DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Love God Only
HTML https://lovegodonly.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Politics
*****************************************************
#Post#: 13027--------------------------------------------------
In the Gutter
DIR By: Kerry
Date: October 10, 2016, 8:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
From CNN:
--- Quote ---
> Rudy Giuliani defended Donald Trump's crude remarks about
women Sunday, telling CNN's Jake Tapper on "State of the Union"
that "men at times talk like that."
--- End Quote ---
This is news to me. Really. I heard a talk show host say men
talked like that. It makes me wonder what kind of people
Giuliani and that radio talk show host hang out with.
--- Quote ---
> Tapper said: "I have never said that; I have never done that.
I am happy to throw a stone. I have been in locker rooms. I have
been a member of a fraternity. I have never heard any man, ever,
brag about being able to maul women because they get away with
it -- never."
>
> Giuliani responded: "We've taken it to an extra degree of what
he said. But the fact is that men at times talk like that. Not
all men, but men do. He was wrong for doing it. I am not
justifying it. I believe it's wrong. I know he believes it's
wrong. I believe this is not the man we're talking about today."
--- End Quote ---
I say this: If people have said things like that around
Giuliani, it says something about Giuliani. People feel safe
to say such things around him. I guess we ought not to be
surprised then about Giuliani's buddy, the pedophile priest.
If someone bragged about assaulting a woman in my presence, I
would be outraged; and if it was only bragging and not a fact, I
would hope he'd admit at once he hadn't really done it. If he
had done it, I'd hope he'd never feel it safe to brag about such
things again in my presence.
--- Quote ---
> In a separate interview on ABC's "This Week," host George
Stephanopoulos told Giuliani that what Trump was describing in
the video is sexual assault -- which Giuliani didn't dispute.
>
> "That's what he's talking about. You know, whether it happened
or not, I don't know, and how much exaggeration was involved in
that, I don't know," Giuliani said. "I do know there's a
tendency on the part of some men at different times to
exaggerate things like this, and I'm not in any way trying to
excuse it or condone it. There is no excuse or answer for it
other than, 'I'm very sorry and I wish I hadn't done it. And I'm
not like that anymore.'"
--- End Quote ---
It's quite simple really. Bragging about evil deeds is a sign
of someone being a psychopath.
--- Quote ---
> The former New York City mayor also insisted that Trump's
apology in a video posted on Facebook in the early Saturday
morning hours was sincere.
>
> "It was an apology. He definitely apologized, and I know from
talking to him that he genuinely feels very sorry about this,
and it's certainly not the views he holds today," Giuliani told
Tapper.
--- End Quote ---
I did not see the video on Facebook; but his so-called apology
at the debate was no apology at all. He was sorry he got
caught. If he had been truly sorry, he would have owned up to
it without trying to minimize it by saying Bill Clinton was
worse. Maybe Bill Clinton is worse; but Donald Trump is not
responsible for what Bill Clinton does. He should answer for
himself. Just because other people have done evil things
certainly is no excuse. If I have done something wrong, I
never try to minimize it by referring to what others did. I
just own up to my part of it. If other people then want to own
up to their parts, fine. Genuine repentance and apologies
contain no blaming of others. You can't say, "I'm sorry I did
that, but I wouldn't have done it if you hadn't done what you
did to me."
If I was Trump's daughter, I think I'd be furious with him.
Back in May, when the New York Times reported that more than one
woman had accused him of groping them, Ivanka went on the
record saying, "My father is not a groper."
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aewjGUd9BL0
From Politico in May:
--- Quote ---
> The New York Times cited a deposition from a woman who claimed
that Donald Trump groped her under the table decades ago, but
the presumptive Republican presidential nominee is certainly not
a groper, his daughter said Wednesday.
>
> “Look, I’m not in every interaction my father has, but he’s
not a groper,” Ivanka Trump said in an interview broadcast
Wednesday on “CBS This Morning.” “It’s not who he is. And I’ve
known my father obviously my whole life and he has total respect
for women.”
