I didn't realize those were implants!I thought the Donald wouldn't settle for anything other than the real deal.

i predict that Melania's life will be made hell by Donald Trump once he loses the election. He will blame her mistakes for his defeat. He will dump her and marry another woman.

Anonymous wrote:She had quite a nice body when she was younger, but I don't think someone who did soft-core porn shoots should be a First Lady. The Obamas have so much more class than the trashy Trump family.

+1

But think about it - since she was a model who shot soft-core porn, and she had no brains or intelligence (plagiarizing Michelle's speech) - there was nothing else left for her than to be an ugly, wrinkly, old man's play thing/3rd wife. At least Donald knew what he was buying because her wares were displayed for the world to see. The age difference is creepy. I cannot even imagine any woman wanting to have sex with Trump willingly.

Old modeling pictures....it's not really all that surprising because she is a former model. I think people knew that these were out there.

I think it's kind of undignified for a First Lady to have pictures like that floating around. But Melania had no way of knowing at the time that she would marry a successful business man and billionaire who would go on to become the President of the United States. She was just a beautiful young woman trying to make it in the highly competitive modeling industry. She has definitely had an interesting life .

Anonymous wrote:
Trump disgusts me, but I don't stoop to criticizing candidates' families.
These pictures are not vulgar, and nudity in itself is not wrong. So this does not diminish his candidacy in my eyes, rather it diminishes the people who are looking to make a big deal out these pictures.

Why don't we focus on everything that comes out of Trump's mouth instead? I mean, there's plenty of material there!

+1

Wish she had not done implants. Looks so fake.

Anonymous wrote:It's funny how illegal drug use by presidents during their youth is ok, but nude modeling pictures of a candidate's spouse is something to be "ashamed" of. For one, she looks amazing! And two, if democrats want to use/spin this as a negative against her doesn't that fly in the face of the supposed sexual/feminine/artistic/cultural (she is European and nudity is treated much differently in the U.S. re: taboo) freedom, liberation, allegedly pro-women stance the party purports?

Aren't you dizzy after spinning all this?

She looks better than Obama's Mama's nude pics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's funny how illegal drug use by presidents during their youth is ok, but nude modeling pictures of a candidate's spouse is something to be "ashamed" of. For one, she looks amazing! And two, if democrats want to use/spin this as a negative against her doesn't that fly in the face of the supposed sexual/feminine/artistic/cultural (she is European and nudity is treated much differently in the U.S. re: taboo) freedom, liberation, allegedly pro-women stance the party purports?

Hold it! Democrats did not publish these photos. Rupert Murdock did!

I didn't say publish...I said use/spin, so let's see the way the Democrat spin plays out. We already see some of it here on this forum.

Internet forums aren't spin, they are opinion. Campaigns do spin, and I don't see the Clinton campaign touching this one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's funny how illegal drug use by presidents during their youth is ok, but nude modeling pictures of a candidate's spouse is something to be "ashamed" of. For one, she looks amazing! And two, if democrats want to use/spin this as a negative against her doesn't that fly in the face of the supposed sexual/feminine/artistic/cultural (she is European and nudity is treated much differently in the U.S. re: taboo) freedom, liberation, allegedly pro-women stance the party purports?

Hold it! Democrats did not publish these photos. Rupert Murdock did!

I didn't say publish...I said use/spin, so let's see the way the Democrat spin plays out. We already see some of it here on this forum.

Anonymous wrote:It's funny how illegal drug use by presidents during their youth is ok, but nude modeling pictures of a candidate's spouse is something to be "ashamed" of. For one, she looks amazing! And two, if democrats want to use/spin this as a negative against her doesn't that fly in the face of the supposed sexual/feminine/artistic/cultural (she is European and nudity is treated much differently in the U.S. re: taboo) freedom, liberation, allegedly pro-women stance the party purports?

Hold it! Democrats did not publish these photos. Rupert Murdock did!

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now the door has been opened for photo-shopped pictures of a nude Hillary - and maybe even Chelsea.

No one wants to see Hillary nude.
Not even her husband, apparently.

How many people want to see Donald nude? Give me Hillary over that any day of the week.

True that most men still prefer women, but certainly not all. So what. Leave 'em alone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now the door has been opened for photo-shopped pictures of a nude Hillary - and maybe even Chelsea.

No one wants to see Hillary nude.
Not even her husband, apparently.

How many people want to see Donald nude? Give me Hillary over that any day of the week.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now the door has been opened for photo-shopped pictures of a nude Hillary - and maybe even Chelsea.

No one wants to see Hillary nude.
Not even her husband, apparently.

But a photoshopped version of Hillary nude?

Anonymous wrote:Now the door has been opened for photo-shopped pictures of a nude Hillary - and maybe even Chelsea.

No one wants to see Hillary nude.
Not even her husband, apparently.