WSJ: Trump lawyer arranged inappropriate content star payment for her silence in October 2016

[Glaucus]

Compared to the current occupant, all of them.

Being less immoral than somebody else doesn't make you moral.

I see that you are a Christian. You should well know how wrong you are right now.

Luke 18
The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector
9 Also He spoke this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others: 10 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other men—extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I possess.’ 13 And the tax collector, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me a sinner!’ 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

Not to say, for example, that Obama is the Pharisee and Trump is the Tax Collector or vice versa.

 

[Rion]

So you think that Dems were HAPPY with Bill Clinton???? Huh.

They seemed neutral to it, TBH.

Say, can you actually respond to what a poster wrote?

I thought I did. My point is that you are complaining about the moral character of a man, after almost a century of campaigns for morality to not matter. If your team wants the other side to embrace the insidious moral relativism stance, why complain about it when they do?

The Republicans, for their part, can never again complain about the moral character of the other guy or gal. However, if the Democrats and Progressives had been thinking about the consequences of their actions, instead of bragging about how the country was going to be all blue eventually, they would have realized that the actual results of this relative morality push would be quite different. Instead of everyone embracing your ideology, the right has simply adopted your moral standards.

This is similar to what I was talking about when it comes to identify movements years ago. At the time I said that embracing groups like the New Black Panthers, BLM, and La Raza could only end in an upswing in white identity movements. Well, gee whiz Wally, what do we have now?

 

[Enfeoffment75]

They seemed neutral to it, TBH.

I was angry as anything with Clinton when this whole debacle occurred. I wanted Clinton to be so much more than that. I really hated the actions of the Right for lambasting Hillary for sticking with him, but I was more angry with Hillary for sticking with him.

In general I feel that Bill and Hillary were reasonably close to Kevin Spacey and Robin Wright on "House of Cards". A mutual advantage society working toward some political supremacy (hopefully without the killing and stuff).

But in general I'm also willing to grant some leeway to Clinton for 1)NOT running on a moral platform (at no point did he cater to people for whom other's morality was important) and 2)being a policy intellectual/wonk.

But that doesn't excuse the damage he did to the progressive political brand.

I thought I did. My point is that you are complaining about the moral character of a man, after almost a century of campaigns for morality to not matter.

But again, the point is NOT that we think Trump should be held to a higher morality than Clinton, but rather 30+ years of the Moral Majority and "Values Voters" telling us on the Left that we were immoral and supported people who were corrosive to America and decency.

THAT'S THE POINT! I like seeing the gross hypocrisy in the "Values Voters". It is abundantly clear that it was NEVER about "Jesus" or anything like that. It was ALWAYS about power and money. Their "faith" that supposedly informs their voting decisions is no more real to them than it is to me, an atheist!

 

[wing2000]

They seemed neutral to it, TBH.



I thought I did. My point is that you are complaining about the moral character of a man, after almost a century of campaigns for morality to not matter. If your team wants the other side to embrace the insidious moral relativism stance, why complain about it when they do?

The Republicans, for their part, can never again complain about the moral character of the other guy or gal. However, if the Democrats and Progressives had been thinking about the consequences of their actions, instead of bragging about how the country was going to be all blue eventually, they would have realized that the actual results of this relative morality push would be quite different. Instead of everyone embracing your ideology, the right has simply adopted your moral standards.

This is similar to what I was talking about when it comes to identify movements years ago. At the time I said that embracing groups like the New Black Panthers, BLM, and La Raza could only end in an upswing in white identity movements. Well, gee whiz Wally, what do we have now?

Why do you assume there are only two sides?

i.e. "you progressives", "your team", etc.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Why does Bill Clinton keep getting brought up? You guys do realize that he was, in fact, impeached? That kind of nullifies the comparison, because that's what is being called for with trump, for much more serious allegations.

 

[TLK Valentine]

He denies it. SHE denies it.

IOW, the presidential candidate who allegedly cheated on his wife (again) with a inappropriate content star, and the inappropriate content star he allegedly cheated with, BOTH deny that any payoffs were made to keep her quite about the affair.

