are you trumpeteers ready for wed?

[space otter]

Donald Trump Is Accused Of Raping A 13-Year-Old. Why Haven't The Media Covered It?

There are two big reasons.
11/02/2016 02:57 pm ET | Updated 1 hour ago



Ryan Grim 
Washington bureau chief for The Huffington Post
If you've been anywhere near Facebook or Twitter in the past several months, you're probably aware that there is a case working its way through the courts that accuses Donald Trump of raping a 13-year-old girl in 1994.

On Wednesday, the woman, who remains anonymous, will appear at a press conference with her new attorney, Lisa Bloom, the daughter of Gloria Allred. Bloom wrote a column about the case in The Huffington Post last summer.

View image on Twitter     https://twitter.com/LisaBloom/status/793880513018785792/photo/1




For months, people have wondered why this case isn't getting more ? or, really, any ? attention in the press, even now that Trump faces an actual court date: a Dec. 16 status conference with the judge. 

The allegations aren't entirely implausible on their face. The accuser says Trump raped her repeatedly at parties thrown by since-convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, who was widely known to throw wild parties with young women and girls. Epstein was convicted in 2008 of soliciting an underage girl for prostitution and served a small portion of an 18-year sentence.

In a New York magazine profile of Epstein before he went to prison, and long before Trump ran for president, Trump acknowledged that he knows Epstein. "I've known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy,'' Trump says in the story. "He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it ? Jeffrey enjoys his social life."

The lawsuit against Trump includes affidavits from two anonymous women who say they were witnesses. Yet there's been little coverage of the case. As one of the media outlets that has not published much about it, I can say there are two main reasons we shied away.

The accuser is anonymous.

The accuser in this case is anonymous, a, and the suit is filed under a pseudonym in New York. A previous case filed in California used the name "Katie Johnson." To accuse someone in print of forcibly raping a child is about as serious a charge as can be made. To do that with an anonymous accuser would be an extraordinary step, putting the journalist's reputation on the line.

One senior national reporter who has covered both campaigns said that the anonymity was the main stumbling block. "If it's something that's this damaging to a candidate, you better be sure, and she's anonymous," the reporter said, asking for anonymity to talk openly about the decision-making process. "Look, if she came out and she would do an interview, that would be different, but she's an anonymous plaintiff."

To go forward with an anonymous source shifts responsibility for the veracity of the claims from the accuser to the reporter. If the person is named and on record, the reporter can argue that he or she is merely reporting what the person is saying, and people are free to believe her or not. But giving anonymity says something different to an audience. It suggests, I, as a journalist, have investigated this person and these charges, and find them sufficiently credible to bring them forward without a name attached. Especially in the wake of the Rolling Stone fiasco, that requires an extreme amount of confidence in the source.

And the way the case rolled out did not inspire that confidence.

The accuser's public backers have been savaged in the press.

One of the leading organizers of the effort to get the press to pay attention to this case is Steve Baer, an outspoken Republican donor. Baer last made news when his effort to out an alleged affair between Reps. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and Renee Ellmers (R-N.C.) contributed to McCarthy dropping his bid to become House speaker. Baer's style is to liberally cc and bcc an endless stream of powerful people, and it usually has the effect of getting none of them to listen.

When I wrote to him Monday night, for instance, to say I was going to write a story on why the media were avoiding the child rape story, he replied and cc'ed Washington Post Executive Editor Marty Baron, along with a host of other media figures.

And Baer, in fact, is among the more credible advocates the accuser has going for her.

The accuser initially filed the case on her own behalf in California, but it was tossed for not stating an articulable violation of her civil rights. The case has since been refiled in New York, under the representation of a patent lawyer named Thomas Meagher. A patent lawyer handling the case hasn't inspired the most confidence. (He didn't respond to a request for comment.)

The least credible backer has to be a man who may or may not be named Al Taylor, but is more likely named Norm Lubow, and was apparently a former producer for "The Jerry Springer Show."

Media outlets that have tried to get in touch with Johnson have had extreme difficulty doing so. The Daily Beast did a deep dive into the case and the people supporting the accuser in July, and came to a devastating conclusion: "Far from derailing the Trump train, Katie Johnson and her supporters seem to be in an out-of-control clown car whose wheels just came off," wrote Brandy Zadrozny.

The Guardian and Jezebel also looked into the situation and came up with equally unfavorable takes. A writer who actually talked to Johnson came away confused about what to make of the allegations. It's unclear if anybody has managed to speak to Tiffany Doe or Joan Doe, the two witnesses cited in the case. "Jezebel, The Guardian and The Daily Beast effectively poisoned the well on Katie's credibility," Baer lamented to HuffPost, accurately.

If you're still struggling to understand why the story didn't get more coverage, imagine for a moment that you're a reporter thinking about spending weeks looking into it. Then go read the Daily Beast article. Still ready to go down that rabbit hole?

But as the reality of the court date increasingly dawns on the press, coupled with Trump's own admission that he sexually assaults women, the case is getting harder to ignore. Baer said that two media outlets have recently done interviews with Johnson, and stories could pop at any minute. 

Erik Wemple, a media reporter at the Washington Post, said he hasn't talked to many journalists about their decision to shy away from the story. "I can't cover everything," he said. "Around the spring, the Washington Post was getting hammered for assigning two dozen reporters to investigate Trump. I wrote a piece wondering whether that was anywhere near enough. It wasn't, as it turns out."

In some ways, given the role of Facebook in disseminating news, it matters less this cycle than any other previous one that the media has largely ignored the case. Open platforms, too, have helped the story circulate. The story that Bloom published on HuffPost's contributor platform has been shared on Facebook 140,000 times. The piece has been viewed 5,221,475 times since June.

But with Bloom's press conference Wednesday, everything could change.

[Just Looking]

I am perhaps in a minority here but I have to say that I am sick, sorry and very tired of all these alleged accusations being brought out so long after the
alleged offence. IF they actually happened they should have been reported then and there not wait so many years before coming forward. How on Earth can
they prove it 100% after all that time and as for the accused what hope do they have of showing that they are not guilty? The answer to both is virtually zero.

[Irene]

Honestly, even though I'm a woman, I have a real issue with people claiming years and decades ex post facto that they've been raped. Anyone can make this claim. There is one huge problem with it - there is no evidence.

I don't care if it's Cosby, Trump, or Clinton. We should be wary.

[rdunk]

more huffington post b/s - senseless and not worthy of comment or consideration.

[space otter]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-child-rape-accuser-calls-off-news-conference-over-threats/ar-AAjN9or?ocid=U348DHP


Trump child rape accuser calls off news conference over threats
The Hill The Hill
Nikita Vladimirov
1 hr ago

Lisa Bloom, the attorney representing a woman who accused Trump of child rape, has called off the news conference on Wednesday over threats.

The accuser, who prefers to keep her identity to herself and goes by "Jane Doe," was supposed to make a public statement about the accusation on Wednesday afternoon.

However, according to her lawyer, the woman changed her mind in light of numerous threats.

"Jane Doe has received numerous threats today, as have all the Trump accusers that I have represented," Bloom told reporters.

"She is living in fear. She has decided that she is too afraid to show her face. She's been here all day ready to do it. But unfortunately she is in terrible fear," she added.

more huffington post b/s - senseless and not worthy of comment or consideration.

oh rdunk  your post defeats itself

[zorgon]

So we have an anonymous accuser...

from 20 years ago or so...

Then they withdraw the accusation because someone made threats..

But since no one knows who the accusser is...

...how do you make threats at someone you don't know?

And your buying this?

Seriously?

[Pimander]

They aren't anonymous in the court case.  They are anonymous to the public.  You can't go to court under a false name.

[Phedre]

They aren't anonymous in the court case.  They are anonymous to the public.  You can't go to court under a false name.

I'm not sure that is true, for bit of money any thing is possible, you can get papers at a stationary store, fill them out, pay the filing fees and it gets assigned to a judge and put On the docket, then nobody shows and it gets tossed out. Pretty sure this is same case that was filed in New York State. And it was thrown out, then it turns up in California. Damage Done. Reporters love reading the dockets. Just a possible alternate ending.

[zorgon]

They aren't anonymous in the court case.  They are anonymous to the public.  You can't go to court under a false name.

So your saying someone in the court system threaten them?

[Phedre]

With my theory, no threats would be necessary. Plenty of suits are filed like "Example", Jane Doe Vs Donald Trump, complaint: Rape. It gets on Court Docket, Public Information.  The press gets it out there. When it gets to the Judge on the docket date, no body shows up, so the Judge throws it out. Check out Frivolous Lawsuits, our court system is plugged up with them. The "Complainant"/ "Plaintiff" would need to show up to proceed with the suit ,The complaint would have been filed in "Civil Court" as 20 years on Rape , the statute would have run out , so there is no DA involvement. But the innuendo is out there. It doesn't matter if the attorney is real or not, it does NOT get that far, and even if it does the attorney can say, the client lied to them and so sorry for inconveniencing the court, get a slap on the hand. 

There is a lot on it on the web both pro and con. My question is that this..... this particular case has been going on well over a year. If it is real, why all the dancing? It is pretty straight forward, except for a Real Client. If Trump loses election, my bet is it will disappear .

[zorgon]

Quite true...

Many people have had their lives ruined by someone making a false accusation. The press covers it on the front page but any retractions or aquitals end up in fine print on page 35

[zorgon]

They aren't anonymous in the court case.  They are anonymous to the public.  You can't go to court under a false name.

yes you can  In the USA you are legally allowed to use an ALias name so long as it is not for fraudulent purposes  Hollywood stars do it all the time  Sting is not his birth name, Ice-T is Tracy Marrow...

Zorgon has been sent mail through the US post office from Clark County  I am officially recognized as King Zorgon  I have the letter and envelope to prove it


Now on the other hand a frivolous lawsuit filed in court has a very stiff penalty  BUT not in Civil Court  where the DA is not involved  as Phedre has said

The party making the complaint just needs to not show up on court date, case dismissed

This works in traffic court too... ALWAYS go to court if you get a ticket  Best thing to do is request a NEW date before your due date  You can do this several times...

When you finally go to court the officer is most likely not available that day... and since the court has no complanent on site the case is dismissed. I have seen it several times... The court clerk calls names before the cases start  They all go up to the judge. The clerk says Officer so and so is a no show... Judge says Case dismissed  see the clerk

[zorgon]

BEST ENDORSEMENT EVER 

[Just Looking]

Of course none of the above have any interest whatsoever in protecting the interests of their past supporters
who wish to maintain their power over us poor people. 

[zorgon]

On Wednesday, the woman, who remains anonymous, will appear at a press conference with her new attorney, Lisa Bloom, the daughter of Gloria Allred. Bloom wrote a column about the case in The Huffington Post last summer.

So which Court is this being handled by? Since the statute of limitations would have long passed IF this charge was even true, I don't see it going to a federal court. perhaps this is why the media is ignoring it?

This whole thing looks like a publicity stunt for Lisa Bloom