Why do you get involved? DM clear as day brought Trump into the issue, I simply pointed out the facts that it doesn’t have anything do do with Trump because the issue has been around for along time & the specific issue of children being lost &/or exploited doesn’t just relate to children that arrived during Trumps Presidency.
That’s really a lie.
DM said no one was focusing on the issue because of Trump scandals.
3 Likes
Exactly, … but Trumpeters never let facts get in the way of a good lie.
And even if you interpret it that way its still absolute bullshyte because again as I pointed out the issue has been around for long before Trump. Unless you can show me where you’ve been focused on the issue pre-Trump scandals then it still reads as hypocrisy to bring Trump into the conversation or to try to equate it with nonsense like “pornstar fetish.”
I don’t have to do ■■■■.
You were really wrong and now you’re trying to double down.
We see it.
1 Like
I think you are just ‘trip with a law degree
Now no one is talking about the issue.
Works every time.
3 Likes
yes I was really wrong, DM didn’t mention Trump at all, I just imagined it & then went to my fake lifetime ban account to re-enforce my delusion.
That’s not nonsense.
I mean…the pornstar stuff is, to me.
I don’t care.
Good on him.
He can ■■■■ pornstars as much as he likes. Watch girls ■■■■ on each other, none of my business.
And doesn’t affect what I think of him as a person.
But ohhhhhhhh, a lot of other people don’t agree with me.
Which is why he bribed a p:rn star.
Which is the problem.
As to this?
I agree, unfair to call out Trump on it.
It’s a US issue.
Not a Trump issue.
Other than that he’s the President of the US.
He mentioned the fixation on the issues surround trump’s presidency. No blame.
You know it. It’s cool.
■■■■ this too.
You can no longer mention anything predating Trump even if he now makes decisions on it too because it’s hypocritical to be critical of a policy because you have to side.
Of ALL the things Trump has done or at least been accused of doing, I think plonking a pornstar & then paying her money to keep quiet about it before running for office is the least concerning. I get that its the best glove they’ve laid on him to date but I care about it as much as I cared when Rudd went to a strip club.
I agree.
To me, it’s not even a thing.
Lewinski, to me, is not a thing.
I mean perhaps she felt she had to so she could keep her unpaid job, or perhaps…just perhaps…she thought, ‘■■■■ me! I get to blow the ■■■■■■■ President! Hell yes!’
There’s a difference there, in my opinion.
But again, the point is, a Lot of people don’t think like me.
People who vote Republican, for instance.
People who would not have voted for Trump if they knew he ■■■■■■ p:rn stars and had a wank over girls ■■■■■■■ on each other.
He mentioned Trump & racism & corruption & pornstar fettish on an issue that I pointed out was not related to Trump or his policies. Now you are free to interpret his post as somehow NOT trying to equate the issue with Trump or not trying to blame Trump but I interpreted it differently so hence why I replied pointing out that the issue pre-dated Trump. Now perhaps you & DM knew it predated Trump, maybe you had no idea. Maybe DM was simply trying to bring an issue he’s been passionate about for decades to light or maybe he was just seizing on the opportunity to whinge about Trump again. You can see it however you want.
Never underestimate the attraction of power. Now maybe some may believe Monica had to have been coerced or even forced, Weinstien style but as Mel Brooks says “its good to be the king”.
As for Trump, I get what you’re saying about the christian lobby never being able to condone that type of behaviour but I think there was enough stuff around about Trump long before he ever ran for office to let people know he was never & as far as I know never claimed to be a beacon of moral virtue. I guess the question is would people have changed their vote to Hillary if it was known pre-election that Trump banged Daniels? I really don’t think that would have been a game-changer. I reckon its one of those issues people can feign outrage over on a public or official level but then in the sanctity of the ballot box not really care about.
I have no outrage whatsoever.
But yes, I think it might have mattered to say…one in ten Republican voters.
And I think he knew that.
And I think he bribed someone to get him into office.
And I think that’s corruption.
I don’t really expect you to agree.
Oh he knew that it would have been an election issue had Daniels come forward earlier, no doubt about that at all. I agree that paying her to keep quiet was absolutely about helping him get into office I just don’t see it as corruption as such to try to keep what I consider a personal issues out of the debate. Is there any specific laws in the US relating to making such settlements for non-disclosure? If there is then obviously that changes things.
I think a better example of the type of corruption you are referring to is the Vic ALP spending $1mil to keep the details of their 2014 electoral fraud out of the public awareness. 
BTW - what is your new avatar?
1 Like
Yep.
DJ King thread.
Best thing on the site.
Get on it.
I think the issue is who paid?
Trumps money, then I’m with you, it’s his private affairs. People may judge the morality of cheating but that’s it.
But using campaign funding does break federal laws I believe.
It would be the same here. The Craig Thompson dramas is close. It wasn’t that he used hookers it was that he used union funds for the hookers.
2 Likes
The corruption part isn’t the hush money. It’s whether or not campaign funds were used as payment. That is illegal.
The sleeping with a ■■■■ star controversy is due to him being married tied with his religious belief.
Two different matters. One law, one ethical.
2 Likes