Jill Biden’s ex-husband accuses her of affair with Joe in 1970s

  • Thread starter Thread starter gam197
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Nepperhan . . . .
I don’t care who she is alleged to have had sex with. After 50 years, the conduct of her and her husband has expiated anything having to do with pre-marriage peccadilloes.
Click to expand...
By “pre-marriage peccadilloes” do you mean Joe running around with his friend’s wife?
Bringing up a claim which is decades-old and not previously mentioned, even if it is accurate, means very little.
Click to expand...
How “old” does it have to be where it is OK?

Because Trump supporters have had this thrown in their face hundreds of times right here.

And to the Trump supporters credit, not one of them has OKed this behavior from Trump. Many of them myself included have condemned it.

But I don’t recall you EVER saying anything like that to those more left posters.

I can’t recall you ever saying to them anything like . . .
Bringing up a claim against President Trump which is years or sometimes decades-old, even if it is accurate, means very little.
So you guys leave President Trump alone. I want you to ignore this Stormy Daniel’s baloney (or reality) who by breaking her alleged non-disclosure clause must mean by definition she is a liar at least about her legal promises to remain quiet!
Click to expand...
But maybe I missed it and you are now going to link me to
your telling this to leftists (or at least people “left” of me)
right here on CAF to knock that stuff off about our President.

So go ahead and provide me with a couple of those links please.
 
Last edited:
Cathoholic said:
By “pre-marriage peccadilloes” do you mean Joe running around with his friend’s wife?
Bringing up a claim which is decades-old and not previously mentioned, even if it is accurate, means very little.
Click to expand...
That’s the ‘tu quoque’ fallacy according to the Jesuits. You have not shown what is posted is wrong so you point at others posting inaccurately? That proves nothing.
Click to expand...
 
Nepperhan . . .
That’s the ‘tu quoque’ fallacy according to the Jesuits. You have not shown what is posted is wrong so you point at others posting inaccurately? That proves nothing.
Click to expand...
But there is no tu quoque from me.

A tu quo que from me would be . . .
Well Biden was a philanderer, so its OK that Trump was a philanderer too.
Click to expand...
I have never said ANYTHING like that.

I am actually implicitly pointing out the hypocrisy of the people that for years have been pretending like this is a deal-breaker for Trump, but now have clammed-up regarding Biden’s philandering.

And I am implying it was all FAKE moral outrage (which anyone could easily figure out for themselves if they look at the SILENCE about even the heinous crime of abortion from such same sanctimonious moral referees like CNN and NBC).

It was FAKE outrage intended to be used as political manipulation against Trump supporters.

People who don’t give a hoot about killing innocent babies,
are not going to be stunned by adultery. (But they will PRETEND they are stunned).

It is like NBC’s Matt Lauer telling you to dislike Trump because Lauer is so shocked at Trump’s history of sexual indiscretions.

The conservatives saw through this stuff nationally.

As far as accuracy or proof or any such thing, a good place to begin, would be with the media asking him tough questions about WHY he said he didn’t know Jill Stevenson until 1975, when you were allegedly having illicit sexual relations with her in 1974 and according to Jill’s husband (now ex-husband civilly) you knew her as she worked on your campaign as early as 1972!

These are issues of integrity that enter into the final formula over who a voter is going to vote for.

I was interested in Trump’s situation (but Stormy Daniel’s leading CNN nightly for almost two months was FAKE) too. But not to the tune of two months of leading stories and over a hundred interviews with then Democrat possible presidential hopeful now-jailbird, Micheal Avenatti.

Just like I want to know about Joe and I want voters to know as well.
 
Last edited:
Cathoholic said:
I am actually implicitly pointing out the hypocrisy of the people that for years have been pretending like this is a deal-breaker for Trump, but now have clammed-up regarding Biden’s philandering.
Click to expand...
Try to see a difference: All you have is an allegation from a interested party.

The thrice married Trump has bragged about committing adultery, has bragged about grabbing women’s pudenda against their will, has invaded the dressing rooms of young beauty contest entrants and has paid off at least two porn stars in order for them to keep their mouths shut about his dalliances with them. I think that anyone can appreciate how Trump’s conduct with multiple women with payouts that lasted up to when he ran for office has a quantum difference from disgruntled whisperings about what Biden did 50 years ago with a woman he married.
 
Last edited:
Nepperhan. . . .
Try to see a difference: All you have is an allegation from a interested party.
Click to expand...
Two points to consider.

The “interested party” was Jill’s husband.
The media is ignoring it by and large (so far).

They won’t able to keep doing that I predict. But for how they are trying to make the story go away.

Biden’s henchmen will attack Stevenson personally to be sure. (Especially after his book comes out.)

Just ask former Biden staffer Tara Reade, who has her own story to tell.
 
Last edited:
Nepperhan . . .
All you have is an allegation from a interested party.
Click to expand...
I didn’t know I needed more (to at least look into it). The guy was her HUSBAND.

And what makes you so sure you know the details about Stormy Daniels?

Stormy Daniels ordered to pay Trump nearly $300,000 in legal fees​

Federal judge says porn star must cover attorney cost after her defamation suit against the president was dismissed
Click to expand...
www.theguardian.com

Stormy Daniels ordered to pay Trump nearly $300,000 in legal fees

Federal judge says porn star must cover attorney cost after her defamation suit against the president was dismissed
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
Last edited:
Cathoholic said:
I am actually implicitly pointing out the hypocrisy of the people that for years have been pretending like this is a deal-breaker for Trump, but now have clammed-up regarding Biden’s philandering.
Click to expand...
How about we point out the hypocrisy of people who object to criticism of Trump’s admitted philandering, and yet call it hypocrisy to ask for any evidence or corroboration of unsupported allegations about Biden.
 
How about we point out the hypocrisy of people who object to criticism of Trump’s admitted philandering, and yet call it hypocrisy to ask for any evidence or corroboration of unsupported allegations about Biden.
Click to expand...
I don’t know any.

I have roundly criticized “Trump” for his admitted philandering.

I can’t think of any conservative here who has supported that. Not one.

How bout we stay on the topic of the thread? (That’d be Joe Biden.)

If you want to begin another thread criticizing “Trump” you are free to do so. Go ahead and begin another one.
 
Last edited:
Cathoholic on the claims of Joe Biden’s Biden’s adultry.
The media is ignoring it by and large (so far).
Click to expand...
Nepperhan . . .
What does that tell you?
Click to expand...
It tells me what I already know.
It tells me the media is providing cover for their leftist candidate. Which is what they always do.

Leftists cannot win on ideas. So they have to force and cheat. i.e. Force by not hiring anyone who is not like-minded. Just ask all the open conservative college professors. Whoops. There aren’t any (that was rhetorical from me. Admittedly there are a few. Darn few though).

Just yesterday I talked to a conservative who found out from his CEO, a leftist was clandestinely trying to get him fired for his political views.

But if you think the media ignoring Joe having charges of adultery, translates into “no big deal”, I will remember that when the media is cornered into covering it and can’t ignore it.

Then I am going to ask you to come back on this or that thread,
and ask you to admit that it IS a big deal now that the media IS covering it
since you brought up this point.

As for me? I know it’s a big deal either way.
 
Last edited:
Cathoholic said:
If you want to begin another thread criticizing “Trump” you are free to do so. Go ahead and begin another one.
Click to expand...
Apparently you missed the fact that my post was about these accusations against the Bidens – specifically, the lack of any evidence/corroboration of them. Which makes your suggestion of a new thread on Trump the off-topic part.

And again with the scare quotes around the name of the President of the United States? Odd.
 
Last edited:
umamibella said:
Seriously?

This sensasionalist hatchet job media is both unbelievable and uncharitable.
Click to expand...
Completely agree with respect to both candidates and both their wives. Especially since none of this stuff is recent and the Bidens were married by a Catholic priest.

This thread is tabloid fodder. It gives an extremely poor image of Catholicism.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
This thread is tabloid fodder. It gives an extremely poor image of Catholicism.
Click to expand...
In general, the World News section brings out the worst in CAF. It should either be more restricted and heavily moderated or abolished.

Some days it’s like a Wild West show here 😒
 
Last edited:
Cruciferi said:
In general, the World News section brings out the worst in CAF. It should either be more restricted and heavily moderated or abolished.
Click to expand...
So now we should abolish debate on candidates. Whether you like or not, presidential elections bring out everything about the candidates.

Can’t claim a moral high ground if there is none. This is an accusation brought out by a first husband who felt betrayed by his wife and a friend.
 
Last edited:
gam197 said:
Whether you like or not, presidential elections bring out everything about the candidates.

Can’t claim a moral high ground if there is none. This is an accusation brought out by a first husband who felt betrayed by his wife and a friend.
Click to expand...
And this is why we are getting the abysmal choices of candidates that we get Who wants to put themselves or their families through the political meat grinder that is presidential politics in the US.? How many men in our history - who were great leaders - would not have been elected because every singular detail about their personal lives was put up for public inspection and debate? How does any of this improve our political system or our elections? Judging by this thread, I think we’re getting the representation we deserve, and that’s really sad.
 
Last edited:
DeniseNY said:
Judging by this thread, I think we’re getting the representation we deserve, and that’s really sad.
Click to expand...
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

I couldn’t agree more. Amen.​

 
If people could actually “debate on candidates” without sinking to new lows in behavior on every other thread, it would be okay.

People don’t seem to be able to control themselves on WN, either in what they post, or in the arguments they get into here.

Many of the threads end up being an embarrassment to Catholicism, people get banned and there are also posters who seem to just want to start “debates” in WN constantly and rarely or ever participate in the many other subforums dealing with actual Catholicism.

If you want a political news discussion forum, they’re all over the Internet. You have dozens to choose from. We don’t need another one here, and a lot of us don’t even want one here.
 
Last edited:
I doubt Bill Stevenson’s book will ever get published.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top