Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (1455415)	5/8/2024 1:53:20 AM
From: pocotrader	4 Recommendations Recommended By Brumar89 Doren Mongo2116 rdkflorida2 Respond to of 1571076

don't blame her, imagine sleeping with a dirty diaper beside you

To: Brumar89 who wrote (1455415)	5/8/2024 12:45:41 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571076

Tenchu's Thoughts: What Goes Around Comes Around Goes Around *Penthouse Forum* The media is going apeshit over the Penthouse Forum that used to be known as the federal courthouse in Manhattan. Salacious details over Trump's sexual encounter with a pron star are all over the news, and I have to admit, I find it hard not to read and get engrossed into the non-story. And a non-story it should be. NONE of us should give a Brandon about Trump's private sex life, especially an encounter that happened consensually. NONE of us should be surprised that a man who was found civilly liable for rape (yes, Trump supporters, it was indeed "rape rape") would be hiring pron stars to cheat on his wife. NONE of us should ever consider Trump to be a man of good character and good morals. Even his supporters will euphemistically acknowledge that he "isn't perfect." Not even his so-called "Christian" evangelical supporters. *Not relevant?* But there's something more important than me going online and insincerely shouting "I DON'T CARE" to a small group of regulars on this forum who may or may not care about whether I care or not. And that is the relevancy to Trump's criminal case. Alan Dershowitz rightly points out that the details of the sexual encounter should be irrelevant and are probably being brought up just to make Trump look bad politically. This will no doubt supercharge the Trump supporters who keep viewing these criminal cases as "OMG WITCH HUNTS WITCH HUNTS WITCH HUNTS!" Except that Trump himself denied everything. Except that Trump is trying to defend himself not by pointing out that the coverup shouldn't be a felony, or that the law itself is unconstitutional, but by claiming the prosecution is making shit up. Hence every detail IS relevant in establishing the pron star's credibility. Every detail IS relevant in establishing that the sexual encounter really did take place, and that there was motive in covering it up and hiding the reason for the hush money payment. Because Trump is denying denying denying, the prosecution needs a strong case to establish the facts. And there is no other way than to describe the sexual encounter in great detail. *Lewinsky All Over Again* By the way, I'm reminded of the Lewinsky scandal, where Bill Clinton said with a pointed finger, "I did NOT have sexual relations with that lady." Later of course, he tried to claim that oral sex wasn't really sex, before finally admitting that (shocker!) he did indeed have an "inappropriate relationship" with the intern. I also remember how the special counsel in that scandal, Ken Starr, was adamant in revealing every lurid detail of Bill Clinton's sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky. He just HAD to describe everything that went on between the two (remember cigars?), even though in normal circumstances none of that should be our business. Except that Clinton initially denied the relationship. Except that Clinton was embroiled in a sexual harassment lawsuit with Paula Jones, and that his philandering ways needed to be publicly exposed to establish charges of perjury. The left successfully painted the whole scandal as the right trying to making blowjobs illegal. Of course, the left is wrong about that, but they are correct in pointing out that the entire scandal was used by the Republicans to try and smear Bill Clinton's character. Which ultimately didn't work (although the Clintons from that moment forward became synonymous with a loose relationship with the tr00th). *Hypocritical Trump Supporters* I guarantee you that most of Trump's supporters these days were aghast at what Bill Clinton did during the days of the Lewinsky scandal. They were the ones who claimed "Character counts." They even nominated a man who was supposed to be the "character" president, namely George W. Bush. And he eventually beat Clinton's successor during a time of economic prosperity, which is remarkable. Now look at these Republicans. They're now defending Trump. They're pointing out how the media is hyper-politicizing an already hyper-politicized criminal case with sex, because as we all know, sex sells. They're going out there and showing righteous indignation over how the pron star turned the criminal case into Penthouse Forum, and that the details of the sexual encounter should NOT be relevant. Well well well, are these the same people who supported Ken Starr when he revealed every single detail of Bill receiving a Lewinsky? *But, But, It's Diffe(R)ent!* Ultimately, presidential sex scandals are all too tempting to cover by the media. They will turn valid cases, both criminal and civil, into media spectacles. And both parties will defend their own and accuse the other side of partisan politics. (See Tenchu's First Rule of Partisan Politics.) In other words, hypocrites calling hypocrites hypocrites. Bottom line is that history is repeating itself, except this time both shoes are on opposite feet. And the same people who once criticized Bill Clinton of playing fast and loose with the truth are now defending Donald Trump when he does the exact same thing. Tenchusatsu