Welcome to Schadenfreude Central!
1. Had it not been for Trump's election....none of this would be happening!
With Hillary running, the whole rape-apologist program of the Democrats came to the the forefront....and they had to pretend that Trump was on the same level (the gutter) as Bill 'the rapist' Clinton.
Here's the 'divide:' the Democrats with at least a double digit IQ are ready to admit the truth, the rape history that the Right has been revealing about Clinton for...what....decades.
2. But the trained seals are still denying!!!!
See it here:
Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
and here:
DEM REP Waters: Trump investigation underway evidence not required for impeachment
and here:
DEM REP Waters: Trump investigation underway evidence not required for impeachment
and here:
Liberals Aren’t Liking This Newly-Discovered Photo Of The 1924 Democratic Convention…
It's really panicville for these half-heads.....
3. Here is the NYSlimes, acknowledging that they have to admit the truth about the rapist:
NYTimes: a day late and a dollar short...
"But with Paula Jones and Monica Lewinsky, we know what happened: A president being sued for sexual harassment tried to buy off a mistress-turned-potential-witness with White House favors, and then committed perjury serious enough to merit disbarment. Which also brought forward a compelling allegation from Juanita Broaddrick that the president had raped her.
The longer I spent with these old stories, the more I came back to a question: If exploiting a willing intern is a serious enough abuse of power to warrant resignation, why is obstructing justice in a sexual harassment case not serious enough to warrant impeachment? Especially when the behavior is part of a longstanding pattern that also may extend to rape? Would any feminist today hesitate to take a similar opportunity to remove a predatory studio head or C.E.O.?
...the most important escalators were the Democrats. They had an opportunity, with Al Gore waiting in the wings, to show a predator the door and establish some moral common ground for a polarizing country.
And what they did instead — turning their party into an accessory to Clinton’s appetites, shamelessly abandoning feminist principle, smearing victims and blithely ignoring his most credible accuser, all because Republicans funded the investigations and they’re prudes and it’s all just Sexual McCarthyism — feels in the cold clarity of hindsight like a great act of partisan deformation." Opinion | What if Ken Starr Was Right?
And pinning the tail on the Democrat donkey:
"....turning their party into an accessory to Clinton’s appetites, shamelessly abandoning feminist principle, smearing victims and blithely ignoring his most credible accuser, ..."
So....as the saying goes.....Time Wounds All Heels
1. Had it not been for Trump's election....none of this would be happening!
With Hillary running, the whole rape-apologist program of the Democrats came to the the forefront....and they had to pretend that Trump was on the same level (the gutter) as Bill 'the rapist' Clinton.
Here's the 'divide:' the Democrats with at least a double digit IQ are ready to admit the truth, the rape history that the Right has been revealing about Clinton for...what....decades.
2. But the trained seals are still denying!!!!
See it here:
Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
and here:
DEM REP Waters: Trump investigation underway evidence not required for impeachment
and here:
DEM REP Waters: Trump investigation underway evidence not required for impeachment
and here:
Liberals Aren’t Liking This Newly-Discovered Photo Of The 1924 Democratic Convention…
It's really panicville for these half-heads.....
3. Here is the NYSlimes, acknowledging that they have to admit the truth about the rapist:
NYTimes: a day late and a dollar short...
"But with Paula Jones and Monica Lewinsky, we know what happened: A president being sued for sexual harassment tried to buy off a mistress-turned-potential-witness with White House favors, and then committed perjury serious enough to merit disbarment. Which also brought forward a compelling allegation from Juanita Broaddrick that the president had raped her.
The longer I spent with these old stories, the more I came back to a question: If exploiting a willing intern is a serious enough abuse of power to warrant resignation, why is obstructing justice in a sexual harassment case not serious enough to warrant impeachment? Especially when the behavior is part of a longstanding pattern that also may extend to rape? Would any feminist today hesitate to take a similar opportunity to remove a predatory studio head or C.E.O.?
...the most important escalators were the Democrats. They had an opportunity, with Al Gore waiting in the wings, to show a predator the door and establish some moral common ground for a polarizing country.
And what they did instead — turning their party into an accessory to Clinton’s appetites, shamelessly abandoning feminist principle, smearing victims and blithely ignoring his most credible accuser, all because Republicans funded the investigations and they’re prudes and it’s all just Sexual McCarthyism — feels in the cold clarity of hindsight like a great act of partisan deformation." Opinion | What if Ken Starr Was Right?
And pinning the tail on the Democrat donkey:
"....turning their party into an accessory to Clinton’s appetites, shamelessly abandoning feminist principle, smearing victims and blithely ignoring his most credible accuser, ..."
So....as the saying goes.....Time Wounds All Heels
Last edited: