|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 23, 2018 23:14:37 GMT -6
www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-23/manhattan-da-may-file-criminal-charges-against-trump-organizationTwo senior Trump Organization officials may face criminal charges in connection with Michael Cohen's $130,000 hush money payment to Stormy Daniels, according to the New York Times, citing two officials. The probe by the Manhattan DA's office "is in its earliest stages and prosecutors have not yet made a decision on whether to proceed." Prosecutors in the district attorney’s office have reviewed the court papers containing the campaign finance charges and other federal crimes to which Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty on Tuesday in United States District Court in Manhattan, the officials said. The papers provide some details about how two Trump Organization executives handled the reimbursement and recorded them as legal fees.-NYT www.nytimes.com/2018/08/23/nyregion/trump-organization-criminal-charges-vance.htmlThe state investigation would revolve around how the Trump Organization accounted for the payment to Daniels (real name Stephanie Clifford), who claims to have had an affair with President Trump over a decade ago. While the Trump Organization recorded the $130,000 payment as a legal expense, Cohen said on Tuesday that he paid Clifford to buy her silence during the 2016 US election, while Federal prosecutors have said the Cohen reimbursement were for sham legal invoices related to a nonexistent retainer agreement - and did no actual legal work on the matter.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boots on Aug 24, 2018 7:06:17 GMT -6
Even better, unnamed sources who signed NDA’s & wanted to remain anonymous to avoid legal repercussions of violating said NDA’s. Welcome to journalism and the legal profession in 2018. Don't worry about actual facts. Just keep saying it over and over. Don't sideswipe the lawyers, they aren't the ones pushing this crap. This is the anti-Trumpers and media. If he got a blowjob from an intern in the Whitehouse they would want him impeached. None of them want to pay attention to the reality. 1. Pecker was given immunity in the Cohen case. 2. The Cohen case is no longer being handled by Mueller. It was sent to the US Attorney for Southern District of NY, just like Manafort's Northern Virginia case. 3. The lone case Mueller did hold onto had zero to do with Trump so how much do you think a case they farm out tonthe local office is going to have to do with Trump? 4. The only possible exposure would have been if there was any evidence that Trump told Cohen to write off the $130k as a campaign contribution. I dont think there is or Mueller would have kept the case. 5. Assume for a minute Trump DID tell him to claim it. Trump and Cohen have both stated that Trump reimbursed Cohen the $130k. That means that any benefit or contribution came from the candidate himself. There are ZERO limits of what a candidate can contribute to his own campaign. But now that the folks drooling over the slight possibility of any wrongdoing on Trump's part are so fired up to impeach. All you are doing is firing up his base. Just in time for the midterms. |
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Aug 24, 2018 7:47:29 GMT -6
Roger Kimball delivers the article of the week: Crime and PunishmentOne of the reasons so many people are confused by the operations of our self-appointed fourth branch of government—I mean in this instance the unending, Kafkaesque investigations conducted by Robert Mueller and his crack team of anti-Trump shock troops—is that while we have seen plenty of punishment meted out, crimes have been rather less populous on the ground. Yes, I understand that Paul Manafort has been nabbed for tax evasion and bank fraud, and that he now faces additional charges in yet another court. One of the nice things about our modern prosecutors is their handy multiplication machine that takes what is essentially one crime and gins it up into dozens or even hundreds of counts. Presto! You’re facing 18 counts, peasant—try beating that! The point is, when you have carte-blanche to torment someone, why stop when you’ve got him locked up for life? Like a cat toying with an injured mouse, the modern major prosecutor keeps batting his prey about till he stops moving altogether. What might have been justice for a serial killer is gleefully applied to someone who fudged his tax returns or tripped over himself answering an FBI agent. Then we have sadism, not justice. When it comes to our legal system, they say that the process is the punishment. But that leaves out the other side of the equation: that for the system, for wretched power-drunk commissars like Robert Mueller, the process, because of the punishment, is all the fun. They enjoy tormenting people. But the thing that makes this long-running entertainment so confusing for most of us is that none of the crimes we’ve seen so far have anything to do with the title of the show. Remember: we crowded into the theater to see “The Great Russian Collusion Drama.” But all of the skits we’ve seen so far—from Manafort’s and Michael Cohen’s tax evasions all the way down to whatever it is that Michael Flynn and George Papadopoulos are supposed to have done—are like warm-up acts. Russian dressing might be slathered over the salad—everyone knows that in this election, as in previous U.S. elections, the Russians meddled and endeavored to sow discord. (And of course, we do the same thing: just ask the Brits or the Israelis.) But the main course—evidence that Donald Trump “colluded” with the Russians to affect the outcome of the election—about that there has been a Godot-like absence in the very center of the narrative. What’s the Reason for All This? As many wits noted back when the the Russian Collusion Investigation was in its early decades—I mean, its early months—this was a Russia investigation with no Russians. We had