Secret FBI document reveals attempt to discredit Martin Luther King as a sexual degenerate

Stanley Levison the Marxist CPUSA Member and MLK confidant:

In the early 1950s the FBI considered Levison to be a major financial coordinator for the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) and began to monitor his activities. The FBI had him under the surveillance of Jack and Morris Childs, two former CPUSA members who became FBI informants. According to the FBI, Levison's CPUSA activities ended in 1957.[2]

He had initially been introduced to King by Bayard Rustin, a Quaker, in New York City in 1956. Though King had offered to pay Levison in exchange for his help, Levison refused on every occasion, as he believed "the liberation struggle is the most positive and rewarding area of work anyone could experience."[3]

Levison was instrumental in all the activities of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), the organization established by King and other Southern black preachers to further the cause of civil rights. He professionalized the fund raising of the organization and took on many of the publicity tasks, in addition to serving as King's literary agent. He was also a close adviser to King and a ghostwriter for him.[7]


Hunter Pitts O'Dell, Marxist CPUSA Member, SCLC Leader, MLK and Jesse Jackson confidant:

During the 1950s, Jack O'Dell was a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA).

He worked with Martin Luther King Jr. O'Dell was a director of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC). Because of O'Dell's past involvement with the Communist Party, King received pressure from many liberal leaders—including the Kennedy brothers, John and Robert—to distance himself from O'Dell. After conferring with King, O'Dell decided to accept a less prominent post within the movement in order not to alienate important allies of the Civil Rights struggle; nevertheless, he continued to play a decisive role in the SCLC, as well as in King's move towards the political left towards the end of his life.[3]

Jack O'Dell worked closely with the Rev. Jesse Jackson. He was a senior foreign policy advisor to the "Jesse Jackson for President" campaign in 1984. He also worked with Jackson as an international affairs consultant to the National Rainbow Coalition.

Soviet funding and espionage (CPUSA)

From 1959 until 1989, when Gus Hall attacked the initiatives taken by Mikhail Gorbachev in the Soviet Union, the CPUSA received a substantial subsidy from the Soviet Union. There is at least one receipt signed by Gus Hall in the KGB archives.[38] Starting with $75,000 in 1959, this was increased gradually to $3 million in 1987. This substantial amount reflected the party's loyalty to the Moscow line, in contrast to the Italian and later Spanish and British Communist parties, whose eurocommunism deviated from the orthodox line in the late 1970s. Releases from the Soviet archives show that all national Communist parties that conformed to the Soviet line were funded in the same fashion. From the communist point of view, this international funding arose from the internationalist nature of communism itself; fraternal assistance was considered the duty of communists in any one country to give aid to their comrades in other countries. From the anti-communist point of view, this funding represented an unwarranted interference by one country in the affairs of another.

The cutoff of funds in 1989 resulted in a financial crisis, which forced the CPUSA to cut back publication in 1990 of the party newspaper, the People's Daily World, to weekly publication, the People's Weekly World. (references for this section are provided below).

Much more controversial than mere funding is the alleged involvement of CPUSA members in espionage for the Soviet Union.

 

But but...



And besides, the Dixiecrats killed about 3,400 people!

No, this post isn't "trolling," I'm yet again making a valid point about ethical lapses on display in this thread.

 

When I was in high school and college yes boys certainly said vulgar things. They bragged about girls they've had sex with or talked about the girl with the big breasts in class and how hot she was. But that's not what we're talking about here. I never heard anyone in the locker room ever say that they could get away with inappropriately touching girls and the ones that went around sexually harassing and molesting their female classmates ended up getting the sh*t beat out of them by their boyfriend, friends or relatives in school or were punished for it by the school and law enforcement. Bragging about being able to inappropriately touch women is not locker room talk or "men being men" it is an expression of entitlement to sexually harass women and nothing that a grown man with a wife and kids should be saying.

This is the exact same mentality that Harvey Weinstein expressed in an audio recording of him trying to lure a woman to his hotel room:



Ambra Battilana Gutierrez: Why yesterday you touched my breasts?

Harvey Weinstein: Please, I'm sorry. Just come on in, I'm used to that.

Listen carefully to the conversation. He is trying to lure a woman in to his hotel room who says she doesn't want to because she is uncomfortable and that he has been sexually aggressive to her and touched her breasts without her consent the other day. That is the EXACT same mentality that Donald Trump is expressing in his audio recording. They let you do it. You can get away with anything (inappropriate touching) because of your celebrity status. You can grab them by the p*ssy. Grab their breasts. Do what you want to them. This isn't some horny teenager either which would still be unacceptable but a married man with children who is now President of the United States who has had women accuse him of touching them on planes, walking in while they're undressing, kissing them without their consent and even raping them. Harvey Weinstein is being investigated for allegations that he raped women. When someone confesses to this behavior and there are multiple witnesses that is as close to a smoking gun as you can get without forensic evidence.

Now compare that to the allegations against Dr. King. They weren't made public. There are no police reports. There are no witnesses who have made public statements. They secretly wiretapped King's hotel rooms which he shared with associates and claim to have heard sex on the tapes. The allegations range from using SCLC money for prostitution, fathering children out of wedlock, various extramarital affairs, drunken sex parties, beating up women in the hotel room and bizarre sex acts. Now if they really had this much dirt on King why not expose him with it? Why not have him arrested? These kinds of allegations would bring down any pastor in the United States TODAY never mind the face of the Civil Rights movement who had so much respect in the Black community and among White Egalitarians.

The allegations of physical assault could land King in prison but all the FBI did was send harassing letters and tapes to his home with suggestions that he commit suicide before they expose him.



This is harassment and intimidation not lawful investigation and if these allegations are true I want to see some concrete evidence. I want to hear the audio recordings. I want witnesses. I want to know the names of these prostitutes. I want to hear their story if they are still alive or were ever interviewed. I want the names of these children fathered by Dr. King and DNA tests proving they're his kids. When the government can give me that then I will acknowledge that there is credibility to these statements. That is more than fair considering Dr. King isn't alive to defend himself, these alleged tapes were done secretly and used to blackmail and intimidate him and no one has ever come forward to corroborate these stories.

The best evidence we got of anything alluding to an extramarital affair was Georgia Davis Powers saying in a book that she had an "intimidate" relationship with King and felt guilty about it when comforting his wife after he was assassinated. She didn't say explicitly that they had sex and I once heard on the radio (ironically after attending Dr. King's church and visiting his grave site) a few years before she died refusing to address the question when asked on the spot if she had a sexual relationship with King. And if she did that only proves an extramarital affair not being violent with or sexually abusing women.

If you were being intellectually honest you wouldn't dismiss the allegations against Trump which are nearly as strong as the allegations against Weinstein. We have him on tape admitting to the behavior he's been accused of by multiple women. I don't know if the claims are true. I don't know if Trump raped a 13 year old girl or peed on Russian prostitutes. I'm not saying he did do it because I wasn't there. I'm simply saying that there is more credible evidence (accuser testimony and audio tapes) that he potentially did these things not to mention his numerous perverted comments over the years.

As far as the victims of communism is concerned your comments don't challenge my position at all. I didn't say anything about living memory, as in people who were alive to witness these events. I said that the victims of White Supremacist ideology outnumber the victims of Stalin's regime. That's a fact. We don't have an exact count but the numbers must be in the hundreds of millions given historical facts. You don't need to be alive today for the victims of a historical atrocity to matter. Not one person alive today experienced American slavery. Does that make it less wrong? If some White Supremacist makes racist comments to me about slavery knowing that I am an African-American should I not be offended? One day every survivor of the Holocaust will be dead. That won't make praising Nazis less offensive.

The fact is that Martin Luther King had nothing to do with communism. He publicly denounced it. The FBI tried to link him to it and they found some associates with ties to the Communist Party but no direct connection to King in terms of ideological influence or criminal activity. There are Democratic politicians who used to be Klan members. In King's assessment Levison and O'Dell's communist ties were in the past and when he knew them he found them to be upstanding men devoted to civil rights. Nothing I have said diminishes the immorality and atrocities of Joseph Stalin, the Soviet Union or the criminal acts of Communists around the world. I'm not a communist. King wasn't a communist. I'm not defending communism. It has nothing to do with me and really nothing to do with this thread other than a side topic related to the FBI's smear campaign against King.

Since King vs. Trump seems to be a theme in this thread I find it ironic that you would say that King merely associating with ex-communists is a serious offense given the Russian investigation against Trump. If the Russians really tampered with our election then Trump needs to be impeached and sent to prison. There's no evidence that King engaged in any illegal activity related to communism any more than the salacious allegations of sexual misconduct on his part. Ironically there's far more credible evidence that Trump is in bed with the Russians in more ways than one.

 

That wasn't luring. He was trying to verbally bully her into caving in. He was trying to impose his will on her without using his fists.

I already proved otherwise and you ignored it.

There's no legitimacy in "denouncing" someone you hang out with and refuse to stop hanging out with. Verbal slaps on the wrist are meant to appease critics, and are not to be taken seriously when the association continues.

 

He was doing that but he also promised he wouldn't harm her. Yet we know now that Weinstein has been charged with sexual assault by several women. This is the mentality of manipulative sexual predators who do whatever it takes to get their way and when persuasion doesn't work they simply take advantage of their victims. This is the same way of thinking Trump was expressing in his audio recording e.g. "They let you do it and you can get away with almost anything because of your status."

The point is that they have the same mentality and similar accusations have been made against them. Trump can say he was just talking trash or lying however he has several accusers. At the very least such allegations shouldn't be easily dismissed. If you say or suggest you've committed a crime you've opened yourself up to the possibility that you've done it and sensible people will take accusations against you seriously.

I've never seen or heard Martin Luther King do anything that would suggest that he was a sexual degenerate. I have heard Donald Trump say plenty of things suggesting he is a sexual degenerate and unlike King actual accusers have gone public against him.

There's no evidence that I know of that Dr. King believed in communism. You have associations. That's it. Oh and a picture of him sitting down at a meeting allegedly receiving communist training which is about as credible as Obama being a secret Muslim.

 

Honestly, his phd should be stripped.

This is exhibit 'a' how illogical egalitarianism is.

 

The kind of verbal manipulation and bullying he was exerting was harm. Weinstein is deranged.

Right, but in that recording, Trump didn't say he touched anyone. He was describing the climate among celebrities.

King was never as open as Trump so it's not comparable. King hid behind (Marxist) speechwriters and spokesmen. There's enough statements to show what he was like, much like Weinstein - people talk, eventually.

