Trump campaign manager charged with misdemeanor battery against reporter Michelle Fields
Remember this? We’re so “onto the next thing, and then the next and the next” that it can be hard to remember even fairly recent incidents in the campaign.
But to summarize: Breitbart reporter Fields alleged she was grabbed by Trump manager Corey Lewandowski on the arm hard enough to bruise it, and the Trump campaign not only denied that (Lewandowski writing about Fields “you are totally delusional. I never touched you. As a matter of fact, I have never even met you”), but also issued a press release saying “not a single camera captured it.” Trump himself personally added in a CNN interview that: “This was, in my opinion, made up. Everybody said nothing happened. Perhaps she made the story up. I think that’s what happened.” He also added in a Townhall interview, “I don’t think it ever happened,” and that they should “Check her out. Just check her out.”
So that’s the background. The usual Trump categorical denial of wrongdoing on their part, and then attacks on the accuser’s reputation and veracity.
Fast forward to now, when police have this to say:
According to an arrest record provided to the Washington Examiner, police were able to obtain video from security officials that shows Lewandowski grabbing the arm of Fields during a press conference at Trump’s international golf course in Jupiter, Fla.
“The video parallels what Fields had told me, in that Trump was walking toward the exit of the ballroom, taking questions and signing autographs, Trump had looked in [Fields’] direction, and then Lewandowski extended his left arm out, stepping between Trump and another male subject believed to be U.S. Secret Service,” Officer Marc Bujnowski explained in the report. “Lewandowski then grabbed Fields’ left arm with his right hand, causing her to turn and step back.”
“Fields also showed me her left forearm, which revealed bruising from what appeared to be several finger marks indicating a grabbing type injury,” the officer wrote.
Somewhere along the way, when earlier video had surfaced indicating some sort of contact, Trump supporters’ defense of their hero became that Fields wasn’t actually knocked down. But she never had alleged that; someone else had, but not Fields. So it’s quite irrelevant, although I have no doubt it will still be claimed by some Trump supporters that this is what Fields said and it didn’t happen, therefore no biggee.
In fact, Trump seems to be saying the following right now:
Wow, Corey Lewandowski, my campaign manager and a very decent man, was just charged with assaulting a reporter. Look at tapes-nothing there!
But Trump’s “nothing” appears to be exactly what Fields originally alleged. He may think it’s “nothing” because certainly it is not a serious injury. But that was never the point, nor was the allegation by Fields that a serious injury was caused. As usual with such things, it’s not the crime, it’s the coverup, which in this case included an attempt to injure Fields’ reputation.
The behavior of Lewandowski should have been unacceptable (and this has nothing to do with the gender of the reporter, at least not to me) and a simple apology issued, even including a disclaimer that it may not have happened but that if it happened they’re sorry and it shouldn’t have happened. That would have nipped the incident in the bud, and left plausible deniability. But Trump seems incapable of something like that. To him, it’s completely acceptable that a campaign manager grab a reporter and bruise her arm, although it’s not acceptable to admit it might have happened. What is acceptable to the Trump camp is not just the action, but a series of lies to cover it up and to smear the accuser, beginning with Lewandowski’s claim that he “never touched” Fields, and Trump’s claim that Fields is a lying liar who lies and that she should be “checked out.”
No, it’s they who lie. And the vast majority of his supporters will defend all of this. And it’s they—and Trump—who are asking us to give him the most powerful office in the land.
[NOTE: By the way, here’s the legal definition of “battery”:
At common law, an intentional unpermitted act causing harmful or offensive contact with the “person” of another.
Battery is concerned with the right to have one’s body left alone by others.
Battery is both a tort and a crime. Its essential element, harmful or offensive contact, is the same in both areas of the law. The main distinction between the two categories lies in the penalty imposed…
The following elements must be proven to establish a case for battery: (1) an act by a defendant; (2) an intent to cause harmful or offensive contact on the part of the defendant; and (3) harmful or offensive contact to the plaintiff.
The Act The act must result in one of two forms of contact. Causing any physical harm or injury to the victim””such as a cut, a burn, or a bullet wound””could constitute battery, but actual injury is not required. Even though there is no apparent bruise following harmful contact, the defendant can still be guilty of battery; occurrence of a physical illness subsequent to the contact may also be actionable. The second type of contact that may constitute battery causes no actual physical harm but is, instead, offensive or insulting to the victim. Examples include spitting in someone’s face or offensively touching someone against his or her will.
