, 07.06.2018 05:47 PM

I believe her. I don’t believe him.

She says it happened. He says it didn’t.

I believe her. He used to say we should believe the victims, too.

So: can he continue as Prime Minister? Should he?

He’ll try and ride it out. I think he needs to step down while it is being investigated.

He made others do that. He needs to do so, now, too.

He won’t.



40 Comments

  1. Matt says:

    I believe her as well.

    Blows my mind the backlash you are taking. People blaming you.

    There is one person to blame here, and his name is Justin Trudeau.

    He groped her. He could have ended this as soon as the story resurfaced. He could have prevented her from being hounded by media. But he didn’t. He’s a fucking coward.

    Prime Minister? More like Prime Molester.

    • Bill Steedman says:

      Touching a person intimately without consent is sexual assault under the Criminal Code of Canada. It is an indictable offence, meaning that there is no limitation period for prosecution. The question we should be asking is, why are there 3 affidavits floating around out there? For what purpose? Was there a civil action that got nipped in the bud? Sooner or later, these affidavits will leak…they always do.

  2. Canada Joe says:

    Well that’s the first one, apparently…

    • Tim says:

      Well, Warren, I must admit that you have held the Dauphin to task. We have seldom agreed politically, but I must say “bravo” for being a journalist first and a Liberal shill second… Notice how easily weasel words are used to confuse the sheeple… The MSM is a pathetic shadow of a once proud and ethical industry and it’s refreshing to see you swimming upstream… I hope the damage Our Little Potato has wrought can be reversed as I thought his Dad (Pierre OR Fidel) was a bloody calamity… The Boy King will destroy as much as he can on the way down…

  3. A. Nonymous says:

    She sounds classy and, unfortunately for the PM, strong willed and strategic. The #Incident sounds rather serious. “This is not going to end well.”

  4. Mike says:

    I’m a Liberal troll. I will defend sexual assault if I have to.

  5. Steve Forbes says:

    Not much of an investigation needed now that she’s been forced to put out a statement. Feel very very bad for her. He’s such a weasel, with his weasel words and now pontificating how this is a teachable moment for all of us. Love Rex Murphy’s column on this today. What’s particularly galling is how long the lovestruck media took to begrudgingly do their job and report on it. Well done bringing this to light Mr. K…Well done.

  6. Sean says:

    He keeps making things up on the fly. Has he ever said what he apologized for? Has he ever been asked why his story keeps changing? I read today that he not only groped but manhandled Rose Knight. If so how does he explain two different perceptions when a lady is groped and manhandled? Why is he now explaining things using the royal “we” when his go to pronoun is usually “I”? How does he expect to recover from the widely held perception that the man is a Groper?

    • Angel Martin says:

      “If so how does he explain two different perceptions when a lady is groped and manhandled? ”

      “Recognizing that people can experience the same interaction differently is a key lesson of “this awakening we’re having as a society,” Trudeau said.

      I guess this is the Rashomon defence…

      • Montrealaise says:

        What he really meant was “”I enjoyed copping a feel and I assumed she enjoyed it as well””.

  7. C.Wills says:

    Warren, I take my hat off too you. You have been as hard on Grope-gate as you were on Patrick Brown, unlike other liberal partisans that I know. I don’t often agree with your politics, but you have a lot of class.

  8. John Martin says:

    I was of the mind that the woman in question didn’t need to come forward and elaborate on her editorial and that it’s her choice to remain silent. I’ve changed my mind. She needs to say exactly what happened. I now think she waved her right to privacy when she wrote the editorial and told her bosses. In this case we either have a PM who possibly committed an assault of some sort or we have a PM who is unfairly living under a cloud of suspicion of sexual assault. I believe the former. She cannot let this linger. Its not fair to anyone. I don’t think this is what the Trudeau crowd want though. They know something bad happened. They’ll champion her right to privacy. Unfortunately she gave it up.

