Remember when Paula Jones showed off her $850k check from Bill Clinton at a national press conference?

[JoeB131]

The mitigating factor is Trump didn't hurt the taxpayer with his payment to Daniels. Clinton sexually harassed Jones. Trump did not do so with Daniels. Clinton's offense was far worse than Trump's. And yet he skated. Again, two systems of justice in this country.

Well, first, what Clinton did wasn't classified as "Sexual Harassment". Jones wasn't his employee, he didn't take any retaliatory action against her, and the judge rightfully dismissed the lawsuit. The Taxpayer wasn't harmed, other than the $70,000,000.00 pervert Ken Starr pissed away on fruitless investigations.

(Jones' story also has problems, like the "distinguishing characteristic" that isn't born out by Clinton's physicals).

Daniels, on the other hand, was promised a role on a Trump TV show, then found herself trapped in a room with a naked Trump, his tiny mushroom, and an armed guard outside he door. That sounds.... pretty coercive to me.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Okay, you are leaving a few points out.

Clinton went to court, and was found not to be liable for sexual harassment because under Federal Law, Jones was not a direct report and she suffered no consequences.

She was paid, essentially, to not drag the case she lost out through appeals AFTER she dropped her demands for an apology for seeing Clinton's Weiner, which must be a thing of Lovecraftian Horror the way she was carrying on.

Blah, blah, blah--lame excuses that ignore the central fact that Clinton paid her off to settle the case. She "suffered no consequences" from having an authority figure bring her up to his hotel room and expose himself to her and ask for a sexual favor? Really? How do you know? My, my, your far-left crocodile weeping for women harassed by sexual predators disappears when a Democrat is the perp.

And, once again, we see that when you like a verdict, you cite it as absolute and convincing truth, but when you don't like a verdict, you find all sorts of reasons to attack the jurors and to dismiss the verdict as invalid.

What else would we expect from a guy who has repeatedly claimed that Mao Tse Tung, one of the worst mass murderers in human history, deserves admiration, and that Joe Stalin could not have murdered tens of millions of people because Soviet census records don't show a corresponding drop in population.

 

[JoeB131]

Whiny Mormon Cultist says what?

Blah, blah, blah--lame excuses that ignore the central fact that Clinton paid her off to settle the case. She "suffered no consequences" from having an authority figure bring her up to his hotel room and expose himself to her and ask for a sexual favor? Really? How do you know? My, my, your far-left crocodile weeping for women harassed by sexual predators disappears when a Democrat is the perp.

How do I know? Because it was established in court. She wasn't demoted. She wasn't denied job opportunities. She wasn't fired. They did mover her desk, because she spent all day talking to other employees instead of doing her work. The supervisor who moved her had no idea she ever met Clinton.

Clinton settled because she was willing to drop her asking cost to 1/3rd, and stopped demanding an apology, and Clinton's insurance company was happy to pay it rather than pay for three more years of litigation that would go nowhere.

Jones Lost. Deal with it. The next year, she was doing nude pictures in Penthouse (proving that most people look better with their clothes on) and boxing with Tonya Harding.

I kind of feel bad for her, because she was ill-used by the men in her life.

And, once again, we see that when you like a verdict, you cite it as absolute and convincing truth, but when you don't like a verdict, you find all sorts of reasons to attack the jurors and to dismiss the verdict as invalid.

Except I was fine with the verdict in the Jones case. The verdict was that she had not been harrassed because Clinton was not her supervisor, nor did she suffer negative consequences to her actions. I'm good with that verdict.

I'm also good with Trump's verdict. He did have co-service sex with Daniels; he did falsify business documents to hide the money he paid her. I'm happy as a clam.

Not to say that there are cases where the courts didn't fuck things up, because they do.

What else would we expect from a guy who has repeatedly claimed that Mao Tse Tung, one of the worst mass murderers in human history, deserves admiration, and that Joe Stalin could not have murdered tens of millions of people because Soviet census records don't show a corresponding drop in population.

The John Birch Society called; they want their lame propaganda back.

Mao is admired by a billion Chinese, most of whom weren't alive when he was. Deal with it.

Here's my standard of whether a leader was effective. Not that he was a nice person. Jimmy Carter is one of the nicest people on the planet, but even I admit he was an ineffective president.

Mao was a ruthless bastard. He had to be. He had to deal with Japanese invaders, a fascist dictator backed by foreign governments, and a lot of local warlords with their own private armies. And at the end of the day, he took this broken, shattered country and converted it into a military and economic powerhouse. He reasserted central authority China had not enjoyed since the height of the Qing dynasty. It's why he's admired and Deng Xiaoping (who I think also deserves a lot of credit for advancing China despite Tiananmen Square) is not really admired as much.

 

[Leviticus]

He paid his lawyer, so it was legal expenses. The statute of limitations had expired even if it was considered a campaign contribution which the FEC determined it was NOT!

Except the payments were NOT for legal work. Cohen had done no legal work for the Trump Organization. The payments were disguised as payments were legal work to cover up that they were actually repayments for Cohen using his own money to pay off Daniel's and others, which is illegal.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Except the payments were NOT for legal work. Cohen had done no legal work for the Trump Organization. The payments were disguised as payments were legal work to cover up that they were actually repayments for Cohen using his own money to pay off Daniel's and others, which is illegal.

How can you be so full of shit and function is daily life?

How much did Cohen pay Stormy? $130,000 wasn't it? Why did Trump pay Cohen over $400,000 for legal work in retainer payments? You didn't pay attention to that tidbit just like the jurors!

Cohen's payments were for an NDA which is perfectly legal. I guess you missed that fact also!

 

[john doe 101]

Weird, huh.

That payoff was not so bad, huh?

Why is that?

What's it like being as dumb as you are?

 

[berg80]

It was a liberal. Everything was fine. Just like joe with classified docs in his garage......"he's just old and incompetent and didn't mean any harm......

Google, "How Bill Clinton's settlement with Paula Jones differs from Donald Trump's Stormy Daniels payment...... nitwit.

 

[berg80]

How can you be so full of shit and function is daily life?

How much did Cohen pay Stormy? $130,000 wasn't it? Why did Trump pay Cohen over $400,000 for legal work in retainer payments? You didn't pay attention to that tidbit just like the jurors!

Cohen's payments were for an NDA which is perfectly legal. I guess you missed that fact also!

Based on that post you are too stupid to dress yourself.

 

[ColonelAngus]

What's it like being as dumb as you are?

Probably the same as a micro penis communist.

Tiny little dick.

You jerk or pay.

 

[berg80]

Clinton paid Jones directly to settle a lawsuit AFTER an election. Trump paid Daniels before an election in order to influence it.

 

[skye]

Exactly!

 

[berg80]

Exactly!



View attachment 956429

If you try hard I bet you can make up dozens of false equivalences that are just as stupid as that one.

 

[skye]

ahhhh.....those were the days!

 

[JoeB131]

Exactly!



View attachment 956429

Because he did this above board, didn't falsify documents, and only settled with her AFTER her case had been dismissed for having no cause.

 

[Billiejeens]

Okay, you are leaving a few points out.

Clinton went to court, and was found not to be liable for sexual harassment because under Federal Law, Jones was not a direct report and she suffered no consequences.

She was paid, essentially, to not drag the case she lost out through appeals AFTER she dropped her demands for an apology for seeing Clinton's Weiner, which must be a thing of Lovecraftian Horror the way she was carrying on.

Your memory is faulty

 

[Billiejeens]

I wouldn't want to go through what Clinton went through at the time.

Who cares ?

 

[Billiejeens]

All Clinton had to do to avoid the entire mess was to NOT sexually harass women who worked under him.

It was Bill Clinton.

 

[whitehall]

Paula Jones and Juanita Crawford were just throwaway clients of the Clintons

 

[JoeB131]

Paula Jones and Juanita Crawford were just throwaway clients of the Clintons

I think you are thinking of Juanita Brodderick, not Juanita Crawford.

The problem with Brodderick is she swore out two affidavits saying she never had sex with Clinton.

She couldn't remember the date, the hotel room, or other key details.

On top of that, after the incident, she kept attending Clinton events (Including one where Hillary "menaced" her by saying "thank you".) and accepted an appointment by Clinton to a state board.

This isn't what rape victims to.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Okay, you are leaving a few points out.

Clinton went to court, and was found not to be liable for sexual harassment because under Federal Law, Jones was not a direct report and she suffered no consequences.

She was paid, essentially, to not drag the case she lost out through appeals AFTER she dropped her demands for an apology for seeing Clinton's Weiner, which must be a thing of Lovecraftian Horror the way she was carrying on.

Sounds like hush money. Don’t you agree?