• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Guy Who Said He Had Sex With Obama Is Pissed Stormy Daniels Is Mainstream Media Darling

Jetboogieman said:
That’s your perception but in this case there’s a ****ing NDA, a payoff in which you’d have to be an idiot of monumental proportions to believe Trumps lawyer paid off Stormy out of the goodness of his own heart and without Trumps knowledge (which may have broken campaign finance laws) and we have a President who actually is that sleazy and doesn’t have a shred of credibility, he’s demonstrated it very well and I do not care he boinked a porn star, in the least.

But the evangelicals, for pushing their bull**** morality on the rest of the population need to choke on this and demonstrate their unbelievable hypocrisy in voting for him because it was plain for all to see how sleazy he was and should it be fond that campaign money was indeed used to pay her off and Trump had knowledge of it there should be consequences, or was being the “law and order candidate” simply another one of his mountain of lies?
Click to expand...

Latest TDS update: Hatred of Trump--check. Hatred of Christians--check. Hatred of morality--check. Before long, all that will be left of you guys is hatred. Choke on that.
 
Fletch said:
Latest TDS update: Hatred of Trump--check. Hatred of Christians--check. Hatred of morality--check. Before long, all that will be left of you guys is hatred. Choke on that.
Click to expand...

Hey there’s the “I don’t like Trump I just happen to jump into every single thread where he’s criticized and defend him to the hilt” guy.
 
HowardBThiname said:
The emboldened above is quite interesting. You claim that the evangelicals need to choke on this for their bull**** morality, but in the previous paragraph, you displayed your own judgment of Trump as being "sleazy," although you then backtracked and claimed you didn't care.

Here's the reality -- you do care -- just as most on the Left care. Be careful not to fall off that high horse, I'd hate to see you break your morality when you land on it.
Click to expand...

One can describe boinking a porn star while your wife is pregnant and paying for her silence possibly using illegal means as “sleazy” can one not?

I mean it objectively is, it, The actual affair in my mind does not disqualify him from being president because Americans are pretty uptight.

I’m not calling for him to be castrated here, but I also don’t push to deny woman reproductive rights because “morality” then support a guy who does things like that...
 
upsideguy said:
If he shows us where Obama paid him $130,000 to keep him quiet AND shows us where Obama told Billy Bush that he routinely uses his fame to get sex, then we have some level of equivalence. Given, however, that Obama appears to have shown the highest levels of integrity with regard to such matters, trying to compare him to Trump, perhaps the biggest sleaze ever to get so far in Washington, is rather disgraceful. The disgrace falls not only on the yahoo that made this claim, but the OP that lacked good sense and good filters that thought this was some foundation for serious discussion. You should have left this article in the check-out line.
Click to expand...

So in your world the disgrace is from the reporter who broke ranks and reported information you would rather not be reported. I get it. Your media has gone rogue, I guess?
 
Jetboogieman said:
Hey there’s the “I don’t like Trump I just happen to jump into every single thread where he’s criticized and defend him to the hilt” guy.
Click to expand...

I never said 'I dont like Trump.' There are things about him I dont like, but there isnt an action he has taken as president that I oppose. But yes, I find myself constantly defending the man against liberal lies. If you guys were actually truthful, I wouldnt have as much to say.
 
chuckiechan said:
So in your world the disgrace is from the reporter who broke ranks and reported information you would rather not be reported. I get it. Your media has gone rogue, I guess?
Click to expand...

No, the disgrace is with his editor the (il)legitimatized the story by publishing it and with the OP of this thread that tried to pawn this shallow matter off as some type of equivalence with one of the MANY sins of Trump.
 
Trippy Trekker said:
Can you at least provide a hint of corroboration? Has anyone asked Alex Jones what he thinks about Larry Sinclair?

Search For The Truth: Did Obama's mother give birth to him in Kenya? Did Michelle transition from male to female?

You never know!
Click to expand...

I think giving him the "Trump Treatment" is just fine in todays "journalism". I mean Obama was kind of feminine, so it stands to reason...
 
Jetboogieman said:
I’m not calling for him to be castrated here, but I also don’t push to deny woman reproductive rights because “morality” then support a guy who does things like that...
Click to expand...
Wow. Perhaps you should learn the difference between an Apple and an Orange. Abortion is ending a human life. An affair is sex. If you dont see the difference, that might explain your difficulties with 'morality.'
 
upsideguy said:
No, the disgrace is with his editor the (il)legitimatized the story by publishing it and with the OP of this thread that tried to pawn this shallow matter off as some type of equivalence with one of the MANY sins of Trump.
Click to expand...

Well, then why don't you go out there and stop it?
 
HowardBThiname said:
In both cases, we have accusers and the accused. In both cases, the accused are not admitting any wrongdoing.

The only difference is that the media is hyping the Stormy account but not touching the Obama one.

Unless, and until, either the accusers back down from their claims, or the alleged persons admit they were at fault, the stories are identical.
Click to expand...

No that is not the only difference

In one we have photos of the two meeting both lawyers stating there is a nda regarding the two


In the other as far as I know a guy who wrote a book.

The way some seem to be saying they deserve equal treatment means I should say I was Melania's pimp and that I should be treated the same as Stormy despite never being a pimp or meeting her
 
Jetboogieman said:
One can describe boinking a porn star while your wife is pregnant and paying for her silence possibly using illegal means as “sleazy” can one not?
Click to expand...

Certainly, you can call it whatever you so choose, but when you do give it a derogatory name, understand that you're doing so from an antiquated perspective, which has been foisted on society by religion.

I mean it objectively is, it, The actual affair in my mind does not disqualify him from being president because Americans are pretty uptight.

I’m not calling for him to be castrated here, but I also don’t push to deny woman reproductive rights because “morality” then support a guy who does things like that...
Click to expand...

I agree with all of that. I prefer to let the private affairs of others alone, however, while I'm "pro-choice," I won't limit my endorsement of any candidate based on a single issue.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
No that is not the only difference

In one we have photos of the two meeting both lawyers stating there is a nda regarding the two


In the other as far as I know a guy who wrote a book.

The way some seem to be saying they deserve equal treatment means I should say I was Melania's pimp and that I should be treated the same as Stormy despite never being a pimp or meeting her
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is that we have no evidence either way of who is telling the truth or lying. It could be that both Storm and the author are telling the truth -- it could be that they are both lying. We have no way of knowing. The NDA is, of course, interesting, but it tells us nothing more than Stormy was told to shut up and go away. As we discussed earlier, oftentimes, they just pay these sort of accusers off because they don't have time to deal with them in court. It's a sad state of affairs to be sure.

But, both of the accusers could be telling the truth.
 
HowardBThiname said:
In both cases, we have accusers and the accused. In both cases, the accused are not admitting any wrongdoing.

The only difference is that the media is hyping the Stormy account but not touching the Obama one.

Unless, and until, either the accusers back down from their claims, or the alleged persons admit they were at fault, the stories are identical.
Click to expand...
That's just whack on a stick.

The media did look into that rat**** Larry Sinclair claims -- back in 2008, and it wasn't long before we learned he had a rap sheet as long as your arm, a felon for most of his life, with crimes involving fraud, forgery and a specialty in lying and deceit.

He had no collaboration whatsoever, and it was pretty clear the toothless guy who would send disgusting pictures of his junk to Obama was off his ****ing rocker. Still, the birther types gobbled up the crackpot felon's juicy fantasies, and would watch Sinclair's mindless youtube wanderings, where once he tried to commit live suicide on youtube to scam his follower$ to give$ me some monie$ or else I'll keel myself!

The man is a bonafide scam artist criminal, and you -- in bizarroland style, think the two "stories" are identical.

lol what a hoot.
 
HowardBThiname said:
What I'm saying is that we have no evidence either way of who is telling the truth or lying. It could be that both Storm and the author are telling the truth -- it could be that they are both lying. We have no way of knowing. The NDA is, of course, interesting, but it tells us nothing more than Stormy was told to shut up and go away. As we discussed earlier, oftentimes, they just pay these sort of accusers off because they don't have time to deal with them in court. It's a sad state of affairs to be sure.

But, both of the accusers could be telling the truth.
Click to expand...

Paperview said:
That's just whack on a stick.

The media did look into that rat**** Larry Sinclair claims -- back in 2008, and it wasn't long before we learned he had a rap sheet as long as your arm, a felon for most of his life, with crimes involving fraud, forgery and a specialty in lying and deceit.

He had no collaboration whatsoever, and it was pretty clear the toothless guy who would send disgusting pictures of his junk to Obama was off his ****ing rocker. Still, the birther types gobbled up the crackpot felon's juicy fantasies, and would watch Sinclair's mindless youtube wanderings, where once he tried to commit live suicide on youtube to scam his follower$ to give$ me some monie$ or else I'll keel myself!

The man is a bonafide scam artist criminal, and you -- in bizarroland style, think the two "stories" are identical.

lol what a hoot.
Click to expand...

We tried to tell you Bro'.... a song for Howard to listen to after President Chump inevitably disappoints him -

 
chuckiechan said:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/2859...tm_content=032418-news&utm_campaign=position2

I think he has a point. He wants his fifteen minutes of fame on CBS, too!
Click to expand...

So for the record, the following people "liked" this idiotic post despite what I'll say next (all based on the article in the liked post): Gaugingcatenate, Slingshot Bob, trouble13, Oborosen, Thoreau72.



