BBC Documentary Reveals Trump's Misconduct With Young Girls

The following is by Andy Borowitz at The Borowitz Report:

The Epstein files are rife with allegations of Trump’s sexual misconduct with children. The DOJ has tried to contain the damage, reportedly withholding interviews with a woman who claimed Trump sexually abused her when she was 13. But a 2018 BBC documentary, little seen in the USA, lends credence to those charges.

On the eve of Trump’s 2018 visit to the UK, the BBC documentary series Panoramaaired an episode called “Trump: Is the President a Sex Pest?” in which women described their encounters with Trump when they were teenagers. These brave women were all willing to go on the record, on camera. They had nothing to gain and everything to lose.

Panorama noted that over twenty women accused Trump of misconduct. One of them, Barbara Pilling, recounts meeting Trump in the 1980s when she was a teen model:

Elsewhere, Trump testifies against himself: he brags about how, in the 1990s, he used his position as a pageant owner to invade dressing rooms and ogle naked girls:

According to witnesses, Trump continued his career in voyeurism when he owned the Miss Teen USA pageant, spying on undressed contestants as young as 15:

This BBC documentary has never aired in the USA, and probably never will. But, as Stephen Colbert recently proved with his James Talarico interview, Trump’s stooges at the FCC can’t prevent video clips from being shared online.

Court Found Trump Is A Sex Abuser - Haley Won't Admit It

The following post is by Jen Psaki at MSNBC.com:

Former President Donald Trump has ramped up his attacks on former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley ahead of the New Hampshire primary, weaponizing her South Asian heritage to spread “birther” conspiracy theories. In a Truth Social post, Trump referred to Haley by her birth name Nimarata (which he misspelled as Nimrada) and shared another post that suggested Haley is ineligible to run for president because her parents were not U.S. citizens when she was born.

Haley has responded with critiques of her own, slamming his support for raising the retirement age, increasing the federal gas tax, and adding to the national debt. Most recently, Haley attacked Trump’s and Biden’s ages, saying that most Americans “think that having two 80-year-olds running for president is not what they want.”

But apparently, she’s tongue-tied when it comes to Trump’s history of sexual abuse.

Earlier this week, CNN’s Dana Bash asked Haley how she felt about Trump being held liable for sexual abuse in the E. Jean Carroll defamation trial. “First of all, I haven’t paid attention to his cases and I’m not a lawyer,” Haley responded. “All I know is he’s innocent until proven guilty.”

It’s hard to believe Haley hasn’t been paying attention. But innocence isn’t the point here. Trump has already been found liable for sexually abusing Carroll. “The fact that Mr. Trump sexually abused — indeed raped — Ms. Carroll has been conclusively established,” noted New York Judge Lewis Kaplan.

Haley is still trying to walk that razor-thin line of running against Trump while not turning away his MAGA supporters.

NY Jury Reminds Voters Why They Rejected Trump In 2020

 The following is by the editorial board of The Washington Post:

Tuesday brought a stark moment of accountability for Donald Trump. The former president, who leads in the latest polling for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination and against Democratic incumbent Joe Biden, has not just been credibly accused of sexual abuse but found liable for it by a jury of his peers. That and the behavior he showcased at trial should remind voters of what they rejected in 2020.

Mr. Trump received a fair trial. A mixed decision after three hours of deliberations underscores that jurors weren’t out to get him: The six men and three women did not find Mr. Trump liable for allegedly raping E. Jean Carroll, as she claimed, but they agreed that he was liable for sexually abusing and defaming her, awarding her $5 million in damages.

Ms. Carroll testified in graphic detail over three days about what she says happened in a department store dressing room in the mid-1990s. Two of Ms. Carroll’s friends corroborated that she told them about it shortly afterward, and two other women recounted their own stories during sworn testimony about run-ins with Mr. Trump. They are among more than a dozen women who have accused Mr. Trump of sexual assault or misconduct. In every case, he has categorically denied wrongdoing.

Mr. Trump declined to appear either on the stand or in the courtroom to face his accuser, as was his right. Instead, jurors watched video of his deposition in which he mistook a picture of Ms. Carroll for that of his second wife. This undercut his claim that the former Miss Indiana University wasn’t his type.

He also doubled down on his notorious comments in the “Access Hollywood” tape. Asked about his boast that he could grab women by the genitals because “when you’re a star, they let you do it,” Mr. Trump said: “Historically, that’s true.” He added: “Unfortunately or fortunately.”

Because this was a civil case, the jury needed to find only that a preponderance of evidence supported Ms. Carroll’s claims. In a criminal trial, prosecutors would have needed to prove them beyond a reasonable doubt — a higher standard. The standard in an election is altogether different, though the results of Tuesday’s decision have given voters compelling new evidence to take into account.

Take Priests/Preachers Off That Pedestal

The picture above is of Father Benedict Groeschel. He recently hit the news because of an interview he gave to the National Catholic Register. In that interview, he tried to defend pedophile priests by saying their victims had seduced them, and because of that they didn't deserve to be punished. Here are his exact words:

"People have this picture in their minds of a person planning to [commit child molestation] — a psychopath. But that’s not the case. Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster — 14, 16, 18 — is the seducer.

"Well, it’s not so hard to see — a kid looking for a father and didn’t have his own — and they won’t be planning to get into heavy-duty sex, but almost romantic, embracing, kissing, perhaps sleeping but not having intercourse or anything like that.

"If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties — except for rape or violence — it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way....And I’m inclined to think, on their first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime."

The National Catholic Register was negligent in its duty to the victims of pedophile priests by printing the offensive interview. To their credit, they have now removed the interview and posted the following in its place:

Child sexual abuse is never excusable. The editors of the National Catholic Register apologize for publishing without clarification or challenge Father Benedict Groeschel's comments that seem to suggest that the child is somehow responsible for abuse. Nothing could be further from the truth. Our publication of that comment was an editorial mistake, for which we sincerely apologize. Given Father Benedict's stellar history over many years, we released his interview without our usual screening and oversight. We have removed the story. We have sought clarification from Father Benedict.


And Father Groeschel has also reacted to the firestorm created by his ridiculous remarks. He has issued the following apology:

I apologize for my comments. I did not intend to blame the victim. A priest (or anyone else) who abuses a minor is always wrong and is always responsible. My mind and my way of expressing myself are not as clear as they used to be. I have spent my life trying to help others the best that I could. I deeply regret any harm I have caused to anyone.


Frankly, I am shocked that such a statement was ever issued or printed. Anyone with half a brain and an ounce of decency knows that the victims of sex abuse are never at fault. Even if they were the seducers (which I severely doubt), the adult is still at fault. The adult is ALWAYS at fault, and should be punished. But these kind of remarks are indicative of a bigger problem.

Far too often in our society (where the vast majority are religious adherents) we give too much leeway to religious figures. They are placed on a pedestal, and it is assumed that they could not have the same faults as other humans because they claim to speak for god -- a claim that is usually taken for granted and not examined too closely. And this problem is not just with the catholic church. Anyone who has been paying attention in the last few years, will know that many protestant ministers and preachers have also been guilty of inappropriate (and many times illegal) sexual contact with people, both children and adults, in their congregation.

It is time to take religious officials off their pedestal, and realize they are just human beings (that have the same range of faults as all other people). Many are deserving of respect, but many are not. But none should be put on a pedestal and thought to be immune from human mistakes and faults. And none should be excused from their mistakes simply because they claim to represent god.

Naked Dancer In Dallas

There are definitely some strange (and sick) people in this world. For instance, consider this weirdo in Dallas. He seems to think others just can't wait to see his 6 foot pudgy body with "pasty white skin".

Dallas police say the unknown man (or should I say "sex offender") has been entering the backyards of other people and dancing naked. He either dances naked around the backyard or jumps naked into the pool. He did one of his dances on top of an air conditioner unit.

This nut has been doing this since 2005, and police want to catch him before he escalates his activity into a more serious type of sex crime.

The man keeps his face covered during his nocturnal dances, and the last time he struck was on September 30th of this year (about a week ago).

He needs to hope the police catch him soon. This is Texas, and a whole lot of people are armed. Not to mention the fact that you can shoot someone on your own property here for nearly any reason.

One of these days this jerk is going to get a butt-full of birdshot.

30 Year-Old Sex Offender Enrolls in 7th Grade

This story really bothers me -- a lot. Neil Havens Rodreick II is a 30 year-old sex offender who served 6 years in Oklahoma after lewdly propositioning a 6 year-old boy. He was supposed to register as a sex offender after his release, but instead he leaves and goes to Arizona. Once he gets to Arizona, the story really gets weird.

Shaving and using pancake make-up, this criminal is actually able to enter school as a seventh-grader. In fact, he is able to pull off this hoax at three different schools and no one figured it out. School officials and teachers accepted him as a seventh-grader named "Casey". It was not until he entered a fourth school, that school officials were suspicious of his paperwork and notified police.

When police went to his home, they found him living with three other men (and two of them were convicted sex offenders). They also found around 600 pieces of child pornography, including one tape of Rodreick having sex with a 10-13 year-old boy in a motel room.

Rodreick grabbed a girl's butt at one school, but police have been unable to uncover any other sexual activity at any of the schools. He plead guilty to several charges including assault, fraud, failing to register as a sex offender and sexual exploitation of a minor. He will be receiving a seventy-year sentence without the possibility of parole.

I don't have any problem with the seventy-year sentence -- he deserved it. What does bother me is the fact that he got away with his sick scheme at three different schools. How is this possible?

Sex Offender Running For Mayor

The city of Wilmer has a population of about 3,500 and covers 6.3 square miles in southern Dallas County, just south of the city of Dallas. This suburban community is not a place you would expect to find a registered sex offender running for political office. But that is exactly what is happening.

James Brian Sliter, 42, is running for the office of mayor of Wilmer. He says his friends talked him into running for public office. But Sliter is a registered sex offender who is currently serving out a 10-year probation.

Back in 2004, Sliter arranged to have sex with what he thought was a 15 year-old girl. But when he showed up to consummate the illegal act, he was arrested by police. He had been caught in an internet "sting" operation.

You may ask how a registered sex offender who is currently on probation could be running for office. If he had been convicted of the offense, he couldn't. But he accepted a deferred adjudication and agreed to the 10-year probation (and agreed to register as a sex offender).

The deferred adjudication does not count as a conviction -- but rather a deferral of his trial for the crime. That means he can run for mayor, even though he is a registered sex offender on probation. Technically, he has not been convicted of a crime.

He may not have been technically convicted, but I can't believe the residents of Wilmer want a registered sex offender serving as their mayor -- especially one who must report regularly to a probation officer!

The election is set for May 10th, and Sliter has two opponents, including current mayor Don Hudson. We'll have to keep an eye on this one.