Former model Amy Dorris alleges Trump sexually assaulted her in 1997

[TitanTiger 20,509]

 

Quote

 

Donald Trump accused of sexual assault by former model Amy Dorris

Lucy Osborne
Last modified on Thu 17 Sep 2020 10.37 EDT

A former model has come forward to accuse Donald Trump of sexually assaulting her at the US Open tennis tournament more than two decades ago, in an alleged incident that left her feeling “sick” and “violated”.

In an exclusive interview with the Guardian, Amy Dorris alleged that Trump accosted her outside the bathroom in his VIP box at the tournament in New York on 5 September 1997.

Dorris, who was 24 at the time, accuses Trump of forcing his tongue down her throat, assaulting her all over her body and holding her in a grip she was unable to escape from.

“He just shoved his tongue down my throat and I was pushing him off. And then that’s when his grip became tighter and his hands were very gropey and all over my butt, my breasts, my back, everything.

“I was in his grip, and I couldn’t get out of it,” she said, adding: “I don’t know what you call that when you’re sticking your tongue just down someone’s throat. But I pushed it out with my teeth. I was pushing it. And I think I might have hurt his tongue.”

Via his lawyers, Trump denied in the strongest possible terms having ever harassed, abused or behaved improperly toward Dorris.

Dorris, who lives in Florida, provided the Guardian with evidence to support her account of her encounters with Trump, including her ticket to the US Open and six photos showing her with the real estate magnate over several days in New York. Trump was 51 at the time and married to his second wife, Marla Maples.

 

Dorris with Donald Trump at the US Open in 1997. She alleges the assault took place behind the partition wall in the background.

Her account was also corroborated by several people she confided in about the incident. They include a friend in New York and Dorris’s mother, both of whom she called immediately after the alleged incident, as well as a therapist and friends she spoke to in the years since. All said Dorris had shared with them details of the alleged incident that matched what she later told the Guardian.

Dorris, now 48 and a mother to twin daughters, said she had considered speaking publicly about the incident in 2016, when several women made public similar accusations against the then Republican candidate for president. But she decided against coming forward, in part because she thought that doing so might harm her family.

“Now I feel like my girls are about to turn 13 years old and I want them to know that you don’t let anybody do anything to you that you don’t want,” she said. “And I’d rather be a role model. I want them to see that I didn’t stay quiet, that I stood up to somebody who did something that was unacceptable.”

Dorris said she spent several days with Trump in September 1997 after being taken to New York for a long weekend by her then boyfriend, Jason Binn. At the time, Dorris was living with friends in Boca Raton, Florida, regularly travelling to Miami for modelling and occasional acting work. Binn, the founder of several luxury fashion and lifestyle magazines, was a friend of Trump; in 1999, he reportedly described the real estate businessman as his “best friend”.

On Friday 5 September, Dorris said Binn took her to meet Trump at his office in Trump Tower in Midtown Manhattan, before they went together to the US Open in Queens.

“He came on very strong right away,” Dorris said of Trump. “It seemed typical of a certain guy, people who just feel like they’re entitled to do what they want … even though I was there with my boyfriend.”

 

Amy Dorris sat between Donald Trump and Jason Binn at the US Open in Queens 1997

The couple were joined by other friends of Trump in his private box, a luxury carpeted suite that had a balcony overlooking the court. Photos from the day show Dorris alongside Trump and his friend Marylou Whitney.

Dorris said the alleged assault occurred when she got up to go to the bathroom, which was hidden behind a partition wall just metres from where Trump’s guests were watching the tennis. “I was having some issues with my contact lenses,” she said. “I remember going in there to moisten my lens.”

When she came out, she alleges, Trump was waiting outside. “Initially I thought that he was waiting to go to the bathroom, but that wasn’t the case, unfortunately,” she said. She alleges Trump forced himself on her after a brief exchange in which she recalls nervously laughing and telling him: “No, get away.”

She alleged she told Trump “no, please stop” but “he didn’t care”. “It doesn’t matter who you are,” she said. “Any time anyone says no, no means no. And that just didn’t work out for me. It wasn’t enough.”

“I just kind of was in shock,” she added. “I felt violated, obviously. But I still wasn’t processing it and just was trying to go back to talking to everyone and having a good time because, I don’t know, I felt pressured to be that way.”

