You completely missed the point.
Right, "Trump being Trump". Where does it say only facts are allowed to be discussed here. You are the one trying to control the conversation by only arguing what you call facts.
So, you want to argue beliefs that are not based on fact?
What exactly is the point or the benefit? Argue all day long that you believe a god exists. Where can the argument ever go without proof?
No I got what you said. Apparently you missed my point again being you are willing to put that aside if it supports your narrative and you will go with your feelings.
It's like the lie that Trump said he grabbed a woman by the pu**y. A lie, but you will say it is true and a fact.
That's not people say. People quote the words that HE said. here they are:
"You know I'm automatically attracted to beautiful—I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the *****. You can do anything."
Seems like you want to defend him so bad, you will change the story to make him innocent.
He said the words above. There is no denying it.
Did he actually do it? Well, if he is declaring that they let him do anything, then a crotch grab is possible, no? he'd have to be speaking from experience to say such a thing, no?
.
But of course, he could have been lying about women letting him do anything. So then when he says "I just start kissing them", he's admitting to making unasked-for physical contact with women.
Edit: Before he loses it and starts demanding proof and calling Trump a ****** or something. Here is the section of the transcript in which he made the pu**y reference.
Trump:...And when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything."
Bush: "Whatever you want?"
Trump: "Grab them by the *****. You can do anything."
He is saying that when you are a star, women will let you do anything including grabbing them by that whoohaaa. He didn't say he did it, he just said you could. He is around celebrities and stars all the time and could very well have seen someone do that very thing. But he NEVER said HE grabbed em' by the pu**y.
No one said he did. They quoted the sh*t out of him saying what he did and expressing personal knowledge of what COULD be done by HIM.
So, if he never did it, he was lying in saying they'd let him do it, b/c he didn't really know.
But the big picture is arguing beliefs versus facts.
What benefit do you get arguing beliefs that you have no way of proving?