Touching the person of someone is defined as including not only contacts with the body, but also with anything closely connected with the body, such as clothing or an item carried in the person’s hand. For example, a battery may be committed by intentionally knocking a hat off someone’s head or knocking a glass out of some-one’s hand.
Although the contact must be intended, there is no requirement that the defendant intend to harm or injure the victim…
Intent is not negated if the aim of the contact was a joke. As with all torts, however, consent is a defense.]
We’re so “onto the next thing, and then the next and the next” that it can be hard to remember even fairly recent incidents in the campaign.
Well, there surely is a sort of symbiosis betwixt this “story” and the current ongoing Trump camp’s smears of such women as Amanda Carpenter, in your positive defense for revisiting the subject neo-neocon. Lying on the Trumpers’ part being the common thread, that is.
sdferr:
Not to mention the repetitive attacks on Megyn Kelly, whose original Crime Against Trump appears to have been asking him about his previous verbal attacks on women, and how that might affect his campaign.
Seems prescient, no?
Well, they had to charge cause she took the time to file with the police after she got fired from breitbart…
its her perogative, but note no one is screaming at her about using the law, which supposedly if trump does it its childish… then on the flip side, what pandoras box has she opened?
its her right as a citizen to press charges…
its his right to be considered innocent till proven guilty…
Its the Zapruder film of the millenial age..
however, its going to open a pandoras box in terms of whether you want a woman covering something, and the potential for abuse. [while being equal they do appear more problematic]
But hasnt anyone realized the degree of trying to make incidents, contrive incidents and so on, and yet, this is the best harm they could do?
its quadruple standards all over the place…
and now more videos are appearing…
Video posted by C-SPAN’s Jeremy Art picks up where TGP’s Kristinn Taylor stopped filming.
the problem is that the actual moment of the incident is out of the screen view at the time of the indcident, so each side is making claims to fill in that
and as far as Amanda Carpenter, Rubio crew has been shopping that story around.. ie. Rubio thought he could kill two birds with one stone, and knock Cruz and Trump, and then what?
Even hacker groups are in to manipulate the election:
hacker group Anonymous threatened to release information it claimed to have on Cruz and his alleged sexual affairs
Twitter Video a1057ed6 4ae6 400e 8bd7 e27c1ddd411a
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vV5jLoSmko
[they say its for what he did to Carson]
For weeks leading up to the National Enquirer report out Friday, which claims Cruz had sexual relations with five former co-workers and political insiders, supporters of Sen. Marco Rubio and “#NeverTrump” promoters on social media discussed “#TheThing,” as the Cruz allegation was dubbed by insiders.
is Journolist back?
One of the women is on Trumps team…
oy…
Like sands through the hourglass these are the days of our lives…
“The Daily Beast reported it was shopped around by two – reporters by somebody who was a Rubio person. I also happen to know that one of the people who was shopping the story around very aggressively was somebody who was completely anti-Trump, and was anti-Cruz also, but who was not a person who in anyway was supporting Trump.” Kirsten Powers
IF lew did this, then fine, fine him and or put him in jail, and move on.
what about hillary?
then what would Cruz and others do if the rumor put forth by Rubio to smear both top candidates, and Anonymous turn out to be true? Bill Clinton II?
I have no idea on each of them, and will have to wait until more comes out… but if we are not going to penalize cruz campaign manager for driving two people to suicide, or iran contra, or 1.5 billion… or or or… then this is also irrelevant by that asymetric view…
Indeed neo-neocon, prescient as knowing something particular and with a depth sure to yield results. The un-self-reflective Trump however isn’t a man given to any sort of curiosity, least of all about himself. How to avoid unnecessarily pissing away women’s support just isn’t in his wheelhouse — and old dogs, new tricks etc.
NeoNeoCon: whose original Crime Against Trump appears to have been asking him about his previous verbal attacks on women,
Trump never commented about all women, but about specific women who are horrid people whom he dislikes (he is not free to say what he wants to equals? women are not protected by patriarchy or that, that is now evil. so why the shock if women are like men and they can say all manner of nasty things and even tell the world what we think even if we dont think it?)
Trump likes strong capable women who work hard and earn what they achieve, not play games, like his grandmother who took over for his grandfather when he died of the flu, then facilitated his father building the empire that trump expanded and diversified.
you CAN read the transcripts and compare questions to see what games were being played…
http://time.com/3988276/republican-debate-primetime-transcript-full-text/
he is not allowed his opinions of some nasty people? Megan took what was specific about some women, and expanded it to ALL women… who are equal… right? but dont treat them like equals unless its about money, as they are all gold diggers who cant take slights… they may faint and have airs…
then after pointing out its women he dont like (without the reasons why he doesnt like them), kelly says:
[edited for length by n-n]
Artfldgr:
No one is screaming about her using the law? Actually, all around the blogosphere I originally read Trump supporters in comments sections challenging her to use the law and practically demanding that she use the law, and asserting that if she didn’t file charges she obviously was a liar.
She did file charges, as they requested. And the police seem to think the charges have some validity, and that the video backs them up.
Artfldgr:
The phrase “Trump’s attacks on women” does NOT mean “Trump’s attacks on all women or on women as a group.” “Women” merely means “more than one woman.”
Kelly referred to specific quotes from Trump that he had addressed to certain women, and asked, “Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man we should elect as president, and how will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who was likely to be the Democratic nominee, that you are part of the war on women?”
It turns out that, if Trump is the nominee, that particular charge is probably going to be a big big problem for him, which is what Kelly was getting at.
And yes, he was attacking specific women for specific things, and the “on your knees” quote was taken out of context and not nearly as bad as it sounded. This was all discussed over and over on blogs after that first debate. My point is a different one—that Kelly was asking a question that seems prescient now, because of Trump’s subsequent attacks on specific women which are over-the-top, and his scorched-earth policy towards anyone (man or woman) who crosses him. His approval among women is terrible, and it will indeed be a potentially big problem for him.
Here is a woman making the same comment as to equal is equal AND commenting on the trump woman scandal…
in case you havent noticed guys hate the double standard of equal but not equal where you get more than equal salaries (if adjusted, as that women earn less trope has been disproved) and you have to be defended against mean men who say things your allowed to say worse at will
and a LOT of women comment on that, and side with the guy because of it. So Megyn Kelly basically handed trump more women, despite what SOME women who have been through college are taught to think
and from
As A Woman I Am Sick And Tired Of Feminist Double Standards, Media Hypocrisy And Especially “Male” Feminists
Kelly’s opening question was an example of what’s called a performative. Worked too, the clever girl.
@neo-neocon Sorry, but you have it wrong… she could have been clear by saying which women, but in the absence of the actual women, its not taken the way you said.. otherwise, you would not hear from the angry feminist above who cant stand that women are not treated equal good AND BAD
the point megyn was makking has no point if its specific women that most people dislike, like rosie… nor would it make sense to bring up war on women, if it was war on specific women.
that was not how it was taken, nor what the rest of the stuff written was about, nor was it treating him equally with the others candidtes, who some had worse things with women and no employees singing praises.
sorry… but thats lawyering ex post facto
its meaningless unless expanded to all women and as an example (wrong) of how he treats all women..
it would be the equivalent of, you had a fude with rosie for over 10 years before you ran for office, and called her bad names, and she called you even worse names a lot more times (but since we dont watch her, we dont know that), why did you call her bad names back to her calling you bad names.
sorry, that is not how megyn wanted it taken, nor anyone else took it that way.
here is a screen image of the stuff megyns friends in the press wrote her after her action
http://allnewspipeline.com/images/GOPDebateFOXKellyFB.jpg
they didnt see it your way either.
nor did the feminist above
nor did budowsky
nor did most of the press
but only you see it that way after you brought it up and it was a tit for tat going back to 10 years…
Artfldgr:
The fact that some people saw it that way doesn’t mean that Kelly said he had attacked all women, and I certainly didn’t say he did that either. Of course he didn’t, nor does he do it now.
I also have made it clear that he attacks men, too.
Kelly’s point—and I believe she made it quite clearly—was that his language about women he didn’t like (so personal and so often using insults that could be construed or interpreted as sexist) could be used by the opposition to hurt his standing with women.
And it has.
He has also played into the hands of those who would use it that way, by continuing the insults.
As I said (and have made clear many times) I think he’s an equal-opportunity insulter. But that doesn’t mean that’s the way it will be interpreted. And it most certainly doesn’t make what he does right whether he does it to men or to women, or to both.
Circlerunning beauty. O Trump, where is thy sting?
She touched me first!
It ‘s, all of it, just another demonstration of a pretty women (Fields) having tired of laboring in the fields desperately wanting to gambol about in the penthouse. Ms. Fields is angling for a prime time gig ala Megyn. The market for attractive women has never been so hot. How long before the market gets glutted and we end up with tulip mania. Just as well, Ms Fields actions are a demonstration that women will ruin everything, given the chance. We need a moratorium on women in high offices. Wonder what Hillary’s up to?
Member of Trump’s Secret Service detail confirms Fields touched Trump twice and was warned to stop, before Lewandowski intervened
https://twitter.com/dmartosko/status/714884879691997189
This is getting ridiculous… but then again, there is only one class that can make ridiculous bs serious stuff…
She touched me first!
heh
What a pathetic loser.
JurassiCon Rex:
Keep carrying Trump’s water, no matter where it leads you.
It’s now indisputable that Lewandowski lied about never touching Fields. It’s highly likely that he lied to Trump as well. I don’t think it’s fair to assume that Trump did anything more than take Lewandowski’s word for it, in the at the time absence of video evidence proving otherwise.
Trump wasn’t solely responding to Field’s allegations, he was responding to the entire hyperbole; “thrown to the floor”, “reporter assaulted”, etc., etc.
Today’s reporters are naturally to be suspected, most will say and do anything with truth not even a minor consideration. So Trump suggesting that the reporter be investigated is fighting by ‘the rules’ that the media has set.
Regarding Megan Kelly, the transcript makes clear that she did indeed mean ALL women and acted in a hostile manner toward Trump. She made that crystal clear when she asked, “how will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who is likely to be the Democratic nominee, that you are part of the war on women?”
Neo-neocon,
I hadn’t mentioned Trump. The incident didn’t involve Trump directly. I was carrying water for the truth. The truth is, all female accusations, of any kind, should be considered as self-serving. One cannot repeatedly cry wolf and expect to be believed by default. The second matter that struts its stuff here is Leftist female cry-bullyism. She’d gotten a b & b boo-boo. What is it Valley girls said…OMG! Don’t care how much Chanel #5 Fields exudes. Something still stinks… and it’s not Trump or Corey.
“all female accusations, of any kind, should be considered as self-serving” JurassiCon Rex
Your misogyny is showing, it interferes with considering the validity of what you might have right.
If DJT is the nominee, the msm and dnc will run with the ‘war on women’ meme. Other women, some perhaps real and others staged, will flood the zone. Trump has demonstrated he responds poorly when attacked. If he truly wants to be POTUS he will have to respond to all sorts of attacks and accusations in a matter that does not turn off independents and his proclaimed support among democrats. I see no reason to believe he is capable of such acting skills.
Your misogyny is showing
Your knee is jerking. I have no problem believing women. I have problems believing girls who have reached the age of consent but not the point of maturity.
JurassiCon Rex,
You said it, own it.
“all female accusations, of any kind, should be considered as self-serving”
ALL and ANY are categorical assertions, now you separate ‘women’ from ‘girls’ but your accusation was against the gender itself.
Artfldgr Says:
“Well, they had to charge cause she took the time to file with the police after (Fields) got fired from breitbart…”
Funny, everything I can find says she resigned.
Art, I read a lot about politics every day, for have for many years, and when I do bother to read your book-length comments, I often find things that don’t jibe with my recollections or don’t make sense. This is just another planted axiom which appears to be totally untrue, like all the nebulous lies Cruz supposedly tells.
Geoffrey Britain,
You are right. I said it. I own it. I was wrong. I meant females of of a certain age/type and was too impetuous in the construction.
Trump is a misogynist, and so are many of his supporters. There are all sorts of “-ists” in the Trump camp, many of them as reactions to the overbearing PC culture. Many of the racists of the alt-right, for example, were created in response to the primacy given to minorities by the left. Undeserved primacy, I might add.
The left has suffered from a “noble savage” syndrome for decades, and the alt-right now thinks even less of them than they should. Classic over-correction.
JurassiCon Rex
You ‘misspoke’, we all do it occasionally. I’m gratified that you’re a big enough man to admit it. If only Trump had as much character.
I just watched Fields on ABC in a prior interview accusing Lewandowski of trying to pull her down to the ground, so she did accuse him of that.
