Trump has now been implicated in a federal crime

[hunarcy]

The breaking news is that Trump violated three different campaign finance laws with the assistance of Michael Cohen according to prosecutors for the southern district of New York, and Trump is being implicated as a felon. Washington Post: Breaking News, World, US, DC News & Analysis

Late Friday, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York filed a document arguing that Michael Cohen, until last year President Trump’s personal attorney, should receive a substantial prison sentence for violations of federal law to which Cohen admitted guilt in August.


Analysis | The government implicates Trump and the Trump campaign in federal campaign finance violations

Wasn't long ago that wanting to prosecute political opponents was considered wrong...but, the hypocrisy of Hillarybots is boundless.

http://www.nationalmemo.com/prosecuting-political-opponents-is-what-dictators-do/

 

[beautress]

Quote: Who did Hillary have an affair with? Who did Bill prior to 1996?

Bill and Hill have a different M.O. if there's any truth to this:

Jim McDougal, a long-time member of the Clintons’ Arkansas inner circle and a central figure in the Whitewater scandal, passed away from a heart attack in prison in 1998. But he said in a final interview before his death that Hillary Clinton had a "hard, difficult personality" and was "riding [Vince Foster] every minute" about Whitewater before Foster took his own life.
McDougal also described his ex-friend Bill as a "master con artist" who married Hillary after a "cold-blooded search" to find himself a politically beneficial wife. Bill, according to McDougal, also privately wanted to prevent Hillary from succeeding in her own political career.
Hillary Clinton Bullied Vince Foster Before Suicide


​

So Hillary wasn’t an adulter. Thanks for conceding.

Quote: So Hillary wasn’t an (sic) adulter. Thanks for conceding.​

You're the one who intimated Hillary might be suspected as an adulterer, not me. My comment was that Hillary had a unique M.O. And for some strange reasons, people implicated in sexual or large fiscal scandals around either of the Clintons were either badgered to death by Clintonista lawyers or found dead somewhere of sundry and plausible causes. All the Clintons had to do to someone else would have been to say "You're fired." They were street smart enough to never have to say that since their too-close-for-comfort former colleagues so conveniently passed away. Or were they each innocent as the driven snow? The answer's somewhere out there, maybe (or not):

"You're FIRED" actually is a nicer outcome than "You're a goner."​

You’re crazy, I intimated no such thing. I posted how scum would vote for a piece of shit who cheats on their spouse and you idiotically threw Hillary’s name at the one. And I care not about any of your kooky conservative conspiracy nonsense.

Quote: You’re crazy, I intimated no such thing. I posted how scum would vote for a piece of shit who cheats on their spouse and you idiotically threw Hillary’s name at the one. And I care not about any of your kooky conservative conspiracy nonsense.​

You said: Who did Hillary have an affair with?
I gave you my answer when I diverted YOUR Hillary-affair question into her modus operandi as being a different one. Debating a differing viewpoint from yours is not significant in determining the mental illness condition of being crazy. Does that makes you guilty of psychiatric malpractice? Of course it doesn't. It simply points out that not only did you misinterpret what you wrote, you projected your mistake onto an innocent bystander who simply but firmly called your own statement to your attention.

Your speech could give the electrical sign "will not phase" new meaning in its credence should you persist in chasing your tail here.

​

We were talking about adulterers. Thanks for admitting you tried to divert the conversation. I accept your concession.

You're peeing into the wind when you said I did anything but divert your attention to YOUR error, not mine. I do not accept your claim of my concession to anything except the acknowledgment of YOUR pointing to any affair associated with First Lady Hillary Clinton, something I never broached, but you claimed I did when actually, YOU mentioned affair, not me..

 

[Marion Morrison]

Ahhhh! Wednesday and all is well in Trumpland, and not a peep from Mueller n friends.

Ayep. BWK

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Your claim doesn't fit under the definition of service, as shown in your link.

serv·ice
/ˈsərvəs/
noun
noun: service

1. 1.
   the action of helping or doing work for someone.

Doesn't fit the definitions shown in your link.

So? That list is not exhaustive. You should have known that when you saw the leading phrase, ”such as”.

I gave you a definition for the word service. That’s what Stormy provided. For which she was paid $139K. Which is more than the $2,700 limit where it then needs to be reported.

If your claim was correct, every positive story written about Hillary in the New York Times was a reportable service. Every negative story about Trump in the New York Times was a reportable service. So how much was the NYT contribution on her FEC paperwork?

And how much were they paid for such services?

And how much were they paid for such services?

What's the commercial rate for ad space in the NYT?

 

[joaquinmiller]

If it was to benefit the campaign, it was ipso facto campaign money.

Now you are trying to read his mind....no judge will allow that evidence in....think!...

