Donald Trump Jr. Tweet about Steve Bannon

Twitter ^ | 1/3/2018 | Donald Trump Jr.

[grayboots]

Steve had the honor of working in the White House & serving the country. Unfortunately, he squandered that privilege & turned that opportunity into a nightmare of backstabbing, harassing, leaking, lying & undermining the President. Steve is not a strategist, he is an opportunist 2:14 PM - 3 Jan 2018

[DiogenesLamp]

Let’s simulate an interview of you questioning me whether I, in my 30’s, ever did what Roy Moore was accused of:

You really seem to have only one arrow in your quiver, and it appears to be an obsession with that interview. No commentary about how you lumped the other six women in with the two accusers?

Hannity did the same thing, and that is where some really bad false equivalency began.

I've already said Moore mishandled it because he didn't expect Hannity to equate dating teenagers with molesting little girls. Moore should have admitted he dated teenagers, but he should have flatly and repeatedly denied having anything to do with molesting a 14 year old girl.

But Moore's bad responses didn't obligate our people to open their F***ing mouths and do everything they could to throw him under the bus. All they should have said was "We believe this decision is up to the people of Alabama."

But they didn't do that. They strongly urged people to not vote for him, and they did so on the basis of unproven and contradictory accusations. They carried water for the enemy.

I would have personally beat the snot out of Jeff Flake could I have but gotten my hands on him while he was doing this. The man deserves to get his teeth punched out.

[Yaelle]

This is cheese-in-the-maze misdirection folks.

---

No. It’s not. Even LS admitted it. This is real, the animosity between Trump and Bannon. Bannon is a bit of a schmuck. Disappointing.

[MountainWalker]

What you describe as one arrow is more closer described as a smoking gun. If you have to give equivocal “context” as to whether you prowled for early-mid teenage girls, the women probably aren’t lying. Or, at least the truth lays closer to their version of the story than yours.

Jeff Flake’s opinion has zero currency with Republican voters, so quit trying to build him up to be some kingmaker. He’s fleeing the Senate because he’s too liberal for medium-red Arizona and was about to get trounced in his primary. For all we know, Flake’s Jones endorsement probably narrowed Moore’s margin of loss if it made any difference at all.

[DiogenesLamp]

What you describe as one arrow is more closer described as a smoking gun. If you have to give equivocal “context” as to whether you prowled for early-mid teenage girls, the women probably aren’t lying.

Point of order here. When that lying Washington Post reporter first broke the story, (same reporter that did the N****er Rock smear on Rick Perry) there was only one accuser of sexual impropriety. The other women said Moore was a gentleman, so there is only one person at that time that could have been characterized as "lying", and that was Leigh Corfman. Therefore it would be singular, not plural. It would be "Woman", as in one accuser, not "Women" as in multiple accusers. Beverly Nelson hadn't done her Gloria Allred Pony show yet.

Once again, you are buying into the false premise presented by the N****er Rock reporter that there was more than one accuser. There wasn't. There was only one. (at that time.)

Or, at least the truth lays closer to their version of the story than yours.

That Moore was a gentleman when he dated them? Yes, I expect all the stories of the non-accusers are true. It's just the story of that single solitary accuser (Leigh Corfman) that is made up bullsh*t.

Again, I will point out that You, Hannity, the Media, and the Republican party all lumped the innocent truth in with the sole example of an accusation, and proclaimed the numbers of women involved proved the case of the one liar.

Jeff Flake’s opinion has zero currency with Republican voters, so quit trying to build him up to be some kingmaker.

Nobody said he was a kingmaker. He is a prominent Republican Senator (of which the bulk of the public is unaware how unpopular he is within the party) making a very public "virtue signaling" gesture, that had the public effect of making the accusations against Moore more believable. The fact that he could get millions of eyeballs to look at what he had done is powerful influence over the electorate.

Add to that Richard Shelby getting on Television and publicly urging his own voters in Alabama to not vote for Roy Moore, and "write in" someone else's name, and you have seriously stuck a knife into the back of one of our candidates. And it was done solely on the basis of unproven, and likely unprovable accusations by kooks dragged up by the Democrat party. No consideration was given for the three witnesses against Beverly Nelson who strongly contradicted her claims, and no consideration was given for the inconsistencies in Leigh Corfman's story.

No consideration was given for the long life history of the man in question, and lack of further supporting evidence against him.

It was a witch burning and a rush to judgement, and I believe it was done precisely because the "establishment" types absolutely did not want a person like Moore in the Senate where he would cause them no end of trouble.

[newfreep]

It’s amazing Trump has survived...I guess making it in business in New York toughened him!

If you can make it there, you can....well, you know the rest.

[Neoliberalnot]

How is Roy a pedophile? Does slandering him prove him a pedophile? If when you were 18 or older and you dated someone, girl or boy, younger than 18, does that make you a pedophile?

[Neoliberalnot]

Do you know of a candidate that isn’t flawed. Sign him up.

[Neoliberalnot]

Why are you taking WAPo’s side? Roy Moore broke no laws, none.

