Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Even on Fox News they are not able to mention anything that is at the level of Trump tapes. The Trump tapes? You mean that one 11-year-old video that shows him talking very crudely about sexual escapades? Sure, that's reprehensible. Is it worse than what past presidents have done while in office? If not, why is it a problem now? Why is one candidate's personal sex life a bigger problem than collusion with the media…
> Why is one candidate's personal sex life a bigger problem than collusion with the media during the campaign If you're prepared to dismiss allegations of (and supporting boasts about) sexual molestation to simply be "his personal sex life" you have a very screwed up idea of sex and personal space.
Did you see the Project Veritas stuff? You know, where the Democratic campaign staffers confess to having hired mentally ill people to commit acts of violence at Trump rallies? And to hiring people to vote out-of-state, specifically using their own cars or rentals to avoid the obvious concern that would be generated by busing them in?
So think about this: if you have at least one of the campaigns having confessed to criminal electioneering, why would you believe anything they say? Why would you believe anyone they bring forward to slander the opposing candidate?
I don't support any such boasts. I support healthy skepticism. NBC didn't have any problem with Trump's conduct when he was a TV star raking in millions for them, but now that he's opposing Dear Leader, the evidence must be brought forward.
And you try to turn this around and make it about me? You're clearly not interested in truth of any kind.