You're trying to tell me what a future, as-yet-unknown judge will allow, and I'm the mind-reader? A judge has already accepted a Guilty Plea from Cohen on the charges, including illegal corporate contributions, as a result of the shell company Cohen set up to make and hide the hush money payments.

 

[joaquinmiller]

A woman threatening a man with revealing private information about him to the public unless he pays her a large sum of money is a crime. It's called extortion. That is the crime that should be investigated here.

That is not a crime....unless you are talking about her with blackmail....Corporations pay off people for silence all the time....Congress uses tax dollars to silence their whores....so if what Trump did was a crime then they are all guilty....what would be a crime is if Trump used campaign money...but just like in Edwards case nearly impossible to prove.....

Yes, it's a crime. What the two women did to Trump was a crime.

ex·tor·tion
/ikˈstôrSH(ə)n/
noun
noun: extortion; plural noun: extortions
the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats.
synonyms: blackmail, shakedown;
formalexaction
"arrested on a charge of extortion"

Its not extortion dummy....it is not illegal to gift someone for their silence...like I said corporations do it all the time....believe me...if it was his money and not the campaigns he broke no laws...it doesn't look good but its not illegal....

Seriously, dummy? You think Trump did this as a gift?

That is what its called in corporate America and in Washington DC....you can not say whether it was a gift or not...can you?...at least not in any court in this nation....Trump is in the clear on this one snowflake.....

It's a Non-disclosure agreement, not a gift. Jesus.

 

[Rambunctious]

If it was to benefit the campaign, it was ipso facto campaign money.

Now you are trying to read his mind....no judge will allow that evidence in....think!...

You're trying to tell me what a future, as-yet-unknown judge will allow, and I'm the mind-reader? A judge has already accepted a Guilty Plea from Cohen on the charges, including illegal corporate contributions, as a result of the shell company Cohen set up to make and hide the hush money payments.

Trump's lawyers would object to any speculation on what was on Trump's mind two years ago....if you think there is a judge on the planet that would over rule you are nuts....

 

[Rambunctious]

It's a Non-disclosure agreement, not a gift. Jesus.

Trump's lawyers will call it a gift...whether you like it or not...

 

[joaquinmiller]

It's a Non-disclosure agreement, not a gift. Jesus.

Trump's lawyers will call it a gift...whether you like it or not...

They can call it a partridge in a pear tree, but there are court documents and an arbitration hearing that show it is money paid in exchange for a non-disclosure agreement.

 

[eagle1462010]

Be more specific.

Her account of their affair would have been detrimental to his campaign, so she provided a service, for which he paid $130,000, to not tell it.

Her account of their affair would have been detrimental to his campaign,

So what?

so she provided a service,

Going back to the link you provided, copy and paste the section that fits your claim.

• Services (such as advertising, printing or consulting) are valued at the prevailing commercial rate at the time the services are rendered (i.e., the amount that was paid or would have been paid for the services).

Nothing there about telling a good story or not telling a bad story.
Try again?

Don’t need to just because you deny it. She provided a service for which she was paid $130,000.

She didn't do it for money when she did it. Extorted for money later. There fixed it for you.

 

[Faun]

So Hillary wasn’t an adulter. Thanks for conceding.

Quote: So Hillary wasn’t an (sic) adulter. Thanks for conceding.​

You're the one who intimated Hillary might be suspected as an adulterer, not me. My comment was that Hillary had a unique M.O. And for some strange reasons, people implicated in sexual or large fiscal scandals around either of the Clintons were either badgered to death by Clintonista lawyers or found dead somewhere of sundry and plausible causes. All the Clintons had to do to someone else would have been to say "You're fired." They were street smart enough to never have to say that since their too-close-for-comfort former colleagues so conveniently passed away. Or were they each innocent as the driven snow? The answer's somewhere out there, maybe (or not):

"You're FIRED" actually is a nicer outcome than "You're a goner."​

You’re crazy, I intimated no such thing. I posted how scum would vote for a piece of shit who cheats on their spouse and you idiotically threw Hillary’s name at the one. And I care not about any of your kooky conservative conspiracy nonsense.

Quote: You’re crazy, I intimated no such thing. I posted how scum would vote for a piece of shit who cheats on their spouse and you idiotically threw Hillary’s name at the one. And I care not about any of your kooky conservative conspiracy nonsense.​

You said: Who did Hillary have an affair with?
I gave you my answer when I diverted YOUR Hillary-affair question into her modus operandi as being a different one. Debating a differing viewpoint from yours is not significant in determining the mental illness condition of being crazy. Does that makes you guilty of psychiatric malpractice? Of course it doesn't. It simply points out that not only did you misinterpret what you wrote, you projected your mistake onto an innocent bystander who simply but firmly called your own statement to your attention.