Well, no reason to lie, is there? I'm totally convinced.

 

[Glaucus]

IOW, the presidential candidate who allegedly cheated on his wife (again) with a inappropriate content star, and the inappropriate content star he allegedly cheated with, BOTH deny that any payoffs were made to keep her quite about the affair.

Well, no reason to lie, is there? I'm totally convinced.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't?

Well, the fact that Donald already did it in the past makes it a whole lot more likely that he would pay someone off (something he also did in the past) to keep quiet about doing it again.

 

[Glaucus]

Well, the fact that Donald already did it in the past makes it a whole lot more likely that he would pay someone off (something he also did in the past) to keep quiet about doing it again.

Yes, his past behavior is quite disgusting and reprehensible, as are some of his current behaviors, but I can't help but think that, in times past, many of you would throw the stones first and ask his lifeless body questions second.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Yes, his past behavior is quite disgusting and reprehensible, as are some of his current behaviors, but I can't help but think that, in times past, many of you would throw the stones first and ask his lifeless body questions second.

It would appear you don't find the most recent allegations to be credible. Why not?

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Even the conservative media is against Trump.



Full story here -->

I'm betting many more payment to keep Trumps victims silent, will happen.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

The reporters did or didn't support Clinton while he was
having an affair in the White House?

I don't remember what the media supported. But my conservative aunt was okay with his affairs and sexual harassments . I wasn't.

 

[JGG]

Even the conservative media is against Trump.



Full story here -->

I'm pretty sure I saw that movie.

 

[hislegacy]

IOW, the presidential candidate who allegedly cheated on his wife (again) with a inappropriate content star, and the inappropriate content star he allegedly cheated with, BOTH deny that any payoffs were made to keep her quite about the affair.

Well, no reason to lie, is there? I'm totally convinced.

Key word there. An unsubstantiated allegation is not permissible in any court no matter how many times it is repeated.

This allegation has been repeatedly spoken of multiple times for seven years, with no charges, no evidence, no proof submitted.

But it keeps being bandied about every 8-10 months.

 

[SkyWriting]

When was the last time we had a truly moral president?

Trump: No
Obama: No
Bush Jr: Maybe? I think he at least tried and had good intentions.
Clinton: No

Beyond that I have no idea. I was too young to remember Bush Sr.

I didn't like Obama's solutions but I don't recall morality problems.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Key word there. An unsubstantiated allegation is not permissible in any court no matter how many times it is repeated.

Key word there. Take a breath, look around you, and tell us if you think you're in a courtroom right now.

 

[JGG]

Key word there. An unsubstantiated allegation is not permissible in any court no matter how many times it is repeated.

This allegation has been repeatedly spoken of multiple times for seven years, with no charges, no evidence, no proof submitted.

But it keeps being bandied about every 8-10 months.

Uranium One.

 

[hislegacy]

Key word there. Take a breath, look around you, and tell us if you think you're in a courtroom right now.

Breathes deeply

Breathes deeply

No, this forum is far, far beneath a court. That is why the court of public opinion is not valid and that is why this unsubstantiated rumor gets brought up every 8-10 months for the last 7 years.

It’s gossip, no base in reality. And people love criticizing Trump so it gets bandied about.

 

[Rion]

Why do you assume there are only two sides?

i.e. "you progressives", "your team", etc.

I am well aware that there are. However, your fellow posters won't let there be anything else. I'm constantly denied the right to be a center left classical liberal. Instead, I am labeled right-wing, Trump supporter, and everything else. If that's how people on the forum want to be, then I will assume that everyone who is to the left of me is an antifa supporting SJW.

I didn't like Obama's solutions but I don't recall morality problems.

Obama was a blood drunk fiend. Go look up double tap drone strikes.

 

[SkyWriting]

Obama was a blood drunk fiend. Go look up double tap drone strikes.

So can you explain why Obama decided to kill more civilians
using the double strike method? Did he think his wife would
be impressed or who was he trying to impress with his military
strategy? Did Generals in the military object to his methods?
Was it a race thing?