The lawsuit accusing Trump of raping a 13-year-old girl, explained
The lawsuit accusing Trump of raping a 13-year-old girl, explained
The anonymous plaintiff dropped her lawsuit against Trump, the circumstances around which have been bizarre.
Johnson claimed that Trump violently raped her when she was 13 at a 1994 orgy hosted by Jeffrey Epstein — the billionaire who was convicted in 2008 of soliciting an underage girl for prostitution and has been accused of having sex with more than 30 underage girls.
Johnson said Trump had sexual contact with her at four of those parties, including tying her to a bed and violently raping her in a “savage sexual attack.” The lawsuit said Johnson “loudly pleaded” with Trump to stop, but that he responded by “violently striking Plaintiff in the face with his open hand and screaming that he would do whatever he wanted.”
Trump is a pedo with several decades of documented creepy behavior.
There. "Explained."
I told a trump cultist about the creepy things he said about his daughter. Guy said it's ok, he made a mistake and God had forgiven him.
Think of the children, though. Those books are really dangerous.
Why isn't this all over prime time news, including fox, so the christian voters can see it.
More importantly why aren't the democrats and liberal establishment forcing this into the public eye. They could be using this to their advantage. Why aren't we hearing about it as loudly as we should be. I'm not seeing it any where mainstream.
Fuck, biden should give a press announcement only for this.
(1) trillionaires (such as Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk) bought out the media - "prime time news" no longer exists, as it used to, now instead we have advertising segments meant to increase profitz
(2) the christians do not care - as evidenced by the fact that they already know. They just used him to accomplish their ends, of restricting abortion and whatever. Authoritarians just don't think in terms like right or wrong, and rather what am I told to feel about this or that?
(3) also, yes they are THAT MUCH against the LGBTQIA+ "agenda" (of living life free from outside interference) that they could have watched the event happen live, heard her screams, and still vote for Trump. Some would still vote that way even if he had done it personally to them. It is an entirely different mindset, and we would do well to listen to it, rather than be surprised a few months from now (as we were before in 2016).
(4) if you want to understand it moar better-er, the best teacher I've seen is The Alt Right Playbook, by Innuendo Studios - I recommend starting at the beginning and going all the way through it, but the most relevant one to this discussion I think is this one.
TLDR: they know, they don't care in the slightest - truly.
It boils down to this: To the GOP the idea that a LGBT person might molest a child is more important than the reality that Trump actually has.
I have to upvote Innuendo Studios.
There is a whole group of religious folks that are certain he is the antichrist and want to bring him to power so he can bring about the end of days, revelations, the rapture (where they will be saved), then after hell on earth, the 1000 years of peace....so....they are totally cool with his evil. It's insane when you think about it from the position of nothing in religion being real.
It should be revealing with a story like this just how controlled the media has actually become. The vast majority of major media outlets have been slowly bought out and/or heavily funded by right-wing groups. The story should be everywhere, but you'll probably only see it in niche news sites and maybe MSNBC. This is also why all we really see are negative stories about Biden regardless of what Trump does or says.
The article describes why the story feels to them so strange and suspicious. For example
It was the end of an incredibly strange case that featured an anonymous plaintiff who had refused almost all requests for interviews, two anonymous corroborating witnesses whom no one in the press had spoken to, and a couple of seriously shady characters — with an anti-Trump agenda and a penchant for drama — who had aggressively shopped the story around to media outlets for over a year.
Those shady characters — a former reality TV producer who calls himself “Al Taylor” and a “Never Trump” conservative activist named Steve Baer — had been mostly unsuccessful in getting the media to bite. There are a few very good reasons for that, which the Huffington Post’s Ryan Grim succinctly summed up: Taylor and Baer have been really sketchy about the whole thing, and since the accuser is anonymous, journalists can’t do anything to verify her claims. The only journalist who has actually interviewed Johnson, Emily Shugerman at Revelist, came away confused and even doubting whether Johnson really exists.
Since a tape of Trump bragging about sexual assault came out in early October, a dozen named women have come forward with credible, similar-sounding allegations of Trump forcibly kissing or groping them in exactly the way he described on that tape. Johnson’s case was an outlier, with far more salacious allegations from a source that seems far less credible.
And it goes much further. I guess not many wanted to go hard on this story with it seeming a bit sketchy. Like they said in the end
It’s true that the allegation is explosive, andcould make voters see Trump’s many disturbing comments about young girls over the years in a new light. But it’s also very dubious and uncertain, and there’s no real need to promote a case like that when a dozen women have come forward with much more credible stories, using their own names and making themselves available to reporters for scrutiny.
This is why.
It's not just Bill Clinton though. Many of the rich and powerful are vulnerable to the Epstein story, including Bill Gates.
That's a bingo.