> Story Continued Below
>
> The billionaire businessman launched a Twitter salvo the
“failing” newspaper for its “false, malicious & libelous story,”
catapulting the story to become the newspaper’s most popular of
the year, according to assistant news editor Theodore Kim.
>
> Read more:
HTML http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/trump-no-groper-ivanka-223316#ixzz4MgecMFHQ
> Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
--- End Quote ---
Why should Trump be annoyed by accusations of him groping women
if he bragged about it about himself? I think I know why. He
knows he can get away with saying that kind of thing in certain
circles and also knows that there are decent people who would be
deeply offended to hear him say that sort of thing. And
obviously, Giuliani is in the kind of circle of people where you
can say that sort of thing.
Now I am wondering if Trump is guilty of raping that woman who
accused him of it. Her lawsuit is moving forward. From The
Independent
HTML http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-accused-underage-rape-lawsuit-a7352976.html:<br
/>
--- Quote ---
> A federal judge has ordered a status conference hearing after
a woman filed a lawsuit claiming Donald Trump raped her when she
was 13-years-old in 1994.
>
> In the lawsuit a witness, identified by the pseudonym Tiffany
Doe, alleges she saw Mr Trump and billionaire-paedophile Jeffrey
Epstein repeatedly rape the plaintiff, identified as Jane Doe.
>
> The complaint claims Epstein hired an unidentified woman to
pick up teenage girls to bring to his parties.
--- End Quote ---
Jeffrey Epstein is a convicted pedophile -- and both Donald
Trump and Bill Clinton have been friends with him. Trump even
commented on how Epstein had an eye for beautiful women and very
young ones too -- that's a matter of record.
--- Quote ---
> Federal Judge Ronnie Abrams has ordered that the status
conference hearing for 16 December in a New York court.
>
> She has asked for both sides to provide information to assist
the Court in advancing the case to settlement or trial.
--- End Quote ---
After the election. . . but Trump is going to lose anyway.
--- Quote ---
> Mr Trump's ex-wife Ivana previously accused him of "raping"
her during their divorce in 1991 - though she later said it was
not in "a literal or criminal sense".
>
> She accused him of rape after he allegedly ripped her clothes
off to have sex with her in a "violent assault".
--- End Quote ---
She changed her tune because their divorce settlement had a
provision in it that said she wasn't allowed to say anything bad
about him. And curiously enough, those divorce records are
sealed -- and a court recently ruled they'll remain sealed.
Trump fought to keep them sealed in court and won.
I am disgusted. If Trump truly was sorry, he'd take his
medicine and withdraw from the race and let another Republican
run. If he genuinely thought Hillary was so bad (and maybe she
is at that :( ), he withdraw for the good of the country.
#Post#: 13028--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Gutter
DIR By: paralambano
Date: October 10, 2016, 8:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Kerry -
If people are certain Hillary will win, wouldn't it be better
for the country if she defeated what people apparently detest
about Trump? Especially if it were a landslide? That way she
could reinforce her claim that America is still America the
"good" by the result? And then most voters can feel good about
themselves? If her camp isn't certain about winning, what does
it say about her view of the country?
para . . . .
#Post#: 13030--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Gutter
DIR By: Kerry
Date: October 10, 2016, 9:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: paralambano link ---
>
> Kerry -
>
> If people are certain Hillary will win, wouldn't it be better
for the country if she defeated what people apparently detest
about Trump?
--- End Quote ---
I don't get how these two things are connected. I'm fairly sure
she's going to win; but I base that on the numbers I see now and
the direction the numbers are going. I am not basing my
estimate of the outcome on ethics.
The ethics is something else. We'd have to try to figure out
how the Clinton marriage works. For example, Gennifer Flowers
said Bill told her he would have left Hillary if they hadn't had
a daughter. Yes, Gennifer said and still says Bill told her
he loved her and wanted to be with her but couldn't divorce
Hillary because of Chelsea. True or false? Gennifer also said
Bill told her that Hillary got to "eat more *****" than he did,
implying I guess that Hillary had lots of lesbian flings.
Former Miss Arkansas, Sally Miller, said something along the
same lines -- saying things like Hillary didn't like men
touching her breasts, had affairs with women, etc.
