It has everything to do with him being president since he possibly had her paid off with campaign funds. It’s hilarious watching the right excuse trump when they have spent the better part of two decades whining about bill clinton having an affair.
NO! That is a spin based on wild speculation that your side of the argument is trying to find evidence for. A belief based on absolutely NO EVIDENCE, that if Trump arranged a pay-off it just had to do with illegal use of campaign funds.
As for "whining about Bill Clinton?"
1. I didn't "whine" back then; I was openly opposed to efforts to impeach him based on "lying about Monica Lewinski."
a. In the first case, everyone involved in that were (apparently at the time) consenting adults.
b. In the second case, his wife apparently didn't care; so why should we?
c. In the third case, IMO back then it was an attempt to entrap him in a lie about something that had nothing to do with the investigation so as to cast doubt about his credibility on all other issues. (Kind of reminds me a little of the FBI tactics with Flynn asking him something they knew he would not reveal as he would have considered it classified, then hitting him with a lying to investigators charge.)
Having said all that:
2. One clear difference between Trump/Stormy and Clinton/Lewinski is that Monica was an employee of the President's office, and relationships between Manager's and subordinates (even when mutually agreeable) is still considered a no-no for all sorts of reasons.
Meanwhile, Stormy was just a gold-digger one night stand back in the day long prior to Trump's holding current office. The fact he tried to keep it a secret so holier-than-thou types wouldn't be "offended" was just good (and typical) campaign tactics.
WRONG. They are just bashing her. The three stories above were all bashing her or questioning her story. Only the first even pretended to be neutral. And it does have everything to do w/him being President since the silencing happened right before the election. Imagine if any other politician did this, you'd be livid.
Yeah?
And CNN, MSNBC, etc. are all using it to bash the President; while both she and her lawyer are feeding them salacious ammunition both to keep her in the public eyes and to gain sympathy for her "legal case."
IMO that's what you are all up in arms about...
in your mind EVERYONE should agree with you and EVERYONE should bash the President because it is the "moral" thing to do. :roll:
I don't buy into sex scandals unless they are directly related to a criminal case at bar (rape, child molestation, etc.). No, what happens between two consenting adults is their business. :coffeepap:
lol...really Cap'n? Really really? I mean,
I know that Fox News is the epitome of exemplary in the department of not being salacious with their negativity but...
:lamo
...sorry, just can't. And neither can you, sorry bud, you know it, I know it, we all know it. Not saying any of your other news venues are any better, but let's not get carried away re: Fox...doesn't look good on ya, pal...
Yes my friend, I can. Why?
Partly for the reasons I posted in responses herein above.
Partly because I really think that FOX news has to be more over the top, because it is one major network espousing conservative views against almost the entirety of the remaining Progressive MSM, which spends hours a day screaming and caterwauling about anything and everything to make the President look bad.
It does not mean that I fail to recognize our current President has faults. It is just that
calling FOX news biased and burying news while the rest of the MSM does exactly the same thing with news about the President's positive acts (either not reporting them at all, or doing so in as denigrating a way as possible and then spinning off into more negatives to distract their audience)
is IMO being either willfully blind or disingenuous. :shrug:
