Democrat Sexual Misconduct

We are doing tremendous amounts of damage to Russia without losing a single troop — that’s impressive no matter who is president.

As for Ron: he has replaced educational boards not because of fault but because he wanted hyper partisans to push an agenda, he has targeted citizens for voting because they were misinformed by officials, went after venues even though his own agents said nothing was wrong, his picks were thinking about implementing period checks for young athletes, not to mention the unconstitutional laws he has pushed nor the vague laws to target others.

For a nationalist you sure seem to be ok with government going after your fellow citizens for wrong think. You do you though

 

What is it about? The OP is about a list of Politicians who have committed sexual "mistakes, it says nothing else. Is there something in the discussion of politics and sex that excludes discussing the former President that I am not aware of?

 

The Bad Orange Man was referred to in the third post...lol

 

I bet you thought you actually did something too but what you forgot to do is adjust for per capita math.

Try doing that and crunch the numbers again

 

When did I say I was for 'government going after my fellow citizens for wrong think'? Releasing inaccurate or sensationalist material without fact checking said information, has led to the fracturing of our society here in America and it's an abuse of the first amendment, which some have interpreted to mean: As long as we're part of the golden goose called the media, we can release whatever sensationalism we want, and not be punished for it.

The Yellow Journalism of centuries past just needed an accepting audience. And that accepting audience is today's media news networks. You could literally have the Hearst newsletters in today's society. This is actually a perfect example, I've made my position well known and yet you make sensationalist claims that are inaccurate.

 

You didn’t mention per capita — the numbers we were discussing were based on general population numbers (male vs female).

If you want to edit the conversation to get to the point you are failing to make them do it but don’t try and move the goal posts due to that failure as it just makes it look even more pathetic.

 

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4924264/user-clip-joe-bidens-sexual-assault-rep-steve-daines-niece



This is sexual assault. ^

 

Using campaign funds for bribes is illegal up and down, left, right and sideways; across the political spectrum.

 

Paying hush money isn't a bribe.

 

WTF is it?

 

I think the bigger question is, how many of those listed people were indicted?

 

You don't want to connect the dots here because it's inconvenient for your position.

 

It's legal as long as the money go to legitimate campaign expenses.

BTW, you are making a circular argument here.

 

From the OP list, I counted 4. That's four with the word "convicted" in the sentance. Another 4 or 5 who the OP said were arrested. The rest were affairs in one form or another.

But the affair is not the true issue here, whether it was Sen. Edwards, which he left off the list somehow, or Trump.

 

the hush money is just one aspect. What got Trump in trouble was creating false documents to try to claim legal expenses. That's the problem, and why he was indicted for "business fraud."

 

The implication was with the OP with a list mixed with a whole bunch of people who had affairs and some who had convictions of more serious crimes. I did day an affair may be immoral, but not illegal. The OP seems to imply that all were illegal, and thus trying to create a false narrative that what Trump did was nothing wrong or illegal. He makes that point very clear: The OP says, "Unlike other lists created by Democrats showing Republicans, we have a very strict requirement that the individuals in question have either confessed or been convicted."

 

Impressive list, but I didn't see JFK or LBJ both womanizers that would make Clinton look like a real piker, though theirs were less public.

 

and it's almost always Christian heterosexual men, regardless of party, what up with this group

so do we really want to blame entire groups for the actions of a few?

 

That's just a misdemeanor, even if it can be proven.

Now it's business fraud? What happened to campaign finance violations?

 

You just called it business fraud. It can't be business fraud if it's a campaign finance violation. What's it going to be?...lol

 

It's payment for someone to ****. Unless the money is intended to persuade someone to do something illegal, it doesn't qualify as a bribe.

 

Where that runs off the rails is when you use campaign fund to do it.

 

So, that means this isn't business fraud?

 

Because there are and have been more Christian white men in Congress.

 

The best part of this thread, is seeing the grey-zone analytics spike that the Democrats reading this have spot-checked the list to see if several of these are true. That makes me feel like this exercise has been successful.