Biden Notes Trump's History of 'Sexual Assault' but Highlights '34 Felonies' That Victimized No One
Facing an opponent who has been credibly described as a sexual predator, Biden instead emphasizes Trump's cover-up of a consensual encounter.

"In the courtroom, we see Donald Trump for who he is," says a new Biden campaign ad. "He's been convicted of 34 felonies, found liable for sexual assault, and he committed financial fraud." One of these things is not like the others.
Those "34 felonies" sound like Trump's most serious offenses, and they are the only justification for calling him "a convicted criminal," as the ad also does. But those crimes were bookkeeping offenses that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg converted into felonies via a convoluted, legally iffy theory that combined several interacting statutes with questionable assumptions about Trump's knowledge and intent.
The victims in that case, Bragg said, were American voters, who supposedly had a right to hear porn star Stormy Daniels' account of sex with Trump before they cast their ballots in the 2016 presidential election. Yet hiding embarrassing information from voters is not a crime, arranging a nondisclosure agreement (NDA) with Daniels was not inherently illegal, and Trump was not charged with "election fraud," which is how the prosecution misleadingly described the essence of his crime.
Trump was instead charged with falsifying business records to cover up the NDA after the election, which allegedly was aimed at concealing "another crime": a violation of an obscure, rarely invoked New York law that makes conspiring to promote a candidate's election "by unlawful means" a misdemeanor. The latter misdemeanor transformed the misleading business records from misdemeanors into felonies, and the 34 counts were all based on the same underlying conduct. Bragg multiplied the felonies by treating each invoice, check, and ledger entry related to the NDA cover-up as a distinct crime.
The "financial fraud" to which the Biden ad refers likewise did not require proof of damages to any particular victim. While a New York judge concluded in a civil case that Trump had systematically exaggerated the value of his assets, there was no evidence that lenders or insurers had suffered financial losses because of defaults or claims. The state argued that banks lost potential income because they would have charged higher interest rates but for Trump's inaccurate financial reports. But the staggering "disgorgement" order in that case was aimed at stripping Trump of his "ill-gotten gains," not at compensating anyone who had been injured by his misrepresentations.*
In contrast, a New York jury's 2023 civil verdict against Trump, which found him liable for sexually assaulting and defaming the writer E. Jean Carroll, did involve a readily identifiable victim. Carroll alleged that Trump had raped her in a department store dressing room in 1996. The jury, which awarded $5 million to Carroll, concluded it was more likely than not that Trump had sexually assaulted her and then defamed her by calling her account a lie.
The behavior that Carroll described was by far the most serious offense alleged in these three cases, and it was consistent with the 2005 Access Hollywood tape in which Trump bragged about sexually assaulting women. Those comments, in turn, were consistent with the accounts of more than a dozen other women who publicly accused Trump of doing just the sort of thing he told Billy Bush he could do with impunity because he was "a star."
On its face, the fact that voters seem poised to elect a man who has been credibly described as a sexual predator is a lot more troubling than the fact that they seem unfazed by the Daniels NDA or Trump's long-standing tendency to exaggerate his wealth. Unlike the 2006 sexual encounter that Daniels described, the encounters that Carroll and Trump's other accusers described were decidedly not consensual. They were inherently felonious violations of other people's rights akin to the crimes that Trump promises to curtail by re-establishing "law and order"—a conspicuous feature of his populist platform.
Unlike the fraudulent records at the center of the two other cases, sexual assault causes obvious injury to specific people, as reflected in the damages awarded to Carroll. Yet somehow that crime gets second billing because of the "34 felonies" that Bragg cooked up.
Trump is "a convicted felon who continues to prove that he will do anything and harm anyone if it means more power and vengeance for Donald Trump," says Biden campaign spokesman Michael Tyler. "His entire campaign is an exercise in revenge and retribution."
Contrary to Tyler's implication, concealing the Daniels NDA did not "harm anyone" in a way that violated that person's rights. Yet Tyler conflates that cover-up with the danger that Trump, if elected, will abuse his official powers to target his political enemies—a much graver concern.
"This election is between a convicted criminal who is only out for himself and a president who is fighting for your family," Biden's ad says. How so? Biden has been "lowering health care costs," the narrator avers, and "making big corporations pay their fair share."
Judging from Biden's job approval ratings, voters have not been impressed by those efforts. According to last week's FiveThirtyEight tally, just 38 percent of voters approved of Biden's performance—the lowest number recorded during his presidency.
As in 2020, Biden's main selling point is that he is not Donald Trump. So it makes sense that Biden's campaign would try to remind voters exactly how awful Trump is. But playing up Trump's "34 felonies" will help do that only if voters were not paying enough attention to understand what those charges actually entailed.
*CORRECTION: This paragraph has been revised to acknowledge the argument that Trump's overvaluation of his assets resulted in lower interest rates on loans, meaning less income for banks.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Facing an opponent who has been credibly described as a sexual predator,
By whom?
In contrast, a New York jury's 2023 civil verdict against Trump, which found him liable for sexually assaulting and defaming the writer E. Jean Carroll, did involve an actual victim.
Ahaha... hahaha! HAHAHAHAAAAAAAAA! HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
Yeah. They found he defamed her (how saying "I did not do it and I do not even know her" is "defamation" is something that NY will have to deal with for decades), nothing about an assault which made zero sense given that the store was not empty and he had properties across the street.
I think it was commenter mad.casual who had the funniest and yet most accurate real-world description of the essence of her case.
^^
Not to toot my own horn, if you aren't reading Carroll's part with Jessica Simpson's almost cartoonish Texas drawl, you aren't doing it right.
And Trump's character should be voiced by Jesse Ventura.
Keep in mind too, E. Jean Carroll was more than 10 yrs. older than Jesse Ventura was in that movie when the alleged incident happened more than 10 yrs. later.
Sullum using the word 'credibly' makes you wonder if he doesn't gasp and dial 9-1-1 when he sees Bugs Bunny shoot Yosemite Sam in the face.
He defamed her by saying she was too ugly to assault or something ridiculous like that.
The dress she claimed to be wearing didnt even exist for another 7 years. Totally credible.
LOL!
Biden is spending $50 million on ad where he brags about arresting his political opposition.
New York democrats should be rounded up and shipped to someplace like Somalia.
By Sullum. Who is in no way credible, logical, or correct.
yeah... and its not like Biden wasnt 'credibly described' as a digital rapist by one Tara Reade is it now?
Oh, but that story was memory holed by the press - i forgot...
Using the current vernacular, "credibly described as a sexual predator" could credibly apply to both JFK and Bill Clinton.
Clinton even paid off at least one of the women accusing him of non-consensual activity to keep further reporting out of the press during the 1992 campaign. JFK didn't have to pay anyone off, the press concealed his "personal life" on the premise that he was entitled to privacy about it (so long as the women he was passing around to his bodyguards weren't famous in their own right).
Sullum probably wasn't an adult in 1960, but it's not unreasonable to think that he was around and aware in 1992. In 2000, the greatest lament of most of the people I know who are apoplectic at the idea of trump still being out of prison (especially every self-described "feminist") was that the Constitution was denying them the opportunity to try to elect that sexual predator for a third term.
The E. Jean Carroll case is a joke--25 year old allegations, and she wasn't even sure of the year. And the Democrats tolerated Senator Kennedy. They can go f themselves.
With friends like Reason, who needs enemies? It baffles my mind that Sullum would call this a "credible" charge, gvien that it lacked anything remotely resembling evidence. "Innocent until proven guilty" and "Justice is blind" aren't exactly terms that spring to mind when I think about these cases against Trump.
And if Biden wants to go there, what about showers with Ashley.
Tara Reade says "Hi" to Biden.
Reade's allegations were thin at best, and they were remarkably more *checks Reason's repeated use of the term* 'credible' than Carroll's.
You mean that crazy bitch who moved to Russia? Yeah, sorry, I don’t believe all women.
It is beyond debate that she is more credible than E. Jean Carroll.
"Yeah, sorry, I don’t believe all women."
Zero surprises that our DNC politruk, Shrike, doesn't believe an accusation that was reported well over two decades ago to the authorities, but has nothing but respect for someone that just started talking about it now, and can't remember the when and where while presenting anachronistic "evidence".
