Donald Trump is right. He is entitled to the presumption of innocence in regards to allegations made against him by various women who say he tried to grope them.
His case is obviously weakened by his self-described “locker room talk” with enabler Billy Bush, with whom he openly boasted about grabbing women by the crotch without their consent.
It was good times for the two boys, safe and secure in their wealth and gross incomes first handed to them by rich daddies, ready to jump any unsuspecting female who crossed their paths.
It is the tinny yap yap of little doggie Bush urging the big beast Trump on that registers, the pathetic poodle sucking up to the big dog. This generation of Bushes clearly does not have the class of George Senior.
But being gross and utterly inappropriate obviously came easy to The Donald who, after all, cited his wife's breast implants in their divorce case saying he wasn't a fan of them, said he’d date his daughter if she wasn’t his daughter and also told Howard Stern it was okay to call her a "piece of ass."
What a role model for a younger generation he would be as president, especially for young men and women navigating the difficult shoals of their teenage sexuality.
But let’s face it – it would be a "he said/she said" case in court if Trump were somehow indicted as a pervert, willing to grab women in such a way.
Trump has gone on the warpath against various publications, including The New York Times, for the reporting of these incidents, some of them from over 30 years ago.
Yet Trump has failed to give the same presumption of innocence to Hillary Clinton, whom he has already indicted and jailed if he becomes president, he says.
Clinton’s case is even murkier: when did personal and state department emails become separate and was there a reason for prosecution?
The FBI investigated and said there was not. That is usually the last word on such matters given that agency's reputation for probity.
Interesting, though, that Trump refused to accept that and has continued to say he will jail Hillary if he becomes president.
In that case issues of law meant nothing to Trump, who was only interested in the court of public opinion.
That public opinion consists of his rallies, which he thinks are indicative of his strength.
He should ask Bernie Sanders, who drew even larger crowds and failed to beat Hillary, about that.
The wisdom of crowd size is as fake as that of media projections that Trump would never be the Republican nominee.
He is and America may never be the same again. He is a rough beast, as Yeats would say, "slouching towards Bethlehem," a beast millions of America hope will be stillborn.
Yet he has intensity and sheer bloody-mindedness on his side. He also has a black and white vision in the worst sense of that word, playing the race card which, despite much handwringing, has often proved successful in the past.
This has been the equivalent of a bad Italian opera, each act more fantastical and unbelievable than the last. Who knows how this country will start recovering on November 9 from this nightmare campaign? And we may have seen nothing yet. Mark my words.