If they want evidence of Trump abusing minors there is an Epstein case they might want to mention.
But is it a bombshell? Most voters are already decided. Trump's flock will ignore any bad news about him, and the rest won't be convinced to vote for Harris any harder than they plan to or have already done. The vision being fed to us, of a nail-biting race seesawing back forth, is just clickbait for ads,
They can get demoralized and stay home.
Certainly couldn't be ruled out, but probably not to an extent that makes the news a "bombshell".
As someone who had to sit through a seemingly unending stream of videos of Biden sniffing hair etc, none of which were as damning as the people boosting them claimed, I really hope they either don't release this, or it actually is what it claims to be, not some similar crap.
"Donald Trump loses his balance and accidentally makes contact with a girl's butt" or similar ambiguous clip is probably not going to do anything except make me have to start ignoring videos of Biden sniffing hair again when magas start posting them in retaliation or whatever.
Same with "Trump speaks slowly and closes his eyes for a couple seconds" being paraded around as him being 'exhausted' or even 'sundowning'.
None of it could possibly sway voters, it's just to make the voting base feel good about their choice of support.
"Closes his eyes for a couple seconds"? Yeah, Trump spending a half hour of his rally walking the stage aimlessly to music was probably just his whimsical side, not a sign that his mind is anything less than razor-sharp. Libs these days will exaggerate ANYTHING!
Even if he was dead on his feet, how does that change anything? The only people who care about the optics of it are libs who already find him gross and disturbed... It makes dems feel better about their candidate's chances ("look, he's tired and on the ropes, give him the haymaker!"). If anything, him being a tired sleepy old man undercuts their message that he's a vindictive and dangerous fascist who's losing touch with reality. It wouldn't surprise me if his change in demeanor is an intentional choice to make him look more chill and reasonable.
You hear how republicans reacted to that town hall? They fucking loved it, they talk about it like it was a birthright trip or something.
Yes I agree it won't change anything. Everybody is pretty much decided at this point, and the whole neck-and-neck race thing is basically clickbait for ads.
His sycophants forgive any crime he commits. They will blame the minor not him.
They use the DARVO strategy: Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARVO
So they will probably end up blaming the girl.
Riley: Oh, yes, the victim! At what point does personal responsibility become a factor in this equation?
Dubois: I don't think that's--
Riley: I see piss coming, I move.
Huey: mmm
Riley: She saw piss coming, she stayed.
Dubois: Yes, she did, but--
Riley: And why should I have to miss out on the next R. Kelly album! Just for that?!
Is this a transcript? Please tell me it isn't.
It's an excerpt from an episode of The Boondocks
It's become relevant again as a fringe group of people are defending their favorites that got implicated in the diddy parties. At least this time it seems like much less people are on the offenders side, but maybe thats because there are so many offenders that the misplaced support is more distributed than when it was just R Kelly or just Bill Cosby.
It was the last episode of boondocks for many people.
Obviously a liberal sleeper agent
He's bragged about doing it before. I don't see how this would affect his popularity.
It isn't, in fact despite the video not being released it's already being "debunked" as AI on Far Right websites.
No, I don't buy it. He's awful. He's a fascist. He has assaulted lots of women (when there were no cameras). I don't believe he'd be this self-destructive at this moment when he needs to win to stay out of prison.
Yes, but he's rich, white, and feels entitled.
Don 'grab em by the pussy' dementia trump?
May I introduce you to the last few months?
You're just long at this one story with fresh eyes. Reasonably. Probably an indicator of sanity. So of course it doesn't sound credible.
Oh I think he'd do it. This is the same guy that keeps starting more grifts while he's being prosecuted for previous ones.
As to whether he actually did it? Show me the video. But the first sentence is already enough for me not to vote for him.
yeah I don't buy it either. a) I don't trust anything on TikTok b) Why is everyone talking about a video when a video doesn't seem to exist? If it exists show it
You don't think the famously stupid person could do something stupid? I know it's a stretch but cmon
This is just conspiratorial garbage. That article is garbage. I would love for something like this to take him down, but if you think this has any credibility, please realize that your ability to critically analyze new information is ridiculously clouded by confirmation bias.
It’s such a waste of time
“Without proof, claims of video of event exists”
And then it’s just random people on twitter
Did Charlie Kirk tweet that? If so, I'd believe it's 100% for real and they're trying to get out in front of it. Like many posters below point out, his base won't care.
I have a hard time discerning if Kirk knows this, or if he's just projecting after the Swift AI nonsense.
The fact that the some of the most immoral spin-doctors that aren't directly related to the Trump campaign -- Posobiec and Kirk for starters -- are clearly trying to get out in front of some sort of bad news that, based on their comments, appears to be a video grants more weight to claims than this random article.
That being said, whether there is actually a video or they're reacting to the same rumored threat is unknown. Even if it were true, I honestly don't know if it would make enough of a difference for Trump's supporters. And, again if true, the longer they hold the video and allow advance spin and damage control to run unopposed, the less effect it will have. The simple fact is that Trump supporters would then be looking for any reason to simple dismiss/ignore it, and they will undoubtedly be given many reasons by affiliates of Trump's campaign.
Perhaps explains his seemingly defeated attitude recently. His canceling of multiple events. His comment at yesterday's rally...
Trump: I realized our time is coming to an end. In many ways it’s sad. I’ve been doing this for 9 years.
I think Daddy Vladdy knows the polls are fake and Donald is terrified of the consequences for not coming through being nigh.
This could actually get him more votes. After all, the GOP is the Party of Pedophila.
Grand Ole Pedophiles
They're the party of "PEDOPHILES SHOULD BE KILLED, DEAD PEDOPHILES CAN'T REOFFEND, I HUNT PEDOPHILES, AND IT'S TOTALLY NORMAL AND NOT PROJECTION THAT I'VE MADE THIS MY ENTIRE IDENTITY." Which is effectively the same thing but is slightly different.
PEDOPHILES SHOULD BE KILLED, DEAD PEDOPHILES CAN'T REOFFEND, I HUNT PEDOPHILES
Always weirds me the fuck out when I see this stuff. Like, my dude, pedophiles are quite universally reviled, even amongst hardcore criminals, why the hell do you feel the need to loudly signal this ?
You know why they feel the need to loudly signal it.
Yeah that is definitely a rhetorical question here
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News