Uh, Do Liberals Realize that the Stormy Daniels-Donald Trump Incident Happened 12 Years Ago?

[JoeB131]

PRESIDENT Clinton was not about whitewater, it was about Monica Lewinsky. Then women like Jennifer Flowers, brought allegations against Bill Clinton for improper behavior against women as governor, to try and tie Mr Clinton to a pattern of behavior. His eventual charges towards impeachment, was lying to a Federal prosecutor relating to Questioning involving Monica Lewinsky. I shouldn’t have to be educating you on this, it wasn’t that long ago.

You left out the part where the Senate acquitted him.

 

[hadit]

Now why waste time, resources, and taxpayer dollars on a 12 year old consensual involvement with a porn star?

The raid had nothing to do with Trump boinking a porn star 12 years ago. However Cohen paying off the porn star 11 days before the General Election is the problem and could possibly violate campaign finance laws which is a federal offense. Over $25,000 could be prosecuted as a felony with up to 5-years in prision.

All facts point to either (1) an ADHD Mullier, assigned to special council, that he has to be all over the place ... or (2) they can’t find any strong impeachable offense, so let’s waste our time and resources on a porn star to attempt to find an actual crime they can use on Trump (3) this (like the FISA WARRANT) is really about opposition research for the next election. The leaks to the media supports point (3).

Just laying out the facts and connecting the dots through a little actual research, as opposed to the (from the hip) commentaries we find among those with their glass tables and network coffee mug logos.

Psst...

The serving of the search warrant wasn't conducted by Mueller, information was turned over to the US District Attorney for Sourthern New York. That office conducted the and will be handling any prossecutions resulting from the finding that have to bank fraud, money laundering, mail fraud, and/or campaign finance law violations.


Glad to help.



>>>>

You know what’s funny is a reporter asked trump all these questions and all trump kept saying was ask my lawyer. Apparently the fbi took him up on it.

The story is awful suspicious don’t you agree? Lying is covering up a crime and obstruction of justice and all to cover up collusion republicans don’t even think is illegal.

Or they’ll say hillary did it too.

Pathetic

That conversation you are bringing up was between Trump and a journalist. Unless of course, You are stating that the media and NOT the special council is actually leading this investigation?

Of course if Russia collusion is SO absolutely certain and SO SOLID in evidence that can not be questioned, there is no need to waste time, resources, and taxpayer dollars bothering with a porn star. You already have strong evidence of impeachment without the need to look into Cohen .

You see how easy it is to find fault in liberal logic?

It’s an ongoing investigation. Is trump ready to testify?

Stormy testified under a polygraph
Why doesn’t Crooked Donnie?

Because there's no reason to think Trump committed a crime.

 

[sealybobo]

The raid had nothing to do with Trump boinking a porn star 12 years ago. However Cohen paying off the porn star 11 days before the General Election is the problem and could possibly violate campaign finance laws which is a federal offense. Over $25,000 could be prosecuted as a felony with up to 5-years in prision.

Psst...

The serving of the search warrant wasn't conducted by Mueller, information was turned over to the US District Attorney for Sourthern New York. That office conducted the and will be handling any prossecutions resulting from the finding that have to bank fraud, money laundering, mail fraud, and/or campaign finance law violations.


Glad to help.



>>>>

You know what’s funny is a reporter asked trump all these questions and all trump kept saying was ask my lawyer. Apparently the fbi took him up on it.

The story is awful suspicious don’t you agree? Lying is covering up a crime and obstruction of justice and all to cover up collusion republicans don’t even think is illegal.

Or they’ll say hillary did it too.

Pathetic

That conversation you are bringing up was between Trump and a journalist. Unless of course, You are stating that the media and NOT the special council is actually leading this investigation?

Of course if Russia collusion is SO absolutely certain and SO SOLID in evidence that can not be questioned, there is no need to waste time, resources, and taxpayer dollars bothering with a porn star. You already have strong evidence of impeachment without the need to look into Cohen .

You see how easy it is to find fault in liberal logic?

It’s an ongoing investigation. Is trump ready to testify?

Stormy testified under a polygraph
Why doesn’t Crooked Donnie?

Because there's no reason to think Trump committed a crime.

There's every reason to think he committed a crime. It's catching him that might be difficult.

 

[hadit]

You know what’s funny is a reporter asked trump all these questions and all trump kept saying was ask my lawyer. Apparently the fbi took him up on it.

The story is awful suspicious don’t you agree? Lying is covering up a crime and obstruction of justice and all to cover up collusion republicans don’t even think is illegal.

Or they’ll say hillary did it too.

Pathetic

That conversation you are bringing up was between Trump and a journalist. Unless of course, You are stating that the media and NOT the special council is actually leading this investigation?

Of course if Russia collusion is SO absolutely certain and SO SOLID in evidence that can not be questioned, there is no need to waste time, resources, and taxpayer dollars bothering with a porn star. You already have strong evidence of impeachment without the need to look into Cohen .

You see how easy it is to find fault in liberal logic?

It’s an ongoing investigation. Is trump ready to testify?

Stormy testified under a polygraph
Why doesn’t Crooked Donnie?

Because there's no reason to think Trump committed a crime.

There's every reason to think he committed a crime. It's catching him that might be difficult.

If you're hanging your hat on Trump committing a crime in the hooker case, you'll probably be hoping for a long time.

 

[iceberg]

Are we still going with "alleged" hookup?

are we still going with "russia and trump colluded!!!"?

 

[sealybobo]

That conversation you are bringing up was between Trump and a journalist. Unless of course, You are stating that the media and NOT the special council is actually leading this investigation?

Of course if Russia collusion is SO absolutely certain and SO SOLID in evidence that can not be questioned, there is no need to waste time, resources, and taxpayer dollars bothering with a porn star. You already have strong evidence of impeachment without the need to look into Cohen .

You see how easy it is to find fault in liberal logic?

It’s an ongoing investigation. Is trump ready to testify?

Stormy testified under a polygraph
Why doesn’t Crooked Donnie?

Because there's no reason to think Trump committed a crime.

There's every reason to think he committed a crime. It's catching him that might be difficult.

If you're hanging your hat on Trump committing a crime in the hooker case, you'll probably be hoping for a long time.

I’m hoping he implicates himself calling into fox and friends.

Mueller has about 40 questions for trump. His lawyers are carefully going over them to make sure he doesn’t perjure himself.

They don’t know what Flynn has told mueller. He’s cooperating

 

[JimH52]

And do u realize she was paid $130,000 a few days before the orange buffoon was elected? Cohen will go down for that and much more unless he flips on the Orange King.

 

[hadit]

It’s an ongoing investigation. Is trump ready to testify?

Stormy testified under a polygraph
Why doesn’t Crooked Donnie?

Because there's no reason to think Trump committed a crime.

There's every reason to think he committed a crime. It's catching him that might be difficult.

If you're hanging your hat on Trump committing a crime in the hooker case, you'll probably be hoping for a long time.

I’m hoping he implicates himself calling into fox and friends.

Mueller has about 40 questions for trump. His lawyers are carefully going over them to make sure he doesn’t perjure himself.

They don’t know what Flynn has told mueller. He’s cooperating

40 questions about the hooker? Doubt it.

 

[bendog]

Looking at the continual stream of liberal threads on the Stormy Daniels scandal, one wonders if liberals realize that Daniels' alleged hookup with Trump supposedly occurred in 2006, 12 years ago, and that Cohen's payoff to her occurred in 2016, 10 years after the alleged encounter and long before Donald Trump even ran for president?

I know. Why'd he pay her 130grand in 2016?

 

[ABikerSailor]

Looking at the continual stream of liberal threads on the Stormy Daniels scandal, one wonders if liberals realize that Daniels' alleged hookup with Trump supposedly occurred in 2006, 12 years ago, and that Cohen's payoff to her occurred in 2016, 10 years after the alleged encounter and long before Donald Trump even ran for president?

I know. Why'd he pay her 130grand in 2016?

Because he was afraid that if she told her story before the election, he wouldn't get elected.

But see................Trump's lawyer really screwed the pooch on this one. If no payment had been made, and no paper trail had been left, then Trump could have simply destroyed her in a Twitter war, especially if he was president, because without the payment or a paper trail, most people would trust a sitting president over a porno star.

But, because there is a record of the payment, as well as a paper trail pointing to Trump, Ms. Daniels' story sounds a whole lot more credible.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

The raid had nothing to do with Trump boinking a porn star 12 years ago. However Cohen paying off the porn star 11 days before the General Election is the problem and could possibly violate campaign finance laws which is a federal offense. Over $25,000 could be prosecuted as a felony with up to 5-years in prision.

Psst...

The serving of the search warrant wasn't conducted by Mueller, information was turned over to the US District Attorney for Sourthern New York. That office conducted the and will be handling any prossecutions resulting from the finding that have to bank fraud, money laundering, mail fraud, and/or campaign finance law violations.


Glad to help.



>>>>

You know what’s funny is a reporter asked trump all these questions and all trump kept saying was ask my lawyer. Apparently the fbi took him up on it.

The story is awful suspicious don’t you agree? Lying is covering up a crime and obstruction of justice and all to cover up collusion republicans don’t even think is illegal.

Or they’ll say hillary did it too.

Pathetic

That conversation you are bringing up was between Trump and a journalist. Unless of course, You are stating that the media and NOT the special council is actually leading this investigation?

Of course if Russia collusion is SO absolutely certain and SO SOLID in evidence that can not be questioned, there is no need to waste time, resources, and taxpayer dollars bothering with a porn star. You already have strong evidence of impeachment without the need to look into Cohen .

You see how easy it is to find fault in liberal logic?

It’s an ongoing investigation. Is trump ready to testify?

Did the Washington Post not say that Trump is not the center of the investigation into Russia Colusion by Mullier? I could find the article for you, if you like.

Actually the Washington Post didn't say that.

Are you perhaps referring to the comment about Trump not being a criminal suspect by Mueller?

Mueller told Trump’s attorneys the president remains under investigation but is not currently a criminal target


Rosenstein told Trump he's not a target in Cohen investigation - CNNPolitics

If Trump is not the “Target” of an investigation, then which is it - Russia, Stormy Daniels, the advised firing of Comey, the FBI’s own firing of McCabe?

If the focus was about Russia interference in an election, then why Stormy Daniels? If it’s Stormy Daniels then the focus is not on the Russia investigation. If the focus WAS on the Russia investigation and Russi interference then Mullier would be following clues “where they led him” even if they include Hillary Clinton to include those within her campaign. We are talking about Russia interfering in a “presidential election” with evidence Putin’s associates played BOTH sides.

There is very little wiggle room when you specifically use the term “Target”, in reference to a legal investigation. So can you tell me was Rosenstein and Mullier lying before or are they lying now? Which is it?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

LOL yeah considering that most of Brip's fellow travellers are convinced that Hillary Clinton whacked Vince Foster- having them lecture us about how it is just a coincidence that Stormy Daniels was bribed to keep quiet about Trump days before the election is pretty hilarious.

I've never said it's a coincidence. But, look at the timing. She was paid to keep quiet--specifically, to sign a non-disclosure agreement--because Trump was in a very close election for president. Obviously, she was making some private noises that she was gonna go public--that's a form of blackmail. So Trump's lawyer paid her to keep quiet and he ensured her cooperation by having her sign a non-disclosure agreement. There is nothing the least bit illegal about that. It was a voluntary, legal transaction. So why are we even talking about this? Didn't you guys scream for years that a politician's private sex life was irrelevant to his job performance? Remember?

One overlooked important point, unlike other contenders running for President, Trump had no political past. The Clinton’s were under investigation over Whitewater, as they were in political office as having “influence” or political involvement due to their government position. Trump was a private citizen who made his fortune in the private sector, not a politician that earns their living through taxpayer revenue.

High Crimes and Misdemeanors refers to those punishable offenses that only apply to high persons, that is, to public officials, those who, because of their official status, are under special obligations that ordinary persons are not under, and which could not be meaningfully applied or justly punished if committed by ordinary persons. Specific allegations of misconduct peculiar to officials include, perjury of oath, abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, unbecoming conduct, and refusal to obey a lawful order.

Events that occur surrounding the dealings of a “private citizen” are not held to the standard of “High Crimes and Misdemeanors”

 

[JoeB131]

Events that occur surrounding the dealings of a “private citizen” are not held to the standard of “High Crimes and Misdemeanors”

Given how often Trump has used government subsidies and bailouts and eminent domain to run his projects, he kind of does have a public life.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Events that occur surrounding the dealings of a “private citizen” are not held to the standard of “High Crimes and Misdemeanors”

Given how often Trump has used government subsidies and bailouts and eminent domain to run his projects, he kind of does have a public life.

Actually no. It specifically refers to those who have taken “an oath of office” and those who attained an official government status position. It’s very clear. Are you really THAT unclear between what is termed as a “government office” from those which are categorized as a private sector position?

 

[JoeB131]

Actually no. It specifically refers to those who have taken “an oath of office” and those who attained an official government status position. It’s very clear. Are you really THAT unclear between what is termed as a “government office” from those which are categorized as a private sector position?

If Trump paid Stormy Daniels to influence the election and didn't report it, he broke the law... period.

I'm sorry you can't get this simple concept.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Looking at the continual stream of liberal threads on the Stormy Daniels scandal, one wonders if liberals realize that Daniels' alleged hookup with Trump supposedly occurred in 2006, 12 years ago, and that Cohen's payoff to her occurred in 2016, 10 years after the alleged encounter and long before Donald Trump even ran for president?

I know. Why'd he pay her 130grand in 2016?

Because he was afraid that if she told her story before the election, he wouldn't get elected.

But see................Trump's lawyer really screwed the pooch on this one. If no payment had been made, and no paper trail had been left, then Trump could have simply destroyed her in a Twitter war, especially if he was president, because without the payment or a paper trail, most people would trust a sitting president over a porno star.

But, because there is a record of the payment, as well as a paper trail pointing to Trump, Ms. Daniels' story sounds a whole lot more credible.

Trump wouldn’t get elected? What about all the women that the left wing media and the democrats brought forth in having some form of inappropriate relationship? It turned out NOT to be a concern for voters going into the election, and every woman who “supposedly” had this “inappropriate relationship” all disappeared shortly there after. Not one case went through legal action. No real surprise, another desperate democrat ploy, just like all this drama hype surrounding Constitutional Crisis, they are so full of Schiff.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Actually no. It specifically refers to those who have taken “an oath of office” and those who attained an official government status position. It’s very clear. Are you really THAT unclear between what is termed as a “government office” from those which are categorized as a private sector position?

If Trump paid Stormy Daniels to influence the election and didn't report it, he broke the law... period.

I'm sorry you can't get this simple concept.

Sorry joe that I have to educate you in these matters of High Crimes and Misdemeanors. The facts are the democrats are desperate to now prove a case of campaign contributions of a billionaire, who spent a lot less than Hillary did in running for office. They have to have clear documented evidence of intentionally using campaign funds, there is none, which is why Mullier is resorting to a set of questions. If there was clear evidence, Trump’s participation in a set of questions would not be warranted.

Try harder Joe, if you were that knowledgeable you would not respond as you did in your last post. Instead I just have to shake my head and laugh.

 

[JoeB131]

Sorry joe that I have to educate you in these matters of High Crimes and Misdemeanors. The facts are the democrats are desperate to now prove a case of campaign contributions of a billionaire, who spent a lot less than Hillary did in running for office. They have to have clear documented evidence of intentionally using campaign funds, there is none, which is why Mullier is resorting to a set of questions. If there was clear evidence, Trump’s participation in a set of questions would not be warranted.

Um, yeah, that's why you have obstruction of justice investigations, to see if justice was actually obstructed.

He paid off a porn star to keep quiet about sex he claims they didn't have...

If he says that in front of a grand jury, it's perjury

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Sorry joe that I have to educate you in these matters of High Crimes and Misdemeanors. The facts are the democrats are desperate to now prove a case of campaign contributions of a billionaire, who spent a lot less than Hillary did in running for office. They have to have clear documented evidence of intentionally using campaign funds, there is none, which is why Mullier is resorting to a set of questions. If there was clear evidence, Trump’s participation in a set of questions would not be warranted.

Um, yeah, that's why you have obstruction of justice investigations, to see if justice was actually obstructed.

He paid off a porn star to keep quiet about sex he claims they didn't have...

If he says that in front of a grand jury, it's perjury

For Perjury you have to be found “lying under oath” dumbass. When did Trump take that oath before speaking on the subject? See, this is why you are just throwing out claims and subject matter, when you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.

 

[JoeB131]

For Perjury you have to be found “lying under oath” dumbass. When did Trump take that oath before speaking on the subject? See, this is why you are just throwing out claims and subject matter, when you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.

SO you are saying that it's okay for Trump to lie to us if it isn't under oath?

Is this what you are claiming?