Nixon resigned because the House Judiciary committee voted out an article of impeachment. It was certain to pass. Senator Goldwater told Nixon that he had only about 15 votes he could count on in the Senate only about half of what he would have needed to avoid conviction and removal from office.

He resigned instead.

In an imaginary country where leaders have ethics, the leader would resign in shame. (Nixon did.)

In neither case is it illegal as long as it's consensual. They are both scum. In a corporate environment it may well be against corporate policy and grounds for termination.

The legal status of a president with respect to crimes committed is dubious. If he got angry at a visitor, whipped out a pistol and shot them in front of witnesses, I'm not sure that he could be arrested. He certainly has the ability to pardon himself.

Overturning the election of a president by the people is a very serious issue. In general, the courts have deferred to the electorate. In Clinton's case the electorate decided it was acceptable.

So the POTUS can use his power to have sex with a subordinate and he gets a free pass but if a Hollywood director does it he's a pervert and should be a leper for life.
Both of them are scum and should be prosecuted in court. Politicians, and the POTUS is no exception, should be held to the same standard of law as everyone else.
Put them in the same windowless cell and throw away the key (assuming there is evidence to convict.)

And, given that he didn't come close to a conviction in the Senate and that it's generally considered to have cost the Republicans support, I think it's been established that it wasn't an impeachable offense.

While technically, the House can impeach for any reason they feel like, there is an expectation of a significantly serious offense.

That's funny. And remember, Clinton wasn't impeached because he had sex with an intern, it was because he lied about it.

Such is why CNN and the rest of fake news media want you to "LOOK OVER HERE!" at a bunch of "Aw, so what?" much ado about nothing as far as me dino is concerned.

https://mises.org/library/organized-c...

LOL... the funny thing about them doing that... I think it would be more shocking if he "didn't" have sex with porn stars. That's kind of what you would expect and was factored into casting a vote. Hey! the stock market is up 40% in a year and unemployment is lower than practically ever - but he had sex with a porn star!! (answer from everyone in the US: "So? Was she hot?")

That is covered by Thomas DiLorenzo in Organized Crime (along with dozens of other government and crony capitalist scams.) Excellent reading.

I was reading the new book lately about Secret Empires and how politicians make money on companies they cannot act on insider trade deals. When the government goes after a particular company (i.e. Facebook) it will lose standing on the stock price. Then everyone jumps in on the lower stock prices and then after a short while once the government has beat up the company a bit to get the stock as low as it can then they will back-off all is good the prices return to healthy levels. Then they quietly cash out. Pretty slick scheme if you ask me.

Crony capitalist is a different way of saying a socialist capitalist who wants the state to control the economy to his benefit, which all socialists want some think they are different because they want a different arrangement for the state to control the market.

There is never, nor will there ever be good in anything Trump can do according to the left.

I dont even listen to liberals any more. They just dream up things to slam Trump and its a waste of time to pay attention to them. Trump is definitely thought of as an enemy of the liberals. He definitely is to a degree, but isnt really a consistent libertarian even.

He wanted to repeal and replace Obamacare, instead of simply repealing it.

I see president Trump as more of a Crony Capitalist. This kind of Capitalism is self destructive.

While it is interesting that whatever either "side" is doing the anti-side is against it. The media is very socialistic and is observable by their antics. However this does not prove that Trump is in any way objectivist. He is a socialist with a different theory than the one the media would like to see implemented.

Target would love the PR.

Q Anon has stated The destruction of the cabal
Is called the storm. Why wouldn't the left bring out Stormy Daniels to attack Trump.
I suppose if he identified as a woman and spent a lot of time on the ladies washroom it would be fine .

Not me.

Star? Had anyone heard of her before?

FB and FBI have destroyed their reputations in the eyes of those who can think, but the majority are led around by rings in their noses and can't see any farther than their next tweet.

Q: What kind of a man would have an affair with a porn star?

A: A lucky one?

I mean we're not talking about Monica Lewinsky here.

CNN up front and screaming to the world: "Toot! Toot! Trump had consensual sex with women! Hear ye! Hear ye! Trump had consensual sex with women! Ding! Ding! Ding! Trump had consensual sex with women! Look over here! Look over here! OOGA! OOGA! TRUMP HAD CONSENSUAL SEX WITH WOMEN! IT'S AN OUTRAGE!
CNN not up front and whispering to each other:: Psst! Never say a word about Slick Willie raping women and having not really sex that's a sex act with an intern while the enabling Evil Hag put down bimbo eruptions.

I think the have destroyed their reputation I suspect a swamp cleaning is in their future.

Of course. I posted the same thing on the WSJ which has become a prog rag. It is inundated by leftist trolls to the extent that you have to take a shower after dipping into the comments.

Having said that, FB is only providing an outlet for people's urge to be part of something that they think is missing from their lives. They think they attain a higher status if they see their names there, to the extent of spilling beans that later come back and bite them