Trump Talk™

So to bring his "I'd date a ten year old" claim into the mix is a valid course of action.

I wouldn't claim that one was done to "sensationalize" anything. Apparently one of the accusers from yesterday happens to be a former Ms. Teen USA contestant and her claim was Trump watched as they got undressed for that pageant. "Teen" means underaged, as in "younger than 18 years old". Under the age of consent. So to bring his "I'd date a ten year old" claim into the mix is a valid course of action.

if your child

So, Seha, if your child was being ogled while getting undressed, it wouldn't bother you? Especially if the pervert doing it was old enough to be his or her grandparent?

No it isn't. If he said sexually suggestive things to the child then yes.

But honestly, if as a child no adult has ever told you they'll marry/date you when you grow up, then you were a pretty ugly kid.

What he actually said was "in 10 years I'll be dating her", COMPLETELY different

It's still gross but it's NOT the same

One can be WAY anti Trump without making Clinton look good at all.

As an example all my posts on the previous page.

the only way that you can make her look good

“We did what the law allows.”

A New York Times article can’t hurt Donald Trump’s reputation after the month he’s had. That’s the crux of the argument a lawyer for the newspaper made today in a letter sent in response to Trump’s latest legal threats.

“Nothing in our article has had the slightest effect on the reputation that Mr. Trump, through his own words and actions, has already created for himself,” David McCraw, assistant general counsel for the Times, wrote in a letter addressed to Trump’s attorney, Marc Kasowitz, on Thursday afternoon.

Earlier in the day, Kasowitz sent a letter to Times executive editor Dean Baquet accusing the newspaper of publishing a “libelous article” with respect to a report, first published online on Wednesday evening, in which two women accused Trump of touching (and in one case kissing) them inappropriately in separate incidents. In his letter to Baquet, Kasowitz called the article “reckless, defamatory” and said it constitutes libel. The lawyer also claimed in the letter that the timing of the Times article, coming less than a month before Election Day, is evidence that the report “is nothing more than a politically-motivated effort to defeat Mr. Trump’s candidacy.”

Kasowitz demanded that the Times cease further publication of the article, remove it from the paper’s website, and issue a full retraction and apology to the GOP nominee.

In his response letter, the Times’ lawyer bluntly declined those requests from Trump’s legal team despite the threat of a potential libel lawsuit against the newspaper. McCraw essentially argues that the various controversial statements Trump has made about women over the years, some of which just recently came to light, have already tarnished the real estate mogul’s reputation to the point that the Times‘ article could not hurt it further.

McCraw wrote:

The Times‘ attorney also argued that Trump’s proximity to the nation’s highest office, and the fact that Trump’s past treatment of women has become a major talking point in the election, mean that the article in question addresses “an issue of national importance.” Indeed, the most recent presidential debate last Sunday featured a fair amount of talk regarding the recently revealed video footage from 2005 that showed Trump essentially boasting about making unwanted sexual advances toward women. And, in addition to the Times‘ article on Wednesday, several more women came forward with similar accusations against Trump this week in other publications, including People and The Guardian.

“We did what the law allows: We published newsworthy information about a subject of deep public concern,” McCraw wrote to close the letter to Kasowitz. “If Mr. Trump disagrees . . . we welcome the opportunity to have a court set him straight.”

How do we know that Trump didn't identify as a female that day? Aren't we supposed to want people to go into whatever bathroom/locker room they choose to identify with? How dare people discriminate against Trump like that!

How do we know that Trump didn't identify as a female that day? Aren't we supposed to want people to go into whatever bathroom/locker room they choose to identify with? How dare people discriminate against Trump like that!

New York Times has issued a statement to Trump and his campaign regarding allegations of libel and pulling a political hit job.

It basically states "Talk is cheap, bring it"

Donald Trump hasn't sued a newspaper for libel in three decades, despite the Republican presidential nominee repeatedly threatening to do so over the course of his business career, according to databases of state and federal court records.

A lawyer for the New York real estate developer demanded on Wednesday the New York Times retract a story in which two women accused Trump of inappropriately touching them. If the newspaper did not comply, Trump, who says the allegations are fabricated, would "pursue all available actions and remedies," the lawyer, Marc Kasowitz, said in a letter.

Trump said at a rally on Thursday he was preparing a lawsuit.

An attorney for the Times, David McCraw, said the story was of national importance and the paper would "welcome the opportunity" to defend it in court.

Over the years, media outlets including the Wall Street Journal, the Village Voice, the New York Post and Fortune Magazine have reported receiving similar threats from Trump or his representatives in advance of unflattering articles.

However, Trump rarely makes good on those threats, according to a Reuters review of court dockets in the database of online legal research service Westlaw, a unit of Thomson Reuters.

The last time he sued a news organization for libel was apparently in 1984. Trump filed the case after the Chicago Tribune’s architecture critic called his proposed 150-story Manhattan skyscraper an "atrocious, ugly monstrosity."

In 1985, a federal judge in Manhattan dismissed the suit, ruling the critic had a First Amendment right to express his opinion. The skyscraper was never built.

In the 32 years since Trump brought that suit, he has not taken similar action against another news organization, although he or his companies have sued at least three individuals and a book publisher. He was successful in one of those cases.

Book author and former New York Times reporter Timothy O'Brien defeated a Trump libel lawsuit in 2011, after Trump underwent a grueling deposition by O'Brien's lawyers.

Trump's suit against O'Brien, which also named O’Brien’s publisher, Time Warner Book Group, alleged the author deliberately underestimated the businessman's net worth. A New Jersey state judge found in 2009 that Trump had not established O’Brien’s actual malice.

His "army of lawyers" couldn't litigate their way out of four bankruptcies on three different casinos. I think the NYT has nothing to worry about.

... Bankruptcy is something you willingly enter not fight.

Republican nominee Donald Trump claims he gave generously to help his city in the dark days after the deadly terrorist attacks. But new records show a pledged promise to donate $10,000 to a major 9/11 charity must have somehow slipped his mind.

City Controller Scott Stringer conducted a review of hundreds of pages of previously sealed records of the two main 9/11 charities at the request of the Daily News, and found that Trump and his charity hadn't donated a dime in the months after 9/11.

"For the periods covered by the audits, we did not find any record of a donation from Trump himself or a Trump entity to either the Twin Towers Fund or the New York City Public/Private Initiatives Inc.," Stringer's office said in a statement to the Daily News in response to a Freedom of Information Law request.

This appears to contradict Trump's prior boasts of spontaneous generosity, made as his hometown reeled from the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil in history. The records show that through mid-2002 there is no evidence that Trump personally or through the Trump Foundation gave to either group.

The controller's office pointed out that because the reviewed period only covered the year after the attacks for the Twin Towers Fund, they "are unable to conclude definitively that Trump never gave to either of these two funds."

But it's clear that he didn't make the donation anytime soon after the attack, when help was needed the most. And previous reporting indicates that Trump's foundation didn't make any major contributions after that period, either.

In the weeks after the brutal attacks, Trump pledged $10,000 to the Twin Towers Fund as part of an effort Howard Stern was pushing. A report said Trump promised the donation in late September 2001, and the Daily News obtained audio of Stern's Oct. 10, 2001, interview with Trump where both he and co-host Robin Quivers thanked him for that donation.

"He gave us $10,000," Quivers said.

"Yes he did, to our fund," Stern responded.

Trump didn't dispute that he'd made that pledge. Stern was directing people to make out checks to the NYC Public Private Initiative at the time, using the "Howard Stern Relief Fund" as a marketing hook, as the website for the charity efforts shows.

The Daily News also reviewed every Form 990, which provides financial information for nonprofit companies or charities, for the Donald J. Trump Foundation from 2001 through 2014. There are no donations to the Twin Towers Fund or the NYC Public-Private Initiative listed.

The only Sept. 11th donation in those documents was a $1,000 donation in 2006 to the New York Rescue Workers Detoxification Fund, a group founded by Tom Cruise that used scientifically questionable methods approved by Scientology to help rescue workers.

The only recorded major donation to 9/11 causes that Trump has made was $100,000 from his foundation — which has been bankrolled by others without any money from Trump for years — to the 9/11 Museum in April 2016, as he sought to generate headlines after Ted Cruz attacked him for his "New York values" during the primary election.

After earlier reports suggested that the Trump Foundation hadn't given anything to any Sept. 11th charity, his campaign implied he'd made donations to the American Red Cross after the attacks.

