The Media Uses A Strategy Of Reporting On False Rape Accusations To Destroy Men

When a politician isn’t behaving or going along with the elites’ master plan, a coordinated and underhanded rape attack is the first line of offense. The Marxist media, being prostitutes of the elite power structure, specialize in this type of character assassination. Posing as the Fourth Estate while really acting as “for hire” attack dogs is how they make their livings and curry favor with those in the corporate-government complex. When called upon, they collectively aim at a target and commence with “drive by” attacks in 90 second news stories.

It’s really quite easy to perform a character assassination on someone in a sexually repressed culture. Pick an emotional issue, like women being sexually assaulted in a culture that pedestalizes them, and then commence with endless attacks while ignoring Hillary’s endless scandals. That’s exactly what has happened with baseless accusations of sexual misconduct by Donald Trump, repeated and replayed ad nauseum in a last ditch effort to neutralize the threat to globalism posed by his candidacy.

The “Victims”

Who will win the biggest victim prize? Jessica Leeds is in the lead

Who will win the biggest victim prize? Jessica Leeds is in the lead

Suddenly, a senior citizen named Jessica Leeds, a former stewardess, pops up out of nowhere and is emotionally distraught by a groping that supposedly happened 37 years ago. Except her claim is baseless. She claims Trump “raised an armrest” on a flight she worked then proceeded to grab her, but the first class seats on that flight did not have adjustable armrests.

Not only that, an eyewitness said Leeds was throwing herself at Trump, as women tend to do around rich men but that she got rejected. The press would hear none of that because it would deflate both their agenda and ratings, and it would cast holier than thou females in an unholy light. Eyewitness Anthony Gilberthorpe told the press:

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.

It seems the pain of that rejection led her to make up a false story.

Why do the marionettes in the media dig up these old hags and baseless sexual harassment claims? Because it works in a culture in which women can do no wrong. The media even pulled a sexual harassment character assassination attempt back in 2008 with the old battle horse John McCain.

Here’s how they did it. The New York Times did a hit piece featuring Vicki Iseman accusing John McCain of sexual conduct. Here’s the kicker: The New York Times later settled a libel suit brought on by Iseman after the campaign had ended. This is how big media and big politics operate.

The veracity of the claims matter little to a gaggle of “journalists” who would slit someone’s throat for a scoop. Similar to the documented practice of some fireman to set fires to keep their jobs, the media create scandals to gin up ratings and dehumanize those not going by the New World Order playbook.

Predictably, once one woman gets the ball rolling, a dogpile of victims ensues in a culture that lionizes victims instead of winners.

The victim parade continues with Mindy McGillivray

The victim parade continues with Mindy McGillivray

Mindy McGilliavray came out and told the press Trump “nudged” her. She told the fellow travelers in the media:

All of a sudden I felt a grab, a little nudge. I think it’s Ken’s camera bag, that was my first instinct. I turn around and there’s Donald. He sort of looked away quickly. I quickly turned back, facing Ray Charles, and I’m stunned. This was a pretty good nudge. More of a grab. It was pretty close to the center of my butt. I was startled. I jumped.

Hey, kino works that way, especially for billionaires. That’s assuming it’s true. It’s funny that instead of confronting The Donald immediately she waited 13 years to bring it up.

Kristen Anderson claimed Trump grabbed her vagina.

Apprentice contestant Summer Zervos claims Trump harassed her, even though she kept in contact with him and even sought out Donald’s help with her business. If she was emotionally scarred by Trump, why would she continue to associate herself with him?

A race is on to see who can turn being the worst “victim” into being the biggest winner of notoriety and 15 minutes of fame.

The Birth of Pravda

Obama proposed the return of Pravda last week

Obama proposed the return of Pravda last week

An old saying, common amongst jaded idealists when I worked in this soulless industry known as mass media was never let the facts get in the way of a good story. Believe it. That’s how the industry operates. No scandals, no ratings, no job. Bias is also clearly an issue since 96% of campaign donations from journalists have gone to the Hillary campaign, as reported by NewsBusters.

The Gateway Pundit knows their conniving modis operandi well.

The media clearly did not fact check these stories. They ran the stories no matter how farfetched they were. It is clear from the number of stories dropped in the last week that this was a coordinated effort, probably from inside the Hillary Clinton campaign. The goal was not to present facts to the public. Their goal was to destroy Donald Trump.

These pseudo scandals could have raged on unendingly in the past, except the Internet is now exposing most journalists as the frauds they are. But don’t think the elite are content to let us talk amongst ourselves and figure out the ruse. Just last week President Obama foreshadowed the coming censorship that’s sure to be implemented once The Bitch begins her reign of terror.

We are going to have to rebuild within this wild-wild-west-of-information flow some sort of curating function that people agree to. There has to be, I think, some sort of way in which we can sort through information that passes some basic truthiness tests and those that we have to discard, because they just don’t have any basis in anything that’s actually happening in the world.

Translation: Anything written that’s not approved of by the elite is not the “truth” according to Obama.

The Democrat Socialists now want government imposed “truth tests” will tell us what to believe and what not to believe on the Internet, and later to vet what gets published and what doesn’t in a supposedly free society. We are fucked as a society if the sheeple let this happen.

It’s only because of the Internet the truth is now known about this thinly veiled attempt to destroy Donald Trump’s chances of winning the election. If we lose the Internet, we lose free speech. Moreover, any man accused of “rape” by Big Media is almost certainly a person the power structure wants to silence for political reasons and to maintain the power structure’s lock grip on the national narrative. Trump is only their latest target, but he certainly won’t be the last.

Read More: Why The Media Disinformation Campaign Against Donald Trump Will Fail

327 thoughts on “The Media Uses A Strategy Of Reporting On False Rape Accusations To Destroy Men”

  1. I can’t fathom how anyone could see these accusations for anything other than a pitched, desperate attempt to slander the man. It’s transparent beyond belief.
    I’m actually rather dissapointed at the quality of propaganda our government and media put out. Billions of dollars directed, and stuff like this is the best you can throw?
    “The Russians are coming, the Russians are coming!”

    1. If anything this election has shown me just how many emotionally cuckolded “men” there are out there. In spite of our growing numbers, it is still sad to see how so many “men,” even ones who had admitted to being burned by such fake accusations in the past, automatically buy into conveniently timed but evidence-lacking accusations.

      1. I am emotionally damaged and I notice how these things create a pull on me. I hate it. It’s not even like I really believe it. It’s more like I feel an obligation to believe it. I think it’s like that for many. It’s not that they really think it’s true. They rather believe that it is unacceptable and unthinkable that it could be untrue, hence it HAS TO be true. Even if a big part of them protests. They may imagine, in their heads, how they scrutinize those things in front of others, and see it play out: How people laugh at them, how they are ridiculed, not taken seriously, shamed, guilt-tripped. The idea is too terrible to accept.
        A perfect example is the holocaust thing. They say: You can’t question a thing like that.
        Think about it … it is such a terrible event that questioning it is unacceptable. Except – if it isn’t real, it isn’t terrible, hence you should question it. So you are left with almost a kind of double bind: If it is real, we are not allowed to question it. If it is unreal, we have to question it. So in order to determine whether we are allowed to question it, we have to first determine whether it is real – which goes against us not being allowed to question it IF it is real.
        Mindfuck.

