NYT Attack on Trump Gets Outed as a Misrepresentation and Spin

[PokerGuy]

Funny to see the hit piece blow up in the faces of the stupid trash NYT and expose them further.

 

[Subyman]

She said he asked her to change into a bikini after only meeting her for a few moments. Then he showed her off to his friends:

Her words:

Donald was having a pool party at Mar-a-Lago. There were about 50 models and 30 men. There were girls in the pools, splashing around. For some reason Donald seemed a little smitten with me. He just started talking to me and nobody else.

He suddenly took me by the hand, and he started to show me around the mansion. He asked me if I had a swimsuit with me. I said no. I hadn’t intended to swim. He took me into a room and opened drawers and asked me to put on a swimsuit.

[...]

“He brought me out to the pool and said, ‘That is a stunning Trump girl, isn’t it?’ ” Ms. Brewer Lane said.

Then he labels her as his own. Its quite objectifying eh? Take girl through your mansion, ask her to change into a bikini, and then parade her in front of your friends and claim her by attaching your name to her. Hmmmm.

 

[emperus]

I don't necessarily see the inconsistency here. The thrust of the NYtimes article and her feelings of what happened can equally coexist. As we know there are some people who are more than ok with certain behavior (behavior that gives us a view at how someone views other people) that a lot of us wouldn't be ok with. I think that was the thrust of the NY times piece.

The NYtimes reported what she said and then took a societal moral stance on it. She believes even though he did that, he was a good guy. Eh..

 

[buckshot24]

She said he asked her to change into a bikini after only meeting her for a few moments. Then he showed her off to his friends:

Her words:



Then he labels her as his own. Its quite objectifying eh? Take girl through your mansion, ask her to change into a bikini, and then parade her in front of your friends and claim her by attaching your name to her. Hmmmm.

She said she wasn't offended.

 

[Subyman]

She said she wasn't offended.

It doesn't really matter. The NYT reported her story and described their take on it. She may live in a world where she enjoys men acting that way, but many find it reprehensible.

 

[emperus]

She said she wasn't offended.

And so what. I'm sure I can find someone who wouldn't be offended if I gave them a golden shower (I know that is crass). I don't think whether she was offended would be the issue for most people.

 

[shady28]

I don't necessarily see the inconsistency here. The thrust of the NYtimes article and her feelings of what happened can equally coexist. As we know there are some people who are more than ok with certain behavior (behavior that gives us a view at how someone views other people) that a lot of us wouldn't be ok with. I think that was the thrust of the NY times piece.

The NYtimes reported what she said and then took a societal moral stance on it. She believes even though he did that, he was a good guy. Eh..

She commented on the swimming pool, he asked if she had a swimsuit she said no, so he asked if she wanted one.

You know, one time I took a girl out on a sailboat (small catamaran). She changed her clothes on the first date.

Big. Fucking. Deal.

Yet the same people who attack Trump in this way think it's OK for a 12 yr old little girl and a grown old man who thinks he's a woman to have to expose themselves in the same restroom.

 

[Blackjack200]

My wife (who hates trump) says the article was a mess. Even when I pointed out their dual sided reporting she still thought it was a ridiculously messy hit piece.

My wife (who loves trump) says the article was brilliant. Even when I pointed out that one of the women disagreed with how her story was portrayed, she still thought it was a well researched and honest piece.

 

[LegendKiller]

And so what. I'm sure I can find someone who wouldn't be offended if I gave them a golden shower (I know that is crass). I don't think whether she was offended would be the issue for most people.

Feminism - forcing everybody to be offended about anything, even tangentially.

 

[LegendKiller]

She commented on the swimming pool, he asked if she had a swimsuit she said no, so he asked if she wanted one.

You know, one time I took a girl out on a sailboat (small catamaran). She changed her clothes on the first date.

Big. Fucking. Deal.

Yet the same people who attack Trump in this way think it's OK for a 12 yr old little girl and a grown old man who thinks he's a woman to have to expose themselves in the same restroom.

That's because the grown man is just being himself in a blow to the patriarchy . But how dare a woman be herself and bow down the the patriarchy, she must be shamed mercilessly. That is unless she was shamed by hillary, then it is all good because she is a whore, but we can't victim blame, so she has to be believed, unless she is against hillary, then she is a liar.

The backflips liberals go through must be exhausting.

 

[michal1980]

If you read the details of the Fox interview with Rowanne Brewer Lane, Lane repeats essentially everything stated in the NYT story. The reason she's upset is that SHE enjoyed the experience of meeting Trump and dating him for a few months, whereas the NYT reporter interpreted her experience at the party as Trump exploiting/debasing a young woman he had just met.

But the Times story is far from one-sided. It makes clear that Trump treated women both very badly and very well. To quote from the story:



So if this Time story is - to quote the OP - "outed as a lie," then I guess that means that some women did NOT find Trump gracious and encouraging. I guess that means that he never promoted some women to "the loftiest heights of his company." I guess that means Trump never "nurtured women's careers."

You see, it works both ways: If you claim the story is a fabrication you don't get to just dismiss the negative stuff.

The Times story was sold as negative to trump form the start.

Just look at the headline, and sub-headline

"Crossing the Line: How Donald Trump Behaved With Women in Private

Interviews reveal unwelcome advances, a shrewd reliance on ambition, and unsettling workplace conduct over decades."

But please continue telling us how theres no bias in the lmsm.

 

[Moonbeam]

We live in a world driven by competition and competition is hate. If you tell a person with an ego like Trump's he's a bad person, be prepared to have blood flow from your nose or somewhere and then whine and get called a bitch. Pick your sport. Are you big league and ready to give Trump a taste of your blood or are you going to scream 'protected class'. How many times does he have to say, "If your nice to me I'll be nice to you."

And some of the worlds greatest misogynists are women.

 

[emperus]

She commented on the swimming pool, he asked if she had a swimsuit she said no, so he asked if she wanted one.

You know, one time I took a girl out on a sailboat (small catamaran). She changed her clothes on the first date.

Big. Fucking. Deal.

Yet the same people who attack Trump in this way think it's OK for a 12 yr old little girl and a grown old man who thinks he's a woman to have to expose themselves in the same restroom.

Isn't the right the bastion of judgment? I remember Bill Clinton got impeached for having sex with an adult.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Meanwhile the Clinton Foundation gives $2,000,000 to a for-profit company partially owned by the "Energizer"....yet the New York Times could give a shit. But hey...Trump offered a girl a swimsuit to wear at a pool party...what a fucking scumbag!

http://nypost.com/2016/05/13/clinton-charity-arranged-2m-pledge-to-company-owned-by-bills-friend/

Clinton charity arranged $2M pledge to firm owned by Bill’s ‘friend’

 

[Vic]

Cmon, guys, try to keep up. Only Republican Presidential candidates are allowed to brag about how many times they've cheated on their many wives and still be considered heroes of morality.

 

[buckshot24]

And so what. I'm sure I can find someone who wouldn't be offended if I gave them a golden shower (I know that is crass). I don't think whether she was offended would be the issue for most people.

So what? Are you saying doing that would be wrong?

 

[buckshot24]

Cmon, guys, try to keep up. Only Republican Presidential candidates are allowed to brag about how many times they've cheated on their many wives and still be considered heroes of morality.

Who said he was a hero of morality?

 

[FerrelGeek]

If there's a retraction (doubt it), it'll be buried in the obits in 4 point type.

If she was misquoted the Times should definitely issue a retraction and apologize.

There are an awful lot of direct quotes from women in that piece though and it seems unlikely that they are all misquotes or even substantially misquotes. It's not like these accusations against him are anything new either. Women have been talking about how horrible he is for years and his public behavior towards women has been pretty abominable as well.

So yeah, if they screwed this part up that's pretty shitty. I hope that means people are looking into the other quoted women as well to make sure their accounts were accurate. If they are though, Trump still has a lot to answer for.

 

[Vic]

Who said he was a hero of morality?

The Religious Right is saying that about this twice divorced casino boss who has frequently boasted about his many adulterous escapades.

 

[fskimospy]

If there's a retraction (doubt it), it'll be buried in the obits in 4 point type.

I doubt it, as the Times is renowned for tackling criticisms of it head on. Hell, they have a public editor column that they show quite prominently whose sole purpose is to critique the paper's own reporting.

 

[Victorian Gray]

My wife (who hates trump) says the article was a mess. Even when I pointed out their dual sided reporting she still thought it was a ridiculously messy hit piece.

Of course she did.

You and your messiah. LOL!

 

[Blackjack200]

I doubt it, as the Times is renowned for tackling criticisms of it head on. Hell, they have a public editor column that they show quite prominently whose sole purpose is to critique the paper's own reporting.

And she just left, unfortunately. I would have liked to see Margret Sullivan's take on this.

 

[fskimospy]

I thought it was benign as well even with all the lies and spin. Meanwhile, the recent Clinton Foundation scandal gets very little media attention. Go figure.

Just to be clear and so we can avoid the inevitable 'who, me?' from you later on, what are you asking us to 'go figure', specifically? What are you claiming?

 

[FerrelGeek]

Isn't the right the bastion of judgment? I remember Bill Clinton got impeached for having sex with an adult.

Nice try for repeating the lie. Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/impeachvote121198.htm

There is no mention in the above link of Clinton getting a Monica mouthwash, stuffing her cooch with a cigar, or applying a cream rinse to her blue dress.

Yes, I'm fully aware of the subject of the trial was where he perjured himself, but that's irrelevant. He lied under oath; something that lands people in jail and/or gets them fined. He was also sanctioned and had his law license suspended for 5 years for said perjury.
http://www.landmarklegal.org/DesktopFrame.aspx?frame=LONGTEXT&itemid=347

 

[FerrelGeek]

I doubt it, as the Times is renowned for tackling criticisms of it head on. Hell, they have a public editor column that they show quite prominently whose sole purpose is to critique the paper's own reporting.

Well, if they do that, kindly link it here please.