Dorris cannot recall if she told Binn the full details of the alleged assault, but she says she asked him to tell Trump to leave her alone. She said she told Binn: “He’s all over me. I can’t deal with this. You have to do something.”

Binn did not respond to a request for comment. However, according to Trump’s lawyers, Binn told them he had no recollection of Dorris telling him that anything inappropriate had happened with Trump or that she felt uncomfortable around him.

Dorris said that soon after the alleged incident, she phoned a friend who lived in the city and told them what had happened. “I think I just felt safe knowing that I had someone in New York that I could go to, God forbid it got worse,” she said.

She said Trump did not seriously assault her again during her stay in New York, but that he continued to pursue her despite her firm rejection of his advances.

The day after the alleged assault, Dorris and Binn returned to Trump’s box at the US Open. Dorris said she decided to wear a “conservative” outfit of khakis, a blue knit sweater and loafers in an effort to discourage further advances from Trump.

The couple stopped off at Trump’s apartment in Trump Tower on the way, where they posed for photographs with celebrities who were also visiting the real estate tycoon before attending the tennis, including the musicians Lenny Kravitz and Sean Combs, AKA Puff Daddy.

 

Posing with Puff Daddy, left, and Lenny Kravitz, second right, at Trump Tower.

Dorris said Trump continued to pursue her, asking questions such as: “Could you see yourself living here?” “It didn’t matter that I changed my clothes, it was still the same situation,” she said. “I didn’t feel like myself that second day at all. It did feel like something was taken away.”

Later they were joined in Trump’s box by more VIP guests, including Leonardo DiCaprio and the illusionist David Blaine, with whom they posed for photographs. DiCaprio, Blaine, Kravitz and Combs did not respond to requests for comment.

 

David Blaine, second right, and Leonardo DiCaprio, second left, in the box at the US Open.

Two days later, on 8 September, 1997, Dorris said she attended a memorial service for Gianni Versace with Binn and Trump.

Asked why she continued to spend time with Binn and Trump in the days after the alleged assault, Dorris said: “I was there from Florida and I was with Jason. I had no money, nowhere to go. We were going from event to event and it was overwhelming.” She did not fully process what had happened until later, she added. “People spend years around people who have abused them, that’s what happens when something traumatic happens, you freeze.”

Lawyers for Trump said Dorris’s version of events did not stand up to any scrutiny and had there been any inappropriate behaviour by Trump outside of the bathroom within the VIP box, there would have been numerous witnesses.

 

Dorris signing autographs with Donald Trump

Trump’s lawyers said it seemed incredible that Dorris would voluntarily choose to be in the vicinity of Trump, at the US Open and the Versace memorial, in the days following the alleged assault. They said Binn had raised similar questions about her account. Trump’s lawyers also questioned why Dorris sat next to Trump at the Versace memorial, when she could have sat the other side of Binn.

They said Dorris had never raised the allegations with a law enforcement agency or to Trump, and said the timing of the claims so close to the November presidential election suggested they might be politically motivated.

The Guardian first heard about Dorris’s accusation against Trump via a model agent she had worked with in Chicago, in whom she had confided. Dorris first shared her allegation with the Guardian in confidence 15 months ago, but was unsure about going public. She recently decided she was ready to take that step, in part to be a role model to her daughters, who are now in their teens.

“When you invade someone’s space, it doesn’t matter if you were raped, it’s sexual assault, and it’s not OK,” she said. “You don’t touch someone unless they want to be touched. And I did nothing to encourage him to touch me.”

Dorris said she was also frustrated to hear Trump’s many other accusers being accused themselves of lying. “I’m sick of him getting away with this,” she said. “I’m tired of being quiet. It’s kind of cathartic. I just want to get this out. And I want people to know that this is the man, this is our president. This is the kind of thing he does and it’s unacceptable.”

Today the Guardian broke an exclusive ...

... on the story of Amy Dorris, a former model who has come forward to accuse President Donald Trump of sexually assaulting her at the US Open tennis tournament in 1997. She is at least the 26th woman to publicly accuse Trump of sexual misconduct.

