Let's assume Gannon did something illegal in his private life of a sexual nature. How would he be different from WJ Clinton?
Gannon did not do any of it while being paid by the tax payer, and I don't think it affected his employer- who was not the public anyway. And Gannon did not obstruct justice- certainly not while he was the head of national law enforcement. (The Pres is the cheif executive, you all understand, right?)
Why are "politics of personal destruction" embraced by some - depending on the target? Is that not a type of the "evil prejudice" that most rail against?
Holding multiple standards based on your agenda- do you have to study Aristotle and Socrates to understand this is wrong?
Are the terms doubletalk, two-faced, double-standard, good ol boys, prejudiced, etc only a bad thing when done by others?
I hear many say it is OK to rip Gannon because of what other conservatives have done, but exacting penalties on one person because of what others have done is wrong! I've heard Cracker Jack gave some idiots their drivers liscences, but it looks like some got their moral compasses from the same place!
If WJC can obstruct justice as President for something he did in the peoples' house during working hours - and you are OK with that - then spare me your outrage over Gannon. (Who?)
Lefties- can you even understand what I am saying here? Can you hear the words coming out of my keyboard?
People talk about "red state values" - can you even begin to understand my point?