Flynn and youngsters like Papadopoulos entrapped by the FBI, but for what people call “process crimes,” i.e., more process than crime. Stepping back from the details of this expensive, divisiveness-spreading machine that is the Mueller Investigation, what is the central crime being investigated? What is the raison d’être of this beltway spectacular? Oyez, oyez, oyez: I am now in a position to answer these questions. Drum roll, please! The crime at the center of this deep-state initiative is the election of Donald Trump. The tort? He was elected without the permission of the ruling class, its jesters and its scribes and moralists. Pete Wehner does not approve of Donald Trump. Bill Kristol thinks he is infra-dig. Psychiatrists are still trying to figure out what Mad Max Boot and Jabbering John Brennan think. But this, Ladies and Gentlemen (and unlike the MTA and the London Tube, we still use the phrase “Ladies and Gentlemen” here), this is the crime: Donald Trump was elected. That’s it. That’s the crime. It’s not in the statute books, but a little thing like that never stopped a diligent bureaucrat, especially one armed with a phalanx of partisan prosecutors and an unlimited budget. So, the next time you see Robert Mueller indict a ham sandwich or order a pre-dawn, guns-drawn raid on your Aunt Millie, remember: it’s not personal (or maybe, as Daisy Buchanan says in The Great Gatsby, “It’s only personal”). In Mueller’s twisted mind, there is or might be some connection between the ham sandwich or your Aunt Millie and Donald Trump. By squeezing them, he hopes, he can finally achieve his goal, which is to remove this president from office. Getting Donald Trump is the point of this entire sordid “investigation.” (It has a subsidiary goal of distracting attention from the only real Russian collusion in the 2016 election, that between the Clinton campaign, Fusion GPS, and Christopher Steele on one side and dubious Russian sources “close to the Kremlin” on the other, but that really is just a collateral benefit to team Mueller.) Impeachment Is the Goal As many commentators have observed—and none more eloquently or with stronger legal acumen than Andrew McCarthy, who has been terrier-like in his dissection of this whole sorry saga—this investigation is primarily about impeachment. Once that is understood, the mists clear and we know where we are with this baroque phantasmagoria of an investigation. Think about this: not one of the people indicted by this wholesale indictment factory, not one, would have been indicted had Mueller not thought him a possible conduit to the president. How’s that for guilt by association? In practical terms, it means that the president has to approach the midterms not state-by-state but nationally. The midterms are a referendum of the 2016 election. The president needs to go to the people and ask: was your vote in 2016 legitimate? He should say: “I promised you judges who would interpret the law, not seek to make the law, stronger borders, tax cuts, economic growth, low unemployment, a stronger military, and a more rational, less intrusive regulatory environment. I have delivered on those things as much as Congress would allow me. Do you want more of that or do you want tax hikes, weaker borders, and more regulation? Do you want more Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Nancy Pelosi or Brett Kavanaugh and Mike Pompeo? That’s your choice in November.” The Pardon Play A nonpartisan friend (he did not vote for Trump or Hillary) wrote me with another bit of practical advice for the president. Reflecting on the vindictive, death-by-a-thousand-cuts procedure of Robert Mueller, he noted that the president could “avoid this form of slow water torture by simply pardoning Manafort and anyone else who has gotten in Mueller’s sights. I can,” he said, “right now write the presidential statement”: I am now pardoning Paul Manafort and everyone else who has come within the gun sights of the special counsel. These individuals have fallen into jeopardy entirely because of their association with me, my campaign, my business, my family, and so forth. None of them would be in such trouble but for the fact that they are seen by Mr. Mueller as stepping stones in his quest to get me. Rather than wait until the end of the process, I have decided to pardon everyone now, because the enormous distraction caused by the Mueller investigations threatens to distract the nation from attending to crucial business in a very dangerous world. This is a fight between Mr. Mueller and me, not between Mr. Manafort, nor anyone else, and Mr. Mueller. I signed the pardon papers this morning. Having now pardoned all of Mr. Mueller’s targets, I invite him to file a report with the House of Representatives, recommending my impeachment. The House, and, if articles of impeachment are voted by the House, then the Senate sitting as my jury, are the proper arena for this battle. This is a political, not a legal battle. I am prepared to wage that political battle within the House and the Senate in an impeachment context, and before the American people in the next presidential election, in which, I hereby announce, I intend to run for a second term. Let the American people have their say. Neither Don Lemon nor Rachel Maddow nor their many confrères in the media would like this. Indeed, it would drive them, if possible, to further frenzies. But, hey, in for a penny, in for a pound. If, as I say, Donald Trump’s crime was simply being elected, such a forthright expedient might be just the ticket. After somehow managing to get elected, Donald Trump’s biggest crime has been fighting back against his enemies. They are not used to a president who gives as good as he gets. They’re used to having a monopoly on calling people unpleasant names and acting like dyspeptic toddlers. Donald Trump has had the temerity to repay them in kind. How dare he! Robert Mueller has been about impeachment all along. Bring it on, and let’s see what happens. |
|
|
|
Post by okirishfan on Aug 24, 2018 7:49:17 GMT -6
Don't sideswipe the lawyers, they aren't the ones pushing this crap. This is the anti-Trumpers and media. If he got a blowjob from an intern in the Whitehouse they would want him impeached. None of them want to pay attention to the reality. 1. Pecker was given immunity in the Cohen case. 2. The Cohen case is no longer being handled by Mueller. It was sent to the US Attorney for Southern District of NY, just like Manafort's Northern Virginia case. 3. The lone case Mueller did hold onto had zero to do with Trump so how much do you think a case they farm out tonthe local office is going to have to do with Trump? 4. The only possible exposure would have been if there was any evidence that Trump told Cohen to write off the $130k as a campaign contribution. I dont think there is or Mueller would have kept the case. 5. Assume for a minute Trump DID tell him to claim it. Trump and Cohen have both stated that Trump reimbursed Cohen the $130k. That means that any benefit or contribution came from the candidate himself. There are ZERO limits of what a candidate can contribute to his own campaign. But now that the folks drooling over the slight possibility of any wrongdoing on Trump's part are so fired up to impeach. All you are doing is firing up his base. Just in time for the midterms. 1. Who cares if he had immunity if he has the evidence to back something up? Evidence of a crime is evidence of a crime regardless of the motivation of the one providing it. Bank statements and audio recordings don't know or care who provides them and for what reason. They're just evidence.
2. and 4. Honest question. Doesn't the state have more leeway in charging a sitting president than the federal government does? That's what I've seen but I'm not an attorney.
And I'm against impeachment before the investigation is completely over. I just want him to be treated just like you or I would be treated (I mean, that kind of was his the premise of his candidacy....drain the swamp and all that). If he committed a criminal act, then he should be held accountable. Period. If there is no criminal activity, then fine.
|
|
|
|
Post by xingtherubicon on Aug 24, 2018 7:56:39 GMT -6
When LIErish eyes are smillllllllling....
|
|
|
|
Post by Boots on Aug 24, 2018 8:11:09 GMT -6
Don't sideswipe the lawyers, they aren't the ones pushing this crap. This is the anti-Trumpers and media. If he got a blowjob from an intern in the Whitehouse they would want him impeached. None of them want to pay attention to the reality. 1. Pecker was given immunity in the Cohen case. 2. The Cohen case is no longer being handled by Mueller. It was sent to the US Attorney for Southern District of NY, just like Manafort's Northern Virginia case. 3. The lone case Mueller did hold onto had zero to do with Trump so how much do you think a case they farm out tonthe local office is going to have to do with Trump? 4. The only possible exposure would have been if there was any evidence that Trump told Cohen to write off the $130k as a campaign contribution. I dont think there is or Mueller would have kept the case. 5. Assume for a minute Trump DID tell him to claim it. Trump and Cohen have both stated that Trump reimbursed Cohen the $130k. That means that any benefit or contribution came from the candidate himself. There are ZERO limits of what a candidate can contribute to his own campaign. But now that the folks drooling over the slight possibility of any wrongdoing on Trump's part are so fired up to impeach. All you are doing is firing up his base. Just in time for the midterms. 1. Who cares if he had immunity if he has the evidence to back something up? Evidence of a crime is evidence of a crime regardless of the motivation of the one providing it. Bank statements and audio recordings don't know or care who provides them and for what reason. They're just evidence.
2. and 4. Honest question. Doesn't the state have more leeway in charging a sitting president than the federal government does? That's what I've seen but I'm not an attorney.
And I'm against impeachment before the investigation is completely over. I just want him to be treated just like you or I would be treated (I mean, that kind of was his the premise of his candidacy....drain the swamp and all that). If he committed a criminal act, then he should be held accountable. Period. If there is no criminal activity, then fine.
1. He gets immunity for information he has on Cohen. Nothing to do with Trump or Murller would still have the case. 2. That's an interesting question. States generally can do whatever they want but courts have stopped them from seeking to enforce what is strictly federal law. Many laws overlap and have federal and state laws such as elections. If we are talking about that issue in particular, it was a federal election. That means federal law. It also means if a state is fired up about it, its political and they dont have shit. 3. Watergate threw the nation into a downward spiral. The stupid ass GOP spent the entirety of Clinton's presidency investigating him. And for what? |
|
|
|
Post by okirishfan on Aug 24, 2018 8:31:28 GMT -6
1. He gets immunity for information he has on Cohen. Nothing to do with Trump or Murller would still have the case.
2. That's an interesting question. States generally can do whatever they want but courts have stopped them from seeking to enforce what is strictly federal law. Many laws overlap and have federal and state laws such as elections. If we are talking about that issue in particular, it was a federal election. That means federal law. It also means if a state is fired up about it, its political and they dont have shit. 3. Watergate threw the nation into a downward spiral. The stupid ass GOP spent the entirety of Clinton's presidency investigating him. And for what? 1. Is that inference or fact? I would think that if he got immunity, he probably has evidence of something that goes beyond Cohen.
3. Well, despite any negative reactions to Watergate: 1) you don't ignore crimes and 2) much of what led to Watergate,Daniel Ellsburg and the Pentagon Papers, for example, helped put an end to what many, probably a majority of people now (including my father-in-law who was in the thick of it all), to believe that it was a war that was not going to be won and that politicians were lying about for it's continued existence as thousands of American's died.
What crimes would you believe would be worth investigating? I mean let's say the whole Russia thing wasn't a thing. Let's say Trump's financial statements were leaked by wikileaks or something, and it was found that he had committed all kinds of financial crimes, do you think that is worthy of investigation? Or should we just turn a blind eye because he's doing a great job?
I'm just trying to figure out where you (and many others) stand on this issue. I get the issues with the Russia probe. But it seems for many supporters, they could find out during an investigation as I hypothetically noted above that he murdered someone twenty years ago and they'd still yell, "but that's not what the investigation was about!!!" and "it happened so long ago" and "the economy is humming".
I'm just kind of bewildered that some people don't want people to be held accountable, IF in fact they did something wrong (and as it stands, we don't know if he did anything. All you have right now are a bunch of supporters blaming anyone and everyone who goes against him, even the LE institutions, despite them admitting that he's not a credible person). The motivation for his enemies want him investigated is understandable, i.e. the MSM, Dems, etc (I'm not ready to call the FBI and everyone else conspirators just yet). But the motivation has nothing to do with whether or not a criminal act was committed. It doesn't matter if I'm running a drug ring out of my house and my neighbor whom I've been feuding with for years turns me in (even though he does drugs himself) just because he doesn't like me. If there's evidence I'm running a drug ring, that's all that matters. And I can scream "but my neighbor does drugs!!! I only sell them!!!" all day and it won't matter. If there's evidence I committed a crime, that's all that matters.
|
|
|
|
Post by sheepdog on Aug 24, 2018 8:45:44 GMT -6
1. He gets immunity for information he has on Cohen. Nothing to do with Trump or Murller would still have the case.
2. That's an interesting question. States generally can do whatever they want but courts have stopped them from seeking to enforce what is strictly federal law. Many laws overlap and have federal and state laws such as elections. If we are talking about that issue in particular, it was a federal election. That means federal law. It also means if a state is fired up about it, its political and they dont have shit. 3. Watergate threw the nation into a downward spiral. The stupid ass GOP spent the entirety of Clinton's presidency investigating him. And for what? 1. Is that inference or fact? I would think that if he got immunity, he probably has evidence of something that goes beyond Cohen.
3. Well, despite any negative reactions to Watergate: 1) you don't ignore crimes and 2) much of what led to Watergate,Daniel Ellsburg and the Pentagon Papers, for example, helped put an end to what many, probably a majority of people now (including my father-in-law who was in the thick of it all), to believe that it was a war that was not going to be won and that politicians were lying about for it's continued existence as thousands of American's died.
What crimes would you believe would be worth investigating? I mean let's say the whole Russia thing wasn't a thing. Let's say Trump's financial statements were leaked by wikileaks or something, and it was found that he had committed all kinds of financial crimes, do you think that is worthy of investigation? Or should we just turn a blind eye because he's doing a great job?
I'm just trying to figure out where you (and many others) stand on this issue. I get the issues with the Russia probe. But it seems for many supporters, they could find out during an investigation as I hypothetically noted above that he murdered someone twenty years ago and they'd still yell, "but that's not what the investigation was about!!!" and "it happened so long ago" and "the economy is humming".
I'm just kind of bewildered that some people don't want people to be held accountable, IF in fact they did something wrong (and as it stands, we don't know if he did anything. All you have right now are a bunch of supporters blaming anyone and everyone who goes against him, even the LE institutions, despite them admitting that he's not a credible person). The motivation for his enemies want him investigated is understandable, i.e. the MSM, Dems, etc (I'm not ready to call the FBI and everyone else conspirators just yet). But the motivation has nothing to do with whether or not a criminal act was committed. It doesn't matter if I'm running a drug ring out of my house and my neighbor whom I've been feuding with for years turns me in (even though he does drugs himself) just because he doesn't like me. If there's evidence I'm running a drug ring, that's all that matters. And I can scream "but my neighbor does drugs!!! I only sell them!!!" all day and it won't matter. If there's evidence I committed a crime, that's all that matters.
The people holding the noose don't want to be told about outstanding parking tickets, yet that's really all they have, and essentially it's the gist of the story. |
|
|
|
Post by NN on Aug 24, 2018 9:02:54 GMT -6
Trumps CFO has been granted immunity.
|
|
|
|
Post by okirishfan on Aug 24, 2018 9:34:03 GMT -6
1. Is that inference or fact? I would think that if he got immunity, he probably has evidence of something that goes beyond Cohen.
3. Well, despite any negative reactions to Watergate: 1) you don't ignore crimes and 2) much of what led to Watergate,Daniel Ellsburg and the Pentagon Papers, for example, helped put an end to what many, probably a majority of people now (including my father-in-law who was in the thick of it all), to believe that it was a war that was not going to be won and that politicians were lying about for it's continued existence as thousands of American's died.
What crimes would you believe would be worth investigating? I mean let's say the whole Russia thing wasn't a thing. Let's say Trump's financial statements were leaked by wikileaks or something, and it was found that he had committed all kinds of financial crimes, do you think that is worthy of investigation? Or should we just turn a blind eye because he's doing a great job?
I'm just trying to figure out where you (and many others) stand on this issue. I get the issues with the Russia probe. But it seems for many supporters, they could find out during an investigation as I hypothetically noted above that he murdered someone twenty years ago and they'd still yell, "but that's not what the investigation was about!!!" and "it happened so long ago" and "the economy is humming".
I'm just kind of bewildered that some people don't want people to be held accountable, IF in fact they did something wrong (and as it stands, we don't know if he did anything. All you have right now are a bunch of supporters blaming anyone and everyone who goes against him, even the LE institutions, despite them admitting that he's not a credible person). The motivation for his enemies want him investigated is understandable, i.e. the MSM, Dems, etc (I'm not ready to call the FBI and everyone else conspirators just yet). But the motivation has nothing to do with whether or not a criminal act was committed. It doesn't matter if I'm running a drug ring out of my house and my neighbor whom I've been feuding with for years turns me in (even though he does drugs himself) just because he doesn't like me. If there's evidence I'm running a drug ring, that's all that matters. And I can scream "but my neighbor does drugs!!! I only sell them!!!" all day and it won't matter. If there's evidence I committed a crime, that's all that matters.
The people holding the noose don't want to be told about outstanding parking tickets, yet that's really all they have, and essentially it's the gist of the story. Well..that's just like your opinion man. And you have a vested interest in wanting to believe that, so......
And it really doesn't answer my question but rather confirms what I was saying about many of his supporters "Donald didn't do anything wrong". How do you know that? "Because everyone is out to get him...and even if they found something I'm going to deem it 'unimportant' because it's not what they were searching for".
But, if you'd like to answer the hypothetical scenario I posed, since you decided to weigh in, feel free to do so. Otherwise you're just Exhibit A.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 24, 2018 9:41:56 GMT -6
Remember this: theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/20/our-guy-the-real-russian-collusion/Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley requested testimony from Mr. Waldman surrounding his contacts and engagements throughout the 2016/2017 operation to undermine and remove President Donald Trump. In a response letter released today (full pdf below) lawyers representing Mr. Waldman are trying to keep their client from forced testimony; and it appears likely he is remaining outside of the country to avoid being captured in the investigative net. www.scribd.com/document/386518002/Waldman-Letter-to-Grassley-08-17-2018-Follow-Up#He is a lawyer for both Steele and a Russian Oligarch. Well, he has been found in the states.   Dear Mr. @chuckgrassley good news! Looks like Waldman is back in the Country earlier than his lawyers expected and he’s on the East Coast. @markwarner has his cel maybe he can swing by the Hill? Sooner than later everyone will have to face the big Elephant in the room Deripaska. pic.twitter.com/JEwt55YNnF — Rosie Memos (@almostjingo) August 24, 2018 ...... So, I can safely assume his passport, etc has been flagged so he can answer the Senate’s questions correct? |
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 24, 2018 9:45:01 GMT -6
From one of Trump’s biggest critics: dailycaller.com/2018/08/24/chris-cuomo-not-impressed-campaign-finance-charges/A day after CNN mentioned “impeachment” 108 times in 18 hours, one of the network’s biggest stars Chris Cuomo confessed he’s “not impressed’ by Michael Cohen’s charging documents. “I’m not impressed by these campaign finance violation charges,” he said Thursday. Following a long, heated debate with Kellyanne Conway, Cuomo the host of “Cuomo Prime Time,” lead a discussion between Democratic strategist Paul Begala and former Trump advisor Jason Miller. Begala began calling Trump “a pathological liar,” and added, “also he does have real legal jeopardy.” “In the Cohen plea he accuses the president of the United States of cooperating to subvert the campaign finance laws.” Begala later said, “He has real legal jeopardy here. That’s why he’s not telling the truth.” Cuomo responded, “Let’s flip it a little bit and see how many people I can get angry at me in one night. I read that information, what they call the charging document, where there are no charges because there was a plea deal. I’m not impressed by these campaign finance violation charges. He pled guilty. I get it. That was his decision, but they never proved it, and they are cutting it very fine with what they say he did. I don’t think we know that this was some grave campaign finance conspiracy going on. I think they were lying about it, I think they were being sneaky about it, but I don’t know that there’s criminal exposure for the president, especially with all the DOJ guidance about when you can when you can move on a president. They would have to impeach him first. I don’t know this is a high crime or misdemeanor.” Later in the segment Begala, agreed with Cuomo saying, “I think you make a good point the president has a defense. This is not obstruction of justice it was obstruction of wife.” Begala went on saying, “He could have a possible defense with a lot of people, I didn’t want my wife to know that I failed her that’s why I paid.” Cuomo interrupted, “I’m fine with all of that. I’m fine with him saying, look I lied because it is none of your business. I would’ve taken care of it anyway. It’s not a crime. I lied. I shouldn’t of lied. I’m sorry. Let’s move on. He’d get an applause from me on that.” |
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Aug 24, 2018 9:46:45 GMT -6
Trumps CFO has been granted immunity. I’m just blown away by the support for these outright intimidation tactics. It’s groupthink, laid bare. As long as we understand this is the new normal now. Whomever replaces Trump, there’s investigations coming. If you run for federal office, I am going to know everything about you. Because that’s how politics, and progressive by definition, works. Should make for an interesting pool of candidates. Do you agree that you’re willing to work outside the normal process to expose Trump because he’s so bad he deserves it? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
|
|
Post by sheepdog on Aug 24, 2018 9:49:13 GMT -6
The people holding the noose don't want to be told about outstanding parking tickets, yet that's really all they have, and essentially it's the gist of the story. Well..that's just like your opinion man. And you have a vested interest in wanting to believe that, so......
And it really doesn't answer my question but rather confirms what I was saying about many of his supporters "Donald didn't do anything wrong". How do you know that? "Because everyone is out to get him...and even if they found something I'm going to deem it 'unimportant' because it's not what they were searching for".
But, if you'd like to answer the hypothetical scenario I posed, since you decided to weigh in, feel free to do so. Otherwise you're just Exhibit A.
if I am wrong then just simply state what they have that actually bears significance. How do you know that Trump did something wrong other than you despise him? I have no vested interest it's just I'd like to think I could differentiate bullshit and hot air from the relevance embedded in our lives. |
|
|
|
Post by 1tc on Aug 24, 2018 9:55:51 GMT -6
Trumps CFO has been granted immunity. I’m just blown away by the support for these outright intimidation tactics. It’s groupthink, laid bare. As long as we understand this is the new normal now. Whomever replaces Trump, there’s investigations coming. If you run for federal office, I am going to know everything about you. Because that’s how politics, and progressive by definition, works. Should make for an interesting pool of candidates. Do you agree that you’re willing to work outside the normal process to expose Trump because he’s so bad he deserves it? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I wonder if these people getting immunity will do the same as the Hillary people who were given immunity in her case(s)? |
|
|
|
Post by nmgaucho on Aug 24, 2018 9:56:28 GMT -6
Trumps CFO has been granted immunity. Trump is fucked !  |
|
|
|
Post by okirishfan on Aug 24, 2018 10:03:14 GMT -6
Well..that's just like your opinion man. And you have a vested interest in wanting to believe that, so......
And it really doesn't answer my question but rather confirms what I was saying about many of his supporters "Donald didn't do anything wrong". How do you know that? "Because everyone is out to get him...and even if they found something I'm going to deem it 'unimportant' because it's not what they were searching for".
But, if you'd like to answer the hypothetical scenario I posed, since you decided to weigh in, feel free to do so. Otherwise you're just Exhibit A.
. How do you know that Trump did something wrong other than you despise him? I have no vested interest it's just I'd like to think I could differentiate bullshit and hot air from the relevance embedded in our lives. 1. It's an ongoing investigation.
2. There's the operative word for most of his supporters: "significance". Exhibit B, if you will, of my first point about some of his supporters. EVERYTHING is going to be deemed insignificant because you want to defend him, i.e. you have a vested interest.
And I never said he did anything wrong (I believe it will be found out that he did...due to his lack of character he has exhibited most of his life). I've been on record saying I doubt they'll find evidence of collusion. However, I'm quite sure they'll find some financial criminal activity and I do believe he's attempting to obstruct the investigation (because I have eyes and ears). But, here's the important part: I'm willing to wait til the end of the investigation to say "I know" anything. I'm making a judgment based on his behavior and am willing to let the investigative process play out.
And yes, I despise him so much that you just liked a post of mine defending him yesterday. I do despise the fact that someone with such low character, who is a pathological liar, and uses people to get what he wants has so much power. I'm not naïve. I understand that's the way the world works but it doesn't mean I have to like it. And my dislike for him doesn't lead me to believe he's guilty of everything being levied against him.
