Blue-check mob thinks Donald Trump just sexually harassed Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand
President Donald Trump attacked Senator Kirsten Gillibrand this morning on Twitter, but it’s his phrasing that’s put the blue-check mob in meltdown mode.
Trump wrote:
Lightweight Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a total flunky for Chuck Schumer and someone who would come to my office “begging” for campaign contributions not so long ago (and would do anything for them), is now in the ring fighting against Trump. Very disloyal to Bill & Crooked-USED!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 12, 2017
It’s the “and would do anything for them” that’s set off the mob with an insinuation that Trump means something sexual here:
"and would do anything for them" – he's trying to imply she offered him sexual favours? This won't end well. https://t.co/itCizikOCM
— Arieh Kovler (@ariehkovler) December 12, 2017
This reads like sexual harassment. @SenGillibrand calls for him to be disciplined, and he implies, well, exactly what “and would do anything for them” implies. https://t.co/1jVsExFJHI
— Jamil Smith (@JamilSmith) December 12, 2017
(and would do anything for them) Vile language attempting at slut shame a US Senator from the mouth of a sexual predator president who is so out of touch with consequence that he is willing to lie that he solicited sex for donations and thinks it makes someone else look bad. https://t.co/nC3cwMsFbS
— Av Gutman (@abgutman) December 12, 2017
“And would do anything for them”. Is he trying to insinuate something sexual here? Because it sure AF seems that way to me.
— Kathleen Smith (@KikkiPlanet) December 12, 2017
"And would do anything for them". What does that mean, @realDonaldTrump?! You, a man, accused by more than a dozen credible women of assault and harassment, has the audacity make this vile, disgusting implication. SHAME! https://t.co/Cx2a1X2AWA
— Patti Solis Doyle (@PattiSolisDoyle) December 12, 2017
"and would do anything for them" Way to remind us of how you have such respect for women, Mr. President. You just insinuated that she traded "favors" for campaign contributions. https://t.co/gDovoZxIG8
— Bradley P. Moss, Esq (@BradMossEsq) December 12, 2017
“(And who would do anything for them)” reads… pretty poorly in this climate. https://t.co/n7mkBjx8Fw
— Scott Bixby (@scottbix) December 12, 2017
“would do anything for them” Let’s be clear: This insinuation is exactly what we think it is. Vulgarian. https://t.co/oR96BRw40r
— Jeremy Hooper (@goodasyou) December 12, 2017
What are we supposed to make of "and would do anything for them"? Seems like a very poor choice of words given what some other women are accusing you of. #Clintonesque
— Ross Kaminsky (@Rossputin) December 12, 2017
Our repugnant, rancid pig of a @POTUS wrote this about a female Senator: "would come to my office “begging” for campaign contributions not so long ago (and would do anything for them)"@GOP,this is ok? Fauxminist fraud @IvankaTrump, you busy lighting the Menorah? #TrumpResignNOW
— Lesley Abravanel (@lesleyabravanel) December 12, 2017
if ( (window.__aa_fraud_serve === undefined) || (window.__aa_fraud_serve == true) ) { googletag.cmd.push(function () { googletag.display(“div-gpt-300x250_1”); }); }