Again, it's the associations. He knew who they were. He was warned by a number of people including the Kennedy brothers. He kept associating with them anyway. That in and of itself speaks volumes. To attempt to move the goalposts from association to proving he "believed" is disingenuous, as again you'd never accept such a standard of proof against Trump or other white conservatives you dislike.

In 1957, the Georgia Commission on Education published a pamphlet titled "Highlander Folk School: Communist Training School, Monteagle, Tennessee".[2] A controversial photograph of Martin Luther King and writer, trade union organizer, civil rights activist and co-founder of the Highlander School Donald Lee West, was published. According to information obtained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, West was the District Director of the Communist Party in North Carolina,[3] though West denied he had ever been a member of the Communist Party.

West's CPUSA associations are also likewise documented.

So would you accept that a conservative activist or politician who knowingly closely associated for years with people with longtime ties to the KKK who gave verbal lip service that he disagreed with the KKK but kept hanging around such people anyway as not being a KKK member or sympathizer? That is a yes or no question.

Keep in mind, you already condemned Trump for associating with alleged "white supremacists" and not condemning them forcefully enough.

 

I see no reason he should get a slide on plagiarism when nobody else does. I smell black privilege. I smell pandering.

 

Of course they slandered MLK.. and the ones who did so were all adulterers.

Of course they accused him of being communist. He opposed the Vietnam war.

 

Ofcourse it was. The point is that Trump has expressed the same mentality as Weinstein and been accused of molestation and rape. So why are you so dismissive of accusations against Trump?

He spoke as if he was speaking from experience that he could get away with touching women in inappropriate ways because of his celebrity status and wealth. Trump has been accused of sexual harassment, molestation and rape. Why are you dismissive of these allegations?

There are no statements from any accusers that King had sex with prostitutes, beat women or fathered children out of wedlock. These are FBI rumors orchestrated by J. Edgar Hoover who was completely obsessed with discrediting King. They went so far as to send him harassing letters telling him he should commit suicide. If they really had that kind of dirt on him and they wanted him out of the picture why not just have him arrested? Obama was accused of getting a blow job from a gay man while smoking crack in a limousine and killing off gay lovers in Chicago to cover up his down low bisexual lifestyle. None of those rumors were supported by any credible evidence and I have likewise not seen any evidence supporting allegations against King. King was also a public figure as famous as American Presidents during the 1960s. If he was a sexual degenerate he didn't act like it, unlike Trump. A lot of people have skeletons in their closet. John F. Kennedy had affairs with women including Marylin Monroe. J. Edgar Hoover was rumored to be gay and a cross-dresser who went to gay parties dressed as a transvestite.

If Dr. King had engaged in some inappropriate or controversial sexual behavior in his past he would be a member of a club that includes many public figures including some of the men investigating him and accusing him of indecency. As it stands no concrete evidence has ever been presented supporting these allegations.

Who cares? What is this supposed to mean to me? Associating with people who have some relation to communism isn't a crime and the FBI was never able to prove that King himself was a communist so why does it matter? You seem to just want to score points with King associating with communism which isn't even the topic of the thread.

No. Being friends or associates with a member of the KKK doesn't make you a Klansman or a sympathizer.

Trump has made actual statements that can be construed as racist which in addition to his associations and lack of sincerity in criticizing White Supremacists is suspicious at the very least.

I have never said that Trump is a White Supremacist. He has said many racially insensitive things and expressed a bigoted attitude on a lot of issues as well as promoted intolerant policy recommendations. There's far more reason to be concerned with Trump's racist attitudes than there is King being a communist or communist sympathizer. What did Dr. King actually do as a public figure and civil rights activist which can actually be verified as an objective fact that you feel is morally wrong? I answered your question so answer mine. Complaining about associations isn't an answer. What did he actually do that you feel caused serious harm to society?

 

You said there were members of Trump's cabinet that were associated with White Nationalists. Still waiting for you to back that one up.

 

Pointing out the mentality exists isn't the same as "expressing the same mentality."

I'm dismissive against charges that aren't proven, like you claim to be. The question is why you have a much lower burden of proof for one - Trump - than you do another - MLK.

I saw nothing of his expressing personal experience. Simply being around celebrities as often as Trump has been is more than enough to observe a climate with how people behave around celebrities.

MLK has been accused of adultery, frequenting hookers, having bastard children out of wedlock, and having orgies. Why are you dismissive of these allegations?

OH so the goal post is moved to "statements from accusers" rather than simply information surfacing over time? Interesting.

If you wish to claim that the FBI "orchestrated rumors," let's see your evidence.

Arrested for what?

Same with Trump. Whoops.

Then why are you in uproar that we should care about Trump's alleged association with people you term as "white supremacists"?

Even when informed of their activities and membership so you're fully aware? If that's the case, then why blast Trump?

Obama has made statements that can be construed as communist in addition to his associations and lack of sincerity in criticizing communists while maintaining close relations with them is suspicious in the very least.

What racially insensitive things? What "bigoted attitude"? What "intolerant policy recommendations"? Why exactly should we all bow to what you and yours subjectively term as "tolerant"? What IS bigotry?

1.
stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.
2.
the actions, beliefs, prejudices, etc., of a bigot.

That definition fits you and everybody, so why is Trump's allegedly being one scandalous?

