Does anyone NOT give a crap about Stormy Daniels?

[Jayjay]

Shouldn't be too hard to corroborate Stormy's story. Find a CBS person working on the Apprentice, whom Trump may have pitched Stormy Daniels as a contestant (although, he might not have actually done so despite trying to get to Stormy's pants by saying he was working on it). And a PI could possibly find possible associates of Cohen or Trump who could have threatened Stormy, and show her some mug shots.

 

[Tigers!]

Who is Stormy Daniels?

 

[untermensche]

This is the way it is with the rich.

They want their pornstars, their wives, and they want to be able to legally shut people up.

Any contract that limits speech that isn't some national secret should be illegal.

They are just one way the rich fuck over all the nonrich.

One way to prevent the ordinary people living under the boot of the rich from knowing truths.

 

[Beer With Straw]

OK, try not to puke...

It's been in the news for a bit already BUT think of the Donald Trump sex video? If so, it should be leaked on the internet.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics...t-sot-tsr.cnn/video/playlists/stormy-daniels/

 

[southernhybrid]

It's not about the affair. It's about the lies, the likely illegal campaign contribution, the lies, the probability that Stormy was threatened with physical violence, the lies, and the lies.

 

[Jayjay]

It's not about the affair. It's about the lies, the likely illegal campaign contribution, the lies, the probability that Stormy was threatened with physical violence, the lies, and the lies.

On my moral compass, the illegal campaign contribution ranks only slightly above the affair. But you're right about the lies though. I'd add hypocrisy to the mix too.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Yet another vote for I don't give a hoot about the affair. I figure anyone with the drive to reach the oval office is likely to have an affair.

I do care about the coverup.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I honestly don't give a crap.

The media keeps telling me I should give a crap, but I don't.

 

[starwater]

This is the way it is with the rich.

They want their pornstars, their wives, and they want to be able to legally shut people up.

Any contract that limits speech that isn't some national secret should be illegal.

They are just one way the rich fuck over all the nonrich.

One way to prevent the ordinary people living under the boot of the rich from knowing truths.

The way it is for white men rich.

 

[Elixir]

The Stormy story is a genuine nothingburger. The cover-up though... that might have legs.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I no longer try to figure out why evangelicals and fundamentalists support Trump, realizing now it's because they are exactly the same way. I think they love Trump because he's a great sinner, just like them, but that god loves those who love themselves. Stormy Daniels is a different story, she's just Eve, the original sinner, a woman who should be home obediently making babies.

 

[Underseer]

I despise trump. But I care about his hook up with Daniel's as much as I cared about Clinton's with Lewinsky. I don't intend to watch tonight either. Am I alone?

As others said, it's not that he had an affair, it's the laws he broke covering it up, and I enjoy watching conservatives and libertarians (who are completely different, honest!) squirm while spitting out special pleading fallacies explaining why it was necessary to impeach Clinton over a blowjob, but we should all just shut up about Stormy.

 

[ElectEngr]

It seems to me that Avenatti is trying this more in the Court of Public Opinion than in a Court of Law. If he had a strong case, he'd be waiting for trial rather tan tease it in the mdeia. It seems to me, he may not have a strong case.

Later,
ElectEngr

 

[Underseer]

I no longer try to figure out why evangelicals and fundamentalists support Trump, realizing now it's because they are exactly the same way. I think they love Trump because he's a great sinner, just like them, but that god loves those who love themselves. Stormy Daniels is a different story, she's just Eve, the original sinner, a woman who should be home obediently making babies.

It's not that hard to figure out.

The Euthyphro dilemma predicts that authority-based moral systems lead to the most extreme form of moral relativism imaginable. That's how you end up with William Lane Craig arguing that objective morality proves god, also it's moral for god to order all the babies in an entire city killed, but immoral for you to do the same thing.

Under authority-based moral systems, things are not good or evil based on what is done, but based on who does them.

Thus, Trump is a holy man of god no matter how many porn stars he fucked behind his wife's back. Treason doesn't matter, apologizing for Nazis doesn't matter, and the racism is probably a plus for them.

 

[Copernicus]

I care about it because it is necessary for the public to be continually reminded of the nature of the man that got elected to the presidency on an electoral college technicality. We need to understand the extent of the damage as fully as possible, and those who are deluded enough to support this man's continuation in office should have their noses rubbed in it.

As others have pointed out, it isn't about the sex or marital infidelity. That is between Trump and the women who choose to get involved with him. It is about the deception and illegal activity. Why is this important to the public? Because it shows the lengths to which this man will go to cover up his own wrongdoing. Hence, he can be influenced by blackmail.

Make no mistake about it. Stormy Daniels was blackmailing Donald Trump, and he did succumb to that blackmail up to a point. She saw a commercial value in her one-night stand, and she sought to exploit it. After he became President, she saw the value go up, and she is now cashing in on it. As she said in the 60 Minutes interview, she was not a victim. She was not joining the "Me Too" movement. She knew what she was doing, and she is exploiting this now for all it is worth. She asked the rhetorical question during that interview of why anyone would not take twice as much money to do the same thing that they had been doing for money earlier. Her fees for public appearances have gone up a lot, although she jokingly chided Anderson Cooper for not even buying her breakfast. His interview, however, was part of her campaign to exploit Trump's stupid behavior for all it is worth.

So, how far will Trump go to cover up the other things he has done in his past? I think we know that now, but I think that most of the public is still in denial on that subject. Even those who think he is doing a terrible job in office are still predisposed to think better of him than he deserves.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I despise trump. But I care about his hook up with Daniel's as much as I cared about Clinton's with Lewinsky. I don't intend to watch tonight either. Am I alone?

As others said, it's not that he had an affair, it's the laws he broke covering it up, and I enjoy watching conservatives and libertarians (who are completely different, honest!) squirm while spitting out special pleading fallacies explaining why it was necessary to impeach Clinton over a blowjob, but we should all just shut up about Stormy.

Look, I know you're upset that this means your president might get in to trouble, but while you keep wearing your alt-right maga hat leave us libertarians out. We don't want anything to do with alt-right people like you. Yes, we'll defend your freedom of speech, but that doesn't mean we like alt-right people like you. Go take your maga hat somewhere else, we don't support your president.

 

[Elixir]

I enjoy watching conservatives and libertarians (who are completely different, honest!) squirm while spitting out special pleading fallacies explaining why it was necessary to impeach Clinton over a blowjob, but we should all just shut up about Stormy.

Look, I know you're upset that this means your president might get in to trouble, but while you keep wearing your alt-right maga hat leave us libertarians out. We don't want anything to do with alt-right people like you. Yes, we'll defend your freedom of speech, but that doesn't mean we like alt-right people like you. Go take your maga hat somewhere else, we don't support your president.

I don't think his MAGA hat is what makes hypocrites out of those who:
a) threw a fit about Bill Clinton's blowjob, and attacked Hillary for not dumping him over it, while ignoring Trump's disgusting behavior in all cases, and never raising any issue about his wife dumping him, and those who
b) failed to condemn Bill Clinton or call for Hillary to dump him, while criticizing Trump's philandering habits and saying Melania should dump him.

FWIW, I was very critical of BC's Lewinsky stupidity and lies, even though I liked much of what he did as President. I despise Trump in every way imaginable, but don't think anyone needs to be hypocritical in order to rightfully condemn either his general behavior or his acts as President.

 

[Angry Floof]

It seems to me that Avenatti is trying this more in the Court of Public Opinion than in a Court of Law. If he had a strong case, he'd be waiting for trial rather tan tease it in the mdeia. It seems to me, he may not have a strong case.

Later,
ElectEngr

I think he enjoys the show, too, but he's also goading Trump. The man, er, hobgoblin, who has no control over his own mouth is stuck in a place where he can't say a damn thing no matter what Daniels accuses. His reflex to lie and defend himself can only expose him with this issue. I'm enjoying that, too.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I despise trump. But I care about his hook up with Daniel's as much as I cared about Clinton's with Lewinsky. I don't intend to watch tonight either. Am I alone?

As others said, it's not that he had an affair, it's the laws he broke covering it up, and I enjoy watching conservatives and libertarians (who are completely different, honest!) squirm while spitting out special pleading fallacies explaining why it was necessary to impeach Clinton over a blowjob, but we should all just shut up about Stormy.

Look, I know you're upset that this means your president might get in to trouble, but while you keep wearing your alt-right maga hat leave us libertarians out. We don't want anything to do with alt-right people like you. Yes, we'll defend your freedom of speech, but that doesn't mean we like alt-right people like you. Go take your maga hat somewhere else, we don't support your president.

Two words:

Tucker

Carlson

 

[Angry Floof]

It seems to me that Avenatti is trying this more in the Court of Public Opinion than in a Court of Law. If he had a strong case, he'd be waiting for trial rather tan tease it in the mdeia. It seems to me, he may not have a strong case.

Later,
ElectEngr

I think he enjoys the show, too, but he's also goading Trump. The man, er, hobgoblin, who has no control over his own mouth is stuck in a place where he can't say a damn thing no matter what Daniels accuses. His reflex to lie and defend himself can only expose him with this issue. I'm enjoying that, too.

He's playing it well.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/inve...da4122-30e4-11e8-94fa-32d48460b955_story.html