Porn star says she was threatened to keep silence on Trump - TV interview

[Different]

This is media war but Trump will never be impeached because things have changed a lot in politics since the seventies.

[JimmyJ]

MaeJoMTB - "So this thread is essentially guys living in Thailand bashing a guy in America for using hookers? You gotta laugh!"

 

Guys bashing a politician whose base is Fundamentalist "Family Values" Christians, a guy who makes sure to invoke the word "God" at every official event, yet whose personal life in words and deeds is 180 degrees opposite.

 

I.e., a hypocrite exposed (yet again).

 

(Also, neither woman was a hooker).

Edited March 27, 2018 by JimmyJ

[Thakkar]

28 minutes ago, JimmyJ said:

MaeJoMTB - "So this thread is essentially guys living in Thailand bashing a guy in America for using hookers? You gotta laugh!"

 

Guys bashing a politician whose base is Fundamentalist "Family Values" Christians, a guy who makes sure to invoke the word "God" at every official event, yet whose personal life in words and deeds is 180 degrees opposite.

 

I.e., a hypocrite exposed (yet again).

 

(Also, neither woman was a hooker).

 

While self-proclaimed god-fearing family values fundamentalist Christians are A-ok with a thrice married, adulterous philandering shady conman president who has repeatedly expressed sinful incestuous urges, open minded liberals are aghast.

 

Folks, it’s finally happened; we have slipped into a parallel universe. Over here, Seinfeld is a deeply thoughtful show about *someting*.

[Jingthing]

It's probably only a matter of time till we learn about the real deal between Stormy and the media/dems/whoever. The entire story is so fishy, only ignorants can't see it.
 
Stormy gets older, her career is over, she needs money. Easy as that.

If you're blinded by "trump" loyalism that is.
Interesting that the God Emperor has not mentioned her by name. He generally doesn't have any hesitation about hitting super hard at anyone that has even mildly criticized him.


Hmm.

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[alocacoc]

7 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

If you're blinded by "trump" loyalism that is.
Interesting that the God Emperor has not mentioned her by name. He generally doesn't have any hesitation about hitting super hard at anyone that has even mildly criticized him.


Hmm.

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Wait and see. A Stormy story is a nothingburger and Trump will win again.

[Jingthing]

Wait and see. A Stormy story is a nothingburger and Trump will win again.

It's one thing out of many dude but enjoy your denial and see you in the midterms

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[alocacoc]

10 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

It's one thing out of many dude but enjoy your denial and see you in the midterms

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

This topic isn't about midterms.

 

Why liberals always deflect? Always the same pattern.

 

Who's next? Windy Alexa?

 

CNN Poll: 42% approve of Trump, highest in 11 months

Btw, https://edition.cnn.com/2018/03/26/politics/cnn-poll-trump-approval-rating-rises/index.html

 

(it's CNN, so it must be true

 

Edited March 27, 2018 by alocacoc

[Jingthing]

48 minutes ago, alocacoc said:

This topic isn't about midterms.

 

Why liberals always deflect? Always the same pattern.

 

Who's next? Windy Alexa?

 

CNN Poll: 42% approve of Trump, highest in 11 months

Btw, https://edition.cnn.com/2018/03/26/politics/cnn-poll-trump-approval-rating-rises/index.html

 

(it's CNN, so it must be true

 

I'll take those odds, dude. You neglected to mention 54 percent DISAPPROVE. Yes, I also consider CNN a quite credible source. Thanks for agreeing. 

 

To add, I don't really buy into your insult that mentioning the midterms is really a deflection. You see, thing is, it's now widely understood that the coming midterms is going to largely be a referendum about how people feel about "trump" -- not only his policies, but probably more so about his atrociously BAD BEHAVIOR. The sex scandals and the sleazy lying and likely criminality involved in the coverups is part of what will be judged by the voters -- ESPECIALLY WOMEN! 

 

Of course his hard core white nationalist, misogynist, deplorable base (30 to 35 percent) won't be moved by ANYTHING. Does not matter. 

Edited March 27, 2018 by Jingthing

[Thakkar]

47 minutes ago, alocacoc said:

53 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

It's one thing out of many dude but enjoy your denial and see you in the midterms
 

This topic isn't about midterms.

 

Why liberals always deflect? Always the same pattern.