Why's that? We're told to lionize King and his movement and conform to it. MLK at best was a pinko hack. He made anti-capitalist statements, called for massive confiscatory economic redistribution of income.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/ober...alism-of-martin-luther-king-jr_b_4629609.html

Hint: If you abhor communism you don't hang out with communists.

We have a cultural establishment dedicated to waxing mythological by placing MLK on a pedestal for us to emulate - including his economic leftism.

And yes, promoting interracial marriage is harmful in a number of ways.

What has Trump actually done that you feel caused serious harm to society? Complaining about accusations isn't an answer.

 

You weren't aware of this? Trump has several advisors in his administration with racist views and associations. All throughout the year there have been investigations, resignations and terminations of Trump advisors because many of them are highly corrupt.

Politifact - Are there White Nationalists in the White House?

Slate.com - How Trump Has Cultivated the White Supremacist Alt-Right for Years

Marieclaire.com - A Close Look at Donald Trump's Cabinet

Examples:

Steve Bannon



The former chairman of Breitbart News helped run Trump's campaign and is a senior White House adviser. Bannon once proudly described Breitbart as "the platform for the alt-right," and under his leadership the site published an infamous article that celebrated the work of several white supremacists, including Richard Spencer, who was one of the leaders of the Charlottesville rally and who made headlines for using Nazi slogans and gestures at a Washington celebration of Trump's inauguration. (Breitbart also famously posted some of its stories under the heading "Black Crime.") Bannon has repeatedly and publicly endorsed The Camp of the Saints, a novel popular in white-pride circles in which black Americans, "dirty Arabs," and feces-eating Hindu rapists (among others) destroy civilization. The book refers to black individuals as "******s" and "rats." Bannon has also reportedly praised a far-right French writer named Charles Maurras who was sentenced to life in prison after World War II for collaboration with Nazi occupiers. And he's complained publicly that too many tech CEOs are Asian American. And he reportedly told his ex-wife that he didn't want their children attending schools with significant Jewish enrollment.

Sebastian Gorka



Ostensibly a counterterrorism adviser, Gorka’s job appears to consist entirely of making grandiose and factually erroneous declarations during Fox News appearances, and he is reportedly a member of a far-right Hungarian group called Vitézi Rend that collaborated with the Nazis during WWII. (He denies it.)

Julie Kirchner



Previously the executive director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, Kirchner was appointed to work at the federal Office of Citizenship and Immigration Services by the Trump administration in May. The Federation for American Immigration Reform's founder and its current president are both interested in eugenics and crank race science; both have complained that immigration undermines whites' dominance.

 

I asked for you to actually back up your assertions and you failed. First, none of these were in Trump's cabinet, secondly you failed to make any connection between White Nationalists and these three people. I mean seriously, Bannon saying Brietbart is "the platform for the alt-right," in the media but what does that mean? Do you mean Mencius Moldbug? What White Nationalist is Bannon associated with? Gorka denies being a member of the organization you are accusing him of being in, and frankly, I've never heard of Julie Kirchner, but she, like the rest of your choices, isn't in the cabinet. So a low level staffer. What White Nationalist is she associated with again?

I've no doubt you'll respond with a rebuttal, because that's what you do, but when you make a claim about Trump's cabinet and fall flat on your face the first swing of the bat, I can guess how the rest of your responses will go.

 

The 11 most anti-capitalist quotes from Martin Luther King Jr.

“I imagine you already know that I am much more socialistic in my economic theory than capitalistic… [Capitalism] started out with a noble and high motive… but like most human systems it fell victim to the very thing it was revolting against. So today capitalism has out-lived its usefulness.” – Letter to Coretta Scott, July 18, 1952.

“Call it democracy, or call it democratic socialism, but there must be a better distribution of wealth within this country for all God’s children.” – Speech to the Negro American Labor Council, 1961.

“We must recognize that we can’t solve our problem now until there is a radical redistribution of economic and political power… this means a revolution of values and other things. We must see now that the evils of racism, economic exploitation and militarism are all tied together… you can’t really get rid of one without getting rid of the others… the whole structure of American life must be changed. America is a hypocritical nation and [we] must put [our] own house in order.”- Report to SCLC Staff, May 1967

“The evils of capitalism are as real as the evils of militarism and evils of racism.” –Speech to SCLC Board, March 30, 1967

“I am now convinced that the simplest approach will prove to be the most effective – the solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed matter: the guaranteed income… The curse of poverty has no justification in our age. It is socially as cruel and blind as the practice of cannibalism at the dawn of civilization, when men ate each other because they had not yet learned to take food from the soil or to consume the abundant animal life around them. The time has come for us to civilize ourselves by the total, direct and immediate abolition of poverty.” – Where do We Go from Here?, 1967.


Definition of socialism
:any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
:a system of society or group living in which there is no private property:a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
:a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

 

OK So since associating with Stalinists wasn't a mark on MLK, what on earth is this? You're smearing this person based on her replacement saying offensive things?

 

He was speaking in the context of his personal experience being a celebrity and being inappropriate with women.

I have the same standard. Nothing has been proven however Trump has accusers. King did not. Trump was also recorded admitted to the behavior and attitudes he was accused of.

Watch the actual video where Trump (a married man) admits to trying to have sex with other women and inappropriately touching them. Unless something is wrong with your ears or comprehension you can clearly hear him speaking from experience about getting away with being inappropriate with women. He was clearly talking about himself and not just generalizing that people in his position can get away with it.

Who made these claims? Where is the evidence? These are unsubstantiated rumors put out by the FBI not verified facts.

Information supported with what evidence? We know for an objective fact that Hoover conducted secret wiretaps and did an investigation to find dirt on King. You don't seem to understand the difference between a rumor or unsubstantiated claim and a verified fact. The FBI did investigations in to claims that Adolf Hitler faked his death and escaped to Argentina. Do you believe that? Do you believe every claim for Alien abductions, Bigfoot Sightings or Ghosts?

If King fathered children out of wedlock I want evidence. I want testimony from the mother, the name of the child and DNA evidence all of which could have been provided by now but no evidence has surfaced.

I already provided it in the opening post. They made unsubstantiated claims. They didn't provide ANY evidence.

For beating Russian prostitutes in his hotel room. That's one of the claims. You don't think if the FBI had wiretaps with audio recordings of Dr. King having sex orgies with White women and beating them senseless for not giving in to his sexual demands that they couldn't just arrest him on the spot and charge him with assault? Instead they sent him a creepy and threatening letter suggesting he commit suicide before his "filthy, abnormal fraudulent self is bared to the nation.”

If Hoover hated King that much and he had that kind of evidence on him he could just have him arrested. What they did instead has the hallmarks of a fishing expedition. Maybe someone had sex in the hotel room (not necessarily King) and they want to turn that in to King having sex orgies and beating up prostitutes. Or maybe they just wanted to cause problems between him and his wife in order to intimidate him in to listening to them. In any case until I hear actual audio recordings I'm not going to view these allegations as credible.

I'm being very fair here. I've heard Weinstein on tape. I've heard Trump on tape. I've heard Bill Cosby admit in court to giving women drugs to make them "compliant" for sex. I've heard the accusations of sexual harassment molestation and rape against those men. Where are the King accusers and where is their evidence?

I don't expect you to care. There's simply more credible evidence that Trump is a racist or sympathizes with racists for political purposes.

Obama is not a communist and these claims are just character assassination much like the claims that he is a secret muslim, not a natural-born citizen, a terrorist sympathizer, a Black Nationalist and the anti-Christ. The criticisms against Trump and the Russian investigation are based on actual activities and not lies or representations of policy.

Here's a list.

Huffingtonpost - Trump Condemned Racism As ‘Evil.’ Here Are 18 Times He Embraced It.

I don't really care what you think. If you want to believe that Trump's policies are not bigoted go ahead.

Good. All hail the King!

What ways?



I would really like to hear your ways in which interracial marriage is harmful to society that aren't blatantly racist.

His entire Presidency is a joke. What has he not done that isn't harmful to society?

 

Wasn't Trump was one of the most vocal Birthers before he ran for office? I don't see why anyone could support Birtherism without seeing Obama as some kind of visible "un-American" foreigner because of his half-African parentage. Either Trump was being racist himself, or he was pandering to racists. Which is still pretty racist by itself, since it shows an eager willingness to throw people of color under the bus in the name of political advancement.

As for the rumors about King's proclivity for adulterous affairs with white women, they sound little more than a cheap white supremacist attack on his character. And I mean really cheap. I swear, the white supremacist crowd have a real fetish for black man/white women coupling.

 

The Birther Movement was without question a conspiracy theory designed to disqualify Barack Obama as being eligible to be President of the United States based on the technicality that only natural-born citizens can be President. Despite the fact that he was born in Hawaii many conservatives claimed he was not a natural-born citizen either based on the bogus claim that he was born in Kenya or some other claim that had no basis in reality. The movement was certainly motivated by racism (e.g. We don’t want a Black man to be President so let’s try to say he’s not qualified can say it’s not because of racism) and Trump was the most popular Birther before he ran for President. He was a businessman with a reality show and no political experience before that so yes he entered the political arena on a conspiracy theory against Obama.


Personally I think Trump is just an opportunist. At one point he was more pro-Democrat than Republican but he knew that Republicans could be easily manipulated by appealing to conservative values. So he deliberately supported a far-right agenda in order to get votes. He says he’s for everybody but he only cares about himself and he’s obsessed with trying to tear down Obama’s legacy. He’s only making a fool out of himself and unfortunately the world will suffer so long as he is President.


As for Dr. King and the White Women allegations I agree with you. This was the 1960s and King was the face of the Civil Rights Movement. What better way to discredit him than to portray him as a sexual degenerate? The allegations against him include adultery, soliciting prostitutes, physical assault and fathering children out of wedlock. Oh and these just so happen to have been WHITE prostitutes who King had drunken sex parties with (on SCLC money of course) while making self-hating racist and blasphemous comments.


http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/1998/02/all_kings_men.html


Unknown to the public, King was also hemmed in by blackmail threats from the FBI. J. Edgar Hoover despised King, whom he genuinely believed to be a Communist and further resented for assailing the bureau's sometimes laggard enforcement of justice in the lawless South. Hoover's agents received special commendations for such petty deeds as getting Marquette University to withdraw an honorary doctorate it had planned to award King. Worse, the bureau tapped King's phones and shadowed his every move, hunting for any damaging secrets.

