Did Donald attend a pee party ?

Originally posted by @mghrn55
Clinton was held to account.
And CNN, the liberal media, led the way.

This clown now has proven to be much worse.
And he had no problem bringing up Bill Clinton's indiscretions during the 2016 campaign.

Talk about the height of hypocrisy !!

You seem to care about this issue. I don't. But if you want to compare. Clinton used his position as president to have sexual relations with an intern and to then use his taxpayer paid security to try to shield it from the general public. It seems a lot worse then some consensual sex act with another adult.

Originally posted by @mghrn55
Clinton was held to account.
And CNN, the liberal media, led the way.

This clown now has proven to be much worse.
And he had no problem bringing up Bill Clinton's indiscretions during the 2016 campaign.

Talk about the height of hypocrisy !!

He wasn't held accountable. Being held accountable means going to prison, like he should have for raping Juanita Broaddrick. Bill Clinton is a rapist pig who used his power to avoid justice.

Originally posted by @wolfe63
It's thoroughly disgusting.
This humiliating epoch in American history will haunt us for years. 😞

I hate Trumpf as much as anyone here but it WAS Russia and if there is a tape we will never see it. After that it is all innuendo, rumors and such. AND I would not put it past POTUS to have done it. He is about as sleazy as it is possible for a human being to get. He should be buddy buddy with Bill Crosby.

Originally posted by @sonhouse
I hate Trumpf as much as anyone here but it WAS Russia and if there is a tape we will never see it. After that it is all innuendo, rumors and such. AND I would not put it past POTUS to have done it. He is about as sleazy as it is possible for a human being to get. He should be buddy buddy with Bill Crosby.

The Old Groaner? Never!

Originally posted by @quackquack
You seem to care about this issue. I don't. But if you want to compare. Clinton used his position as president to have sexual relations with an intern and to then use his taxpayer paid security to try to shield it from the general public. It seems a lot worse then some consensual sex act with another adult.

The issue isn't consensual sex. It's illegally using campaign funds as hush money. Unlike Clinton with Lewinsky, Trump actually did something illegal.

Originally posted by @vivify
The issue isn't consensual sex. It's illegally using campaign funds as hush money. Unlike Clinton with Lewinsky, Trump actually did something illegal.

Using your position as president to have an affair with interns and using the Secret service to shield it from the general public seems like a gross misuse of power. The answer is obvious government needs to shrink.

Originally posted by @quackquack
Using your position as president to have an affair with interns and using the Secret service to shield it from the general public seems like a gross misuse of power. The answer is obvious government needs to shrink.

In what way specifically does "shrinking" the government, in and of itself, alleviate the possible abuse of power by the president of the U.S.?

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
In what way specifically does "shrinking" the government, in and of itself, alleviate the possible abuse of power by the president of the U.S.?

If government shrunk
(1) there would be less opportunity for it to abuse its power
(2) it would be easier to monitor its actions

Originally posted by @quackquack
If government shrunk
(1) there would be less opportunity for it to abuse its power
(2) it would be easier to monitor its actions

Parts of the government serve to check and balance the President. If you "shrunk" the government by removing those checks and balances...well even you should be able to figure this out...

Originally posted by @athousandyoung
Parts of the government serve to check and balance the President. If you "shrunk" the government by removing those checks and balances...well even you should be able to figure this out...

Are you arguing that no government cuts are ever appropriate because we might remove a check and balance?

Originally posted by @quackquack
Are you arguing that no government cuts are ever appropriate because we might remove a check and balance?

We could start by cutting Federal funding to the States which take far more from the national trough than they donate through taxation.

Unfortunately, their two Senators each will continue the pork-barrel ear-marking. Oink! Oink!

Originally posted by @quackquack
If government shrunk
(1) there would be less opportunity for it to abuse its power
(2) it would be easier to monitor its actions

In what way, specifically? How does shrinking the apparatus of the government to combat corruption, for example, help it combat corruption within its ranks?