What? What responsibility does Abedin have for any scandal that may come of this? This is the same bullshit that was leveled at Hillary over the Lewinsky scandal.
Do I personally think it's fair that people will hold her responsible for how she reacts to this? No. But a scandal will come from it anyhow. And the news has been non-stop reporting about how she's leaving him. If she chose not to leave him, it would probably distract from the campaign even more. Damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. Donald Trump is already trying to make some sort of impossible connection between Weiner and Hillary and classified data. It's stupid and despicable to do that, but he is. So the best thing for her to do is ditch him. To lessen the effects of the inevitable "scandal". Also because he's a gross person.
You can't be that naive. Divorcing him is the only way she can remove herself from responsibility with this scandal. Oh, you're married to a disgraced congressman who has a sex addiction and texts nude pictures to relative strangers while your son lays next to him on the bed? Yeah. If she stayed any longer she'd be complicit in his behaviour. Arguably she already is; by now, she knows what she's married to. I understand not bailing the first time, because I think she was pregnant, but there's no justification to stay now. And as Clinton, if Abedin stayed with him you'd have to cut her off the active portion of the campaign trail. It would be a giant red flag and target to anyone who wanted to attack Clinton by proxy. Like it or not, to a certain degree you're responsible for your spouse's behaviour. Not before you know about a flaw, but after? Absolutely.
It's also been speculated on that Hillary was complicit in the sexual assaults Bill was accused of and helped to bury them or cover them up. I wouldn't be be shocked if Hillary told Abedin to tell him to fuck off so the campaign doesn't suffer. I have this feeling that political marriages function in much different ways than your standard husband and wife situation. You get the public face. And then the real fucked up story. I would have loved to be a fly on the wall in the white house in the late 90's.
Is that really any different than spouses who are with star athletes? I'd say a good portion of them know their star spouses have flings in different cities but deal with it because it affords them a lifestyle they otherwise wouldn't have. I wouldn't lose respect for them and as xrayvision said; it's probably very different to be in that kind of relationship than your typical John and Jane Smith marriage.
I mean think about it... We have seen 2 sexting scandals on this guy. That we know of. Can you imagine the amount of shit that we don't know about? No way this guy limits it's to just 2 ever. I know his now ex wife knew about all this shit before but tried to remain professional and not have it make its way over to Hillary. Just imagine what we don't know. She was probably aching to get rid of him a long time ago but she has a fairly high profile job as far as politics is concerned. Getting a divorce and having it go public opens the door for so much more speculation as to why she left him. And more scandals and distraction. Now that he's blasting his cock all over the place, it gave her a good out. And there is no need for further speculation.
Eh, I don't think he's clever enough to be a mastermind of any great sex ring of secrets. Also, he is (or was) a pretty big fish to catch in terms of a "Gotcha!" moment. When the first scandal broke, we would have seen women coming out of the woodwork if he was balls deep. We may yet now that this second one has come forward and his personal life, as opposed to just his professional life, is falling apart. Looking at the pictures, it's a matter of time. She is way out of his league once he's stripped (ha!) of the title of office.
I disagree. But then again, broken narcissistic snarky Jewish guys with sex addictions are my type. I always find the drama and politicization of these "stand by your man" situations for high-profiling cheating cases so tiresome. That aspect of the story is so irrelevant and meaningless and no one else's business. The idea that a wife is at all responsible for his behavior is completely absurd. And it's frustrating that the only possible explanations for why she would stay are always so negative towards her, especially in political relationships. I know I'm not the only person in the world that doesn't consider cheating to be THAT big of a deal. (And in this case in particular, he didn't even actually cheat on her. At least in the story we all know.) Maybe instead of being weak or a gold digger or politically motivated she genuinely just doesn't care that much.
I guess it depends on the relationship dynamics and one's perspective, but in most marriages what he did is absolutely cheating. You don't have to fuck someone to cheat on your spouse. But again, different strokes...
Huma isn't Hillary, but by extension, wouldn't you expect Huma to live up to some of the central planks of Hillary's campaign schtick? Hillary touts breaking down barriers that hold women back, and equal pay for equal work amongst other slogans as part of her campaign. Wouldn't being attached to a philandering, disgraced ex-politician fly in the face of those beliefs to some degree? That doesn't sound like equality or fairness to me. I guess after writing that thinking of Huma, I realized that it also discribes Hillary. So, maybe, it doesn't mean anything after all. Neither one of the two potential future Presidents are exactly beacons of virtue so who cares it this is who you want to lead you?
Me either, that sounds like victim blaming. So we should denigrate her because she stayed with her cheating husband?
To a certain degree, yes. I'll be the first one to acknowledge that marriage is fucking hard and that I have no experience whatsoever with it. I do, however, have extensive experience with addiction. The unfortunate truth is: people don't change. Or rather, they change so rarely and often only when THEY decide to. So if you discover that you're married to an addict, you have two choices: leave, or be part of the problem. The first time it happened, I can understand staying because likely a bunch of promises were made and they were expecting their first kid, which is a hard time for any woman to decide to go solo. At this point, though, you are now deeply aware that your husband has proclivities that put you both at risk, to say nothing of sending a semi-naked picture WITH YOUR TODDLER SON AWAKE AND BESIDE HIM IN BED. If you stay, you are complicit in that behaviour. At some point you have to decide to get off the sinking ship, or to go down with it.
This man saved a baby's life from a hot car. CNN interviews this real-life hero. He had a Trump t-shirt on, so they censored the shirt. My question is: there is no possible way we can hate the media more than the current state they're in, because they are a Perfect Zero. 6% of citizens now trust them. They know we hate them, they know we don't trust them, any and all comment sections they have on social media is festooned exclusively with scorn meant directly for them in every post. When WILL they get the message that they suck and must change?
When something comes along causing them to change. Right now, there's nothing. They are also RAKING in money like it's fucking Columbia circa 1980. There is no reason for them to stop doing what they are doing from a business standpoint. The ethical side has been dead and gone a long time now.
There's been another interesting dichotomy in the election the past few weeks too, if you haven't noticed. Trump has gone to Louisiana and visited with the flood victims, met with Latino leaders to get their input on immigration policy, and today flew to Mexico to meet with the Mexican president to discuss NAFTA, immigration, and his wall. Meanwhile, Hillary has held a couple of fund raisers and gave a speech to the American Legion.
I don't think either of them honestly give a shit about the people in Louisiana. If you're only going to help out for 45 minutes to get your picture taken, you might as well take a shit on them. Hillary knows better than to pander that hard to people when all you succeed in doing in bombarding them with an obscene amount of security personnel. And she's the queen of pandering. They were also in the middle of a disaster where the logistics of planning her security would be next to impossible. She probably has more than Trump.
the only reason Trump did any of that is votes, and a desperate bid to sway Latinos and other immigrants to vote for him. Hillary doesn't need to bother. Cold, but there it is.
I happen to be from the south/Mississippi. Without sounding like sour grapes it still chaps my ass that when anything is mentioned about Hurricane Katrina the only city mentioned is New Orleans; instead of Waveland, Pass Christian, Long Beach, Gulfport, Biloxi, Ocean Springs, Gautier, or any of the other cities that were actually hit by that fucking hurricane!! New Orleans got the tail end yet the land mass between New Orleans and Mobile was decimated. People thought that Camille in 1969 was the worst but it wasn't. I do happen to be a Republican and I remember the response by the government and the vitriol that was shown to Bush for everything. Obama should have cut the golf trip short and shown up. Trump tried to make political hay with it but I don't know if it helped. But at least he showed up. Hillary has the minority vote so she just kept campaigning. And if she is such an awesome person I'm gonna say that HRC should not need any security?!?!.. And if ya couldn't tell I'm still pissed about the Katrina narrative. MS isn't ever mentioned because our governor and state services actually manned up and did what we should without bitching about how much the federal government wasn't helping us
Oh man Giuliani wearing that "Make Mexico Great Again Also" hat has me in fucking tears... so when's Ashton Kutcher jump out for the big reveal that the US has just been fucking with the rest of the world and this election cycle is an episode of Punk'd on the grandest scale imaginable?
I read that he was told by the governor not to come because they needed all of their people helping with rescue and not helping with the logistics of his arrival.