Talk:Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations: Difference between revisions
Verificity (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 52: | Line 52: | ||
--[[User:Jeffsyrop|Jeffsyrop]] ([[User talk:Jeffsyrop|talk]]) 01:33, 19 July 2019 (UTC) |
--[[User:Jeffsyrop|Jeffsyrop]] ([[User talk:Jeffsyrop|talk]]) 01:33, 19 July 2019 (UTC) |
||
: [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations&diff=903525027&oldid=903492767 I added it a few weeks ago, but it was reverted per 2016 consensus]. Maybe it's time to revisit the consensus. [[User:Soibangla|soibangla]] ([[User talk:Soibangla|talk]]) 01:37, 19 July 2019 (UTC) |
: [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations&diff=903525027&oldid=903492767 I added it a few weeks ago, but it was reverted per 2016 consensus]. Maybe it's time to revisit the consensus. [[User:Soibangla|soibangla]] ([[User talk:Soibangla|talk]]) 01:37, 19 July 2019 (UTC) |
||
It should be overruled. There is more than enough material and witness testimony by two witnesses. It's probably the most serious and disturbing cases of sexual misconduct by Donald Trump. |
|||
https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-Lawsuit-and-Affidavits |
|||
[[User:Verificity|Verificity]] ([[User talk:Verificity|talk]]) 18:03, 11 August 2019 (UTC) |
|||
==12- and 13-year-old girls== |
==12- and 13-year-old girls== |
Revision as of 18:03, 11 August 2019
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
This article was nominated for deletion on October 13, 2016. The result of the discussion was Keep per WP:SNOW. |
Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
Rape lawsuit and affidavits
As per Bassett, Laura (July 11, 2019). "When Does America Reckon with the Gravity of Donald Trump's Alleged Rapes?". GQ. I propose that we link to the Donald Trump & Jeffrey Epstein Rape Lawsuit and Affidavits alongside describing Labor Secretary Alex Acosta's plea bargain offer allowing Epstein to avoid jail time for the alleged sexual abuse of, "nearly three dozen girls, mostly 13-16 years old, at his Palm Beach mansion from 1999 to 2006," when he was alleged to have used the girls and staff to help recruit other young girls, sometimes booking "three or four girls a day." I propose that the plea bargain be referred to as a "hush payment," because of mainstream news reports such as this, and the plea bargain terms which were rejected by a Federal Judge because they did not include a way to notify the victims of the status and whereabouts of the convicted. EllenCT (talk) 04:19, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
This Article Needs to Include Katie Johnson!
It seems very strange that the allegations of this lower-middle-class nail shop girl don't "count" while the allegations of the 18 more "respectable" women do. It's a huge oversight since her two court filings are real and serious allegations. Here[1] is the latest version. Read the affidavits of Katie Johnson and her witness starting around the 15th page.
--Jeffsyrop (talk) 01:33, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
- I added it a few weeks ago, but it was reverted per 2016 consensus. Maybe it's time to revisit the consensus. soibangla (talk) 01:37, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
It should be overruled. There is more than enough material and witness testimony by two witnesses. It's probably the most serious and disturbing cases of sexual misconduct by Donald Trump.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-Lawsuit-and-Affidavits
Verificity (talk) 18:03, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
12- and 13-year-old girls
Are the two underage girls (then aged 12 and 13) Donald J. Trump has been accused (along with Jeffrey Epstein) of raping mentioned in this article? link? 76.189.141.37 (talk) 15:44, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- No: those accusations have been retracted, and it has been decided by RfC not to mention them, see Talk:Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations/Archive 8#RfC: Jane Doe content. — JFG talk 18:44, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- More accurately: the lawsuit was dropped, not necessarily that the accusations were retracted. soibangla (talk) 18:46, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- Right: the story was ginned up a few days before the 2016 election, and dropped shortly afterwards. Barring the appearance of any new facts in that case, there is no reason to re-open it here. — JFG talk 20:23, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- I'm not arguing it should be reopened. I'm saying that your characterization is incorrect. The original suit was filed in April 2016, and Doe canceled her scheduled November 2 press conference allegedly because she received threats, then dropped the suit. She has not recanted, and the suit included a sworn affidavit from a woman who claimed Epstein employed her to procure underage girls, and that she eyewitnessed the assaults. soibangla (talk) 22:03, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- That's correct, JFG. That the lawsuit was dropped is no proof or even evidence that the story was "ginned up". But I support the RfC result, nothing has changed enough since then to warrant a revisit. ―Mandruss ☎ 22:10, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- Maybe "ginned up" doesn't mean what I think it means. Certainly the story was timed so as to get the most political bang for the buck. ―Mandruss ☎ 22:15, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- Given the extensive history documented in this article, and the well-documented long friendship of the two men, I am less inclined to reflexively presume a political motive by Doe, unless warning America against electing a monster as president can be considered "political." soibangla (talk) 22:34, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- I think we've speculated enough. ―Mandruss ☎ 23:11, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- Given the extensive history documented in this article, and the well-documented long friendship of the two men, I am less inclined to reflexively presume a political motive by Doe, unless warning America against electing a monster as president can be considered "political." soibangla (talk) 22:34, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- I'm not arguing it should be reopened. I'm saying that your characterization is incorrect. The original suit was filed in April 2016, and Doe canceled her scheduled November 2 press conference allegedly because she received threats, then dropped the suit. She has not recanted, and the suit included a sworn affidavit from a woman who claimed Epstein employed her to procure underage girls, and that she eyewitnessed the assaults. soibangla (talk) 22:03, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- Right: the story was ginned up a few days before the 2016 election, and dropped shortly afterwards. Barring the appearance of any new facts in that case, there is no reason to re-open it here. — JFG talk 20:23, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- More accurately: the lawsuit was dropped, not necessarily that the accusations were retracted. soibangla (talk) 18:46, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- ^ https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000158-26b6-dda3-afd8-b6fe46f40000.
{{cite web}}
: Missing or empty|title=
(help)