Dorris first shared her story with the Guardian 15 months ago and recently decided it was time to go public. In that time, reporter Lucy Osborne was able to corroborate her account with half a dozen people and amass evidence supporting details of the story. ...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/17/donald-trump-accused-of-sexual-assault-by-former-model-amy-dorris

Add it to the list.  I know some will look at the timing and the interval of decades since it happened and dismiss it out of hand, but she's hardly the first to make similar claims and she did tell others at the time of the incident what happened.  I know it's the tendency of all political tribes to be skeptical when their guy is accused of stuff like this while flipping their lid over it when the other tribe's guy does it (see Bill Clinton).  But at what point do the accounts start adding up and is there a breaking point for Trump voters where believing he's just a victim of baseless smears no long holds for them?  And if so, what do they do in November with that?

[homersapien 11,423]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

But at what point do the accounts start adding up and is there a breaking point for Trump voters where believing he's just a victim of baseless smears no long holds for them?  

 

oooo, ooooh     I know the answer! 

No

[jj3jordan 2,059]

Homer you gonna break with the hair sniffer and fondler in chief?  oooo, ooooh! Me too!🤨

[alexava 6,973]

He probably did it. Biden probably did it. It doesn’t matter anymore. None of it can be proven. We as a country really suck at democracy. Or we suck at how we execute democracy. 

[DKW 86 7,438]

5 minutes ago, alexava said:

He probably did it. Biden probably did it. It doesn’t matter anymore. None of it can be proven. We as a country really suck at democracy. Or we suck at how we execute democracy. 

Indeed we do. 

[Mikey 16,686]

20 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

I know some will look at the timing and the interval of decades since it happened and dismiss it out of hand

Timing is everything. First the Ford woman accusing Kavanaugh as he's being considered for the SCOTUS after decades of silence, now this one pops up right before the election? Yes, I dismiss it out of hand. Decades ago was the time to press this issue. At this point in time it's nothing but another political ploy. Whether her statements are true or not doesn't matter at all.

[TitanTiger 20,509]

4 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Timing is everything.

Timing is something.  It's not everything.  Something can easily be 100% true and have suspect timing.

 

Quote

First the Ford woman accusing Kavanaugh as he's being considered for the SCOTUS after decades of silence, now this one pops up right before the election? Yes, I dismiss it out of hand. Decades ago was the time to press this issue. At this point in time it's nothing but another political ploy.

Of course you do because you don't like to bother with critical thinking.  Makes your head hurt and wastes time.  Much easier just to knee-jerk to default pat answers and move on.

 

Quote

Whether her statements are true or not doesn't matter at all.

Of all the asinine, moronic things you've wasted keystrokes on in this forum since you've been here, this has easily shot to the pole position.  Holy frick.  I mean, this one post alone makes me question your fitness to be in any forum even attempting to have serious discussion on something.

[channonc 466]

Trump rape accusers have become like COVID-19 deaths. The country has become numb to something that should be repulsive and publicly unacceptable. It's sad actually.

[TitanTiger 20,509]

18 minutes ago, channonc said:

Trump rape accusers have become like COVID-19 deaths. The country has become numb to something that should be repulsive and publicly unacceptable. It's sad actually.

There's no way Trump's supporters would ignore this if the accusation were about a Democrat.  No. Way. 

That's not to say that Democrats don't have their own sordid history on this.  The turning of the blind eye to Bill Clinton's allegations and the tribal politics surrounding all that was a terrible look.  What's hard for me as a conservative is, I believed my various Republican and conservative heroes back then when they staked the moral high ground.  In general, I believed conservatives had a true vision of honor and integrity in office (even if a few of them failed to live up to it personally) and that they were right - Bill Clinton was unfit to be president and the Democrats only cared about winning political battles and power.  The allegations against him should have been taken more seriously and for the most part, it was only conservatives that treated them that way.

My mistake I see now was believing that the conservatives back then were banging that drum because of a true belief in the idea that the leader of our country should be someone of high moral character.  In truth, they only cared about it because it was a useful brickbat with which to attempt to beat Democrats in politics.  It was ruthlessly utilitarian.  They didn't give a s*** about his sexual assaults and what kind of man he was.  They just wanted to win.  And I know that because when confronted with someone with just as many or more allegations (and far more recorded, documented instance of sexism and misogyny coming from his own mouth) who was on their team, they looked the other way, made excuses, dropped all pretense of caring about character, and made him their champion.  The same people that preached moral character in the 1990s now said things like "we're electing a president, not a pastor," "he's a baby Christian," or "it's about policies, not the person."  

