My thoughts? A Royally stupid move on their part. The party needs to work on their own act and not worry that Fat Donald et al are in cahoots with the Russians.
1 Like
I heard Stormy gave all her $130,000 to Planned Parenthood.
In Donald Trump’s name.
Ooof.
I seriously doubt if she still can get pregnant. It’s more likely a veritable house of horrors in there. Trump has bad taste in whores.
Seems like it could backfire if they don’t have a real strategy in place.
Even then, it could distract from or get in the way of the Mueller and Cohen investigations.
1 Like
When it comes to me, that is a massive understatement. 
But I get your point. However, the assumptions that all of America has moved on, I believe to be an overstatement.
^ GOP 2018
I hope you women are watching.
you think the women here identify with “Stormy Daniels” who has sex with men to
make money?
Even I have a higher opinion of the lib women here… and I really can’t say I like them. But I don’t see them as that kind of women.
1 Like
I think I grossly understated it.
I think there is a lot of truth in this post as well. If they want to reclaim Congress next year, and even more so, if they want to prevent Trump from being reelected in 2020, they need a message other than Russia or anti-Trump.
Out of curiosity, is this Lou?
1 Like
I’m not real sure how that all works. But wouldn’t the criminal cases take some sort of precedence over a civil case? And yes, I know I’m asking a Brit this question. 
I disagree. If what you said were the case, then you would not have talking heads from both the right and the left spending hours upon hours every day of the week discussing these issues. They would have, as you suggest, moved on.
Well, he was pro choice before he allegedly became pro life.
1 Like
and he would likely enjoy the charitable tax deduction. He’s not an ideologue. Libs are confused by that.
1 Like
Yes. This is the poster formally known as LouC.
I figured the “Fat Donald” would be pretty obvious. 
What the heck, I thought, new Forum, good time to give it all a new start.
What makes it even more stupid is when FBI offered to look into it DNC hacked server they told them no.
I don’t see how they even have a case here. When they didn’t even want the feds to investigate.
1 Like
That’s what led me to the assumptive question. Good to see you over here my friend!!
Thanks. I was premature in my initial negative assessment of this new place.
I was wrong, as I told Snow.
Just don’t know how to block all the ads I see here on my new iPhone.
That and getting used to a different format.
1 Like
I definitely understand it will take some getting used to. Especially for some of us, ahem, seasoned individuals.
And I agree about the ads and the iPhone. I’m posting from mine right now and it makes scrolling challenging as well. But, there are some really neat tricks here too. Hopefully we will see more people here, and more engagement.
This is also a civil suit, so the standard of proof isn’t as high. And yes, a lot of people will be called into to respond. I didn’t think too much about this when I first heard the news – especially that they filed it so long after the election. The contrast with the Watergate suit, though, is that that was filed with nothing almost immediately after the break-in. More time has elapsed here and there’s more information out there. Think of the O.J. civil suit. This could be very interesting. Very.
