Child Rape Case Against Donald Trump

[_Doc]

Last week Donald Trump as had a federal lawsuit put on him by "Jane Doe"(A fake Name) for raping her in 1994 when she was 13. He has also had two prior sexual assault court cases. His first wife in 1989, and 34 year old Jil Harth in 1997.

With the new Jane Doe case there are verifiable facts of Trump and a friend of his Jeffrey Epstein. As well as a strong witness statement. The first time she attempted to sue Trump she did it without a lawyer and got dismissed due to technical filling errors. She now has gotten a lawyer and is now being viewed at New York Federal Court. Jane Doe claims that she was a sex slave that would attend parties at the home of Jeffrey Epstein.

The witness "Tiffany Doe"(a fake name) said that she was the one who recruited Jane Doe to be a sex slave at Port Authority in New York. Tiffany Doe has also said to seen Jane Doe be sexually assaulted multiply times.

Here are two documents that are with Jane Doe's complaints.

Defendant Epstein then attempted to strike me about the head with his closed fists while he angrily screamed at me that he, Defendant Epstein, should have been the one who took my virginity, not Defendant Trump.

Defendant Trump stated that I shouldn’t ever say anything if I didn’t want to disappear like Maria, a 12-year-old female that was forced to be involved in the third incident with Defendant Trump and that I had not seen since that third incident, and that he was capable of having my whole family killed.

Trump has also have been seen to attack a journalist.

Mr. Trump has relished calling women “dogs,” “slobs” and “pigs,” and cyberstalked and derided journalist Megyn Kelly for having the temerity to ask him to defend his own words. He threw out the most misogynist of attacks, attempting to undermine her professionalism by accusing her of menstruating. He’s cruelly ridiculed the appearance of a female opponent (Carly Fiorina) and an opponent’s wife (Heidi Cruz). His campaign even openly acknowledged that it disqualified all women for consideration as his vice-president.

The last sentence in the Huffington Post said

What do you call a nation that refuses to even look at sexual assault claims against a man seeking to lead the free world?

That is my same question.

Link:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-bloom/why-the-new-child-rape-ca_b_10619944.html

[EquALLity]

What do you call a nation that refuses to even look at sexual assault claims against a man seeking to lead the free world?

Yeah, it's horrible.

Do you think Trump actually did it?

[brimstoneSalad]

Does it matter if a candidate is a pedophile?

I'm worried about the policies and how they affect the world -- hundreds of millions of children, more so than a small few.

[_Doc]

Does it matter if a candidate is a pedophile?

I'm worried about the policies and how they affect the world -- hundreds of millions of children, more so than a small few.

At what point does it matter? Murder? Rape a million children? I have never been one to use consequentialism so I do think it matters. I don't want to just turn a blind eye to someone just because he may affect the world positively.

[brimstoneSalad]

I have never been one to use consequentialism so I do think it matters. I don't want to just turn a blind eye to someone just because he may affect the world positively.

"Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus."

Have you read this thread? http://philosophicalvegan.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=785

[_Doc]

I have never been one to use consequentialism so I do think it matters. I don't want to just turn a blind eye to someone just because he may affect the world positively.

"Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus."

Have you read this thread? http://philosophicalvegan.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=785

I am a little curious do you think we should ignore this completely? Or should he go to trail and face the consequences? (If he is found guilty that is).

Let me try be more specific on my view on this:
Would I hate him as a person if he was found guilty. Yes. Would I then view all his action as horrible? No. The main reason why I would not want a president to be a rapist is because of relations. How would other countries react to that. As well as the citizens of America. That is my fear of having a president with something like that on their record.

Lastly, now that I re-read my own sentence and the definitions of the ethical theories. I have worded my first sentence incorrectly. I rarely use consequentialism. I can't really give a name to my personal ethical theory. I typically change it depending on the incident. (If that makes sense.)

What do you call a nation that refuses to even look at sexual assault claims against a man seeking to lead the free world?

Yeah, it's horrible.

Do you think Trump actually did it?

I want to say no but, I don't know him that well. I only know him from what I have seen in media.

[brimstoneSalad]

I am a little curious do you think we should ignore this completely? Or should he go to trail and face the consequences? (If he is found guilty that is).

Regardless of what we do, if there's actual evidence of this he will go to trial and face consequences.

I don't necessarily think it's appropriate to try people in the court of public opinion. All of this is hearsay and gossip. Even Trump is innocent until proven guilty.

No. The main reason why I would not want a president to be a rapist is because of relations. How would other countries react to that. As well as the citizens of America. That is my fear of having a president with something like that on their record.

That could be a sensible consequential perspective. So, does that hold up to the evidence?
Do any other countries have heads of state who have engaged in terrible things, and yet are still viewed with respect?

I typically change it depending on the incident. (If that makes sense.)

That's generally viewed as inconsistent... not in a good way, in the sense of potentially having double standards. It's a better idea to stick with something consistently in your dealings so people at least know what to expect.

[_Doc]

I am a little curious do you think we should ignore this completely? Or should he go to trail and face the consequences? (If he is found guilty that is).

Regardless of what we do, if there's actual evidence of this he will go to trial and face consequences.

I don't necessarily think it's appropriate to try people in the court of public opinion. All of this is hearsay and gossip. Even Trump is innocent until proven guilty.

No. The main reason why I would not want a president to be a rapist is because of relations. How would other countries react to that. As well as the citizens of America. That is my fear of having a president with something like that on their record.

That could be a sensible consequential perspective. So, does that hold up to the evidence?
Do any other countries have heads of state who have engaged in terrible things, and yet are still viewed with respect?

I typically change it depending on the incident. (If that makes sense.)

That's generally viewed as inconsistent... not in a good way, in the sense of potentially having double standards. It's a better idea to stick with something consistently in your dealings so people at least know what to expect.

Okay. I think misunderstood. I thought you were saying that even if he was found guilty he should still be allowed to run. But, do you mean that he should still run until he is found guilty(if he is)? Or do I still not understand. If that is so I also agree on that.

Never thought that I would have double standards just by using different ethical theories. I do see now how I could do that. It would be hard for me to stick to one. But, I will try it out and see how my views change.

[EquALLity]

Does it matter if a candidate is a pedophile?

I'm worried about the policies and how they affect the world -- hundreds of millions of children, more so than a small few.

I don't think the type of person who rapes children would care about policies that help those children.

How many red flags are too much for you? Pedophilia is one of the worst things a person can do.

[brimstoneSalad]

I don't think the type of person who rapes children would care about policies that help those children.

Well, that's not really fair; even unapologetic/enthusiastic meat eaters can have enough internal conflict to "care" about animal welfare and environmentalism. It's ridiculous, but people aren't always consistent. Sometimes two values that contradict each other can coreside in a person.

Even if he didn't care, that's not true that he wouldn't advance good policies. Maybe not for the children's sake, but an egomaniac is going to want to be regarded as a great president, and go down in history for all of the things he did, even if that means saving the children he's indifferent to.

Psychopaths can actually be very effective.

How many red flags are too much for you? Pedophilia is one of the worst things a person can do.

Right now it's rumor, which I don't give much credence to in a presidential campaign. There are also rumors that Hillary is a reptilian alien.

I'm more concerned with Trump's running mate, which isn't rumor.