        1. I would be more willing to accept claims of sexual impropriety if there was objective evidence provided, or if it was rape or sexual assault, a police report that at least says that the accuser felt that such an incident was bad enough to have reported it, even if an investigation went nowhere.
          But as we’ve seen with the Duke Lacrosse case, the UVA rape hoax, Mattress Girl, etc., women do lie about this, a lot. And like you, I used to buy into these accusations, but with so much lying going on, I won’t buy into it without evidence.

        2. It’s a revamped version of The Boy Who Cried Wolf, except now it’s The Feminist Who Cried Rape.
          They’ve cried rape so many times, only for it to be proven false, that people are now not buying it. Now, when they REALLY need their rape card to work, it isn’t getting as much traction.

        3. The other possibility we are forgetting is that back then, the women may actually have enjoyed it. Liked it. Found it funny. But later they heard ‘OMG, that was assault!’ and they were suddenly like ‘OMG I have been hurt and abused’.

        4. The other possibility we are forgetting is that back then, the women may actually have enjoyed it.

          Even that could prove that there was at least sexual contact, but in all of these stories, there simply was no way for Trump to have been able to do these things, as many times his only contact with any of these women would have been in public places.

        5. I don’t see how Trump couldn’t pinch some girl in her ass during some gala full of snobbish elites who live the decadent life. Seems like an almost straight-forward normal thing to do.

        6. The only difference is that in The Boy Who Cried Wolf the wolf, eventually, actually shows up. This is the Feminist who Lied Rape

        7. I do it frequently. I travel in pretty well shoed circles. It is all propriety for an hour or so but those parties get pretty frisky.

        8. There is a bar that I frequent called Bemelman’s at the Hotel Carlyle. This is the snootiest of the snooty. Been around for 100 or so years. Waiters and bartenders in red tux jackets and bow ties. Piano player. Very well dressed clients….you would be very out of place without a jacket and tie and the women are all competing for who is dressed the best. Kind of joint where drinks are 30 bucks and no one seems to care. Always a few pros in the corner. But come 1030 or 11 it turns into the well heeled folks sipping cocktails and chatting to pretty much as dirty as any night club only with more expensive shoes. It is really a fantastic place.

        9. I know a couple of those too. It’s like music. I get into different moods and like the options. But really, the vast majority of my time is spent in a tie listening to someone play jazz on a piano somewhere while I drink good scotch. Otherwise I usually just stay home and shake my fist at God.

        10. That’s because you care too much about women who could care less if you lived or died. That’s why I’m voting for Trump irregardless if these claims are true or false. I don’t care.

        11. That’s more common than you think. I’ve heard women say that they didn’t know that they were in an abusive relationship. Even after their bad boy lover tossed them into oncoming traffic. Someone sometime later had to tell them after the fact.

        12. I mean it’s all cool. We sometimes harm ourselves or let ourselves be harmed without knowing what we’re doing. Then we become angry, at ourselves and those who hurt us. Eventually, at some point, we take responsibility and realize that we indeed did allow it to happen and even invited it.
          Also, when we are fucked up, we can hurt ourselves by doing stuff that a normal person would find enjoyable. Take emotional/sexual trauma. If you have those and engage in sex, it may hurt you and it may be partly against your will. But that doesn’t always mean the other person really did something evil. It’s just that we were too fucked up to realize what’s good and bad for us.

        13. Well shoed circles”.
          ….
          Do you ever wonder what the cobblers are doing, when you are at a party like that?

        14. He can use it if he wants to; regardless if irregardless is a word or not, common usage trumps all (see what I did there?).

        15. I am emotionally damaged and I notice how these things create a pull on me. I hate it. It’s not even like I really believe it. It’s more like I feel an obligation to believe it. I think it’s like that for many.

          Funny, I never feel obligated to believe this horseshit. Anytime I hear of an accusation by a woman I think, “Ok why is this bitch lying?” And I hold to that unless hardcore evidence pops up to prove it. I feel no inclination at all to believe this shit. I’ve seen it too much by now.

    2. When your audience is BLM, uneducated immigrants, and their ivory tower white sympathizers with more degrees than common sense, how hard do you have to try, really.

  2. I Was Sexually Assaulted By Hillary Clinton
    Let me take you back to the summer of 2000. It was a simpler time. Before 9/11. Before terrorism cast its long shadow across America. We downloaded music for free from Napster instead of paying iTunes 99 cents per song like we do today. We listened to our favorite songs on burned CD-Rs not on iPods. There was no social media. No Facebook. No Twitter. Cell phones were rare and used solely for making calls. What should have been an idyllic summer between middle school and high school spent listening to nu metal and playing Age of Empires instead marked the loss of my innocence at the hands of the predatory and lecherous First Lady of the United States, Hillary Rodham Clinton.
    My father had to attend a week-long conference in Washington D.C. for work. Being on summer vacation, I got to tag along with him. On the last day of my visit to the nation’s capital, I went on one of those tours of the White House that are offered to the public.
    Halfway through the tour, I started to realize downing three cans of Surge soda beforehand probably wasn’t such a good idea. In search of relief, I wandered off from the tour group to find a restroom.
    I meandered down long hallways and dark corridors. At last, I found a bathroom. Unzipping my cargo shorts, I began to relieve myself.
    “Ah, sweet relief,” I murmured to myself as a robust stream roared forth. Midway through my voiding, I heard the restroom door creak open. I’ve always been bladder shy, particularly when I was younger, and the sound caused me to pause. I stood there at the urinal, my back to the door, silently hoping the interloper would leave and I could resume voiding my bladder.
    “Don’t stop the music on my account,” I heard a mocking female voice intone.
    Startled, I turned my head fractionally around only to see the First Lady of the United States, Hillary Rodham Clinton, standing just a few steps behind me with a bemused look on her face.
    “Mrs. Clinton — I mean — Mrs. First Lady!” I stammered.
    “And where are you visiting from?” she asked with a smirk.
    “Wis- Wisconsin,” I replied nervously.
    “Cow country, huh? Do they grow all the boys there so big and strapping?” she smirked.
    I blushed. I was tall and gangly. Puberty had caused me to grow like a weed and I hadn’t yet filled out my gawky frame.
    “And just how old are you, country boy?” she asked.
    “13 ma’am,” I answered hesitantly.
    “Well, underneath the chuppah, that makes you a man,” she said with a leer so obscene it could only have been alcohol-induced.
    At the time, I didn’t possess the voluminous knowledge on all things Judaic that I now do. I did not know that males in the Jewish faith were considered men at 13 and I certainly didn’t know what a chuppah was. But I nodded dumbly.
    “I’m sure you must have heard all about my unfaithful husband and that no-good intern Monica having oral sex in the Oval Office. Can you imagine that? It’s deplorable.”
    “Did he run up the phone bill?” I asked innocently. Yes, I really was that naive at 13. I really did think oral sex was the same thing as phone sex. That innocent comment made the First Lady grin even wider. Her grin became grotesque, like that of the Cheshire Cat in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.
    “Well aren’t you well-versed in the ways of the world,” she said ironically with a twinkle in her eye. “Bill’s not the only one who can rob the cradle…” And with that, she darted forth, quickly
    closing the small distance between us, and smoothly, almost expertly, reached around to the front of my cargo shorts and seized my exposed member with one of her icy hands.
    “I have arthritis and I need to grab a handful of that dick,” she stated matter-of-factly.
    Never mind that this is a line from the 2012 comedy 21 Jump Street. Never mind that 21 Jump Street is one of my all-time favorite movies. That’s what she said.
    I was frozen. Petrified. I didn’t know what to do.
    “Mrs. First Lady …what are you doing?!” I shrieked.
    “Shhh,” she hissed, starting to stroke my member.
    “Mrs. Clinton, please stop!” I begged, tears beginning to well up in my eyes.
    She moved her hand faster and faster, like the piston of a runaway steam locomotive.
    “Come on. Do it for queen and country,” she encouraged, stroking my member faster.
    I don’t know what hurt more: the iron grip with which she held my member or the casual manner in which she disregarded our country’s democratic foundation by assuming a mantle
    of royalty for herself.
    “I’m with her. I’m with her. Say it,” she hissed, her hot breath on the nape of my neck. It was like an incantation for her. Like the phrase possessed magical power. Her eyes were maniacally wide. “I’m with her. Say it. Say it.”
    Meekly, I complied. “I’m- I’m with her,” I stammered clumsily.
    “Louder!” she barked.
    “I’m with her!” I yelled out, tears running down my cheeks. I was at this point sobbing uncontrollably.
    “Good boy,” she purred.
    It soon became too much for me and I could no longer hold back no matter how much I tried, no matter how ashamed I felt. The First Lady got what she had come for. Sky rockets in flight. A bit of afternoon delight in the restroom in the West Wing of the White House.
    And with that, my member was released from her talons. I hurriedly zipped up my cargo shorts and ran for the bathroom door.
    “As my in-laws say when we visit them in Arkansas, ‘Y’all come back now, y’hear?’” she mockingly called out after me as I fled. The cackle that followed still haunts me to this day. It echoed and resounded off the corridor walls as I ran. It is tattooed on my mind.
    And that is how at the tender young age of 13, I was robbed of my innocence by the First Lady of the United States, Hillary Clinton. I never told anyone what happened until now.
    While I’ve tried to move on and put that dark day behind me, I still suffer consequences from that bathroom encounter back in the year 2000. I have my good days and my bad. I never know what will trigger a flashback. Sometimes it’s the creak of a door or the whiff of cheap Lancome perfume. All I know is that Hillary Clinton took something from me that I can never recover: my innocence.

    1. Facts. We need to get you on CNN, asap. Unfortunately, you’ll be killed shortly after, and your clip will never air, but rest assured, you will most certainly have died for nothing.

      1. Maybe, maybe not. There is a man telling his story of being Bill Clinton’s son. Not dead yet, but not acknowledged or given a paternity test either.

    2. One hole in the story is when you heard a “female voice.” So who was Hillary with that was female?
      Other than that I believe this all the way and props to the surge detail.

        1. Have you ever been at a male organised party in which a strobe light is placed in the toilet? The physics of droplet formation in a buzzed state is amusing.

    3. Could have sworn the same thing happened to someone else and the manosphere jumped on that man’s guilt.
      EDIT: Original comment was altered due to the change from ellipsis to full on novella. A Hillary Groping Tale?! This is worse than when Grandma Maple told me how sour apples were made. On the plus, I know the ingredients are all organic.

    4. Amusing, but I call bullshit. If you were a woman, it would be more believable since Clinton is a dyke.

        1. napster ftw
          I would set my download queue before I went to bed then wake up go to work and get home around 7 pm and boom….like almost 50 songs.

        2. Jolt? No way man…well, at least not once Stacker 2 came out….the good one loaded with Synephrine. Christ on a cracker that stuff was fantastic.

        3. Do you also remember audiogalaxy ? was so cool because you could queue downloads without being at your machine.

        4. Stacker 2…wasn’t that banned because some kid in the Midwest drank a whole case and metamorphosised into a human sized insect?

        5. hahaha, it was pills so no drinking. I think your guess is close. I am pretty sure that some fucking moron thought that a single dose makes a great prework out so a quadruple dose will probably be even better and his heart exploded. I stockpiled that shit when it was announced that a ban was going to come it. Compared to the stacker 2 original jacked with DMAA was like a cup of tea.

        6. there is no “did” with kratom. Kratom bends the space time continuum over and deep dicks it until it crumbles. Kratom is always present tense

      1. This widely know truth will never be admitted by the MSM until after her second inaugrial (if she lives more than the next 6 months).

        1. I don’t know. I could see them immediately rushing to claim not only “1st Wymynzzz!!!” but “1st Faggzzz!!” too. It might be part of her inaugural address.

    5. Hey WP…..if you recall some time ago on ROK there was a very excellent article called Anatomy of a Troll Job. It was, truly, one of the most interesting articles I have ever read on this site and that says a lot.

      Anatomy Of A Troll Job: The xoBang Gang And The Business Of Rage


      At any rate, I wonder….with a fake gmail, twitter and wordpress account you could publish this account on the word press and use the twitter to link it or post it (I don’t know twitter lingo) to 50 of the most vocal and obnoxious feminist critics and see if they pass it around the femicunt community and watch your analytics shoot through the roof. Screen shot all along the way. The articles main message, that the greatest source of kinetic energy is online feminist rage, is one that I honestly believe is true and is super ripe to be grabbed by the pussy

      1. It would be pretty amazing to spread this stuff as if it were real. Really. Just put it out there and see what people make of it. Maybe create a false identity. Find some random picture of some guy on the internet and pin it to it (or use Photoshop to combine some faces). Say it’s from this real guy. See who really backchecks it. I read about one confirmed case where a totally bogus April fools article made it around the world.

        1. Don’t even need a picture. Just claim you want to remain anonymous because of Hillary’s reputation of making people disappear but felt a moral obligation to get this out there.

        2. I really bet that it would go viral….not from Trump supporters but from feminists who share it with utter outrage

        3. I would really like to do it, but that brings up the more practical questions: Where to post it? And how to get the ball rolling? Obviously, most of those who spread it must believe it is real.
          And the people who spread it need to feel like they discovered it on their own and not like it was spoon-fed to them. For this, it would help to have some kind of list of journalists to whom we can send this anonymously. I don’t have such a list.
          Sending it to them is one possibility. We could either publish it on a quick-dirty wordpress blog and send the link or send the original story.
          Or we could try to get a major right-wing site to play along. For instance, it would be cool if Breitbart published this. But then the question is: How many feminist nuts would believe it from that source … and do we need them to? … questions over questions.
          Whatcha think? How would you go about it?

