Second Gentleman scandal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Umm, it doesn’t get any worse than knocking up the nanny when you’re married with young kids. This guy is a sociopath.

So are you saying Trump is a sociopath?

Because didn’t he basically do the same thing… twice? Didn’t Trump openly flaunt his affair with Marla Maples while his 3 kids were very little and they could see their dad with his mistress in the tabloids and it was generally a traumatic and humiliating experience?

In addition to raping a lady? Isn’t raping a woman worse? Or is there something particularly special if a baby is involved?

Yes, Trump is also clearly a sociopath. Is that even a question?

So how exactly is this relevant to politics? Emhoff is not running for office. And honestly, if every dbag who had an affair couldn’t run for office we’d have like 10% of our politicians and historical figures.

Married to POTUS and his personal and sex life can be used to blackmail him.

How can it be used as blackmail, if it is so well known it's in mainstream media? Looks like he's now less of a risk than ever.

It was kept out of the press for 15 years. How? What else don’t we know in his closet?

Do you not think the US government can vet? Or is it that you don't think they noticed Harris was married?

Doing scandalous things isn't really a problem. This isn't a morality play. Being able to be leveraged is the problem. But if everyone in your personal life knows, and anyone supervisory to you or your partner knows -- well, it's not really blackmail material.

You could try to say someone would be blackmailed because they were vested so heavily in it not getting leaked to the press. Let's see how much this "leak" seems to damage anyone, shall we?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That settles it. I’m never voting for Doug Emhoff!

Was about to type the same thing. This Emhoff guy seems unfit for the presidency.

[Anonymous]

PS: And it would have been vetting a VP candidate under Trump's term. She was certainly married before she ran. Do you think Trump's administration was incompetent?

[Anonymous]

Just to be clear - everyone thinks that the conduct of their spouse, before being married to them, should be relevant criteria for job selection. In that the standard you prefer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel horrible for the nanny and hope she got a huge settlement. Of course there’s probably a NDA, so the details will be private unless the child decides to speak out.

There’s nothing but insinuations that there is actually a child. The quote in fact says that the nanny had an abortion.

[Anonymous]

Slut shaming is you declaring someone qualifies as a slut and therefore is one and then indicating they ought to be ashamed of it and should be publicly ostracized for it too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just to be clear - everyone thinks that the conduct of their spouse, before being married to them, should be relevant criteria for job selection. In that the standard you prefer?

As a general rule, Americans prefer having standup people in the White House. Of course that doesn’t always happen, and won’t this time sadly. Whichever way it goes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Emhoff not such a mensch, if true. How did this not come out earlier?? Terrible timing! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13703933/Kamala-Harris-Doug-Emhoff-cheated-nanny-Najen-Nayler.html

This story is more than borderline stalker-ish - they ambushed the woman while she is caring for a baby as part of nanny job and followed her and photographed her? They "obtained" employment records? They are trying to search for a baby she might have had as the product of the affair?

Yeah, cheating on your wife is bad, but the GOP told us it shouldn't matter. So I don't know what the issue is if the candidate's spouse cheated on his first wife with someone. Maybe Trumpers can explain.

But I'm disgusted that some regular person's life is being turned upside down in this way. But that's par for the course for conservatives, as far as I can tell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just to be clear - everyone thinks that the conduct of their spouse, before being married to them, should be relevant criteria for job selection. In that the standard you prefer?

As a general rule, Americans prefer having standup people in the White House. Of course that doesn’t always happen, and won’t this time sadly. Whichever way it goes.

And, you’re establishing this fact because her husband, before they were married, knocked up the nanny, when she wasn’t ever in the picture? Even though this individual isn’t actually running for office? And on these grounds you determined Harris is roughly equivalent to Trump, based on his personal conduct? Fascinating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Emhoff not such a mensch, if true. How did this not come out earlier?? Terrible timing! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13703933/Kamala-Harris-Doug-Emhoff-cheated-nanny-Najen-Nayler.html

This story is more than borderline stalker-ish - they ambushed the woman while she is caring for a baby as part of nanny job and followed her and photographed her? They "obtained" employment records? They are trying to search for a baby she might have had as the product of the affair?

Yeah, cheating on your wife is bad, but the GOP told us it shouldn't matter. So I don't know what the issue is if the candidate's spouse cheated on his first wife with someone. Maybe Trumpers can explain.

But I'm disgusted that some regular person's life is being turned upside down in this way. But that's par for the course for conservatives, as far as I can tell.

She is collateral damage in the GOP quest to hurt Harris and give rich people a tax cut and police female bodies. Classy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just to be clear - everyone thinks that the conduct of their spouse, before being married to them, should be relevant criteria for job selection. In that the standard you prefer?

As opposed to being concerned with the conduct of the person actually running for office: A rapist who had human sex traffickers on speed dial, who has spent his entire life showing what racist human garbage he is as a husband, father, crook businessman and anti-democratic thug who sent his flying monkeys to kill MoC.

This is like when you respond to any criticism of Trump by mentioning Hunter.

[Anonymous]

The Daily Mail is where racist filth gather in a circle ****. It should stick to celebrity garbage.

They have no business covering politics when the agenda is to demonize via racism and bigotry.

[Anonymous]

I'm really enjoying MAGA flailing around for something that sticks, and then having every allegation boomerang back in Trump's face.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just to be clear - everyone thinks that the conduct of their spouse, before being married to them, should be relevant criteria for job selection. In that the standard you prefer?

As a general rule, Americans prefer having standup people in the White House. Of course that doesn’t always happen, and won’t this time sadly. Whichever way it goes.

And, you’re establishing this fact because her husband, before they were married, knocked up the nanny, when she wasn’t ever in the picture? Even though this individual isn’t actually running for office? And on these grounds you determined Harris is roughly equivalent to Trump, based on his personal conduct? Fascinating.

I think the point was that Doug Emhoff will be in the White House too.

[Anonymous]

Now I’m worried about what other skeletons Emhoff might have in his closet. Cheating is rarely a one-off.