On Jan. 6, 1964, FBI men installed microphones in King's Washington, D.C., hotel room and turned on the tape recorder. According to officials who heard the tapes, King that night betrayed his wife, Coretta--not for the first or the last time--shouting, amid his most private activities, "I'm f*cking for God!" and "I'm not a Negro tonight!" Later that year, agents anonymously shipped King "a 'highlight' recording of bugged sex groans and party jokes" along with a letter warning him: "You are done. There is but one way out for you. You better take it before your filthy, abnormal fraudulent self is bared to the nation." They called it the "suicide package."

Such claims sound too good to be true if you're a White Supremacist. If the FBI had this kind of dirt on King I wonder why they didn't just expose him instead of making threats.


Ralph Abernathy addressed these claims denying any knowledge of King having sex with White prostitutes or taking any interest in White women at all. Although he didn’t directly say that he knew King cheated on his wife he did acknowledge the possibility that he did given his status in the African-American community as a hero that women would be drawn to, him being away from home due to his busy traveling schedule and is charming personality which appealed to women. Abernathy says they were all tempted, King was especially fond of women and good at talking them so certainly there is a possibility that he had extramarital affairs but no evidence to his knowledge of the salacious allegations the FBI made about King.

https://www.snopes.com/history/american/mlking.asp

Personally I don’t feel that extramarital affairs tarnish King’s legacy. If they happened that is a poor reflection on him as a husband but I would still consider him to be a good man overall. Now if he beat women that is another matter as such actions are not only detestable but criminal. No man should ever beat a woman. But I don’t believe these allegations. When someone provides some credible evidence I will take them more seriously.

 

That's your personal opinion you've stated as fact. Not impressive.

If that was the case, you wouldn't have posted a litany of claimed "white supremacist" associations with Trump as evidence of what you think he is while you ignore the large number of Communists around MLK.

Because you think files that were held as secret for decades were somehow put there to defame MLK. That makes no sense.

False analogies. I do understand the difference, why is why I'm pointing out your lower standard in accepting negative claims against Trump.

Many MLK records are not set for release for 10 more years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King_Jr._Records_Collection_Act

I can't wait.

Yet you have a much lower standard of accepting allegedly inappropriate behavior from Trump. You continue to claim he's a "***** grabber" when he never said he touched anyone in such a manner.

The FBI doesn't arrest people that hire prostitutes. That's local police jurisdiction. Why would they blow a surveillance operation involving MLK's seemingly endless ties with the Kremlin over some hookers?

And you're ignoring that this comes in no small part due to MLK's ties to the Kremlin via his numerous Communist Party ties. During the Cold War, especially, the feds are going to take notice when there are bands of social agitators forming that are heavily involved with agents of the Kremlin.

Where's your evidence Trump grabbed any *****?

Why are you fixating on sexual accusations against MLK here and ignoring his massive CPUSA ties?

MLK associate Donald West's lovely poetry:

Because he isn't. Your "evidence" is agenda-driven left wing media and SPLC tripe.

That's horse ****. "Travel ban targeting Muslims" is a flagrant lie. "Attacking Muslim gold star parents" is horse ****. The guy is in the pocket of the DNC. You fell for a political set-up. That article is political tripe.

Are you able to post a single source on Trump that doesn't come from a left wing hack anti-Trump website?

Name one "bigoted" policy. Fake Muslim ban isn't it. Furthermore, the President of the United States has a right to ban whoever he wishes from entering the country, even if you suffer hurt feelings as a result.

That statue was designed, built, and paid for by Chinese Communists. Shocking, I tell you.

It was announced in January 2007 that Lei Yixin, an artist from the People's Republic of China, would sculpt the centerpiece of the memorial including the Stone of Hope, his statue of King.[74] The commission was criticized by human rights activist Harry Wu on the grounds that Lei had previously sculpted Mao Zedong. It also stirred accusations that it was based on financial considerations, because the Chinese government would make a $25 million donation to help meet the projected shortfall in donations.

For a guy that wasn't a Red, the Reds surely love them some MLK. He attracted Communists like a roach motel attracts bugs. As I already posted, Communists support their own. They don't do things like this for capitalist pigs.

Lower average IQ offspring, mixed kids with identity and social acceptance issues, studies show that interracial marriages are more likely to end sooner and last fewer years before divorce, transplantation compatibility issues with mixed-race people, black high out of wedlock birth and poverty rates, the destruction of diversity with large-scale mixing.

It's pretty obvious.

OK So you can't name anything harmful he's done to society. Considering the anti-Trump crowd have called his presidency a "joke" and a "failure" since the first week he took office, I therefore cannot take your protestations seriously. I think you would take issue with people who would claim the same of Obama after less than a year in office, and I think you would cite that as people being biased and unfair toward him.

By the way,

 

Sadly the number of people that view marriage so cheaply that they turn a blind eye to adultery and don't consider the emotional abuse that such behavior puts on a wife, not counting the out-and-out humiliation.

 

LOL. Quote him accurately. Between the lines he absolutely did say that MLK committed adultery:

Martin and I were away more often than we were at home; and while this was no excuse for extramarital relations, it was a reason. Some men are better able to bear such deprivations than others, though all of us in SCLC headquarters had our weak moments. We all understood and believed in the biblical prohibition against sex outside of marriage. It was just that he had a particularly difficult time with that temptation.

In addition to his personal vulnerability, he was also a man who attracted women, even when he didn't intend to, and attracted them in droves. Part of his appeal was his predominant role in the black community and part of it was personal. During the last ten years of his life, Martin Luther King was the most important black man in America. That fact alone endowed him with an aura of power and greatness that women found very appealing. He was a hero — the greatest hero of his age — and women are always attracted to a hero.

 

Then according to the Democratic Party it must be true since the FBI is always truthful and people should believe everything they say, accepting of course they can't provide any evidence because that isn't allowed.

 

You're either too biased to properly interpret what he's saying or can't comprehend it. He clearly stated that he tried to have sex with a woman that was not his wife and that he could get away with almost anything when speaking to women including inappropriate touching. You have been supplied video evidence of this. Transcribe the text that you think implies he is NOT talking about himself. Anyone who can hear and understands English knows what he said and knows talking about inappropriately touching women and getting away with it because of HIS celebrity status.

That has nothing to do with what I just said. Trump has accusers of sexual harassment, molestation and rape. King does not.

J. Edgar Hoover had an obsession with defaming King for years, secretly wire-tapped his hotel room and had a letter sent to his house suggesting that he commit suicide before he gets exposed. The files that released only show that there was an investigation but the FBI following leads to claims of sexual misconduct by King not that any of these claims are true.

No, you don't seem to understand what the standard of credible evidence is. The FBI files indicate claims were made much the same way people have claimed to have been abducted by Aliens, seen Bigfoot in the woods, claim Ghosts were haunting their houses or that Hitler was living in Argentina years after World War II with his Black lover. Following leads to claims that Dr. King fathered children out of wedlock, used SCLC money to have orgies with Russian prostitutes, beat them senseless or had sex with White celebrities are NOT evidence that any of those claims are true.

Holding King to the same standard as Trump would be analyzing evidence based on those leads. At the very least with Trump I have heard audio of him admitting to sexual misconduct and accusers speaking on national TV who have said he sexually harassed or molested them and one report said he raped a 13 year old girl who dropped her allegations after receiving death threats.

Where is the evidence against King? I haven't heard any testimonies from women saying they fathered his child out of wedlock. No audio recording of him having sex with White prostitutes or beating them up. No testimonies from those prostitutes saying King abused them. Nothing.

I'm well of aware of them and neither can I. When they can supply this information we can actually look at it and see what they've got. If they don't have anything in the way of credible evidence I will not be surprised.

You have never once heard me say that Trump grabbed any specific woman by their vagina. This is the type of behavior he says you can get away with. How would he know? Did he see someone do it? Did he do it himself? He said that this is the type of behavior HE could get away with after telling a man that he tried to have sex with woman he was flirting with, that he loved kissing women he didn't know and that HE could get away with all kinds of inappropriate sexual behavior because that is what you can do when you are a man in his position. He didn't say he grabbed "Woman X" by her vagina however he admits to this attitude and behavior and we have several women who say Trump was inappropriate with them. Why would YOU not take claims like that seriously?

Imagine if someone was audio recorded saying this:

Person X: I love breaking in to women's houses. How cool is that? You can sneak in to their room while they are sleeping, tie them to their bed and rape them in the middle of the night. If they have young girls even better. You can kidnap them, rape them too and sell them in to sex slavery. White women are the easiest targets because they live in communities where they think they are safe and my job in home security allows me to know which houses to target.

Accuser: Person X broke in to my home, tied me to my bed, raped me and kidnapped my two daughters who have been missing since the break in!

The accuser just so happens to be a White woman in her mid 30s with two teenage girls aged 12 and 13 whose father is also White and was away from home on business when the alleged incident occurred. You know the name of Person X, who has been spotted in the area and an audio recording has been discovered where he said those exact same words. You don't have any forensic evidence yet but after hearing this information you make a judgment call on the credibility of the claim. Given the available evidence is this a credible claim?

I'm holding Donald Trump to the same standard I would any other man accused of these crimes. Weinstein is on tape saying that he is used to touching women's breasts without their consent and heard aggressively trying to persuade a woman to enter his hotel room. He has been accused by a multitude of woman of sexual harassment, molestation and rape. Bill Cosby has admitted in court to offering women quaaludes in order to make the "compliant" with him for sex. Giving women an aphrodisiac (Spanish Fly) to make them horny and want to have sex was part of his standup routine as a comedian. Several women have accused Cosby of giving them pills and water to drink and then discovering him raping them or inappropriately touching them after they've passed out.

Donald Trump in his own words (bold my emphasis):

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/08/us/donald-trump-tape-transcript.html



Trump: I moved on her, actually. You know, she was down on Palm Beach. I moved on her, and I failed. I’ll admit it.

Unknown: Whoa.

Trump: I did try and f*ck her. She was married.

Unknown: That’s huge news.

Trump: She wanted to get some furniture. I said, “I’ll show you where they have some nice furniture.” I took her out furniture — I moved on her like a bitch. But I couldn’t get there. And she was married. Then all of a sudden I see her, she’s now got the big phony tits and everything. She’s totally changed her look.

Yeah, that’s her. With the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.

Bush: Whatever you want.

Trump: Grab ’em by the p*ssy. You can do anything.




Why are you dismissive of these allegations?!

They said that he beat them up. That's a physical assault, a crime. If he really did this why not arrest him for it? The damage to his reputation would be irreparable. He could get a prison sentence. If he really was involved with communists they could make a deal with him. There is simply no reason why anyone in their right mind should think that the FBI had evidence of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. beating the hell out of White women, prostitutes or not, in a hotel room and they did nothing about it when everything was recorded on audio.

