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.
Perhaps Trump simply meant that the esteemed senator would be willing to pass any legislation deemed favorable to Trump....in exchange for his contributions. We really don't know what Trump meant by the tweet to begin with, although that didn't stop the left from using it for their own purpose.
This is exactly what happened & exactly what Trump meant by texting that she would "do anything".
Heck....Trump probably has had some kind of politician (city, state, federal) knocking on his door once a week for the past 30 years (looking for bucks or influence).
The fact that this thread has gone on for 40 pages (& over 400 posts) shows just how idiotic that many (most) of the Media is and just how much Democratic leaders (& their supporters) have their hair on fire. Seriously guys:
1. Take a look at Cankles Gillibrand. There is no way that she is trying to entice a male (who's married to a fashion model) with sex..... when she has legislation & votes to sell. The last thing that Trump (or any male) would think about if having a meeting with Gillibrand would be some afternoon delight.
2. Being a lawyer who has often discussed legislation with movers & shakers, even Cankles knew this. Which is why she didn't make a big deal of the tweet until Lie-awatha (from Mass), being the dumb*ss that she is, made a big d*mn deal of it.
Any person who construes Trump's text to mean that Cankles is peddling sex (& not graft or influence) is either an idiot, or their mind is in the gutter. (or both)
.
Last edited by hound 109; 12-13-2017 at 03:11 PM..
I think I love you old Gringo. You said all the sweet words I like to read about this low awareness moron in the white house.
Trump's low brow demeanor is what links him to the notion of his supporters being a deplorable lot. Not that this is true, but guilt by association is unfortunately an undeniable political fact.
Perhaps Trump simply meant that the esteemed senator would be willing to pass any legislation deemed favorable to Trump....in exchange for his contributions. We really don't know what Trump meant by the tweet to begin with, although that didn't stop the left from using it for their own purpose.
I took it nothing more than that, and how it got twisted to be sexual is amazing. SMH.
Trump in the past made several comments about being "on the other side" as a donor for a quid pro quo's, and that he would not be affected like many other Presidential candidates taking donations for favors (i.e. Crooked Hillary with her 1-2 billion dollar donations) So, when he made that comment, i automatically thought that what he meant. But somehow ( i guess Im not really surprised) how the left would twist it in a different way.
Perhaps Trump simply meant that the esteemed senator would be willing to pass any legislation deemed favorable to Trump....in exchange for his contributions. We really don't know what Trump meant by the tweet to begin with, although that didn't stop the left from using it for their own purpose.
Did you look into Trump's heart to come up with that?
Perhaps Trump simply meant that the esteemed senator would be willing to pass any legislation deemed favorable to Trump....in exchange for his contributions. We really don't know what Trump meant by the tweet to begin with, although that didn't stop the left from using it for their own purpose.
exactly. except that explanation leaves little room to howl 'sexist pig!'
Warren said Trump ****-shamed her. Trump never uttered that phrase. Do you or warren known what ****-shaming is? Typically, you are usually ****-shamed when you are a ****. Either Warren doesn't nknow what she is talking about, again. Or, Warren knows Gillibrand is a hoe. Whatever the case may be, Warren called Gillibrand a **** indirectly.
I wondered why feminists were so quick to interpret Trump's comment about Gillibrand as meaning she'd give sexual favors. Is that the rumor that's been out there? Did Bill Clinton demand 'favors' from her in exchange for his help?
Yes, the rumosr was out there. I heard it being discussed by Dems in power when Patterson was deciding who to pick for the Senate seat Clinton vacated. Another poster heard the same rumors where he worked as well.
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.
You said all the sweet words I like to read about this low awareness moron in the white house. 