    • Tim says:

      You miss the point… It doesn’t matter WHAT happened as we know SOMETHING happened which he hypocritically apologized for only because she worked for a National news chain… He has claimed over and over to champion the #ME TOO movement, he said himself that he should be held accountable as his victims, (i mean colleagues) whose careers have been destroyed by his hand…

      • John Martin says:

        I didn’t miss the point and I 100% agree with you. I was simply commenting on another aspect of the issue. Too many of Trudeau’s apologists are trying to say nothing happened or it was a shoulder touch. It would be tough for them to continue down that road if she said exactly what happened. To them it’s impossible for him to be a hypocrite. They need to be slapped in the face with what he did.

      • John Martin says:

        Probably better then the world view of someone who is a sexual assault and rape enablers/apologist.

  9. Bubbadub says:

    This would not have been the only time that he behaved like this towards a woman – privileged snots like him think it is their entitlement. If another woman comes forward, our Bollywood-dancing Prime Molester can go back to his acting career.

  10. William R Morrison says:

    It would be a tempest in a teapot if Trudeau hadn’t laid down such strict rules for dealing with such things. Isn’t that the point? It’s not the abuse, it’s the appalling hypocrisy of his response. And if there’s more of this waiting to be revealed, I think he’s in serious trouble.

  11. Walter says:

    When the secret recording of Trump talking about groping was released 2 years ago – every Republican was asked to make a comment and to disown Trumps behaviour.

    Has any Liberals MP been approached for a comment?
    Has any Liberal woman MP or cabinet Minister been approached for a comment?
    Has the Minister for the Status of Women been approached for a comment?

  12. Sean McLaughlin says:

    It would be nice if all parties could just come out and actually say what “the incident” we’re referring to entailed. Without that information, how can you make a judgment one way or the other?

    • Fred from BC says:

      Yeah, that would be really helpful, wouldn’t it? From the information released so far (such as it is), calling this ‘sexual assault’ is a bit of a stretch, and calling it ‘sexual violence’ is just childishness.

      I’ve made it clear enough that I neither like Trudeau nor respect him, and find his handling of this incident so far to be appallingly hypocritical (in light of his statements regarding others similarly accused), but even with all that I still couldn’t support calls for him to resign as Prime Minister over this. That would make *me* just as much of a hypocrite as he is.

      If there really are more verified incidents, though…he’s got to go.

  13. Robert White says:

    Theoretically, I think Warren is working off of the premise of ‘what is good for the goose is also good for the gander’, but I get the presumed innocence thingy too. Frankly, the ex-reporter does not wish to pursue the matter and we need a PM that absolutely despises that piece-of-shit Orange Jesus across the border down in Fascist Land USA so I’ll go with Trudeau takes the summer off and follows Warren’s prescriptive advice to get some counselling in order to ensure that this kind of incident never happens again.

    RW

  14. Walter says:

    I am generally a MeeToo skeptic. When the woman comes forward several years later, it automatically throw some doubt into my mind. Is it just a vexatious complaint or did it really happen. (The exceptions being for minors, and when the attacker has undue power over the accused).

    In this case, the victim did come forward immediately. She told several people and wrote about it. This added a boatload of credibility to the accusation. Coming forward this additional time was not really necessary, but she did, and she re-confirmed that the grope did occur.

    This moment will show whether we decide to sweep assault under the table, even if the victim comes forward and complains immediately – which is what we say they should do.

  15. Canada Joe says:

    Sexual assault is not a trifling matter. Neither is trying to cover it up.

    • Canada Joe says:

      Because the Criminal Code says:

      265. (1) A person commits an assault when

      (a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;

      So either you respect a person’s boundaries or you don’t. The law is quite clear on that.

  16. Canada Joe says:

    You just can’t accept Justin for what he really is.

  17. Kevin says:

    My thoughts exactly! Rose Knight is NOT entitled to a right of privacy – after all she wrote the original damning editorial accusing Justin Trudeau of a sexual assault. She needs to spell out EXACTLY what happened…WHERE was she groped? WHAT did she mean about JT being “too forward” HOW did JT apologize to her? WHAT did JT say in his apology? I DO believe her as far as she has gone in her statement but that is not enough – she cannot say that she will not answer any questions or pursue the matter further. If Trudeau sexually assaulted her 20 years ago when he was just the son of a former PM what is Trudeau doing to women NOW that HE is the Prime Minister of Canada? IF as she claims a sexual assault (groping) did in fact occur Rose Knight owes it to ALL women to EXACTLY say what happened so that other women can possibly be saved from a similar fate.

