Red, White, and Right


Exposed: Trump Sexual Harassment ‘Victim’ Caught In Filthy LIE…Our President Is INNOCENT!

Well here’s a story that’s bound to shock you!

…or not.

Remember when the left-leaning media went nuts and pounced on all those women who brought forward stories of being sexually assaulted or abused by Donald Trump?

Well, the now-President, then-President-elect, and then-campaigner Donald Trump denied all the accusations and said soon enough, his accusers would be exposed as plants, as liars, as shills for the left.

And I suppose we’ll just ignore the fact that one of the leaders of that Women’s March over the weekend has confirmed ties to the terrorist organization, Hamas. Yeah, that’s actually dangerous.

But anyway, CNN got lots of traction from this, if you recall:

The story has rather faded from view in recent weeks, leaving one to wonder: Hey, what happened to all these women?

We can pretty much guarantee you won’t hear about it from the mainstream media, so here’s a clue from the Proud Conservative, citing the Gateway Pundit:

“The New York Times released a hit piece on Donald Trump recently about a Trump rape accuser that turns out to be a total fake. Her entire story just got blown to bits with facts.”

Makes you wonder if that’s what happened to all the accusers’ stories – if the facts and truth finally caught up to them and tripped up their tall tales.

The New York Times story recounted how a woman named Jessica Leeds supposedly was assaulted by Trump. But as Proud Conservative noted:

“Jessica Leeds ‘borrows’ her sexual assault story from another sexual assault case, nearly word-for-word.'”

Making matters worse for the media, is that Leeds is tied directly to the Clinton Foundation. How? Seems Leeds’ and the Clinton Foundation’s phone number are one and the same, the news blog wrote.


Oh, puh-LEEZE.

How shocking – shocking! – that the mainstream media would be caught up in furthering this false narrative against Trump.

But remember, this is the New York Times, the same newspaper that sent out a message to readers post-election promising to be less one-sided in its reporting. In other words, the New York Times pretty much admitted it was biased, and that it was promising to stop being so biased.

Well, if this is evidence of a less biased New York Times, I gotta say: I can’t really tell the difference.

Here’s a thought: How about we wait until one of these so-called victims of sexual assault actually win a conviction against Trump before going to press with lewd details of their alleged groped selves?

That seems only fair – not to mention unbiased.

Source: Proud Conservative, Gateway Pundit

To Top

Send this to a friend