HTML http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3427366/He-frilly-nightie-danced-playing-sax-Former-Miss-Arkansas-says-Bill-Clinton-bed-confided-Hillary-sex-women-fears-Hillary-vendetta-sleeps-loaded-semi-automatic.html
What is the truth? I wouldn't jump to conclusions. Bill could
have told his girlfriends lies about Hillary to manipulate them,
to get their sympathy or to convince them he was really in love
with them but stuck with Hillary.
On the other hand, there's Huma who was not a stay-at-home wife
with her randy husband who created his own set of embarrassing
problems. Why did Huma say she fell in love with Hillary when
she met her? Why do the two seem inseparable?
Or did Hillary know the truth about Bill and keep quiet --
encouraging his bad behavior -- and intimidating and threatening
the women who accused him? All this is very confusing and
very nasty; but Hillary could have been duped by Bill for years
just as Melania could have been duped by Donald. I used to
think Hillary stayed with Bill solely because the alliance was
useful to her; but now I wonder if he lied to her so effectively
she doesn't know the whole truth herself.
At any rate, her winning over Donald would be hard to portray
as a triumph of virtue over vice.
--- Quote ---
> Especially if it were a landslide? That way she could
reinforce her claim that America is still America the "good" by
the result? And then most voters can feel good about themselves?
If her camp isn't certain about winning, what does it say about
her view of the country?
--- End Quote ---
I think her side is pretty confident of winning. I also think I
could hear it in her voice last night. There is a kind of
laughing -- which seems to be the only kind of laughing she has
-- which almost sounds warm and endearing but is actually
cockiness and arrogance -- the kind of amusement a cat has with
a wounded mouse.
The only reason I can see to say Hillary would be better than
Donald is that she responds to public opinion. She would not
go too far out there out of fear on not getting re-elected.
Donald appears to have a strong authoritarian side to him that
doesn't care what others think if he thinks he has the clout to
do what he wants. I was horrified when I heard him say, "If I
win, I am going to instruct my Attorney General to get a special
prosecutor to look into your situation because there has never
been so many lies, so much deception." In other words, his
Attorney General would be a yes-man, a hatchet-man. He really
showed his true colors when he threatened her with jail. How
about an impartial trial first, Donald? That kind of talk
strikes me as a threat to our democracy. I don't think she
would go that far.
I think both Democrats and Republicans both figure she's going
to win. The Republicans are now putting more resources into
other races, desperately trying to hold on to what they have,
knowing they are at risk of losing the Senate and if things get
much worse maybe the House as well. The smarter Republicans
are calling for Trump to withdraw since they know he can't win
-- and he is putting their party's control in Congress at risk
by staying in.
#Post#: 13031--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Gutter
DIR By: paralambano
Date: October 10, 2016, 5:23 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Kerry -
I have understood that it's the undecided who could swing the
vote and the way the media portrays it starting with the
Republican defections and now the outrage over Trump's latest
issue it seems it's going to be for some of them an issue of
character foremost. Here it seems that Clinton has the advantage
since I don't know that they're outraged over her emails. It
could come down to how they expect a President to behave
ethically and apparently most if not all women (and men) could
think Trump's comments about women don't fit the bill.
I think Hillary will win as well since she might appear to most
as the lesser of "evils". She's spoken of a good America and
contrasted Trump with it while he's spoken of making America
great again as if to my mind that the country's not quite good
enough economically and militarily but didn't leave a note
unless I missed it about its basic decency.
Yes, he should not have said what he did about what he would
have happen to her if he were elected. Better though that it
came out beforehand. Beside its seeming vindictiveness and
dictatorial overtone, talk about tipping your hand to the
"enemy", something he said he would not do militarily.
Well, the term "devil" was used not "hermaphrodite" as one Pres
candidate called another in a previous campaign and there was no
hurling of excrement among the spectators(?). You might know
this history better than I somehow came across it.
para . . . .
#Post#: 13032--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Gutter
DIR By: Kerry
Date: October 10, 2016, 8:53 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: paralambano link ---
>
> Kerry -
>
> I have understood that it's the undecided who could swing the
vote
--- End Quote ---
Absolutely . . . and then the question is how do you identify
who they are and how many there are? Then there are the people
who have decided who they prefer but aren't that enthusiastic to
go out to vote. Some don't vote because they are so sure of
the outcome they don't think it matters if they do.
--- Quote ---
> and the way the media portrays it starting with the Republican
defections and now the outrage over Trump's latest issue it
seems it's going to be for some of them an issue of character
foremost.
--- End Quote ---
I think two factors are at work with the Republican defections.
First, some of them are running for office themselves. They may
fear some voters who hate Trump will go vote a straight
Democratic ticket against him. (By the way, I doubt if I'll
see any Trump goons at my polling place since their plan was to
go to predominantly Democratic precincts here in Pennsylvania;
but if I do see one trying to "monitor" the election by
challenging voters, I may tell him I'm so outraged I'm going to
vote straight Democratic.)
Secondly, politicians are like sharks smelling blood in the
water when it comes to a wounded politician in their own party.
They will support some of the worst people if they think the
attacks aren't going to bring down someone; but if they sense he
is so wounded that's he's "dead meat," they figure they might
as well pile on and "be on the side that's winning." What the
Republican politicians are saying now may say more about how
they perceive Trump's fate among voters than about their own
opinions about him. It's hard to say how many of them are truly
offended and how many are putting on an act to appeal to voters
who are offended.
--- Quote ---
> Here it seems that Clinton has the advantage since I don't
know that they're outraged over her emails.
--- End Quote ---
Yes, the emails are harder to understand. They also don't evoke
the same kind of emotional response. And too, the
Republicans have been talking about them for so long, it
doesn't matter that much now what new revelations come out since
many people have tuned out on that subject. I've tuned out on
many subjects involving Hillary. I figure she is a liar, so
why put a lot of effort into trying to figure out if she's lying
about this or that?
--- Quote ---
> It could come down to how they expect a President to behave
ethically and apparently most if not all women (and men) could
think Trump's comments about women don't fit the bill.
--- End Quote ---
Initially it may occur more to women than to men; but people's
views are influenced by talking to other people. Any man who
talks about it with other people (including women around him)
could find Trump's remarks offensive. A man imagining Trump
groping his wife, his daughter or his mother and then bragging
about it is apt to be offended. Do men in this country want a
leader who treats women like objects to be collected the way
kings, sultans and sheiks have at times? I think not.
How a man treats women says something about him. It tells us
how he looks at other people -- and if a man chooses to exploit
or abuse women because he can, he lacks empathy for others,
doesn't see other people as real people. Trump has more than a
problem with women. His comments about Mexicans and Muslims
show the same trait. His mocking a handicapped man shows it
too.
--- Quote ---
> I think Hillary will win as well since she might appear to
most as the lesser of "evils". She's spoken of a good America
and contrasted Trump with it while he's spoken of making America
great again as if to my mind that the country's not quite good
enough economically and militarily but didn't leave a note
unless I missed it about its basic decency.
--- End Quote ---
Yes, and of course his comment about making America great again
also offended some people. Again he showed his propensity for
denigrating things and trying to paint horrible pictures that
alarm people. Hillary at least does not see the American
electorate as so depressed and frightened by the world that
she needs to appeal to fear. I think she is a very calculating
person. If she thought she could win by scaring people, maybe
she would -- so she appears saner to me. She may not be in
touch all that much with ordinary people; but she's not as out
of touch as Trump is. I think she was right when she said
Trump lived in an "alternate reality."
That suggests she would try to govern the same way. It doesn't
mean she'd always do the right thing; but it does mean she would
be restrained in what she did.
--- Quote ---
> Yes, he should not have said what he did about what he would
have happen to her if he were elected. Better though that it
came out beforehand. Beside its seeming vindictiveness and
dictatorial overtone, talk about tipping your hand to the
"enemy", something he said he would not do militarily.
--- End Quote ---
Yes, talk about being inconsistent! But then he's so
inconsistent that when I heard he said there was "zero chance"
that he would drop out, I joked by saying, "That means he'll be
quitting soon."