  18. Grayson says:

    > I’m disappointed to read you involving yourself in this hysteria.

    I encourage you to reflect upon the fact that it’s a great privilege of yours to be able to dismiss the epidemic of discrimination and sexual violence women face in our society as mere “hysteria”. Unfortunately, many of the rest of us — women, People of Colour, LGBTQIAs, etc — don’t have it as easy as you do. So go ahead, call the very real pain a lot of people are feeling a “trifling matter”; congratulations on your white penis.

  19. Grayson says:

    Look, with all due respect, the time where you can just dismiss sexual violence like this is over. You may have grew up in a different place or time but the way you are approaching this is simply unacceptable. As a society we are moving beyond the attitudes you are espousing and it’s encumbent on all of us to do the hard — and often painful — work of unpacking our unearned privilege as we grapple with these sort of issues. Cling to your outmoded way of thinking all you want, but rest assured that in doing so you are on the wrong side of history.

  20. Sean says:

    Question to Watren

    I don’t blame Rose Knight one bit for shoring up her editorial and at the same time washing her hands of the incident. But if another lady came forward with a similar story who experienced trauma and wanted closure by having her story heard in court, would ahe be able to find a lawyer to represent her?

  21. Wayne says:

    Now confirmed it happened from the victim. “The former publisher of the newspaper told CBC News her recollection of what the reporter told her was that it was “a very brief touch” on her rear end.” He grabbed her a$$. Period. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/hajdu-trudeau-support-allegation-groping-1.4735327

    • Fred from BC says:

      A “very brief touch”?

      That doesn’t fit with the rest of her comments. Someone appears to be obfuscating…

  22. Tori says:

    interesting. Most people don’t normally capitalize, bracket and quote words like (“Incident”) in statements. Unless they are written by lawyers. It then begs to be answered, why would she need her statement to be written by a lawyer, if she is telling the truth?
    She’s also VERY careful to write that she has not had any contact with JT since. But that does not preclude that she hasn’t been in contact with someone operating on his behalf.
    Perhaps it is just me, as a woman. If this had happened to me and I was upset enough to write and publish an editorial about the altercation, I have a very hard time reconciling that kind of spirit with “after he apologized the next day, I chose not to push this any further”.
    I’m betting she’s legally bound not to say anything.

  23. Peter K Marshall says:

    His bosses in the Liberal party should tell him to step aside. Other groups & businesses have done it why not a political party?
    Peter K

  24. Jim Prosser says:

    Here’s the deal, Joe says that the females perspective of the so called ‘incident’ by be a litle differnt from his. Reall)…ya, I guess 20 years ago chicks expected to get groped, it was called being hit on on as one woman put it who is in love with Joes socks. Ahhh…yes, them were the days…men lived in caves and carried that heavy club until the politically correct PM came around, tightened his shirt and said we were doing it all wrong. Just tired of his insensitivity, incompetence and overall fuckedupness….time to dump this bitch

  25. Liam Young says:

    I’d like to say more,but Johnny nails this.

  26. Joseph says:

    Normally when one turns away from the bad they did in the past and change their ways they should be given the chance at redemption.
    However, the standard set here is the one Justin has established himself and used to pronounce guilt until proven innocent then removing cabinet members while an investigation is completed.
    His standard as he stated is immutable regardless of when the alledged malfeasance occurred and the woman should always be believed. He also mandated that this standard applies to him as well.
    Its like that time the AG reported on ad contracts for little to no value and Paul Martin couldn’t keep his story straight either.
    This will be the event that puts the liberals back in purgatory again.

  27. mark says:

    Man, you are really starting to lose it.

    You should ask Maxine Waters if she has a spare room in her house for you to stay in.

  28. Bill Steedman says:

    Touching a person intimately without consent is sexual assault under the Criminal Code of Canada. It is an indictable offence, meaning that there is no limitation period for prosecution. The question we should be asking is, why are there 3 affidavits floating around out there? For what purpose? Was there a civil action that got nipped in the bud? Sooner or later, these affidavits will leak…they always do.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*