Trump Being Trump

[Kathianne]

There's reasons he loses that one Republican Group:

https://hotair.com/headlines/archive...shes-not-type/

I’ll say it with great respect: No. 1, she’s not my type. No. 2, it never happened. It never happened, OK?”

I’ll say it with great respect: No. 1, she’s not my type. No. 2, it never happened. It never happened, OK?”




So if 'she was' his 'type' he'd have done that?

[Kathianne]

Meanwhile, DeBlasio joins in with 'stupid is as stupid does,' :

https://hotair.com/archives/2019/06/...mplaint-filed/

De Blasio: The NYPD Will Investigate The New Rape Claim Against Trump If A Complaint Is Filed

ALLAHPUNDITPosted at 4:41 pm on June 24, 2019

...

No can do, thanks to a 2003 SCOTUS decision written by Stephen Breyer and joined by liberal stalwarts Ginsburg, Stevens, and Souter (plus Sandra Day O’Connor). A state can’t “revive” prosecution of an alleged crime that’s otherwise been barred by the statute of limitations. To do so violates the Constitution’s Ex Post Facto Clause. In the mid-90s, when Trump supposedly assaulted author E. Jean Carroll, the statute of limitations in New York for first-degree rape was five years. That was changed a decade later when the state legislature abolished the time limit for prosecuting rape cases, notes Mother Jones, but the courts like to maintain the legal fiction that the law as written serves as formal notice to citizens to guide their behavior. (The “fiction” part is that average people have any idea what the law is.) If the law said you won’t be prosecuted after five years on the day you committed a particular crime and you relied on that promise, it’d be unfair to break that promise after the fact. Plus, as SCOTUS noted in its opinion at the time, the statute of limitations represents a legislative judgment about when evidence might be so old as to no longer be fully reliable. How can evidence that would have been unreliable five years after the Trump/Carroll incident be reliable 25 years later?


The dissent, written by Anthony Kennedy and joined by Scalia, Thomas, and Rehnquist, would have allowed for the “revival” of previously time-barred prosecutions. It’s silly, they argued, to believe that criminals rely on the statute of limitations in planning their crimes. If a would-be criminal is given formal notice by the statute books that what he’s about to do is an offense, that’s all the notice he needs to justify a prosecution later. As for the legislature’s initial judgment that evidence in rape cases would be stale and unreliable after five years, so what? Why should that judgment bind the same legislature 10 years later if it changed its mind in the interim? DNA forensics advanced significantly in the years before New York abolished the statute of limitations for rape. (Carroll was asked this morning on CNN if there might be any, ahem, Trump DNA present on the clothes she was wearing that day, which she claims were never laundered afterwards.) If science can “revive” prosecutions of heinous offenses like rape, why the hell should the law stand in its way?


Thanks to O’Connor, the Court’s liberals won that argument. Trump can’t be prosecuted, which I assume means the NYPD can’t lawfully investigate him. How would de Blasio, who’s presently competing for Trump’s job, justify using police resources to investigate a criminal case which can’t be brought to court? It would look transparently like a mayor from one party abusing state assets to harass a political opponent from the other.

...

[jimnyc]

There's reasons he loses that one Republican Group:

https://hotair.com/headlines/archive...shes-not-type/


I’ll say it with great respect: No. 1, she’s not my type. No. 2, it never happened. It never happened, OK?”




So if 'she was' his 'type' he'd have done that?

I think it's a lame way of adding another reason that it never would have happened. Better off leaving it alone than adding fuel to the fire. And your question is the main reason his response is dumb. That, and claiming he never met her when there was already a photo floating around of him and I think Melania with her. I still don't believe her story but I think as usual he does himself no favors here.

[Gunny]

There's reasons he loses that one Republican Group:

https://hotair.com/headlines/archive...shes-not-type/


I’ll say it with great respect: No. 1, she’s not my type. No. 2, it never happened. It never happened, OK?”




So if 'she was' his 'type' he'd have done that?

[STTAB]

There's reasons he loses that one Republican Group:

https://hotair.com/headlines/archive...shes-not-type/


I’ll say it with great respect: No. 1, she’s not my type. No. 2, it never happened. It never happened, OK?”




So if 'she was' his 'type' he'd have done that?

Jesus Christ the man just can't help himself LOL

This is right up there with his comments about how he'd date his daughter if he was single. Obviously we knew what he meant, but God Almighty that sounded bad lol

I'm gad he said it though, it's great to joke about Trump wants to plow his own daughter LOL

[Gunny]

Jesus Christ the man just can't help himself LOL

This is right up there with his comments about how he'd date his daughter if he was single. Obviously we knew what he meant, but God Almighty that sounded bad lol

I'm gad he said it though, it's great to joke about Trump wants to plow his own daughter LOL

I've used that "not my type" line before in defense of against BS accusations. Yeah, it's kind of weak, BUT ... true nonetheless. I consider it a reasonable response. I laughed at Kathianne's response because that's the SAME response I got from the ex over the same initial accusation and response

[STTAB]

I've used that "not my type" line before in defense of against BS accusations. Yeah, it's kind of weak, BUT ... true nonetheless. I consider it a reasonable response. I laughed at Kathianne's response because that's the SAME response I got from the ex over the same initial accusation and response

Trump is a glutton for punishment or something because he constantly gives his opponents new ammunition LOL

[Gunny]

Trump is a glutton for punishment or something because he constantly gives his opponents new ammunition LOL

I have to say I honestly don't get it. The way they have investigated Trump and can't find a damned thing. Not real, anyway. I can't believe he's that clean

If they got back to my high school and pre-marital Marine days I'd be sunk

[STTAB]

I have to say I honestly don't get it. The way they have investigated Trump and can't find a damned thing. Not real, anyway. I can't believe he's that clean

If they got back to my high school and pre-marital Marine days I'd be sunk

That's the point I've tried to make to a few, but it's wasted breath, if the FBI wants to do a deep enough dive over the course of a 3 year long investigation they'l find a crime the fucking Pope committed (okay it would probably be pedo related, and the Pope is a poor example, but you get the point)

And yet even so no real evidence of let alone proof of a crime committed by Trump. "ooooh he got mad and told hi lawyer to fire Mueller, you got him now libs..............."

[Gunny]

That's the point I've tried to make to a few, but it's wasted breath, if the FBI wants to do a deep enough dive over the course of a 3 year long investigation they'l find a crime the fucking Pope committed (okay it would probably be pedo related, and the Pope is a poor example, but you get the point)

And yet even so no real evidence of let alone proof of a crime committed by Trump. "ooooh he got mad and told hi lawyer to fire Mueller, you got him now libs..............."

They've destroyed several Republicans with not much but their usual blowing shit out of proportion. I figured he was done.

[STTAB]

They've destroyed several Republicans with not much but their usual blowing shit out of proportion. I figured he was done.

And that my friend is why they truly hate Trump. They prefer Republicans who fold under accusations of misogyny and racism and Islamophobia and homophobia even when those charges aren't true. Trump turns the tables and fights back using THEIR tactics only harder and that just pisses them off. "Why didn't he just go away when we falsely accused him of________"