Your speech could give the electrical sign "will not phase" new meaning in its credence should you persist in chasing your tail here.

​

We were talking about adulterers. Thanks for admitting you tried to divert the conversation. I accept your concession.

You're peeing into the wind when you said I did anything but divert your attention to YOUR error, not mine. I do not accept your claim of my concession to anything except the acknowledgment of YOUR pointing to any affair associated with First Lady Hillary Clinton, something I never broached, but you claimed I did when actually, YOU mentioned affair, not me..

LOL

Who cares what you claim? I was talking g about cheating spouses. You idiotically threw Hillary’s name into that. Your stupidity is yours alone.

 

[Faun]

serv·ice
/ˈsərvəs/
noun
noun: service

1. 1.
   the action of helping or doing work for someone.

Doesn't fit the definitions shown in your link.

So? That list is not exhaustive. You should have known that when you saw the leading phrase, ”such as”.

I gave you a definition for the word service. That’s what Stormy provided. For which she was paid $139K. Which is more than the $2,700 limit where it then needs to be reported.

If your claim was correct, every positive story written about Hillary in the New York Times was a reportable service. Every negative story about Trump in the New York Times was a reportable service. So how much was the NYT contribution on her FEC paperwork?

And how much were they paid for such services?

And how much were they paid for such services?

What's the commercial rate for ad space in the NYT?

Why are you asking me? Do I look like The NY Times to you?

 

[Faun]

If it was to benefit the campaign, it was ipso facto campaign money.

Now you are trying to read his mind....no judge will allow that evidence in....think!...

You're trying to tell me what a future, as-yet-unknown judge will allow, and I'm the mind-reader? A judge has already accepted a Guilty Plea from Cohen on the charges, including illegal corporate contributions, as a result of the shell company Cohen set up to make and hide the hush money payments.

Trump's lawyers would object to any speculation on what was on Trump's mind two years ago....if you think there is a judge on the planet that would over rule you are nuts....

There’s not going to be s judge involved; only the Democrat-led House with impeachment powers.

 

[Faun]

Her account of their affair would have been detrimental to his campaign, so she provided a service, for which he paid $130,000, to not tell it.

Her account of their affair would have been detrimental to his campaign,

So what?

so she provided a service,

Going back to the link you provided, copy and paste the section that fits your claim.

• Services (such as advertising, printing or consulting) are valued at the prevailing commercial rate at the time the services are rendered (i.e., the amount that was paid or would have been paid for the services).

Nothing there about telling a good story or not telling a bad story.
Try again?

Don’t need to just because you deny it. She provided a service for which she was paid $130,000.

She didn't do it for money when she did it. Extorted for money later. There fixed it for you.

Are you on drugs? She got paid and stayed silent through the election.

 

[Flopper]

Don’t need to just because you deny it. She provided a service for which she was paid $130,000.

Your claim doesn't fit under the definition of service, as shown in your link.

serv·ice
/ˈsərvəs/
noun
noun: service

1. 1.
   the action of helping or doing work for someone.

Doesn't fit the definitions shown in your link.

So? That list is not exhaustive. You should have known that when you saw the leading phrase, ”such as”.

I gave you a definition for the word service. That’s what Stormy provided. For which she was paid $139K. Which is more than the $2,700 limit where it then needs to be reported.

If your claim was correct, every positive story written about Hillary in the New York Times was a reportable service. Every negative story about Trump in the New York Times was a reportable service. So how much was the NYT contribution on her FEC paperwork?

Because the party can endorse its own caywithout being reported as a contribution. I note you failed to show trump reported his endorsements, which you claim should have been reported.

Because the party can endorse its own caywithout being reported as a contribution

But you said a benefit to the campaign is a contribution. Any benefit. You were wrong.

I note you failed to show trump reported his endorsements,

If I had made the claim you did, I'd have been all over the failure to report.

And I gave you an exemption to what has to be reported. It’s not my fault it bothers you so. And I take it your refusal to show trump reported such endorsements because he didn’t. Which means according to your nonsense, that’s yet another example of trump breaking the law.

And I gave you an exemption to what has to be reported.

So not every benefit needs to be reported?
Excellent!
You have a link that shows Trump's payoff benefit needs to be reported?

Sure....

In addition to contributing money, a nonconnected committee may donate goods or services to candidates and their committees. Gifts of goods or services are called in-kind contributions. For example, a committee makes an in-kind contribution when it:

Making in-kind contributions to candidates - FEC.gov

Thanks. More evidence that paying off porn stars isn't a reportable contribution.

You don't seem to get. The act was a violation of election law. Cohen has admitted in court that he had arranged the payments “for the principal purpose of influencing the election” for president in 2016. Further he named President Trump as the coordinator in the crime. Cohen has pled guilty, been convicted and sentenced. Continuing to argue that this was not a crime is just plain silly.

 

[DandyDonovan]

If it was to benefit the campaign, it was ipso facto campaign money.

Now you are trying to read his mind....no judge will allow that evidence in....think!...

You're trying to tell me what a future, as-yet-unknown judge will allow, and I'm the mind-reader? A judge has already accepted a Guilty Plea from Cohen on the charges, including illegal corporate contributions, as a result of the shell company Cohen set up to make and hide the hush money payments.

Trump's lawyers would object to any speculation on what was on Trump's mind two years ago....if you think there is a judge on the planet that would over rule you are nuts....

There’s not going to be s judge involved; only the Democrat-led House with impeachment powers.

LOL they arent even going to try to impeach Trump. This is kabuke theater to keep the rabble roused up. Worked on you

 

[Faun]

If it was to benefit the campaign, it was ipso facto campaign money.

Now you are trying to read his mind....no judge will allow that evidence in....think!...

You're trying to tell me what a future, as-yet-unknown judge will allow, and I'm the mind-reader? A judge has already accepted a Guilty Plea from Cohen on the charges, including illegal corporate contributions, as a result of the shell company Cohen set up to make and hide the hush money payments.

Trump's lawyers would object to any speculation on what was on Trump's mind two years ago....if you think there is a judge on the planet that would over rule you are nuts....

There’s not going to be s judge involved; only the Democrat-led House with impeachment powers.

LOL they arent even going to try to impeach Trump. This is kabuke theater to keep the rabble roused up. Worked on you

LOLOL

Democrats have already submitted articles of impeachment; only it went nowhere because Republicans controlled the House. We’ll see what happens when Democrats take control.

 

[DandyDonovan]

Now you are trying to read his mind....no judge will allow that evidence in....think!...

You're trying to tell me what a future, as-yet-unknown judge will allow, and I'm the mind-reader? A judge has already accepted a Guilty Plea from Cohen on the charges, including illegal corporate contributions, as a result of the shell company Cohen set up to make and hide the hush money payments.

Trump's lawyers would object to any speculation on what was on Trump's mind two years ago....if you think there is a judge on the planet that would over rule you are nuts....

There’s not going to be s judge involved; only the Democrat-led House with impeachment powers.

LOL they arent even going to try to impeach Trump. This is kabuke theater to keep the rabble roused up. Worked on you

LOLOL

Democrats have already submitted articles of impeachment; only it went nowhere because Republicans controlled the House. We’ll see what happens when Democrats take control.

Right, just like Republicans did all sorts of shit when they knew Obama would veto it because they could then say "look at us, we're working hard but that mean old _____"

Both sides are useless turds who play that game way too often. Democrats would be stupid to impeach Trump, especially given that there is ZERO chance that the Senate would convict him.

On the other hand, Democrats ARE stupid, so you may have the point here.

 

[joaquinmiller]

Now you are trying to read his mind....no judge will allow that evidence in....think!...

You're trying to tell me what a future, as-yet-unknown judge will allow, and I'm the mind-reader? A judge has already accepted a Guilty Plea from Cohen on the charges, including illegal corporate contributions, as a result of the shell company Cohen set up to make and hide the hush money payments.

Trump's lawyers would object to any speculation on what was on Trump's mind two years ago....if you think there is a judge on the planet that would over rule you are nuts....

There’s not going to be s judge involved; only the Democrat-led House with impeachment powers.

LOL they arent even going to try to impeach Trump. This is kabuke theater to keep the rabble roused up. Worked on you

LOLOL

Democrats have already submitted articles of impeachment; only it went nowhere because Republicans controlled the House. We’ll see what happens when Democrats take control.

I don't think the Democrats should help remove that rotting crap from around the GOP's neck.

Smell that smell?

 

[eagle1462010]

Her account of their affair would have been detrimental to his campaign,

So what?

so she provided a service,

Going back to the link you provided, copy and paste the section that fits your claim.

• Services (such as advertising, printing or consulting) are valued at the prevailing commercial rate at the time the services are rendered (i.e., the amount that was paid or would have been paid for the services).

Nothing there about telling a good story or not telling a bad story.
Try again?

Don’t need to just because you deny it. She provided a service for which she was paid $130,000.

She didn't do it for money when she did it. Extorted for money later. There fixed it for you.

Are you on drugs? She got paid and stayed silent through the election.

The way you stated your sentence sounded like 130 k to screw. She did it for free to extort money or profit for it later. She wasn't forced to screw him and by her own admissions she did it for future gain only.

Aka your great fec violation is a whore just like it was a long time ago. Great Russian story, Right Mr. Mueller.

Investigation in search of a crime. Not investigating one.