He is out of his depth. He has been surrounded so long by
sycophants and parasites, he is sure he perfected his
techniques for manipulating people. Of yes, those techniques
work when people see you as having money or power and want
something from you -- they'd willing let you grope them if you
want to. That's absolutely true. The rich and famous often go
in circles where they can do almost anything they like and their
yes-men nod approval. What Trump and people like him fail to
understand are people who aren't interested in getting something
from him personally. They want a decent society. It's
interesting as an exercise in psychology.
Allegations about sexual assault in that kind of circle can be
hard to figure. A woman can throw herself at a powerful man if
she thinks she can get something from him. Woe to the man who
has sex with such women since if you don't give them what they
want, they can turn vindictive and claim almost anything. The
sex could have been voluntary; but if they say you forced
yourself on them, how can you prove you didn't? Then there
are women who think they can manipulate powerful men by flirting
with them and they can wind up being assaulted. Such situations
are volatile and unpredictable. Women should be taught to
avoid them since they can pay a high price; and a truly smart
man, even if he didn't care about women or anyone else, would
avoid such situations if only to prevent trouble for himself.
--- Quote ---
> Well, the term "devil" was used not "hermaphrodite" as one
Pres candidate called another in a previous campaign and there
was no hurling of excrement among the spectators(?). You might
know this history better than I somehow came across it.
>
--- End Quote ---
I had to look that comment about hermaphrodite up. When I
heard Trump use the word "devil," it lowered my opinion of him.
It didn't make me look at Hillary as the devil just because he
said so. It made him look worse instead. It leaves me cold
when people try to manipulate me by using emotionally charged
language to vilify others. There have been elections where I
didn't know that much about the candidates and where I voted
against the person who said the worst things about the other.
That was on the theory that they resorted to insults because
they had nothing meaningful to say.
#Post#: 13034--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Gutter
DIR By: paralambano
Date: October 11, 2016, 10:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Kerry -
By my understanding of the alleged mocking by Trump of the
disabled reporter, I don't know that it was intended. By this I
mean that the site
HTML https://www.catholics4trump.com/
HTML https://www.catholics4trump.com/
(about 1/3 of the way down the
page) claims and has "evidence" that Trump's movements in regard
to this person is typical of his gestures in demonstrating a
flustered person disabled or not. If it's true, I do still think
he ought to have been more circumspect or thoughtful in this
instance and not have done it since it does give the appearance
of evil if not so intended.
--- Quote ---
> Woe to the man who has sex with such women since if you don't
give them what they want, they can turn vindictive and claim
almost anything.
--- End Quote ---
And if you don't oblige sexually or romantically, hell might
still hath no fury like . . . . (just sayin' from experience
:) heterosexually since not all persons (females) appear
suitable in the moment). I was trapped I tell you! Trapped I
say! Yikes! I escaped eventually.
para . . . .
#Post#: 13036--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Gutter
DIR By: HOLLAND
Date: October 11, 2016, 6:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
^^^Trump is surely unsavory. After Paul Ryan has now stated
that he is not going to support the Trump campaign but is going
to work to save Republican seats in the House and Senate, Trump
is now railing against what he calls disloyal Republican RINOs.
The Donald is wallowing in the gutter and it's all going to get
very dirty. Third World politics it is. How sad . . .
#Post#: 13037--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Gutter
DIR By: Kerry
Date: October 11, 2016, 11:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: paralambano link ---
>
> Kerry -
>
> By my understanding of the alleged mocking by Trump of the
disabled reporter, I don't know that it was intended. By this I
mean that the site
HTML https://www.catholics4trump.com/
HTML https://www.catholics4trump.com/
(about 1/3 of the way down the
page) claims and has "evidence" that Trump's movements in regard
to this person is typical of his gestures in demonstrating a
flustered person disabled or not. If it's true, I do still think
he ought to have been more circumspect or thoughtful in this
instance and not have done it since it does give the appearance
of evil if not so intended.
--- End Quote ---
The other instances seem to show that, yes. I agree now he
wasn't mocking the disability of the reporter. I agree too
with your point that he should learn to be more circumspect.
--- Quote ---
> And if you don't oblige sexually or romantically, hell might
still hath no fury like . . . . (just sayin' from experience
:) heterosexually since not all persons (females) appear
suitable in the moment). I was trapped I tell you! Trapped I
say! Yikes! I escaped eventually.
--- End Quote ---
Yes, the woman scorned thing. I don't know what to make of the
women who say bad things about Bill Clinton. He must be a poor
judge of character however to have put himself into situations
where they could say these things and be credible.
When it comes to kiss-and-tell books, I always wonder. What
kind of woman would have an affair with a man, supposedly in a
relationship of trust, and then turn on him later by making
embarrassing allegations? Obviously, the type who can be
trusted as long as she is getting what she wants but no more
than that. So why should I trust her honesty? That applies
to men too, men like Dick Morris, who is trying to peddle his
book about the Clintons. What kind of person would blab later
after leading Bill Clinton into confiding in him? And what
kind of person trusts unreliable back stabbers?
--- Quote from: HOLLAND link ---
>
> ^^^Trump is surely unsavory. After Paul Ryan has now stated
that he is not going to support the Trump campaign but is going
to work to save Republican seats in the House and Senate, Trump
is now railing against what he calls disloyal Republican RINOs.
The Donald is wallowing in the gutter and it's all going to get
very dirty. Third World politics it is. How sad . . .
>
--- End Quote ---
Let him rail against the Republicans who voiced their
disapproval. I'd wager they don't care. It may help them come
November. People were getting disgusted with the entire
Republican Party may be more inclined to split their tickets.
#Post#: 13055--------------------------------------------------
Re: In the Gutter
DIR By: Kerry
Date: October 15, 2016, 9:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
How absurd can things become? The Trump campaign now says they
have a witness who says the woman is lying when she said Trump
groped her on an airplane. Their witness? A man who claimed to
act as a pimp procuring young boys for Tory MPs.
From the New York Post
HTML http://nypost.com/2016/10/14/trump-camp-puts-forward-witness-to-refute-sex-assault-claim/:
--- Quote ---
> Donald Trump’s campaign says a British man is countering
claims that the GOP presidential nominee groped a woman on a
cross-country flight more than three decades ago.
>
> The man says he was sitting across from the accuser and
contacted the Trump campaign because he was incensed by her
account — which is at odds with what he witnessed.
>
> “I have only met this accuser once and frankly cannot imagine
why she is seeking to make out that Trump made sexual advances
on her. Not only did he not do so (and I was present at all
times) but it was she that was the one being flirtatious,”
Anthony Gilberthorpe said in a note provided to The Post by the
Trump campaign.
>
> In an exclusive interview arranged by the campaign,
Gilberthorpe said he was on the flight — in either 1980 or 1981—
where Jessica Leeds claimed Trump groped her.
>
> Jessica Leeds arrives at her apartment building, Wednesday,
Oct. 12, 2016, in New York.Photo: AP
> Gilberthorpe, 54, said he was sitting across the first class
aisle from the couple and saw nothing inappropriate. Leeds was
wearing a white pantsuit, he said, while Trump was wearing a
suit and cuff-links, which he gave to his British flight
companion.
>
> Indeed, Gilberthorpe claimed, Leeds was “trying too hard” in
her attempt to win Trump over.
>
> “She wanted to marry him,” Gilberthorpe said of Leeds, who
apparently made the confession when Trump excused himself and
went to the bathroom.
>
> There was no kissing, but the “shrill” Leeds was “very much in
your face” with the real estate developer.
>
> Gilberthorpe made headlines in 2014, when he went public with
a claim that as a 17-year-old he procured boys (some who “could
have been” underage”) for sex parties with high-ranking British
politicians.
>
> ‘If there’s evidence Trump’s done it, sure, hang him from the
post, but I was there, I was in a position to know that what she
said was wrong, wrong, wrong.’
>
> Gilberthorpe has no evidence to back up his claim — just his
self-described excellent memory.
>
> “What she said about Trump is wrong,” he told The Post. “I
mean, no decent human being could sit by and have a woman go on
television and tell the United States of America — accuse an
individual of sexually molesting. It’s wrong for Trump, it’s
wrong for me. But you know something else? It’s wrong for the
American people,” he said.
>
> Leeds alleged this week in interviews with The New York Times
and CNN that Trump groped her, touching her “wherever he could
find a landing spot.”
>
> “The guy in the seat across the aisle could see. And I kept
thinking, maybe the stewardess is going to come and he’ll stop,
but she never came,” Leeds told CNN.
>
> That allegation infuriated Gilberthorpe, a retiree living in
northwest England, who said, “That I sat there — eyes bulging —
and not intervening is nonsense.”
>
> “If there’s evidence Trump’s done it, sure, hang him from the
post, but I was there, I was in a position to know that what she
said was wrong, wrong, wrong,” he said.
>
> He immediately recognized Leeds when he saw video of her in
The Times earlier this week holding up a younger picture of
herself.
>
> “Undoubtedly it was her,” he said. “I have a good photographic
memory. I recognized her.”
>
> He said he contacted the Trump campaign because he didn’t like
that Leeds said that another passenger sat by while she was
molested.
--- End Quote ---
Oh my goodness! If he did procure young boys for Tory MPs is
true, what kind of person does that make him? If it isn't
true, what kind of person is he? This may be worse than
saying it was so long ago, we can't produce any witnesses.
July 13, 2014 -- ibtimes.co.uk
HTML http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/child-abuse-whistleblower-anthony-gilberthorpe-supplied-underage-rent-boys-tory-mps-sex-drugs-1456460:
--- Quote ---
> Senior cabinet ministers in Margaret Thatcher's Conservative
government were supplied with underage boys for sex parties,
ex-Tory activist Anthony Gilberthorpe has claimed.
>
> In an interview with the Sunday Mirror, Gilberthorpe says he
was asked to find underage rent boys for a private sex party at
a hotel.
>
> After 30 years, the 52-year-old has come forward, saying he
was acting on the orders of some of the most powerful and senior
members of Thatcher's government.
>
> Many of the claims centre around conferences at Blackpool and
Brighton in the 1980s, at which boys as young as 15 were given
alcohol and cocaine before having sex with the politicians.
>
> The former Tory activist says he was told to find the
"youngest and prettiest" boys for several cabinet ministers as
the "entertainment".
>
> Those alleged to be present at the parties included Sir Keith
Joseph (Secretary of State for Education and Science), Rhodes
Boyson (Minister of State for Northern Ireland), Dr Alistair
Smith and Michael Havers. All are now deceased.
>
> Gilberthorpe claims that at the 1983 Blackpool conference he
was asked by Dr Alistair Smith, the Tory Party Chairman in
Scotland, to arrange for young rent boys to have sex.
>
> "Dr Smith, who I looked up to at the time and was the most
important Tory in Scotland, told me to go and fetch some
'entertainment', which was code for young boys, and handed me a
handful of bank notes. There was about £120."
>
> He said: "It was a norm and an open secret that these older
members of the Tory party, like Dr Alistair Smith, paid for
young men to join them at sex parties.
>
> "There was a well known and used cruising area close to the
Imperial Hotel, which was a conference hotel."
>
> Gilberthorpe said he witnessed two senior Tories having sex
with the boys. He said: "A couple of other MPs were in the room.
I can clearly remember seeing one politician, who is now a
serving Tory MP, standing there and watching."
>
> Gilberthorpe also claims that two years earlier in 1981 he saw
Sir Michael Havers – then Attorney General – at a swimming pool
party at the Tory conference in Blackpool, where underage boys
were encouraged to perform sex acts on several politicians.
>
> Two inquiries are to be held into alleged child sex abuse
involving MPs as well as other institutions such as the NHS, the
Church and the BBC.
>
> Gilberthorpe has come forward to expose the child abuse
cover-up. "I am prepared to speak to the inquiry. I believe I am
a key witness."
--- End Quote ---
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1