Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So you don't notice it's a forced plee across the board which means you don't see how this can boomerang?Exactly, which is why it might be a trap for his lawyer to show they forced the plee in illegal manipulation/threats thus hoping to getting a dismissed case or future revisit and perhaps an obstruction charge on who is interfering with the case in the Clinton camp since he (Cohen's lawyer) is closely tied.False, Cohen's 8 has only 1 possible connection to Trump, the one that wasn't even a crime.
How can one be charged with something not even a crime? And why would a lawyer that knows it is not even a crime plead gulity to something that is not even a crime?
So your working theory......is that Michael Cohen plead guilty to something that isn't a crime?
LMFAO! Really?
And the judge and federal prosecutors just didn't notice?
Then that makes the perfect set up....a set up is one you don't notice not onecthat is as obvious as Obama telling Sessions to meet with the Russian Ambassador.
no nice spin, there is no crime in hush money and he proved it was not done from funds, so how can there be a lie except by the MSM spin.I wasn't the one correlating campaign finance fraud to watergate, your Trump derangement syndrome suffering friends did.lol
You can't be serious.
Furthermore you seem to think it's funny that a party can harass opponent parties including unequal justice being that Obama got fined and Cohen is going to jail that proves the "political bias" and Dem fascist behavior.
Yes there is a huge difference between inadvertently having issues with your system and deliberately conspiring to bribe and cover up illegal activity and the lie about it.
It’s never the first mistake that gets you. It’s the lies and the cover up that follow. The Obama campaign acknowledged their mistakes and paid their fine.
Trump lied, denied and then lied some more. That conspiracy and obstruction of justice. Big difference.
no nice spin, there is no crime in hush money and he proved it was not done from funds, so how can there be a lie except by the MSM spin.I wasn't the one correlating campaign finance fraud to watergate, your Trump derangement syndrome suffering friends did.lol
You can't be serious.
Furthermore you seem to think it's funny that a party can harass opponent parties including unequal justice being that Obama got fined and Cohen is going to jail that proves the "political bias" and Dem fascist behavior.
Yes there is a huge difference between inadvertently having issues with your system and deliberately conspiring to bribe and cover up illegal activity and the lie about it.
It’s never the first mistake that gets you. It’s the lies and the cover up that follow. The Obama campaign acknowledged their mistakes and paid their fine.
Trump lied, denied and then lied some more. That conspiracy and obstruction of justice. Big difference.
I never said that, so your reading comprehension problems makes you falsely state facts. You'll have to pinpoint what you said that was not accurate to the plee. Clue it wasn't about "excess" contributions according to MSM even unless you are describing another candidate he worked for, as we were first told he left that nameless as well.So you don't notice it's a forced plee across the board which means you don't see how this can boomerang?Exactly, which is why it might be a trap for his lawyer to show they forced the plee in illegal manipulation/threats thus hoping to getting a dismissed case or future revisit and perhaps an obstruction charge on who is interfering with the case in the Clinton camp since he (Cohen's lawyer) is closely tied.False, Cohen's 8 has only 1 possible connection to Trump, the one that wasn't even a crime.
How can one be charged with something not even a crime? And why would a lawyer that knows it is not even a crime plead gulity to something that is not even a crime?
So your working theory......is that Michael Cohen plead guilty to something that isn't a crime?
LMFAO! Really?
And the judge and federal prosecutors just didn't notice?
Then that makes the perfect set up....a set up is one you don't notice not onecthat is as obvious as Obama telling Sessions to meet with the Russian Ambassador.
So lets list your batshit nonsense:
1) Cohen plead guilty to something that isn't a crime
2) Okay, making excessive campaign contributions is a crime, but Cohen didn't plead guilty to it.
3) Okay, Cohen did plead guilty to it, but it was a forced plea.
Any other desperate backpedalling you'd like to do for us, baby bird? Because watching you flail is hilarious!
I never said that, so your reading comprehension problems makes you falsely state facts. You'll have to pinpoint what you said that was not accurate to the plee. Clue it wasn't about "excess" contributions according to MSM even unless you are describing another candidate he worked for, as we were first told he left that nameless as well.So you don't notice it's a forced plee across the board which means you don't see how this can boomerang?Exactly, which is why it might be a trap for his lawyer to show they forced the plee in illegal manipulation/threats thus hoping to getting a dismissed case or future revisit and perhaps an obstruction charge on who is interfering with the case in the Clinton camp since he (Cohen's lawyer) is closely tied.How can one be charged with something not even a crime? And why would a lawyer that knows it is not even a crime plead gulity to something that is not even a crime?
So your working theory......is that Michael Cohen plead guilty to something that isn't a crime?
LMFAO! Really?
And the judge and federal prosecutors just didn't notice?
Then that makes the perfect set up....a set up is one you don't notice not onecthat is as obvious as Obama telling Sessions to meet with the Russian Ambassador.
So lets list your batshit nonsense:
1) Cohen plead guilty to something that isn't a crime
2) Okay, making excessive campaign contributions is a crime, but Cohen didn't plead guilty to it.
3) Okay, Cohen did plead guilty to it, but it was a forced plea.
Any other desperate backpedalling you'd like to do for us, baby bird? Because watching you flail is hilarious!
hard to claim that against a man who footed most of his own campaign.no nice spin, there is no crime in hush money and he proved it was not done from funds, so how can there be a lie except by the MSM spin.I wasn't the one correlating campaign finance fraud to watergate, your Trump derangement syndrome suffering friends did.lol
You can't be serious.
Furthermore you seem to think it's funny that a party can harass opponent parties including unequal justice being that Obama got fined and Cohen is going to jail that proves the "political bias" and Dem fascist behavior.
Yes there is a huge difference between inadvertently having issues with your system and deliberately conspiring to bribe and cover up illegal activity and the lie about it.
It’s never the first mistake that gets you. It’s the lies and the cover up that follow. The Obama campaign acknowledged their mistakes and paid their fine.
Trump lied, denied and then lied some more. That conspiracy and obstruction of justice. Big difference.
It is a crime if its to benefit the campaign and its in excess of campaign contribution limits, baby bird.
You simply don't know what you're talking about.
lol
You can't be serious.
You have to admit, the whataboutism today has been a thing to behold.
hard to claim that against a man who footed most of his own campaign.no nice spin, there is no crime in hush money and he proved it was not done from funds, so how can there be a lie except by the MSM spin.I wasn't the one correlating campaign finance fraud to watergate, your Trump derangement syndrome suffering friends did.lol
You can't be serious.
Furthermore you seem to think it's funny that a party can harass opponent parties including unequal justice being that Obama got fined and Cohen is going to jail that proves the "political bias" and Dem fascist behavior.
Yes there is a huge difference between inadvertently having issues with your system and deliberately conspiring to bribe and cover up illegal activity and the lie about it.
It’s never the first mistake that gets you. It’s the lies and the cover up that follow. The Obama campaign acknowledged their mistakes and paid their fine.
Trump lied, denied and then lied some more. That conspiracy and obstruction of justice. Big difference.
It is a crime if its to benefit the campaign and its in excess of campaign contribution limits, baby bird.
You simply don't know what you're talking about.
-epic failed argument.
Now that you guys busted yourselves on the Hillary crimes issue and the lax illegal entrance issue, why would you avoid protecting your lawlessness stance only to throw ad hominem arguments avoidingvthe innevidable? You yourselves have admitted in this discussion your shameful stance.
Once again: hush money is not a cime I said, you change my narrative to excessive Finance which by the way Cohen doesn't name the politician but his Clintonian lawyer does="could be" a set up for his lawyer to be exposed obstructing justice through a Clintonian source.
To pay hush money with the purpose of helping a campaign is not illegal. To not report it is illegal. Trump admitted he paid the money. If he did not declare the funds as a contribution to his campaign, it is a felony.Once again: hush money is not a cime I said, you change my narrative to excessive Finance which by the way Cohen doesn't name the politician but his Clintonian lawyer does="could be" a set up for his lawyer to be exposed obstructing justice through a Clintonian source.
I proved how you keep changing what you read and what people say.
Then I gotchas, in taking your own words and proving you believe Hillary was slick and your party are criminals in it's support of illegal entrance.
Try to keep up, I am using you to make my points.
Lastly 4 different news sources report 4 different versions proving tabloid news as an issue, the one agreeing with you was Fox new that used "excessive", CNBC mentions no such thing "unlawful corporate contribution" and your go to news sources don't either, therefore your Hannity and Rush ad hominem responses are not only displacement, it ends up being you who agrees with Fox instead of me. *LOL*
You just can't catch a break can you?
Once again: did not say that.Once again: hush money is not a cime I said, you change my narrative to excessive Finance which by the way Cohen doesn't name the politician but his Clintonian lawyer does="could be" a set up for his lawyer to be exposed obstructing justice through a Clintonian source.
Says you, citing you. And your source sucks.
You've already been demonstrated that you have no idea what you're talking about when you insisted that Cohen didn't plea to making excessive campaign contributions.
Which he most obviously did:
Document: Michael Cohen Plea Agreement
Charge 8: Making Excessive Campaign Contributions.
Sorry, Baby Bird.....but you just don't know what you're talking about. Making your latest claims just more ignorant noise based on nothing.
Once again: did not say that.Once again: hush money is not a cime I said, you change my narrative to excessive Finance which by the way Cohen doesn't name the politician but his Clintonian lawyer does="could be" a set up for his lawyer to be exposed obstructing justice through a Clintonian source.
Says you, citing you. And your source sucks.
You've already been demonstrated that you have no idea what you're talking about when you insisted that Cohen didn't plea to making excessive campaign contributions.
Which he most obviously did:
Document: Michael Cohen Plea Agreement
Charge 8: Making Excessive Campaign Contributions.
Sorry, Baby Bird.....but you just don't know what you're talking about. Making your latest claims just more ignorant noise based on nothing.
Exactly, how can you support MSM lying to you about the sequence and who said what, Hillary lying, Obama Lying, your mate lying, you lying, your boss lying, your friends & family members lying, your pastors lying, your teachers lying, etc etc.To pay hush money with the purpose of helping a campaign is not illegal. To not report it is illegal. Trump admitted he paid the money. If he did not declare the funds as a contribution to his campaign, it is a felony.Once again: hush money is not a cime I said, you change my narrative to excessive Finance which by the way Cohen doesn't name the politician but his Clintonian lawyer does="could be" a set up for his lawyer to be exposed obstructing justice through a Clintonian source.
I proved how you keep changing what you read and what people say.
Then I gotchas, in taking your own words and proving you believe Hillary was slick and your party are criminals in it's support of illegal entrance.
Try to keep up, I am using you to make my points.
Lastly 4 different news sources report 4 different versions proving tabloid news as an issue, the one agreeing with you was Fox new that used "excessive", CNBC mentions no such thing "unlawful corporate contribution" and your go to news sources don't either, therefore your Hannity and Rush ad hominem responses are not only displacement, it ends up being you who agrees with Fox instead of me. *LOL*
You just can't catch a break can you?
Why did Trump lie that he knew nothing about hush money payment. Now he says he paid Cohen.
Today he said he did not know about the payments until after they were made. He is such an idiot. There is a recording of a phone call between Cohen and Trump planning the payment.
How can you support his lies?
Quote: "He never pleeded to that",Once again: did not say that.Once again: hush money is not a cime I said, you change my narrative to excessive Finance which by the way Cohen doesn't name the politician but his Clintonian lawyer does="could be" a set up for his lawyer to be exposed obstructing justice through a Clintonian source.
Says you, citing you. And your source sucks.
You've already been demonstrated that you have no idea what you're talking about when you insisted that Cohen didn't plea to making excessive campaign contributions.
Which he most obviously did:
Document: Michael Cohen Plea Agreement
Charge 8: Making Excessive Campaign Contributions.
Sorry, Baby Bird.....but you just don't know what you're talking about. Making your latest claims just more ignorant noise based on nothing.
Oh, I believe you. But this HaShev guy says you're lying your ass off:
Skylar: I'm still giggling that they're laughably insisting that excessive campaign contributions aren't a crime.
HaShev: He never pleeded to that, either your fake news misslead you or your comprehension is off. By some of your mistakes reading our posts here and how you processed the info poorly I say it's both since they spin, but mainly you because you take it way off the original story.
Post 73
Obama 2008 campaign finance fraud was presidential darkest day since Watergate
So not only were you comically, laughably wrong.......as Cohen most definitely did plead guilty to making excessive campaign contributions.
But you're also lying after the fact to cover your hapless ignorance.
And this is why you citing you is such a lousy source. So is that it? just you quoting your shitty source: yourself?
If so, that was easy.
Quote: "He never pleeded to that",Once again: did not say that.Once again: hush money is not a cime I said, you change my narrative to excessive Finance which by the way Cohen doesn't name the politician but his Clintonian lawyer does="could be" a set up for his lawyer to be exposed obstructing justice through a Clintonian source.
Says you, citing you. And your source sucks.
You've already been demonstrated that you have no idea what you're talking about when you insisted that Cohen didn't plea to making excessive campaign contributions.
Which he most obviously did:
Document: Michael Cohen Plea Agreement
Charge 8: Making Excessive Campaign Contributions.
Sorry, Baby Bird.....but you just don't know what you're talking about. Making your latest claims just more ignorant noise based on nothing.
Oh, I believe you. But this HaShev guy says you're lying your ass off:
Skylar: I'm still giggling that they're laughably insisting that excessive campaign contributions aren't a crime.
HaShev: He never pleeded to that, either your fake news misslead you or your comprehension is off. By some of your mistakes reading our posts here and how you processed the info poorly I say it's both since they spin, but mainly you because you take it way off the original story.
Post 73
Obama 2008 campaign finance fraud was presidential darkest day since Watergate
So not only were you comically, laughably wrong.......as Cohen most definitely did plead guilty to making excessive campaign contributions.
But you're also lying after the fact to cover your hapless ignorance.
And this is why you citing you is such a lousy source. So is that it? just you quoting your shitty source: yourself?
If so, that was easy.
What is "THAT" IN THIS SENTENCE?
If you don't know then you are mistaken and proven my other complaints about your skewed dissemination.
Once again,
"unlawful corporate contribution"
a political candidate he didn’t identify in court.
The lawyer broke client confidentiality which might end up boomeranging "if" The Clintons or any political motivated connections are in anyway interfering (obstructing) the case through that lawyer. This in turn would help Cohen.
Hence the term Trap.
You once again missrepresented what I said proving my point about spin and control of narrative.
But notice not one response in refuting your accidental admissions to Hillary's crimes and Dem support to break the entrance laws=criminal act.
Thanks for your help gettingthese points across.
NOW BACK ON TOPIC:
Former Obama aide,
Evelyn Farkas, who left her position as deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine, and Eurasia in the Obama White House in 2015, disclosed that Trump’s staff was indeed spied on.
She claimed in a brief March 2 MSNBC "Morning Joe" appearance that she had urged her “former colleagues and … people on the Hill” to get as much information as they could about the Trump team before Obama left office.
AS MY TOPIC POST STATES:
the only emulation or proper use of Watergate as an Analogy is Obamas Spygate. THE FAKE NEWS USE as somehow liken to campaign finances is not even close enough to mention and only "Inadvertantly" hit Obama back since he had worse campaign finance issues as did Rankel and others.