[MountainWalker]

It’s utterly amazing that you keep glossing over Moore’s belly flop on Hannity’s show as if not emphatically and unequivocally denying all the charges are mistakes that innocent men sometimes make. It’s preposterous.

Who gives a flying F if Moore is or was a gentleman. No one ever alleged that he raped them or that he was manipulative or bullying. That’s not the freaking point. The point is what the hell is a grown man in his mid thirties doing hitting on teenage girls!

[MountainWalker]

He was in his mid-thirties. This was not a case of him as a teenager dating another teen. Give me a break.

[MountainWalker]

Politicians lose elections all the time for untoward behavior that may not be technically illegal.

I hate the Compost. I also hate that Alabama primary voters gave them a big fat bullseye of a candidate for them to hand the election to the Democrats.

[Neoliberalnot]

We both have zero proof that he “hit” on anyone 35 years ago. It is more likely the girls were hitting on him. When I was 24 I dated an older woman that hit on me. She had a 14 Year old daughter that “hit” on me a dozen times or more. I guess I’m guilty.

[MountainWalker]

Please. Roy’s interview with Hannity was what it was. Ask me if I ever hit on teenage girls as a man in my 30’s. Unlike him, my answer will not leave you guessing.

[DiogenesLamp]

It’s utterly amazing that you keep glossing over Moore’s belly flop on Hannity’s show as if not emphatically and unequivocally denying all the charges are mistakes that innocent men sometimes make. It’s preposterous.

And it is utterly amazing to me that you keep ignoring my explanation of how Hannity made the interview about dating, instead of making it about molestation. I've already told you several times that Hannity put Moore in a bad situation by accepting the premise (pushed by the N***er Rock reporter) that dating teenagers was equivalent to molesting a 14 year old.

Hannity should have rejected the issue of the other women who dated Moore as teenagers, and focused solely on the accusation of molestation. Hannity should not have accepted the other six women as "accusers", when they weren't doing any accusing. There was only one accuser, and she was a psychological mess.

That’s not the freaking point. The point is what the hell is a grown man in his mid thirties doing hitting on teenage girls!

Early 30s, and it doesn't amount to a hill of beans so far as i'm concerned. Was it legal? Yes. So shaddup about it, and focus on the only serious accusation.

As others had pointed out, Moore went to West Point out of high school, and from thence to Vietnam. By the time he got back to the United States, most desirable women his own age were already married. If he didn't want an undesirable or a retread, he was going to have to date girls who hadn't yet already been involved with someone else.

The entire issue of him dating teenagers is a big nothing, and it should have had no bearing on anything. Seinfeld, Prince Charles, and countless other 30 year olds dated teenagers too, and the entire media world thought it was cute.

[MountainWalker]

All the excuses you’re offering on his behalf are not even the ones he offered on his own behalf. Maybe if he presented a semi-decent explanation instead of calling it fake news and then withering under softball questions in a cupcake forum, he’d be a US senator right now. Actually, I bet he would be.

Instead, he outright denied the allegations that he tried to date young teenager girls through statements from his campaign mouthpieces. No one is accusing him of molestation, but you keep bringing it up - probably because it makes for a convenient distraction.

Then, when Hannity gave him a more than fair hearing, he could not even semi-cleanly back up his press statements. I’m sure Hannity was as shocked as the rest of us. He thought he was helping him set the record straight, and here he is seemingly confirming the allegations.

[DiogenesLamp]

No one is accusing him of molestation, but you keep bringing it up - probably because it makes for a convenient distraction.

It is the only serious charge against him. The "dating" allegations is socially icky to some, but the molestation accusation is criminal.

It was the lumping together of the serious claim and then the assertion that the other six women were also "accusers" that lent credibility to the one serious accusation.

He thought he was helping him set the record straight, and here he is seemingly confirming the allegations.

The Dating allegations, that had been inextricably linked to the "molesting a child" allegations. Hannity should have focused only on the molestation accusation, not the dating teenagers issue. Different time and different Demographic than Hannity's New York.

The dating of teenagers was a big nothing, but the linking of that to the accusation of child molesting made it appear that there was more support for the child molesting accusation than there really was.

[MountainWalker]

No, it’s socially “icky” to most, and it’s hard to know what the real truth is when this guy is flopping all around like a fish on the deck in a friendly interview with an ally.

Roy Moore really is the worst kind of politician: dishonest enough not to just tell the complete, plain truth from the jump but stupid enough to not even be able to keep an easy political lie straight in a friendly interview.

Instead of calling it fake news in his press release, he could have given your justification: it was a different time, broke no laws, came back from war and all the women his age were married, forced himself on no one, he ended up dating a teenager who became his beloved wife of x number of years, etc. He probably could have gotten himself off the hook that way. Or, he could have convincingly doubled down on his lie to Hannity in Clintonesque fashion, that it was all fake news and never courted any of these women as teenagers, etc. But, he didn’t do any of that because he has zero political acumen and managed to lose an unlosable seat.