It's beyond disappointing and disheartening.

[DKW 86 7,438]

43 minutes ago, channonc said:

Trump rape accusers have become like COVID-19 deaths. The country has become numb to something that should be repulsive and publicly unacceptable. It's sad actually.

But you would you feel that way about Biden accusers? Titan is correct. When this was going on with WJC, you could not find a Democrat anywhere that would even acknowledge anything back then. They covered and covered for him. They ATTACKED the women. Called them every name in the book and smeared them ceaselessly until recently. 

It is very funny how politics makes some blind on some topics. 

[DKW 86 7,438]

37 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

There's no way Trump's supporters would ignore this if the accusation were about a Democrat.  No. Way. 

That's not to say that Democrats don't have their own sordid history on this.  The turning of the blind eye to Bill Clinton's allegations and the tribal politics surrounding all that was a terrible look.  What's hard for me as a conservative is, I believed my various Republican and conservative heroes back then when they staked the moral high ground.  In general, I believed conservatives had a true vision of honor and integrity in office (even if a few of them failed to live up to it personally) and that they were right - Bill Clinton was unfit to be president and the Democrats only cared about winning political battles and power.  The allegations against him should have been taken more seriously and for the most part, it was only conservatives that treated them that way.

My mistake I see now was believing that the conservatives back then were banging that drum because of a true belief in the idea that the leader of our country should be someone of high moral character.  In truth, they only cared about it because it was a useful brickbat with which to attempt to beat Democrats in politics.  It was ruthlessly utilitarian.  They didn't give a s*** about his sexual assaults and what kind of man he was.  They just wanted to win.  And I know that because when confronted with someone with just as many or more allegations (and far more recorded, documented instance of sexism and misogyny coming from his own mouth) who was on their team, they looked the other way, made excuses, dropped all pretense of caring about character, and made him their champion.  The same people that preached moral character in the 1990s now said things like "we're electing a president, not a pastor," "he's a baby Christian," or "it's about policies, not the person."  

It's beyond disappointing and disheartening.

This, and many more thing like this, is why I just dont listen to  Republicans anymore. There was never any honor nor integrity there. None. 

[SocialCircle 570]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

There's no way Trump's supporters would ignore this if the accusation were about a Democrat.  No. Way. 

That's not to say that Democrats don't have their own sordid history on this.  The turning of the blind eye to Bill Clinton's allegations and the tribal politics surrounding all that was a terrible look.  What's hard for me as a conservative is, I believed my various Republican and conservative heroes back then when they staked the moral high ground.  In general, I believed conservatives had a true vision of honor and integrity in office (even if a few of them failed to live up to it personally) and that they were right - Bill Clinton was unfit to be president and the Democrats only cared about winning political battles and power.  The allegations against him should have been taken more seriously and for the most part, it was only conservatives that treated them that way.

My mistake I see now was believing that the conservatives back then were banging that drum because of a true belief in the idea that the leader of our country should be someone of high moral character.  In truth, they only cared about it because it was a useful brickbat with which to attempt to beat Democrats in politics.  It was ruthlessly utilitarian.  They didn't give a s*** about his sexual assaults and what kind of man he was.  They just wanted to win.  And I know that because when confronted with someone with just as many or more allegations (and far more recorded, documented instance of sexism and misogyny coming from his own mouth) who was on their team, they looked the other way, made excuses, dropped all pretense of caring about character, and made him their champion.  The same people that preached moral character in the 1990s now said things like "we're electing a president, not a pastor," "he's a baby Christian," or "it's about policies, not the person."  

It's beyond disappointing and disheartening.

The biggest issue is there wasn’t a good option in 2016 and there isn’t a good option on the ballot in 2020. I am again voting against today’s Democrat Party. I once again consider Trump the lesser of two evils. 

[Leftfield 2,636]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

There's no way Trump's supporters would ignore this if the accusation were about a Democrat.  No. Way. 

That's not to say that Democrats don't have their own sordid history on this.  The turning of the blind eye to Bill Clinton's allegations and the tribal politics surrounding all that was a terrible look.  What's hard for me as a conservative is, I believed my various Republican and conservative heroes back then when they staked the moral high ground.  In general, I believed conservatives had a true vision of honor and integrity in office (even if a few of them failed to live up to it personally) and that they were right - Bill Clinton was unfit to be president and the Democrats only cared about winning political battles and power.  The allegations against him should have been taken more seriously and for the most part, it was only conservatives that treated them that way.

