Piling on The Don

By Cyberquill 10/16/20162 Comments

If, as one female MSNBC morning anchor has stated, the fear of being branded a liar indeed clocks in as the primary reason why many women hesitate to come forward with sexual assault allegations, then three weeks before a presidential election seems like the absolutely worst time to open up about having been indecently assailed by one of the candidates, for at that point every self-styled assault victim airing such tales is practically guaranteed to be branded a liar, a dupe, and an attention strumpet by up to half of the American electorate.

One lady, sobbing in the arms of damsel-in-high-profile-distress counselor in chief Gloria Allred, a gaggle of microphones and cameras pointed at her as she sniveled her way through her abuse story, said she had decided to speak up because she “just wanted to be able to sleep at night.” So apparently, the poor woman hadn’t slept since 2007 (the year of the alleged assault), and that nine-year-long sleep deficit had finally caught up with her just in time for October surprise month 2016.

IMHO, the credibility of these ladies would have been better served if they had either (a) come forward much earlier, i.e., at a time when ulterior motivations would have been far more difficult to impute to their disclosures, or (b) at least waited until after the election. Because to gang up and pile on Creepy Donald at the most strategic moment to sink his candidacy at the eleventh hour smacks too much of an orchestrated hit job rather than an ingenuous effort to deal truth.

Ironically, the fact that all these women’s accounts happen to track to a T with Creepy Donald’s hookup m.o. as he conveniently outlined it himself on that somewhat unpresidential “grab ’em by the [kitten]” video both supports as well as undermines their credibility.

Supports, because it appears to substantiate what was said on the tape.

Undermines, because multiple parties, upon hearing the tape, could quickly and easily have made up eerily similar assault yarns to match Creepy Donald’s own words, and in a country of 300 plus million people—including 150 plus million women—it is virtually impossible to not flush out at least a dozen that would happily come forward with just the right kind of revelations, true or trumped-up, no pun intended, in exchange for guaranteed and massive media exposure.

One cannot, on the one hand, put forth that we live in a celebrity-obsessed culture where people will say and do virtually anything to get their fifteen minutes in the spotlight, and on the other hand deem it wholly out of the question that a handful of individuals might provide false or embroidered information that would instantly catapult their names and likenesses to the top of the news all over the world for days on end.

Finally, coming forward only after Creepy Donald’s public denial of ever having put his average-sized paws where his big mouth was on that [kitten] tape sends a message that denial of sexual assault is a graver offense than sexual assault itself—in other words, that the type of sexual assault described by Creepy Donald’s accusers doesn’t rise to the level of report-worthiness unless and until the perpetrator himself denies it ever happened.

I suppose one could argue straw that broke the camel’s back, but this again makes it sound as if the assaults at issue here just weren’t serious enough as standalone offenses, which in turn subverts the juicy narrative of the Republican candidate for president as a true sexual predator; a narrative that CNN, for one, can’t seem to weary of pushing, having gone wall-to-wall on Creepy Donald’s alleged lechery, at the expense of shining a light on whatever skeletons might be lurking in Crooked Hillary’s basement.

Tags: ,

Print This Post Print This Post

Terms Of Use

  • Cheri

    The American media are the big losers in this election. (They always were losers but now everyone knows…).

    • http://blog.cyberquill.com/ Cyberquill

      Hard enough to appear neutral when you’re trying to be neutral, but once you stop even trying, the result is CNN’s election 2016 coverage. Of course, the question news organizations must grapple with is whether they ought to stay neural when what they perceive as the greater good is better served by taking sides. So if slanting their coverage may help keep a buffoon like Trump out of the White House, isn’t it their moral imperative to slant away?

← Previous Post