One more time: Considering that there are tens of millions of Trump supporters how is that there is SO MUCH negative stuff about Trump in the news ALL THE TIME, EVERY DAY, EVERY MINUTE? Hey?
Are you taking into account that he was talking about the attitude of groupie type women? Women who invite sexual touching by "stars?" In that context I can't think of him as boasting. About something a groupie invited? How do you boast about that?
There's just something about the tone, the context, that makes it something other than boasting about sexual assault. The term assault doesn't fit it. Tic tacs so he can kiss her? If he said something like "want to bet I can get her in bed this afternoon? or that sort of thing it would fit the accusation better. There isn't enough information there to come to that conclusion.
A Christian couldn't talk like that, and I didn't vote for a Christian in Trump, I voted for his political policies. His mouth can be a problem but until there's some kind of evidence of actual sexual assault it's just words and I object far more to the Leftist witch hunt than I do to his verbal offenses.
WARNING: This is information I've heard from various sources including Laura Ingraham and Infowars. It's not in writing.
The point is that lots of American politicians have had contact with Russia over the last few years or decade and nobody made anything of it. Kerry spent quite a bit of time with Putin and another Russian representative in 2015 with the same objective of easing relations with Russia that Trump has, without anybody objecting. Hillary met with Putin privately and secretly twice as Secty of State. Sessions simply ran into a Russian ambassador at a gathering where he ran into lots of ambassadors from lots of countries, all as part of his senatorial obligations and nothing to do with the Trump campaign.
This is all just part of the Leftist witch hunt, depending on people being ignorant of these things, either ignorant or complicit with the witch hunt.
If the meetings were the reason for the suspicion you might have a point. But they aren't. The fact that both Flynn and Sessions didn't admit to their contacts with the Russians when they should have is more important.
They had no reason to "admit" to contacts that were completely unrelated to the questions asked them, as Sessions clearly explains in his interview with Tucker Carlson. He answered the questions honestly as he understood them. He and Flynn acted in no way differently than other US representatives in frequent contacts with ambassadors from Russia and elsewhere, and none of it ever had anything to do with Trump's campaign. Why would they even THINK of mentioning something so irrelevant? They wouldn't. Only a weasel Leftist would think of it and hang it on them. Flynn was railroaded. Trump should have defended him.
And even that is less important than the evidence of Russian attempts to influence the election and the shift towards a more pro-Russian stance.
What evidence? There isn't any evidence. It's all a figment of the Leftist imagination in the service of the witch hunt.
Here's a recent discussion of this fake news from Frontpage:
Attorney General Jeff Sessions officially recused himself yesterday from the nonsensical, possibly even nonexistent, federal probe into claims of Russian interference in the election — claims that for all we know were invented by President Trump’s enemies in the intelligence community and the Democratic Party.
Despite the oceans of mass media hysteria, there is still no publicly available trustworthy evidence that the Trump campaign somehow colluded with the Russian government last year. Sources in newspaper articles are never identified. There is not a scintilla of proof of improper conduct. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zero. All we have is the alleged say-so of faceless CIA spooks whose motives are questionable, to put it charitably.
...It needs to be said that even the theory that Russian President Vladimir Putin has been trying to undermine the public’s faith in American democracy is suspect. The KGB veteran delights in being seen as a puppet master who throws his weight around in other countries. As a few voices in the wilderness have suggested, if Russia is trying to manipulate the American political process, it is in an attempt to shore up Putin’s position at home. In other words, it is a propaganda campaign aimed at Russians in Russia, and the Left is only too happy to help out in order to hurt Trump.
Where's the evidence?
There are a lot of things suggesting a relationship with the Russians that may have gone beyond what is proper.
Such as? Which fake news invention has most captured your attention about this?
And the cover-up attempts only make it look more plausible
Imaginary cover-up attempts for an imaginary offense.
And even that is less important than the evidence of Russian attempts to influence the election and the shift towards a more pro-Russian stance.
What's "pro-Russian" about wanting to have good relations with Russia, same thing Kerry was seeking in his visit in 2015? Why wasn't that "pro-Russian?"
More evidence of the horrors in Europe for you all to deny
So many good videos on the danger of Islam. Here's another. If you don't want to watch much just two or three or four minutes ought to get it across. / / /
/ / / This one starts out with one minute showing Muslims destroying Christmas trees in shopping areas. / / /
I suppose I'll be amazed again at how nobody here will accept this as evidence, -- just isolated instances involving a few or something like that? even if there are hundreds of such videos about different events -- and attack me as the one at fault, Godzilla excoriating me as if I were the most evil person on earth for showing how dangerous Islam is. Well, I'm no bambi I'm sure, or if I am I'm a bambi with teeth, but Horowitz was so right about how the Left attacks people with scathing hellfire and brimstone denunciations. Not the violent ones, the ones who are trying to expose the violent ones.
Re: More evidence of the horrors in Europe for you all to deny
You didn't see the Muslims climbing up the tree in the second shot? Shouldn't the destruction of two Christmas trees by Muslims tell you something about Muslims wanting to destroy Christmas trees? The pictures are clear, your hopeful counterevidence is just hearsay.
™ Version 4.2