Odd JFKA Reference By Right Wing Radio Pundit?

[Leslie Sharp]

47 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:

Wow, this sounds like extremist rhetoric. We don't need this kind of poison in our politics and discourse. Yes, the prosecution of Trump over the Stormy Daniels payoff seems very selective and smacks of partisan prosecution, but this does not excuse Santilli's poisonous rhetoric. 

I disagree with any who attempt to characterize prosecution of Trump's payoff to Stormy Daniels as a partisan prosecution. I do agree that the crime was, as a matter of fact, partisan.

Trump wanted to be president running on the GOP ticket, she posed a threat, he paid her off.  As a collective, evangelicals and conservative Catholics — his base — do not look kindly on headlines of sex with a porn star or unseemly locker talk so he knew his campaign would take a severe blow, as indeed it did when the Access Hollywood grab 'em tape surfaced.  Let's not brush that tape under the rug here. It reveals an attitude reflective of a behavior, for instance sex with Stormy Daniels. No doubt prosecutors consider patterns.

If it is established that based on the timing of the payoff, Trump did use money that must be categorized as campaign funds because he was running on the GOP ticket at the time, and he committed a felony — not a misdemeanor, then I suppose one could argue this is indeed a prosecution of a "partisan" crime tied directly to the Republican apparatus.

Edited March 23, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Ron Bulman]

9 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

I disagree with any who attempt to characterize prosecution of Trump's payoff to Stormy Daniels as a partisan prosecution. I do agree that the crime was, as a matter of fact, partisan.

Trump wanted to be president running on the GOP ticket, she posed a threat, he paid her off.  As a collective, evangelicals and conservative Catholics — his base — do not look kindly on headlines of sex with a porn star or unseemly locker talk so he knew his campaign would take a severe blow, as indeed it did when the Access Hollywood grab 'em tape surfaced.  Let's not brush that tape under the rug here. It reveals an attitude reflective of a behavior, for instance sex with Stormy Daniels. No doubt prosecutors consider patterns.

If it is established that based on the timing of the payoff, Trump did use money that must be categorized as campaign funds because he was running on the GOP ticket at the time, and he committed a felony — not a misdemeanor, then I suppose one could argue this is indeed a prosecution of a "partisan" crime tied directly to the Republican apparatus.

One might say, furthering their agenda?

[Benjamin Cole]

21 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

One might say, furthering their agenda?

What is difference between paying blackmail, and paying hush money? 

[W. Niederhut]

On 3/23/2023 at 10:23 PM, Benjamin Cole said:

What is difference between paying blackmail, and paying hush money? 

Ben,

    This MAGA pearl-clutching about Trump's Stormy Daniels hush money case is simply astonishing.

    Let's think for a moment about Donald Trump's brazen hypocrisy.

    Do you remember when Donald Trump brought some of Bill Clinton's former sex partners/accusers to one of his debates against Hillary Clinton in 2016?

    At the time, Trump was simultaneously paying off Stormy Daniels to remain quiet about their affair!

    And, at the time, Fox News-- Trump's Ministry of Propaganda-- buried the Stormy Daniels story.

[Benjamin Cole]

56 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Ben,

    This MAGA pearl-clutching about Trump's Stormy Daniels hush money case is simply astonishing.

    Let's think for a moment about Donald Trump's brazen hypocrisy.

    Do you remember when Donald Trump brought some of Bill Clinton's former sex partners/accusers to one of his debates against Hillary Clinton in 2016?

    At the time, Trump was simultaneously paying off Stormy Daniels to remain quiet about their affair!

    And, at the time, Fox News-- Trump's Ministry of Propaganda-- buried the Stormy Daniels story.

Trump is a character. No one denies that. 

Few would deny large swaths of the media have become aligned with the two major political parties, and thus mouthpieces. And the parties have deep relations with the intel state and media. 

Trump did and does not. That explains a lot. That does not make Trump a sterling character. But it does set context. 

But back to the question: what is the difference between "hush money" and "blackmail"? 

This is from Encyclopedia.com

Blackmail generally refers to hush money, and extortion refers to certain forms of public official misconduct and to those making threats of physical harm to person or property. Few "blackmail" statutes remain on the books, with most statutes prohibiting such behavior as extortion, theft, or criminal coercion.

---30---

Ms. Daniels' lawyer was, of course, Michael Avenatti, now sentenced to prison and disbarred. 

Daniels, to her credit, says her decade-old and multiple liaisons with Trump were consensual.

Then, as Trump became successful in his bid for the nomination, Daniels through Avenatti, resurfaces, and her story could imperil Trump's chances, and she is paid $150k (except Avenatti kept the money). 

Rather obviously, Trump was backmailed, or "paid hush money" and he paid it. 

Paying "hush money" is the same as being blackmailed. 

Except for the spin. 

 

 

 

[W. Niederhut]

Ben,

   Do you grasp the Trump/GOP hypocrisy in the Stormy Daniels case?

   Let's recall that the GOP spent five years and millions of taxpayer dollars "investigating" Bill Clinton, then smeared and impeached him for engaging in a private, consensual affair with an adult.

    Brett Kavanaugh leaked grand jury details about Clinton's private sex life to the media, before later ruling from the bench that grand jury details about Trump's Russiagate treason were confidential.

    Under the circumstances, I have no sympathy for Trump and his Fox/GOP enablers.