Another double-negative?

We already know that Trump started an affair with former Playboy model Karen McDougal back in 2006 shortly after Melanoma gave birth (what an upstanding guy and model husband our Donald is) and now - predictably - he's lying through his teeth again after his former lawyer called his bluff and released a recording of their damage-control discussions.

In the recording Trump says "pay cash" but his new lawyer (long-time Trump apologist and asslicker Rudy Guliani) is now claiming Trump said the opposite: "don't pay cash". Sounds like another one of those "double-negative" things that the rest of us are all too stupid to understand.

When is this vain, bloated and repulsive human being going to man up and take some responsibility for his actions? 

KKK you ignorant pratt, America didn't vote in a saint they voted in a street brawler who would fight for them. That is why President Trump is at his highest approval rating ever.

You double standards are appalling, what a stinking hypocrite you are. 

Also bear in mind that politician pay these accusers to remain silent even if they are innocent due. Trump lawyer Guiliani however says no payment was made.

Then think of how this information was obtained - a total disgrace.

Ou rooitwit is so bent he has no clue whatsoever! 

Vlag, you are either going to be labeled a right wing nutter, a conspiracy theorist or,.....wait for it...a Russian bot, for asking these questions.

Windpomp the Clintons are the most corrupt politicians along with Obummer ever experienced in America . Their actions were treasonous and they must be held to account.

Ou rootwit as usual is making a complete JACKASS of himself. 

Hey rooitwit that Jackass would make a nice avatar for you!

Well just thought i would give you some idea of how a jackass like ou rooitwit thinks. Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha Lots more where this came from!

Uhmmmm, so no bases for saying that Trump is mysogynistic, rude, vain, lying, incompetant, egotistical, etc. Just plain accusations, and he has done nothing for America.

He has always only had a few things on his mind as far as the USA is concerned. Look at the facts like the economy, unemployment, the shapeup of NATO, etc.

Of course his distractors would say that the NATO thing was BS and then would expect the USA to keep on funding the protection of Europe while they are doing bugger all themselves.

His distractors were up in arms over his aproach to the Paris agreement. An agreement where the USA, once again, was the main contributor into a pit of funds with no end purpose. No punative actions against those who violate the agreement or fail to pay their contributions. In addition, the worst  offenders in the agreement were the ones excempted from the terms of the agreement as well as the funding of the agreement, i.e. (among others) India and China.

His distractors were up in arms over his withdrawal from the Iran Deal. He was against the terms of the deal and wanted it renegotiated. Billions of US Dollars in hard cash were litterally flown into Iran under the deal. Iran were allowed to continue their nuclear armement under cover. They were allowed to continue to fund ISIS, etc.

Why should we not explore previous administrations in evaluating Trump?

Once again, I have not called anybody any names becaue of their dislike for Trump. I have just taken note of the opinions of others and gave my opinion based on my own observations. If that makes me a Trumpanzee, then so be it.it.

Then again.... if what Trump is doing exonerates any of his predecessors of any wrong doing then there is something seriously wrong somewhere.

This is the irony. In an interview a few days ago Rep Matt Gaetz (R) was interviewed and asked about something Rep Adam Schiff (D) said about (IIRC) the declassifying of FISA warants. Schiff, himself, proposed legislation to declassify information regarding the handling of FISA warants. He (Gaetz) supported it. The legislation wasn't passed by Congress. When the latest saga started unfolding around the current debate into the FISA warrants in the Trump/Russia saga Gaetz, once again, saught to introduce the same legislation that Schiff proposed some time ago. This time, though, Schiff refused to support the exact same legislation that he himself put forward back then. This just to illustrate that somehow, what is good for the goose is not always good for the gander as well.

Peace.

I am not going to go into the debate over his personality and/or behaviour but I will leave you with this, and it is my opinion based, once again on my own observations and misstrust in the media. The media, IMO, has totally lost the plot. They have forgotten that they have an important role, i.e. to convey the facts and not opinions and to provide oversight over govt and to do it objectively. Instead they have become invloved in political manipulation. This is the contents of emails sent to and from the Hillary campaign manager, John Podesta:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/59194

Hope you're both well. Amy Chozick and I are doing a story about how the > Clinton campaign and its supporters view Trump as a general election > opponent and plan to run against him. The story will run in tomorrow's > paper. > > One part of the story deals with how Secretary Clinton, President Clinton, > President Obama, and other Dems regard Trump as a potential general > election opponent. > > I wanted to run some points by you about President Clinton, based on our > reporting with allies and campaign advisers and other Dems who have spoken > to him. > > We're told that President Clinton (like Mrs. Clinton and some other Dems) > thinks that Trump would be a formidable opponent in the general election, > and that Dems are in a form of denial if they dismiss Trump as a joke who > would be easily defeated in November. President Clinton, like others, > thinks that Trump has his finger on the pulse of the electorate's mood and > that only a well-financed, concerted campaign portrayed him as dangerous > and bigoted will win what both Clintons believe will be a close November > election. > > We're told that President Clinton (like Mrs. Clinton and many other Dems) > thinks the single greatest weapon against Trump is Trump's own instinct to > make outrageous, divisive, even hateful comments that can come across as > unpresidential. He, Mrs. Clinton, and the campaign all agree that they will > need to seize on opportunities to paint Trump as extremist and recklessly > impulsive. > > > > We're told that President Clinton, like Secretary Clinton and some others, > think Trump could pose a real threat in battleground states that President > Obama carried in 2008 and 2012 -- like Virginia and Ohio -- and he will be > competitive in Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. > > We're also told that the campaign intends to unleash President Clinton on > social media and the campaign trail when Trump lashes out/tries to sway the > news cycle.

Sorry but am I the only one that thinks that's just not a good look for a president? 

No you are not, it's disgusting how little respect he has for the opposite sex. 

Article