As well as disgraced governor eyes running for mayor of NYC

https://www.politico.com/newsl...s-city-hall-00174420

Welcome to the Big Apple, don't mind the maggots

Remember when voting for sex abuser politicians was just an East Coast thing?

You mean a convicted felon and someone found liable for sexual assault in a civil case is running for something?

Shocking.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
You mean a convicted felon and someone found liable for sexual assault in a civil case is running for something?

Shocking.

Bill Clinton

Your ignorance is breath-taking.

Clinton isn't a convicted felon.

He wasn't found liable for sexual assault in a civil suit.

Only your boy has those two strikes against him. But I can see the truth doesn't trouble your thoughts.

Interesting, President Clinton was never convicted and was never found by a jury to have engaged in non consensual sexual contact.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Interesting, President Clinton was never convicted and was never found by a jury to have engaged in non consensual sexual contact.

But, Slick Willy was too stupid to simply say it was nobody's business and avoid lying. Lying just comes too easy for politicians. It's always the default move. Regards, Bill

Still no jury finding of non consensual sexual touching and still not a convicted felon.

In full disclosure, he should have been prosecuted for perjury and witness intimidation. He was not and he is not a felon.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Interesting, President Clinton was never convicted and was never found by a jury to have engaged in non consensual sexual contact.

Was he ever charged?

Do you know for sure that Lewinsky was not paid off to not make such accusations?

Has he ever been involved in a Stormy Daniels type pay-off with nondisclosure agreements that have not come out?

By some academic definitions of rape, he did rape Ms. Lewinsky. (the extreme power differential making it impossible for her to truly consent - no I don't buy that, but it serves for a point of argument...) and was never charged with the crime, he was only charged with lying under oath. Note that the perjury was only proven because someone other than Lewinsky had evidence that intercourse happened.

Note that like Trump, it really didn't hurt his political positioning with his party's base...

Where is the "Its just sex" crowd now?

No. President Clinton was never charged.

Ken Starr cut some kind of deal. I forget the details. I think the deal was a fine based on contempt of court of $90k.

Imagine that, a setting President was held in contempt and punished in that contempt. Tell me again, why Trump was not sanctioned to jail for his contempts. Oh, yeah, the system was rigged against Trump.

Are there any politicians or business moguls out there not accused of some sexual impropriety ?

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Interesting, President Clinton was never convicted and was never found by a jury to have engaged in non consensual sexual contact.

Was he ever charged?

Do you know for sure that Lewinsky was not paid off to not make such accusations?

Has he ever been involved in a Stormy Daniels type pay-off with nondisclosure agreements that have not come out?

By some academic definitions of rape, he did rape Ms. Lewinsky. (the extreme power differential making it impossible for her to truly consent - no I don't buy that, but it serves for a point of argument...) and was never charged with the crime, he was only charged with lying under oath. Note that the perjury was only proven because someone other than Lewinsky had evidence that intercourse happened.

Note that like Trump, it really didn't hurt his political positioning with his party's base...

Where is the "Its just sex" crowd now?

A payoff to Lewinsky would have got President Clinton charged. President Clinton was caught on audio recordings encouraging Lewinsky not to cooperate with her deposition notice by Starr.

Again, President Clinton was never charged. President Clinton was found in contempt of court and fined 90k as a sitting President.


There is difference w a distinction between President Clinton’s sex with Lewinsky than cornering a woman in what amounted to a closet and so her consent touch her sexual organs and kiss her like Trump was found by a jury to have done.

George Patton pulled a revolver on a man he thought was forcing a woman to do less than Trump does

So now you say he did encourage her to not comply with the subpoena? And this is different than Trumps nondisclosure agreement with Daniels how, exactly?

Yes, Patton pulled a gun on someone he thought was forcing attentions on a woman... You probably would charge him with assault now, as a prosecutor if it occurred today, wouldn't you?

Frankly, lots of things were better then... and lots were worse.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Interesting, President Clinton was never convicted and was never found by a jury to have engaged in non consensual sexual contact.

Was he ever charged?

Do you know for sure that Lewinsky was not paid off to not make such accusations?