    6. I’m just glad to hear she didn’t lather you up with her hot sauce, she always keeps in her bag. “Is it workin?”

    7. Are you sure she wasn’t just trying to steady herself, reached out for something solid and the Parkinsons did the rest?

    8. I’m reading this in Wal Mart and I couldn’t help myself but to laugh out loud.
      This is comedy gold.
      “It wasn’t sexual assault if you came”-
      Hillary Clinton

  3. This side of the Atlantic (Brit here) it all looks ridiculously shoddy… actually on both sides.
    The one thing I’m holding on to is that by this point in the ‘Brexit’ campaign our equally hideously biased media had also persuaded everyone (me included) that a Brexit vote was a wasted vote…
    I thought Fuck It(™) and voted Brexit anyway…
    Remember they *don’t* control everything… they simply work hard to give the impression they do and thereby to steer all of us through the door they want us to go.
    Don’t give up, don’t buy it, it’s not over until it is.
    Yes, they are fighting dirty but they did with Brexit and we still told the fuckers to shove it….
    Looking forward to President Trump!

      1. Yes, and the ‘whatever-passes-for-illuminati-in-today’s-conspiracy-theory(™)’ most powerful weapon. The illusion of control near-as-dammit *is* control….

  4. Anyone else seeing a Bill Cosby pattern here? It’s almost like they beta-tested this version of gang stalking before rolling out version 2.0

  5. The (((media))) sends their lackeys to destroy the lives of successful men with game! Everything involving a woman is “rape”!

  6. This stuff points to one of the reasons that the media attack Trump so virulently. Trump often gets accused of being anti-first amendment because he has advocated doing away with the intentional malice standard in defamation suits. For those unfamiliar, in normal defamation cases, the plaintiff usually only has to prove that the statement was false and that it damaged him. But long ago, courts allowed the NYT to establish a higher standard for “public figures.” If you’re a “public figure,” you not only have to prove the statement was false and that you were damaged, but also that the press acted with actual malice – in other words, you have to show that they actually intended to harm you with the falsehood, and the fact that it was false, even if conclusively shown, is not enough for you to win.
    There is almost no way to meet this standard unless you have an email that says “let’s run a false story to hurt Donald Trump.” And the definition of “public figure” is so broad that it is basically anyone that the press writes a story about – by making you a subject of public interest, they are then free to defame you however they see fit. So this standard gives the press a free license to publish whatever bullshit they want about anyone with virtually no chance of repercussions ever.
    Trump has said he thinks this standard ought to be done away with. I agree with him. People call this anti-free speech, but you have no right to lie about someone and try to ruin them, especially when you enjoy a pulpit like some of these media organizations. Luckily, a guy like Trump has the resources to fight. By contrast, a guy like Roosh can be completely fucked by these people and there is almost nothing he can do.
    Now compare Clinton – she wants to repeal Citizens United. That was a case about a group of people who made a video critical of Hillary Clinton during the run up to the 2008 election – in other words, the very bedrock political speech that the first amendment is intended to protect. Clinton sued, not on grounds that it was defamatory, (in other words, not that it was false) but that it violated campaign finance laws. Citizens United argued that this infringed on their first amendment right to speech. The Supreme Court correctly held that you don’t lose your speech rights just because you join others in a corporation or other legal entity and pool your resources to facilitate speech.
    At her rallies Clinton pledges to use overruling this case as a litmus test for judges, to the cheers of drooling idiots in her audience. But think about it for a minute – name one press organization that is not organized as some form of corporate entity. You probably can’t. Clinton says corporations should not have free speech rights, but how is that supposed to square with the freedom of the press, when the press is made almost entirely of corporations? So realize that Clinton is hostile to both the freedom of speech and press.
    Don’t worry though, under a Clinton regime, the NTY, WP, HuffPo, etc…will continue to be allowed to speak, and lie with impunity, so long as they are friendly to Clinton. It is the dissenters that will be targets.

    1. We did see some hope with the Gawker case. As for “intentional malice,” that can definitely be proven on the part of the New York Times.

      1. Gawker was different – it was an invasion of privacy case. It was not about defamation. Hogan did not have to prove the tape was false.
        I should also clarify – the terms of art is “actual malice” not intentional (though in practice they are very similar (post edited to correct).
        Defamation is already one of the hardest types of cases to win. Actual malice makes it much harder.

    2. I don’t know. This is going a step back in freedom of speech.
      Frankly, I think we may be approaching the whole thing wrong.
      Here’s a little provocative idea.
      Why do people blindly believe lies in the media? Because they think that the media is obligated to tell the truth and thus they are protected from lies.
      Why do people not do their own research? Because they trust the media. Why do they trust the media? Because they’ve been told the media is supposed to be objective and unbiased.
      So here’s a proposition: Let’s altogether abandon all moral constraints and laws that in any thinkable way obligate publishers to tell truth or objective facts. Let’s make it 100% legal and acceptable to spread lies.
      What’s the effect?
      People will protest. They will say ‘I have a right to hear truth’. But the law gets passed and then they realize: Well, fuck. Now I can no longer trust the press. Figure I must now do my own research.
      The press can no longer sit in their ivory towers with their monopoly on ‘truth’ and if they advertise ‘we tell truth’, no ass will believe them, because they know they are allowed to lie.
      And suddenly, people start to take responsibility for their beliefs and flows of information. Suddenly, they no longer trust ‘safeguards to ethics and morality’, but make up their own damn minds.
      It’s a bit like all the regulations and human rights and safety shit. Our government fools us into believing nothing can ever happen to us – and we let our guards down. We no longer wonder whether what that guy is selling is of value, instead we blindly trust, rationalizing it with ‘The government wouldnt let him sell if he was a fraud’.
      But if those regulations fall away, what are we left with. Natural distrust and skepticism. So instead of trusting the seller, we ask a few friends: Have you bought something from him? Was it any good?
      And suddenly, reputation has to be earned. People start to only trust people they know well etc. Suddenly, people take responsibility for their money and minds.
      🙂

      1. Hey, even better: Obligate the media that they must put a few lies into everything they write, even if they don’t want to. Make it punishable to tell 100% truth for major outlets.
        Same for schools. Obligate teachers to put 10% lies into everything they say and obligate them to tell this to their pupils.
        1. It will make for a fun game
        2. It will teach students individual and critical thought.

        1. My father told me back in the early 60s that every newspaper article of which he knew the facts got it wrong in some significant way. Hence he said, why would he not think they got every other article wrong? It seemed logical to me then and still does.
          There is no need to encourage the MSM to put lies in every article it is their standard practice. Pathological liars need no encouragement to lie; they just do it.

      2. I think you are too optimistic that people would stop trusting the media. People already report that they don’t trust the media by an overwhelming margin, and yet stories like these continue to get traction.

        1. The question is: Which part of them doesn’t trust the media?
          There is always a part in us that doubts these things. That has ‘weird ideas’.
          But then, when in public, when in an actual debate full of emotional constraints, how often do we actually say what we think?
          Hence I think anonymous polls are not indicative of how many people of those who claim to distrust the media actually act on their distrust instead of emptily proclaiming it.

