Writer claims Trump raped her

[SkepticThinker]

But are they honest, given the hatred among the left for DJT, I would need to see a thorough investigation first.

In the mean time, it seems she has a fixation about sex in Bergdorf's store.

In Carroll’s 1996 book A Dog in Heat is a Hot Dog and Other Rules to Live By, which is a collection of her columns from 1993 to 1995. she jokes about having sex at the Bergdorf store.

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=zWAuVOJV2ZgC&pg=PA118&lpg=PA118&dq=e.+jean+carroll+Indeed+this+locations+works+better+for+woman+than+the+second+floor+of+Bergdorf's&source=bl&ots=vJGySQcurI&sig=ACfU3U0TKv7TpBh7YhwQlolLxkmiioUCXg&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=e. jean carroll Indeed this locations works better for woman than the second floor of Bergdorf's&f=false

Yeah so? Guess what? I enjoy shopping at Bloomingdale's. That doesn't mean I'd like to be raped there.

I'm so sick of this nonsense.

20+ Women have accused Trump of some type of sexual harassment or another. I mean, at what point do we start believing them when they all say the same thing that Trump himself previously said he does, on tape? But nope, we're still all just sitting here beating up on the person who says she was raped. Some things never change I guess. How revolting.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Would you subject yourself to what you saw as a witch hunt with no basis?

I would want to clear my name and prove that I didn't do anything wrong. The way to do that is to answer questions and be open and transparent and direct about it.

The way not to do it, is to be evasive, whine and cry foul every day, refuse to go in for questioning, and to say stuff like "she's not my type" when someone claims that you've raped them. That's not what innocent people do or say.

 

[SkepticThinker]

He is many things, but I don't think he is a rapist and physical abuser, none of his actual beyond dispute female relationships, such as his wife and ex-wives, etc., have ever said a bad word about him in this regard so far as I know, nor have there been anyone in family circles come out as a witness in this regard. Most abuse of women generally occurs in a family environment sfaik, and offenders are generally serial in this regard.

His ex-wives have plenty bad to say about him. Ivana has claimed that he has been violent at times during their marriage.

And you think all of this in spite of the fact that he stated on tape that he is an abuser, and despite the fact that more than 15 other women have claimed that he has assaulted them in some way as well?

I can only imagine the kind of mental gymnastics you have to engage in, to make that work in your mind.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I'm not using her mental state against her, I suspect though her apparent weird behavior is due to the fact that she is being sometimes ambiguous so as to mitigate any legal repercussions if her allegations are shown in time to be false,

Yes you are. Don't kid yourself.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It is not only women who claim false things about DJT, look at the FBI, CIA, DOJ, SD, DNI, and the MSM media, they all were involved with the idea he colluded with Russia, he has not brought them to justice either....yet. But the wheels are turning, albeit slowly, and before long those responsible will wish they had not lied about him.
Lefty Wapo hates DJT and is a part of the swamp that DJT is draining, so it follows they publish a lot of fake news about him, it is not a credible source in this regard.

Ah I get it now. You live in an alternate reality of your own choosing.

 

[SkepticThinker]

That is yet to be seen, stay tuned...

William Barr couldn't even cite any evidence back when Congress asked him for anything that would back up his claim of "spying." Turns out, he had no evidence to offer, and had to say as much. Turns out, it's just his personal belief.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I think you may have a problem, you are not making sense to me...who are the others that I lied to? And don't give me that "I offered to go over the evidence with you" B/S, no hard feelings but you have no idea, you really are out of your depth.

That is a symptom of cognitive dissonance. You used sites that you did not understand since they refuted your claims. Your last source means there may be an increase in the future due to Trump, but we were not discussing that.

By not being willing to discuss your blatant errors you are running away. Even if you try to change the topic of natter on about something else that is still running away.

 

[SkepticThinker]

The US is now the biggest oil gas producer in the world, this would and could not happen without deregulation of EPA environmental and climate change rules established by Obama. The Steel industry has grown tremendously for the same reason, steel companies have been reopening old plants and building new modern ones. New car plants are being built and car manufacturers are returning to the US from Mexico due to renegotiating the old NAFTA trade agreements and using tariffs as appropriate. And so it goes, give credit where credit is due, no IPCC Paris COP is going to stop the Trump MAGA train.

Btw, I was only joking about going off topic...this is already off topic.

Is that supposed to be something to be proud of?

Boy oh boy, it sounds like you just take in whatever Trump feeds you as the Gospel truth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What are you talking about, your interest is obviously not climate science, the agw alarmists call her a denier, get with agw alarmism 101. Deal, I will stop using "alarmist" when you stop using "denier", that's how serious discussions should precede, name callers are not interested in hearing what the other side is saying,

Now , now, you objected to be told that you are lying and then you go ahead and use a term that you were corrected on. That is lying.