Has he ever been involved in a Stormy Daniels type pay-off with nondisclosure agreements that have not come out?

By some academic definitions of rape, he did rape Ms. Lewinsky. (the extreme power differential making it impossible for her to truly consent - no I don't buy that, but it serves for a point of argument...) and was never charged with the crime, he was only charged with lying under oath. Note that the perjury was only proven because someone other than Lewinsky had evidence that intercourse happened.

Note that like Trump, it really didn't hurt his political positioning with his party's base...

Where is the "Its just sex" crowd now?

A payoff to Lewinsky would have got President Clinton charged. President Clinton was caught on audio recordings encouraging Lewinsky not to cooperate with her deposition notice by Starr.

Again, President Clinton was never charged. President Clinton was found in contempt of court and fined 90k as a sitting President.


There is difference w a distinction between President Clinton’s sex with Lewinsky than cornering a woman in what amounted to a closet and so her consent touch her sexual organs and kiss her like Trump was found by a jury to have done.

George Patton pulled a revolver on a man he thought was forcing a woman to do less than Trump does

My Man, this is common knowledge. President Clinton was caught on audio recording directing Lewinsky not to comply with a deposition. That is not a subpoena.

In the face of it, President Clinton did not use campaign contributions to pay her off. Other than that, I said he could have been prosecuted for intimidating a witness along w perjury. Starr cut him a deal. Take it up w Jen Starr. The deal was President Clinton was sanctioned to the tune of 90k for contempt of court.

Here is the details of his pressure to Lewinsky to not cooperate.


https://www.washingtonpost.com...eport/7groundsvi.htm

I would have impeached President Clinton. I would have prosecuted him. Take it up w Ken Starr and the GOP in the Senate back in 1998.

Lewinsky testified in her Deposition when asked directly by Tripp that President Clinton spoke to her about lying assuring her that no one would go to jail for perjury. Lewinsky would testify to the Grand Jury that she lied when she gave this testimony.

I am pretty sure the types were recently published. No, they were stayed by Lewinsky again asserting the President’s contact.

Lewinsky revealed that Clinton convinced her to deny the affair if she was called to testify in the Paula Jones case. The 45-year-old recalled the former president telling her that she could avoid being deposed if she denied the affair in an affidavit.

Lewinsky said that Clinton had called her at 2:30 in the morning to let her know that she was on the witness list for the Paula Jones case.

And though she clarified that Clinton never said the words "you're going to have to lie here," Lewinsky pointed out that he also never said "we're going to have to tell the truth."

After being subpoenaed, the former White House staffer decided to talk to attorney Vernon Jordan, a close friend of Clinton. In the documentary, Lewinsky claims that she managed to secure a meeting with Jordan on her own and from that meeting, she was introduced to lawyer Frank Carter.

"Frank Carter explained to me if I'd signed an affidavit denying having had an intimate relationship with the president it might mean I wouldn't have to be deposed in the Paula Jones case," she recounted. "I did feel uncomfortable about it but I felt it was the right thing to do, ironically, right? So, the right thing to do, to break the law."

Following her decision to sign the affidavit, Clinton called Lewinsky to the White House for a somewhat private Christmas celebration.

She continued: "Over the summer he had gone to Martha's Vineyard and he brought back a bunch of different things. He had this big canvas bag from the Black Dog. This marble bear, sunglasses. It was the most presents he'd given me at one time. He knew the subpoena was gonna ask to produce certain items and yet he was giving me more gifts. He clearly still trusted me."

Lewinsky added that at the time, she gave the president's gifts to his secretary for safekeeping and to avoid possible seizure.


https://www.foxnews.com/entert...ore-ditching-her.amp

Thus, I believe the President tried to influence Lewinsky’s testimony. Ken Starr did too and put that opinion in writing.

I cannot help that Starr and Senate Republicans let President Clinton off with a contempt sanction and loss of his Arkansas Law License.

I would not have. I will also not let Trump.

Facts remain. Lewinsky was not paid off. Lewinsky’s relationship w President Clinton had a major Lowe dynamic. However, she continues to classify the relationship is consensual. The event is not the fact pattern of Trump’s sexual assault found by a civil jury. Trump is the convicted felon. President Clinton is not.

Should President Clinton be a convicted felon? That is a different conversation. I have made position clear on the matter. I would not vote for President Clinton because of it. I was in the 4th grade when all this went down. I remember watching the votes in the House and Senste w my father (adopted).

George Wills said, “ President Trump was impeached over lying about a question that should never had been asked.” Maybe? The inquiry seems beyond the scope of Starr’s initial purpose. That does not excuse President Clinton’s actions.

What happened or did not happen with President Clinton does not excuse what is the situation w Trump.

Joshua
I wasn't aware that trump used campaign monies.. well, that Cohen used campaign monies.. do you have a citation from a court that proves this?

But where did slick Willie get 850k for paula jones?

That is the allegation currently proven. That the monies spent in the NDA were unreported and excessive campaign contribution. This is because the pay off was made to benefit, further the campaign.

I already said yes. It was a settlement of her civil action. Trump should have done the same apparently. Not for anything, the Jones case was dismissed by the trial court. Reinstated on Appeal to the Fed Circuit. At, that point, Clinton settled the case.

That is not the same as being found by a jury to have sexually assaulted a woman.

A court conviction is in no way explicit of truth or guilt. Bash Trump all you want, you’re all angels yourselves no doubt. Just remember Clinton had a twenty something suck his dick so well, he came on her dress. I don’t know if he stuck his cigar in her pussy before or after. High five

In the Oval Office. Sounds like something JFK would do. The former potus not the airport. But who wouldn’t bang Marilyn?

All that was okay.....liberal privilege, you know!

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:
A court conviction is in no way explicit of truth or guilt. Bash Trump all you want, you’re all angels yourselves no doubt. Just remember Clinton had a twenty something suck his dick so well, he came on her dress. I don’t know if he stuck his cigar in her pussy before or after. High five

A court conviction is a finding beyond a reasonable doubt that facts applied to law are a crime was committed. I can say I have never lied under oath pressured someone else to lie under oath. I can say, I have not had an affair after 14 years of marriage. I know more men who have not had an affair than had.

I have also never called for the Constitution to be suspended simply because I did not like the outcome of an election. You can guarantee that will never happen.

Yeah, a conviction is explicit of guilty.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by tomahawker:
A court conviction is in no way explicit of truth or guilt. Bash Trump all you want, you’re all angels yourselves no doubt. Just remember Clinton had a twenty something suck his dick so well, he came on her dress. I don’t know if he stuck his cigar in her pussy before or after. High five[/QUOT


You have to be kidding or higher than a kite.

Our foundation is the Constitution and we have no choice other than to follow it's directions or self distruct. Was OJ guilty? The court said no and we move forward regardless. Was Clinton guilty or Trump during impeachment? The court said no and we move forward.

Has trump been convicted of a felony? Yes.

Has Trump been found liable? Yes.

Has Trump advocated Sedition with his own words? If you say no I can only conclude you smoke crack.

Again you kids look around at others to justify your behavior or those you think are on your side and it's disgusting. Be a Man, stand up for the values and morals you believe in and don't equivocate.

Neither OJ nor Clinton, not Trump or Harris ever have anything to do with what I set as my standard.

If you don't, I hope you don't have kids. This nation doesn't need a next generation of, "they do it so I can too!".

quote:

Neither OJ nor Clinton, not Trump or Harris ever have anything to do with what I set as my standard.

Absolutely agree. In 2021, the FBI reported that nearly 23,000 people were killed, and criminology experts say that almost half of those cases won't be solved.

I’ll say it again. A court conviction does not determine guilt.

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:

quote:

Neither OJ nor Clinton, not Trump or Harris ever have anything to do with what I set as my standard.

Absolutely agree. In 2021, the FBI reported that nearly 23,000 people were killed, and criminology experts say that almost half of those cases won't be solved.

I’ll say it again. A court conviction does not determine guilt.

MANY cases are won on appeal. Many cases turn out to be bad convictions based on withheld evidence. In fact, the dhimps have a candidate who did just that. Her office knowingly withheld evidence. Many who post here are okay with that and will vote for her. Speaks volumes.

quote:

Originally posted by Grizzly Adams1:
Are there any politicians or business moguls out there not accused of some sexual impropriety ?

Of course, the difference is that trump has been convicted of 34 felonies by a court and found liable for sexual assault by a court. These are not unfounded political accusations.

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:

quote:

Neither OJ nor Clinton, not Trump or Harris ever have anything to do with what I set as my standard.

Absolutely agree. In 2021, the FBI reported that nearly 23,000 people were killed, and criminology experts say that almost half of those cases won't be solved.

I’ll say it again. A court conviction does not determine guilt.

A court conviction does not determine guilt?

What does?

Some of the so-called conservatives on here must have more moral and ethical flexibility than an olympic gymnast has physical flexibility. There is no limit to how they will contort and twist themselves to rationalize, explain away, defend and justify the ridiculous conduct of the Orange Jesus. He literally has them under a Jim Jones-type spell. You wonder whether they have children and how their children interpret and internalize the blatant hypocrisy. E.g., you need to tell the truth and not lie . . . Trump just misspoke, it's no big deal. E.g., you need to respect the girls you date and treat them like ladies . . . sure Trump said you can do anything you want to a woman, just grab them by the pussy, but it was just locker room banter.

Typical!

You all are looking at one side of the coin.

Famous men.

Rich men.

Don’t have to rape anyone.

Women throw themselves on them!

Take a larger view. We’re all just crawling around on a blue rock. Someone is guilty for all those unsolved murders. Lack of conviction does not absolve one of guilt. It’s why people can’t sleep. Your boy Slick Willy knows what keeps him up at night. Pun intended

PS Clinton was 49 yrs old while Lewinsky was 22. Zero outrage

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:
PS Clinton was 49 yrs old while Lewinsky was 22. Zero outrage

You got anything from this century that has a bearing on November 2024?

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:
Take a larger view. We’re all just crawling around on a blue rock. Someone is guilty for all those unsolved murders. Lack of conviction does not absolve one of guilt. It’s why people can’t sleep. Your boy Slick Willy knows what keeps him up at night. Pun intended

In our legal system we do not absolve guilt with trials. The person is presumed, a starting legal conclusion that must be rebutted, to be innocent.

Trials prescribe guilt and dissolve innocence. Trials do not dissolve guilt.

That is our system. If you want more than that, talk to a priest, bishop, person of holy instruction, or a philosopher.

Simply put, your faux outrage has been exposed. Trumps policies are better than any alternative at this point.

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:
Simply put, your faux outrage has been exposed. Trumps policies are better than any alternative at this point.

Right. Trying to fraudulently overturn the result of a general election is the "better" policy.

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:
Simply put, your faux outrage has been exposed. Trumps policies are better than any alternative at this point.

Suspending the Constitution is a bummer of a policy.

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:
Simply put, your faux outrage has been exposed. Trumps policies are better than any alternative at this point.

I put lying under oath especially by an attorney and President of the United States along with the appearance of witnesses tampering as actions that need more punishment that what President Clinton got. At least, more of a judicial inquiry than what President Clinton got.

However, my wants do not override due process.
Trump has had his presumption of innocence stripped by a court of competent jurisdiction. Trump has been liable for sexual assault. Due process continues.

See the two previous responses from me.

Trump has no policy that is worth his son against our constitutional system. His policies, such as they were, were overall not that great either:
NATO
The Negotiation of US Withdrawal from Afghanistan,
Russia,
North Korea,
Executive Action to ban bump stocks,
Right Wing Judicial Activism,
I do not blame Trump for Covid. I have no issue with his travel ban upheld by the Supreme Court,
I consider his border policy a failure bc unlike Biden Administration he did not negotiate legislation to make the situation better,
My brother is a teacher. He got a whopping two dollar tax break from “Trump Tax Policy.”
Calling international sport hunting a horror show.

Whew, at least we’ve shed the absurd moral outrage and can focus on policy, which we can agree to disagree on.

I voted for Trump 2x
I would again but for Jan 6 and his criminal behavior.