- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Our President tweets about Muh Cohen!
Posted on 12/13/18 at 8:51 am to TOKEN
Posted on 12/13/18 at 8:51 am to TOKEN
quote:
It was a private transaction used with money that never touched campaign. I think you’re right about being able to prove extortion and payoffs have happened before Trump ever ran for Prez.
The keys in the case are the fact that Cohen and AMI (it will have been Pecker who spoke to the Grand Jury and his deputy was given immunity I believe - probably eventually Weisselberg the CFO of Trump org too, btw) testified to the fact that the payoffs had the purpose to influence the outcome of the campaign, as well as the timeline of events - both sexual encounters/affairs happened in 2006 and Trump only saw fit to pay them off just weeks before the election.
This post was edited on 12/13/18 at 8:56 am
3
Posted on 12/13/18 at 8:53 am to TigerDoc
quote:
both sexual encounters/affairs happened in 2016 and Trump only saw fit to pay them off just weeks before the election.
Oh noz he must be indicted then. Dude you have been so wrong about everything it's amazing.
Posted on 12/13/18 at 8:54 am to TOKEN
quote:
It was a private transaction used with money that never touched the campaign
Wrong. The Trump Org lumped re-payment of his money for Stormy to Cohen with Campaign expenses for "IT services" that cohen provided.
that's campaign expenses.
Posted on 12/13/18 at 8:56 am to 007tiger
quote:
007tiger
Can you control your bleeding
Posted on 12/13/18 at 8:59 am to Seldom Seen
quote:
As a lawyer, Michael has great liability to me!
What does this mean?
Seems like a strong statement.
Posted on 12/13/18 at 8:59 am to SDVTiger
Last week you made a semi-substantive comment (albeit in a trollish fashion) and I thought it was growth moment for you, dude.
Let's keeping working at it, alright?
Let's keeping working at it, alright?
Posted on 12/13/18 at 8:59 am to TigerDoc
Sounds like a certain Reverend in the recent past.
Posted on 12/13/18 at 8:59 am to BBONDS25
quote:
Are you not aware of the audio tape Cohen surreptitiously took when Trump specifically states that if there is any payment it must be “on the up and up”?
That's not true. The recording shows that Trump is already aware of the catch and kill scheme.
quote:
Are you aware that if trump entered into similar NDAs prior to becoming a candidate that would be a defense to the allleged crime?
If.... Do we know that there are other NDA's? Would be a piece of a defense, but with everything we know, there's no evidence that other NDA's exist pre-election.
quote:
Are you aware the alleged violation is that Cohen made a contribution above the limit. That “contribution” was
Reimbursed, yet the SDNY relies on that reimbursement as evidence of wrongdoing? It’s circular and a bootstrap.
AMI was never repaid their 150,000. So there goes that argument.
Posted on 12/13/18 at 9:01 am to TigerDoc
These memes are so perfect for you
Posted on 12/13/18 at 9:01 am to SDVTiger
quote:
007tiger
Can you control your bleeding
Great comeback, I'm totally changing my mind.
Posted on 12/13/18 at 9:02 am to 007tiger
Trumps simply going to state these payments were meant to hide from his affairs from his wife and wasn’t political in nature..Still AMI is looking a lot like an illegal and unreported in-kind corporate contribution to help the campaign. Mueller had them over a barrel and so their corroboration with Cohen gives them some ammo but not enough to nail Trump.
This post was edited on 12/13/18 at 9:03 am
Posted on 12/13/18 at 9:03 am to 007tiger
Dude step back and read the statute. The only argument Trump would have to make is, were he not President and the same women approached him and threatened to make their affairs public, would he have paid them off? The answer to this question is obviously yes, especially when Cohen and other lawyers will undoubtedly affirm that they've drafted NDA's prior to Trump running for office.
Posted on 12/13/18 at 9:05 am to 007tiger
It's clear no one is changing your mind but you are frothing at the mouth and its sad
Muh campaign finance law yet the last prez did this on a massive scale. Should we indict him. No its cause muh Trump mean
Muh campaign finance law yet the last prez did this on a massive scale. Should we indict him. No its cause muh Trump mean
Posted on 12/13/18 at 9:07 am to 007tiger
quote:
Wrong. The Trump Org lumped re-payment of his money for Stormy to Cohen with Campaign expenses for "IT services" that cohen provided.
that's campaign expenses.
If they were lumped in it was at insistence of his lawyer. Trump again can say Cohen mislead him on best way to make payoff. Cohen was spearheading the payoffs which btw wasn’t illegal.
Posted on 12/13/18 at 9:08 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
I remember when Judge Nap was the only person on Fox to defend Ron Paul and the libertarian position on most issues. Now he sounds more like a foaming-at-the-mouth neocon when it comes to cheerleading rogue prosecutors and their win-at-all-costs mentality. Do they have pics of Nap diddling a kid or something?
Something happened to Nap when he was suspended from Fox for a couple of weeks for bluntly speaking the truth (I forgot what the issue was).
Posted on 12/13/18 at 9:09 am to TOKEN
quote:
Still AMI is looking a lot like an illegal and unreported in-kind corporate contribution to help the campaign.
Yes. The Trump campaign was meeting with AMI about coordinating assistance from the beginning of his campaign (August 2015 meeting reported on by WSJ).
Posted on 12/13/18 at 9:10 am to TigerDoc
quote:
the fact that the payoffs had the purpose to influence the outcome of the campaign, as well as the timeline of events - both sexual encounters/affairs happened in 2006 and Trump only saw fit to pay them off just weeks before the election
Good point, but I still contend you can dirty the intent side of this by stating this was to protect Melania from finding out. He can say the extortion happens prior to election.
Posted on 12/13/18 at 9:11 am to 007tiger
quote:
If.... Do we know that there are other NDA's? Would be a piece of a defense, but with everything we know, there's no evidence that other NDA's exist pre-election.
Trump has employed 10s of thousands of people. Any severance package given to any employee would contain and NDA.
Posted on 12/13/18 at 9:12 am to TOKEN
It's gonna come down to what Cohen, Pecker, Pecker's deputy, and Weisselberg say about what the president knew and what they believe his intent to have been.
ETA: even Trump spawn. DJTJ is executive 2 in the statement of the offense.
ETA: even Trump spawn. DJTJ is executive 2 in the statement of the offense.
This post was edited on 12/13/18 at 9:14 am
Posted on 12/13/18 at 9:13 am to TigerDoc
quote:
Yes. The Trump campaign was meeting with AMI about coordinating assistance from the beginning of his campaign (August 2015 meeting reported on by WSJ).
We start getting to slippery ground because many papers hold stories and use them to gain access inside the White House. I tactic has been used since the inception of our Republic.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News