White House attacks Stormy Daniels' credibility after TV interview
- Thread starter AdolfHipster
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I agree 100%. Which is why I'm baffled he doesn't just own it. He can't possibly expect us to think the $130,000 NDA has nothing to do about his affair.
Something no one is really commenting on is if this NDA should count as a campaign contribution. Let's be fair, if Clinton (either Bill or Hilary) did the same thing (paid one of the women Bill sexually assaulted or consensually had sex with) 8 days before an election, I think most people on the right would say it should count as a campaign contribution because it was highly politically motivated (didn't want the information to be leaked right before the election).
His affair means absolutely nothing to me though. It has nothing to do with me. Him lying to the American people and possibly breaking campaign finance law... well, I can hold him accountable for that.
Last edited:
Well, Trump is the president of the United States, right? The White House spokesman is Raj Shah, right? Donald Trump appointed Raj Shaw, right? Raj Shaw has said Trump has repeatedly denied the Stormy Daniels claims, right?
If Donald Trump isn't really saying any of this, then he should probably fire/let go another appointed official (to the long list).
I think that she agreed that it only happened once, is that not right? And after the birth of his son, and everyone knows that there is a period of time when a pregnant woman does not have sex, so that could account for his indiscretion. I am not defending the act, simply putting it into perspective. We did not choose him to be our pastor, we chose him to lead our country, and by all honest accounts he is doing a good job of that, even though every blood hound in the country is on his tail, hoping to be able to take him down. But I honestly think that God had a hand in electing him, by moving on all the Evangelicals to vote for him, and if so, I do not believe that all the demons in Hell will be able to move him.
why does it matter? of course it's a sin if he did it but what difference does it ultimately make to the country? he's still president for 3 more years.....this is just a dull lack of news and they found something to sensationalize (the msm...)...what trump does with his body is his own business...maybe stormi is a russian 
where's cloudy and sunshine as well? can't forget foggy and tornado...lol
where's cloudy and sunshine as well? can't forget foggy and tornado...lolWell exactly, that's what other people say, that's not what President Trump said. Whether he should fire the Raj guy or not will be seen. I personally think he should fire him, but maybe President Trump will take into account his naiveté and will be clement about it, we'll see.
Also to comment on the campaign contribution thing. It's not a campaign contribution for your lawyer to pay someone else (and note President Trump did not even sign said NDA, but this is something his lawyer did on his own volition). A campaign contribution would be when someone contributes to the candidate, for example the large amount of money given to Hillary by many foreign governments in exchange for political favor.
Lol you know seeing how Hillary is I can kinda understand why Bill lied. Lol the former secret service agent accounts of her attacking him after that episode are an interesting read!
J
joefizz
Guest
Thank you I call this stuff as I see it.(not ragging on our president Donald trump's efficiency but honestly both he and the woman in question both have had careers that require "lieing" in some way so best to not take the words as "truthful" so quickly)
Absolutely not... Bill's whoredoms are irrelevant to me, but if you address the American people (as he did), don't lie to them. That's my point. The fact Bill did it while in office doesn't change any of this for me personally, it's that he straight up lied about it. That's why I'm saying Trump should just own it... I doubt a significant portion of his supporters will change their mind about him.
I just think it's a bit of a double-standard to only care when one party does it and then state "Well, Bill was in office when he did it!" as if that is suppose to be the game changer that exonerates Trump from lying to the American people and possible breaking campaign finance laws (something no one is even commenting on).
It's sort of why I don't identify with the Republicans. I hate partisan politics as both sides stick to double-standards and pretend that one minor detail that is different changes everything.
Last edited:
why does it matter? of course it's a sin if he did it but what difference does it ultimately make to the country? he's still president for 3 more years.....this is just a dull lack of news and they found something to sensationalize (the msm...)...what trump does with his body is his own business...maybe stormi is a russian
Is that you Hilary Clinton?
It makes a world of difference if the $130,000 NDA was made for political reasons (so she wouldn't talk about the affair 8 days before the election)... that's called breaking campaign finance law. Sort of a big deal, no?
I sort of thought that was the hole point of a president appointing people to his white house communications team, no? If they don't represent and relay what the president says, what is their job description exactly?
I'm not going to pretend I'm an expert on campaign finance law, but everything I've read (I don't trust CNN to give me credible information on their reports) said there is some basis to tie Trump's lawyer paying for the NDA to a campaign contribution as it was to benefit the Trump campaign. I don't think anyone can objectively state it wasn't for Trump or his campaign when it was 8 days before the election. There are already enough loop-holes in campaign finance rules, so maybe this is one of them. It's definitely something to look into and not something petty from my point-of-view. I'm not going to go soft on a politician simply because I liked him more than the opposition...
I think that Stormy has already spent her $130K and now wants more. The MSM is willing to pay her a bundle for her side of the story.
All I can say is that if you add all the Trump Lawyers fees to her $130K, Stormy was one expensive one night stand.
All I can say is that if you add all the Trump Lawyers fees to her $130K, Stormy was one expensive one night stand.
Well that doesn't mean they necessarily do a good job. You'll often find the spokesmen, press secretary, and other such jobs in US government are usually the ones that get the axe the most. They don't represent the President, they merely try to communicate to the public what the White House is doing at the moment. Hence why I would say this aide here is really in a position where either he is talking on his own and should be fired, or he is naïve and has been played a fool by the press and maybe should be given clemency.
No this does not violate campaign finance law, lol that's just the silly liberal traitors fishing around and trying to twist it into something it's not because they are losing so badly in their other rigged witch hunts in reality. See this is the nature of the liberals, they make stuff up all the time, they deal in lies and not in the truth. Anyone can say objectively that it wasn't for Trump or his campaign since President Trump didn't sign it. It's basically all on the lawyer since the lawyer drew it up and signed it on his own volition.
I was pointing out the hypocrisy of the left, trying to crucify Trump for (gasp) having an extramarital affair.... 10 years before he became a politician, much less the POTUS..... when slick Willie was doing it in the White House, and lying publicly about it.... multiple times, until caught red-handed. John Kennedy was known for having young ladies (plural) smuggled into the White House, having skinny dipping parties with them (from what I've read). LBJ had at least one affair while POTUS. I mean, good grief... it's practically a tradition for liberals.
I have no idea whether campaign laws were broken. Can you enlighten me as to what the law states, in regard to paying someone to not disclose something potentially damaging? Sounds like a sound business deal to me, on the surface. If there is, truly, a law against doing that, then I would say Trump was wrong. IF.
It's not exactly "blindly". Most of his supporters I know that voted for him even think he did it. I'm taking Trump's (lack of) credibility into account, in addition to his bragging of committing adultery, the timing this takes place, other women saying the same thing. It's true, none of this PROVES Trump and Stormy had an affair, but it's enough to make me think he isn't being truthful. Let's say it turns out they really DIDN'T have an affair, it still wasn't blindly believing Stormy, as I don't think she's trustworthy either.
If Trump and Stormy didn't have an affair, what was the NDA all about 8 days before the election? Sad to say, the affair to me is really an afterthought. I'm not concerned much about the actual event but the lying and potential campaign finance laws broken.
Last edited:
Willful blindness is what I see.
Isaiah 5:20 King James Version (KJV)
Isaiah 5:20 King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]20 [/SUP]Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!