My mistake I see now was believing that the conservatives back then were banging that drum because of a true belief in the idea that the leader of our country should be someone of high moral character.  In truth, they only cared about it because it was a useful brickbat with which to attempt to beat Democrats in politics.  It was ruthlessly utilitarian.  They didn't give a s*** about his sexual assaults and what kind of man he was.  They just wanted to win.  And I know that because when confronted with someone with just as many or more allegations (and far more recorded, documented instance of sexism and misogyny coming from his own mouth) who was on their team, they looked the other way, made excuses, dropped all pretense of caring about character, and made him their champion.  The same people that preached moral character in the 1990s now said things like "we're electing a president, not a pastor," "he's a baby Christian," or "it's about policies, not the person."  

It's beyond disappointing and disheartening.

I'll add that this dovetails into the discussion in another thread about the degradation in expectations of how a President should act. Society became largely inured to sexual misconduct over the course of the Clinton scandal. Now we're seeing continuous Constitutional assaults and breeches of Presidential power. How far has that shifted the popular opinion of what is acceptable, and how much worse will it be if Trump gets a second term?

[TitanTiger 20,509]

Just now, Leftfield said:

I'll add that this dovetails into the discussion in another thread about the degradation in expectations of how a President should act. Society became largely inured to sexual misconduct over the course of the Clinton scandal. Now we're seeing continuous Constitutional assaults and breeches of Presidential power. How far has that shifted the popular opinion of what is acceptable, and how much worse will it be if Trump gets a second term?

My hope, if nothing else, is that Biden will be a reversion to the mean - a return to a baseline modicum of seriousness and professionalism in the office.  Our politics in general have been degrading in this way for a while.  It predates Trump, but Trump took it and nose-dived even further and faster than anyone had before.  So even if I disagree with many of Biden's policies, I'm hoping that we can course correct on that and hopefully in 4 years there will be a return on the Republican side to good public servants and reasonable people who know how to behave like grown ups.

[TitanTiger 20,509]

But what I suspect will happen is that 4 years won't be enough to cleanse the Trump stank from the Republican Party and the soonest that anyone from the GOP can even hope to be taken seriously again is 2028.  It could go longer.  The Democrats from 1968 to 1992 only got 4 years in the Oval Office.  The GOP is deluded if they think Trumpism can't do the same to them.

[Leftfield 2,636]

 

10 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

 The GOP is deluded if they think Trumpism can't do the same to them.

That's the bigger problem - getting reasonable people back in control of the Republican Party. Any hope that memories will fade is all for naught if the Republicans turn around and nominate another horrible person. And we've barely even talked about those in Congress yet.

[TitanTiger 20,509]

56 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

 

That's the bigger problem - getting reasonable people back in control of the Republican Party. Any hope that memories will fade is all for naught if the Republicans turn around and nominate another horrible person. And we've barely even talked about those in Congress yet.

There's a remnant of folks who never bowed the knee and kissed the ring to be allowed into the halls of power under Trump.  They called it like they saw it early on and didn't chicken out and crawfish when he inexplicably won.  Hopefully those brave souls will be vindicated and be able to steer the party to better waters in the aftermath.  But yes, we'll have to deal with the residuals of those who came into Congress on his coattails for another election cycle or more.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

But what I suspect will happen is that 4 years won't be enough to cleanse the Trump stank from the Republican Party and the soonest that anyone from the GOP can even hope to be taken seriously again is 2028.  It could go longer.  The Democrats from 1968 to 1992 only got 4 years in the Oval Office.  The GOP is deluded if they think Trumpism can't do the same to them.

If Trump does lose, the Republican battle for the nomination in 2024 will be fascinating.  It will really be the Trump wing vs the traditional Republican wing.  And don't be shocked if Don Jr runs.

[Grumps 3,704]

5 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

If Trump does lose, the Republican battle for the nomination in 2024 will be fascinating.  It will really be the Trump wing vs the traditional Republican wing.  And don't be shocked if Don Jr runs.

