Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And Trump has admitted that he donated to politicians so that they would do his bidding.
As Pam Bondi did.
So, following your thought let me ask this. "Is it better to be the buyer or the bought?" I think both are distasteful but having to choose I think I'd rather be the "john" than the "whor#".
The WSJ has done some digging and has found a pattern of similar behavior from Trump.
Now, one could strongly argue that this is pretty much the norm for people of certain financial standing, after all, this is exactly how/why DC is awash (infested) with lobbyists.
It does, however, beg the question: just how exactly is Trump not a member of the establishment?
Pay-to-play is pay-to-play, whether private citizen or public official.
Synopsis from TPM, the original, linked below, is behind a paywall.
"Donald Trump donated about $140,000 to state attorneys general or candidates for the office between 2001 and 2003, some of whom were reviewing cases or decisions that would impact the real estate mogul's business, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday."
"Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has throughout his career given campaign contributions to state attorneys general while they weighed decisions affecting his business, a review of his political donations shows.'
So, following your thought let me ask this. "Is it better to be the buyer or the bought?" I think both are distasteful but having to choose I think I'd rather be the "john" than the "whor#".
Location: Big Island of Hawaii & HOT BuOYS Sailing Vessel
5,277 posts, read 2,807,753 times
Reputation: 1932
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimj
So, following your thought let me ask this. "Is it better to be the buyer or the bought?" I think both are distasteful but having to choose I think I'd rather be the "john" than the "whor#".
Morally, were it not for the Johns there would be no Whores
Which brings up another point.
Prostitution is not the oldest profession.
Hunting is.
Were it not for hunting, the first Johns would have no earnings of value to tempt the first Whores.
Location: Big Island of Hawaii & HOT BuOYS Sailing Vessel
5,277 posts, read 2,807,753 times
Reputation: 1932
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24
The plot thickens.
The WSJ has done some digging and has found a pattern of similar behavior from Trump.
Now, one could strongly argue that this is pretty much the norm for people of certain financial standing, after all, this is exactly how/why DC is awash (infested) with lobbyists.
It does, however, beg the question: just how exactly is Trump not a member of the establishment?
Pay-to-play is pay-to-play, whether private citizen or public official.
Synopsis from TPM, the original, linked below, is behind a paywall.
"Donald Trump donated about $140,000 to state attorneys general or candidates for the office between 2001 and 2003, some of whom were reviewing cases or decisions that would impact the real estate mogul's business, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday."
"Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has throughout his career given campaign contributions to state attorneys general while they weighed decisions affecting his business, a review of his political donations shows.'
"Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has throughout his career given campaign contributions to state attorneys general while they weighed decisions affecting his business, a review of his political donations shows."
Now ask yourself, why is Trump always being reviewed by State Attorney Generals?
Is it because he operates his businesses legally or illegally?
"Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has throughout his career given campaign contributions to state attorneys general while they weighed decisions affecting his business, a review of his political donations shows."
Now ask yourself, why is Trump always being reviewed by State Attorney Generals?
Is it because he operates his businesses legally or illegally?
Did you read the articles?
The articles say he wasn't being reviewed.
I guess the complete lack of any evidence to support any wrongdoing with the AG in Florida, the dems desperately make up more completely unfounded stories.
The media is becoming downright ridiculous with these completely unfounded hit pieces.
It's as if they think everybody are democrats that will never actually read the articles, and see that there is absolutely no evidence ever being presented.
The question is will there be anything left of the msm after the election?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
