world

Trump lawyer Giuliani does not rule out payments were made to other women

84 Comments
By Timothy Gardner

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2018.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

84 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

U.S. President Donald Trump's attorney Rudy Giuliani said on Sunday he would not rule out the possibility that payments were made to women other than porn star Stormy Daniels to get them to stay silent about allegations against Trump.

And those women who accused him of sexual harassment are all lying.

What a loser.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

Burn Republican party, burn.

The party of the "moral compass" .

Meh...

7 ( +8 / -1 )

What an absolute embarrassment and sham, but there is no shame in that party.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

How is this related to carrying out the duties he was voted to perform? Hilarity ensues every single time the morality card's played by the very same individuals with mounds of skeletons in their closets. What a joke us politics is.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

I think the whole world knows that he did have an affair with more than one woman. The question is if it will affect his reelection.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

I love the hypocrisy of those attacking Trump. The Democrat party essentially promotes extra-marital affaires by attacking and undermining marriage and undermining parental rights. They have defended their own politicians peccadilloes for decades because the ends were always more important than ideological purity. So essentially they won and the culture changed to endorse their loosening moral world view. Trump gets elected and all of the sudden puritanism is coursing through the Left. Yesterday it was just about sex, now it’s a criminal act. Too funny.

It’s not illegal to make a consensual legal agreement over consensual sex. What person wants their extramarital affaires public? Bill Clinton didn’t. And he lied to cover it up. Hillary participated in the lie. Everyone knew that when she went after Trump for the exact same thing - and her attacks went no where. Everyone understood that she was a hypocrite then and Dems are hypocrites now. It some stupid law makes this out as a campaign finance violation then Trump should pay the fine and be done with it. This is minor, nit picky stuff.

With such cynicism and in your face politicization of social mores they are shocked - shocked! that their political opposition has recognized their game and decided to join the fray. The Banana Republic comes closer to fruition every day. So entertaining.

-12 ( +1 / -13 )

How is this related to carrying out the duties he was voted to perform?

It says the US president is a sleazebag. His dalliances with porn stars and prostitutes, however, don’t concern me as much as his constant lying to cover his tracks. He’s shown his word is no good, that nothing he says can be believed. 

How can anyone in the US or abroad ever believe anything he says? That mistrust affects the way he performs.

But what concerns me more than his dalliances with porn stars and prostitutes, his lying and his flip-flops is where he’s been getting his money and who he’s beholden to. In the US and abroad.

Go Mueller!

5 ( +7 / -2 )

I don’t know how you go from an allegedly respectable prosecutor to a very public buffoon, but Giuliani has perfected the transition.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

Trump is a complete and utter loser.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

It's weird, it's like the right is discovering for the first time the reason that presidents have always had to have mostly squeaky clean pasts, as if skeletons in president's/politicians' closets haven't disrupted administrations to the point of becoming ineffective in the past.

This isn't new information folks. It's why most politicians resign when their personal problems/issues/indiscretions are found out. Trump hasn't done so, and now we see the end result.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The Trump memos as recorded by James Comey:

So what can you tell me about this Golden Shower thing? You know, James, this whole Russian hookers' thing is nonsense. Oh, by the way, Putin told me that Russian hookers were the most beautiful in the world.

In regard to extramarital affairs and sexual encounters, former president Clinton looks like a saint compared to Trump.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

The Democrat party essentially promotes extra-marital affaires by attacking and undermining marriage and undermining parental rights.

7:53am, and we've already got a candidate for silliest comment of the day. Will we see a challenger in the coming hours? Stay tuned to see.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

What person wants their extramarital affaires public? Bill Clinton didn’t. And he lied to cover it up.

Look how that turned out. It brought the end of his presidency to a halt in the muck.

And you speak of hypocrisy, without acknowledging that the Republicans freaked out over Clinton, yet give Trump a pass.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

enjoy your manufactured outrage of things your side already did. Not a crime and not done in office. It’s simply not working out for you guys, in fact your desperation is turning voters off by now.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

It’s so bad that Reuters is disputing the accuracy of their own polling and apologizing to liberals for Trump approval being so high.

Yet they never mentioned any possible inaccuracies when it was the lowest poll of all, that was just the “truth”.

plus Rosie o Donnel killed your campaign finance violation angle. So all you got left is Mueller struggling with both court cases and Stormy.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

It's not a crime to have affairs, one night stands etc.

But to lie about it, to use hush money, to intimidate those involved?

"Making it go away". Hmmm.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

It’s so bad that Reuters is disputing the accuracy of their own polling and apologizing to liberals for Trump approval being so high.

Once again, I seriously doubt this is accurate, and is instead some twisted version of what happened being used as a talking point by you, as we see so often.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/reuters-ipsos-data-core-political-2018-05-04

but I’m sure you will diagram a sentence to make this mean something else. Let me diagram Rudy for you. He said “if necessary”, that doesn’t mean anything happened.

The point is that why do they feel it necessary to make a statement now that it’s high and cast doubt on their own poll? They didn’t doubt it when it said 35%. But don’t worry they will make it go back down to 40 by next week, claiming it’s the impact of Stormy “revelations”

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Giuliani had a decent reputation as a lawyer before he got involved with Trump. Now he is an embarrassment!!

Sometimes its difficult to figure out which side he is on , he seems to be hurting Trump more than helping him.

Just goes to show that anyone who comes close to this sh** swamp gets sucked in.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Not a crime and not done in office. 

Just makes him an utter P.O.S,

Cheer hard.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

He said “if necessary”, that doesn’t mean anything happened.

If nothing happened, why the payments?

What's to stop me from coming forward and alleging an affair with your President? Why pay someone when nothing happened?

Trump is finished.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

So when is Rosie getting raided for illegal campaign finance contributions. 5 variations of name and 4 different addresses used but no “intent” to deceive? She admitted it and doesn’t care.

Instead let’s keep speculating about that “if necessary” is an admission of something or not? All Rudy did there was eliminate any other Stormy from being news, cause liberal media already has the next one waiting for Stormy to be put away.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Rich and famous people get falsely accused all the time. That’s why they have lawyers and use NDAs to handle these types of things.

Nothing to stop you from making a false allegation against Trump or anyone else. Just realize you will be at the back of the line behind all the others trying to “get Rich” off someone.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

You might want to reread what you seem to have forgotten:

https://edition.cnn.com/2017/11/16/politics/settlements-congress-sexual-harassment/index.html

Congress paid out $17 million in settlements. 

so all these people were guilty? They paid, right? Ok let’s release all the names and everyone on the list is fired. Deal?

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

So when is Rosie getting raided for illegal campaign finance contributions. 5 variations of name and 4 different addresses used but no “intent” to deceive? She admitted it and doesn’t care.

Because Rosie can be dealt with in good time. If any wrongdoing does come to light, I'm sure it will be addressed.

Also, she's not the PotUS.

Who lies to you on a daily basis.

Back to the main issue - if nothing happened, why the payments?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Why did congress pay 17 million yet we don’t know who these people are or their stories?

NDAs cover the payments everyone else makes so no one breaks them. But liberals found a porn star willing to break hers, knowing that liberals donors will pay any legal bills she may incur for breaking it.

It’s worth 50 million to embarrass the president for these donors and they found their perfect money hungry porn star at her expiration date.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Here we go again. Exactly as I suspected.

The claim:

It’s so bad that Reuters is disputing the accuracy of their own polling

What Reuters actually said:

This week’s Reuters/Ipsos Core Political release presents something of an outlier of our trend. Every series of polls has the occasional outlier and in our opinion this is one. So, while we are reporting the findings in the interest of transparency, we will not be announcing the start of a new trend until we have more data to validate this pattern.

They haven't disputed the accuracy of their polling, as they point out, every series of polls have outliers. What they are not doing is declaring this one poll the start of a trend. If and when they get more data to validate the pattern, they will declare it a trend. They have neither disputed the accuracy of their own polling, nor even disputed that it's a trend, they have reserved judgement on whether or not it's a trend until they have enough data to do so.

They didn’t doubt it when it said 35%.

Because this value wasn't an outlier. It was consistent with what they had previously seen.

But don’t worry they will make it go back down to 40 by next week

This may be true, but unless you have something to show that they are doing this, your comment is baseless (as in having no base in something that can actually be shown to have happened) speculation.

apologizing to liberals for Trump approval being so high.

There is literally not a single word of apology in that entire article. And I use the word 'literally' as it actually means - not as an exaggeration. There are zero words in that article that are making apology.

I’m sure you will diagram a sentence to make this mean something else.

It's ironic that you twist what was actually said into something other than what was said, which is proven above by comparing your comments with actual text from your link, and then try to claim that as me twisting it into meaning something else.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

So when is Rosie getting raided for illegal campaign finance contributions.

You'd have to ask the investigative and prosecuting authorities who should be investigating her. If they have not started, and there is reason for her to be investigated, then it should be happening, or there should be an explanation as to why it's not. That's common sense. If there is evidence someone has done something wrong, they should be investigated, wouldn't you agree?

That all said, it doesn't seem to have anything to do with this article here.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Sure it does, the reason this is “news” supposedly is that Trump was going to be impeached and Cohen was going to jail for illegal campaign finance violations. Yet someone else was found to have done that and it’s not “news” at all in the liberal media.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

The Reuters statement itself is an apology. Like “hey, sorry we know this probably isn’t right and we hope Trump doesn’t tweet about this, and we are sure it will go back down to “normal” next time.” Have you ever seen such a statement before? That means they are questioning their own poll.

Same thing you guys are doing with Rudy’s statements. Adjusting it to what you want it to say by adding some “hidden meaning” that is outside the actual words said. So I have chosen to do the same.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

Sure it does, the reason this is “news” supposedly is that Trump was going to be impeached and Cohen was going to jail for illegal campaign finance violations.

The leader of a nation may be impeached and his lawyer going to jail. Sounds like extremely major news, in any country in the world

Yet someone else was found to have done that

Wait, who's been found to have done what? I hadn't heard about any trials. Ok, that was sarcasm. But let's look at Rosie. She's an actress/comedian. Not the leader of anything. In a profession that has had so many scandals over the years that it's pretty commonplace. Something to be reported on, sure (if true that is). But she's not nearly in the same class as Trump and his lawyer in terms of newsworthiness.

it’s not “news” at all in the liberal media.

There is very little 'liberal media'. The overwhelming majority of media is 'capitalist media' - they report on the things that bring the most revenue, which means reporting on issues that draw readership/viewers. There is no political motivation behind that, it's financial motivation.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

plus Rosie o Donnel killed your campaign finance violation angle.

We'll always have the constant dishonesty to the American people angle with Trump.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

And the American people can decide that at the ballot box in 2020, not in the media.

Nobody is getting “impeached” are you guys back to that? How’s that 25th amendment thing going?

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Regarding impeachment, I'll wait patiently for the Mueller investigation to end.

It's the Trump camp that can't seem to stop yelling "But it's not collusion so you can't impeach!" these past couple of days. No mention from them about the President of the United States being caught in another blatant lie.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Regarding impeachment, I'll wait patiently for the Mueller investigation to end.

It's the prudent thing to do. No one knows what is happening in the investigation. Trump may be clean as a whistle for all we know.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

 But liberals found a porn star willing to break hers, knowing that liberals donors will pay any legal bills she may incur for breaking it.

So you find nothing wrong with Trump sleeping around with a Porn start, just that fact that got found out!!!

It’s worth 50 million to embarrass the president for these donors and they found their perfect money hungry porn star at her expiration date.

We've moved beyond embarrassment now, there are campaign rules violations and even a possible crime. Lets leave out the lying part, because even you have to accept the POTUS lies , repeatedly.

@Strangerland Well done dissecting the Reuters story, but as you probably realize, facts are just impediments for the liars' agenda.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

No mention of Mueller having issues in all his court cases either. Plenty of mention about every single supposed “lie” on the Trump side.

no concern that Mueller can’t seem to prosecute anyone correctly? Manafort and the 16 Russians are like 80 percent of your indictments, what happens if those go south? Along with Comey getting caught lying again about Flynn not lying....not looking good.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

No mention of Mueller having issues in all his court cases either.

And once again I predict you're twisting the actual details into some right talking point again. So let's go through this pony show again.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Plenty of mention about every single supposed “lie” on the Trump side.

We know all about his MANY lies, so it makes sense to start being concerned about them.

no concern that Mueller can’t seem to prosecute anyone correctly?

No one really knows exactly how the investigation is going. But judging by their erratic behavior and statements, Trump and his legal team seem the most concerned. Panicked might be a better word for it.

Manafort and the 16 Russians are like 80 percent of your indictments, what happens if those go south?

If the unobstructed truth proves Trump is not guilty, we'd move on.

Along with Comey getting caught lying again about Flynn not lying

How about Guliani blurting out that Trump fired Comey because he wouldn't say publicly that Trump wasn't a part of the investigation? Remember that thing about unobstructed truth? Why do you guys seem to care so little about it?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

"The 'no' refers to when the payment occurred," she told CNN. "It was a fast-moving exchange. I asked the president what he meant and he said: 'I didn't know about it when the payment occurred.'"

I’ve got some top quality hammers for left-handed people for sale. Anyone interested? I’ll give you 2 for the price of 3.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@Toasted: It's not a crime to have affairs, one night stands etc.

But to lie about it, to use hush money, to intimidate those involved?

"Making it go away". Hmmm.

No, it is not a crime to lie about having an affaire. It it were, there would be millions of people in jail for it. What is a crime is lying under oath about it. Trump hasn’t done that - “yet”. But even if he did he couldn’t be removed from office over it. Bill Clinton did that already so the precedent has been set.

It is not illegal to give someone money that you had consensual sex with to keep things on the down low. Sugar Daddies been doing that since marriage was invented. Do you actually think that giving someone $130,000 is akin to intimidation? The guy is a hound dog but plenty of presidents have been guilty of that while in office (see JFK and Bill).

This is a ridiculous line of attack on Trump as it was already tried before on a previous president and failed.

@ Strangerland: This isn't new information folks. It's why most politicians resign when their personal problems/issues/indiscretions are found out. 

Oh I so love this. Every time a Lefty says “Stormy Daniels” all I have to say is “Bill Clinton”.

It's the prudent thing to do. No one knows what is happening in the investigation. Trump may be clean as a whistle for all we know.

Reality is finally starting to set in for some.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Good ol CHRISTIAN and FAMILY VALUES !!!

Morals, good ok evangelical bible thumping people! :-/

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Mueller suddenly doesn’t want to go to court for his 16 Russia indictments from February. Doesn’t seem to be ready to provide any evidence of his claims. Don’t you have that when you indict?

https://www.politico.eu/article/judge-rejects-muellers-request-for-delay-in-russian-troll-farm-case/

not going so well in manafort case either:

http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/04/judge-skeptical-mueller-manafort/

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Yep Stormy Daniels

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Oh I so love this. Every time a Lefty says “Stormy Daniels” all I have to say is “Bill Clinton”.

Team red is already doing that. It crippled the end of his presidency, yet you seem to be expecting that the same thing wouldn't cripple Trump's.

Reality is finally starting to set in for some.

Well, we can't forget he may be dirtier than a perverted white horse that just fell in a mud puddle. That's the point, no matter how much either team proclaims that the investigation is going nowhere, or that the president must be impeached, no one outside of the investigation actually has any idea of what will actually happen.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Mueller suddenly doesn’t want to go to court for his 16 Russia indictments from February.

Ok, so we finally have the article about which you are speaking.

The judge in the case wanted to arraign. Mueller's legal team's sought to delay based on the grounds that it’s unclear whether Concord Management formally accepted the court summons related to the case. And that they had unsuccesfully tried to deliver the summonses for Concord and IRA through the Russian government. The judge denied this challenge.

That is the content of the article. There is nothing in the article that says 'Mueller does not want to go to trial'. Simply that they put forth a legal challenge. You do understand that's how trials work, right?

Doesn’t seem to be ready to provide any evidence of his claims.

This is entirely speculation on your part, as there is nothing in the article that indicates this to be the case.

So once again you've twisted an article into some weird talking point, that a close look shows doesn't support your talking point.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Yes he put forth a legal challenge that he wants to delay the trial for at least 5 weeks. That equals “doesn’t want to go to trial”.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Yes he put forth a legal challenge that he wants to delay the trial for at least 5 weeks. That equals “doesn’t want to go to trial”.

It doesn't equal to any intent one way or the other. It's a statement of fact, not intention.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Team red is already doing that. It crippled the end of his presidency, yet you seem to be expecting that the same thing wouldn't cripple Trump's.

I seem to remember Clinton going out of office with fairly good job approval. If Trump can keep unemployment low and Dems talking about sex instead of their agenda he will be fine. The Dems have peaked too soon and their mid-term prospects don’t seem as rosy now as they did 2 months ago. Instead of a blue wave it’s likely to be a blue trickle. Still might take the US House but the Senate is looking out of reach (that’s where impeachment trials are held by the way).

