This is not a moral issue - This is a campaign financing issue. Rules are rules. They appear to have been broken.
Do You Care If A World Leader Had An Affair Before Taking Office?
After Ole Hil & Bill I don't think there are any unbroken moral codes -- affairs looking mild.
Leaders should, by definition, lead by example and set a higher standard than the average person.
They are human, not perfect, but—if they are to enjoy the privileges and benefits of their position they sure as hell better live up to the responsibilities as well.
The one thing I can never forgive anyone in a position of authority is hypocrisy and covering it up.
If anyone wants forgiveness, compassion and understanding for their shortcomings and failings, then they have to deserve it. When it comes to that, actions speak louder than words.
In Trump's America, you don't pay the whore, the whore pays YOU.
Trump attorney accuses Stormy Daniels of violating nondisclosure agreement 20 times, claims right to seek $20 million in damages
No I don't care. What's that have to do with him running a country? I ask.
I want the best guy for the job and if he had an affair, I don't think it should have any type of negative effect on his carrying out his duties. I'm owning my own shadow here and we all have needs nobody should look down on him for doing something men do perhaps more than you realize.
Governments every one of them have dirty secrets and the world leaders know that. So that's why I laugh at the impeachment of Bill Clinton.
It is only the propagandized citizen think one needs to be this angelic figure to run the government properly, that is not the case it's a product of brain washing indoctrination of the public school system and history as they teach it that think a prez need to that way..
I think a guy could be banging a few guys and gals every week and still do an ok job, take JFK for example I think he was a pretty good president and he did a lot of hanky-panky.
We live in an age of personal freedoms.
A president can live their life as they choose, provided it's within the law. If a president is discovered to have cheated on their partner then they know that famous people's private lives are reported on by the media. They have to accept that it's part and parcel of being famous.
It makes me chuckle when footballers take out injunctions to prevent newspapers from reporting on their peccadilloes. It's simple: if you don't want newspapers printing those kind of articles, don't do those kind of things.
If a politician make a big deal about how wonderful they are because they're faithful to their partner, don't do drugs, don't get drunk, etc. and then are caught with hookers, drugs and booze ... well they can rightly expect to be ripped to shreds.
The voting public are allowed to choose who they want to vote for. If some choose not to vote for a candidate because of that candidate's private life, well fair enough. That's their choice.
As for me, I'd rather vote for a philandering candidate who knows how to sort out the UK's problems ... instead of a squeaky clean candidate who is faithful to their partner and children but doesn't have a clue of how to sort political problems out.
According to the Bible Jesus himself was conceived out of wedlock, with the father being someone other than the actual man that Mary was engaged to. Hmmm.
Please forgive my ignorance, but I believe having a side-woman/man in France is highly accepted. In the recent past a high ranking French official was very open about his mistress. No one batted an eye.
This is a campaign financing issue. Rules are rules. They appear to have been broken.
It's really bizarre if that is the case - how much was spent on the election in all by the dems for instance?
We now have people running for senate who are blocked from facebook for 30 days while an executive of facebook backs and bankrolls their opponent. Shouldn't that be an unfair 'contribution'?
Why are the likes of Facebook, Twitter and Google and the rest of the MSM allowed to put the considerable weight of their fingers on the scale and it not be considered some form of contribution?
Would you care if Trump was an Atheist? If so why???