They don't want to shed light on it because it could implicate way more than just trump.
The media itself is a fucking mess.
Take this, for example:
So a self-affirmed victim sends an email to a magazine. That email becomes a point of fact even though people involved either never confirmed it or straight up said it never happened.
This happens constantly. "News" is getting reported before or without confirmation. Shoot first, ask questions later, maybe put a blurb at the bottom a couple weeks later when nobody will read it correcting everything that was wrong.
Obviously the Clinton's wouldn't confirm it, but they've long since learned not to deny it either. Denying is nearly as bad as confirming, since it gives even a little more credibility to the claims, just by acknowledging its existence. Especially in this current political climate, commenting at all has nothing to gain and everything to lose.
Highly recommend the book "Trust me, I'm Lying". News consumers have to do their due diligence now and actually judge the sources of the news itself, even for sources previously thought to be reputable. The court of public opinion is all that matters, and it's judged by old and new media alike. Spez and Musk and Zuck are all as powerful as Murdoch, and they're the Supreme Court of Public Opinion.
And then you have shit like the Internet Research Agency flooding the docket.
Christians have a thing about fucking kids, remember?
Well, as others said, it’s probably because it’s a 2016 article about a story that never got anywhere.
Maybe it was true, maybe it wasn’t, who knows. But it’s definitely not the best thing to give press announcements about, especially considering all the horrible stuff Trump has verifiably done.
I don't think they've read the article, which is a shame because it's an interesting one. But it does make that point and comments about Clinto campaign
But the Clinton campaign hasn’t touched Johnson’s allegation, and with good reason. It’s true that the allegation is explosive, andcould make voters see Trump’s many disturbing comments about young girls over the years in a new light. But it’s also very dubious and uncertain, and there’s no real need to promote a case like that when a dozen women have come forward with much more credible stories, using their own names and making themselves available to reporters for scrutiny.
He Raped that LITTLE GIRL as an OFFICIAL Act of the Presidency!
And he'd do it again too.
offtopic: Other than Trump and MAGAts using it, such capitalization could look interesting. As something, indeed, characteristically American. And it might make texts more legible sometimes (I'm not joking), a bit like with Bionic Reader.
So this wasn't an official act? I guess it depends upon which SC justice you ask.
Ask Trump is all.
He might not have been the president in 1994, but I don't have a source to back that up
Republicans: “That man is just LIKE US! He embodies every value that we hold dear! We should totally nominate him to lead our party.”
It is amazing how there is no line that Trump/GOP are willing to cross for this man. I've never seen a guy make so many people admit they have no moral backbone at all. Everything they hate and say other groups are he is.
Criminal ✅
Con-Man ✅
Rapist ✅
Racist (They enjoy this.) ✅
Hostile insurrection. ✅
Criminal ✅Illegal Democrat Witch HuntCon-Man ✅Media LiesRapist ✅Fake NewsRacist (They enjoy this.) ✅Democrats are the real DEI racists.Hostile insurrection. ✅Peaceful protest.Unfortunately for them this is what that list is.
We live in 2 or more realities existing simultaneously due to the real scum of the earth: propagandists.
I don't get why people are down voting you. This is exactly it. They have an infinite layer of lies on lies to spin all of this stuff.
Whoops I missed the last line! My bad.
Yep, spot on. When you read trough their new media and their forums, this is ant it comes down to.
Try asking a Democrat to name one thing that Biden could do that would make them not vote for him.
To be fair, though, I don't think that Biden would've gotten the nomination if he were as scummy as Trump.
538 upvotes on an article from 2016. This rape allegation was known in 2016:
A 2016 lawsuit accused Trump, then a candidate for president, of raping a minor, but no evidence was put forth before the case was dropped.
but no evidence was put forth before the case was dropped.
The case was dropped because the victim received death threats from Trump's fanclub.
The whole case was also really suspicious, like the article said. People, including the only reporter who got to interview the woman (over a phone call) wasn't even sure if the person actually ever existed. Seeing that this is a fairly old article, I wonder if we got any new info on this.
Oh well if he raped the 13 year old child 8 years ago it's all fine. Statute of limitations on ethics and all.
/s
Technically not an accusation, Trump lost the lawsuit to Jane Doe. When Trump denied the allegations and accused her of defrauding him, he got sued again for defamation.
Trump raped a 13 year old girl.
Aren't those different cases?
No. But Trump does have like 30 other allegations, so I could see why you were confused.
I'm not sure what case they mean but this particular Jane Doe doesn't seem to have won against Trump on rape allegations. First case was dismissed and second was dropped after there were death threats. Seems like there's four Jane Doe lawsuits against Trump, two about the rape, but two of them have nothing to do with that. Pretty confusing.
Technically not an accusation, Trump lost the lawsuit to Jane Doe.
I'm not sure if there's some other Jane Doe lawsuit he lost but he didn't lose (either time) the rape accusation talked in the article. First was dismissed and second was dropped (likely because death threats).
A lawsuit filed in California in April 2016 accused Trump and Jeffrey Epstein of forcibly raping three 12 and 13-year-old girls at underage sex parties at Epstein's Manhattan residence in 1994.[39] The case was dismissed the following month. A second version of the lawsuit was filed in New York in June by a Jane Doe claiming to have been raped by the pair at four 1994 parties when she was 13 years old.[40] It was withdrawn in October as the plaintiff said she had received death threats.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations#Jane_Doe_(1994)
But her emails. But his stutter.
Supreme Court: "Presidential Action! Immune!"
Oh thank God it was explained away.
Anyway, here are 13 pages of links to Biden old lame shitposts by tankies.
Don't forget to nuke the west!
Why did they drop it though? If it was actually proven, then that would've been the end for him
I am afraid to think that soon we will find ourselves discussing whether or not someone who has raped a girl can run for presidency
Current court might decide it's a requirement. Look at Jefferson.
Although they might decide that it's not rape if it's a slave. Which might make 13th amendment interpretations interesting.
Is this the one where the girl and her mother were constantly threatened so they refused to testify and moved away?
The (second) case against Trump was dropped after Jane Doe got death threats. Not sure if that's what you mean. The article does mention " two anonymous corroborating witnesses whom no one in the press had spoken to". Was that a girl and her mother?
I don't excuse the media for not talking about this, but I also don't think it would matter if they put it on a 24 hour news cycle and shouted it from the rooftops. Or if they used the emergency broadcast system to send the story directly to every phone owning American. The cult of trump just doesn't care. My (ugg) Facebook feed is full of people saying that felony's don't matter when it cost them some extra cash to buy groceries. I see people almost daily wearing clothing proclaiming they are voting for the felon. They just do not care about what ever he has done.
You're right and it's terrifying. I don't see any way to fix it besides maybe forming a new non-fascist country
The media talked about it plenty. This story is 4 years old. How often do the expect the media to report on unfounded allegations by someone who dropped the case?
Americans influenced everything in my life.
I hope they collaborate onto better goals.
Buckle up.
Okay so now can we start talking about how fucking Turnip inc. needs to FUCK OFF HOLY SHIT IS ANYBODY LISTENING FUCK MY LIFE
We all are, but the media hides it. Fake news was always just another projection. The news has always loved Trump.
And no MAGAtard worth their trash has ever linked their God-Emperor to that pervert Epstein. 😡🤬
MAGAtard? They prefer MAGAt or MAGAholic
Why are we posting 8 year old articles to Politics?
Because the actual records of this case and transcripts from the Epsteine documents were revealed, and it goes into a lot of depth on why this case should be bigger news and given a lot more attention.
Would make more sense to post a new article with that new info imo
…does it? I tried googling a bit but couldn’t find anything recent.
EDIT: okay, there’s articles talking about the Epstein documents, but they don’t seem to be explicitly connected to this specific case. Would’ve been better to post that article instead of a 8-year old one.
The man in question was elected president of the USA eight years ago.
He was? I hadn't heard that. Can someone please post an article from 2016 so I can verify Trump was indeed elected President?
Why are we upset about it?
AHHHH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
The general consensus is that this lawsuit was fake and started by anti-Trump members of the GOP in 2016.
The general consensus is that this lawsuit was fake and started by anti-Trump members of the GOP
And yet there is a case number and record of the case.
Here's a current press item about the issue, dated Jul 04, 2024, Donald Trump, Katie Johnson Allegations: Everything We Know - Newsweek
…which confirms that there’s no new info.
Some X users appeared to believe that the document is a recent filing. The post was shared after about 150 pages of transcripts related to a 2006 grand jury investigation into Jeffrey Epstein's rape and sex trafficking of teenagers was released to the public on Monday.
However, the document included in the X post isn't connected to those papers, but actually comes from a lawsuit filed in the months leading up to the 2016 election by an anonymous plaintiff using the name "Katie Johnson."
Now, I wouldn’t be surprised if he actually did it, wouldn’t even be the worst thing he did. But that is indeed the general consensus, afaik.
EDIT: the article posted by Flying Squid would be more relevant to current events.
The Murdochian consensus, yes.
As for the rest of us, anyone who’s bothered to look can see the situation fits trump to a T.
Allegedly.
Sure
None of the other victims corroborate that Katie Johnson was even on the island. They made a real filing of fake claims.
I'm all for sticking it to Trump and punishing him for his crimes, many of which were sexual and some may have been with underage girls. However we have to be careful to focus on the things he is actually guilty of, else he will just be exonerated and get another layer of orange Teflon added to his skin.