The news is out Trump Campaign obstructed

[Billiejeens]

73 Former GOP National Security officials endorse Biden But the Qanon idiots won't Right Billie jeen?

73 Former GOP National Security officials endorse Biden

Wow!

What percentage is that?

LOL Don't rightly know but it's a good start How many do you need to prove trump is a pos and a disaster?

If there are only 73 former officials, then 73 is a lot.
If there are 73,000 then who gives a ****?

How many you think there are going back say 10 years? Even Hannity is said to have called Trump bat shit crazy

That's a lie

 

[Billiejeens]

Have a link for that?

Senate intel leaders said Trump associates may have presented misleading testimony during Russia probe: report

Republican and Democratic leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee reportedly told federal prosecutors last year that they believed President Trump’s family and associates may have presented mi…

thehill.com

Gee who would suspect the trumps are lying scum ..?....Only ones who ignore it are called repubs ,his base

Looks like Eddie the uneducated ***** can’t read. One big little word there. MAY. Meaning they have ZERO proof. No actual names mentioned or legitimate sources cited. As usual, Eddie and Stupidus fall flat on their lying faces.

They have all the proof they need. Obstruction proven, check, finance campaign violations with Michael Cohen, check.

You have nothing. As usual idiot. No obstruction per the senile Mule-er’s own words. Courts have already said the Stormy Daniels shit from Cohen does not violate campaign finance law since Trump used HIS OWN MONEY. You lose. As always.

What logical deductive reasoning do you not understand about this? Mueller is not allowed to render a decision on obstruction because of the OLC opinion. But law enforcement can do that when Trump leaves office. You lose the argument again.

No, as usual you’re an idiot. Mule-er the senile’s own words. The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision. Lack of evidence moron. Keep crying dipshit. You lose again. As always. And no, Trump will not be prosecuted in 2024. Another loss for you.

The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision

We explain that to them.
They can't hear it.
Impervious to any single bit of knowledge.

 

[BWK]

Have a link for that?

Senate intel leaders said Trump associates may have presented misleading testimony during Russia probe: report

Republican and Democratic leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee reportedly told federal prosecutors last year that they believed President Trump’s family and associates may have presented mi…

thehill.com

Gee who would suspect the trumps are lying scum ..?....Only ones who ignore it are called repubs ,his base

Looks like Eddie the uneducated ***** can’t read. One big little word there. MAY. Meaning they have ZERO proof. No actual names mentioned or legitimate sources cited. As usual, Eddie and Stupidus fall flat on their lying faces.

They have all the proof they need. Obstruction proven, check, finance campaign violations with Michael Cohen, check.

You have nothing. As usual idiot. No obstruction per the senile Mule-er’s own words. Courts have already said the Stormy Daniels shit from Cohen does not violate campaign finance law since Trump used HIS OWN MONEY. You lose. As always.

What logical deductive reasoning do you not understand about this? Mueller is not allowed to render a decision on obstruction because of the OLC opinion. But law enforcement can do that when Trump leaves office. You lose the argument again.

No, as usual you’re an idiot. Mule-er the senile’s own words. The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision. Lack of evidence moron. Keep crying dipshit. You lose again. As always. And no, Trump will not be prosecuted in 2024. Another loss for you.

The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision

We explain that to them.
They can't hear it.
Impervious to any single bit of knowledge.

No one can possibly be this stupid. I just refuse to believe that.

What is it about simple elementary logic do you not get? Did you go to the "School of about Face Logic?" Look, let's try this again. Good God! The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision because it couldn't. Mueller did not have the authority to enter any decision, guilty or not. Then, the interviewer finally asked the key question. Can Trump be indicted for obstruction after he leaves office. Answer, YES!

If Mueller had the authority to enter a decision he would have. And based on his final answer about could Trump be prosecuted after he left office, it wasn't "maybe." It was "YES. " No one can be that dense not to understand that. Do you really not understand that?

 

[lantern2814]

Have a link for that?

Senate intel leaders said Trump associates may have presented misleading testimony during Russia probe: report

Republican and Democratic leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee reportedly told federal prosecutors last year that they believed President Trump’s family and associates may have presented mi…

thehill.com

Gee who would suspect the trumps are lying scum ..?....Only ones who ignore it are called repubs ,his base

Looks like Eddie the uneducated ***** can’t read. One big little word there. MAY. Meaning they have ZERO proof. No actual names mentioned or legitimate sources cited. As usual, Eddie and Stupidus fall flat on their lying faces.

They have all the proof they need. Obstruction proven, check, finance campaign violations with Michael Cohen, check.

You have nothing. As usual idiot. No obstruction per the senile Mule-er’s own words. Courts have already said the Stormy Daniels shit from Cohen does not violate campaign finance law since Trump used HIS OWN MONEY. You lose. As always.

What logical deductive reasoning do you not understand about this? Mueller is not allowed to render a decision on obstruction because of the OLC opinion. But law enforcement can do that when Trump leaves office. You lose the argument again.

No, as usual you’re an idiot. Mule-er the senile’s own words. The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision. Lack of evidence moron. Keep crying dipshit. You lose again. As always. And no, Trump will not be prosecuted in 2024. Another loss for you.

The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision

We explain that to them.
They can't hear it.
Impervious to any single bit of knowledge.

No one can possibly be this stupid. I just refuse to believe that.

What is it about simple elementary logic do you not get? Did you go to the "School of about Face Logic?" Look, let's try this again. Good God! The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision because it couldn't. Mueller did not have the authority to enter any decision, guilty or not. Then, the interviewer finally asked the key question. Can Trump be indicted for obstruction after he leaves office. Answer, YES!

If Mueller had the authority to enter a decision he would have. And based on his final answer about could Trump be prosecuted after he left office, it wasn't "maybe." It was "YES. " No one can be that dense not to understand that. Do you really not understand that?

No, Mueller had NO evidence so he couldn’t charge Trump. OLC had no bearing. Mule-er is an idiot and so are you for lying. Too bad mule-er doesn’t know anything. There will be no prosecution in 2024. Period. There is no evidence. Period. You’re a lying loser. Period. Continue your tantrum.

 

[Billiejeens]

Have a link for that?

Senate intel leaders said Trump associates may have presented misleading testimony during Russia probe: report

Republican and Democratic leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee reportedly told federal prosecutors last year that they believed President Trump’s family and associates may have presented mi…

thehill.com

Gee who would suspect the trumps are lying scum ..?....Only ones who ignore it are called repubs ,his base

Looks like Eddie the uneducated ***** can’t read. One big little word there. MAY. Meaning they have ZERO proof. No actual names mentioned or legitimate sources cited. As usual, Eddie and Stupidus fall flat on their lying faces.

They have all the proof they need. Obstruction proven, check, finance campaign violations with Michael Cohen, check.

You have nothing. As usual idiot. No obstruction per the senile Mule-er’s own words. Courts have already said the Stormy Daniels shit from Cohen does not violate campaign finance law since Trump used HIS OWN MONEY. You lose. As always.

What logical deductive reasoning do you not understand about this? Mueller is not allowed to render a decision on obstruction because of the OLC opinion. But law enforcement can do that when Trump leaves office. You lose the argument again.

No, as usual you’re an idiot. Mule-er the senile’s own words. The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision. Lack of evidence moron. Keep crying dipshit. You lose again. As always. And no, Trump will not be prosecuted in 2024. Another loss for you.

The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision

We explain that to them.
They can't hear it.
Impervious to any single bit of knowledge.

No one can possibly be this stupid. I just refuse to believe that.

What is it about simple elementary logic do you not get? Did you go to the "School of about Face Logic?" Look, let's try this again. Good God! The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision because it couldn't. Mueller did not have the authority to enter any decision, guilty or not. Then, the interviewer finally asked the key question. Can Trump be indicted for obstruction after he leaves office. Answer, YES!

If Mueller had the authority to enter a decision he would have. And based on his final answer about could Trump be prosecuted after he left office, it wasn't "maybe." It was "YES. " No one can be that dense not to understand that. Do you really not understand that?

I am going to try one more time.

The question was could he be tried for obstruction after he leaves office?
Of course.

The question was not, could he be tried for obstruction for crimes already committed

See the difference?

Why was the 2nd question not asked?

Why?

Maybe to lead really ignorant people who believe themselves to be geniuses down the path your handlers want you to go.

 

[Billiejeens]

Have a link for that?

Senate intel leaders said Trump associates may have presented misleading testimony during Russia probe: report

Republican and Democratic leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee reportedly told federal prosecutors last year that they believed President Trump’s family and associates may have presented mi…

thehill.com

Gee who would suspect the trumps are lying scum ..?....Only ones who ignore it are called repubs ,his base

Looks like Eddie the uneducated ***** can’t read. One big little word there. MAY. Meaning they have ZERO proof. No actual names mentioned or legitimate sources cited. As usual, Eddie and Stupidus fall flat on their lying faces.

They have all the proof they need. Obstruction proven, check, finance campaign violations with Michael Cohen, check.

You have nothing. As usual idiot. No obstruction per the senile Mule-er’s own words. Courts have already said the Stormy Daniels shit from Cohen does not violate campaign finance law since Trump used HIS OWN MONEY. You lose. As always.

What logical deductive reasoning do you not understand about this? Mueller is not allowed to render a decision on obstruction because of the OLC opinion. But law enforcement can do that when Trump leaves office. You lose the argument again.

No, as usual you’re an idiot. Mule-er the senile’s own words. The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision. Lack of evidence moron. Keep crying dipshit. You lose again. As always. And no, Trump will not be prosecuted in 2024. Another loss for you.

The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision

We explain that to them.
They can't hear it.
Impervious to any single bit of knowledge.

No one can possibly be this stupid. I just refuse to believe that.

What is it about simple elementary logic do you not get? Did you go to the "School of about Face Logic?" Look, let's try this again. Good God! The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision because it couldn't. Mueller did not have the authority to enter any decision, guilty or not. Then, the interviewer finally asked the key question. Can Trump be indicted for obstruction after he leaves office. Answer, YES!

If Mueller had the authority to enter a decision he would have. And based on his final answer about could Trump be prosecuted after he left office, it wasn't "maybe." It was "YES. " No one can be that dense not to understand that. Do you really not understand that?

No, Mueller had NO evidence so he couldn’t charge Trump. OLC had no bearing. Mule-er is an idiot and so are you for lying. Too bad mule-er doesn’t know anything. There will be no prosecution in 2024. Period. There is no evidence. Period. You’re a lying loser. Period. Continue your tantrum.

I will disagree with Mueller being an idiot.
He probably has reached roughly the same level of diminished capacity that Biden has.

Devious and evil, sure.

 

[basquebromance]

not only should Trump be locked up, he should be impeached and bankrupted!

 

[cnm]

It wasn't.

It was. The sentencing memo is quite specific.

• “During the campaign, Cohen played a central role in two similar schemes to purchase the rights to stories – each from women who claimed to have had an affair with Individual-1 – so as to suppress the stories and thereby prevent them from influencing the election. With respect to both payments, Cohen acted with the intent to influence the 2016 presidential election. Cohen coordinated his actions with one or more members of the campaign, including through meetings and phone calls, about the fact, nature, and timing of the payments. In particular, and as Cohen himself has now admitted, with respect to both payments, he acted in coordination with and at the direction of Individual-1. As a result of Cohen’s actions, neither woman spoke to the press prior to the election.”
• The memo says the “principal purpose” of an agreement with “Woman-1″ was to “prevent [her] story from influencing the election.”
• “After the election, Cohen sought reimbursement for election-related expenses, including the $130,000 payment he had made to Woman-2.”
• The government argues Cohen’s “offenses strike at several pillars of our society,” including “transparent and fair elections.”

Here's what the Cohen sentencing memos say about his efforts to help Trump's 2016 campaign

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Investigation of Russian interference in 2016 election SENATE INTEL .....Which means traitors your own senate knows it was crooked,,,,but we know you don't give a damn He's your crook

a retard TDSER

 

[bigrebnc1775]

not only should Trump be locked up, he should be impeached and bankrupted!

we'll build a wall for a firing squad to face traitor biden and his VP

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It wasn't.

It was.

Payoffs to hoes happen all the time. Not campaign expenditures.

 

[cnm]

It wasn't.

It was.

Payoffs to hoes happen all the time. Not campaign expenditures.

Unless there is a sentencing memo stating the payments to be campaign expenses. Excerpt edited into previous post above.

Here's what the Cohen sentencing memos say about his efforts to help Trump's 2016 campaign

 

[Billiejeens]

It wasn't.

It was. The sentencing memo is quite specific.

• “During the campaign, Cohen played a central role in two similar schemes to purchase the rights to stories – each from women who claimed to have had an affair with Individual-1 – so as to suppress the stories and thereby prevent them from influencing the election. With respect to both payments, Cohen acted with the intent to influence the 2016 presidential election. Cohen coordinated his actions with one or more members of the campaign, including through meetings and phone calls, about the fact, nature, and timing of the payments. In particular, and as Cohen himself has now admitted, with respect to both payments, he acted in coordination with and at the direction of Individual-1. As a result of Cohen’s actions, neither woman spoke to the press prior to the election.”
• The memo says the “principal purpose” of an agreement with “Woman-1″ was to “prevent [her] story from influencing the election.”
• “After the election, Cohen sought reimbursement for election-related expenses, including the $130,000 payment he had made to Woman-2.”
• The government argues Cohen’s “offenses strike at several pillars of our society,” including “transparent and fair elections.”

Here's what the Cohen sentencing memos say about his efforts to help Trump's 2016 campaign

I laugh

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It wasn't.

It was.

Payoffs to hoes happen all the time. Not campaign expenditures.

Unless there is a sentencing memo stating the payments to be campaign expenses. Excerpt edited into previous post above.

Here's what the Cohen sentencing memos say about his efforts to help Trump's 2016 campaign

The government says Cohen made payments to two women who said they had affairs with Trump in order to affect the election outcome.

Well, shit.

Every New York Times article that said Hillary was the smartest and most qualified candidate in history was written in order to "affect the election outcome".
How much time have those writers been serving for their campaign contribution violations?

Now, if Trump had used campaign contributions from contributers to pay off hoes with checks from the "Committee to Elect Trump" would that have been legal? LOL!

 

[BWK]

Have a link for that?

Senate intel leaders said Trump associates may have presented misleading testimony during Russia probe: report

Republican and Democratic leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee reportedly told federal prosecutors last year that they believed President Trump’s family and associates may have presented mi…

thehill.com

Gee who would suspect the trumps are lying scum ..?....Only ones who ignore it are called repubs ,his base

Looks like Eddie the uneducated ***** can’t read. One big little word there. MAY. Meaning they have ZERO proof. No actual names mentioned or legitimate sources cited. As usual, Eddie and Stupidus fall flat on their lying faces.

They have all the proof they need. Obstruction proven, check, finance campaign violations with Michael Cohen, check.

You have nothing. As usual idiot. No obstruction per the senile Mule-er’s own words. Courts have already said the Stormy Daniels shit from Cohen does not violate campaign finance law since Trump used HIS OWN MONEY. You lose. As always.

What logical deductive reasoning do you not understand about this? Mueller is not allowed to render a decision on obstruction because of the OLC opinion. But law enforcement can do that when Trump leaves office. You lose the argument again.

No, as usual you’re an idiot. Mule-er the senile’s own words. The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision. Lack of evidence moron. Keep crying dipshit. You lose again. As always. And no, Trump will not be prosecuted in 2024. Another loss for you.

The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision

We explain that to them.
They can't hear it.
Impervious to any single bit of knowledge.

No one can possibly be this stupid. I just refuse to believe that.

What is it about simple elementary logic do you not get? Did you go to the "School of about Face Logic?" Look, let's try this again. Good God! The OLC opinion did not enter into the decision because it couldn't. Mueller did not have the authority to enter any decision, guilty or not. Then, the interviewer finally asked the key question. Can Trump be indicted for obstruction after he leaves office. Answer, YES!

If Mueller had the authority to enter a decision he would have. And based on his final answer about could Trump be prosecuted after he left office, it wasn't "maybe." It was "YES. " No one can be that dense not to understand that. Do you really not understand that?

No, Mueller had NO evidence so he couldn’t charge Trump. OLC had no bearing. Mule-er is an idiot and so are you for lying. Too bad mule-er doesn’t know anything. There will be no prosecution in 2024. Period. There is no evidence. Period. You’re a lying loser. Period. Continue your tantrum.

My God man, you really are what I hoped you weren't. There really is no hope for you. Tell me, when Mueller said that Trump could be prosecuted after he left office, what do you think he meant? Take your time. I know it's hard.

Also, how, and in what alternate universe did you conclude that the OLC opinion had no bearing, when Mueller said he could be prosecuted after he left office? Not a trick question, so take your time.

 

[Billiejeens]

It wasn't.

It was.

Payoffs to hoes happen all the time. Not campaign expenditures.

Unless there is a sentencing memo stating the payments to be campaign expenses. Excerpt edited into previous post above.

Here's what the Cohen sentencing memos say about his efforts to help Trump's 2016 campaign

The government says Cohen made payments to two women who said they had affairs with Trump in order to affect the election outcome.

Well, shit.

Every New York Times article that said Hillary was the smartest and most qualified candidate in history was written in order to "affect the election outcome".
How much time have those writers been serving for their campaign contribution violations?

Now, if Trump had used campaign contributions from contributers to pay off hoes with checks from the "Committee to Elect Trump" would that have been legal? LOL!

We have a 2 tier legal system and Clinton is a democratic.

 

[BWK]

It wasn't.

It was.

Payoffs to hoes happen all the time. Not campaign expenditures.

Unless there is a sentencing memo stating the payments to be campaign expenses. Excerpt edited into previous post above.

Here's what the Cohen sentencing memos say about his efforts to help Trump's 2016 campaign

The government says Cohen made payments to two women who said they had affairs with Trump in order to affect the election outcome.

Well, shit.

Every New York Times article that said Hillary was the smartest and most qualified candidate in history was written in order to "affect the election outcome".
How much time have those writers been serving for their campaign contribution violations?

Now, if Trump had used campaign contributions from contributers to pay off hoes with checks from the "Committee to Elect Trump" would that have been legal? LOL!

He paid it from his own pocket and didn't report it on a tax disclosure as to where that money went. He's not only an election cheater, he cheated you and I, because he never paid his fair share of taxes. That's a federal crime. You don't give a **** what Trump does, so why are you asking?

 

[BWK]

It wasn't.

It was.

Payoffs to hoes happen all the time. Not campaign expenditures.

Unless there is a sentencing memo stating the payments to be campaign expenses. Excerpt edited into previous post above.

Here's what the Cohen sentencing memos say about his efforts to help Trump's 2016 campaign

The government says Cohen made payments to two women who said they had affairs with Trump in order to affect the election outcome.

Well, shit.

Every New York Times article that said Hillary was the smartest and most qualified candidate in history was written in order to "affect the election outcome".
How much time have those writers been serving for their campaign contribution violations?

Now, if Trump had used campaign contributions from contributers to pay off hoes with checks from the "Committee to Elect Trump" would that have been legal? LOL!

We have a 2 tier legal system and Clinton is a democratic.

Again, and as always, that is a lie without proof. You lose again.

 

[BWK]

not only should Trump be locked up, he should be impeached and bankrupted!

we'll build a wall for a firing squad to face traitor biden and his VP

What's the charge?

 

[Billiejeens]

It wasn't.

It was.

Payoffs to hoes happen all the time. Not campaign expenditures.

Unless there is a sentencing memo stating the payments to be campaign expenses. Excerpt edited into previous post above.

Here's what the Cohen sentencing memos say about his efforts to help Trump's 2016 campaign

The government says Cohen made payments to two women who said they had affairs with Trump in order to affect the election outcome.

Well, shit.

Every New York Times article that said Hillary was the smartest and most qualified candidate in history was written in order to "affect the election outcome".
How much time have those writers been serving for their campaign contribution violations?

Now, if Trump had used campaign contributions from contributers to pay off hoes with checks from the "Committee to Elect Trump" would that have been legal? LOL!

We have a 2 tier legal system and Clinton is a democratic.

Again, and as always, that is a lie without proof. You lose again.

Clinton is not a democratic?