I did not have sex with that woman

[anonymous]

Since when is a one night boink an affair.
Seriously, does anyone really give a crap if the president has/had an “affair”?
Reminds me of the hypoctical condemnation of Tiger Woods. The guy was living every man’s fantasy, Rich, handsome, famous, beautiful wife and kids, golf and pornstars every day. C’mon, admit it, you’d do it if you could, even you Thumper.

No, idiot I wouldn’t. I could do all sorts of things but I I make the choice not to behave in such a manner and instead be faithful to my wife.

Could have done the homecoming queen long before I ever met my wife but didn’t do it because it wouldn’t have been right. Everybody isn’t as twisted as you are.

 

[anonymous]

Karen McDougal was not a one-night boink, it was ab affair. And personally, I could give a fuck but he sure does, enough to pay 2 women between $130K and $150K to keep quiet. The issues (apparently) are 1) If he lies about little things, will he lie about bigger things? and 2) If he used campaign money to silence them, it is illegal use of campaign money.

Would I do it? Hell yes, I had a one nighter with an adult movie star in the 70s. It didn't cost me a nickel. And she was WAY better looking than Stormy although I must admit Karen McDougal is pretty hot.

Hypocrite much? You have the nerve to raise point 1 above when you’ve defended Bill Clinton as many times as you have over the Lewinsky affair?

Can’t you pick a standard and stick to it? Is it ok to lie about sex or not?

Trump didn’t need to use campaign funds and he almost certainly didn’t. The amounts involved are pocket change to him.

Obama broke campaign finance law so it really doesn’t matter if he did use campaign funds. Nothing is going to happen to Trump. The vast majority of his supporters wouldn’t tolerate it.

 

[Vagitarian]

Hypocrite much? You have the nerve to raise point 1 above when you’ve defended Bill Clinton as many times as you have over the Lewinsky affair?

Can’t you pick a standard and stick to it? Is it ok to lie about sex or not?

Trump didn’t need to use campaign funds and he almost certainly didn’t. The amounts involved are pocket change to him.

Obama broke campaign finance law so it really doesn’t matter if he did use campaign funds. Nothing is going to happen to Trump. The vast majority of his supporters wouldn’t tolerate it.

I didn't defend Clinton for lying at all. I said it wasn't an offense that should cost him office and he used an 'interpretation' in admitting the blow job but said it wasn't 'sexual relations'.

Trump is laughably STILL denying anything even happened. I would like to see the proof accepted the way Clinton's proof was accepted and no - I don't think it should cost him his office.

OK?

 

[anonymous]

No, idiot I wouldn’t. I could do all sorts of things but I I make the choice not to behave in such a manner and instead be faithful to my wife.

Could have done the homecoming queen long before I ever met my wife but didn’t do it because it wouldn’t have been right. Everybody isn’t as twisted as you are.

Huh? But whatever, good for you.

 

[anonymous]

Hypocrite much? You have the nerve to raise point 1 above when you’ve defended Bill Clinton as many times as you have over the Lewinsky affair?

Can’t you pick a standard and stick to it? Is it ok to lie about sex or not?

Trump didn’t need to use campaign funds and he almost certainly didn’t. The amounts involved are pocket change to him.

Obama broke campaign finance law so it really doesn’t matter if he did use campaign funds. Nothing is going to happen to Trump. The vast majority of his supporters wouldn’t tolerate it.

Obama never broke campaign finance law. Document your allegation - you can't. But a federal judge just denied Trump's motion to dismiss the lawsuit brought by the attorneys general of Maryland and Washington, D.C., which alleges that Trump, whose businesses are regularly patronized by foreign officials, is violating the Constitution's ban on officials accepting emoluments from foreign governments (and state governments). The court rejected Trump's effort to define "emoluments" very narrowly, and instead accepted the plaintiffs' argument that they constitute "profit," "gain," or "advantage," i.e., the sort of profits that go to Trump's businesses. This means the case now moves forward to determine whether Trump reaped such profit, gain, or advantage from foreign governments.

Tick, tock !!!

 

[anonymous]

No, idiot I wouldn’t. I could do all sorts of things but I I make the choice not to behave in such a manner and instead be faithful to my wife.

Could have done the homecoming queen long before I ever met my wife but didn’t do it because it wouldn’t have been right. Everybody isn’t as twisted as you are.

You've only 'been with' one woman in your life? That isn't even healthy.

 

[anonymous]

I didn't defend Clinton for lying at all. I said it wasn't an offense that should cost him office and he used an 'interpretation' in admitting the blow job but said it wasn't 'sexual relations'.

Trump is laughably STILL denying anything even happened. I would like to see the proof accepted the way Clinton's proof was accepted and no - I don't think it should cost him his office.

OK?

No it’s not ok. Lots of convenient revisionist history on your part and Clinton LIED about his sexual affair with Lewinsky. PERIOD!

And it should have cost him his office because his attempt in lying was to deny an American citizen their fair day in court. If that’s not a high crime or misdemeanor I don’t know what else could qualify.

Clinton didn’t admit anything until DNA evidence showed up. Get back to me when there is any DNA evidence to prove Trump did anything. Until then it isn’t apples to apples.

 

[anonymous]

Obama never broke campaign finance law. Document your allegation - you can't. But a federal judge just denied Trump's motion to dismiss the lawsuit brought by the attorneys general of Maryland and Washington, D.C., which alleges that Trump, whose businesses are regularly patronized by foreign officials, is violating the Constitution's ban on officials accepting emoluments from foreign governments (and state governments). The court rejected Trump's effort to define "emoluments" very narrowly, and instead accepted the plaintiffs' argument that they constitute "profit," "gain," or "advantage," i.e., the sort of profits that go to Trump's businesses. This means the case now moves forward to determine whether Trump reaped such profit, gain, or advantage from foreign governments.

Tick, tock !!!

I know that living in your libtard bubble you are ignorant of the fact that Obama broke campaign finance law but he did. If you’re on this board then you’ve got access to Mr. Google so I suggest you use him and educate yourself.

Trump is a business man. That case is going nowhere. Again if you fools think we would allow Trunp to be taken down over something as petty as this when Hillary traded on her position as Sec of State and likely next president to enrich herself through the Clinton Crime Foundation you’re smoking crack.

You might as well chunk your clock out the window!

 

[Vagitarian]

I know that living in your libtard bubble you are ignorant of the fact that Obama broke campaign finance law but he did. If you’re on this board then you’ve got access to Mr. Google so I suggest you use him and educate yourself.

Trump is a business man. That case is going nowhere. Again if you fools think we would allow Trunp to be taken down over something as petty as this when Hillary traded on her position as Sec of State and likely next president to enrich herself through the Clinton Crime Foundation you’re smoking crack.

You might as well chunk your clock out the window!

Trump is a business man who wants to open a hotel in Moscow and has been admonished for his behavior with many very conservative Congressmen such as Newt Gingrich who is a hell of a lot smarter than you and a hell of a lot more patriotic than you - as in Newt Gingrich is not a Russian operative or pawn and suggests Trump needs to correct the appearance that he is. If not Trump (or Trunp as you call him) just may go down.

 

[anonymous]

Trump is a business man who wants to open a hotel in Moscow and has been admonished for his behavior with many very conservative Congressmen such as Newt Gingrich who is a hell of a lot smarter than you and a hell of a lot more patriotic than you - as in Newt Gingrich is not a Russian operative or pawn and suggests Trump needs to correct the appearance that he is. If not Trump (or Trunp as you call him) just may go down.

LOL! So now you’re a Newt fan? Well better late than never I guess. Welcome to the fan club!

Now with that said, I have heard Newt extensively on this topic and as usual you are misrepresenting somebody’s position.
Newt also stated that the record clearly shows Trump has been harder on Putin than any other president and by no rational measure could a sane person. Think him a Putin pawn.

Nothing, including this is going to take Trump down, idiot boy. Forget it!

We same Trump voters would never allow it. Never! And with the rocking economic news out today like Clinton the economy, if nothing else, would save him!

 

[Vagitarian]

LOL! So now you’re a Newt fan? Well better late than never I guess. Welcome to the fan club!

Now with that said, I have heard Newt extensively on this topic and as usual you are misrepresenting somebody’s position.
Newt also stated that the record clearly shows Trump has been harder on Putin than any other president and by no rational measure could a sane person. Think him a Putin pawn.

Nothing, including this is going to take Trump down, idiot boy. Forget it!

We same Trump voters would never allow it. Never! And with the rocking economic news out today like Clinton the economy, if nothing else, would save him!

You lie like a dog about Gingrich. He CLEARLY says Trump's misadventure in Russia 'needs to be corrected'. You misrepresent what I say as well as what he says as if what you say matters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8l9uEs1m4U

 

[anonymous]

You lie like a dog about Gingrich. He CLEARLY says Trump's misadventure in Russia 'needs to be corrected'. You misrepresent what I say as well as what he says as if what you say matters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8l9uEs1m4U

No, idiot boy. You’re the liar. Posting a YouTube video won’t help your case.

Newt did indicate that Trump needed to clarify and walk back his statements concerning our intelligence community vs Putin. That doesn’t mean that Trump is Putin's pawn when he has clearly been tougher on Putin than either Obama or Bush. Now granted you do have to play the PR game especially with the hyperbiased and unfair libtard press. He also said that Putin seems to have an uncanny ability to deceive and fool American presidents do Trump isn’t really out of line with other presidents so your Trump bashing utterly falls apart.

Unlike you where I’m concerned I’ve never intentionally or carelessly misrepresented your position.

But hey, welcome to the Newt fan club. That’s going to be very useful to me in the future.

Funny how you didn’t also mention that Newt said Trump was the most influential president since FDR and this is in spite of his supposed Putin misstep.

 

[anonymous]

No, idiot boy. You’re the liar. Posting a YouTube video won’t help your case.

Newt did indicate that Trump needed to clarify and walk back his statements concerning our intelligence community vs Putin. That doesn’t mean that Trump is Putin's pawn when he has clearly been tougher on Putin than either Obama or Bush. Now granted you do have to play the PR game especially with the hyperbiased and unfair libtard press. He also said that Putin seems to have an uncanny ability to deceive and fool American presidents do Trump isn’t really out of line with other presidents so your Trump bashing utterly falls apart.

Unlike you where I’m concerned I’ve never intentionally or carelessly misrepresented your position.

But hey, welcome to the Newt fan club. That’s going to be very useful to me in the future.

Funny how you didn’t also mention that Newt said Trump was the most influential president since FDR and this is in spite of his supposed Putin misstep.

Yeah, but that’s not a compliment. FDR gave Europe and the Ukraine to Stalin, who makes Putin look like a boy scout. FDR’ legend doesn’t come close to his reality.

 

[anonymous]

No, idiot boy. You’re the liar. Posting a YouTube video won’t help your case.

Newt did indicate that Trump needed to clarify and walk back his statements concerning our intelligence community vs Putin. That doesn’t mean that Trump is Putin's pawn when he has clearly been tougher on Putin than either Obama or Bush. Now granted you do have to play the PR game especially with the hyperbiased and unfair libtard press. He also said that Putin seems to have an uncanny ability to deceive and fool American presidents do Trump isn’t really out of line with other presidents so your Trump bashing utterly falls apart.

Unlike you where I’m concerned I’ve never intentionally or carelessly misrepresented your position.

But hey, welcome to the Newt fan club. That’s going to be very useful to me in the future.

Funny how you didn’t also mention that Newt said Trump was the most influential president since FDR and this is in spite of his supposed Putin misstep.

You continue to think that because a president is successful in many ways, we should wag our tails at everything he does? Why is there a char board? Why not just a 'Rah, rah, cis coom bah, hail Trump board?

 

[anonymous]

Yeah, but that’s not a compliment. FDR gave Europe and the Ukraine to Stalin, who makes Putin look like a boy scout. FDR’ legend doesn’t come close to his reality.

You’re absolutely right but the fact remains that for good or ill, he was the most influential president of the 20th century. Didn’t say he was the best, far from it, just the most influential.

 

[Vagitarian]

You’re absolutely right but the fact remains that for good or ill, he was the most influential president of the 20th century. Didn’t say he was the best, far from it, just the most influential.

Don't underestimate the effect that Truman ending the war has had on our lives. That Democrat but he had more balls than any one else.

OK, now we just wait for Sparky to say that today he would have been claim him a Republican - ROFLMAO !!!

 

[anonymous]

Don't underestimate the effect that Truman ending the war has had on our lives. That Democrat but he had more balls than any one else.

OK, now we just wait for Sparky to say that today he would have been claim him a Republican - ROFLMAO !!!

LOL! Few things entertain me as much as watching you whack yourself with the stupid stick. If you want to claim that Truman would more likely be a Dem rather than a Repub today, well it’s your funeral.

I think it likely that the Reagan philosophy would prevail: he didn’t leave the Democrat party. It left him.

Dropping the nuke was a momentous decision but it was also basically a no brainer and it was just one decision essentially.

 

[anonymous]

LOL! Few things entertain me as much as watching you whack yourself with the stupid stick. If you want to claim that Truman would more likely be a Dem rather than a Repub today, well it’s your funeral.

I think it likely that the Reagan philosophy would prevail: he didn’t leave the Democrat party. It left him.

Dropping the nuke was a momentous decision but it was also basically a no brainer and it was just one decision essentially.

Truman was a Democrat - case closed.

 

[Vagitarian]

Truman was a Democrat - case closed.

He was a Democrat with huevos and the topic is still debated today. As we know, Gen MacArthur wanted to go further in the war and some speculate if he had been allowed to do so, the Korean War and the Viet Nam war would have never happened. But Truman fired MacArthur and that decision not only ended MacArthur’s military career, it ended the president’s political career as well, setting the stage for the subsequent presidency of Dwight Eisenhower. In the first 24 hours after the president’s announcement, the White House received more than 5,000 telegrams—three-quarters of them backing the popular MacArthur, who had been named the greatest living American in a 1946 poll. In the wake of the firing, Truman’s popular approval rating set a record not matched before or ever since—22 percent—lower even than Nixon’s at the depth of the Watergate scandal. After that, Truman didn't pursue his party’s nomination in 1952.

MacArthur harbored ambitions of succeeding Truman as commander-in-chief after returning home to a hero’s welcome that included an address to a joint session of Congress and a ticker-tape parade through New York City – the things Donald Trump fantasizes about.

There was a surge of support for MacArthur when he came home but it turned out it was for what MacArthur had done in the past rather than what he might do in the future. Eisenhower, who was a Republican not a Democrat, took over. Read your history Sparky. Think dammit, think.

 

[anonymous]

Hypocrite much? You have the nerve to raise point 1 above when you’ve defended Bill Clinton as many times as you have over the Lewinsky affair?

Can’t you pick a standard and stick to it? Is it ok to lie about sex or not?

Trump didn’t need to use campaign funds and he almost certainly didn’t. The amounts involved are pocket change to him.

Obama broke campaign finance law so it really doesn’t matter if he did use campaign funds. Nothing is going to happen to Trump. The vast majority of his supporters wouldn’t tolerate it.

I think people shouldn't have to explain their sex life in first place what does that have to do with their job description, unless their working at the bunny ranch or something like that.