I wouldn't have had her pegged to be into that.
Yeah, I feel bad for saying anything. I wasn't meaning to speak over. I was just running my mouth and should have stayed in my lane, as you put it. Sorry for any bad feelings I put out there. I will mind my manners in the future.Way too many straight people in this post are telling queer people, in particular gay men, how they shouldn't be airing out Lindsay's dirty laundry. This is not some homophobic movement lead by anti-gay folks, this is a movement by gay men for gay men. Stay in your lane and don't speak up over us.
This is only part of the story
I suspect this story will be an October surprise.
Again I think the real thing here is "who owns Lindsey Graham"? Remember how anti Trump he was and the he wasn't? Information like this is probably already weaponized. It has to get out do damage done by it can be investigated.
If he was some CEO or some celeb I agree. The fact that he is a lawmaker is important.
There's a reasonable calculation that Graham's switch was related to his well known predilection for coat tail riding - but it was so sudden and uncalculated (you'd think a cynical politician would create a week of "evolution" on the topic to make it more convincing and reversible) - that it shocked me at the time.
But that's not the suspicious part.
The suspicious part is that in the same 24-48 hour period he flipped to hard Trumper (literally reverse paraphrasing his own "kook" insults as Dem slander) - he also got unprecedented personal access to his till-that-moment hated foe, Donald Trump. He was also (much later) one of the handlers (along bizarrely with Kid Rock) who Barr sent to keep Trump off Twitter the weekend he presented the Mueller Findings as opposite to what they actually said. That period was one of the longest Twitter pauses in Trump's entire presidency and it was carefully arranged because they knew that simply telling him this would not work.
I've frequently surmised that there's blackmail material on Graham that goes beyond his sexuality - because as others have said, that wouldn't be enough in DC - but sex workers and specifics might, and I suspect that the person most aggrieved at this sex worker coming forward, isn't Graham himself, but rather someone with leverage over Graham. I'd guess David Pecker or similar based on the instant, literally overnight access to sworn enemy Trump - and Graham for a while continued an anti-Russia stance, so it wasn't Putin.
It's shocking how plausible all of this is.
And people forget that the same Summer the DNC servers were hacked, the RNC's servers were hacked, too. And so far none of that has leaked.
This is only part of the story
I suspect this story will be an October surprise.
The NDA may not refer to illegal activity at all. It can refer to any private relationship detail and be plenty to shut someone up about knowing him and his personal information.Something that was pointed out to me that makes me suspicious of this; prostitution is illegal in DC and you cannot enforce an NDA to conceal illegal activity, which would mean they aren't beholden to them even if they did sign them. This gives me pee tape "eh it tracks, but kinda feels like 'we got dirt on someone we hate!' fanfic"
I agree tbh. I think it will become some twisted example of a "reasonable LGBT person would be in support of Trump." They'll use it as a sign of their tolerance like they use Ben Carson and they will play dirty to keep every seat they have.I don't see this hurting him as much as people think it will. If this were 15, 20 years ago? Sure. But conservatives have learned that it's worth to have a token from a marginalized group on their side to hold up and say "see, even a (insert minority) is against the radical left!" Even evangelicals will accept a gay representative for this purpose, as long as they aren't openly flaunting their sexuality.
What, and give up the grift?? Never gonna happen.Unless this dude is going to release what information he has instead of just trying to tease people with it, he needs to honestly shut the fuck up.
🤣
What, and give up the grift?? Never gonna happen.
These folks always do this, and it saddens me that people keep giving them the attention they don't deserve because, one day, they may, hopefully, come through.
Talking about the tweeter with the scoop ready to drop any moment now.graham? (Answering generally)
Probably amazingly and oddly smart and timely investments — like all senators — Including the "good" ones. But some of their grift is just for the access, power and celebrity - when they retire or lose they do boardships and collect big on favors.
I don't see this hurting him as much as people think it will. If this were 15, 20 years ago? Sure. But conservatives have learned that it's worth to have a token from a marginalized group on their side to hold up and say "see, even a (insert minority) is against the radical left!" Even evangelicals will accept a gay representative for this purpose, as long as they aren't openly flaunting their sexuality.
It's free branding/marketing for Winslow. He can give the impression that he's got some kind of insider info (which he conveniently never gets around to explaining, but will surely continue to say is coming) in order to gain attention/followers, which leads to more sales of his books or whatever else he's hawking. That's why I call it a grift.
Talking about the tweeter with the scoop ready to drop any moment now.
This is exactly how I see it.
They might use this to try to hurt the left, "Oh, so much for tolerance and letting people be free to be who they want to be," or some bullshit like that.
It doesn't help that this was announced, so Graham and the GOP can prepare a response.
The only way I can see this work is if he used funds that he wasn't supposed to for sex workers.