Morals, good ok evangelical bible thumping people! :-/

Americans don’t care about morals anymore- the Dems won that battle when they defended Clinton from impeachment. People’s sex lives are their own business and if Hillary was willing to ‘stand by her man’ who are others to judge? Meanwhile evangelicals are pretty happy with Trumps public policy with respect to religious issues.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

I seem to remember Clinton going out of office with fairly good job approval.

Because he did a good job.

If Trump can keep unemployment low and Dems talking about sex instead of their agenda he will be fine.

Then you should have no problem with 'Dems' talking about his sexual issues.

The Dems have peaked too soon and their mid-term prospects don’t seem as rosy now as they did 2 months ago. Instead of a blue wave it’s likely to be a blue trickle. Still might take the US House but the Senate is looking out of reach (that’s where impeachment trials are held by the way).

Or maybe it's the complete opposite to this. None of us will actually know until the election.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

the Dems won that battle when they defended Clinton from impeachment.

Um, Clinton WAS impeached (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton). Not remembering your history so well it appears.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Giuliani is not so much falling on his sword in order to shaft Trump, as he is taking a running leap and flinging himself onto it. This is farcical.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Care to tell us how many NDAs you have, Trump?!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Yes please keep talking about all this nonsense until the midterms. Don’t bother to come up with any policies of your own, resist Trump all the way! Even when he is doing things that are good for the country, resist!

Then you can trot out Hillary again to explain why you lost again. She is getting good at “explaining” losses by now.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

not going so well in manafort case either:

The only people who should be happy about that are Manafort and Trump. Obviously Mueller wants to get at Manafort to get the truth about Trump. I'll ask again, but why are you rooting for the truth not coming out?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

And yes, Clinton did a great job as president and I voted for him both times. I didn’t care in the least that he was a “horn dog” and it made perfect sense for him to lie to save his family and wife from being hurt by his personal sex stuff.

But somehow when Trump says the same exact things Bill said about immigration, Dems hate it now. When he tries to protect his family, you won’t let it go. How about trying to treat Trump how you treated Bill?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Looks like Giuliani may have become a Democrat!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I am rooting for the truth to come out. But Mueller wants to drop charges to get a coerced statement about Trump where we will never find out if anyone else was guilty or not. He dropped TWENTY charges against Gates. Why?

Just like he did to Flynn. Coerce and threaten and bankrupt people to get them to say what you want or plea to something. Now we doubt that Flynn even lied in the first place. Coney testified to Congress Flynn didn’t lie, right? So how is all this getting to the “truth”?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

But Mueller wants to drop charges to get a coerced statement about Trump where we will never find out if anyone else was guilty or not. He dropped TWENTY charges against Gates. Why?

I think coercion is a strong word. Getting criminals to rat on other criminals is nothing new.

Coerce and threaten and bankrupt people to get them to say what you want or plea to something.

I doubt their words and testimonies would be enough evidence. They would still have to offer proof.

Nothing wrong with firing your FBI director for refusing to declare your innocence though, right?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Wolfpack:  It is not illegal to give someone money that you had consensual sex with to keep things on the down low.

Not illegal at all. Trump can do this dozens of times and not go to jail for it.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Yep, when your FBI Director won’t tell the public the truth that he told you in private, to fire him per your constitutional authority is the correct choice.

Are you guys still stuck on this after finding out like 5 reasons Comey should have been fired? Pick one and move on. trump never said it was the ONLY reason. There were multiple that’s why more reasons keep being said.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Adam schiff is already laying the groundwork for the “he was guilty but people just wouldn’t accept it” excuse for later when Trump is cleared.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/adam-schiff-impeachment-warning-democrats-2018-strategy/

Schiff declares, “During the course of our investigation in the House Intelligence Committee, we have found troubling evidence of both collusion and obstruction of justice.” (Notice he never says who colluded and who obstructed.)

says the guy who accepted illegal campaign donations.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

when your FBI Director won’t tell the public the truth that he told you in private, to fire him per your constitutional authority is the correct choice.

I suspect that the bolded part is once again a characterization of what actually was reported.

Are you guys still stuck on this after finding out like 5 reasons Comey should have been fired? Pick one and move on.

I haven't even heard one valid reason Comey should have been fired.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Has affairs, pays for sex, lies and then bribes.nice kind of a guy.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Yep, when your FBI Director won’t tell the public the truth that he told you in private, to fire him per your constitutional authority is the correct choice.

The content of any private conversations are Trump's words against Comey's. This is where Trump's constant lying really hurts him.

Are you guys still stuck on this after finding out like 5 reasons Comey should have been fired?

We're "still stuck on this" after less than a year (anniversary is coming up!) because none of the official reasons were good and and the other ones reek of obstruction on justice. That's kind of how this whole Mueller investigation started, remember?

Pick one and move on. trump never said it was the ONLY reason.

When is Trump going to move on from the Clinton emails? That's really old news involving someone who's not even in office, but bringing it up again would be a vaguely plausible reason (at least to his base) to attack the DOJ... Hmm.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I suspect that the bolded part is once again a characterization of what actually was reported.

Mis-characterization

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

except everyone knows Comey told Trump he wasnt under investigation, but every time he went in front of a camera he did his "maybe/possible/im not really sure" routine that we saw every day for 2 weeks straight recently. That and his lying about not testifying in Congress that Flynn didnt lie. The transcripts show that is exactly what he said. So did he lie in Congress or on TV? His story and McCabe story different too? which one is the liar? His "friend" who leaked the memo, he "forgot" to tell us that guy was an FBI employee at the time. on and on...

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Trump will move on from the Clinton emails once we get the "truth" which you guys have been demanding of our side. Oh, and once the DOJ IG is done with it, as this is the reason his report is delayed.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

everyone knows Comey told Trump he wasnt under investigation

Was Trump under investigation when Comey told him he wasn't? I don't ever remember hearing that anywhere. In fact, I would bet that whatever link you could provide in an attempt to support your assertion would not in fact support Trump having been under investigation if and when he asked Comey that.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Trump will move on from the Clinton emails once

Whose emails? I feel like I've heard that name. Weren't they somebody back in the past? They seem to be a nobody now.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I thought Giuliani was brought in to deal with Trump's Russia woes, not some penny-ante FEC issue. Instead, Trump is calling "Closer... closer...." as Giuliani plays blind man's bluff with the truth when Trump could end this in a second if he told truth to the camera.

Lordy, if this is how they handle Stormy, God help them when Mueller releases his report.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Not a nobody according to the IG. She’s yours and you own her and her 45 reasons she lost.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/05/04/doj-inspector-generals-testimony-postponed-amid-new-leads-in-clinton-case-review.html

wow, amid NEW leads.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

What an utter shambles this has become and it's not even 18 months into Trump's presidency yet. His advisors have been arrested, have quit or have been fired, Kushner and Ivanka are incommunicado and Melania has run back to New York. All that's left is a handful of crackpots, some generals and the sad figure of Giuliani, staggering around and bumping into the furniture.

How long until he's simply ushered out of the door and sent to Florida for the rest of his life? When are the adults going to step in and end this clown show?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

clown show?

clown show?

The clown lost the election. Maybe next time the Wall Street Dems will support somebody who can win. Until then, blame the left for being utterly stupid in thinking Hillary Clinton was the thier only and best choice. Sheesh! It's like a brick just fell on your head and you keep walking under the same building.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

She’s yours and you own her and her 45 reasons she lost.

She's yours, not ours. We haven't cared about her for a year and a half now. You can have her. Or throw her aside, whichever you like. She's a nobody.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

blame the left for being utterly stupid in thinking Hillary Clinton was the thier only and best choice.

The left liked Bernie, not Clinton.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Bernie was offering free crap to everyone. It only sounded good to the idealistic youngsters and socialists. Even the Wall Street Dems did their best to destroy his message.

i had it out with my family when Ken Starr was doing his best to ruin the country. What's so different now? Sheesh!

Watch out!!

another brick is falling.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Bernie was offering free crap to everyone. It only sounded good to the idealistic youngsters and socialists. Even the Wall Street Dems did their best to destroy his message.

And yet, he was still the choice of the left.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Back on topic please.

The clown lost the election

No, the insincere, Wall Street arse-kissing, self-centered candidate lost the election.

The clown is in office. This fart-lighting act got fewer votes but entertained people in the right places.

They were appalling candidates for different reasons.

By the way, has anyone heard anything from those who said Trump’s idiocy, schoolboy antics and allergy to facts were just part of the act to get elected and he’d act like a competent grown-up when in office?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites