Crazy that the line is at sexual misconduct but undermining a democracy is ok.
I mean…at the very least it’s consistant. I never had an issue with Bill Clinton getting a BJ. I felt like Hillary should have the right to be mad, but everyone else should fuck off.
The right on the other hand lost their shit. They made it into a 4 year big deal. If Bill had just told the truth on the stand, that he got sucked off and loved it, then they’d have no tools to impeach him. But to them the sexual deviancy was the big deal to them.
I guess same here. They don’t care about laws or the country, but if you include sexual misdoings, they faint like a karen in a church seeing people outside having fun.
That’s just a facade they put up in public. Newt Gingrich lead the charge on that impeachment and at the time was cheating on his wife (later to deliver her divorce papers at the hospital where she was receiving cancer treatments and leaving her and their children completely broke).
Furthermore, you can look at all the scandals with organizations like the Boy Scouts of America or the Catholic church and they still get unwavering support from the right.
It’s not though. See Thomas. Also the seemingly never ending parade of GOP officials.
If it’s their team it’s NBD, I’m very surprised this has had any consequences. I bet it’s more he bit the hand that fed him.
They always denied it was about the sex though. Even at the time. We all knew it was, but they constantly were claiming it was about lying on the stand.
And then Larry Flynt inadvertently helped them on that front when trying to shame them by putting out a report detailing all the Republican congresspeople who had affairs. I appreciate what he tried to do, but that made it even easier for them to say it wasn’t about the sex since no one got rid of them for an affair.
It was about the letter after his name. If sex was illegal (and I think sex with subordinates often should be), they would have gone for that. Lying under oath is illegal, so they went for that. This wasn’t some principled mission, this was to stop the guy they disagreed with using whatever would stick.
According to the report, Kindred created a hostile work environment by incessantly “discuss[ing] his past dating life, his romantic preferences, his sex life, the law clerks’ boyfriends and dating lives, his divorce, his interest in and communications with potential romantic or sexual partners, and his disparaging opinions of his colleagues. He also made disparaging comments about public and political figures. Some examples of these comments include: ‘I was a huge hit at dinner Partly due to how much s— I talked about Sarah Palin’; ‘I told a republican [state] senator to eat a d—’; and ‘[a senator] is worried that I can kick [] his a–.’”
He also rated people based on “f—ability” in the presence of subordinates, and retaliated against clerks who came forward to say they were uncomfortable with his behavior.
As Trumpian as you can get.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything good related to people who are Trump affiliated.
`According to the report, Kindred created a hostile work environment by incessantly “discuss[ing] his past dating life, his romantic preferences, his sex life, the law clerks’ boyfriends and dating lives, his divorce, his interest in and communications with potential romantic or sexual partners, and his disparaging opinions of his colleagues. He also made disparaging comments about public and political figures. Some examples of these comments include: ‘I was a huge hit at dinner Partly due to how much s— I talked about Sarah Palin’; ‘I told a republican [state] senator to eat a d—’; and ‘[a senator] is worried that I can kick [] his a–.’”
Why can’t this happen to at least two SCOTUS jurists?
Judge Qanon??
Oh. Pfft. Well, good anyway.
