Part 3—When Gennifer met Howard Stern: Keeping them honest, we get the impression that some of our journalists really do care about the sex.
Not for them the silly disclaimers favored by other Stormy-watchers! For one example, just consider one recent post by a liberal Internet mogul.
The mogul had an important point to convey. Needless to say, his point involved Stephanie Clifford.
In his latest attempt at keeping them honest, Anderson Cooper had interviewed Clifford for an upcoming 60 Minutes breaking news blockbuster bombshell. According to the Internet mogul, "What Daniels told 60 Minutes is more damaging than people may realize."
How did the Internet mogul know that? We'll let the mogul tell you:
MARSHALL (3/12/18): I’m told that in her 60 Minutes interview with Anderson Cooper Daniels suggests that Trump, how to say this, likes it when women aren’t nice to him, treat him in perhaps denigrating ways.Yum! The mogul had been told something, presumably by someone, that "deepened his curiosity" about the deeply important story Clifford wants to share, or about CBS' suppression of same.
I think that would be very much off brand for Trump. It also puts in sharper relief why he and his lawyer seem to be fighting so hard to keep Daniels’ story under wraps. It also deepens my curiosity about whether CBS will have the stomach to air that part of the story.
The interview did not run this weekend and it is not clear when it will run. CBS says they want to take their time reporting out Daniels’ claims. That is of course laudable and appropriate. But I’m not sure how they’d report out claims like that...
People, how to say this? Someone had told the Internet mogul that Donald J. Trump "likes it when women aren’t nice to him, treat him in perhaps denigrating ways."
Lord god of hosts, how delicious! Someone had told the mogul this, and now the mogul told us.
Keeping them honest, this particular person has never claimed that he couldn't care less about the (consensual) sex. Nor did he make any such claim in the subsequent, steamy posts which have run beneath these headlines, accompanied by large photographs of Clifford's large body parts:
Is The Stormy Story More Damaging Than We Thought? (3/12/18)When did Michael Cohen become "Mike Cohen?" We have no idea!
Stormy Daniels Saga
The Stormy Agreement and the Comet letter—on the same day! (3/12/18)
Stormymat! Or Why Did Stormy And 2nd Trump Girlfriend Have NDAs Negotiated By The Same Lawyer? (3/13/18)
Too Hot for 60? (3/13/18)
Let’s Talk to Joan Walsh About Stormy, Mike Cohen, 2016 and 2018 (3/13/18)
That said, is Clifford "too hot for 60 [Minutes]?" She certainly isn't too hot for this mogul, who has adorned these posts with smokin' hot photos of Clifford, not to say with soft porn.
Those photos, which you should peruse, announce this mogul's remarkable lack of progressive sexual politics—or perhaps a cynical view of the values and interests he ascribes to his Prime subscribers.
At any rate, we'll suggest you should click here, then scroll down to peruse the steamy photos adorning these steamy posts. For one hot example, click this.
The mogul's site has rather plainly gone supermarket tabloid. Such tabloids play a large role in our tale. Having said that, let us also say this:
As you can see, some of our journalists make no bones about the fact that they're involved in the sex. Others, of course, are more lofty. This brings us back to Colbert's King's source of concern about the silencing of this important truth-teller.
Just for the record, Colbert King is a mature and experienced person who often writes sober, instructive columns. As we noted yesterday, he says he's concerned about the silencing of Clifford, not because he cares about the sex, but for the following reason:
KING (3/10/18): I do care, however, if within one month of the presidential election, Republican candidate Trump’s personal lawyer Michael D. Cohen paid hush money to Clifford/Daniels to keep the affair secret. True, the porn star is not, at least to the best of my knowledge, a public official. She has no public or legal duties to discharge. A payment of hush money to her, therefore, is unlikely to be illegal.King says he cares about "the integrity of our elections." We don't doubt that his statement is true, but we think his judgment is poor.
But campaign finance laws are there to ensure the integrity of our elections and the democratic process. And I do care about those things very much. I have written reams about end runs around our election laws, primarily here in our nation’s capital. I care just as much about those provisions at the federal level.
We care about our elections too. That's why we think Donald J. Trump and his helpmate, Michael Cohen, should be awarded highest national honors for their ongoing efforts to hush Clifford up—to keep her from telling her story.
Why is the world would we say such a thing? Because we remember what happened when Gennifer met Howard Stern—Gennifer Flowers, that is.
Flowers decided to "tell her story" in January 1992. To this day, we know of no reason to believe that her story was true—but Flowers had thrilling body parts too, and her story was wonderfully steamy.
Her story, which almost surely was false, involved consensual sex only. But back in those days, our nation's reporters didn't necessarily feel the need to pretend that they didn't care about consensual sex.
In 1987, they took out Candidate Hart through their interest in sex. One year later, George H. W. Bush was elected to the White House, quite possibly as a result.
Now, in 1992, they set their sights on the goal of taking out Candidate Bill Clinton. They loved loved loved Flowers' steamy tale. Though many balked at this intrusion upon the budding presidential cvampaign, they didn't always feel the need to pretend that they didn't care about the sex.
Flowers stood before the press in New York City, where she'd gone to accept the $150,000 she was (initially) paid, by the steamy tabloid The Star, for telling her steamy story, which was riddled with obvious errors and almost surely was false.
(In the end, she would receive at least $500,000 from several sources, likely much more, for telling her important story. which was almost surely false. This supplemented the income from her $17,000 per year state job, which she eventually lost.)