        2. If you make it publicly known that lies are acceptable – then that becomes the official truth. And then it becomes fashionable and socially acceptable to question everything.

        3. Again, I think your assumptions are too optimistic, but supposing that they were true – then you run into another problem: sometimes the press is telling the truth. The point of a free press was supposed to be that the press could serve as an additional check on the government so that the citizens could know what the government was doing and take action if they wanted to change things. By completely undermining the press, you remove what could be, and used to be a useful watchdog against the government.
          I prefer holding the press accountable for lies they tell, the same as anyone else. You say, make lies free speech. Why should my neighbor be allowed to lie about me? Suppose that enough people believe the lies that it results in me losing my job and friends, and ruining me financially, or having me charged with a crime. Is that what free speech is supposed to be? Be very careful with this – you are turning free speech into a popularity contest, where the prevailing party will not likely be the most rational person.

        4. “Be very careful with this – you are turning free speech into a popularity contest, where the prevailing party will not likely be the most rational person.”
          Would that be any different than it is now?
          I’m just shooting this idea out into the wind. Maybe someone will find it, refine it, adapt it, whatever. It’s not meant to be the perfect ideal.

        5. “Would that be any different than it is now?”
          Yes. Now you cannot lie without facing a penalty for it if your lies can be proven.
          You are saying that there can be no penalty because it is free speech. This rule would legitimize false rape accusations. It is free speech. Who cares if it is a lie? That is terribly unjust.

        6. I am not saying there can’t be. I just proposed an idea out of the top of my head. Obviously, it has flaws, like the one you pointed out.
          But again, how is it different now? It is unjust and theoretically, they face penalties for it. Practically, that only means they put more effort into lying and get away with it either way.

        7. I must have beat out the socially accepted years ago, because I have questioned everything in the MSM since I was advised to do so by my father while I was still in short pants.

        8. What he is saying is that for the press this is already true. You can prove they were lying until you are blue in the face and you can get no recompense out of them because the law says that you have to also prove malice; which you can’t ever.
          Also what the law gives with one hand in case of false rape accusations it takes away with the other. This is the second set of books noted by Thomas Ball, May he rest in peace. Yes the perjurer is subject to civil and criminal penalties, but in the case of false rape accusers this is never happening because it might stop some actual victim from coming forward. At least that is the excuse. Letting liars lie is somehow the right thing to do under our legal system.

  7. Heh, while watching Gamergate a few years ago, I came to the conclusion that being labeled sexist/racist was the modern equivalent of blasphemer, hence why they threw around so much at the ones who disagreed. Being called a rapist/sexual assaulter is considered worse than that (and rightfully so) but the lack of evidence required is akin to the witch trials from only a few hundred years ago.

    1. It depends. In the religion of Social Justice a white racist is infinitely more sinful than a Muslim gang rapist. See Germany for more information.

  8. It’s truly amazing how women seem to be able to lie. I just can’t get it into my head how one would be able to do that. There would be a thousand emotions stopping me from it.
    Frankly, this also makes me question the Bill Clinton rape thing. You just can’t ever fully trust what comes out of the mouth of those creatures.

    1. In that case hose women shared some details common to their experiences that they would have no way of knowing.

        1. In regards to Bills accusers ? They each tell of something very specific that bill did to all of them but had no way of knowing.

    2. He slipped them all the weiner and each one them came, grooled and squirted. Hardly harassment.
      Don Rumsfeld told me about it. A known unknown.

  9. Amazing how all these women step forward 3 weeks before the election when it looks like Trump might actually clinch it.
    What’s stopped them before now? Trump has always been insanely rich. Why did they wait until right before he might win the election?
    Things that make you go “hmmmmmm…..”

  10. The alt-right should deflect the methods used by SJWs back to them. We should all mount a huge DDOS attack against ALL leftist media like the Times or CNN.

  11. That woman accuses him 37 years after the incident? It’s either bullshit or Trump did that groping tremendously well.

  12. Donald was playing spin the bottle with my aunt in 1958- both were twelve at the time. He stopped the bottle when it pointed at her, and he stole a big sloppy kiss. Dude is pure evil

    1. I played a game like that with a few classmates in 5th class or so. Think it was truth or dare. I was dared to give some girl a lovebite. I went through with it, but that poor thing was scared shitless, lol.

  13. Two days ago a girl invited me to her apartment. A few days prior, I had her naked in my bed and we fooled around. Since then we’ve exchanged a lot of playful text messages. So I show up at her place. She answers the door wearing booty shorts and a tiny shirt. We sit, talk, laugh and kiss a little bit. Then the real life Seinfeld episode begins. We’re watching TV, my arm around her in a recleined position and she starts swatting at my hand like a fly. I said, “what are you doing?” She said, “your hand is in my peripheral vision and its bugging me.” I laughed and said, “are you serious?” She said “Yes.” I didn’t react, I wanted to see where it would go from here. A few minutes went by, she complained about a word I used (Can’t remember the word or her ridiculous reasoning). I was there for about and hour an a half and it was a pretty boring evening. I sat in silence thinking about the evening as a whole and without warning, I stand up, grab my keys, walk toward the door and put on my boots. She starts panicking, “what are you doing?” “Where are you going?” I say nothing, I open the door and she grabs my arm, she says, “HEY!” I calmly look at her, look at my arm, jerk my arm away and walk out, look over my shoulder and give her a casual, “see ya.” She starts yelling, “come back! I want you here!” I stroll out to my car. I’m driving and she’s calling and texting like crazy. I don’t answer.
    Next morning, Headline: “Woman’s peripheral vision assaulted by mans hand.”

      1. I’m pretty sure she was. Getting a nut off is one thing. Getting a girl to squeal, “please come back!” Priceless. A week ago, she texted me, “I want to take it slow, I don’t want to rush into anything.” My response: “Sounds like you need a lap dog.”

        1. Also hung out with a chick recently who said she was raped. Run Forrest run. I said, “So, you got really drunk, had sex with a guy and regretted it the next day, is that what happened?” She went into her speil about how she was passed out and woke up to a guy fucking her. I said, “seems a little odd that you wouldn’t wake up during the process of a guy forcing himself inside you.” She said, “well there’s nothing I can do to prove it, this is just you getting to know me.” I said, “You could be telling the truth but I chose not to believe your story. Women throw these accusations around like crazy and it’s causing a lot of harm to both men and women.” She had nothing to say. I wrapped up the conversation and haven’t spoke to her since.

        2. It’s kinda shitty. In an ideal world, we would be able to talk about these things to process it and move on, and build intimate bonds with each other (sexual and non-sexual). But with things being what they are, I would act exactly as you did.

        3. I agree. It is shitty. I was having a decent conversation with this girl up until that point. I took a gem from a recent ROK article and remembered to ask, “so, is this man in jail?” Her response, “No……” Me: “hmm.”

