Ex-Trump Org VP drops bombshell:CFO Weisselberg knows about at least 5 more Trump hush money payoffs

Bombshell.jpg
 
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.

Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense
 
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.

Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense
Actually, it can be both.

I will just say it once.
 
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a crime.

Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense.
Paying off blackmailers isn't a campaign expense
Actually, it can be both.

I will just say it once.

That way you're only wrong once.

From someone who forgot more about the law than you would ever hope to know with a lifetime of studying:

Dershowitz: Candidate Entitled To Pay Hush Money, Committed No Election Crime
 
That way you're only wrong once.
haha... are you for real?

Um... hey dumbasses.... Trump's personal attorney literally is about to go to prison for it... I'm sure Dershowitz's opinion will be very comforting, as Bubba breathes lightly on the back of his neck...

Trumps attorney broke the law. Trump did not.

Try to follow, stupid fuckhead. You apparently didn't watch the video. It's even entitled "candidate is allowed to pay hush money." It says nothing about anyone else doing it.

I notice you edited out my link, rather than debate the topic you attack the poster. A sure sign of a loss.

Thanks for the easy win!
 
Wouldn't two years of nonstop investigations by Meuller and his team of 13 trump hating democrats, at least one working for the Clinton foundation, have come up with something by now if he had?
They would have referred anything they found on that to the SDNY office, which would have then taken up the investigation, if it saw cause to do so.

Well, would ya look at that! The SDNY office is apparently investigating trump for this very thing! Must just be coincidence... ;)
 
Wouldn't two years of nonstop investigations by Meuller and his team of 13 trump hating democrats, at least one working for the Clinton foundation, have come up with something by now if he had?
They would have referred anything they found on that to the SDNY office, which would have then taken up the investigation, if it saw cause to do so.

Well, would ya look at that! The SDNY office is apparently investigating trump for this very thing! Must just be coincidence... ;)

You don't know what anyone is doing. It's all classified.

What is your source? Lyin' Cohen?
 
You don't know what anyone is doing. It's all classified
When their prosecutors claim in federal court filings that the payments made by Cohen and AMI were coordinated with the trump campaign and with trump himself, I think we can safely say they took the next step and looked further into it. Unless you can somehow craft a compelling case that they all decided to say "fuck it!" and moved on to something else...
 
You don't know what anyone is doing. It's all classified
When their prosecutors claim in federal court filings that the payments made by Cohen and AMI were coordinated with the trump campaign and with trump himself, I think we can safely say they took the next step and looked further into it. Unless you can somehow craft a compelling case that they all decided to say "fuck it!" and moved on to something else...

I don't have to do anything. You made the claim, you back it up. I don't have to prove a negative.

Who is "their prosecutors?" Because NOTHING has been stated about this. You're making shit up. You HOPE this is happening but you can produce no PROOF that it's happening.

The ONLY reference made to this was made by lying Cohen in a hearing in which he has been criminally referred for lying again after being convicted of lying. If that's your "reliable source" you might want to look elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
Trumps attorney broke the law. Trump did not.
Oh yes, he certainly may have.

Wouldn't two years of nonstop investigations by Meuller and his team of 13 trump hating democrats, at least one working for the Clinton foundation, have come up with something by now if he had?

Wow, what an original retort!
I think I’ve seen/heard that one, at least a couple hundred times. A sure sign of an easily manipulated goose-stepper. Keep up the good work, genius! :happy-1:
 
This unclassified enough?

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA :

-v.- : 18 Cr. 602 (WHP)
MICHAEL COHEN, :

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5453395/USDOJ-Cohen-20181207.pdf


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. (PSR ¶ 51).
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. (PSR ¶¶ 41, 45).
As a result of Cohen’s actions, neither woman spoke to the press prior to the election. (PSR ¶ 51).
 
You made the claim, you back it up.
I just did. Pay attention! The prosecutors said in court filings (not classified, your point refuted) that these crimes were in coordination and directed by the temp campaign and trump himself.

So, naturally, it's totally fair to assert that they are investigating trump for these events as well (your other point, refuted). In fact, that is so self-evidently true, that I propose the burden of argument lies on anyone who claims otherwise.

Yes, I think they are investigating him for this. And so far, this (above) is my support for claiming it . Furthermore, Trump's top accountant and the head of Ami have both been granted immunity for their cooperation. Add to this the fact that there exist,in the possession of federal prosecutors, audio tapes of trump talking about it with Cohen, and even saying things like, "use cash".

So, if all of this doesn't compel you to believe -- in fact, KNOW -- that Trump is being investigated for these hush payments, then I think you have to look at your own biases for why it does not.
 
This unclassified enough?

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA :

-v.- : 18 Cr. 602 (WHP)
MICHAEL COHEN, :

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5453395/USDOJ-Cohen-20181207.pdf


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. (PSR ¶ 51).
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. (PSR ¶¶ 41, 45).
As a result of Cohen’s actions, neither woman spoke to the press prior to the election. (PSR ¶ 51).

That's about Cohen. This is about Trump. The assertion was made that TRUMP was under investigation by the SDNY prosecutors office. I asked for proof. So the proof you provide is Cohen committed a crime? We know that, he's going to prison.

You obviously can't keep up. Like I said, it's all classified. Nothing has been released.
 

Forum List

Back
Top