Gennifer Flowers had injected herself into a White House campaign. She'd done so by telling a story which almost surely wasn't true.
That said, the story was exciting, and the underbelly of the nation's discourse was eager to join in the fun. As told by the leading authority on her life and times, this happened at her raucous press conference, along with other embarrassing nonsense:
After Clinton denied having a relationship with Flowers on 60 Minutes, she held a press conference in which she played tape recordings she had secretly made of phone calls with Clinton. Clinton subsequently apologized publicly to Mario Cuomo for remarks he made about the then-Governor of New York on the tapes. During the press conference, Flowers was famously asked several questions by "Stuttering John" Melendez of the Howard Stern Show if she was planning to sleep with any other candidates before the election, along with if Clinton used a condom and if there ever was a threesome. She responded by laughing at Stuttering John's prank whereas her advisor wanted to ignore him by trying to answer other questions. News reports at the time speculated that the taped phone conversations between Flowers and Clinton could have been doctored...That was the day when Gennifer Flowers met Howard Stern, who had already gone a long way toward turning the daily American discourse into a low-IQ clownshow driven by gruesome values.
Unlike Candidate Hart before him, Candidate Clinton survived this (non-Russian) attack on our election. In early 1998, the press corps began chasing the consensual sex with the 21-year-old intern who was neither 21 nor an intern, and he, along with two other players, didn't quite survive that.
President Clinton was impeached but escaped removal from office. As part of the press corps' subsequent fury, they conducted a two-year war against Candidate Gore which sent George W. Bush to the White House.
(The three principal agents of this war: The New York Times, the Washington Post and NBC News and its cable arms. The Fox News Channel played little role in this remarkable war.)
Sixteen years later, the New York Times was still stroking its private parts about Bill Clinton's sex life. The paper made little attempt to separate claims and admissions of consensual sex from claims of non-consensual sex, nor did it try very hard top evaluate the latter.
The New York Times still cared about the sex. On October 3, 2016, the paper published this slippery front-page report in which it revisited the good old days when they were chasing Bill Clinton around about consensual sex. The ridiculous paper even resurrected claims by famous "rock groupie" Connie Hamzy, a local Arkansas figure who was so famously ridiculous that no one ever believed her self-promoting claims, even back in real time.
Candidate Hillary Clinton lost to Candidate Donald J. Trump by a very narrow margin. Question:
How many Republicans have now been elected president because of the press corps' sex stampedes, which started in 1987 with the pursuit of Gart Hart's fully consensual sex?
The American upper-end "press corps" is in love with sex. In fairness, it's also in love with body language, wardrobe and hair, and with embellished paraphrase of pointless offhand remarks.
How silly do the children get when hot steamy consensual sex rears its consensual head? When it comes to consensual sex, which it doesn't care about?
The children get very foolish.
By 1998, the year of impeachment, they had resurrected Gennifer Flowers, along with her implausible, error-riddled story for the tabloid Star. By now, they were even pretending that she was an admirable truth-teller.
By the summer of 1999, Flowers was running a pay-to-read web site about the Clintons' many deeply disturbing murders. She had written a ludicrous book in which she made the slimiest presentations about Hillary Clinton, also revealing the fact that the former Arkansas first lady was the world's most gigantic lesbo.
That said, moral idiots like Frank Rich just could make themselves come to terms with what this behavior suggested about his new darling, Flowers. By the summer of 1999, another major corporate star invited her onto his "cable News" show for the full half-hour.
How ridiculous are these corporate stars? This is where our discourse goes when we let people like Flowers start telling exciting stories, true or false, about consensual sex:
MATTHEWS (8/2/99): I gotta pay a little tribute here. You're a very beautiful woman, and I, and I have to tell you:In fact, he fawned and flirted all through the half hour, as he would do with other shaky sex accusers.
He knows that, you know that, and everybody watching knows that. Hillary Clinton knows that.
How can a woman put up with a relationship between her husband and somebody, anybody, but especially somebody like you, that's a knockout? I don't quite get this relationship...
It's an objective statement, Gennifer. I'm not flirting.
At one point, he came extremely close to getting a journalist killed by someone who was mentally ill and didn't know that this was all a con. Today, Rachel is happy to tell us that he's her very good friend and her favorite political analyst.
This is one small part of what occurred when Gennifer Flowers met Howard Stern and his idiot sidekick, Stutterin' John.
By that time, Stern and Imus had spent many years making a joke of the American discourse. In 1992, Gennifer met Stutterin' John and things went down one more very large notch.
Five years earlier, the children had knocked Candidate Hart out of the race due to their obsession with consensual sex. Five years later, they started chasing Bill Clinton.
People are dead all over the world because they've behaved this way. Now, people like King want to do this again. In this way, they hope to protect "the integrity of our elections!"
Gennifer Flowers was playing the fool when she met Howard and Stutterin' John. Chris Matthews was the fool when he fawned all over Gennifer Flowers, then slurped his beloved Kathleen Willey. (At the time, Matthews was aggressively leading the war against Candidate Gore.)
How many elections have been waylaid by childish, dishonest nonsense like this? Still and all, to this very day, one of our liberal Internet moguls wants to sell you photographs of Stephanie Clifford's extremely large breasts, and Colbert King says he wants to "protect our elections" by letting Clifford mouth off.
Subhumans care about nothing but sex. Increasingly, more and more, this is the shape of our upper-end culture, even Over Here inside our own pseudo-liberal tents.
Tomorrow: Confessore's (highly intelligent) warning
Still coming: Stormy meets Norman O. Brown