It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Michael Cohen Secretly Taped Trump Discussing Payment to Playboy Model

page: 8
21
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: highvein
a reply to: Abysha






The hypocrisy is why.

It was either him or Clinton if that explains it for you.


Clinton's adultery was roundly condemned by both sides. Furthermore, he wasn't ironically backed by the general Christian demographic.




posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

It was perfectly clear that my point was objection to the use of taxpayer money to pay these settlements.



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian





Whataboutism is worse than both those. But hey, that's part of the playbook you're required to follow like a good little cult member highvein. Even worse, whataboutism based on a false claim



Yes, yes. Your cry of "whataboutism's" is a deflection from choosing which is worse. To kill someone or pay for their silence. I think you need to brush up on your definition of "whataboutism". I used no names that would link a "whataboutism" to my simple question, yet you still called it a "whataboutism".

I find that interesting. Who did you think I was talking about?



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: highvein
a reply to: Abysha






The hypocrisy is why.

It was either him or Clinton if that explains it for you.


Clinton's adultery was roundly condemned by both sides. Furthermore, he wasn't ironically backed by the general Christian demographic.



Hint: Wrong Clinton. Bill wasn't running. It was either Donald or Hilary.



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: angeldoll

originally posted by: SgtHamsandwich
Well at least Trump used his own hush money instead of tax payer money for the same types of stuff.

Good on him.


That's a positive observation!

I have nothing else to say, so I will mock his tiny hands.


ftfy.

edit on 20-7-2018 by SummerRain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:34 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah


It was perfectly clear that my point


I know what your point was. I also know what you were implying and I've shown rather clearly that you're in the wrong on this matter. There's no evidence of a 'slushfund' for Democrats over harrassment claims. Has tax payer money been used to settle accusations of sexual misconduct by politicians? Yes, it's been done over years for both Dems and Republicans. You're implication here is that Dem's misused tax payer money, it's a partisan view on this matter.

Your point is perfectly clear.



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:35 PM
link   
a reply to: highvein


To kill someone or pay for their silence.


Who was killed for their silence? Come out with it.



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:38 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

omfg im done...

/ded



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: highvein

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: highvein
a reply to: Abysha






The hypocrisy is why.

It was either him or Clinton if that explains it for you.


Clinton's adultery was roundly condemned by both sides. Furthermore, he wasn't ironically backed by the general Christian demographic.



Hint: Wrong Clinton. Bill wasn't running. It was either Donald or Hilary.


I thought you were referring to the hypocrisy of Christians backing an adulterous liar. Which is what I was talking about and you responded to that.

What does any of this have to do with Hillary? Are you saying the church had to endorse one of the two of them? Because they really didn't. I can't imagine a genuinely-honest Christian endorsing Trump, period. I imagine any honest Christians simply didn't vote. The church was playing politics and, for once, they have zero chance of ever justifying it. They have forever marked themselves as disingenuous prophets of sleezebaggery.



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: highvein
a reply to: Southern Guardian


I wonder what is worse. Paying someone for their silence, or silencing them by suicide. The left love to protest the wrong things.


Good point.

So, some woman sleeps with a rich guy and then wants money or she will tell the world. And he shrugs and says yeah, whatever here you go. You know, there are some women who will sleep with a rich guy BECAUSE of this.

And on the other hand, we have a long list of suspicious deaths of people connected to certain persons. Some of these dead people reportedly had information regarding criminal activity of the certain persons.

Huge difference. It's not like Trump's fling ended up hanging by the neck in a shed, after telling everyone that she would never commit suicide because she was in fear and knew someone might kill her. Or by some other such horrid and suspicious death.



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: BlueAjah


It was perfectly clear that my point


I know what your point was. I also know what you were implying and I've shown rather clearly that you're in the wrong on this matter. There's no evidence of a 'slushfund' for Democrats over harrassment claims. Has tax payer money been used to settle accusations of sexual misconduct by politicians? Yes, it's been done over years for both Dems and Republicans. You're implication here is that Dem's misused tax payer money, it's a partisan view on this matter.

Your point is perfectly clear.


Ummm, no.
Did I say "slushfund"?
Did I say "Democrats"?
nope


originally posted by: BlueAjah
The hypocrisy of this outrage is funny.

IF Trump paid off women with whom he had consensual affairs, using his own money, why is that anyone's business?

Compare that to the $17 million of OUR taxpayer money that Congress used to silence sexual harassment claims.

Think about the difference.




posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Abysha

The Evangelists have made it clear that they voted for Trump because of what he can do for the country, regardless of his personal life.

They use common sense, as most of us do.



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:45 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

A generation of a fair scotus perhaps?



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: Abysha

The Evangelists have made it clear that they voted for Trump because of what he can do for the country, regardless of his personal life.

They use common sense, as most of us do.



Lol.



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:45 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah


Ummm, no.


Your premise that Democrats have a specific fund to pay off their own sexual allegations is false.

Move along.



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Please do not put words in my fingers.
I never said Democrats. I said "Congress".

There are elite Republicans in Congress that are as bad as the Democrats.


edit on 7/20/18 by BlueAjah because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:50 PM
link   
a reply to: SummerRain

Haha, you guy have already been featured on South Park..several times.



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:50 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah


Please do not put words in my fingers.


It's fairly clearly what you're implying.

I'll repeat again, your premise that Democrats have a specific fund to pay off their own sexual allegations is false.



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Where did I say "Democrats" in that post?



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 09:59 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah


Where did I say "Democrats" in that post?


Where is there a $17 million slush fund from tax payers for Dems? I'm well aware you didn't say Democrats specifically but your post is based on a report from rightwing outlets claiming there was a $17 million slush funds for them and them along on sexual allegations - that's the origin of your claim and it's false. Don't cower and pretend you were being anything but partisan in that post of yours.

Now that we have that deflection cleared up, moving along.




new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join