Harvey Weinstein Helped Pay for Bill Clinton’s Legal Fees During Monica Lewinsky Scandal

Exactly correct. Hillary defenders want Hillary to be left alone, and I'm fine with that, but when she inserts herself into the news, she's fair game for discussion.

 

How is that emotional? If you want to constantly talk about Hillary Clinton, go ahead. I move on from people who are washed up. I started doing it in 1984 when Walter Mondale lost. I focused on how good President Reagan was in 1984, not how bad his competition was.

 

Agreed. Did you not know this until The Gateway Pundit told you this? And how does her husband's contributions from 20 years ago impact us today? They don't. He's no longer President, and she never was President, and hopefully she never will be.

You can ignore her, you know. When you ignore people, they tend to fall off the front page.

 

There's no question Tres is a Hillary defender, drives her nuts when the Hag gets mentioned.

 

I'm a woman, and she never spoke for me. She still doesn't.

She's finished politically. Thank you lucky stars about that. I do. Now let's focus on 2017 and not 1998.

 

She doesn't though Tres, she's the media's number one go to when they want to deflect back to Trump and she's right there to bash him.

 

There's no question you didn't tell the truth here. You disappoint me, again. I didn't vote for either Clinton, ever. I didn't vote for Hillary in 2008 nor 2016. I voted for Gary Johnson. Hillary defenders don't vote against her.

 

You don't "deflect back" to the current President. He is always in the news. That's the way it's been since we had Presidents and since we had a media.

 

You're doing it again, dear.

If Walter Mondale or either of the Bush's commented about Weinstein, politics or anything else, they become both part of the conversation and also legitimate topics for discussion. There's a difference between reaching back and saying "Well, Ford did it too!" and taking a current comment or action related to the topic and posting about it. In this case, Hillary inserted herself into the Weinstein scandal by 1) commenting upon it and 2) refusing to return his $250,000 political bribes donations.

 

You sound like her defense lawyer, you practice law?

 

Agreed, but I don't get it. She claims to be a conservative and a Republican, but becomes angry when quoting a current news article relating Hillary to Weinstein. WTF?

 

Okay, you dwelled constantly on Mondale. I didn't. Hard for me to understand why people obsess about irrelevance.

If you want to contributed to Weinstein's political defense fund, I'm sure you can do so. I don't think anyone else cares if a charity he donated to gives his money back to help him. I don't anyway.

 

Trump was in the news because the Hag called Trump a predator with no evidence on 10-15-17.

 

Now you're just trolling me. Have a good day.

 

I'm starting to notice a resemblance to establishment conservatives. Example: repeal and replace ... until it becomes time to do it. Immigration reform and border security ... until DACA expires, and the wall needs funding. Tax cuts, trade reforms ... etc. As soon as Trump suggests the GOP live up to it's conservative principles they find a reason not to act. Talking the talk ... voting Gary Johnson ... Libertarian. A spineless, do nothing conservative is no better than a liberal. Congress proves it every day.

 

Voting Gary Johnson is a vote for Hillary.

 

More emotion and personal attacks, dear. You brought up Mondale and I mentioned him in one single post

Your false accusation about me wanting to contribution to Weinstein's defense is another example of your emotionally-laden debate style. The "charity" he donated money to should donate it to an actual charity, not a political slush fund.

 

Disagreed. I refused to vote for either deplorable so I voted a straight Libertarian ticket. It's one reason why neither Trump nor Hillary broke the 50% barrier.

 

Or to groups that support victims of sexual assault. Why not send a clear signal of which side of the issue you put your support behind? Is it because the DNC doesn't want to offend other donors like Weinstein who've yet to be exposed?

 

Do you see your entire world through the left-right lens?

 

No, I try to give people the benefit of doubt.

 

Anyone who ever voted for a Clinton (or, for that matter, a Kennedy) has zero right whatsoever to criticize anyone who voted for Trump.

 

He's not letting you stop him, even though you are desperately trying to hijack the thread.

 

I get that, I've heard a lot of conservatives say that. The plan that the left had for the country was to much. Since Johnson had no way of winning it wouldn't help, so right or wrong that's just how I felt about it.

 

And the Democrats said sexual assault, sexual harassment, perjury and obstruction of justice did not warrant removal from office so what is your gripe about Trump and why do you inject him here?