What next, is he going to post a link that refutes his own talking point?
As a serial child rapist, I’m sure you reflexively attack real victims of sexual assault.
Restructure this sentence. You are implicating yourself as it reads. Pretty sure that's not what you meant.
"Reade’s allegations were thin at best, and they were remarkably more *checks Reason’s repeated use of the term* ‘credible’ than Carroll’s."
I'll remind that Reason felt that Blasey-Ford has "credible" accusations.
DON'T BELIEVE HER!
Did anyone notice that the DOJ is hunting down Tara Reade in Russia as we speak? Tucker Carlson did an interview a couple weeks ago. Recommend Sullum actually do some reporting. Nah.
I saw her in those Sharknado movies. She looked hideous.
Believe All Women (except for Tara Reade, and Paula Jones, and Juanita Broderick, and anyone who said they saw someone named Bill on Epstein Island in the 90s or 2000s)
Never doubt the one "accuser" of Brett Kavanaugh who admitted she lied, though. Women don't just "make up" stories like that, even if they admit that they did...
Yeah, Biden doesn't want to fire a shotgun in that glass house.
I somehow doubt Sullum will address Biden’s history as a sexual predator regarding his rape son adult women, or his incestuous molestation of his own preteen daughter.
Apparently the fact his daughter actually memorialized his perversion in her diary isn't credible enough for Sullum.
Biden's showers with his daughter.... she didn't like them.
Especially when he sampled the o'le taco....
"It's ok Ashley, I'm a democrat and black people have to vote for me. Stop wiggling around."
As in 2020, Biden’s main selling point is that he is not Donald Trump. So it makes sense that Biden’s campaign would try to remind voters exactly how awful Trump is. But playing up Trump’s “34 felonies” will help do that only if voters were not paying enough attention to understand what those charges actually entailed.
Yeah, listen to this advice. Put E. Jean Carroll on the campaign trail with you. Let her stump for you. She’s a winning strategy. She's "credible".
Could you imagine if they rolled out all the people that were going to take Trump down at the DNC. Bring in the 51 intel officers, Michael Avenatti, Stormy, E. Jean Carroll, Cohen, Hillary, Michael Steele, The FBI, CIA, and all the other very credible opposition. We can have a parade of legal brilliance with Bragg, Jack Smith, Fanny, and Tish James. Maybe they can get Jussie Smollett to host the roast.
"51 intel officers, Michael Avenatti, Stormy, E. Jean Carroll, Cohen, Hillary, Michael Steele"
Being a Democrat must be an absolute blast some days.
The ability to say whatever the fuck comes into your head and defame whoever you want with zero repercussions must be a power-tripping high stronger than cocaine.
“I wouldn’t go that far” - Hunter B.
It’s time to change that.
Trump should do a commercial about Biden showering with his daughter,
No credible evidence. Sure his daughter wrote it herself in a diary certified authentic by the court and the FBI. But other than that, no credible evidence.
What is with you guys and reading a teenager’s diary. It’s pretty sick, man.
What is it with you guys condoning perversion and drug abuse?
Reading a teenager’s diary for deets on her relationship with her Dad isn’t perverted? You guys need to let go of your inchoate hate… it’s making you stupid.
NO, it is called learning who JRB really is. When I was young, I quickly learned, in my Southern Baptist town, that the worst people were the ones who claimed to be the nicest. The ones that put the fish symbol on their car and "praised Jesus" were the meanest, most untrustworthy people around.
Who goes around screaming to anyone who will listen that he is kind and decent? Joe Biden.
Beware. If you have to explain, it probably is not true.
"NO! It's not the fact that he tried to fuck his daughter that's the problem, it's people reading about it!!!" - Buttplug.
See, this is why Open Society fired you.
Yeah, reading the diary is the bad part of this story. Not the dad showering with his adolescent daughter.
"Well Adjusted" JFC.
And from the guy who posts child porn links here.
Sad.
You’re very bad at deflection Shrike. And let’s be honest. You’ve nearly corned the market on stupid. Although Pedo Jeffy and Sarc are giving you serious competition p.
Not clear if that typo was supposed to be cornered or cornholed?
Cornered. He reserves the cornholing for little boys., and probably Sarc.
Edit: Thanks. I always appreciate a setup for a good zinger against those scumbags.
We’re far, far behind you in STUPID, asshole. FOAD.
"What is with you guys and reading a teenager’s diary. It’s pretty sick, man."
What's far sicker is what the diary says, and what you're trying to distract from, although the only thing that bothers you, Pluggo, is that a teenager is way too old.
Next article: Jack Black makes cool, impassioned argument for Biden's re-election!
I'm thinking a bunch of agents are ringing there clients and explaining to them how uncool a ringing, impassioned endorsement of Joe Biden is. Regardless of politics, the cool crowd is clearly uncool in doing so. They are similar to all of the influencers that pimp Biden, but are clearly paid shills.
Every 'influencer' is a paid shill. That's what an 'influencer' is. In essence, they are advertising personified.
Kind of like that episode of Community where legally that one guy was Subway.
Subway, the Person
He came back a few seasons later, working for Honda.
"...Facing an opponent who has been credibly described as a sexual predator,.."
Sullum is a steaming pile of TDS-addled shit, ain't he?
FOAD, asswipe.
It used to be that having a consensual affair would disqualify you from office (Gary Hart) or get you impeached and have your penis publicly described for 2 years (Bill Clinton). Nowadays with this Republican Party they’re just fine with a serial sexual predator who cheats on his wife with a pornstar. Hey, he has his needs and if he needs to rape someone to be the man he is today the means justify the ends.
Yes but White Republicans do it to Christianize those girls and cast out the evil of race suicide, so their motives are as pure as the riven snow in Ryno's Hay Fever and Catarrh Remedy.
That's just it - So many of these men have no morals, no matter what the political party. Yet, given the choice between a proven record of no wars, low inflation and improving economy by a president who likes adult women and a president who mis-manages foreign policy to the point he wants us to fund a war against superpower for the next 10 years , disses our ally Israel, opens our border to gangs and terrorists, lost untold numbers of minor foreign children AND his own daughter accuses him of pedophila.
The choice is not hard. DJT 2024
That moment when the left realizes they're not the cool kids...
Lol. Ok, grampa.
Funny, coming from a pedophile like you, who loves sodomizing little boys.
When the Democrats were rationalizing Clinton's behavior (including rape allegations) they had a expressed a wish that the Republicans would not care about a politician's "private sex life". They got the world that they wanted. Why are they complaining?
There is zero evidence that he's a sexual predator. Know how I know? Because they bothered to let E. Jean Carrol spread her BS. If they had a credible accusation they wouldn't have let that see the light of day.
not seeing the predator part - not like a guy who stalks his own daughter come shower - time.
Gary Hart was a bit of a special case in that he literally dared the press to try to catch him doing anything inappropriate in his personal life. It didn't take long before he was then photographed in public with his side-piece sitting on his lap (on board a boat named "Monkey Business", unfortunately for him).
Until Bill did it, most of his supporters insisted that there's no such thing as a "consensual" relationship in a workplace because there's generally some level of "power dynamic" at play in which one person is in some way subordinate to the other.
After the revelations about Bill and Monica, many of those same people were absolutely certain that the interns in the White House weren't actually "subordinate to the President" since they're technically employed through the government's version of "HR". Trying to get one of them to admit that as part of the executive branch, that office and everyone in it are all subordinate to the POTUS, who can fire pretty much anyone in that branch of the government for any reason (or for no reason at all) was like pulling ribs.
No one cares what Biden says; he might as well be a corpse; he’s just a place holder to stand in place while his staff run the country.
he’s just a place holder to stand in place while his staff run the country
Absolutely true. But just who is this “staff”?
Using Reason’s own weasel words, FJB has absolutely “been credibly described” as a corrupt lifetime politician who takes foreign money. Sure, his presidential role seems to be limited to not incoherently wandering off from events he absolutely must attend. Obviously others are running the office of the president.
But let’s not forget the foreign money that The Big Guy and his disgusting family are taking for favors.
His staff are a bunch of promoted Obama lackeys, but without any kind of leader to rein them in. This is why everything is falling apart so fast and all at once.
If the democrats cheat their way into another four years of Biden everyone needs to make a decision whether they’re willing to risk their necks to avoid losing everything or not.
Obama never reined in his lackeys, he just named targets on his campaign web site and waited for the henchpersons in the regulatory agencies and FBI to launch audits on opposing donors and put opposing staffers under FISA surveillance "without direction from the President or the campaign".
Remember in 2006 when the Dems campaigned to re-take Congress on a platform of "stopping the illegal wiretapping" by Bush and Cheney? Did anyone predict that their way of doing so would be to make those wiretaps legal (and then triple the use of them during the first term of the Obama administration)?
"he might as well be a corpse"
At this point, are we really sure he's not?
Someone with a lot more tact and diplomacy skills may have to break the news to Sullum. The whole POINT of organizing the LP was to provide voters a law-changing voting alternative to the entrenched looter kleptocracy. Looter means robber, raider, plunderer, marauder, pirate, pillager... Kleptocracy means government by those who seek chiefly status and personal gain at the expense of the governed. Where in all of these Merriam-Webster decodes does anyone here find reference to objective, truthful, honest, reliable, trustworthy or worth the plutonium it would take to blow it away?
'Biden Notes Trump's History of 'Sexual Assault' but Highlights '34 Felonies' That Victimized No One'
As if Biden notes anything besides the flavor of pudding. Does anyone doubt that the Big Guy is just a prop now?
He’s been puppeteered by Obama’s henchcreatures his whole term.
Ackshully, the Maryland governor has just pardoned more than 175,000 marijuana convictions, so 100,000 people may now live lives worthy of a rights-respecting individual Stateside OR emigrate to some country where more than 1 in 50 of its State governments are not lying mystical looter satrapies. Oh yes. Anslinger-Reagan Republicans have seen to it that a nuclear scientist who touched anything better than gin or cigarettes is no more welcome in God's Own Prohibitionist 'Murrica than a Jewish physicist like Otto Frisch was in the Christian National Socialist Third Reich.
Hank, I really need to context your medical proxy about removing your internet access. And there should also be a discussion about turning up your morphine drip.
His entire campaign is an exercise in revenge and retribution.
I'm confused, are conservatives and libertarians supposed to be concerned about that? I don't think it is a likely outcome of his victory, but I would love it if it is.
This raises an interesting point. HL Mencken published a pocket explanation of what Friedrich Nietzsche wrote that made a lick of sense. In it he remarked on how natural an act it has been since the dawn of time to destroy one's enemies. But startling is Mencken's conclusion that Teedy Roosevelt, like his buddy the Kaiser, used Nietzschean ethics as the basis for his own bullshitting, specifically in "The Strenouos Life." Mencken invites any reader to contrast it with the Sermon on the Mount and observe that in all things fundamental, Rooseveltian and Nietzschean philosophy are identical. Read it on Kindle.
Modern beltway libertarians to people with defensive knife wounds all over their hands and arms: Stop resisting!
That's why I'm on the Trump train: the executive branch head-rolling extravaganza which will follow inauguration.
"In the courtroom, we see Donald Trump for who he is," says a new Biden campaign ad. "He's been convicted of 34 felonies, found liable for sexual assault, and he committed financial fraud."
Let’s hear Brandon repeat that without a teleprompter, and without a ten second pause in the middle of it as he desperately tries to remember what the fuck he’s talking about.
“Moreover, Donald Trump presents himself to juries as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory, someone for whom many jurors identify reasonable doubt.”
the 2005 Access Hollywood tape in which Trump bragged about sexually assaulting women.
We all know he did no such thing, Jacob. Who do you think you're addressing here?
a man who has been credibly described as a sexual predator
By whom? Carroll? She has no credibility whatsoever. I think you know that.
It’s assault every time a wealthy celebrity uses their fame and money to get what they want (easy sex).
So I am not because I can poor?. Just asking for a friend.
Yeah, but in Sullum’s defense he’s a liar and a coward.
But why? What does he think he gains from that?
Cocktail party access. He didnt come out against Bragg until after the NYT admitted it was a sham.
He wants the approval of his ‘peers’ in the beltway. This is a problem among most of the Reason staff.
This whole article is one big "both sides" apophasis. Using the thinnest possible veneer that "Trumps 34 Felonies are not bad" as a cover to spread that smear repeatedly and pile on more smears. Is this the Washington Post?
>>On its face ...
the "on its face" part is the entire problem with the investigative jornolism reportedly conducted here.
An historical event that compares with Trumps 34 "felonies" is Jack Johnson's 1912 conviction under the "Mann Act." The prosecution used the act to "get" him. Johnson was the first black heavyweight champion. He beat up too many white boys, which didn't help the narrative about black inferiority. Also, he was running around with white girls. He was convicted for paying for a hotel room for his white girlfriend. The act was meant to make it illegal to bring females across state lines for prostitution. Trump and Johnson have little in common, but their prosecutions certainly do.
There is some truth to that. Honkies who hate that naygyur Obama for profiting at the expense of Bush Jr’s faith-based asset forfeiture Crash–and de-Greating Amerika–comprise mebbe 88% of the shrewdness of Trumpanzees seeking to rerun the country from the monkey cage. George Herriman, premier cartoonist of Jack Johnson back in de day, was no pureblood Aryan. His funniest cartoons picked at the racial collectivism divide that cut across America like the Grand Canyon while the Supreme Court labored to put the uppity in their place.
Geez, you must still be fueled up from Hunter and joeys cocaine fentanyl orgies. Take a shower with Jill and Ashley and cool down.
And learn how to spell. Gropin Joe don’t care about you, but I bet he would be glad to rub his hands on your little legs to make those sexy hairs stand at attention.
Note to foreign readers: This fakename sockpuppet aptly represents the cross section of Landover Baptist lampreys fastening onto rational media channels. Try this experiment: go to some Alabama Beatles album bonfire site and see if they will publish your comment saying anything nice about non-nationalsocialists.
Just die you ancient piece of dried up hippie shit.
Funniest part of this sullum idiocy is he recognizes how corrupt NYC was for the 34 felonies but doesn't for the evidence free defamation trial.
Apparently being able to identify the year you were assaulted is evidence enough to find someone liable for sexual assault... That would be like a college coed accusing a classmate of sexual assault "sometime in my sophomore year" at the 25 th class reunion.
She wasn't even able to do that.
And, again:
2006: A 62-yrs.-old Trump, married to 36 yr. old Melania, pays a 27-yr.-old Stormy Daniels for sex? Uh, if Stormy’s got receipts, sure.
1995-6ish: A 50 yrs. old, married to 33 yr. old Marla Maples, asks a 53-yr.-old E. Jean Carroll to try on lingerie for him in a public department store? Are you fucking retarded?
Less 25th class reunion thinking back to sophomore year, more 50th class reunion thinking back to 24th or 25th class reunion about a guy you didn't got to school with.
It's at least consistent with the standard they were using for Christine Blasey Ford, though. If a woman says it, she's probably credible. Remember when Robby Soave, of all people, said, "Well we shouldn't dismiss Julie Swetnick immediately" when what she was saying was blatantly comical on its face?
I feel that calling ford credible was the bottom of Robbie left wing experiment. It was fucking awful.
I put it at Swetnick, actually. The idea of a college girl continually going to high school rape fest parties was comical. And yet Robby thought that the mere fact that a ton of women were all making accusations meant we needed to listen to this woman, basing proving the whole purpose of #MeToo: to bolster weak claims of sexual misconduct by throwing behind them the weight of numbers, mostly anonymous accounts.
Real victims do not wait decades to come forward.
Ask Elizabeth Smart.
Fuck Jacob Sullum. By far the most dishonest Reason editor ever. Even Ron Bailey wouldn't stoop this low.
Don’t sell Boehm short. He’s running neck and neck with Sullum, and a far bigger piece of shit than Bailey.
This is a provably wrong statement, why does no one correct it?
"and it was consistent with the 2005 Access Hollywood tape in which Trump bragged about sexually assaulting women."
The 2005 Access Hollywood tape said, paraphrasing, "when you're a star, women let you grab them in the p*ssy."
He said "women let you," he didn't say "l like to" or "I frequently", he said "they let you" - kinda sounds like the women give consent...
Here's the actual text from the transcript:
Trump: "Yeah that's her with the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know I'm automatically attracted to beautiful... I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything."
Bush: "Whatever you want."
Trump: "Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything."
Here's a link to the transcript:
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37595321.amp
I don't defend what Trump said, I have no "first hand" (sorry) knowledge of what women let stars do...
This is a provably wrong statement, why does no one correct it?
I've been saying this in the comments every time Sullum uses it, but he's married to this narrative now and can't let it go.
Then again, we do have knowledge of what women do let The Don grab their pussies, right?
It's actually quite humorous to see Biden and his [D]-gangsters care so much about morality when it comes to Trump.
The religious puritans of the left out Gunning down the sinful.
Self-Projection. It's all the left has in their corner.
In other news, Eliot Ness notes Al Capone's history of murder, but highlights his 22 counts of tax evasion.
Believe all women except Tara Reade...and Amy Biden.
"sexual assault causes actual injury to specific people"
Yes, and so do unsubstantiated charges of sexual assault. There is no corroborating evidence that these assaults ever happened. A jury wanted to believe them, and therefore Trump was guilty simply because?
Trump's a scumbag.
Scumbags commit sexual assault
Therefore, Trump committed sexual assault.
QED
The invalid nature of that syllogism is irrelevant because... because... er...Trump is Hitler and we have to stop Hitler.
Like in the Soviet Union, accusations of any kind are not to be made against an elite Party member in good standing.
“…it was consistent with the 2005 Access Hollywood tape in which Trump bragged about sexually assaulting women.”
Not this again. While what Trump was describing was piggish behavior, he was bragging that “stars” get groupies, not sexual assault on unwilling women, per se.
Sullum could talk about Trump's insane pandering to servers or about deporting 16 million workers or acrooss-the-board tarriffs, but instead he is laundering this tripe? While your at it maybe you ought to mention that Trump colluded with AMI to plant fake news and suppress other stories that would harm him. Is that a victimless crime?
I guess the people do not need to know about the character of a presedential candidate. If you are rich you get to buy silkence. If you are poor you need to be willing to accept that your character will be protected as long as you go to bat for your benefactors.
I don't think Sullum understands what was happening. This is classic campaign finance fraud. We have these laws in place so that when we go into the voting booth we can have some trust that we know what we are voting for. If we allow candidates to bury stories and accept in-kind favors from people who know about their sordid past then how can we trust what we are seeing? Or does it no longer matter any more? Might as well carry water for Trump so as to get in his good graces because I hear there is retribution coming.
"...While your at it maybe you ought to mention that Trump colluded with AMI to plant fake news and suppress other stories that would harm him..."
We need to point out that you're lying pile of slimy lefty shit. FOAD, asshole.
Considering that I'm not a fan of Donald Trump, have never voted for him and will never vote for him, I hate that once again I'm being forced to defend him.
It is apparent that the Biden Regime and Democrat Party elites are targeting their political opposition using the manipulation of law. This is not to say that Trump isn't guilty of something, but some say that we all violate some law several times a day.
The Biden Regime and Democrat Party elites are working backwards from the desired verdict searching for any way they can contrive a crime that Donald Trump can be charged with. To be clear, these tactics are being used against Trump loyalists.
The Biden Regime and Democrat Party elites are excessively charging Trump loyalists in hopes of persuading the weaker souls to stop their persecution (not prosecution) by abandoning Trump and perjuring themselves.
There isn't an honest attempt to crack down on crime, but rather a targeted effort to sway an election. For all the talk of Jan 6th and the attempt to overturn the "Election of Biden", the Biden Regime and Democrat Party elites are going out of their way to rig the upcoming election in their favor.
Trump may not be suitable to become president again, but he is much less dangerous than Biden serving another term. I can't vote for either Biden or Trump, but realize that there isn't a 3rd party candidate who will be allowed to hold the office.
If anyone gets close it would probably be Kennedy. I don't see Chase Oliver, West, or Stein gaining much traction. All three embody the worst aspects of American Liberalism to some degree. In the event that a 3rd party candidate does gain traction, I'm sure that the deep state will handle it just as they dealt with the Kennedy problem a couple of times already.