Since you are using terms incorrectly your only hope is to show that you are not doing so

First, how is any scientist being an "alarmist"? I will grant that there are those that do not understand the sciences that will make errors when it comes to AGW, but nonscientists get science wrong an amazing amount of the time. Second what sources called your one poor example a denier?

Your claims, you need to be ready to support them.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Is that supposed to be something to be proud of?

Boy oh boy, it sounds like you just take in whatever Trump feeds you as the Gospel truth.

That was one of his claims shown not to be true. The growth in oil production occurred as a result of new technology developed and implemented during the Obama administration. That and oil prices drove production up.

But you are correct. He does appear to take in anything supporting the man, no matter how poorly supported, and reject any claims against regardless of the evidence.

 

[Revoltingest]

20+ Women have accused Trump of some type of sexual harassment or another. I mean, at what point do we start believing them when they all say the same thing that Trump himself previously said he does, on tape? But nope, we're still all just sitting here beating up on the person who says she was raped. Some things never change I guess. How revolting.

You gotta stop using that word that way.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You gotta stop using that word that way.

Is "How Revoltingest!". any better?

 

[SkepticThinker]

You gotta stop using that word that way.

Oopsie. So sorry.

 

[Revoltingest]

Is "How Revoltingest!". any better?

Grrrrrrrr!

 

[Ben Dhyan]

My emphases in quoted comments.
The article in your link was authored by Alex Epstein.

Alex Epstein (American writer) - Wikipedia
Alexander Joseph Epstein (/ˈɛpstaɪn/) is an American author, energy theorist, and industrial policy pundit.[1] He is the founder and president of the Center for Industrial Progress, a for-profit think tank located in San Diego, California. Epstein is an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute and a former fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute.[6][7]

​

What are his qualifications in the field?

From 1998 to 2002, Epstein earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in philosophy from Duke University...​

No qualifications for judging climate science.
No qualifications for judging scientific papers.

Believing his comments on AGW is no different than believing the comments regarding evolution found on sites like Answers in Genesis.

So what, Al Gore is no climate scientist either...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Ah, Dr. Judith Curry. The darling of the AGW deniers. She is like the "scientists" tobacco companies dragged out to explain that nicotine was not addictive.

So, you have not shown that she is not an excellent climate scientist..

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Those are opinion pieces, not scientific sources. With opinion pieces, one can "find out" that the Earth is flat and that Elvis is walking hand-in-hand with Hitler.

Maybe actually try using scientific sources next time, such as "Scientific American", "National Geographic", NOAA, NASA, the NAS, and even our own DoD, etc. Each of them, if you spend time to google them, say that climate change is real and that human endeavors are mostly to blame.

Metis, we have been through this before, you know my opinion of National Geographic, it is a disreputable left wing rag when it comes to science, sadly it was not always so, I used to subscribe to it once.

We have also been over the 97% claim, bogus then and bogus now, no one believe it except the agw true believers.

Btw Metis, I notice that these days you are calling yourself...Catholic-- liberal & ecumenical, di you convert from Judaism?

 

[Subduction Zone]

So what, Al Gore is no climate scientist either...

Correct. And guess what? Al Gore got some of his facts wrong. No one has made the error of appealing to Al Gore.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I went to your linked site. Most of the articles are by Curry. Here are excerpts from one by Garth Paltridge

There is still a distinct possibility that much of the observed rise in global temperature may be the result of natural (and maybe random) variability of the system.

For what it is worth, one possible theory is that mankind (or at least that fraction of it that has become both over-educated and more delicate as a result of a massive increase of its wealth in recent times) has managed to remove the beliefs of existing religions from its consideration—and now it misses them. As a replacement, it has manufactured a set of beliefs about climate change that can be used to guide and ultimately to control human behaviour.
​

Ah, yes. We replaced the religion of GOD with the religion of AGW. Creationists believe that anyone who accepts Evolution is an atheist. Apparently, we should now believe that anyone who accepts AGW must also be an atheist.


That leads me to wonder if anyone has done a study to determine how many Evolution deniers are also AGW deniers. I'm guessing that there would be a significant correlation.

Yes, it has long been suggested by some observers that the agw belief system is akin to a cult, who is to say?

 

[Subduction Zone]

So, you have not shown that she is not an excellent climate scientist..

Remember how you failed when you claimed that AGW had stopped? That was refuted at least nine years ago, and Dr. Judith Curry was one of those that made that false statement. You can read more here:

https://skepticalscience.com/global-cooling-january-2007-to-january-2008.htm

Worse yet is of course that global warming has continued since then with the five hottest years on record being the last five years.