 

“Trump is an adulterous philandering horndog”

“Look over there! Clinton Foundation, uranium One, Benghazi!”

 

Is a deflection.

 

“Trump’s philandering ways with porn stars may negatively affect mid term election prospects of Trump-supporting Republicans relying on an evangelical base” is a logical supposition.

 

Just saying words is not the same as making an argument.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

2 hours ago, MaeJoMTB said:

So this thread is essentially guys living in Thailand bashing a guy in America for using hookers?

You gotta laugh!

 

That's a nice attempted cheap shot and deflection.

 

Except, not all, nor probably most, of the married guys living here use hookers once married, and of the married guys who do, I suspect many of them don't have their wife at home caring for a newborn/young child while they're out prowling the streets (or penthouses in Donald's case).

 

To the contrary, lots of guys living here in Thailand manage to lead normal lives without cheating on their wives or hanging out with porn stars or hookers, and we're not even TV stars or future presidents of the U.S.

 

[janclaes47]

3 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

That's a nice attempted cheap shot and deflection.

 

Except, not all, nor probably most, of the married guys living here use hookers once married, and of the married guys who do, I suspect many of them don't have their wife at home caring for a newborn/young child while they're out prowling the streets (or penthouses in Donald's case).

 

To the contrary, lots of guys living here in Thailand manage to lead normal lives without cheating on their wives or hanging out with porn stars or hookers, and we're not even TV stars or future presidents of the U.S.

 

So why is it anyone's business what the current president of the usa did in his personal life a decade or more before he became president?

 

It becomes clear from your last comment that you consider it your business.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

18 minutes ago, janclaes47 said:

So why is it anyone's business what the current president of the usa did in his personal life a decade or more before he became president?

 

It becomes clear from your last comment that you consider it your business.

 You seem to be forgetting a few things:

 

1. He's probably repeatedly lying about that and other things now. And while being a blatant and pathological liar may not be illegal, it's not what you'd wish for in your president. But more to the point, future voters have the right and obligation to judge him on his overall conduct, as a lying president, and before. And to judge him fairly, the truth needs to be known.

 

2. The payoff to Daniels, coming on the eve of the last election and not a decade ago, to keep her quiet by Trump's lawyer may well have been an illegal campaign expenditure. And that may figure into the special counsel's current investigation of the election.

 

3. And lastly, I'm an American, so yes, what my (I use that term reluctantly) president does and has done are things I consider to be my business as a U.S. citizen and voter.

Edited March 27, 2018 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[janclaes47]

Just now, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

2. The payoff to Daniels, coming on the eve of the last election and not a decade ago, to keep her quiet by Trump's lawyer may well have been an illegal campaign expenditure. And that may figure into the special counsel's current investigation of the election.

To me that more smells of extortion from Daniels side.

 

1 minute ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

3. And perhaps unlike you, I'm an American, so yes, what my (I use that term reluctantly) president does and has done are things I consider to be my business as a U.S. citizen and voter.

The personal life of the president a decade before he entered office is nobodies business but his own. Ever heard about privacy? Why would the fact that he decade ago did or not did walk around with his johnny out of his pants have anything to do with the current state of affairs?

 

5 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

And while being a blatant and pathological liar may not be illegal, it's not what you'd wish for in your president.

Well you said it there yourself, it is not illegal.

 

6 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

But more to the point, future voters have the right and obligation to judge him on his overall conduct, as a lying president, and before.

Yes you have the right to judge him on his overall conduct during his time in office, or maybe as well during the campaign, but what happened in his personal life a decade ago has no relevance to the governing of the country today

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

2 minutes ago, janclaes47 said:

 Why would the fact that he decade ago did or not did walk around with his johnny out of his pants have anything to do with the current state of affairs?

 

 

Yes, you used the correct term of reference in regards to Trump... the current state of AFFAIRS!

 

It's kind of funny, there used to be a time in the U.S. when you couldn't get elected as president if you were Jewish or Catholic or black. Being any of those ruled you out as being a candidate for president because too many voters wouldn't accept it.

 

But nowadays, a lot of those same Americans who didn't want blacks, Catholics or Jews as president (and I'm not one of them) suddenly are OK with a President renowned for lying, infidelity, corruption, and abusive behavior toward woman, among Donald's many sterling traits. It's a very strange world out there.

 

[geriatrickid]

How about a kind thought for  the current Mrs. Trump and his kid Barron?

I feel for them. No one can suffer such indignity and not be hurt.  I expect the poor woman is trying to protect that boy who seems to be somewhat "special". Anyway, just a reminder that there is some collateral damage. Consider how his daughter must feel. I would expect she's humiliated, especially after the spanking comment.

As for his two clods of sons I couldn't care less. And the other daughter, Tiffany is fortunate she's an unwanted family member.

[alocacoc]

2 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

How about a kind thought for  the current Mrs. Trump and his kid Barron?

I feel for them. No one can suffer such indignity and not be hurt.  I expect the poor woman is trying to protect that boy who seems to be somewhat "special". Anyway, just a reminder that there is some collateral damage. Consider how his daughter must feel. I would expect she's humiliated, especially after the spanking comment.

As for his two clods of sons I couldn't care less. And the other daughter, Tiffany is fortunate she's an unwanted family member.

The truth will come out. Be patient. But don't expect anything from the Stormyclan&Co.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

13 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

How about a kind thought for  the current Mrs. Trump and his kid Barron?

I feel for them. No one can suffer such indignity and not be hurt.  I expect the poor woman is trying to protect that boy who seems to be somewhat "special". Anyway, just a reminder that there is some collateral damage. Consider how his daughter must feel. I would expect she's humiliated, especially after the spanking comment.

As for his two clods of sons I couldn't care less. And the other daughter, Tiffany is fortunate she's an unwanted family member.

 

Kind of sadly funny, the other day, I saw the headline of a news article wherein the First Lady (through a spokeswoman) was issuing her first public statement on the whole Stormy Daniels affairs, literally. I believe it was just in the wake of the 60 Minutes interview airing on TV.

 

And I was wondering, what the heck can the First Lady possibly say on the topic? And then when I read into the article, basically, the gist of the statement was to chide the news media to not keep mentioning her son by name in the various articles about Trump's affair with Daniels, which occurred when the wife was at home with the recently born (anonymous) child.

 

And I guess my thought about that issue is, perhaps she should have addressed the concern to her husband, since he's the one who put her and her son into that somewhat humiliating situation.

 

[Thakkar]

1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

That's a nice attempted cheap shot and deflection.

 

Except, not all, nor probably most, of the married guys living here use hookers once married, and of the married guys who do, I suspect many of them don't have their wife at home caring for a newborn/young child while they're out prowling the streets (or penthouses in Donald's case).

 

To the contrary, lots of guys living here in Thailand manage to lead normal lives without cheating on their wives or hanging out with porn stars or hookers, and we're not even TV stars or future presidents of the U.S.

 

 

Speak for yourself. I’m going to bankrupt some casinos and an airline, open a fake university, launder some Russian dough, screw some porn stars then run for President on a racist evangelical ticket.

 

Wish me luck!

 

 

[Thakkar]

57 minutes ago, janclaes47 said:

So why is it anyone's business what the current president of the usa did in his personal life a decade or more before he became president?

 

It becomes clear from your last comment that you consider it your business.

 

I don’t know about anyone else, but I’ve made it my business becaus I aspire to duchbag stardom and I like to learn from the best.

[lannarebirth]

4 hours ago, MaeJoMTB said:

So this thread is essentially guys living in Thailand bashing a guy in America for using hookers?

You gotta laugh!

That part is pretty predictable it is the so called "credible" journalists delving in that has me shaking my head. Why would anyone ever give credence to what they write in the future when they have already self labeled themselves "tabloid" journalists.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

30 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

 

Speak for yourself. I’m going to bankrupt some casinos and an airline, open a fake university, launder some Russian dough, screw some porn stars then run for President on a racist evangelical ticket.

 

Awesome!!! 

 

And nice recap too... But you missed the parts about allegedly groping more than a dozen women and refusing to disclose your federal tax returns. And I think some rape allegations as well.

 

Edited March 27, 2018 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[JimmyJ]

1 hour ago, janclaes47 said:

So why is it anyone's business what the current president of the usa did in his personal life a decade or more before he became president?

 

 

I agree with this in general.

 

But - when someone positions themself as the holier than thou fundamentalist Christian, and the "Family Values" spokesperson, then they have abdicated their right to privacy on issues which negate their espoused values.

 

The same with sexuality - e.g. if someone is gay that should not be an issue of any kind and shouldn't be brought up as it is (or should be) irrelevant.

 

But if the person is consistently supporting anti-gay legislation, condemns gays in general, and it turns out is actually gay and enjoying the gay lifestyle while at the same time working against that community, that person should be exposed for the lying hypocrite that they are.

 

(There is a terrific documentary on that very topic - gay politicians who campaign as anti-gay).

 

Edited March 27, 2018 by JimmyJ

[JimmyJ]

6 minutes ago, JimmyJ said:

I agree with this in general.

 

But - when someone positions themself as the holier than thou fundamentalist Christian, and the "Family Values" spokesperson, then they have abdicated their right to privacy on issues which negate their espoused values.

 

The same with sexuality - e.g. if someone is gay that should not be an issue of any kind and shouldn't be brought up as it is (or should be) irrelevant.

 

But if the person is consistently supporting anti-gay legislation, condemns gays in general, and it turns out is actually gay and enjoying the gay lifestyle while at the same time working against that community, that person should be exposed for the lying hypocrite that they are.

 

(There is a terrific documentary on that very topic - gay politicians who campaign as anti-gay).

 

Christopher Hitchens was well spoken on this -

 

"Whenever I hear some bigmouth in Washington or the Christian heartland banging on about the evils of sodomy or whatever, I mentally enter his name in my notebook and contentedly set my watch. Sooner rather than later, he will be discovered down on his weary and well-worn old knees in some dreary motel or latrine, with an expired Visa card, having tried to pay well over the odds to be peed upon by some Apache transvestite.”

 

[bendejo]

I agree.  IMO anyone who puts on such a pretentious display of some sort of righteousness is very likely the biggest offender.  E.g. the conservative politicians in the US who go on and on about the waste of tax payer dollars are the ones overdoing their expenses in the extreme.  One certain "Tea Party" darling is collecting Federal farm subsidies by not growing anything on a few acres of land she owns.

And then there's the religious and social (read as gender issues) blowhards.  Mike Pence?  tick tick tick....

Put it this way, they are the ones who are thinking about that stuff.  For instance, Pence will not be in a room with a woman unless his wife his present -- what does he think will happen, it will turn into a gang bang?  This attitude is very sharia, BTW.

 

 

[Thakkar]

8 hours ago, janclaes47 said:

So why is it anyone's business what the current president of the usa did in his personal life a decade or more before he became president?

 

It becomes clear from your last comment that you consider it your business.

 

To me it’s not so much about Trump as about the hypocrisy of “family values” touting evangelicals who support this thrice married  unapologetically adulterous pornstar boning  philandering pervert.

[MaeJoMTB]

9 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Except, not all, nor probably most, of the married guys living here use hookers once married, and of the married guys who do, I suspect many of them don't have their wife at home caring for a newborn/young child while they're out prowling the streets (or penthouses in Donald's case).

Yeah, I did.

[MaeJoMTB]

7 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

To me it’s not so much about Trump as about the hypocrisy of “family values” touting evangelicals who support this thrice married  unapologetically adulterous pornstar boning  philandering pervert.

I thought Trump won because he wasn't 'Hillary', not for any other reason.

I'm thinking Charlie Manson would have had a good chance of being President if running against her.

 

Trump could have run his whole campaign and won just standing up and saying 'I'm not Hillary'.

[MaeJoMTB]

7 hours ago, JimmyJ said:

The same with sexuality - e.g. if someone is gay that should not be an issue of any kind and shouldn't be brought up as it is (or should be) irrelevant.

Of course it's an issue.

How can you represent 'family values' when you will never have a family.

(family = man + woman + their children)

[animalmagic]

Just now, MaeJoMTB said:

Of course it's an issue.

How can you represent 'family values' when you will never have a family.

(family = man + woman + their children)

By that logic are you suggesting that a female president cannot represent men, or vice versa?

Being born in the first place suggests that the individual does have a family.

Edited March 28, 2018 by animalmagic
addition

[HLover]

On 3/26/2018 at 9:08 AM, Darcula said:

How do you threaten a pornstar?

 

Promise not to upload her compromising vids online.

Perhaps a shot to the eye?  I researched your question online and found that "Suprise money shots" seemed rather unpleasant for the whores on the receiving end.