ion and whether or not their sex is actually a separate conversation. Now you might say to me Scott Scott Scott they both know it's for sex. Yes and no. They both know that that's an intention but it doesn't mean that if the young lady said no that Matt Gaetz was going to force it or that he wouldn't pay what he said he was going to pay. So in my opinion these are always consensual and it's not always about the money even if money was paid with sort of an overlying umbrella assumption that you know we're both kind of thinking in this direction because it's a separate decision. The decision of whether you would accept money to be in the company of this person for a weekend is one decision and then once you're there you're still a human being who can make a separate decision about what you want to do with your body right. Matt Gaetz does not control anybody's body. If they say no it's just no that's it.

So is that a case of paying for sex? How would you rate that if you know the money has that sort of intention behind it but it's not a decision? There's an intention which is not illegal. I don't think it's wrong to have an intention but the decision can still be completely separate because I'm sure that they weren't punished or sent home immediately if they said you know what I'm not feeling good tonight or this doesn't work for me.

Now every now and then I have to stop and say I'm not excusing anything he did. I'm also not condemning it unless you know there was an underage part that has to be dealt with. But you need to understand it in the world of the yacht jet set people things are not like I bought a prostitute to have sex and she left in an hour. It's more like can you spend a week with me in the Bahamas and you're both just sort of thinking in the same direction. I don't know. So I guess I don't know even if the young ladies testified that the money was for sex was it because that could be an intention but not necessarily a decision. You can separate them. I don't know. Legally it looks like it's pretty perilous so I'm not going to try to defend him. I'm just going to say that these are never as clean as you think like these situations they always have all this gray area so who knows. But if it's true that he didn't know the age of the young one and if it's true that he just had a racy situation and money was part of it I don't care. I really don't care at all. Do you? Because even the seventeen-year-old I hate to say this because I'll get in trouble for it but I don't believe she complained because remember their relationship continued after she was eighteen so I think she had no complaints. So if there's no victim in the classic sense except that somebody was technically under eighteen how much should I care? Can I agree that some of this looks illegal and still not care? I think I can because if you looked at the number of seventeen-year-old young women who had a sexual relationship with somebody over eighteen it's going to be a really large slice of America and we're not chasing all of them to ground and the reason is that we all have the same impression which is I wish you hadn't done that but let's not talk about it. I mean that's how people feel about seventeen most people anyway.

Celebrity endorsements don't work. Just the