  14. Many will not like hearing this, but the hypocrisy of attacking Hillary’s husband for decades old public rape allegations makes it far more difficult to shut down the same allegations made about Trump. If there was a little more consistency and principle here, ie sticking to our guns and repeating the line that public rape allegations are always false, acknowledging that a court has never validated any of these claims, and not using the same dirty tactics the left is using against Donald, then it could not only shut down these attacks which are harming Trump, but also be a bigger win against the whole harassment issue, which honestly I think is more important than whichever of these two becomes president.
    And of course the “deny Trump allegation but repeat Clinton one” thing ONLY appeals to the ideologues–it doesn’t change any independent or undecided voter’s opinion.
    What Trump supporters don’t realize is that by using these tactics, we acquiesce to the redefining of rape, to where each and every one of us has raped. Rape means, or will soon mean, to make a woman feel uncomfortable because of something you’ve said or done. You hear feminists already yelling “You’re raping me! This is rape! This is harassment!” when you say something they don’t like. It will soon spread to the gen pop.

    1. Logically, at some point, this should lead to a defusion of the word ‘rape’, where someone says ‘I was raped’. And someone else says ‘Oh well, big deal. Rape is fun’

  15. “We are going to have to rebuild within this wild-wild-west-of-information flow some sort of curating function that people agree to. There has to be, I think, some sort of way in which we can sort through information that passes some basic truthiness tests and those that we have to discard, because they just don’t have any basis in anything that’s actually happening in the world.”
    How about we apply this is idea to the mainstream media? THIS is what needs to be fixed!

    1. That’s the scary thing, tho. I wouldn’t want nobody to do this ‘truth check’. Not a feminist. Not a manospherian. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech, not freedom to speak one particular truth.

    1. Sometimes it’s about surviving in the Yukon with nothing but a half bucket of Kratom. If you wanted to nail down a theme, I’d go with “stuff that intelligent guys find important”.

        1. Not trying to be a smartass but, the world doesn’t revolve around getting poontang. There are other things equally as important.

        2. Additionally there are a bajillion PUA articles on here in the archives. Help yourself.

        3. Yes I read them but there have been changes since 3 years ago.
          There is nothing on Instagram game, Okcupid and pof are not the same. Nothing about Snap chat or any new destinations. Fashion would be interesting.
          I’m interested in game like the majority of readers

        4. Archives. Everything that can be said about PUA has already been written about exhaustively. A simple search of the archives would confirm that for you.
          I find it interesting that you want to eliminate political discourse on this site.

        5. Not sure about everyone else here, but there’s quite a few of us that see the world for what it is but are generally optimistic guys. Sure, the USA could be going to shit, but with some proper planning, you can still continue to thrive. You are getting kind of the knee-jerk reactions and venting from the people here. I speak to quite a few of these fellas in private online chat rooms and we are all making plans for prosperous futures, regardless of how the rest of the country goes.

        6. I will have enough time to talk politics when I will be older and get angry at kids because they will be different. I’m only 24 now and Im enjoying life.

        7. The Founding Fathers were all pretty young in their days of action.
          And it’s not “get angry at kids because they will be different”. In what way is this article that sentiment? This is about how the media absolutely destroys men with false accusations and routinely gets away with it. This ain’t no “git offa mah lawn!” piece.
          And last, if “different” is “socialist” then they deserve to be berated by everybody else.

        8. Then find PUA articles and be happy. Plenty to find here, have at it.

        9. No no no you read me wrong. The atticle is okay and I don’t buys into stupid fat loser che guevarrists propaganda. I don’t care about anything I’m done with caring and other can. I am only trying to enjoy life before I get married and/or get into working full time.
          Travel, sex, drinking, memories and hedonism preocup me now.

        10. That’s perfectly legit man. I’m not busting on you per se. I’m just noting that if you want PUA articles, this site has so many that it’s insane, in the archives, with many added each week to that store. If that’s your goal, then hit the archives. There is a solution to the issue you bring up, is what I’m saying.

        11. A lot of readers would like to expand their minds instead of talking about poontang all the time. By the way another article has been posted about dating sites, perhaps that will help.
          Politics changes daily, picking up women is the same as its always been, there’s only so much that can be written about an activity that stays the same.

        12. I wouldn’t knock PMA (positive mental attitude), just don’t mistake “positive thinking” for wishful thinking.

    2. Like my brothers here, I’m going to refrain from being a smartass and be completely sincere as you look like you might be legit and not trolling.
      Take a look at the archives and count how many articles are on ROK. Now imagine that EVERY. SINGLE. ARTICLE. was about picking up chicks. Do you think people who continue to visit this site? Of course not, because they’d be bored out of their minds. While ROK might have started as a PUA site, it has evolved to more of a red-pill version of Art of Manliness mixed with current events/news and the occasional dating article.
      All in all, an improvement if you ask me.

        1. I lost interest after reading the 4th article that described how to be the perfect gentleman-caricature from a Disney movie. I also fucking hate the style.

        2. Agreed that some of the articles hold very blue-pill, beta beliefs. I kind of like the old-timey style, but that’s just personal tastes. Someone a few months ago referred to my site as a red-pill version of AoM. That was kind of my goal, so I guess I’m on the right track. Also, don’t have such a hokey style either. Heh.

        3. What’s your site?
          I have bad associations with that old-timey style. Was with a girl whom I thought would be my girlfriend watching that stupid black-white-retro silent movie that was praised as artsy shit some years back. After the movie, I got rejected. Bam. Since then I hate that shit. Well, I didn’t like the movie either way.

  16. herman caine was in hannity last night talking about this. how women with accusations suddenly turn up everywhere. Cosby has these problems.
    George Orwell detailed this in 1984 as well. it’s always a sex crime.

    1. That’s actually an interesting point. It’s never anything else; always a sex scandal. You’d think people would be catching onto this by now. Whatever happened to good old money laundering and ties with the mafia?

      1. Sex is something everyone can relate to. Email servers, quid pro quo, subpoena, perjury, obstruction of justice…not so much.

      2. Sex scandal draws out the white knights and kooky feminists, as well as the moderates around the edges. Independents can use it as a exclusionary excuse.

    2. It’s the Left’s last ditch effort to remove a male. They do it pretty frequently. Most of the time it works regardless of innocence (Herman Caine), sometimes it doesn’t (Clarence Thomas). The reason they use it is because it’s the most “interesting” to the public at large, and there is no burden of proof since the “case” is tried in the “media”. Even if it comes out that there’s no proof (like, the dude says “Ok, show me the police report or witnesses) the Leftists then sneer “It’s the gravity of the accusation that matters!”
      The thing is, this is their final card. If a man can survive it, he’s golden. They only use it on true threats.

      1. Ok show me the police report
        There isn’t a police report because women are afraid to file them because reasons and patriarchy

        1. And my answer to that is: “Evidence or GTFO”. That simple. She’s “too afraid” because reasons and patriarchy, then how is she not too afraid to scream it over the media without a shred of evidence and be made a fool?
          I don’t care that they’re logically inconsistent, it’s a given. Just take the hard line stand “Evidence or GTFO” and go about your business.

        2. evidence is racist and literally hitler you fucking shitlord. Plus, all white males have already raped all women by virtue of being heterosexual so “proof” isn’t needed. “proof” and “evidence” and “logic” and “rational reasons” and “math” and science” and “Expectation of honesty” are all tools of the patriarchy which have, for billions of years, suppressed the rights of women, gays and elmo….elmo….do you understand that you have raped elmo? What kind of man would rape elmo. I will ask you one time: How do you feel having raped a sweet and loveable childhood icon?

        3. See, get them to spout that. That kind of gibberish on the airwaves would wake up a whole ton of people as they say “Christ, that girl is batty!”

        4. by the way you didn’t answer the simple question. Yes or No. Did you enjoy raping elmo?

        5. I had an idea about a good approach on rape stuff.
          In general, show compassion and understanding to everyone who claims to have been raped. Just assume that they really feel what they feel. Give them all the emotional support they need to heal and recover.
          At the same time, do not assume that what they say is objectively true. Only acknowledge their feelings instead. Give them love and understanding, but nothing else.
          In other words: Give them all they need to heal if they were truly raped, but don’t let this be in any way connected to a legal investigation.
          At the same time, introduce a legal system where the burden of proof for a prosecution on rape lies solely on the victim.
          The result is a system that can convict if 100% reliable evidence is presented. Meanwhile, everyone who is unable to provide that, still gets all the help they need.
          This will stop false rape accusers, because they do not have the necessary proof. And all they can gain is psychological support which they don’t really need.
          Bam.

        6. And that’s fine on a personal level. We’re talking about ginned up charges by the Left using a tactic that they’re famous for using. In this situation, Trump has two choices, either withdraw (like Cainne did) or grit his teeth, say “show me the evidence” and then sally forth (like Clarence Thomas did).

        7. Introduce that on a federal level and all the shit goes away. When a girl says, without evidence ‘I was raped by Trump’, listen to the ‘I was raped’ and discard the ‘by Trump’.

        8. Not the point. Right now, that’s not happening. Further, there would be zero traction to install a “sympathize but search for actual proof” system, since it does not benefit either the feminists, the Left nor the white knight cuckservatives.

        9. I did not insinuate that this was an immediate solution. I proposed an idea that I think would be great, that’s all. It may not be relevant for the short time-span. So what.

        10. Besides, if they are honest about their intentions, this would fit perfectly into their worldview. Girls who got raped would no longer have to go through a phase of having to prove it to get support. And men would no longer get sentenced without evidence. Win win.

    3. Right. Trump would have it easier if he stabbed someone to death, preferably a man, 37 years ago. That would be more acceptable to a lot of people than some skank getting groped.

  17. The Gilberthorpe testimony is pretty damning. I was sceptical at first, but it seems he was sitting beside her the whole time she claimed to be getting groped (for 15 minutes). He takes it personally as he reasons that were this to have happened – for 15 minutes – he could not failed to have been aware of what was going on, and therefore would be complicit in the gropefest. But leaving all that aside the real take-away is the fact that he is insistent that she was absolutely thrilled to be sitting next to Trump, and even hoped to marry him – possibly she was joking but why should one assume that: Trump would have been the ultimate catch for such a woman.
    So, what we really have here is evidence of what happens to female memory with respect to encounters with top tier males who they fail to snag. Something sours in them obviously, but more importantly it seems that everything that stood as a positive – the attractive qualities of the male in question – are all turned against him. Somehow for women like this memory reconstructs a positive experience (if indeed there is anything worthy of being called an experience beyond sitting next to Donald Trump) as some kind of assault against the person. What exactly going on inside the minds of these women really needs to be studied by psychologists. Clearly exposure to feminism and its narratives of male oppression, makes it possible for weak-minded women to completely reinterpret positive events as abusive and exploitative, particularly where this furnishes the individual with the kind of bragging rights that mean something today. Being able to say you had a fumble with Donald Trump 35 years ago won’t get you much credit, and indeed would just gain you the status of being a bit of an slut, the kind of woman who a man like Trump wouldn’t even have looked for at least 30 years. Claiming assault indemnifies against such a charge: and qualifies plaintiff to both attention and a kind of equality that accepting the encounter would good humour could never achieve. I really do think there needs to be systematic research done into psychology and motivations of complaints because until there is some serious research done there are going to be an increasing danger of miscarriages of justice based on pure fantasy.

  18. That old lady is just looking for her 15 minutes of fame, nobody wants to touch her old dusty cootchie anymore so she claims Trump felt her up a lifetime ago.

    1. “Groped” for 15 minutes? I’ve been grabbed, felt up and corned in a dark closet. Fifteen minutes is a LOOOOOONNNNNNNGGGGG fucking time! You must have been reeeeeaaaallllllyyy enjoying it.

      1. Yeah, that was a fun party. I probably should have called you back the next day. My bad.

        1. The whole of you only live twice is just amazing. Watching them turn Bond “into a Japanese” by putting a mo howard wig on him, have him painted yellow by a bunch of bikini clad Japanese girls and then taping his eyes up slanty is probably the best thing ever.
          Tanaka’s plan
          FIRST! You become a Japanese. SECOND! You become a ninja like us. THIRD! You take a Japanese wife.

        2. sean connery painted yellow with a wig and slanty eyes fitting in on an island as one of the local Japanese fishermen? If you haven’t watched it you really need to. It isn’t the best of the Connery Bonds by far, but it is the funniest.

        3. Nancy Sinatra sang the theme song- I saw her in a movie with Elvis a few days ago- good looking woman. She was an IRS agent and he was a stock car driver. Good cheesy 60s fun

        4. I was recently wondering whether women could indeed make for good agents or soldiers. After all, they do have some amount of power through their … let’s call it charme.
          But then I thought: A woman may have power, but let her meet a man hotter than the man she has at home and she will turn without thinking back.

        5. BTW in case you wanted to know, the order in which Bond movies go starting from the best are
          Dr. No
          From Russia With Love
          Goldfinger
          Diamonds Are Forever
          Thunderball
          You Only Live Twice
          On Her Majesty’s Secret Service
          The Man With The Golden Gun
          Never Say Never Again (Non Canonical)
          Everything other than Moonraker
          Moonraker
          In order of being hilarious You only live twice is tied for first with Never say Never again, then the rest of the connery ones, then all the Roger Moore ones starting with the latest, a view to a kill, because he is so fucking old and in velvet bell bottoms, working backwards and then everything else.

        6. live an let die is lumped in with “everything other than moonraker” under all the connery ones and the oft overlooked one hit wonder bond George Lazenby who was absolutely excellent but then went all hippie dippy political.

        7. I think you would be an excellent candidate for our upcoming Robocop program- send me a private message

        8. If there’s anything bad that can be said about Elvis, I think about 90% of the blame can be directed at Col. Tom Parker.

      1. I’m a medical person so I literally think vagina. Hand up past the meat curtains and trying to grasp a slippery tube.

        1. Yes. Vagina can be used in an overall descriptive sense. For me, I think of the actual anatomical parts. Just the way my brain operates.

  19. Trump needs to tighten up. For while he was leaving the MSM in the dust, now he keeps staying on the same topic too long and giving them a chance to catch up. He isn’t running against Paul Ryan and the Press he’s running against Hillary and should be hammering her everyday instead of whining about the “fix”. Everyone already knows about that, move on to something else.

      1. In what universe are you old enough to have even owned a wallet that did not contain pictures of Daffy Duck on it, when Clinton was in office? Heh.

        1. Oh, no, Slick Willy is now accused of pederasty by the venerable GoJ, with Columbo-like investigative attention to detail… (as he lights el-supremo): “The kid’s Daffy Duck wallet with the used condom in it – the DNA of the jizz was presidential”

      2. The saying prior to the 92 election came from Arkansas, Slick Willy wants your wallet. It turned out to be completely true.

  20. Someone probably already mentioned it- but they did the exact same thing to Herman Cain. Once he dropped out of the election- crickets.

      1. He may well get them. We’re probably not going to hear about anything positive towards him by women, since that would destroy the Media’s attempt to make Hillary the Savior Of All Vaginas.

        1. According to the Leftists, sure, because “(insert noun here) is a social construct”!

    1. If women were not allowed to vote, there would have been a democrat POTUS since the 40s. Women are pathetic judges of character.

  21. Important article Relampago. I’m glad we’ve got an ex-media vigilante like you on our side.
    Pretty insane how in 2016 these kinds of accusations go all the way up to friggin US presidential candidates weeks before their elections. It’s all just a ruse to get people to avoid talking about anything of real substance.
    Furthermore we’ve got the current president telling everyone who they should vote for. Something about that just seems so strange to me… Obviously the current president will tell you to vote for the next candidate of their own party. Every adult that I’ve asked has told me that they’ve never seen this before. Presidents would more or less mind their own business until they were done their service. Dunno if any of you guys can vouch for or against that.


    1. Look at this. Do you see a man who rests at his centre and is at peace with himself? I don’t. I see a kid craving for attention by bringing down someone else while bathing in the roars of the hysterical crowd. He’s just a showman.

      1. You might like this vid.
        Obama roasts the Donald a couple years back while on the podium, in his usual snarky self-congratulating tone.
        I would bet money that this was the exact moment Donald decided he would run for president.
        I honestly think Obama is threatened that his legacy will mean nothing in the wake of a Trump presidency.

        1. “in his usual snarky self-congratulating tone”
          Thank you for putting it into words as eloquently as I couldn’t. That is exactly how I feel about him.

        2. I really hope when Trump does get elected it is 8 years of unbridled prosperity for the US and OBaba is forgotten and exiled to the scrapheap of history never to be heard from again unless people want to study how “leaders” get elected and make no difference to their people whatsoever…….

        3. The usual way things goes is a sane president enters, fixes some major problems (usually by getting the government to stop being in the way of private citizens) and things turn around and get better just in time for the newly elected asylum escapee promising free gibsmedats for all to take office and claim all the credit.

      1. Just a funny pic.
        Samsung Note 7s are being recalled because customers are reporting that they are exploding and causing fires and injuries.

        1. Samsung is doing hell of a shitty job. I saw some Facebook ads recently. You know, the sponsored ones that pop up in your news feed.
          ‘THE NEW SAMSUNG GALAXY! WILL CHANGE YOUR WORLD! ADVENTURE! WATERPROOF BLAH BLAH’
          The comments on that ad were priceless. 70% of all commenters were like: ‘Seriously, this phone is total shit. I got a few sprinkles of water on it and it failed me.’ or ‘Resilient touch screen? Dear Samsung, this tablet fell down from 1 foot height and broke’.

  22. The media is rigging the election, all right. If they get enough bellyfeelers to vote for thecunt (or not vote for Trump) through these emotionally-based attacks on Trump while running cover for thecunt, they won’t even have to use the classic methods of vote fraud such as ballot box stuffing or dead people. I still run into people who take what Lügenpresse says at face value, and I just want to slap them.

  23. The last US election had a black Republican named Herman Cain run on the GOP primary ticket. I had family campaign for him. Several white women from no where suddenly accused him of “misapproriate behavior” with the emotional character assassinations… I mean accusations.
    It is all lies and political street theater.

    1. Yeah I was hoping to vote for Cain in 2012. They did the exact same thing to him that they’re doing to Trump now, except I guess Trump has more of a stomach/wallet for it.

      1. thats why I initially supported Trump because he is a hard headed mother f that can take it. You put anyone else out there that doesn’t want illegal amnesty and pushes against the system- and they will be tarred and feathered.

      1. Please stop. Just because it didn’t happen to other people doesn’t mean it is now true.
        Can someone help me out, which logical fallacy is this? Or are they now inventing new fallacies just to stop Trump?

        1. The argument was anyone that didn’t act accordingly had a false rape sexual assault against them
          I demonstrated that the premises were wrong it seems you don’t understand basic logic
          There is no fallacy

  24. “a coordinated and underhanded rape attack is the first line of offense.”
    so how many rape accusations have come against Ron Paul? Rand Paul?
    ”Suddenly, a senior citizen named Jessica Leeds, a former stewardess, pops up out of nowhere and is emotionally distraught by a groping that supposedly happened 37 years ago.”
    you do know that Drumpf is a senior citizen too right? They didn’t just appear out of nowhere. It was because Drumpf said that never happened. That is why the women stepped to say “well he actually did this to me”.
    They’ve been there, you just didn’t know about them: http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/exclusive-inside-the-donald-trump-sexual-assault-lawsuit/
    The media also gave Drumpf billion dollars of free publicity I guess they were rigged that way too smh
    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-has-gotten-nearly-3-billion-in-free-advertising-2016-05-06

    1. I’ve seen this before. They try to refute the premise of this article by naming people who haven’t been targeted. Not everybody in the world has had this happen to them, so they have a near infinite well of names to bring up.
      Ron and Rand Paul are not as big of a threat as Trump is (btw, you spelled his name wrong). Out of the most recent non-establishment candidates – Ross Perot, Ralph Nader, Ron Paul, Bernie Sanders – Trump has gotten the furthest.

      1. If we have an infinite names to bring then that means the premises are wrong therefore your conclusion will be wrong pretty basic logic

        1. Note the word “near”. Judging by your reading comprehension and writing ability, I’m going to guess that you and logic have never actually met.

  25. Not even a strategy at this point. It’s basically “I don’t like this man. Find some woman to say he raped her.”
    Aaaaaand he’s destroyed. Champagne all around

  26. The true “rape culture” in this country:
    Women are seldom prosecuted for making false rape claims.
    Women can make false rape claims knowing that even if caught their identities will not be disclosed.
    Women are 1/3 less likely than men to be prosecuted for sex crimes.
    Women’s jail sentences for sex crimes are less than 1/3 what men receive.

  27. A possible approach, usable in some cases, might be to discuss the left’s envy of a man women really like as the real motive for dredging up all the sluts. Most leftists being betas — or for that matter, omegas.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *