News That Should Not Be News

Monica Lewinski says that Bill Clinton pressured her to lie.

This is only news to people who didn’t actually follow what was going on at the time, or people who have been fed a false history for two decades (he was impeached for a BJ, or “lying about sex”). Which is most people. Subornation of perjury (and not just Lewinski’s, but from Linda Tripp, via Lewinski, with physical threats to her family) was one of the reasons he was impeached.

6 thoughts on “News That Should Not Be News”

  1. I think this is battlespace prep for Mueller’s report, which will have less to do about Russia and more to do about Trump’s sex accusers. If I’m right, I have a few thoughts:
    * To date, I haven’t seen a legitimate complaint of sexual harassment, much less assault or rape. Such an allegation would be big news, if there is one.
    * The only legal issue seems to be in regards to campaign finance, which I think is a stretch. There was a clearer example with John Edwards and his mistress, and SCOTUS said there was no legal issue there.
    * Trump’s on his third marriage, so potential infidelity shouldn’t be a surprise to Melania or anyone else.
    * I originally assumed the accusations were true, but as time goes by, the antics and failed legal contests suggests these are just allegations. But this is a mostly irrelevant discussion because again, Trump hasn’t shown marriage fidelity. I’m willing to yield the argument that Trump was unfaithful in his marriage.
    * The thing with Bill Clinton was his multiple allegations of sexual harassment of employees. The attempt by victims to seek legal challenges, but not given a day in court to discuss. Clinton tried to prevent Paula Jones from even suing him, and when that failed, he subordinated perjury.
    * If you don’t trust Trump because of his infidelity; great! That’s why you got Trump. You shouldn’t trust the government or its leaders. Let that be a lesson on why government power should be limited.

    1. I originally assumed the accusations were true, but as time goes by, the antics and failed legal contests suggests these are just allegations.

      I am sure Trump and Stormy was a thing. Her lawsuit isn’t about Trump mistreating her in anyway on the night in question but to get out of her NDA, which she looks to have ignored anyway.

      Most of the women that the Democrats brought out in the election turned out to have been paid. That calls into question the honesty of the others since they were all in the same group and they were likely either paid too or were too caught up in TDS to ask to get paid for their lies.

      Democrats wont care but if “Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the election” turns into “Trump paid a stripper not to run her mouth” then it doesn’t look good for Mueller. It will look even worse if the truth comes out about how Obama, Hillary, the CIA/FBI/State Department colluded with foreign powers to spy on the Trump campaign in hopes of rigging the election and getting him impeached if that failed. The whole Mueller thing stems from this and is part of a slow rolling soft coup attempt.

      1. I can believe that Trump and Stormy did something together. However, that belief comes more from the notion that she may have gotten paid and less from the NDA. When she and her lawyer trotted out the NDA, it is a hot mess. First, the NDA, as noted by Daniels, doesn’t mention either of their names. Alone, that NDA is useless paper, and as noted, was only signed by one party. Second, the secondary amendment that is supposed to identify the names calls out the wrong paragraph of the NDA to amend. So even if it is a real document, it creates a legally useless NDA. And again, that second document was only signed by one party, which was Daniel’s legal excuse for violating the NDA. Alas, the NDA is not being enforced anyway nor does it seem Daniels ever intended to follow it, or that Trump even cared.

        What I think happened is that Cohen was retained with a large account to handle nuisance complaints. When Daniels popped up with her nuisance, Cohen through her some money and paperwork and told her to go away. This is a smart business approach, because fighting these things in court (regardless of whether running for political office or not) is more expensive than the small sum to run them off. It can get expensive if it creates an industry of nuisance complaints, but that’s why it is handled by lawyers, who can always be ready to make the process the pain.

        As for Mueller, I agree Democrats won’t care if the story changes. Again though, there is nothing illegal about paying Daniels to shut-up, and the campaign finance argument was already answered with John Edwards. Still, impeachment is less a legal matter than a political matter. And Democrats will want to frame it the same way Starr went after Bill Clinton. However to do that, they first have to acknowledge Bill deserved to be impeached. That’s a fine line to claim Bill should be impeached (now 20 years later) yet still support Hillary.

        I don’t disagree at all about the Obama/Hillary/Executive Branch collusion. But I think enough people know about it and nobody seems to care. Then again, Lindsey 2.0 suggests that perhaps more people can see things for what they really are and get mad about it. I’m not holding my breath. If there was justice, Hillary would be prosecuted for mishandling classified information (the case isn’t closed simply because prosecutors at the time decided not to prosecute). Assuming a fair jury condemns her, then it would show how wrong Comey was; and that’s enough of a punishment for him. Obama will forever be tainted as well, which is about all that will happen with him. And there would be enough to clean out the partisans in CIA/FBI/State that stood back and let this happen. Again, I’m not holding my breath.

  2. Monica still hasn’t come to understand what happened. She blames everyone except Bill, Hillary, and the DNC media for how she was treated.

    1. I think this accurate, but I don’t blame her – she was naive (not in a pejorative way – she was 22 years old and taken advantage by very powerful people in a very public way) I want to call it Stockholm Syndrome, but there’s probably a more precise term out there.

      1. I think she got a nice golden pillow that was far better than Stormy’s NDA payout. Its doubtful she was ever interested in making a truly honest living as a way to fulfillment. That’s also not to blame her, but just recognizing that she is probably satisfied with what she got from Bill, Hillary, and the DNC media. Everyone else only offered her a life of having to personally restore her image and credibility in order to make an honest living.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *