“I Did Not Have a Negative Experience” with That Man, Donald Trump

Posted by Tina

The New York Times targeted Donald Trump in what’s been called a very long and immensely boring hit piece over the weekend. One of the women interviewed for the article, Rowanne Brewer Lane, is hopping mad. According to her the Times grossly misrepresented what she told them and said that Trump, “never made me feel like I was being demeaned in any way.” Check it out:

“Actually, it was very upsetting. I was not happy to read it at all,” Brewer Lane said. “Well, because The New York Times told us several times that they would make sure that my story that I was telling came across. They promised several times that they would do it accurately. They told me several times and my manager several times that it would not be a hit piece and that my story would come across the way that I was telling it and honestly, and it absolutely was not.”

Asked what the reporters got wrong, Brewer Lane said they took her quotes and “put a negative connotation on it.” …

… Co-host Ainsley Earhardt asked to clarify if Brewer Lane knew him well and that they dated for several months.

“That’s correct. Yes, and he was never — he never made me feel like I was being demeaned in any way. He never offended me in any way. He was very gracious. I saw him around all types of people, all types of women. He was very kind, thoughtful, generous, you know. He was a gentleman,” Brewer said.

This woman’s experience of Trump mirrors what others who know him well say about him.

The Times, a trash leftist newspaper, wants it’s readers to imagine…PRETEND…that Donald Trump is scum on par with a certain former President and his enabling cohort wife now lobbying to get back into the White House. Their story will not accomplish what it intended. BC’s initials fit him well, his manner takes us all back to the stone age. The seriousness of the charges leveled at Bill Clinton are credible and many. If the Times cared about women, Bill Clinton would have been targeted and smeared long ago and the pair dumped for their sleaziness corrupt lifestyles.

You can read Brewer Lane’s entire testimony from her interview on Fox and Friends this morning at Politico, linked above.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to “I Did Not Have a Negative Experience” with That Man, Donald Trump

  1. J. Soden says:

    Asking the NYT for accuracy is like asking Charles Manson to be your babysitter. She shoulda known better!

    After much research, it has been found that there is absolutely NO use for the NYT!
    Fish wrapped in it spoils, line the birdcage and the bird will die, and it’s not fit for landfill due to the slimy Leftie ooze that leaks out.

  2. Libby says:

    Not enough sensation for you?

    I thought it was quite even-handed. The ladies who were grateful for the career opportunities he gave them got their say. You actually got ideas of a complicated psychology working there, his objectifying of the ladies having very little to do with he ladies themselves, and everything to do with a really insecure fellow, who still could, on good days, see worth in the other sex.

    However, fundamentally, too immature for the presidency.

    • Tina says:

      And I should be convinced by someone who doesn’t see (Or won’t admit) the adolescent bent in Bill Clinton or the current occupant who “presidentially” refers to the citizens he leads as, “guys?”

      What the PC left finds “objectifying,” with respect to Trump and women, is simply a normal, friendly pattern of male/female discourse. It’s considered perfectly acceptable when Bill Clinton engages in it. Much worse is what is overlooked in Clinton’s behavior which is well beyond the friendly banter between men and women in social settings. And that banter, let’s face it, can be rude and crude in today’s “open” society.

      • Libby says:

        Oh, Tina, this is sad … that your idea of friendly banter should be so gross. “I like your candy.” ? You find this friendly? Really?

        (I’m having “Coke Can” flashbacks, myself.)

        And that, to a woman he ostensibly respected. Gross.

        • Tina says:

          So you bought that absurd coke can crap? Sorry old girl but that’s gross.

          Apparently Ms. Hill was so traumatized and offended she followed him when he transferred to another department…what kind of a (grossed out) woman does that!

  3. Chris says:

    I could really care less about Trump’s treatment of women in his private life. It doesn’t matter, so this NYT article seems pointless to me. He is a public figure, and what matters more is his *public* treatment of women. He could treat every woman he meets in person like a saint, but that doesn’t excuse his public misogynistic attacks on Carly Fiorina, Heidi Cruz, Megyn Kelly, and many more women throughout the years, and that no person who finds these things acceptable to say in public should ever be president.

    • Tina says:

      Women who want to play hard ball had better be prepared to get hit hard. Women like Hillary, and her hard core feminist minions, want it both ways. They speak like seasoned truckers and then blanch like virgin school girls when they can make political hay. Hillary was quite crude, rude and condescending to her security detail yet pretends in public to be nice and deserving of respect. (She never quite pulls it off, IMHO)

      Trumps manner is not my cup of tea but then as I watch any New York based event or movie I’m reminded that Trumps world in NY is much different from what I know.

      An aside, I realized this morning what bugs me about Trumps facial expressions. Wrong ethnic profile…visually, he’s Joe Pesci…fagetaboudit! Hey, I’m walking here, in Italian.

      • Chris says:

        Tina, you don’t know Clinton was rude to her security detail. We do know Trump is openly misogynistic to Republican women he doesn’t like. You’re once again comparing allegations to public, documented conduct.

    • Pie Guevara says:

      I could really not care less what Piss Chris says about anything.

      • Chris says:

        And yet you always feel the need to reply, to let everyone know how little you care, and to come up with nicknames that you think are insulting to me but really only reflect poorly on your character and maturity.

        I mean, “Piss Chris” is no “Negro Burner,” but then, what is?

  4. Peggy says:

    I haven’t read the article nor do I have any interest in doing so. But, I do have a couple of questions.

    I understand the article was 20 pages long. Is that possible in a newspaper?

    I don’t remember the NYT doing a similar article about Obama in 2008 or 2012 where they went back and interview 50 people who knew him like Bill Ayers, his law professors, old girlfriends that weren’t made up or even how about some old friends from college. Did I miss the article/s by the Times or any mega newspaper that went into this much investigative reporting of then candidate Obama? I didn’t think so. The liberal media bias’ slip is showing again.

    It would have been nice to see what we were buying besides a pig in a poke.

    • Tina says:

      Excellent observation Peggy.

      You and I are aware of someone who did do extensive research to determine who Obama was. Dinesh D’Souza’s video profile was excellent. Of course he was hounded and vilified. Same old story, right Peggy?

      A trailer for his latest spotlights Hillary. “Hillary’s America” will be in theaters in mid-July.

      It’s sad we’ve come to this but here we are. Might as well keep swimming so we don’t drown and keep our attention on the larger goal. It will take much longer and require a ton of patience and hard work but what else is there to do (wry smile).

  5. Rick Clements says:

    I have said it since the Progressives took power in Chico, I said it when the Progressives lied to the Californian voters and got elected by calling themselves “moderates”. They now control 68% of the State Assembly and Senate, they got Moonbeam elected; and they all did it using the same tool their political model requires. Lie about yourself. Cook the books when you have the power to do so. Use the Liberal media to shame and embarrass your detractors, and support the “talking point” lies issued from the top party officials, but most importantly and above all, always,…support, defend, and never break ranks when using the Progressive Liberal/Democrat motto: “United We Lie”.

    The Progressives and their Unions have spent years in the making and building of how to grow their ranks. First, and most importantly of all, they had to be in control of the Educational system from K4 to College graduation. After adopting their Union friends, they would pick the teacher’s and college professors in which to control and allow the manipulation of the young student minds and their lifestyles to begin. Using Political Correctness was instrumental to starting the brainwashing process. The use of “protected tenure” created by the Unions and by requiring the Tenure inclusiveness within their negotiated contract language terms, this would allow the Progressive Liberal indoctrination process to go on long term without being interrupted. The tenure apparatus created, also allowed all teachers and professor’s to live worry free about any termination of their job employment. The Democrats and the Democratically controlled State Assembly under Governor Gray Davis put everything planned into motion by putting the Educational system under the Union’s blanket by renaming and including them as “Public Sector Employees” to which the Government controls the financial purse strings.

    The Californian voter never saw it coming until it was to late to stop. And now you have total destruction of the entire Country and it’s capitalistic economy having been underway with the election of Obama which included the last seven years of abusing the powers of the Congress and the Constitution. The Progressives don’t care who will prevail in Court, they have learned to survive and grow by installing their own laws that will never survive the Judicial system’s check and balances, or any of the Court’s final legal findings; rather, it’s the damage to the financial system they will and do intentionally inflict while everyone during the interim of awaiting the legal conclusions, which they know, drags on for years on end. Obama’s ObamaCare, illegal immigration executive orders that bypassed Congress, The IRS scandal, The Debt rising to over 19 Trillion, the American Foreign Policy image, you name it, this Progressive Liberal model of which I have described here, is the legitimate source of this Country’s infection. How to get rid of and cleanse the Country and its citizens from this corruption is entirely up to the voter to correct and cure, but the mainstream liberal media’s job is to see that that cleansing process never begins…that is…until Trump.

    The “United We Lie” Democrats cannot destroy Trump financially and that is what has been the base of their frustration and failures to control this election; unlike the way they made sure Obama won with their “Control the message..Control the Voters” strategy. Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the Lying New York Times!!

  6. Libby says:

    You know what they’re saying, Rick, that Trump won’t release his tax returns because he has, shall we say, mislead everybody about how much money he’s got. So, if he can’t get financial backing for the campaign, and I think he might have a little trouble there, he may have financially ruined his own campaign … by lying.

    How about that?

    • Tina says:

      Rick thanks for your thoughts and glad to see you posting here on Post Scripts. Your message needs to be heard across our state and across the land! Look for it featured prominently tomorrow AM.