If you're trying to bring a man down (Hoover's real agenda) you don't withhold evidence and send him creepy letters telling him he needs to commit suicide. Whether Hoover was trying to ruin King or genuinely thought he was involved with communists evidence of him beating women is enough to arrest him for a serious criminal act that could result in a long prison sentence and get him to confess to anything they wanted to escape the situation.

If they had evidence of criminal involvement with communists they would have had King arrested. They did not. Hoover convinced Kennedy to authorize a secret wiretapping of King's hotel room. Any criminal activity of any kind would have resulted in an arrest. Beating women in a hotel room is definitely a serious criminal offense and they wouldn't even have to make King aware of the wire taps. They could just give the evidence to the local police, track down the women and make an arrest. Then they could negotiate with King over any alleged communist ties they had in exchange for escaping a prison sentence.

They didn't have anything on him that could be verified. The letter indicates that they tried to bluff him. That didn't work and shortly afterwards King was assassinated under suspicious circumstances. You're simply not being objective about this. Nothing about the FBI's operation makes any sense. The bureau was highly corrupt at the time and Hoover was completely obsessed with linking King to communism. They stalked and harassed King for years. They launched a smear campaign against them and never presented any credible evidence of a crime involving communism, prostitution or assault. If they did they could have made an arrest and there is no reason why they wouldn't given how much of a threat King was in the mind of Hoover.

There's no physical evidence that I know of, just his own words and women who say he sexually assaulted them.

What?! What is the title of this thread? Stop trying to change the subject.

Credible evidence and your dismissal doesn't change facts.

Huffingtonpost is a credible website. Trump did in fact issue a travel ban specifically targeting Islamic countries to keep Muslims out of the country because some of them could potentially be terrorists. Nothing in that article is false information. Calling it tripe is meaningless.

 

Continued....

This is all racist propaganda.

1. What scientific evidence do you have that interracial marriage lowers the IQ of offspring? This is a dysgenics argument which has been thoroughly discredited. If you have some genetic evidence that this is a legitimate claim then share it.

2. Multiracial children tend to have identity and social acceptance issues because of racism. This is the fault of racists in society not parents having children.

3. Interracial couples having higher divorce rates is largely a product of stress from racism in society including parents and family members who don't approve as well as other members of society that interracial couples face in everyday life. Studies showing higher divorce rates for interracial marriages does not mean that there is something wrong with interracial marriage itself.

4. The problem with transplantation compatibility is finding the right genetic variants that make compatibility with donors more likely. This wouldn't be as much of a problem if there were more samples from diverse populations to increase the probability of matches. Genetic admixture itself is not the problem. The problem is the lack of research and samples to help people with more rare genetic variants find matches.

You can familiarize yourself with the fallacies of using the concept of race in biomedical research in this video:




The current results with matched unrelated marrow transplant show that many fatal disorders in African Americans can be cured by transplantation [9-12]. One reason for
the low matching rate for African Americans is the different prevalence of HLA antigens and haplotypes between Caucasians and African Americans, which affects the chances of
finding a match in the overall pool; for instance, the most common haplotype in Caucasians is Al, B8, DR3, whereas in African Americans it is A30, B42, DR3 [13,14]. Also, the relative
low absolute number of African-American donors in the NMDP registry may contribute to the low rate of matches; 55% Caucasians versus 8% African Americans results in an
80% versus 30% probability of matches, respectively.

Thus, theoretically, increasing the African-American donor pool by 2.7-fold to about 800,000 donors would be one solution. However, the genetic disparities within the African-American population may play a role in the difficulties of identifying a match. Therefore, targeting minority populations can increase the chances of finding patient/donor matches within the same racial or ethnic group. In conclusion, our study demonstrates that an education program targeting African Americans can overcome some of the barriers to bone marrow donation. Validating this observation on a larger scale in different areas of the United States is needed.


Source: Assessment of Barriers to Bone Marrow Donation by Unrelated African-American Potential Donors Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation 7:45-48 (2001)


5. Out of wedlock births would not apply to interracial marriages that produce children and disproportionate poverty rates in the Black community, which were primarily caused by institutional racist discrimination, in no way make interracial marriages morally wrong.

6. Interracial marriages add to human genetic diversity. If two people of different so-called races get married that's not stopping you from getting married. Marriage is a choice. No one is making for example every White woman marry a Black man and not marry White men. If this is really a concern to you then the simple solution is to have more children however the idea that interracial marriage promotes White genocide is really just a scare tactic to promote racism. White people can't go extinct unless Whites stop having children. Even if a phenotype disappeared from the Earth due to intermingling that doesn't make interracial marriage morally wrong.

Obama didn't have all of these scandals derailing his Presidency and the vast majority of people in America considering him a bad President at this stage in his Presidency. Trump has record low approval ratings with a looming investigation that could result in his impeachment or resignation. We'll see what happens over time. At least he hasn't started World War III and had us all killed yet!

Did you vote for Trump? What is your opinion of his presidency so far?

I did say that was a poor reflection on him as a husband didn't I?

He said that King had a difficult time with temptation not that he witnessed him having an affair. He's simply giving reasoning for the plausibility that King had extramarital affairs not stating out right that he knows objectively that it happened. Contrary to what you said earlier Abernathy clearly states that he never saw Dr. King have relationships with White women or White prostitutes.