Ivana. Not Ivanka. Trump's wife who he raped. She was up there in years, but the conspiracy nuts are gonna go apeshit with this one. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us...twitter&at_custom1=[post type]&at_campaign=64
Searched on that rape accusation. She disavowed it herself. So are you repeating it because you want it to be true? "“That was all just the lawyers' talk”, she said, after having previously clarified she did not accuse him in “a literal or criminal sense”" Cue some drooling fucktard to accuse me of defending the orange man.
Sure, a rape victim has NEVER retracted an accusation because their rapist was a powerful political, financial or other form of authority figure. Especially not when their kids' future was dependent on said rapist.
Well Jesus fucking Crom, let me Google that for you, princess. And I note you don't press Matt up there for any links supporting the rape accusation. Willing to put your faith in something that services your confirmation bias. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...w-fox-and-friends-time-magazine-a7993041.html https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trumps-wife-ivana-disavows-rape-allegation/story?id=32732204
And nobody has ever made shit up to score points in a divorce proceeding, either. Maybe she did recant for practical purposes. Doesn't seem to be any actual criminal investigation involving evidence, eyewitness accounts or anything other than her recanted statement, so the reasonable conclusion is maybe it happened, maybe it didn't. Reasonable if you don't engage with the world like a trashy gossip magazine.
There's not just one reasonable conclusion here. It's absolutely a reasonable conclusion that Ivana completely made up the rape allegation to squeeze him in a divorce and once she got what she wanted, walked it back. It's absolutely a reasonable conclusion that she was telling the truth with the allegation but walked it back for any number of reasons (the money, belatedly wanting to minimize the harm to their kids, wanting to avoid the glare of publicity, threats of violence, legal action or other things, and so on). It's absolutely a reasonable conclusion that she was telling the truth in her allegation and did a Clintonesque statement in which she does never says "I was lying when I said he raped me." or "he did not rape me." or anything of that sort. [quote\“During a deposition given by me in connection with my matrimonial case, I stated that my husband had raped me,” Ivana Trump said in a statement at the time, as the Daily Beast reported. "[O]n one occasion during 1989, Mr. Trump and I had marital relations in which he behaved very differently toward me than he had during our marriage. As a woman, I felt violated, as the love and tenderness, which he normally exhibited towards me, was absent. I referred to this as a 'rape,' but I do not want my words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense."[/quote] Note: "I referred to this as a 'rape,' but I do not want my words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense." <>"I was not raped." There are, I'm sure, reasonable conclusions beyond these.
That was just a more verbose repackaging of "maybe it happened, maybe it didn't." Any further conclusions will just be expounding on the maybes.
Don't tarnish the name of poor little Donald Trump! He'll rob, financially threaten, financially destroy, harass, molest, assault, intimidate, blackmail, and stoke full-blown murder, but rape?? A man who thinks he's entitled to everything, including women's bodies, going all the way to rape?? No! That's just too far!
"Maybe it happened, maybe it didn't" is different from "It absolutely didn't happen," which is different from "It absolutely happened." IMO, reasonable people can reach any of those conclusions about this.
I think we're all missing the point that two out of three of Donald Trump's wives were supplied by his Soviet handlers.
If you make either assertion alone, yes. But submitting "absolutely no" versus "absolutely yes" with a dash of "possibly something else" in the same statement is effectively no different from reducing it to "maybe/maybe."
Note: "I referred to this as a 'rape,' but I do not want my words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense." <>"I was not raped." .[/quote]sounds like lines of consent were crossed during an otherwise consensual encounter. it's more than a reasonable cause to dissolve the marriage based on the lost trust/sense of safety... but outside of specific facts, it's hard to presume a criminal intent.
The allegation, as I understand it, was that after Trump had undergone a painful scalp surgery, he thought Ivana was mocking him. He allegedly then ripped out a bunch of her hair out and raped her. The next morning he asked "Does that hurt?" https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/20...-women-have-made-against-donald-trump-n665731 If things happened at all like the original allegation, it's pretty easy to presume criminal intent.
She fucked Donald Trump, goddess help her. I'm going to give that poor woman my deepest respects, and may she rest in peace.
His own "you can grab 'em by the pussy" statement should end any discussion about his attitude toward women. Anything else may be amusing and/or titillating, but so what?
one word too many in that headline, although to be fair the best possible outcome is for him to live long enough to be convicted. If we could only be confident he'd even be tried.
It's kinda like OJ Simpson going to prison for robbery (and not nearly long enough) instead of murder. If there was any justice both Simpson and Trump would be rotting in prison already, but if Trump goes to the can for anything we'll have to be satisfied with it.
It's officially considered an accident. But she definitely died from injuries falling down stairs. And someone called it in as a cardiac arrest. A very specific and odd choice considering the situation.
Are you fact checking every allegation made against everyone lately, or just rape allegations against conservative figures who already confessed on tape that their approach to touching womens genitals doesn't involve obtaining their consent first?
Not just a rape apologist, but a partisan rape apologist. I don't seem to remember him defending Joe Biden when Amaris called him a rapist over and over.
