MeToo feminists in Hollywood also leapt to Mr. Biden's defense, and so... what you got is a big, bright red signal hitting the same marks as the classic GOP dismissal of these allegations, and for almost the same reasons, which has a danger in sending victims back into silence, which hey, this was supposed to be meant to challenge, right? Since the DNC who were insisting "you have to believe women!" are now the ones backtracking it in their political discourse. How can anyone continue using MeToo as a hashtag in the future when the DNC heard what they said, and so clearly ignored it? How can they even pretend to proceed with what they've done? All they do is come off as GOP Lite, which, hey, they are.

Hate-voting doesn't seem like an unprecedented condition in either modern democracy or even otherwise. I think we do have a new political landscape in the form of a social media revolution, but this is essentially a case of distinctly younger demographics with different fundamental customs/conventional habits, being at odds with the older generation. It's a consistent social evolution in which the world moves towards urbanization and a lot more people look to progressivism instead of communitarianism. Like, the dust bowl for instance.

Also I don't find that an administration's speculated inability to solve patriarchy as a reason to disbandon the ideal of establishment in favor or saying it doesn't matter who wins, especially in this case.

It isn't, but with America's hyperpartisanship, as well as other factors, it's become a very dangerous trend that's on the rise. My tribe over yours. I think Mr. Chuck laid down how those who join these big major political parties now have to sell your soul, in his run down of SG-1 Heroes. I'm also not really particularly that sold on social media, given the unsavory types that hang around there. Put me in the minority, I think the internet has done more harm than good. I know the hypocrisy of a netizen calling it a mistake, but there it is. You got politicians such as Mr. Perot in 1992 advocating for digital town halls where citizens could make their sentiment known in RT as a form of electronic democracy and that hasn't materialized yet, has it?

I think, in effect, that the internet has balkanized our social and political discourse. And that is also what breeds a phenomenon such as huge swaths of voters in crucial swing states remaining silent. We retreat into our little echo chambers and like to pretend the world is the way it should be rather than how it is. Also something Mr. Chuck brilliantly ran down in SG-1 Heroes

That's sure an interesting view to take, since many people I know in my little slice of Florida consider patriarchy to be a form of protectorship and romanticism towards our female partners. That it's about love and how we put ourselves in risk and danger on their behalf, while they support us and tend the home. I'm not saying I agree with it, though it is a bit perplexing you consider assault to be one of the core values of a patriarchal system because the majority of human cultures have been patriarchal for going on ten thousand years since we first learned how to farm, and not all of them worked out, but some had. I'm not really against patriarchy or matriarchy, but I would prefer a more egalitarian world and refusing to challenge your views as we see many democrats doing now with the same ones which they would fiercely condemn in the other side moves us further away from that, and it's a shame, but it is why the status quo is more unpopular than ever.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I'm not clear on how the DNC is particularly at odds with MeToo or how there is some friction impeding either's development.

They have been some of the biggest MeToo bandwagon jumpers. I mean, look at how they kicked out Mr. Al Franken, and yet, Mr. Biden gets a pass? Why? You have to conclude there is literally no other factor at play than it is a critical election year, and they've become just as hyperpolarized as the rest of us. A lot of MeToo feminists in Hollywood also leapt to Mr. Biden's defense, and so... what you got is a big, bright red signal hitting the same marks as the classic GOP dismissal of these allegations, and for almost the same reasons, which has a danger in sending victims back into silence, which hey, this was supposed to be meant to challenge, right? Since the DNC who were insisting "you have to believe women!" are now the ones backtracking it in their political discourse. How can anyone continue using MeToo as a hashtag in the future when the DNC heard what they said, and so clearly ignored it? How can they even pretend to proceed with what they've done? All they do is come off as GOP Lite, which, hey, they are.

Al Franken and Joe Biden are two different situations. Al Franken had photographic evidence of his doings. Biden's is an allegation.

Believing Woman isn't supposed to be directed at official proceedings or anything, it's aimed mainly at the public who tend to automatically dismiss a woman's credibility. That doesn't mean every accusation is taken as literal fact.

[Captain Crimson]

I'm not clear on how the DNC is particularly at odds with MeToo or how there is some friction impeding either's development.

They have been some of the biggest MeToo bandwagon jumpers. I mean, look at how they kicked out Mr. Al Franken, and yet, Mr. Biden gets a pass? Why? You have to conclude there is literally no other factor at play than it is a critical election year, and they've become just as hyperpolarized as the rest of us. A lot of MeToo feminists in Hollywood also leapt to Mr. Biden's defense, and so... what you got is a big, bright red signal hitting the same marks as the classic GOP dismissal of these allegations, and for almost the same reasons, which has a danger in sending victims back into silence, which hey, this was supposed to be meant to challenge, right? Since the DNC who were insisting "you have to believe women!" are now the ones backtracking it in their political discourse. How can anyone continue using MeToo as a hashtag in the future when the DNC heard what they said, and so clearly ignored it? How can they even pretend to proceed with what they've done? All they do is come off as GOP Lite, which, hey, they are.

Al Franken and Joe Biden are two different situations. Al Franken had photographic evidence of his doings. Biden's is an allegation.

Believing Woman isn't supposed to be directed at official proceedings or anything, it's aimed mainly at the public who tend to automatically dismiss a woman's credibility. That doesn't mean every accusation is taken as literal fact.

Well, I hate to seem insensitive, but seriously, what do people expect? It's the "he said/she said" nature to any sort of accusation. I think examining whether the subject of the allegations is guilty or not helps, purely out of a subjective bias we all have, as a way to challenge our assumptions, but an automatic dismissal might not be condoning that stuff, merely that they don't believe this particular case.

Why do most people generally agree Mr. OJ is guilty? THE DNA. And if we had more convictions, arrests, and harsher sentencing, maybe we'd have less of that, since with a proper rape kit, you can't fool DNA. Another reason for police reform. So MeToo is literally empty liberal feel-good vaporware. It won't accomplish anything substantial, and "believe women" really doesn't work right given how less informed most voters are, so it can come off exactly the way I'd described. The DNC has turned their backs on all they claim to believe in.

I would still support an independent investigatory commission to probe whether or not these hold true - but we can't do that, can we? It would hurt our chances going into November and make us look like hypocrites!

This is exactly the way these people in the highest echelons of power, assuming he is guilty, get away with it. And I don't think that someone like clearspira that some users have taken issue with for some reason would dispute that. And these issues will persist after the election and continue to plague the DNC. It's possibly why Mr. Biden chose a BLACK WAHMAN VP in the first place, his way to kill two birds with one stone and offset the allegations as well as his gaffes on racial stuff.

Seriously, you don't think some of these numbers have an agenda being pushed? One in five women in the US will experience an assault in their lives? What definition do you use for that? Come on, outside an active war zone such as WWII, those figures do not happen in peacetime. That would mean tens of millions of our citizens are silent trauma victims. Sorry, I don't buy it. Call me a crass privileged male or whatever you want, I'm a bit more hopeful in human nature than that. Besides, we have seen how polling methodology has broken down, so how accurate is that? We don't know. Though if you go with those figures, then doesn't it put more pressure on Mr. Biden? It suggests he could be guilty.

What do I know. This is generally why I dislike activism, and why it was concern for my mother that prompted it. My sisters were the ones to convince me he could win. We will see.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

That seems like a disproportionate response to my post.

[Captain Crimson]

That seems like a disproportionate response to my post.

I like to be articulate as I can be.

[clearspira]

I'm not clear on how the DNC is particularly at odds with MeToo or how there is some friction impeding either's development.

They have been some of the biggest MeToo bandwagon jumpers. I mean, look at how they kicked out Mr. Al Franken, and yet, Mr. Biden gets a pass? Why? You have to conclude there is literally no other factor at play than it is a critical election year, and they've become just as hyperpolarized as the rest of us. A lot of MeToo feminists in Hollywood also leapt to Mr. Biden's defense, and so... what you got is a big, bright red signal hitting the same marks as the classic GOP dismissal of these allegations, and for almost the same reasons, which has a danger in sending victims back into silence, which hey, this was supposed to be meant to challenge, right? Since the DNC who were insisting "you have to believe women!" are now the ones backtracking it in their political discourse. How can anyone continue using MeToo as a hashtag in the future when the DNC heard what they said, and so clearly ignored it? How can they even pretend to proceed with what they've done? All they do is come off as GOP Lite, which, hey, they are.

Al Franken and Joe Biden are two different situations. Al Franken had photographic evidence of his doings. Biden's is an allegation.

Believing Woman isn't supposed to be directed at official proceedings or anything, it's aimed mainly at the public who tend to automatically dismiss a woman's credibility. That doesn't mean every accusation is taken as literal fact.

Do they though? In order for innocent until proven guilty to function, you need to believe BOTH SIDES until you have reason otherwise. You need to look at it as 50% ''she was raped'' and 50% ''she is a liar.'' As time goes on, as evidence is presented, then the scales of justice begin to tip one way or the other until hopefully the ratio is 100-0.

Credibility does not automatically mean that you are innocent or guilty, but it is also a good starting metric of the probability of you being innocent or guilty. Look at Michael Jackson as an example. There is no hard proof against him of being a pedo at all, the police and FBI went to the extent of photographing his genitals and ripping his house apart and they still couldn't find anything concrete. And yet... he was also a man who owned a house with a kiddies' amusement park attached to it that he invited young boys over for sleepover parties. That is not evidence that he is a pedo on its own but it sure as f-k harmed his credibility as being a wholly innocent man and anyone else who did not have the fanbase of Jackson would be crucified by the world on that point alone. Be honest: if he had turned out to be guilty, and someone beforehand had told you that he holds sleepover parties, would you have actually been all that surprised?