The possibility that the Left are giving kids to be raped by child molestors, doesn’t faze him either, if you look at what orders the Left have been giving lately and how many of them have been obeyed on the subject of toilet room rules and false rape charges.

Child Protective Services in Waco and other places with Democrats in power, have been rumored to allow and authorize rapists and crims to have custody of children or access to them. The Left has also been known to defend a rapist director or two. And a rapist politician or dozen. As for false rape charges, the Left uses them to promote their Social Justice Whoredom too, the SJWs.

Then there’s Planned Profit’s attempt to get rid of parental notification. Which was useful to them, since some of PP’s clients are underage girls who have been abused and used by male sex predators. They would prefer that no parents were notified of those convenient abortions.

He’d already made it clear that the truth had no real value to him when his candidate was the one being dishonest.

And I’ll mention that Trump is very much aware that his followers don’t particularly care what he does.

The “he” in question never cared about politicians being dishonest. It was just a con job, an order to obey, nothing more.

Once Trump figured out that many of his 3 pillars of support were Democrats, Trump started testing the water to see what he could get away with. Surpsingly, about the same Hussein did with the same Democrat demographic. They were programmed to Obey AUthority, almost.

That was apparently good enough for his supporters, though he likely wouldn’t have even needed that.

A little while back, a friend of a friend was whining on Facebook about the GOP’s focus on Benghazi. He was a Hillary supporter, and thought that asking further about it was a waste of time. The possibility that people had been abandoned to die there didn’t phase him in the least. Nor did the possibility that Hillary had lied about the events there. Given that there was no further use in discussing things with him at that point, I ended by pointing out that we (the public) claim that we’re angry at politicians for lying. And then we don’t care about politicians – like HRC – actually going out and lying. I didn’t bother following up to see if he posted a response. He’d already made it clear that the truth had no real value to him when his candidate was the one being dishonest.

And I’ll mention that Trump is very much aware that his followers don’t particularly care what he does. He indicated as much way back during the early stages of the primary when he made his comment about shooting someone in public, and not losing any support as a result.

“Camille Paglia: PC feminists misfire again, as fearful elite media can’t touch Donald Trump”
“A boastful, millionaire New Yorker liked the company of beautiful women? This is why NYT can’t lay a glove on Trump

Paglia is implicitly making an argument that media attacks on Trump will be futile. And of course, Trump just happens to have the truth about Hillary Clinton on his side. Things like this video are going viral; “Hillary Clinton lying for 13 minutes straight”

Djt versus ISIS, ISIS wins? Are you suggesting that America cannot beat ISIS? What specifically would Cruz do in regard to ISIS that DJT cannot?

Suggesting that Trump vs Hillary is simply a choice of, “a crony capitalist or a crony capitalist” completely ignores Hillary’s ideological commitment and the massive network of ‘progressive’ organizations that both support her and will greatly assist her (Eric’s activist movement) in further implementing the Left’s agenda.

I read the piece in Slate that you linked to with its citing that;

“In 1997, Broaddrick filed an affadavit with Paula Jones’ lawyers saying Clinton did not assault her.”

Here’s a fuller explanation;
“The only thing that has ever been used against Juanita is the fact that she did sign an affidavit denying she’d experienced unwanted sexual advances from Bill Clinton in the mid-1990s, in an effort to keep her name out of the Paula Jones lawsuit.

“She admitted to Ken Starr in 1998 that she’d lied in that affidavit (that rape had in fact occurred), and she has told the same consistent version of events ever since.”
http://www.wnd.com/2016/05/clinton-rape-accuser-blasts-biased-nbc-anchor/#oYEI8LpWgBhcx5Ry.99

Her signing that affidavit did keep Broaddrick’s name out of the Paula Jones case. There’s also no doubt that in a civil lawsuit where the legal standard is a preponderance of the evidence, that Broaddrick would win.

“Where there’s enough smoke, there’s fire” still holds true. And in the political arena, where the civil lawsuit standard prevails and with a Trump unrestrained by convention, Broaddrick’s accusation along with all the other accusers and circumstantial evidence will have a significant impact.

The more we lose our election process, when it take over a BILLION dollars to be elected, when somehow a trust fund baby millionaire/billionaire who’s been living the playboy life in NYC for 70 years is the voice of the common man. . .

” It was merely seen as a clever move, a sign that Obama was a winner rather than a loser.”

This is the key statement, and please remember Patton’s words (or GC Scott’s scriptwriter):
Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time. That’s why Americans have never lost and will never lose a war. The very thought of losing is hateful to Americans.
<<
Recall, the Dems voted to Lose the Peace in Vietnam in '75, after Paris Peace in '73.

Obama & the Dems decided to run away and Lose the Peace in Iraq before the 2012 election — enabling the genocide of Christians and other chaos all the Bush-hate folk knew was inevitable in Iraq.

Americans, like most normal folk, love a winner. They prefer to win without cheating, but probably most prefer to cheat & win at war or politics, rather than lose.

Elite Reps, like Libertarians, prefer honor.

Does "the end justify the means"? When people feel their survival, or the survival of their way of life, is "the end" if they lose, and cheating is the only means to save themselves for a win, a majority of folks would cheat. When it's a "game", where the other side has successfully won by what seems to be "cheating", the vast majority will accept that the "rules" have changed to allow the cheating — so as to win.

That's the tragedy of Obama's victory and behavior.

Nobody knows, not even Trump, what Pres. Trump will really do — tho I strongly believe he'll find a big budget allocation to go to friends of rich Reps for building the Fence.

His list of SCOTUS nominees is a reminder of how America loses if Hillary gets in.

Avoiding that end justifies quite a wide range of means.

Cruz was never brash enough to reverse much or make progress far. At best he may have held the line… No one knows that Trump will meet any of these insane fantasies the people come up with that I have rarely come close to happening… Because most substitute a personally picked set of things they think are the points that causationally steer reality, when no one really knows what those points really are. Few of the ideas have much to do with how the majority of people think of politics or even care.

The office is not like a rubber band. It doesn’t snap back once distorted by newly created precidents… Funny thing is that whomever runs for office there is always a dissatisfied group in opposition to another group each with erudite wrong reasons

And regardless… que sera sera…
And we are always stuck for the ride