I would like to think that the republican party would go with someone completely different (in my opinion) like Tim Scott or Nikki Haley. They both at least seem to be decent people. If Don Jr. has any success at all then I will have to admit that the party is even worse than I thought.

[johnnyAU 3,637]

Just now, Grumps said:

I would like to think that the republican party would go with someone completely different (in my opinion) like Tim Scott or Nikki Haley. They both at least seem to be decent people.

I agree. This business of the Republican party being doomed for decades is ridiculous and hyperbolic. 

[TitanTiger 20,509]

15 minutes ago, johnnyAU said:

I agree. This business of the Republican party being doomed for decades is ridiculous and hyperbolic. 

I've said a decade or more.  But if the GOP doesn't learn from the Trump error and continues down that path, decades is on the table.

[bigbird 60,578]

In the 2016 primaries, a lot saw Trump as the only candidate that could beat HRC and so he won the nomination. Similarly, Biden won this year's election for the same reason. He was the only candidate that many perceived as capable of beating Trump.  Both elections and candidates reached their position because the majority were/are concerned about winning rather than any policy or compromise. Seriously, I can't think of any policy being discussed to try and sway any electorate. It's all about, I'm not the other guy. It has become a win at all cost ground hog day

As far as the allegations go, Trump's didn't matter to Rs in 2016 and Biden's don't matter to Ds  in 2020. IMO, neither are fit to hold the office. Change the letters behind their names and you have many of the same concerns and complaints from the voters.

For all the complaints and righteous indignation from the left the last 4 year about behavior and ethics, they sure as hell didn't find an alternative candidate that would set them apart and let people rally behind.

[AUDub 11,164]

6 minutes ago, bigbird said:

In the 2016 primaries, a lot saw Trump as the only candidate that could beat HRC and so he won the nomination. Similarly, Biden won this year's election for the same reason. He was the only candidate that many perceived as capable of beating Trump.  Both elections and candidates reached their position because the majority were/are concerned about winning rather than any policy or compromise. Seriously, I can't think of any policy being discussed to try and sway any electorate. It's all about, I'm not the other guy. It has become a win at all cost ground hog day

Biden has made a career of compromise. That's part of the reason it's him and not Bernie or one of the others.

That's partly to his detriment. Some of his compromises, like the crime bill or Clarence Thomas, are albatrosses, and if he thinks he's going to be able to get some of the Rs in the Senate to defect while McConnell is in control,  he's in for a rude awakening. But if anyone can do it, it's him. Few are more respected on the Hill than Joe Biden.

[TitanTiger 20,509]

48 minutes ago, bigbird said:

In the 2016 primaries, a lot saw Trump as the only candidate that could beat HRC and so he won the nomination. Similarly, Biden won this year's election for the same reason. He was the only candidate that many perceived as capable of beating Trump.  Both elections and candidates reached their position because the majority were/are concerned about winning rather than any policy or compromise. Seriously, I can't think of any policy being discussed to try and sway any electorate. It's all about, I'm not the other guy. It has become a win at all cost ground hog day

As far as the allegations go, Trump's didn't matter to Rs in 2016 and Biden's don't matter to Ds  in 2020. IMO, neither are fit to hold the office. Change the letters behind their names and you have many of the same concerns and complaints from the voters.

For all the complaints and righteous indignation from the left the last 4 year about behavior and ethics, they sure as hell didn't find an alternative candidate that would set them apart and let people rally behind.

Hillary was a bad candidate with an arrogant, insular campaign staff.  There were multiple Republicans running in 2016 who could have beaten her.

And the comparisons between Biden and Trump are false equivalencies.  Good and bad aspects of a candidate don't just exist as static things across the board.  They exist in a matter of degrees.  To the degree that Trump and Biden have good personal and character qualities, Biden is better by a matter several of degrees.  To the degree that each have bad aspects of characters, Trump is worse by a matter of many, many, many degrees.  He's quite possible the worst person - just as a matter of measure as a human being - in my lifetime to occupy the office.

[alexava 6,973]

5 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

But you would you feel that way about Biden accusers? Titan is correct. When this was going on with WJC, you could not find a Democrat anywhere that would even acknowledge anything back then. They covered and covered for him. They ATTACKED the women. Called them every name in the book and smeared them ceaselessly until recently. 

It is very funny how politics makes some blind on some topics. 

I don’t think it’s just “some “ topics.