Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nah, Trump was just kidding. She's not invited.

Trump baited the Clinton campaign with the suggestion that she might be invited and they fell for it! Hilarious how easily they are suckered and they think that Trump is thin-skinned!

Straight up Kelly Conway talking point. Do you take dictation?

What conclusion would you arrive at if Flowers was not invited by the Trump campaign but it was dangled out there?

I read not one, but two, tweets from Trump suggesting he would invite Flowers. I also read a tweet by Flowers saying she would be at the debate. So, I would conclude that Flowers believed that she had been invited. If she didn't show, I would conclude that no official invitation has actually been offered. I could envision many reasons why such an invitation would not have materialized.

Why do you repeat verbatim Conway's talking points?

I saw one tweet from Trump which said:

"If dopey Mark Cuban of failed Benefactor fame wants to sit in the front row, perhaps I will put Gennifer Flowers right alongside of him!"

Now that is hardly definitive!

FWIW, I also believed an invitation was going to be issued but now I actually do believe that it was just an attempt to bait the Clinton campaign and it worked.

BTW, never been accused before of repeating any candidate's talking points ...... so that is a new one for me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Trump should invite the Benghazi widows.

All four mothers, or just the ones that are anti-Hillary?

Well, if I'm Trump, I'd pick the ones who are anti-Hillary, right?

We know that, it was never about Benghazi widows, it was always about anti-Hillary!

It's seems a fair counter punch to the Cuban silliness to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Trump should invite the Benghazi widows.

All four mothers, or just the ones that are anti-Hillary?

Well, if I'm Trump, I'd pick the ones who are anti-Hillary, right?

We know that, it was never about Benghazi widows, it was always about anti-Hillary!

It's seems a fair counter punch to the Cuban silliness to me.

No, it is not. Even Trump realized it's stupid.

Anonymous wrote:
Did Clinton campaign issue a statement on Jennifer Flowers?

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:If Flowers is brought up in the debate, Clinton should nod toward Melania and say that is ironic that both Bill Clinton and Donald Trump have former mistresses in the audience.

But the problem is Trump met Melania when he was single. The only mistress Trump ever had is Marla Maples. And they got married. Hillary has no problem lying in front of cameras, but she would lose in court for defamation.

Bill not only had affairs he also sexually assaulted many other women.

Trump has bragged out his affairs. How can you call discussing his affairs defamation and then turn around and say that Clinton has assaulted many women? Are you insane? Clinton has never been charged with assault, let alone convicted. You could be charged with defamation.

For the record, Trump was still married to Marla when he began dating Melania.

takoma wrote:If any or all of Bill's lovers and/or victims shows up, what would be the reaction if Hillary were to make a statement admitting that she is upset about it, that she was badly hurt by Bill many times, that they were the worst part of the marriage and she was not proud of everything she did in response, but that she married him for better or worse, and despite the many times things were worse than she had anticipated, she still takes that vow seriously, and she still loves him despite his flaws?

And refrains from attacking Trump's sex life, which is the least relevant of his flaws as a presidential candidate!

Anonymous wrote:

takoma wrote:If any or all of Bill's lovers and/or victims shows up, what would be the reaction if Hillary were to make a statement admitting that she is upset about it, that she was badly hurt by Bill many times, that they were the worst part of the marriage and she was not proud of everything she did in response, but that she married him for better or worse, and despite the many times things were worse than she had anticipated, she still takes that vow seriously, and she still loves him despite his flaws?

And refrains from attacking Trump's sex life, which is the least relevant of his flaws as a presidential candidate!

Bravo... that is what I was think. I just want to add one more thing. She should also say that Trump knowingly invited them to hurt her personally and that is what he does even if his opponent might be right and the Presidential debate is far from personal feud. She should point out how Trump attacked the disabled leader, Mr. Khan, Rosie O'donell etc. when their differences were not personal.