Second Gentleman scandal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Old news. This could be much much worse.
He could be running for president and she could be a porn star better yet he could have started sleeping with her when the kids were newborns. That would definitely make it worse

Hilarious!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Questions for those of you who think this is irrelevant, has no reflection on Harris, think that this kind of workplace sexual harassment is fine, are calling the nanny a homewrecker and worse, and more: Did you attack Lewinsky back in the day too? Did you wear a pussy hat at a march? Did you support the goals of the #metoo movement?

This all happened before the couple ever met. Years before. I suspect he told her all about it as they got serious. The ex-wife and the kids clearly have a good relationship with him, so it is a non-issue.

The existence of a good relationship has nothing to do with whether the spouse of the potential president has committed serious workplace sexual harassment that the potential president knew about and excused. I mean, we’ve seen Democrats make that argument before (and like this time, viciously attack the victim) but it wasn’t right then and it’s not right now.

OMG shut up. She worked at the school his daughter attended and then moonlighted as a nanny for his family. She was in her 30s not a 19 year-old. Sounds like it was consensual to me.

You need to stop defending workplace sexual harassment and stop blasting out your profound ignorance to the world. You are excusing the inexcusable. “Consensual” doesn’t matter when it comes to workplace sexual harassment, which this was. What matters is the employer-employee status.

This was textbook harassment, something that the #metoo movement was highlighting, and you make yourself look like a hypocritical fool defending it.

Exactly.

And what is particularly jarring is that Doug is a lawyer. He knows the law.

I expect this is a pattern of behavior, not an isolated instance.

Every news media which picked up the story states that Kamala was aware of the specifics of the affair before the couple married, per Doug’s own report. At the time or shortly thereafter, she became the attorney general of California.

None of this negates Trump’s indiscretions. It shows that people are the same at baseline. Our R and D divisions are largely artificial. When it comes down to biology, successful males of our species behave in roughly the same patterns. As a voter, it is even possible that being exposed to this reality makes politicians more astute, more able to predict human reactions, possibly better negotiators.

But I think the tacit tolerance of this behavior also damningly demonstrates the hypocrisy of the current democratic establishment.

Emhoff is NOT the candidate here. This is a total non-issue and is not close to a "both sides" thing.

[Anonymous]

What is the point here with Republicans? Kamala married Emhoff years after his divorce and this particular incident. Emhoff is not running. Your candidate committed sexual assault and has cheated on all of his wives. He was also known to hang out with a convicted pedophile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is the point here with Republicans? Kamala married Emhoff years after his divorce and this particular incident. Emhoff is not running. Your candidate committed sexual assault and has cheated on all of his wives. He was also known to hang out with a convicted pedophile.

The point is to troll non-Republicans and "own" the libs. That's the point of the whole thread. It's really not deeper than that. Don't engage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is the point here with Republicans? Kamala married Emhoff years after his divorce and this particular incident. Emhoff is not running. Your candidate committed sexual assault and has cheated on all of his wives. He was also known to hang out with a convicted pedophile.

And walk into locker rooms to ogle children while they changed, then brag about it. But yeah a 20 year old affair is the problem here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the point here with Republicans? Kamala married Emhoff years after his divorce and this particular incident. Emhoff is not running. Your candidate committed sexual assault and has cheated on all of his wives. He was also known to hang out with a convicted pedophile.

The point is to troll non-Republicans and "own" the libs. That's the point of the whole thread. It's really not deeper than that. Don't engage.

Weird way to try and "own" anyone when their own side is far worse. It's all just shameless, dishonest performative outrage given they don't care that their own guy Trump is far worse.

Astonishing that they don't seem to even realize how embarrassingly incompetent they look to the world for attacking Emhoff given their own far worse baggage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is the point here with Republicans? Kamala married Emhoff years after his divorce and this particular incident. Emhoff is not running. Your candidate committed sexual assault and has cheated on all of his wives. He was also known to hang out with a convicted pedophile.

What is ever the point with Republicans, especially the ones who post here? They don't care about policy or democracy. All they care about is slinging mud so that they can be ruled by their Orange Weirdo.