Don't kid yourself. There's a reason this guy lied to the American public about his taxes. But again, I'm sure that would fine with many of you if he had been defrauding the government and American citizens by not paying taxes, or business fraud, or basically just about anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Aug 24, 2018 10:10:31 GMT -6
1. He gets immunity for information he has on Cohen. Nothing to do with Trump or Murller would still have the case.
2. That's an interesting question. States generally can do whatever they want but courts have stopped them from seeking to enforce what is strictly federal law. Many laws overlap and have federal and state laws such as elections. If we are talking about that issue in particular, it was a federal election. That means federal law. It also means if a state is fired up about it, its political and they dont have shit. 3. Watergate threw the nation into a downward spiral. The stupid ass GOP spent the entirety of Clinton's presidency investigating him. And for what?
What crimes would you believe would be worth investigating? I mean let's say the whole Russia thing wasn't a thing. Let's say Trump's financial statements were leaked by wikileaks or something, and it was found that he had committed all kinds of financial crimes, do you think that is worthy of investigation? Or should we just turn a blind eye because he's doing a great job?
I'm just trying to figure out where you (and many others) stand on this issue. I get the issues with the Russia probe. But it seems for many supporters, they could find out during an investigation as I hypothetically noted above that he murdered someone twenty years ago and they'd still yell, "but that's not what the investigation was about!!!" and "it happened so long ago" and "the economy is humming".
I will go on record and say that murder would be my line in the sand, and he would lose my support. Sheesh. My biggest problem with this whole fiasco (and there are many problems), is that this is such a perversion of justice, and the way our justice system is supposed to work in this country, that our justice system is becoming unrecognizable. Robert Mueller was assigned to investigate whether or not Trump colluded with Russia to influence the outcome of the 2016 election. In this country, you are only supposed to be investigated if there is evidence of a crime...in this case, was there evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. It is plainly obvious now that there was not, other than the bogus, unverified, and now thoroughly debunked Steele dossier. Rosenstein added in the vague stipulation of "any matters that arise directly from the investigation". You would think that this would be referring to election-related matters. No, it turns out that Robert Mueller now has the keys to investigate Donald Trump on anything and everything in his past and present, with still no evidence of crimes committed that we know about. Is that how justice is going to be done in this country now? We don't like somebody, so we are going to go looking into all of that person's past dealings to see if we can find a crime to prosecute him over? If we don't find anything here, then we move on to there. If we squeeze this person and they don't sing, then we move on to this other person, ruin his life, and see if he will sing. Donald Trump may have in fact committed financial crimes in the past. Does that mean we appoint a prosecutor just because we don't like him, or that he "lies" all the time, or that he wants to try to stop the third world flood from ruining our country, or that he is literally Adolf Hitler re-incarnated? He should be treated like every U.S. citizen and if there is evidence of crimes, then let's see it. If not, let him get back to focusing on his job of governing the nation that elected him, and quit doing all of the divisive, incalculable damage that is being done to our country with this nonsense. |
|
|
|
Post by 1tc on Aug 24, 2018 10:11:53 GMT -6
He's been audited by the IRS. Are you saying they found President Trump had cheated on his taxes?
Remember when you didn't post on LT when President Obama was the President? lol
|
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 24, 2018 10:23:23 GMT -6
Don't sideswipe the lawyers, they aren't the ones pushing this crap. This is the anti-Trumpers and media. If he got a blowjob from an intern in the Whitehouse they would want him impeached. None of them want to pay attention to the reality. 1. Pecker was given immunity in the Cohen case. 2. The Cohen case is no longer being handled by Mueller. It was sent to the US Attorney for Southern District of NY, just like Manafort's Northern Virginia case. 3. The lone case Mueller did hold onto had zero to do with Trump so how much do you think a case they farm out tonthe local office is going to have to do with Trump? 4. The only possible exposure would have been if there was any evidence that Trump told Cohen to write off the $130k as a campaign contribution. I dont think there is or Mueller would have kept the case. 5. Assume for a minute Trump DID tell him to claim it. Trump and Cohen have both stated that Trump reimbursed Cohen the $130k. That means that any benefit or contribution came from the candidate himself. There are ZERO limits of what a candidate can contribute to his own campaign. But now that the folks drooling over the slight possibility of any wrongdoing on Trump's part are so fired up to impeach. All you are doing is firing up his base. Just in time for the midterms. Hold your horses, Charlie. I understand all of your bullet points. I'm talking about people like Davis. He's out there practically testifying and doing the job for Mueller. Slip and falls like Stormy's guy too. I didn't say all lawyers. But, if you look, the NYC Da is now getting his nose in all of this. Not his job. And, to be honest, the lawyers are having a huge impact. Who to go after, who to try to flip. Mueller's team is full of anti Trump lawyers. They are far from innocent bystanders. |
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 24, 2018 10:29:02 GMT -6
Everything that is done is related to getting Trump. Manafort, Cohen, et al would never have even gotten a first look unless they thought it would help them get Trump.
|
|
|
|
Post by okirishfan on Aug 24, 2018 10:31:25 GMT -6
He's been audited by the IRS. Are you saying they found President Trump had cheated on his taxes? Remember when you didn't post on LT when President Obama was the President? lol Yeah, 12 times in a row if you take his word for it. It's so bad that he still hasn't released his taxes.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1tc on Aug 24, 2018 10:33:56 GMT -6
He's been audited by the IRS. Are you saying they found President Trump had cheated on his taxes? Remember when you didn't post on LT when President Obama was the President? lol Yeah, 12 times in a row if you take his word for it. It's so bad that he still hasn't released his taxes.
Why not post yours in here? |
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Aug 24, 2018 10:34:55 GMT -6
What crimes would you believe would be worth investigating? I mean let's say the whole Russia thing wasn't a thing. Let's say Trump's financial statements were leaked by wikileaks or something, and it was found that he had committed all kinds of financial crimes, do you think that is worthy of investigation? Or should we just turn a blind eye because he's doing a great job?
I'm just trying to figure out where you (and many others) stand on this issue. I get the issues with the Russia probe. But it seems for many supporters, they could find out during an investigation as I hypothetically noted above that he murdered someone twenty years ago and they'd still yell, "but that's not what the investigation was about!!!" and "it happened so long ago" and "the economy is humming".
I will go on record and say that murder would be my line in the sand, and he would lose my support. Sheesh. My biggest problem with this whole fiasco (and there are many problems), is that this is such a perversion of justice, and the way our justice system is supposed to work in this country, that our justice system is becoming unrecognizable. Robert Mueller was assigned to investigate whether or not Trump colluded with Russia to influence the outcome of the 2016 election. In this country, you are only supposed to be investigated if there is evidence of a crime...in this case, was there evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. It is plainly obvious now that there was not, other than the bogus, unverified, and now thoroughly debunked Steele dossier. Rosenstein added in the vague stipulation of "any matters that arise directly from the investigation". You would think that this would be referring to election-related matters. No, it turns out that Robert Mueller now has the keys to investigate Donald Trump on anything and everything in his past and present, with still no evidence of crimes committed that we know about. Is that how justice is going to be done in this country now? We don't like somebody, so we are going to go looking into all of that person's past dealings to see if we can find a crime to prosecute him over? If we don't find anything here, then we move on to there. If we squeeze this person and they don't sing, then we move on to this other person, ruin his life, and see if he will sing. Donald Trump may have in fact committed financial crimes in the past. Does that mean we appoint a prosecutor just because we don't like him, or that he "lies" all the time, or that he wants to try to stop the third world flood from ruining our country, or that he is literally Adolf Hitler re-incarnated? He should be treated like every U.S. citizen and if there is evidence of crimes, then let's see it. If not, let him get back to focusing on his job of governing the nation that elected him, and quit doing all of the divisive, incalculable damage that is being done to our country with this nonsense. Exactly, and the point so many seem to miss. The perversion of our Justice system, and the outright support for that perversion, is way more scary to many than whatever Trump did as an NYC billionaire. I voted for him knowing he was a douche, bc he had an agenda in line with mine, and the rest of the options were at least as douchy. You want to throw out a bullshit charge that touches at the core of this countries national security as a rouse to use the powers of the US Government to investigate and publicly expose his past business and personal activity, all because you don’t like him? That’s messed up man. That such obviously anti-American activity would be not only tolerated but openly lauded shows just how far we’ve come in putting our personal biases in front of our ability to think long term and rationally. It’s some scary shit man, because this don’t end with Trump. People can’t seem to think past today, but unless you’re dying this afternoon, it’s coming... EDIT: also, many voted for Trump because we didn’t trust the government or establishment and thought they were willing to violate civil liberties and personal rights to get what they wanted. And, here we are..... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
|
|
Post by okirishfan on Aug 24, 2018 10:39:47 GMT -6
Yeah, 12 times in a row if you take his word for it. It's so bad that he still hasn't released his taxes.
Why not post yours in here? Because I'm not running for political office and I didn't tell the American public that I would as a condition for their vote.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1tc on Aug 24, 2018 10:41:50 GMT -6
Why not post yours in here? Because I'm not running for political office and I didn't tell the American public that I would as a condition for their vote.
Yeah, President Trump is under no obligation to post his either. |
|
|
|
Post by nmgaucho on Aug 24, 2018 10:42:19 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 24, 2018 10:45:59 GMT -6
Wow. Life changing post. Will someone please wake me up? |
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 24, 2018 10:50:00 GMT -6
Trumps CFO has been granted immunity. Because he has so much info concerning Russia? |
|
|
|
Post by okirishfan on Aug 24, 2018 10:50:11 GMT -6
Because I'm not running for political office and I didn't tell the American public that I would as a condition for their vote.
Yeah, President Trump is under no obligation to post his either. Never said he was. |
|