There is no evidence that the Trump Foundation did so, and the only way for Trump to prove he did so would be to release his tax returns — something he's stubbornly refused to do throughout his presidential run.

Though it appears Trump didn't donate directly to the Twin Towers Fund, his ex-wife Ivana held a fund-raiser for the cause at the end of October 2001, according to a report, which said she picked up the check for the 52 guests in attendance.

Trump's apparent lie about donating to the Twin Towers Fund is the latest example of his misleading comments about his charitable giving — and his role in helping after the 9/11 attacks.

As the Daily News previously reported, Trump lied that $150,000 his company received from a government fund created to help small businesses recover after 9/11 was for reimbursement for his helping 9/11 victims by taking them in at his nearby building at 40 Wall St.

It's also unclear whether Trump actually did help people at 40 Wall St., as he's said. Trump's campaign refused to respond to multiple requests for more information about his vague claims that he "allowed people, for many months, to stay in the building (40 Wall St.), use the building and store things in the building," as he told Time Magazine in April.

Others who were intimately involved in 9/11 recovery efforts — as well as those who worked at the building at the time — have no recollection of Trump doing what he claimed he did.

"I don't remember," Nancy Lara, the building's property manager at the time, told the Daily News in a recent phone call, after saying she wasn't "inclined to talk about it."

Lara defended Trump's response after the attacks, saying "he did a lot" to make sure the air quality was safe and tenants would be fine in the building, which is near Ground Zero.

"Working for that organization, I can tell you everything was above board in terms of safety studies for people," she said.

But her memory grew fuzzy when the Daily News pressed her on whether she remembered facilitating any charitable efforts in letting people move in or store things there.

"I honestly don't remember. It's a long time ago," she said.

She's not alone.

New York Assemblywoman Linda Rosenthal (D-Manhattan), who at the time managed the Ground Zero Task Force run out of Rep. Jerry Nadler's (D-Manhattan) office, also said she couldn't remember Trump helping out after 9/11.

"I don't recall him being involved at all," she said. "I don't recall his name ever being in the mix."

Trump's campaign didn't respond to repeated requests for more information on the claimed charitable donations or evidence that he'd helped out at 40 Wall St., besides a question from spokeswoman Hope Hicks about when his pledge was made.

The Twin Towers fund was set up by then-Mayor Rudy Giuliani, now a Trump surrogate who made a point of telling the Republican National Convention in July that Trump made unspecified "anonymous" donations after the Sept. 11th attacks.

"Every time New York City suffered a tragedy Donald Trump was there to help," Giuliani said. "He's not going to like my telling you this but he did it anonymously.”

A spokesman for the controller's office told the Daily News that the office did not find any anonymous donations in its review of the earlier audit.

Giuliani has since repeatedly attacked Hillary Clinton for not doing enough to help the response.

"I was there that day, I don't remember seeing Hillary Clinton," Giuliani said Wednesday as he introduced Trump at a rally. "Don't tell me you belong to our very, very tight group of 'Never Forget.'"

Photo evidence of Giuliani standing next to Clinton at Ground Zero quickly emerged.

The Twin Towers fund was supposed to go toward the families of first responders, including firefighters, cops and EMTs, who died that day.

Tax records show the Trump Foundation claimed to have distributed $316,000 in 2001 and $383,000 in 2002, but the Daily Beast and the Smoking Gun have previously reported that Foundation records show none of that went to Sept. 11th charities.

Records of the Twin Towers Fund and NYC Public/Private Initiative have to date remained sealed, however, so it still wasn't clear if Trump himself might have donated.

Stringer's audit for the first time clears that up, revealing that through mid-2002 no Trump-related donation went to either of the biggest Sept. 11th charities.

The finding is based on the work papers contained in a city controller audit of the two charities made back in 2003. Stringer's team looked to see if a Trump check showed up in those papers following Freedom of Information Law requests from the Daily News and other news outlets.

Stringer, who had endorsed Trump's rival, Hillary Clinton, had his staff review all the records of the two charities for the first filing period after the attacks.

He found no Trump donations to the Twin Towers Fund from the day after the attack through Aug. 31, 2002, and nothing to the Public/Private Initiatives Inc. through June 30, 2002.

Those who worked hard to help the city recover after the attacks were furious with the latest revelations.

"This is another indication that Trump doesn't have New York — or American — values of helping those in need," said Catherine McVay Hughes, a lower Manhattan community organizer who helped rebuild the neighborhood and currently chairs Community Board 1. "Many Americans and people throughout the world with much fewer resources came and responded, and were generous with their resources, their time, even their own health."

Delaware, Ohio (CNN) Donald Trump said Thursday he will accept the results of next months election -- if he wins, a caveat that again threatens to undermine the sanctity of the most fundamental democratic exercise.

"I would like to promise and pledge to all of my voters and supporters and to all of the people of the United States that I will totally accept the results of this great and historic presidential election," the Republican presidential nominee told supporters at a rally in Delaware, Ohio, his first comment since the final presidential debate Wednesday.

After pausing for effect, he said, "... if I win."

Trump was widely panned by Republicans and Democrats alike after the debate during which he refused to pledge to accept the results of the election, regardless of the winner.

On Thursday, Trump added, "Of course, I would accept a clear election result, but I would also reserve my right to contest or file a legal challenge in the case of a questionable result.

Trump again repeated the previously debunked claims of widespread voter fraud as ammunition for why he might not accept the results, and again cited the lack of clarity from 2000's presidential election.

"We want fairness during the election. This is having nothing to do with me but having to do with the future of our country. We have to have fairness," Trump said.

Donald Trump on Friday questioned whether a retired general who admitted in federal court this week that he lied to the FBI actually lied to the FBI, just the latest instance in which the Republican nominee has cast doubt on a key US institution.

"We just had a four-star general, highly respected, Gen. (James) Cartwright, heard what happened yesterday. Could go to jail for five years because he supposedly told a lie to the FBI. And I don't know that it was even a lie. I don't know," Trump said at his last of three campaign rallies on Friday.

"So you are pleading guilty because you are, in fact, guilty?" US District Court Judge Richard Leon asked Cartwright in court on Monday.

"Yes, sir," Cartwright answered under oath.

(Newser) – Jessica Drake is the latest woman (No. 11, by Variety and NBC News' count) to accuse Donald Trump of sexual misconduct, claiming that the GOP nominee hugged her tightly and kissed her after a 2006 golf tournament in Lake Tahoe, Calif., then tried to offer her $10,000 to return to his suite (she says she declined). "Collectively, his words and his actions are a huge testament to his character: that of uncontrollable misogyny, entitlement, and being a sexual assault apologist," Drake said at a Saturday press conference in Los Angeles. But while Trump lashed out the same day during his so-called Gettysburg Address and promised to sue Drake and "all of these liars" who've come forward with claims against him, the attorneys for at least two of the women are already sending a message right back: "Bring it on," as Slate puts it.

Gloria Allred, representing Drake and two other accusers, warned at Drake's presser: "Be careful what you wish for, Mr. Trump," noting if he sues, he'll be subjected to intense questioning under oath from all the women's lawyers. And Lisa Bloom, attorney for Jill Harth, Trump's first accuser, tweeted dual statements from herself and her client Sunday with the comment "Spoiler: not backing down." Harth's statement noted, "Trump's calling me a liar again … only strengthens my resolve to speak the truth about what he did to me." Meanwhile, per LawNewz.com, an LA law firm partner has offered to represent the women pro bono should Trump sue. Ted Boutrous first made his offer in an Oct. 13 tweet, then again Saturday, adding, "Many other lawyers have offered to join me." Another commenter tweets: "And so begins the launch of the largest crowd-sourced legal defense fund in history."

And the first arrest for attempted voter fraud in the 2016 election goes to a Donald Trump supporter in Iowa.

Terri Rote, 55, was arrested on first-degree election misconduct charges after trying to vote for the GOP nominee at two separate polling stations in Des Moines Thursday, according to the Des-Moines Register.

Rote, a registered Republican, first showed up to the Polk County Election Office to submit an early ballot, and shortly thereafter went to a county satellite voting location with a second ballot. The voter fraud offense she was booked on is a Class D felony that could land her in jail for up to five years if convicted.

She was initially being held at the Polk County Jail on a $5,000 bond, but was later released, according to records.