    • Tina says:

      Tax returns don’t reveal net worth (How much money he’s got). They represent a snapshot on a particular day that reflects earnings for the previous 12 months.

      I would imagine that Trumps returns are complex, gives me a headache just thinking about it. The audit will be extensive, you can count on that. We’re all too aware of the IRS and how it targets people. I don’t blame him or anyone for holding their cards close to the check at this point in time.

      One thing you’ve not considered, Libby. He’s an attention grabber. His likely opponent could be looking at indictment and is a lot less interesting…I mean really, a barker? Who has coughing fits that go on for minutes at a time? And what about those lengthy bathroom breaks, what is that about? And bragging about how hubby Bill is going to handle the economy…what a woman!

      Just read that Trump and the RNC have announced a joint fundraising deal.

      So far the top donor to Trump, according to Open Secrets, is $150,000 by John Powers Middleton Companies. Next at $50,000 is Manchester Financial Group.

      Anti Corporation Bernie’s biggest donor is Alphabet (Google) at $$255,814. Take a gander he’s even got the big Apple giving him money. Big money Hillary tops them all with Emily’s List at $907,510 and Citigroup at $891,501 wit the big banks, Education, Hollywood and the usual suspects descending from there. Yep, you Dems really hate corporations. Such phonies.

      Just some food for thought. On a much smaller scale my own net worth has changed over the last few years several times as the stock market did its up and down thing. Yours probably did too if you have a little nest egg tucked away. Trumps much bigger net worth changes too, but much more dramatically.

  7. Libby says:

    Tina, you’re not thinking clearly about this at all. Did you really think he was going to
    liquidate his net worth in pursuit of the
    office? You could not be that naive. And now we have indications that his net worth was not equal to the task anyway.

    Me, I just want to see if he paid anything like his share of taxes on whatever it is that he actually claimed as income.

  8. Tina says:

    ‘Scuse me, Libby, what gave you the impression I thought Trump would or had liquidated anything? All I said is net worth changes and net worth isn’t reflected on your tax forms…profit/income is. So how is it I’m not thinking clearly?

    What is anyone’s share of taxes? According to tax law it is the legal percentages applied appropriately to earnings after legal deductions. He’s apparently been audited several times so the IRS must be satisfied.

    I think the assertion (not question) you’re trying to make is that rich people should pay more. You probably can’t tell me what’s “fair,” cause fair is not a definitive term. You guys on the left do this a lot. terms like fair are sneaky and elicit a lot of agreement. But in terms of actual contribution in dollars the rich already pay more than their “fair” share:

    in 2012, the top five percent of income earners paid a majority (59 percent) of federal income taxes and earned 37 percent of total adjusted gross income. The effective tax rate for this group was 21 percent. …

    … The top one percent of income earners, who paid 38 percent of federal income taxes, faced an effective tax rate of 23 percent. This was nearly seven times higher than the effective rate of 3 percent paid by the bottom half of income earners. The bottom half of income earners paid only 3 percent of federal income taxes and earned 11 percent of total adjusted gross income. …

    … the top half of income earners paid 97 percent of all federal income taxes in 2012.

    But that’s not the end of the story. The very wealthy, like trump, invest a lot of the profits they get right back into the economy where jobs are the direct result. The very wealthy pay high property taxes and sales taxes. Someday I’d like to see the chart that shows how much the rich pay in sales taxes on an annual basis!

    The bottom half of the nation pays zero federal tax and some get money credited back.

    I’m afraid that no matter how much is given it will never be enough for you redistributionists. It’s easy to spend other peoples money. Much harder to come up with the urge, creativity and cash to make that kind of contribution yourself. a lot of wealthy people did it just like that. They don’t deserve to be penalized with some arbitrary idea of what’s fair.

    Our government needs to manage what they get better and create policy to encourage more investment and entrepreneurial activity. If they did both there would be enough ad the rich would STILL pay more than their fair share.

    So what figure are you looking for Libby?

  9. Libby says:

    Tina, business profit and personal income are not the same thing. The investment of business profit might reduce a mogul’s personal income, or the other way round. That’s for the mogul to decide. Having decided, he pays taxes on his income, so as to enhance the prosperity of this nice safe place to be rich. And if that income amounts to $8M, he pays 90%.

  10. Tina says:

    That’s correct. Trump files personal taxes and business taxes.

    “And if that income amounts to $8M, he pays 90%.”

    You socialists don’t believe in private property, obviously. You don’t believe what a citizen earns and builds is his to do with as he pleases, clearly. In fact, you’re just money grubby a$$es…why not go out and earn your own $8mil and redistribute to your hearts content? Because…you’re a creepy socialist who prefers to use the power of government, brutish totalitarian thug rule, to spend OTHER PEOPLES MONEY on your pet projects.

    You are a disgrace to all things American!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.