Dear CNN: Trump Personally Paid Off Stormy – Congress, However, Paid Its Victims Millions From Treasury, Is That ‘News?’

The rationale for being offended by Trump’s payout is pretty difficult to square with what his critics have been up to in their own lives.

Trump paid money to silence Stephanie Giffords.

We’re told, by our ‘betters’ in the media that we’re supposed to be outraged about that.

That raises a few uncomfortable questions. Not for Trump… so much as his critics.

First, there’s the complaint that Trump ‘should have’ paid that out of campaign expenses. Stop for a moment and imagine what people would be saying if he had done exactly that?

Would they say he did the right thing? Or would such a payment have been a flagrant misuse of campaign money? (Is there any doubt?)

So they are creating a deliberate Catch-22 Damned if you do, Damned if you don’t scenario.

He paid her money to STFU. Because it would have ‘altered the outcome of the election’.

It’s the ‘altered the outcome’ that has people’s panties in a wad is it? Ok, let’s do a quick check to see whether we’re all still playing by the same rules here.

https://twitter.com/thebradfordfile/status/1071925345417334784

Nope. They’re not.

Remember that slush fund we heard about? The one that Congress used to pay hush money to women (men?) with MeToo-style allegations against elected officials? And yet, somehow we’re not allowed to know WHO was protected, nor how much of that $17 million was paid to protect any one of them?

Yes, $17 million of taxpayer money has been spent on settling, among other things, sexual harassment claims in Congress, and we pretty much don’t know anything about the cases. As CNN noted, the names of those involved are withheld not only from the public but also from party leadership.
Source: WesternJournal

That’s Tax payer money that — if the truth of the allegations were generally known — could certainly alter the outcome of an election, is it not?

But it’s somehow ‘problematic’ for a candidate to use his OWN money? Paying for the silence of those who would blackmail him by telling the world about past sexual trysts — with consenting adults?

We realize, with some irony, who it was that interviewed Cohen. It was George Stephanopoulos. What pops up immediately when his name is searched? Not his current Media job. Nope. His political job. “Former White House Communications Director”. That would be under one William Jefferson Clinton.

This is the same George Stephanopoulos who worked on Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign that famously squelched multiple “bimbo eruptions” surrounding the Arkansas Governor and his quest for the White House. Stephanopoulos recalled his moral position on being part of the bimbo eruption operation in his memoir “All Too Human”:

“I didn’t believe Clinton, and I couldn’t buy the party line — which meant I was the enemy now,” Stephanopoulos wrote. “I didn’t think I was a hypocrite, because my defense of Clinton against past bimbo eruptions had been predicated on my belief that he wouldn’t create new ones … For several years, I had served as Clinton’s character witness. Now I felt like a dupe.”
Source: WashingtonTimes

He actively helped destroy the reputations of women who endangered Clinton’s aspirations. Trump merely purchased their silence, in the same way that one might settle business deal gone awry by paying out the other party, with the condition of non-disclosure of the sordid details.

Nobody would question the legality of the business deal payout. Nobody is losing their heads over the Congressional slush fund. (Even if we’d REALLY like to know whose alleged misconduct is costing taxpayers money.) But Trump paying off a couple of trollops who (probably) had a roll in the hay with a Billionaire Playboy?

It’s the end of the freaking world?

Democrats and their media enablers had a chance to care about personal morality and marital vows. They gave Clinton a pass, refusing to even acknowledge Juanita Broaddrick’s allegations of unqualified rape.

The same media turned a blind eye to the open secret of Jonathan Edwards banging a side-chick while his wife was dying of cancer. He reportedly used donor money to ‘disappear’ her when he learned that he’d knocked her up.

That was to ‘influence an election’ too… right?

But somehow, it’s only Trump’s indiscretions that matter to the media. It wouldn’t have anything to do with that ‘R’ after his name, now … would it?

Nah. Of course not.

Attention is already turning to the big 2020 showdown.

And — if those huge MAGA rallies were any indication — the President is ready.