Jan 272018
 

This photo depicts Donald Trump’s star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

by Thomas L. Knapp…….

In October of 2016, a Wall Street Journal article claims, Donald Trump’s lawyer paid $130,000 to buy the silence of Stephanie Clifford, better known to viewers of adult films, at any rate as “Stormy Daniels.” Daniels, it’s alleged, was set to tell the story of a 2006 sexual encounter with Trump on Good Morning America and in Slate.

Now-president Trump and Daniels deny (through the attorney) both the encounter and the alleged payoff, but as I write this In Touch magazine now claims to have the true scoop. In 2011, the magazine claims, Daniels described the encounter in an interview and passed a lie detector test to substantiate her story.

Pretty juicy, I guess … but is anyone really surprised? Does this particular story tell us anything we didn’t already know about Donald Trump? More importantly, does it tell us anything we didn’t already know about Donald Trump before the 2016 presidential election?

Trump has been married three times. His second marriage was to Marla Maples, with whom his affair while still married to his first wife, Ivana Trump, had been covered in excruciating detail in the American press.

Around the time of the alleged payoff to Daniels, a tape of Trump from before the alleged encounter (and from around the time he married Melania Trump) came to light in which Trump was heard bragging about his pursuit of a married woman and that “I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star they let you do it. You can do anything  … Grab them by the …”

I’m sure you can fill in the blank there, which is pretty much my whole point: Is this latest bit really informative?

By Election Day — November 8, 2016 — everyone who wanted to know the truth about Donald Trump’s sex life, marital foibles, etc. had received a crash course on them.

And then America voted.

Case closed.

Those who voted for Trump believed his denials (and will presumably continue to disbelieve them no matter how many breathless exclusives follow this one), or voted for him in spite of what they knew (and would likely do so again), or just didn’t consider the issue important (and probably still don’t).

Those who voted against Trump because of their perceptions of how he treats women or how honest he is when it comes to, among other things, marital vows can feel smug and affirmed, I guess, but their minds were likewise already made up and are almost certainly going to stay made up.

As American philosopher and psychologist William James is (perhaps apocryphally) said to have noted, “a difference which makes no difference is no difference at all.” The addition of the Stormy Daniels story to the legend of Donald Trump is that kind of difference.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

Facebook Comments

Thomas L. Knapp
Thomas L. Knapp is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.
 January 27, 2018  Posted by at 1:04 am Issue #253, Thomas L. Knapp  Add comments

  13 Responses to “No, I Don’t Really Care Much About Donald Trump’s Sex Life. Here’s Why.”

  1. I see no reason to give a shit about who he sex with before becoming president. Most people have had sex with more than one person. It is perfectly normal in this day and age. People seem to want to destroy the image of Trump and his family.

    He won and the best thing to do now is support him and hope he gets more done than Obama.

  2. Obama got way too much done for my taste. And much of it was as silly and/or evil as the stuff Trump’s trying to do.

    • I am continually surprised Mr. Knapp, that you grip like a vise, the quixotic notion that presidents set agendas or effect policy.

      • Not being of a superstitious bent in most areas, yes, I do exert a rather tight grip on reality.

        • I see. Let me ask you a simple question: I assume you own your home. Do you allow the people who come in to your home to tell you what to do while in your home? where to sit, what to sit on, what rooms are allowed and disallowed? Again, I will assume the answer is no.

          So why would you think that the owners of this country, and I think we can agree that we live in a plutocracy(whoever you define them to be), would allow the people that live in the country they own, to tell them what to do? Why would they would allow for the possibility that their position be challenged? That their agenda be subverted? that their power be shared or circumvented?

          They would not. People do not relinquish power. Ever.

          • I don’t see how any of that conflicts with the notion that the executive — who is always chosen by the ruling class — exercises power. Yes, he exercises it on behalf of the people he works for. But exercise it he does. And Trump is business as usual.

  3. you just made my point. the president, as you say, is selected, and acts on behalf of those who selects him. hence, the president exercises nothing on his own, but follows the dictates of their boss. now, the orange turd can determine when and where he plays golf, who he launders money for, and the like, but policy? no. he does what he is told. as they all have. since Washington.

    this was a guy who was for Medicare for all. wanna bet how long it would take for him to need it himself if he tried to pass it?

    • Apparently your point wasn’t much of a point. The president does indeed set agendas and effect [sic] policy. Just like the CEO of the Coca Cola Company does. The fact that they both work for other people (one for the ruling class, one for the shareholders of the company) is irrelevant, unless you’re suggesting that everyone is a mindless pawn, lacking free will, all the time and on every subject (which I suppose could be the case but wouldn’t be very interesting).

      • sorry. your analogy is senseless. employees don’t make the rules, employers do. employees can indeed make inconsequential decisions, as the CEO of Coke, as well as Drumpf can. Can the CEO of Coke decide on his own to sell of say, operations in Brazil? of course not. But can he decide to buy a new corporate jet? perhaps. Can Drumpf decide to weekend at Mar-a-Lago and charge it all to the Secret Service? you bet. Can he unilaterally decide to invade N. Korea? I think not. candidate Obama promised to get out of the war in Afghanistan and close Gitmo. as Prez, not so much. NO ONE cedes power.

  4. This sure is off track about sex.
    If anything I believe it was just money to shut a porn star up that would cost votes. Does no prove anything ever happened. WOW big deal Trump likes sex. Wake up people , other than in Key West most men do want sex with hot women

  5. You “men” should be concerned that he’s a sexual predator! BIG DIFFERENCE from men just wanting sex.

    PS – Kindergartner Donald does nothing but parrot his aides who are running the WH because he has no knowledge nor does he care about anything going on in the government (unless it affects him), in this country, or in the world.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. See our Privacy Policy here: http://thebluepaper.com/privacy-policy/

Close