The latest video released by the police shows that Lewandowski was pulling slightly upwards on Fields arm, which puts the lie to her accusation that he was trying to throw her to the ground. Now, we know that both Lewandowski and Fields are liars. This should not come as a surprise.
I have stood back from this topic, and will remain standing at arm’s length. Let the investigation proceed and see if it comes to trial, then pass your personal judgment.
More votes for Trump.
That looks as the establishment using the police to attack Trump for something that was basically nothing.
I remember one Mexican friend, who was working for an European company, saying that what shocked him the most from America was how incredibly rotten it was. That’s the same feeling which is driving people to vote Trump, and this episode is just more of the same.
Yann:
Fields filed a complaint, a complaint many Trump supporters challenged her to file. The police looked at the tape and decided there was enough evidence to charge. The legal process will play it out.
In my post I offered the definition of battery, which this fits. The crime he was charged with was a misdemeanor, which is not serious. The charge seems proper.
And yet to a Trump supporter it’s all the “establishment” ganging up on Trump. Of course.
“More votes for Trump.”
Wow, trumpians are a dead end street. It goes nowhere and ends with hrc or a surrogate as POTUS. There is no cure for cluelessness.
parker:
To that kind of Trump supporter, not only does everything lead to “more votes for Trump,” but the corollary is that anything is okay if it leads to “more votes for Trump.” That’s what Trump was referring to when he said he could shoot someone on Fifth Ave…
The ends—“more votes for Trump”—justify any means. It’s edifying, isn’t it, to see how it works?
This story and posts like this is exactly why, although a right winger who most aligns with Cruz, I will never vote for him.
Basically I am seeing all the stuff the left did over the years to the right being applied by the right to republicans – Romney nor the GOPe ever fought against the democrats as hard as Trump. We have anti Trump violence, vile human beings like Reid and Pelosi in sitting positions of power , but now GOPe bloggers faint over a shuffle like this and claim it’s a step away from Tump run concentration camps.
This and all the other fluff should be ignored. That any words or time wasted on this just shows republicans deserve to lose and lose big.
Neo,
When it comes to trumpians,, there is no there.. Dead end street.
whatever,
well, not much to say…please take your meds, get a good night sleep, and wake up a little more sane.
whatever:
It is you who resembles the left, unfortunately.
No one’s fainting.
And no one’s saying that this is a step away from Trumpian concentration camps.
And no one is a GOPe blogger, at least not here.
Go back to conservative treehouse or wherever you came from if you can’t mount a better argument than those.
And here lies the problem: if the police is charging for what is basically nothing, that smells bad. And the stronger it smells, the more votes Trump gets.
Nope, it doesn’t. Fields herself touched Trump twice, second time against the warning of security agents. Have you seen another misdemeanor charge filed against her? It seems that we have quite a double standard here.
Yeap. Indeed, it is. It’s not a secret that the establishment is trying hard to stop Trump.
Yann:
I don’t mean to be rude, but I have a question for you: can you read? If so, have you read the definition of “battery” that I posted as a note at the end of the post? Not all touchings are batteries. Read the whole thing.
The touching of Field arguably meets the definition. The touching of Trump clearly does not.
Funniest part is that Trump’s supporters are so carelessly clueless the harms they do him, no less than themselves.
“Our man’s such a pussy he’s all upset some little 28 yr. old girl touched his arm!”
Nope. Funniest part is how those ad-hominem arguments remind so much to… liberals.
Hey, just keep on keepin’ on promoting your man’s sensitivity then. That’ll do ‘er. Meanwhile maybe don’t mention he’s afraid to publicly debate his competitors for fear of being shown a dim-wit.
You sound exactly as a standard SJW when referring to men’s rights.
I couldn’t imagine conservative could sound so liberal…
Yann:
Trump threatens to sue a reporter who “touched” him twice and complains about “unfair’ media coverage, and won’t debate Cruz. Sounds like a crybully demanding “safe spaces” to me.
Who knew that Sir Donald was a SJW all this time, and you support a SJW? Inconceivable!
But then those evil FL police haven’t filed charges against Fields, must be a conspiracy! Not even for simple battery, unlike poor “baa lamb” Corey (that’s a Woodehouse ref btw).
And we have Lurker, all in for bringing third world press standards (i.e. press that serves the ruing junta/strong man) or is fearful of the mob/street justice. Inconceivable what Trump supporters will resort to.