1. The man making the claim says he was on drugs at the time. Daniels does not.

2. The man making the claim "has a record of crimes involving deceit." Daniels does not.

3. The man making the claim "did not provide corroborating evidence of the alleged affair." Daniels has: she was paid one hundred thirty thousand dollars to keep quiet.

4. The man is quite obviously pulling a debate board move. He claims he's not a fan of Trump and claims to be acting from the goodness of his heart, but his position is 100% anti-Daniels and thus 100% pro-Trump if accepted. Suspicious, just like people who claim they aren't Trump supporters but only post here in defense of him (whether it's direct defense, or simply attacking any critics, or being permanently "just asking questions" mode with regard to Trump but not with regard to his critics, etc).

5. The man failed a polygraph. Daniels didn't. (polygraphs are notoriously shaky as far as evidence goes, but 58-90% accuracy is a bit better than nothing).

6. The man is attacking Obama. OBAMA IS NOT IN OFFICE.




But yeah. Let's stupidly and dishonestly act like despite all these massive differences, the two very unalike things are alike. Then, let's bootstrap THAT stupid dishonesty into an attack on the media and, perhaps, Obama too (thanks Obama). Maybe there's even room for Hillary somewhere in there.

Trump Defense 101.

/vomit
 
Last edited:
HowardBThiname said:
What I'm saying is that we have no evidence either way of who is telling the truth or lying. It could be that both Storm and the author are telling the truth -- it could be that they are both lying. We have no way of knowing. The NDA is, of course, interesting, but it tells us nothing more than Stormy was told to shut up and go away. As we discussed earlier, oftentimes, they just pay these sort of accusers off because they don't have time to deal with them in court. It's a sad state of affairs to be sure.

But, both of the accusers could be telling the truth.
Click to expand...

We have plenty of evidence. See prior post, among others.

Let's not play the game of trying to declare what does and does not count as evidence so as to arrive at a pre-ordained conclusion about whether or not there is evidence.



There's plenty of circumstantial and direct corroboration of what Daniels is claiming. All of the circumstances cast doubt on what this Sinclair tool is saying. And as people speaking on a debate board, we're effectlively speaking as voters. We don't need to be concerned with strict rules of evidence or standards of proof that belong in courts.
 
Mr Person said:
We have plenty of evidence. See prior post, among others.

Let's not play the game of trying to declare what does and does not count as evidence so as to arrive at a pre-ordained conclusion about whether or not there is evidence.



There's plenty of circumstantial and direct corroboration of what Daniels is claiming. All of the circumstances cast doubt on what this Sinclair tool is saying. And as people speaking on a debate board, we're effectlively speaking as voters. We don't need to be concerned with strict rules of evidence or standards of proof that belong in courts.
Click to expand...

The "evidence" for Daniel's claim has been front and center in the media -- in fact -- it's the media that's latched on to this story like a pit bull with a favorite bone. The media has completely shunned Larry's claims, however, so how do we know they are not just as seemingly valid?

I've not read Larry's book (and, I don't plan to) so I can't make a reasonable judgement in my own mind. Neither have I sat down and tried to track all of the Daniels vs. Trump claims, but I do know that high-profile people are often targets of unscrupulous folks -- and, let's be honest -- how much integrity are we willing to give a porn star/whore who was paid off once and now is trying to squirm out of an NDA? Are we willing to say she's a shining model of integrity?

Or, should she be arrested for blackmail?

I don't know -- but I also know that you don't know, and that you're making an assumption of guilt when it hasn't been proved, not legally, at any rate.

I'm not saying Ms Daniels is lying -- but, how do you know Larry is lying?
 
Why would anyone revealed about having sex with this dude, barack " hendrick lamar" obama ?
 
HowardBThiname said:
I'm not dismissing it -- I'm just saying the two are similar.

It's not something I dwell on -- just as I did not dwell on the Clinton/Lewinsky affair. I don't think this type of investigating serves any beneficial purpose to society. I think it's reminiscent of puritanical mentality that seeks to control the thoughts and actions of every person. It will be a good day when we outgrow this silliness.
Click to expand...
Fair enough.

It's not the salacious content itself that necessarily bothers me here, but rather the attendant conduct. I thought what Clinton did in the Oval Office was a great breach of the People's trust, particularly the optics of disrespecting the Office. I hoped he would have been successfully tossed-out. To commit an act like that in the Oval Office, was completely disrespectful of the Office and the citizenry.


And similarly, I see the current President doing his damnedest to silence an American citizen. Trump's not simply a lay citizen, but our President - and I want transparency from him. Consequently, I'd like him tossed-out too (for many other reasons as well, though).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom