Former Playboy model Karen McDougal, with whom President Donald Trump allegedly had an extramarital affair, filed a defamation suit against Fox News on Thursday over Fox host Tucker Carlson’s claims that she had extorted Trump.
I just can’t decide which tasteless, shameless grifter in this pair to root for.
Karen McDougal voted for Trump. Karen McDougal voted for Teump. Karen McDougal voted for Trump. Karen McDougal vot…
Well before someone changes the latter hit of Aretha Franklin’s song “Who’s Zoomin’ Who” to Who’s Suing Who please enjoy the original.
I’m frazzled, but I don’t theek that McDougal didn’t want to go after Trump (lots of reasons), but one thing led to another…
edited
But, Playboy model who had an affair with Trump. Truly a praiseworthy member of society.
winces at that
Gotta say, I’ll still side with someone “slapping” Fox. But it’s a close race.
Not unlike trying to figure out who the “good guys” are in Afghanistan.
Not even close. I am always going with the playboy model over some guy who spends his time with his nose burried in a hustler magazine as he talks about how he is god’s messenger.
And by the by, Tom Steyer would do a lot more good if he would use the millions he is spending to get his dumb jiggly voice on the debate stage funding liable cases against republicans. Every time Trump lies about someone he ought to be sued for it. 50 cases against him - and some against his demon spawn kids - might provide some restraint. Even the president can not freely defame people, and the discovery that would come out in some cases would be killer.
We really need to get our politics back to some degree of truth, and liable law is a good way to do it. People need to know that if they bald face lie, they will end up with no house/car/savings/retirement. Deterrence is needed, and Trump and his back of lairs deserves to be a cautionary tale for future politicians of the right and left.
For me neither: there are levels of odiousness and malice sufficient to render an equivalency false and this is one of them.
Agree on Steyer (and Bloomberg too).
Tucker, Tucker, Tucker - will your fat mouth and tiny brain finally get you in trouble?
But a couple of points:
A) Tucker thinks her actions were intended to “ruin [Trump’s] career and humiliate his family if he doesn’t give them money”? News flash: The only person humiliated here is the one that has to go into court and testify they fucked Donald Trump
B) “Had Carlson done any investigation or responsible reporting or journalism…" Were he capable or even interested in either of those things he wouldn’t be working for Fox.
C) “Fox News will vigorously defend Tucker Carlson against these meritless claims…” Until we realize it’s a losing effort and you join Bill O’Reilly, Glen Beck, Eric Bolling, and a host of other scumbags as they flounder in the universe of podcasts.
Who is funding this, I wonder?
The jury is still out on Bloomberg.
My (perhaps hopeful) view is that he knows he is not going to get 50% of the delegates no matter what. My strong guess is that his plan is to (a) spends a lot of $$$, at the discounted rates he gets as a candidate, attacking Trump (in contrast with Tom Steyer’s ego driven efforts) in various swing states, (b) at the same time try to drive down the favorable of those candidates who he thinks are NOT electable (e.g. Sanders, Warren, perhaps Budajudge), (c) gather some delegates along the way, hoping to get a seat at the table, and (d) then assume that there is going to be a brokered convention at the end of the process, in which case he can try to see it is a more moderate, electable candidate.
As long as Bloomberg uses his money to mostly attack Trump (again in contrast with Steyer) I think he sees this as a way to improve his standing/prominence, while hopefully helping get a more moderate nominee.
But I think the key thing for Bloomberg is that he gets cheaper TV rates as a candidate, and more control over the message, than if he simply funded a PAC.
And she was the quiet one that didn’t originally want to press any charges, if I recall. Amazing how things change.
Meanwhile there are still 25 women who have stated quite clearly that tRump had made improper sexual advances and harassed them individually over the years. I’d still like to hear more about that. There’s a whole lot of unfinished business the country has chose to ignore or normalize with tRump. It makes me sick.
I wonder if having an affair is humiliating to one’s family even if they don’t know about it. I wonder if the married person having the affair is at all to blame if their family becomes publicly humiliated, maybe even more so than the person who does not have a spouse. Tough questions. /s
I do like Ms. McDougal’s timing.
Love her businesswoman’s outfit. I can’t wait to see what she wears on the witness stand.
Yep. That’s what Fox always says before they settle a meritorious case for a bucket of dough.
Why is there no friendly liberal billionaire willing to purchase Fox News outright and either shutter it or repurpose it for good?
I guess billionaires can only be bothered to come to the defense of the Republican party, or to fund feel-good missions in a transparent attempt to purchase enough goodwill that people will stop asking whether that whole fortune is legitimate. But not to defend this country from criminals or Russia.