poor analysis, mentions power imbalance then says nothing else. Does not mention blue dress, DNA that I saw.
There is little evidence that Trump had this extramarital affair alleged by Stormy. It is perfectly clear she tried to extort him though. It is also not clear Trump authorized the hush money or even knew about it at the time. Recall the lawyer who gave her the hush money turned out to be defrauding Trump.
If you are outsourcing the production of your "articles" I will outsource my reading of it.
This has freed up five whole minutes.
Did it take the facts of the Paula Jones case into account for Clinton’s moral assessment? How about the Kathleen Willey or Juanita Broaddrick cases?
Ok the moral "issues" are bogus.
1) He probably did not deceive his wife, because he probably had no affair with Stormy. She was trying to extort him during the election sure, but that is it.
2) He probably did not try to deceive the voters. The prosecution tried and spectacularly failed to show he authorized the hush money. And obviously he would not be deceiving any voters for what he put in his account books since the election was over when he marked his legal expenses as legal expenses.
So wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong.
AI is best for statistical info. If opinions or analysis is involved you can hear the voice of the leftists that program AI.
The alleged “hush money” was paid to Daniels AFTER Trump won the 2016 election .So the money couldn’t have been used to influence the election. Grok doesn’t do very well on these kinds questions.
AI is already being characterized as being able to “hallucinate” namely to form opinions based on faulty or incomplete knowledge. Not sure it is wise to ask AI to make value judgements and expect a correct opinion
Of course, it may be comparable to many imperfect humans in that regard.
Lousy AI-generated “analysis.”
Anyone with a name like GROK is and idiot!