George Papadopoulos is running for Congress in California district vacated by Katie Hill

[HomerJS]

CA25 is an odd district. It was all dem until 1990. Thereafter, it was all rep until Hill won it last year. Kind of a swing district. But I don't think any R closely affiliated with Trump has a good chance right now. Also, Papadopoulos is a total idiot. This is the best they could do to challenge this swing district?

Because of his involvement with Trump he'll get saps to contribute to his campaign.

 

[woolfe9998]

Because of his involvement with Trump he'll get saps to contribute to his campaign.

Probably right. But the funny thing is...he talked. He told the FBI that he was contacted by a UK professor with ties to the Kremlin in March, 2016, and told that the Russians had "stolen e-mails" which would be very bad for the democrats. And he then told all the senior staff of the Trump campaign about this, meaning that Trump knew the Russians stole those e-mails months before he said it might be a 300 lb man in his mother's basement.

But yeah, they'll try to help him anyway.

 

[Jhhnn]

Papadopoulos is a known nincompoop & Trump sycophant. He's perfect.

 

[hal2kilo]

Qualifications? Lied to the FBI and spend a couple weeks in the slammer, a small fine, and community service. That's his platform, "Lock me up!"

Republican wet dream.

 

[HomerJS]

Probably right. But the funny thing is...he talked. He told the FBI that he was contacted by a UK professor with ties to the Kremlin in March, 2016, and told that the Russians had "stolen e-mails" which would be very bad for the democrats. And he then told all the senior staff of the Trump campaign about this, meaning that Trump knew the Russians stole those e-mails months before he said it might be a 300 lb man in his mother's basement.

But yeah, they'll try to help him anyway.

Besides GP gave Barr the Mifsuf lead so our tax dollars can be wasted.

 

[Greenman]

If doing a thing and getting punished for it is 'legitimizing', then Nixon legitimized corruption for Republicans back in '72. Care to comment?

Clinton wasn't punished for the act, he was impeached for lying about it under oath. I'm reasonably confident that he didn't legitimize perjury.

 

[Greenman]

Trump did it and covered it up with hush payments for which one person has gone to jail.

And Bill was dragged through the coals for lying about it. Meanwhile GOP is doing jack sh!t about a president who's committed actual crimes.

Totally the same?

No, those are different.

 

[Greenman]

I found a copy of the GOP's family values plank...

That's about what I expected.

 

[pcgeek11]

As we can see from pcgeek's response, Democrats are always guilty of much worse things than Republicans, even when there is no evidence proving it.

That isn't what I said.

Cutting to the root of what I said is that.
She didn't need to resign. It was her choice. I don't think she needed to either.
I suspect that there are other reasons for her resignation other than what is already in the public eye. I could be wrong, but as of yet I see nothing to resign for. Esp if she is innocent as she claims.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Trump did it and covered it up with hush payments for which one person has gone to jail.

And Bill was dragged through the coals for lying about it. Meanwhile GOP is doing jack sh!t about a president who's committed actual crimes.

Totally the same?

Clinton is far worse because he's a Democrat.

 

[ch33zw1z]

That's about what I expected.

Yep, republicans erased all of their professed beliefs wrt conservative family values. Better call focus on the family and the 700 club for starters, let them know it's over

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Clinton wasn't punished for the act, he was impeached for lying about it under oath. I'm reasonably confident that he didn't legitimize perjury.

And Nixon wasn't actually impeached, so he was just as 'punished' as Clinton was for it. Ergo he legitimized corruption just as much as Clinton legitimized adulterly.

No go on, continue to tell us all how it's different because Clinton was a Democrat.

 

[Greenman]

And Nixon wasn't actually impeached, so he was just as 'punished' as Clinton was for it. Ergo he legitimized corruption just as much as Clinton legitimized adulterly.

No go on, continue to tell us all how it's different because Clinton was a Democrat.

I don't follow your logic at all. Clinton was never charged with the crime of adultery, that was never on the table. He was charged with perjury, and never convicted. By your (seriously flawed) logic, Clinton legitimized perjury as much as Nixon legitimized corruption.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

I don't follow your logic at all. Clinton was never charged with the crime of adultery, that was never on the table. He was charged with perjury, and never convicted. By your (seriously flawed) logic, Clinton legitimized perjury as much as Nixon legitimized corruption.

There's no logic to it because it's illogical, just as it's illogical to state that Clinton legitimized adultery. I was being intentionally obtuse to point out how ridiculous your argument was.